Apple Lossless becomes open source.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.
chebby said:
Never heard any complaints about all those competing record player manufacturers who all "got into the game" or competing CD player manufacturers or cassette deck manufacturers...etc. What's so bad/shocking/immoral/wrong about Apple (or anyone else) making mp3 players?great and being a delight to look at as well as to use?
Nothing. At all. I don't have a problem, it's more an observation
chebby said:
Just the same as any PC manufacturer "copied and made globally popular" PCs.
Absoultely. Although a huse amount of the credit must go to IBM.
chebby said:
You wouldn't have written it if you hadn't meant it negatively.FWIW Japan has innovated more than virtually any other nation in the last 150 years and continues to do so.
I agree 100%. But for a short time they concentrated on copying rather than innovating. I absoultely didn't mean it negatively, again, it's more an observation than a comment.
chebby said:
Good!What on Earth is wrong with our day-to-day technology looking and feeling great and being a delight to look at as well as to use?
Nothing. I agree. I'm glad Apple exist, PCs and laptops look great these days because of them!ALthough I always prefer function over form personally.
chebby said:
Never heard any complaints about all those competing record player manufacturers who all "got into the game" or competing CD player manufacturers or cassette deck manufacturers...etc. What's so bad/shocking/immoral/wrong about Apple (or anyone else) making mp3 players?great and being a delight to look at as well as to use?
Nothing. At all. I don't have a problem, it's more an observation
chebby said:
Just the same as any PC manufacturer "copied and made globally popular" PCs.
Absoultely. Although a huge amount of the credit must go to IBM.
chebby said:
You wouldn't have written it if you hadn't meant it negatively.FWIW Japan has innovated more than virtually any other nation in the last 150 years and continues to do so.
I agree 100%. But for a short time they concentrated on copying rather than innovating. I absoultely didn't mean it negatively, again, it's more an observation than a comment.
chebby said:
Good!What on Earth is wrong with our day-to-day technology looking and feeling great and being a delight to look at as well as to use?
Nothing. I agree. I'm glad Apple exist, PCs and laptops look great these days because of them!ALthough I always prefer function over form personally.
 
John Duncan said:
steve_1979 said:
manicm said:
Bits are bits and all that, but Apple Lossless still sounds the pits compared to any other lossless format.

Could you please cite your source for this information.

Or alternatively if you came to this conclusion yourself could you explain the method you used for the tests. Was it a 'fair and unbiased blind' scientific test (such as an ABX test using Foobar) or did you know which file you were listening to when you judged them?

It's just his opinion. They're allowed here, you know.

Of course, but then it's also fine to question the spread of blatent misinformation on the internet!

🙂
 
snivilisationism said:
It's amazing really. I had an mp3 player way before Apple got into the game, and I've never had an iPod of my own. Apple seem to have innovated nothing, but copied and made globally popular quite many things.

I also had an mp3 player around the time the first iPod appeared on the market; a Rio Carbon. It was considered a best buy by WHF. I thought it was brilliant at the time.

But the reality was that early mp3 was a minor niche in audio. The general public hadn't heard of it, the major AV manufacturers weren't remotely interested and had no products of their own, availability of downloads was very limited and by and large it was going nowhere.

What Apple did was to take the technology and created a whole new ecostructure that provided the hardware (iPod), a very slick and intuative user interface, the content (downloads) and a easy to use portal (iTunes) to access, to listen to and purchase that content. Design and aesthetics were just the the icing on the cake. The result as we know was a roaring success.

By the time the "big boys" had woken up, it was too late; Apple had the market completely wrapped up.

You said ..."Apple seem to have innovated nothing"... but that's entirely incorrect as that example shows. It wasn't the mp3 player that was new, the innovation was the whole package.

The same applies to Smartphones. Smartphones were around, but they were mostly clunky and cumbersome to use, designed primarily for professional business use. They seemed to be an attempt to put a phone inside one of those old PDA's. Touchscreens had also been around for quite a while, but up to that point the technology had again been clunky and a little "primative" by today's standards. Apple weren't even in the Phone business back then.

With the iPhone, Apple introduced the idea of a slick fast OS married to the latest touchscreen technology, with an easy to use and intuative interface. But most importantly, they created an ecostructure, or rather an extension of one (Apps via iTunes) to open up a whole new market sector that appealed to not just business users, but anyone. Again, attractive and stylish aesthetics were the icing on the cake.

The innovation was not so much a "phone", but what we could now do with that phone; the apps and the social networking aspects that it became a platform for. That simply did not exist before.

As we know, the results have been phenomenal, propelling Apple to being one of the major players in the mobile communications market and kick starting a revolution in mobile communications that goes beyond "just mobile phones". The ultimate proof of this innovation is in the huge amount of competition and the number of players who are falling over themselves outdo (and to a degree copy), this idea.

Do I sound like an Apple "fanboy" ? Probably, but it's not intentional (honestly).

Until my daughter received her first iPod as a replacement for her Sony mp3 player, i wouldn't have anything to do with Apple. It had no appeal for me. After my Rio Carbon, I had a very nice Sony mp3 walkman and hoped all the hype over the iPod phenomenon would go away. However I got used to iTunes by helping her rip CD's, buy downloads and managing her library. The same when my son bought himself an iPod too.

I quickly realised that the ipod was actually really very good, but I had no intention of ever looking at Apple computers and was perfectly content with our Windows PC's. Not being particularly advanced in computer literacy, learning something different seemed like a chore I wasn't interested in taking on. Plus I believed some of the anti-Apple stuff that was starting to appear on the internet.

