FLAC or Apple Lossless

Which do you prefer?

Other urls found in this thread:

macosforge.github.io/alac/
google.com/patents/US5703999?dq=5,703,999
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

m4a isn't lossless

ALAC is the apple lossless format

>what are file extensions
>what are encoding formats
jesus christ

They both sound like shit. I only listen to uncompressed WAV files.

alac, still lossless and plays on more stuff

>m4a isn't lossless

M4A is simply a container.

FLAC because it respects my freedoms

ALAC is free software. It's licensed under the Stallman-approved Apache License 2.0.

macosforge.github.io/alac/

ALAC tagging was more organized I think.

>alac, still lossless and plays on more stuff
No

Flac just because I got used to it.

Really doesn't make a difference. All my players support both and both offer what I need.

mp3 320kbps

>CBR

yes

...

alright stop being some autistic person who screams tech acronyms when someone says something

honestly, what's wrong with this? Are you all retarded or what? i also listen to mp3 320. holy shit, sometimes even in 128 and i don't hear any difference. fucking nigger audiphiles.

You do realize you used tech acronyms yourself?

ALAC. sane container, better for battery, is more portable while has almost the same filesize as FLAC (+1-2%)

constant bit rate?

m4a is shit
It is the software equivalent of making everyone use model specific cables and shit of that nature. I would much rather waste diskspace on a FLAC file than contribute to the travesty that is iTunes.

mp3 like a normal fucking human being. Anything else is autism.

The fact that there are still American patents on it indicates that there is still autism surrounding it.

Furthermore, it becomes quite ludicrous to refer to things as autistic after awhile. I had to stoop to your level to get a message across. What can I say? Nobody wins.

Don't the last remaining patents expire next year?

m4a is an open source container and format

Haven't used ALAC. FLAC has virtually instant decoding and built in md5 hash. Does ALAC do these as well?

148kbps opus

ALAC is literally the same as FLAC but in m4a. has everything.

This, but 96 kbps

This is the final remaining MP3 patent. It was granted on December 30, 1997. Under current laws giving it 20 years, it will expire on December 30, 2017.

google.com/patents/US5703999?dq=5,703,999

After that one expires, MP3 enters the clear for good.

Who said anything about patents? Mp3 sounds just as good as flac without the extra kb of autism and placebo.

I honestly can't really tell between FLAC and MP3 V0.

QuickTime is not open sourced.

I wasn't condemning it based on patents. Many Linux distros including Ubuntu refuse to ship with MP3 support because of these patents. Once they expire beginning 2018, they will be free to include them without paying license fees or making themselves vulnerable to lawsuits.

>k712 Pro
>Schiit smear

WAV, AIFF, FLAC, APE, Opus, MP3@320

They all sound the same, where did I go wrong

You didn't buy into the placebo.

FLAC because why the fuck would I use ALAC?
I guess if I stored all my music on my computer maybe I'd use ALAC, but it's all on my home server.

>666

>sometimes even in 128 and i don't hear any difference

ok, that only means that your equipment is shit

I only listen to high quality audio files that I get from youtube.

Based satan.

ALAC - Slightly bigger filesize = slightly higher quality

this
but honestly, differences between 320kbit and flacs are soooo indistinguishable like 99% of the time

This but 128kbps

well that is true, if you aren't too mach of a sound enthuisiast you wouldn't hear shit, but for concertos for example it really helps, especially with studio headsets

ALAC sucks: No error handling and the MPEG-4 tag spec can DIAF.

Fuck off, Cirus!

I don't give a shit as long as it's mp3 320 or better quaility-wise.

>as long as it's mp3 320
You need to read up on your codecs a bit more if you think 320Kbps MP3 is worth using, let alone MP3 at all.

Got beats. honestly i csn't hear the difference.

I peeffer flac

Doesn't really make much of a difference to me, but ALAC is more convenient for working with quicklook and not needing any third-party stuff to play it.

Most of my stuff is MP3 V0 or AAC VBR 256/320 though because it's damned close to perfect and doesn't take up so much space

>Got beats.
Found your problem.

>Most of my stuff is MP3 V0 or AAC VBR 256/320 though
Why? Use AAC. There's no good reason to use MP3 in 2016. None.

If it's MP3 and it's in my collection, I didn't encode it and and AAC wasn't available. If I rip, I rip to FLAC for archival and then AAC for daily use.

Universal player support.

Why not Vorbis?

You missed your chance to build a solid FLAC collection now that what.cd is gone.

AAC has been ubiquitous since the mid-2000s thanks to iTunes and iPods. Even shitty Chinese players can decode AAC. There's no good reason to use MP3 these days.

Because player support isn't as wide as AAC and they're pretty much neck and neck in terms of bitrate:quality.

>You missed your chance to build a solid FLAC collection now that what.cd is gone.
Yeah I know. Was a member there for 7 or 8 years and a month after getting a proper NAS set up with a decent amount of storage they got shut down. Fucking sucks.

checked

.flac is the best lossless audio format in terms of compression/overhead.

...

No. ALAC is less CPU efficient, less space efficient and it lacks the audio data checksum.

It's objectively inferior in every way, except that it plays on iShits.

You can play FLAC on iDevices if you use third party apps, that's not much of an issue. The bigger issue is now hardware acceleration, meaning playing back FLAC drains your battery more quickly than playing ALAC does.

But do any devices offer hardware accelerated FLAC decoding? I'm not aware of any.

>The bigger issue is now hardware acceleration, meaning playing back FLAC drains your battery more quickly than playing ALAC does.
[citation needed]
I doubt ALAC decoding is done through hardware acceleration.

>But do any devices offer hardware accelerated FLAC decoding? I'm not aware of any.
Probably because any shitty old phone CPU can decode FLAC and ALAC without breaking a sweat.

No

Its called good enough in most cases for a reason.
some may be smaller, some may get you a bit more, but I see no reason to not use mp3 when everything supports it and flac when something is improved over mp3 and the space is worth it.

This but 144kbps,because the hydrogenaudio overlords recommend it.

Any good site to download flac music?

Bandcamp.

>You missed your chance to build a solid FLAC collection now that what.cd is gone.
What is usenet

Fucking worthless for music.

>sounds just as good
> autism and placebo

Sadly, you're so retarded that you can't even understand that you're retarded.

Just, please, go away. Back to your containment space. Or wherever. You have nothing to contribute here.


> autism and placebo

You can't even comprehend the irony, let alone understand what irony is, when you enter a thread that you know nothing about, have nothing to contribute, then proceed to shitpost all over it with off-topic trolling.

Please roll around in a pickup truck full of broken glass and die slowly. Do humanity the one favor you are still capable of doing. It's the Right Thing to do.

Hook, line, and sinker, friend.

>Which do you prefer?
Apple Lossless because it's supported by almost every hardware devices (software too...)

Both are open source.

Also 144hz is a multiple of 24, so when you play it with a movie, it doesn't cause clipping.

But not a multiple of 60, which is what futurist directors are striving for.

t. Audiopedophile.

mp3 192kbps

I just read sheet music.

>inb4 vinyl

VBR MP3 because I don't own any output drivers that would make it possible to tell the difference between VBR and FLAC, as is probably the case with 95% of the FLAC posters in this thread.

>Apple proprietary file types
Kys

>Apple Lossless is proprietary

This is what some people actually believe.