FLAC or ALAC or both?

[garym]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

So, Garym, let me try to summarise all your advices, so that I should be ready to go:

1) As I am living in an Apple environment, I will use the Apple Lossless format ALAC as my main audio format, that works well with Roon, Sonos, and iTunes to combine it also with iTunes Match.
2) I will keep a backup of this on a separate USB drive and keep it somewhere else (not same house).
3) To be ready for the future or a situation, where ALAC cannot be used, I could make a FLAC copy of the full ALAC library by using the dbpa batch converter, when i am done with my full ripping project, and in this case the FLAC Files will also have this important checksum by default.

Does this make sense? THANKS.

Yes, Correct. One aside, you mention a "future where ALAC cannot be used". This is unlikely. Both FLAC and ALAC are codecs that will likely have encoders and decoders available for many, many years. And if they do fall out of favor, there will be plenty of time (decades) to convert them to the new flavor. And since they are LOSSLESS, the conversion to the new flavor in the future will be LOSSLESS too. For example, the first LOSSLESS, but size compressed codec I was familiar with was a SHN file. Concert tapers/traders used that for many years. You can still run across SHN files, but they are easily converted to FLAC or any other format, with available converters.

The benefit I mention of the FLAC and embedded checksum comes up in situations like this (and I know of these exact situations). Say you have a harddrive failure. And it turns out that your backups are not up to date or also have a problem, etc. So now you work hard to get all those files moved from the failing/failed harddrive (sometimes at a great $$$ expense) and now you have the files on a new drive. But when playing them, you start noticing that every so often a file is corrupt and won't play. So you'd like to know once and for all which of the files are corrupt. With WAV or ALAC or AIFF you have no way of easily doing this. But with FLAC, you point a program at the top of your music directory, selecting ALL your files in a single batch, and run a TEST. Let it run, and when done, it will tell you which files, if any, are corrupt. Most people never need this. But if needed, it becomes very important.

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

So, Garym, let me try to summarise all your advices, so that I should be ready to go:

1) As I am living in an Apple environment, I will use the Apple Lossless format ALAC as my main audio format, that works well with Roon, Sonos, and iTunes to combine it also with iTunes Match.
2) I will keep a backup of this on a separate USB drive and keep it somewhere else (not same house).
3) To be ready for the future or a situation, where ALAC cannot be used, I could make a FLAC copy of the full ALAC library by using the dbpa batch converter, when i am done with my full ripping project, and in this case the FLAC Files will also have this important checksum by default.

Does this make sense? THANKS.

[garym]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

ha, very good approach!

Regarding Point 3: If I rip to ALAC, as you mentioned, and I would like to make this third step with a FLAC copy. Will I also get this checksum by using the dbpa music converter? I am asking, because I thought, ALAC doesn't have it, so I am wondering, how it can be there in the FLAC copy when the ripped source will be a ALAC version...? I hope you understand my point here...

The FLAC files, when created with dbpa music converter, will have embedded checksums upon creation of the FLAC files by the converter. A created FLAC file from any source has an embedded "md5 hash for the raw audio data" (i.e., the checksum) by default.

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

And again regarding Apple Match: I'm not sure you're understanding my point. Yes, Apple Match only matches what is in your iTunes library. And obviously, FLAC files can't be imported into your iTunes Library. So you need some format that will import into iTunes. BUT ONCE IN YOUR ITUNES LIBRARY, APPLE MATCH PROVIDES A VERSION OF THAT TRACK IN THE CLOUD THAT IS *NOT* IDENTICAL TO YOUR ITUNES VERSION. IT IS WHATEVER APPLE HAS, CREATED USING APPLE'S OWN ENCODER AND AT WHATEVER BIT RATE APPLE USES. Whether you have a 320kbps file or 64kbps file in your iTunes library, Apple Match may still give you a 256kbps version in the cloud. (again, I'm not an apple match user, but this is what I've read in the past).

Yes, this is correct. My point here was, that if I go the extra mile of having a second library only for iTunes devices, then I could also rip into an Apple format with higher quality (even when I know, that from iTunes Match I get 256 kbps as maximum back). This is why i am struggling to find the best compromise for me, but maybe your idea with using ALAC as the main format for everything and a Flac copy is a good approach (see your last post.)

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

ha, very good approach!