It was a chance visit to someone who'd recently bought one of the new metal bodied iMacs that sparked curiosity. So many of its features and the way it worked just seemed light years ahead of our various PC's. A visit to the Apple store for a demo convinced me that this was the way to go. Since aquiring the Mac, my family began to ignore their PC's and laptops and started to hog my machine. We continue to run two desktop PC's, a windows laptop and a netbook, but they receive little use now. Even the shiny new Windows 7 machine bought at the beginning of this year is considered "rubbish" by my son. A new MacBook Pro has just been aquired by my daughter; my son intends to buy one as soon as he can pay for his car insurance.

Why? As the slogan goes, "it just works".....well it does for us. It may not for others.

What is the point of this ramble? Just to say, don't slag off something because it's not to your taste.

By the way, we've got two Android phones and a brand new Blackberry here, so you can see we are not biased.

snivilisationism said:
Maybe I'm just too much of a geek to understand.

I know you said that in jest, but I suspect it's closer to the truth than you realise????? (said in a friendly manner and not intended to be patronising or an insult).

.
 
altruistic.lemon said:
manicm said:
Bits are bits and all that, but Apple Lossless still sounds the pits compared to any other lossless format.
I'm a betting man. I'll give you £100 that in a blind test you couldn't pick the difference.

Talking about betting, don't forget the biggest race in the known universe is in Tuesday :dance:

On my PC, whether it's down to iTunes or some other factor ALAC always sounds the worst to me. I'm willing to concede through a standalone DAC this may be different. On my iPod, and through a dock on my hifi ALAC also sounds worse to me.

Because with familiar music I know what to look for - extended high frequencies at certain places in a song, blind testing would not make any difference. It's impossible.

On the topic of native ALAC support - well the poster is wrong - Linn and Naim now have native ALAC support, and I'm sure other streamers will have it too shortly - the market will demand it.
 
I've been thinking a bit more about this and now wonder how those without iTunes are going to listen to these ALAC files, other than through streamers?

I mean MS for sure aren't going to add an Apple codec to the library in WMP, so it means that whoever wants to rip/listen to music in ALAC format is likely going to have to either install iTunes, another media player, or a codec pack - in which case it's no different to FLAC.

It'll be interesting to see how this all pans out.....
 
iemslie said:
I've been thinking a bit more about this and now wonder how those without iTunes are going to listen to these ALAC files, other than through streamers?

.......it means that whoever wants to rip/listen to music in ALAC format is likely going to have to either install iTunes.....

It's no different to the current situation for those who use an iPod, iPhone, IPad and/or use iTunes to download tracks.
 
Speculation, but Apple is positioning for the streaming future. HD movies are already available on Apple TV and the soon-to-be launched iCloud Match service ($24.95 per annum) points to the future for audio. CES 2012 will give us a clue, but 24/192 lossless files are too big to be stored in bulk on most hard drives. Allegedly, record labels distributors are preparing to release Hi Res versions of their back catalogues, especially the ever popular 60s and 70s classic rock. There are battles ahead in format wars that hopefully will be resolved peacefully, rather than Betamax/VHS attrition, but I would't bet against Apple withits $84 billion in cash war chest.
 
There's more likelyhood of a difference in sound quality caused by the DAC analogue output, other equipment in the audio chain, or by the source material itself.

Very important point from an earlier post. I think most forum members are dedicated to some extent in having really excellent quality of sound reproduction. One can postulate endlessly about FLAC vs ALAC vs whatever other format but in the end if the original sound recording was rubbish any resultant digital file will also be rubbish, and of course the opposite is true. I've toyed with FLAC, 24bit/96 recordings the list is endless and in the end and I came to the conclusion that a good recording is what makes the experience pleasurable. Best demo I heard at Manchester was a vinyl one. Worst was an iPad toting streaming system (by the way thats not an anti Apple slur just a comment on how it seemed).
 
Confirming John's earlier comment about developers buring the midnight oil working on updates to play ALAC , Foobar 1.1.10 Beta 1 out, now playing ALAC out of the box, plugin no longer needed.
 
Flac is slightly less cpu intensive and uses around 4-5% less space than Alac. But as both are lossless you'd expect same quality to be the same.

I would have preferred Apple to just add FLAC support - there is no need for extra (ex)proprietary formats.
 
Digging up this old thread, I'm just wondering why, 1 year on, ALAC is still pretty marginal?

From the comments here - and I'd agree with a lot of those suggesting ALAC should power on having gone open source - it doesn't really seem to have come to fruition.

Odd.
 
From my limited knowledge and experience as a consumer, it still seems like there are comparatively few pieces of hardware out there that have native ALAC support when it comes to streaming.

Having just taken the iPlunge, I'm finding it tricky to find the hardware I want to support ALAC, which is the file type I'd like to convert my FLAC library too for uniformity.

I may be wrong, but it seems that way.
 
Well I tried FLAC when I got my iPhone and found it was a bit fiddly without the native support - file / folder structures, transferring files in the first place, all tricky because of a need for workarounds.

These days I want simple and streamlined. Pretty much everything plays ALAC too, but it seems like streamers and hardware components are slower on the uptake than PC utilities etc.
 
Apps like Flac Player or Golden Ear add the flac files to Itunes so you can sync them to other devices or stream them over airplay.

So the theory goes...
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts