Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: .wav for ipod (Read 8899 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

.wav for ipod

Hello All,
    My first time on this forum. Found it through Red Wine Audio. I am trying to understand what is going on using .wav files on my ipod and tag data problems. I'm sure I just need a little education on the matter. I have always used either apple lossless or aac before. I was reading on Red Wine Audio that wav/lossless files would be better. This is what I read: "The iPod needs no formal introduction… music lovers have been enjoying its first-rate user interface and features for years now, and more and more audiophiles are realizing that they can obtain favorable results using it as a source for their high-end headphone amplifiers and high-end stereo systems (ripping their music and playing them back as WAV/lossless files and using a line-out dock cable)".
    So I went ahead and ripped a dozen cds to itunes using WAV Encoder. My first question......is WAV Encoder the same as WAV/lossless? What I mean to say is, is WAV Encoder ripping it to .wav uncompressed?  From what I've been reading .wav isn't compressed at all, being encoded as PCM, but can be compressed with ACM like in windows sound recorder. This is just some things I read in wikipedia. Second....Does the Lossless on WAV Lossless mean it is a compressed wav file.
    Also I am having problems with my files within itunes all of a sudden using the WAV Encoder. It used to be when it couldn't find album artwork I could add it manually. It will not allow me to add artwork anymore or change artwork that was acquired by itunes that was incorrect. I read that .wav doesn't support tag data. Ripping to WAV Encoder using itunes will get album, artist, song titles and artwork though. It stores it in a separate data base. So if I use wav on an imod for example, am I stuck with this problem or am I doing something wrong? What I want here is to have the best sound quality from my ipod possible, but without breaking my ipods/itunes functions. Sorry for being so long winded. Thanks in advance.

fewjr

.wav for ipod

Reply #1 –
Yeah, first WAV is not lossless it's just uncompressed PCM audio data, second you can't use WAV with an Ipod, the ipod uses, .mp3, AAC.mp4, and ALAC. You can use any of those three, if you want something Lossless use ALAC (Apple lossless Audio Codec), which will give you the same quality the larger wav file will give you because it's lossless.

I use FLAC for storing my music on an external hard drive, but i wouldn't recommend using Lossless on an Ipod it takes to much space and you probably won't or couldn't tell the difference between that and a well encoded AAC file, using either Nero AAC or itunes quicktime 7 AAC. VBR. This will give you good quality for the Ipod because you probably won't notice the difference between the lossless and the compressed AAC file on the Ipod.

Felix

.wav for ipod

Reply #2 –
You're supposed to be using ALAC.  WAV makes no sense at all for an iPod.

.wav for ipod

Reply #3 –
WAV plays perfectly fine on my iPod classic, nano and iPhones. though I prefer AIFF for 1:1 rips, because of the cover art/tag issues


from apple.com
Quote
Audio
Frequency response: 20Hz to 20,000Hz
Audio formats supported: AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), Protected AAC (from iTunes Store), MP3 (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3, and 4), Apple Lossless, AIFF, and WAV

.wav for ipod

Reply #4 –
wav plays fine on my ipod too. It does take up alot more space. WAV Encoder is one of the options itunes gives you for ripping though. I guess what I need to know then is what Red Wine Audio means. How are others that use the imod doing things?

.wav for ipod

Reply #5 –
Even with wav or lossless, your rips might not be perfect if you use an unsecure ripper like iTunes.

.wav for ipod

Reply #6 –
Quote from: fewjr on
"...(ripping their music and playing them back as WAV/lossless files and using a line-out dock cable)".

So I went ahead and ripped a dozen cds to itunes using WAV Encoder. My first question......is WAV Encoder the same as WAV/lossless?

[...] Second....Does the Lossless on WAV Lossless mean it is a compressed wav file.

It appears to me as though you've taken "WAV/Lossless" to be one thing. When I read it I took it to mean WAV or lossless, and the use of the "/" (as in, oblique/slash, for 2 interchangeable objects) is due to the fact that audio quality-wise WAV and a lossless format (e.g. ALAC) are identical, so using one or the other makes no difference in terms of audio quality.

Thus, the sentence could have read: "playing them back as WAV/ALAC files, i.e. WAV or ALAC.

So basically, what I think Red Wine Audio mean is, for top quality use lossless. And since ALAC is lossless and can be tagged, ALAC makes the most sense on your iPod.

