Ipod Classic

[Cypher]

Simple question ;

Will an Ipod Classic play (uncompressed) WAV files ?

Thanks.

 

[manicm]

Yes, but rather rip in AIFF - I've had good results and album art is supported too.

 

[iMark]

Even better: rip in Apple Lossless. Same SQ as AIFF but better metadata management and you almost double the capacity on your iPod.

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

so guys. the answer to the question is: iPod classic cannot play uncopressed .WAV files, isn't it?

 

[Paul.]

The iPod can play uncompressed .wav files, but it is not advisable. By converting to apple lossless you will cut an album down from 700mb to 350mb roughly with no loss in audio quality. http://www.apple.com/ipodclassic/specs.html

 

[manicm]

Even better: rip in Apple Lossless. Same SQ as AIFF but better metadata management and you almost double the capacity on your iPod.

We all have our own ears and tastes etc. but to me Apple Lossless does not sound as good as AIFF or WAV.

 

[iMark]

Have you actually tried a double blind test? I have and I can't hear any difference between AIFF and Apple Lossless.

I don't think it's ears and tastes. It's your mind playing tricks on you because you probably think AIFF should sound better and therefore you think it does.

Very similar to having people taste something made by brand A and it's actually brand B while using the packaging of brand A.

Just use Lossless files and tell yourself it's AIFF.

 

[manicm]

Yes my mind repeatedly plays tricks on me, or is it my iPod? Damn Jobs and his sycophants. My ears are obdurate and disobedient I guess.

 

[iMark]

On my iPod Nano 5G ALAC files sound the same as AIFF. I have never heard of iPods giving worse sound with ALAC than AIFF. Are you sure you encoded them in ALAC and not AAC?

I have had my MacBook connected to my DacMagic through Toslink. I had encoded 5 tracks (vocal, jazz, classical, rock, pop) in different formats: mp3/128, mp3/192, mp3/320, AAC/128, AAC/192, AAC/320, ALAC and AIFF. All encoding was done with error correction on. I put all versions in a playlist and let them shuffle and scored the sound quality. I let someone else take count of which version was playing. For all 5 tracks I (nor the other person) could hear any difference between ALAC and AIFF.

With the different compressed formats I could hear some or more artefacts. They were the least obvious with spoken word.

It takes some time but it is quite a nice little test and almost double blind.

The best thing about ALAC is when you use an Airport Express. Because the protocol uses ALAC to send from the computer to the AE the computer doesn't need any processing power to send the files. All the processing was done during encoding.

 

[manicm]

iMark I've had 4 iPods now - so please don't insult my intelligence, or my ears for that matter. You think I've mistaken AAC for ALAC?? Please!!!!!!

And don't tell me what I'm hearing is not true ok?? If you want to contradict me, at least don't do it at 6th grade form.

Good evening.

 

[iMark]

If you (think you) hear difference between ALAC and AIFF I deducted that you might have mistaken AAC for ALAC. Apparently not. Something else is wrong and I suggest you do a blind test.

No intention of insulting your intelligence. Just amazed that you claim to hear a difference. You say that you have had 4 iPods. Did you also try to hear a difference between ALAC and AIFF when playing these files on a computer?

BTW, I don't think there's anything wrong with your ears. It's your mind that may play tricks on you. At the back of your mind you think that lossless compressed files simply can't sound as good as AIFF and therefore they sound worse too you. There have been many tests with tasting, smelling and listening where it has been shown that the mind plays tricks on us.

Wikipedia:

"Lossless audio compression produces a representation of digital data that can be expanded to an exact digital duplicate of the original audio stream."

Nothing specifically to do with Apple. The same principle applies for FLAC and other lossless formats. In the meantime I would stick with AIFF if that sounds better to you. Just don't advise other people to do the same because it's a waste of storage.

And a very good evening to you.

 

[manicm]

iMark. the only thing playing tricks on anyone is yourself. It's not what I think, but what I hear thank you very much. We're beyond the point of rip quality - but it's now acknowledged that players may not play lossless or compressed formats equally.

Please don't patronise me - and I don't need Wikipidia to tell me what lossless/uncompressed is or is not.

FYI, when I first acquired a Classic I ripped to ALAC first - so that eliminates any false prejudice on my part. I could elaborate further that I'm not alone in this but that will just give you further ammunition to continue this pointless discussion. Just don't force your viewpoint as truth down my throat.

 

[iMark]

By who is acknowledged that players not play lossless or compressed formats equally? Reference please.

 

[AnotherJoe]

The Ipod classic has a problem playing lossless files (both compressed and uncompressed) due to its small buffer size.

As well as affecting sound quality the classic has to access the hd more frequently which hurts battery life.

I believe this problem only applies to the classic amongst the current Apples.

 

[manicm]

By who is acknowledged that players not play lossless or compressed formats equally? Reference please.

Naim's whitepapers emphatically prefer uncompressed WAVs to anything else. Linn, while espousing FLAC, have had a few of their engineers post on Linn's forums that lossless/uncompressed files may be handled differently by their players e.g. FLAC may affect processing power, but WAVs could affect the network.

Wadia emphatically prefer WAVs on their digital iPod dock.

I also agree with AnotherJoe in that in any event I'm not impressed with the last few Classics soundwise. But I don't want to spoil the OPs enjoyment and hope he finds rips to suit.

 

[iMark]

That explains why I don't have any issues with my iPod Nano 5G or the iPad.

I didn't know about this issue.