Regarding Point 3: If I rip to ALAC, as you mentioned, and I would like to make this third step with a FLAC copy. Will I also get this checksum by using the dbpa music converter? I am asking, because I thought, ALAC doesn't have it, so I am wondering, how it can be there in the FLAC copy when the ripped source will be a ALAC version...? I hope you understand my point here...

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_bitrate

You can spend the next 100 years reading internet discussions of "which is best for sound quality". And most of the stuff you'll find is complete nonsense wrapped in fancy psuedoscience discussion.

What I'd tell my music loving friends that care about sound quality and want flexibility: I'd suggest VBR and choose whatever quality gives you estimated bitrate of 256kbps. This is more than enough potential quality and probably overkill. But 320kbps is major overkill. And keep in mind that for the *potential* best quality, you have the FLAC lossless files. That said, the odds of being able to tell the difference between the FLAC verison and a 256kbps version is essentially zero. But it's nice to have the LOSSLESS version (like FLAC) as a permanent archive (as you can then create any sort of lossy versions later if you choose to; say some super duper new lossy CODEC gets invented that can save 1000 files in the space of 10, while maintaining good sound quality. In this case, you have the FLAC files and with a few mouse clicks can create an archive using the new codec, with no re-ripping needed.

And since you have the FLAC archive version, why not use that at home in your Roon or Sonos setup. Then you don't even have to question "best bit rate".for stuff you're using at home. Stuff you're using on the move, is coming from Apple and more than good enough for listening on portable devices.

p.s. I used to be a major iTunes user and I understand where you are coming from trying to maintain this. I tried for several years. But the best thing I ever did was give up iTunes all together. I now don't have to worry about maintaining an iTunes version of things. I only need my FLAC files. These work in my Roon setup, my LMS setup, on my office computer running foobar2000. And I use TuneFusion to send files to my iphone and ipad for use on my portable devices WITHOUT THE NEED FOR MAINTAINING A LOSSY (MP3 OR AAC) LIBRARY.

Well said, thanks for this summmary!

[garym]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

Another approach you might take if you are committed to iTunes and apple match.

1. Rip to ALAC with dbpa. This will give you a lossless version of all the rips and you can use these in iTunes (Apple Match), Roon, Sonos, LMS, and every other modern server/player I'm aware of.
2. Keep a backup or two of your ALAC LIbrary on separate USB drives, not kept plugged in, and preferably at 2 separate locations (think fire, flood, theft).

Most people can simply stop right there. If you really want to be ready for a future problem, add *3 below.

3. Create a FLAC copy of your library. Use dbpa music converter to create a FLAC version from your ALAC files. The main benefit of the FLAC files is the embedded checksums which I mentioned earlier. But this is only important if you are trying to check for file corruption, etc. at some future date. For current use, your ALAC files do everything you want.

[garym]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

And again regarding Apple Match: I'm not sure you're understanding my point. Yes, Apple Match only matches what is in your iTunes library. And obviously, FLAC files can't be imported into your iTunes Library. So you need some format that will import into iTunes. BUT ONCE IN YOUR ITUNES LIBRARY, APPLE MATCH PROVIDES A VERSION OF THAT TRACK IN THE CLOUD THAT IS *NOT* IDENTICAL TO YOUR ITUNES VERSION. IT IS WHATEVER APPLE HAS, CREATED USING APPLE'S OWN ENCODER AND AT WHATEVER BIT RATE APPLE USES. Whether you have a 320kbps file or 64kbps file in your iTunes library, Apple Match may still give you a 256kbps version in the cloud. (again, I'm not an apple match user, but this is what I've read in the past).

[garym]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

Thanks again, as always.

Can you explain to me the difference between VBR or CBR? in the Settings, by default Bit Rate is ticked, and then I can adjust the Bit Rates from 8 to 512 kbps. When ticking VBR (as you prefer), I have choose between Quality 0 (with estimated bitrate of 30 kbps) until Quality 127 (with estimated bitrate of 320 kbps). In other words, can you say to a Newbie, which of the 2 choices in this setting (Quality, VBR) or Bit Rate, CBR) delivers the better results? I hope my question is clear.

Regarding Apple iTunes Match, this is exactly the point. iTunes match works only with what you have in your iTunes library. But if I go for the lossless format of FLAC, I have the problem, that iTunes cannot read Flac and thus, iTunes match cannot make a copy into the Apple cloud. If I would go for Apple lossless formats like AIFF or ALAC, then iTunes works and also iTunes match, but I thought, the best and most common standard for a lossless version, that works also in a non-Apple world is FLAC. This brings me back to my idea of multi-Encoder...ah, a nightmare!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_bitrate

You can spend the next 100 years reading internet discussions of "which is best for sound quality". And most of the stuff you'll find is complete nonsense wrapped in fancy psuedoscience discussion.

What I'd tell my music loving friends that care about sound quality and want flexibility: I'd suggest VBR and choose whatever quality gives you estimated bitrate of 256kbps. This is more than enough potential quality and probably overkill. But 320kbps is major overkill. And keep in mind that for the *potential* best quality, you have the FLAC lossless files. That said, the odds of being able to tell the difference between the FLAC verison and a 256kbps version is essentially zero. But it's nice to have the LOSSLESS version (like FLAC) as a permanent archive (as you can then create any sort of lossy versions later if you choose to; say some super duper new lossy CODEC gets invented that can save 1000 files in the space of 10, while maintaining good sound quality. In this case, you have the FLAC files and with a few mouse clicks can create an archive using the new codec, with no re-ripping needed.

And since you have the FLAC archive version, why not use that at home in your Roon or Sonos setup. Then you don't even have to question "best bit rate".for stuff you're using at home. Stuff you're using on the move, is coming from Apple and more than good enough for listening on portable devices.

p.s. I used to be a major iTunes user and I understand where you are coming from trying to maintain this. I tried for several years. But the best thing I ever did was give up iTunes all together. I now don't have to worry about maintaining an iTunes version of things. I only need my FLAC files. These work in my Roon setup, my LMS setup, on my office computer running foobar2000. And I use TuneFusion to send files to my iphone and ipad for use on my portable devices WITHOUT THE NEED FOR MAINTAINING A LOSSY (MP3 OR AAC) LIBRARY.

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

Thanks again, as always.

Can you explain to me the difference between VBR or CBR? in the Settings, by default Bit Rate is ticked, and then I can adjust the Bit Rates from 8 to 512 kbps. When ticking VBR (as you prefer), I have choose between Quality 0 (with estimated bitrate of 30 kbps) until Quality 127 (with estimated bitrate of 320 kbps). In other words, can you say to a Newbie, which of the 2 choices in this setting (Quality, VBR) or Bit Rate, CBR) delivers the better results? I hope my question is clear.

Regarding Apple iTunes Match, this is exactly the point. iTunes match works only with what you have in your iTunes library. But if I go for the lossless format of FLAC, I have the problem, that iTunes cannot read Flac and thus, iTunes match cannot make a copy into the Apple cloud. If I would go for Apple lossless formats like AIFF or ALAC, then iTunes works and also iTunes match, but I thought, the best and most common standard for a lossless version, that works also in a non-Apple world is FLAC. This brings me back to my idea of multi-Encoder...ah, a nightmare!

[garym]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

1) Should I tick under Target "Quality (VBR)" or "Bit Rate (CBR)?

I'm a fan of VBR. The Codec is then smart enough to use more bits for passages of music that can benefit from that an fewer bits for passages that don't need more bits.

2) Which Bit Rate should I choose? (I know, that in iTunes most stuff is available now in 256 kbps, but here in the selection it goes until 512 kbps)?

VBR that averages about 256 is plenty (and probably overkill, see final note below). It would be rare for a song at about 192kbps to NOT be transparent (i.e., indistinguishable from the original CD). I use VBR ~192kbps for my lossy conversions for use on iThings. And even that is overkill as I suspect even 128kbps would be transparent for almost all my music.

3) Should I use the multi-Encoder (for Ripping in FLAC and in AAC), or is ist faster, to rip first everything only in FLAC and then use afterwards the Batch Converter to get AAC versions for iTunes?

This is really a personal opinion. Many people like and use mulitencoder. Many don't. I'm in the camp of rip to FLAC, then review rips to insure all my tagging and naming is how I like it, then make any corrections. I've ripped about 6,000 CDs....believe me, you'll always find something! And currently, I don't use mulitcoder, because I don't even want lossy versions of my entire library. I use TuneFusion to create lossy versions "on the fly" if I decide to put something on my iThings. This way I don't need to maintain a separate lossy library.