C.

EDIT: added example to quote
PC = TAK + LossyWAV  ::  Portable = Opus (130)

.wav for ipod

Reply #7 –
Quote from: fewjr on
I guess what I need to know then is what Red Wine Audio means.


When they say "WAV/lossless" they should really say "WAV/ALAC" since the only lossless format you can play on standard iPods is ALAC, and as someone said WAV is just uncompressed "lossless" (you noticed it was bigger) and it doesn't support tags -- and that also means album art that is not received via iTunes. As I understand it, anyway.... if you are after lossless with album art, use ALAC as already mentioned.

.wav for ipod

Reply #8 –
Yes I realized that WAV/lossless was not one thing just a bit ago. Sorry....I've been working 12 on 12 off all week. My brain is a bit mushy. I found Red Wine Audio's FAQ.....it states:

"Q: What format should my music files be on my iMod?

A: For audiophile listening, we highly recommend listening to music files ripped using lossless compression (e.g. Apple Lossless) or full CD quality (e.g. WAV, AIFF) with the iMod. The use of compressed music files (e.g. MP3 format) is not recommend if you are looking to obtain best results with your iMod."

    So I will be going to Apple lossless, because it is really a mess in my Ipod right now. As far as Itunes being an unsecure ripper.....what did you mean by that? I do find that some songs skip like they didn't transfer properly. I have this one Robin Trower cd with one song that doesn't work well. It has happened with a few others as well. I thought that maybe my cdrom was running to fast, but Itunes doesn't let you pick a speed like you would in something like Nero when you burn a cd for instance. What do you folks use? What is a better program to use for ripping and adding artwork, videos, pictures, etc? I really only use my Ipod for music, but would like to keep the other media as an option. Thanks Guys.

fewjr
   

.wav for ipod

Reply #9 –
Well regardless of your brain being a bit mushy, Red Wine Audio's FAQ is confusing and poorly written:

Quote
"A: For audiophile listening, we highly recommend listening to music files ripped using lossless compression (e.g. Apple Lossless) or full CD quality (e.g. WAV, AIFF) with the iMod."

This gives the impression that "lossless compression" is not "full CD quality", when it is.

Quote
"The use of compressed music files (e.g. MP3 format) is not recommend if you are looking to obtain best results with your iMod."

Since they've already mentioned lossless compression they ought to have used the term "lossily compressed music files" when referring to MP3, afterall ALAC are also "compressed music files". This is especially relevant given the preceding sentence.

Anyway, glad you've got the issue sorted.

C.
PC = TAK + LossyWAV  ::  Portable = Opus (130)

.wav for ipod

Reply #10 –
Yes Sir...thank you very much. I believe I do. You are right though. I never read so much about audio formats, but I have tonight. Thanks again. What about rippers?

.wav for ipod

Reply #11 –
The favoured rippers in this forum are Exact Audio Copy and dBpoweramp. dBpoweramp can rip to ALAC whereas I don't believe EAC can.
daefeatures.co.uk

.wav for ipod

Reply #12 –
First of all welcome to HA and a community probably entirely different from the one you came from

You should note that while many in the hifi-community believes that lossless is not as good as WAV, we have already previously discussed and most of us concluded that it per definition always will be.

Besides that, we are believers of ABX tests to be able to determine differences in audio samples. This is to prevent biased results on sighted listening tests. I mention this because I have yet to see the person that can reliably tell the difference on good lossy encodings with a lossless source. With this in mind I think that most people here would prefer lossy encodings on their portable devices, but of course that's entirely up to you
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P

.wav for ipod

Reply #13 –
I got curious what Red Wine Audio is. It looks like they specialize in snake oil. $450 cables? As for the iMod, none of the reviews listed mentioned any sort of blind testing involved.

.wav for ipod

Reply #14 –
Hi
I too am new to this site.  I think you would have to do an a/b comparison to see if the loss-less sounds as good as the uncompressed wav and you would have to do it on a better then average home system to really see if there is a difference.  I think anything compressed would affect the sound of original music. 

I came here looking for info on using wav on my Ipod and then running it through my car audio system via my Alpine H/U then into my Nakamichi H/u which will control the sound.  I am very sure the wav recording will be better then MP3 or any other heavily compressed formats.

