Flac vs Apple Lossless Alac

[admin_exported]

I Was always favorable of iTunes ALAC (Lossless) since their format stores all the info needed for complete artist/cd/folder structure when converting back to wav when working with redbook cds at 44.1khz-16bit.

But, the wav encoder is limited to 16bit, so if you use iTunes Lossless for a 96khz-24bit audio file and then convert it back to wav you will now have a 96khz-16bit wav file, a 98mb wav is now a 65mb wav, that is not lossless!
I wonder how many people have converted files this way and are unaware.

Why the limitation with iTunes, anyone?

 

[Chokobolt]

Just use AIFF or WAV

 

[Anonymous]

Chokobolt:Just use AIFF or WAV

Those are not lossless audio compression formats, FLAC works as true lossless with any format, similar to MLP, and that does not answer the question...

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Why do you want to convert flac to smth and then to wav?
I rip CDs in ALAC and play from ALAC.
If I have a FLAC 24/96 file I convert to ALAC using Max and the result is a 96khz file that is lossless - or at least I beleive so - and has all the metadata.
Why do you need wav?

 

[Anonymous]

I want to convert wav to lossless, just like everybody else. I prefer apple, but it's limited to 16bit files. You say you use Max, what is that and have you checked what the bit rate of the 96khz-24bit file was after converting it back to wav from apple lossless?

If you go into iTunes wav encoder settings the highest setting is 16bit.

 

[manicm]

ranosb - best leave hi-res music alone - and don't convert to other formats.

If your equipment can play FLAC why convert to ALAC??

 

[Anonymous]

When you convert back to wav with flac none of the folder structures are saved, is anyone out there that knows what's going on?
I thought this forum was listed as "Ask the Experts", yeah right...