I understand that your use is different, as you want AAC (m4a) version of your entire library on iTunes so it can be read by Apple Match and then available to all your devices in the cloud.

QUESTION. I don't use Apple Match, but from what I've read, I always thought that no matter codec you use for putting songs in iTunes, the Apple Match version in the cloud will be whatever Apple puts there. That is, it's NOT a copy of your actual file. I've read in the past of people using Apple Match to put in 128kbps songs and have Apple Match create better 256kbps versions in the cloud. Again, I only know what I've read and even that is in the distant past. But if I'm right, I'm not sure it makes too much difference what you put in iTunes. But given that you might sometime directly use the files in iTunes (rather than the Cloud versions), you want them to be decent versions. For that you certainly are very safe using VBR ~256kbps (whatever that's called for AAC/m4a files; for mp3 files, that would be VBR -V0).

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

Dear Garym,

sorry, another point here:
What are you recommendations, when converting an Apple Lossy Format (AAC):
1) Should I tick under Target "Quality (VBR)" or "Bit Rate (CBR)?
2) Which Bit Rate should I choose? (I know, that in iTunes most stuff is available now in 256 kbps, but here in the selection it goes until 512 kbps)?
3) Should I use the multi-Encoder (for Ripping in FLAC and in AAC), or is ist faster, to rip first everything only in FLAC and then use afterwards the Batch Converter to get AAC versions for iTunes?

Thank you!

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

perfect, thanks for your help. I will go with Flac and then use Batch Converter to get my iTunes copies, as you recommended. And in this case, you are right, no need for ALAC, m4a versions should be fine. Thanks.

[garym]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

Hi Garym,

thank you very much. some questions on your reply:
1) You are right, Flac does not work with apple/iTunes. But these CRC checksums, that you mentioned, are they automatically built-in in FLAC, or do I need to consider this in the settings somewhere. and if so, where? What about AIFF? this would be my second iTunes option. Does AIFF have these CRC checksums or also not?

No, this is automatic in FLAC....nothing to set. AIFF does not have these embedded checksums. Only FLAC.

2. can you please explain me better, how you use PerfectTunes to convert FLACs on the fly and add them to your iphone? For me, it is already clear, that I will use mainly Roon and Sonos when listening to music at home. But for mobile usage, I need iTunes and iTunes Match to first load my full library into iTunes and then via iTunes Match into iCloud on my devices. Happy to learn, if there is a better way by using PerfectTunes (and keeping out iTunes if I understood you correctly).

Thanks.

Read about TuneFusion (sorry, not PerfectTunes) on the forum here (they have their own area) and at the illustrate product page (click at top of this page). I use foobar2000 mobile on my iphone/ipad (which does play FLAC by the way), and it syncs automatically with TuneFusion, where I "select" albums I select to be synched. But TuneFusion can do lots of other sorts of synching. You could set it to convert albums from your FLAC library to a different directory as either ALAC or m4a or mp3 or whatever, that is watched by iTunes, and then these files can by synched to your iDevices directly, or I assume, via iTunes match.

EDIT: or just rip to FLAC, then use batch converter to convert all the FLAC files to, say, m4a versions for iTunes, as I assume ALAC doesn't matter, as the iTunes match versions will be lossy m4a versions, not ALAC (but I've never used so not sure about that).

[Apple-Fan]

Re: FLAC or ALAC or both?

Hi Garym,

thank you very much. some questions on your reply:
1) You are right, Flac does not work with apple/iTunes. But these CRC checksums, that you mentioned, are they automatically built-in in FLAC, or do I need to consider this in the settings somewhere. and if so, where? What about AIFF? this would be my second iTunes option. Does AIFF have these CRC checksums or also not?

2) can you please explain me better, how you use PerfectTunes to convert FLACs on the fly and add them to your iphone? For me, it is already clear, that I will use mainly Roon and Sonos when listening to music at home. But for mobile usage, I need iTunes and iTunes Match to first load my full library into iTunes and then via iTunes Match into iCloud on my devices. Happy to learn, if there is a better way by using PerfectTunes (and keeping out iTunes if I understood you correctly).

Thanks.