Has anyone here used there Ipod into there car audio systems and how did it work compared to a prerecorded CD?  I wonder how the Ipod would work on a home system doing an a/b comparison with a 2000.00 CD player?  It would be nice if they were the same? 

Has anyone used their Ipod on their home audio systems if so how did it work out?  I think I will have to an a/b comparison to see what sounds better, wav on the Ipod or wav on a prerecorded CD.  I would bet the CD player would sound better.

Is one model of Ipod any better then the others for sound quality when handling uncompressed wav music?

Thanks
John

.wav for ipod

Reply #15 –
Quote from: johndi1962 on
I think you would have to do an a/b comparison to see if the loss-less sounds as good as the uncompressed wav and you would have to do it on a better then average home system to really see if there is a difference.  I think anything compressed would affect the sound of original music.

No

Quote from: johndi1962 on
I came here looking for info on using wav on my Ipod and then running it through my car audio system via my Alpine H/U then into my Nakamichi H/u which will control the sound. I am very sure the wav recording will be better then MP3 or any other heavily compressed formats.

I'd like to see that 0dB noise floor car you're driving. Also, please provide ABX test proving that you can actually tell the difference between an mp3 encode and the lossless source.

Edit: Just to clarify that last sentence; yes wav will by definition be better than *lossy* (to more precisely describe what you mean by "heavily compressed formats"), as it's a lossless compression form. That said, you are highly unlikely to be able to *hear* the difference between a proper lossy encode (e.g. lame @ -v5) and it's source, and here we *require* that you to perform ABX tests to support a claim to hear the difference between such. For car-use (and anything beyond archiving) i fail to see the benefit of lossless codecs.
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P

.wav for ipod

Reply #17 –
I think you would have to do an a/b comparison to see if the loss-less sounds as good as the uncompressed wav and you would have to do it on a better then average home system to really see if there is a difference. I think anything compressed would affect the sound of original music.

No

I have not tried it yet but it seems from what I have read about 50% can hear a difference.

Techniques that take advantage of the specific characteristics of images such as the common phenomenon of contiguous 2-D areas of similar tones. Every pixel but the first is replaced by the difference to its left neighbor. This leads to small values having a much higher probability than large values. This is often also applied to sound files and can compress files which contain mostly low frequencies and low volumes.

Apple claims that audio files compressed with its lossless codec will use up "about half the storage space" that the uncompressed data would require. Testers using a selection of music have found that compressed files are about 40% to 60% the size of the originals depending on the kind of music, similar to other lossless formats. Furthermore, the speed at which it can be decoded makes it useful for a limited-power device such as the iPod.[2]

This to me sounds like an inferior product that has to use a product designed for its limitaitons which does not make me think its as good as some think it is.

I just believe if you take something original change it and try to put it back then there will be some problems.  Maybe the human ear will not pick it up but other tests should. 

I know that compressed video is not the best.  I had a Bell/Dish system (small dish-compressed) and a C-band system (big dish-analog  no compression) installed at the same time.  I was down sizing to the Bell system as I was under the impression that the picture quality would be the same.  I switched between both systems watching the same channel.  This is while ago so the video was through S-video.  The picture on the C-band system was very noticeably cleaner, everything was sharper I was amazed at how much better the picture was.  I had sold the C-Band system so I had to keep the Bell system. :-(  I can only imagine what a HD signal (uncompressed) through a C-band system would look.

I found this chart which shows various results when using various programs to record the same item.  There are 14 tracks whose genres range from rock to pop to death metal to classical to chant.  These were done a few  years ago but it is still interesting the time it takes to encode and decode.

http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html


.wav for ipod

Reply #18 –
Quote from: johndi1962 on
Hi
I too am new to this site.  I think you would have to do an a/b comparison to see if the loss-less sounds as good as the uncompressed wav and you would have to do it on a better then average home system to really see if there is a difference.  I think anything compressed would affect the sound of original music.


It will affect the sound, but you will not be able to perceive it.  Music compressed at mdoderate/high compression rates is audibly indistinguishabel from the original material, in my experience.

Quote
I came here looking for info on using wav on my Ipod and then running it through my car audio system via my Alpine H/U then into my Nakamichi H/u which will control the sound.  I am very sure the wav recording will be better then MP3 or any other heavily compressed formats.


Better than heavily compressed - possibly.  Better than moderate to light compression - no.

