Apple "Lossless" file compression

inverseroom · Post by **inverseroom** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:18 pm

So...how do we all feel about the fact that, increasingly, this is how music is being listened to? I've been using an iPod for the past few days and I'm fairly impressed with how unshitty this format is, at least in the context it's typically employed by listeners: that is, driving a car or walking down the street.

I wonder, honestly, how many of us actually listen to music in a nice quiet house, on a nice system, and give it our complete attention? I haven't spent a single moment doing that since 1997, when my kids started being born. The only music that gets my full attention these days is the music I'm making myself, while I'm making it. Truly, I do appreciate the value of a nice vinyl record played through great speakers. But this is not a value that seems to be progressing through the 21st century unscathed.

So: iTunes: populist, lo-fi. Do we love this, or do we hate this?

jca83 · Post by **jca83** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:21 pm

we love this. i use lossless codec or 320 kbps mp3.. while not great, is a lot better than most mp3 formats around. sounds unnoticeable in situations where, as you said, you're on the go.

which like you said, is all the stinking time.

Rufer · Post by **Rufer** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:48 pm

I rip 192 AAC and enjoy the hell out of walking to the Metro stop. This is as close to critical listening as I seem to get.

EDIT: By the way I just got some AKG K26 headphones for around $49 with shipping. They're great smallish headphones for portable listening. The iPod can drive them pretty well. I think nice headphones really enhance Pod listening and make me enjoy listening to music on the iPod---even at 192.

inverseroom · Post by **inverseroom** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 4:03 pm

I will check out those phones. right now I am using Koss "The Plug" which ain't great but is better than those damn apple buds.

Plus, I got a black iPod and the earbuds are still fucking white!

evan · Post by **evan** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 4:57 pm

Well, Apple Lossless should sound 'unshitty', since no information is lost when you compress a file into the format -- it's data compression, not perceptual trickery, like MP3s employ. Assuming during playback there isn't any data errors or some other decoding weirdness, it should sound exactly the same as if you were playing it back from the uncompressed source. That's what makes it lossless.

And yep, white headphones for everyone! Apple won't willingly give up their completely ingenious method of advertising.

I might be committing some grave sin by admitting it, but I like well-encoded MP3s fine. The latest LAME encoder at the 'standard' VBR preset is very good. In most cases, I would be hard-pressed to tell you in a blind listening test which is the uncompressed original. But that might speak to the quality of my playback equipment, DAC's, etc. first, which is definitely not world-class.

leigh · Post by **leigh** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 5:24 pm

inverseroom wrote:So: iTunes: populist, lo-fi. Do we love this, or do we hate this?

Populist, yes. Lo-fi, not necessarily. The choice is up to the listener.

You can encode your songs as 128K MP3s, and listen on the shitty headphones that Apple includes with the iPods. Or, you can transfer your songs as full-bandwidth AIFFs and listen with a nice set of phones. I think the DAC and headphone amp in the iPod are pretty good; what comes before and after those stages is up to the individual.

In a sense, this is great, because it is up to the listener to make the decision about the quality/quantity tradeoff (do I want 10 albums at full bandwidth, 100 slightly compressed, or 1000 sounding fairly shitty). In another sense, this sucks, because at certain stages of the audio delivery pipeline (places like the iTunes store) they are deliberately degrading the audio quality (ie using codecs that create audible artifacts) in order to meet desires on the quantity side of that same tradeoff.

I agree with you that the experience of "a nice vinyl record played through great speakers" is becoming rare, and I miss that quality of experience too. Maybe it always was rare, not that many people I knew actually had nice speakers, come to think of it.

totally babbling at this point....
Leigh

;ivlunsdystf · Post by **;ivlunsdystf** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 6:40 pm

Try sticking those earbuds up your nose and listening that way sometime. Kind of interesting. All those orifices are connected (although beware: There is no direct "tube" between your two ears, so don't force anything too deep into an ear!) My good friend in junior high discovered the nose earbud trick during a church youth group van ride.

inverseroom · Post by **inverseroom** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:09 pm

So lossless is actually lossless? Whenever I see a word like "lossless" I immediately assume it's a lie...

Anyway, it does sound perfectly good to me.

Phiz · Post by **Phiz** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:14 pm

inverseroom wrote:So lossless is actually lossless? Whenever I see a word like "lossless" I immediately assume it's a lie...

Lossy and lossless data compression are formal computer science/information systems terms.

televator · Post by **televator** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 11:06 pm

i've never been afraid to admit that I can't really tell the difference between mp3's and uncompressed audio. Obviously I've heard poorly encoded files that are washy, but the 128kbps aac files i encode in itunes... can't tell any difference. I don't doubt that those of you with more demanding ears/standards really hear "artifacts", but it's no big deal to me. maybe it's because i grew up listening to songs i recorded off the radio on a single speaker cassette player. it's always been the notes that mattered to me, not the quality.

my point, don't feel too sorry for us poor fools listening to low bit rate mp3's. we can't tell the difference.

inverseroom · Post by **inverseroom** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:57 am

I'm using 160kbps aac, and I think it sounds good...

Jeremy Garber · Post by **Jeremy Garber** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:03 am

I haven't spent a single moment doing that since 1997, when my kids started being born.

hah! I feel the same way. I used to take the time to really veg out, with my old Dynaco speakers blasting. Usually when I listen to music now, it's either CDs in the car, or internet radio stations while I game. I also like to bring my Minidisc to work with me, so I can jam out while I paint!

I've never tried an iPod out. I'd pick one up, but I think my Minidisc would get jealous. I really prefer the OGG format over MP3. It gives better quality at smaller file sizes. However, lately I've come to enjoy what 128kb MP3 encoding does to some of my songs. It gives it a bit of noise/lofi that purely digital recordings seem to lack. Although, MP3 encoding can really mangle things like cymbals and the kick/bass, but it wasn't too bad on my tunes. Perhaps because my mixes weren't as full as they could have been. I dunno.

inverseroom · Post by **inverseroom** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:20 am

Once Apple decides to actually support the mic- and line-in 16/44.1 recording capability that the video iPod is supposed to have, I will sell my minidisc player. Until then, though, fuggedaboudit.

Brett Siler · Post by **Brett Siler** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:46 am

I just switched from listen to music on a Sony Minidisc to and iPod and the iPod sounded better hands down. The Minidisc did have a noticable amount of compression on it. I just got my iPod and haven't had a chance to do any deep listening to it but I think that if there is a slight lose of quality the conviece of the product out weighs it. The average music listener will not be able to hear the difference.

Cyan421 · Post by **Cyan421** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:46 am

just wanted to note one thing. Apple lossless compression is different than AAC. And i don't see the point to the apple lossless because sometimes it makes the file bigger!! Why not just drop aiff or wav on their......

Yeah apple needs to get off the high horse and let someone make some recording devices to work with the ipod.

Message Board

Apple "Lossless" file compression

Apple "Lossless" file compression

Re: Apple "Lossless" file compression

Who is online