Quote
Has anyone here used there Ipod into there car audio systems and how did it work compared to a prerecorded CD?


Yes, I use my iPod in my car, it is indistinguishable from CD.  I don't put it through a HU though, it just direct feeds into a small Nakamichi amp, not that I think the HU would degrade the sound, just that I don't listen to radio so don't need a HU.

Quote
I wonder how the Ipod would work on a home system doing an a/b comparison with a 2000.00 CD player?  It would be nice if they were the same?


Done that, they are the same.

Quote
Has anyone used their Ipod on their home audio systems if so how did it work out?


I use my iPod as the main source for my home system. it is much better than a CD player because of the amount of music it holds and the more flexible playback options like genres, playlists random etc.  In terms of audio quality, there is no difference in quality from CD, even using compressed formats (moderate to high bitrates).

Quote
I think I will have to an a/b comparison to see what sounds better, wav on the Ipod or wav on a prerecorded CD.  I would bet the CD player would sound better.


When you do the A/B comparrison, make sure you accurately match the volume levels so they are equal.  If you don't, the louder source will always be perceived as sounding better.

Quote
Is one model of Ipod any better then the others for sound quality when handling uncompressed wav music?


I am using an old 3rd gen iPod, which some Net wisdom has labeled as the worst sounding iPod ever.  Since in my A/B testing I found it indistinguishable from an excellent CD player, any of the other models should be even better than CD ;-)

.wav for ipod

Reply #19 –
johndi1962's inability to quote and needless use of colour aside . . .

Quote from: johndi1962 on
I have not tried it yet but it seems from what I have read about 50% can hear a difference.

[citation needed]

Quote
This to me sounds like an inferior product that has to use a product designed for its limitaitons which does not make me think its as good as some think it is.

What? What does that jumble of negative words even mean? And what has image compression to do with it, lossless or not? Which brings me to:

Quote
I just believe if you take something original change it and try to put it back then there will be some problems.  Maybe the human ear will not pick it up but other tests should.

Read my earlier post. Lossless infers without loss. The audio is compressed totally reversibly, and reconstructed to its original state before being sent anywhere near anything that will be redirecting it to your ears (or "other tests"; such as what, since we're here?).

As for your video anecdote, it seems completely irrelevant.


Quote from: brownianm on
It will affect the sound, but you will not be able to perceive it.  Music compressed at mdoderate/high compression rates is audibly indistinguishabel from the original material, in my experience.

I assume you refer to lossy formats; lossless formats will, of course, sound identical.

.wav for ipod

Reply #21 –
Quote
I just believe if you take something original change it and try to put it back then there will be some problems. Maybe the human ear will not pick it up but other tests should.

And why is it important to keep something you can't hear?

Also forget about A/B-tests. You are biased against compressed formats and knowing which one is playing, you are fooled by the placebo effect. You should, as mentioned, use ABX tests instead.

I take from your replys that you didn't read the link I posted <--- CLICK HERE!!!!
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P
 

.wav for ipod

Reply #22 –
Listening to two different sources would not be the placebo effect.  Anyway I initially got in this conversation to find out if there is any different from lossless to wav so why would I not want to hear the truth?  Why would I use the ABX test when I am going to be listening to music in my vehicle and maybe on my home system.  If I cannot hear a difference when listen on my Krell/B&W system then why would I not want to switch over since the Ipod is much more convenient?  Its one of those things that I have to hear for myself not rely on what people tell me.

Anyway I am actually looking at this unit  http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers...63&cl=US,EN for my music playback.  If the ipod is as good as a CD then this one should be as well.  The item on the link above was compared to an 8,000.00 CD players and there was no difference in sound quality.  Do you think an iPod would sound as good as an 8,000.00 CD player doing an ab test?

Another thing to look at is the quality of the CD player being used, what type of DAC's does it use etc etc etc.  There is also how the CD Player/Ipod handles the signal.

Yes I did read that thread.

Quote from: odyssey on
Quote
I just believe if you take something original change it and try to put it back then there will be some problems. Maybe the human ear will not pick it up but other tests should.

And why is it important to keep something you can't hear?

Also forget about A/B-tests. You are biased against compressed formats and knowing which one is playing, you are fooled by the placebo effect. You should, as mentioned, use ABX tests instead.

I take from your replys that you didn't read the link I posted <--- CLICK HERE!!!!