Moving away from iTunes on a Mac

[Beef Oven!]

I'm looking to set up a second music library alongside my iTunes library on my MacBook Pro.

Although I'm geting a bit fed up with iTunes, I want to keep it as my day to day library and source for my iPod.

However, I will get a new portable player (Fiio X3 2nd Gen) which stores music on n SD card and can play various formats including WAV, FLAC etc.

The idea is to set up a 'higher quality' smaller library of my favourite music, FLAC-ripped from my CDs (I don't mind re-ripping a few hundred of my CDs to FLAC.

Does anyone know what the best way to do this is? What software is there out there to achieve this?

Capacity won't be an issue as I am adding a 2 TB hard drive to my Macbook, so bigger files etc won't be a problem.


Thanks.

[Dave2002]

What format are your files in iTunes currently in? Are they in lossy formats?

If not, then perhaps it might be easier to convert the existing music files to FLAC, rather than re-rip the subset of your CD library which you mention.

I have used some file converters before to convert FLAC to ALAC, though I don't remember doing the other way round. I gave up and ripped a whole bunch to ALAC in the end as easier for iTunes.

I did a search for ALAC to FLAC and found a few, but some offer helpful "features" such as volume normalisation - which I feel is probably a bad idea - only suitable for pop music.

I may have used this - X Lossless Decoder - at one time which could have been OK - http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/234...ssless-decoder

Also DBPoweramp comes up - and I think that's a decent converter - though costs money - and it looks as though there is now a Mac version if you have Mountain Lion or later - https://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm That one will do batch files, so you should be able to set up a script and leave it running. That might turn out to be your best option.

[Beef Oven!]

What format are your files in iTunes currently in? Are they in lossy formats?

If not, then perhaps it might be easier to convert the existing music files to FLAC, rather than re-rip the subset of your CD library which you mention.

I have used some file converters before to convert FLAC to ALAC, though I don't remember doing the other way round. I gave up and ripped a whole bunch to ALAC in the end as easier for iTunes.

I did a search for ALAC to FLAC and found a few, but some offer helpful "features" such as volume normalisation - which I feel is probably a bad idea - only suitable for pop music.

I may have used this - X Lossless Decoder - at one time which could have been OK - http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/234...ssless-decoder

Also DBPoweramp comes up - and I think that's a decent converter - though costs money - and it looks as though there is now a Mac version if you have Mountain Lion or later - https://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm That one will do batch files, so you should be able to set up a script and leave it running. That might turn out to be your best option.

Thanks Dave.

My files are mainly AAC Audiophiles and I have ripped them over a long period. Many of them are AAC 256 kbps. From time to time I convert these files to Apple Lossless and that gives for example, 480 kbps (on the most recent conversion that I've done).

However, I'm looking to set up a separate library to go alongside iTunes. I don't want to convert my existing iTunes library. I'm happy to leave it as it is, converting things to Apple Lossless, from time to time.

What I really want is to set up a separate library of maybe 500/600 of my favourite CDs, ripped to FLAC (or better, if possible) that I can listen to on my laptop and transfer to an SD card to listen to on the move on a Fiio X3 portable device.

Edit: I've just checked a title burned from CD in my iTunes library, 'The Doors In Concert'. It's 256 kbps.

I converted it to Apple Lossless and it changed to 828 kbps.

I took the CD from the shelf and re-burned it in Apple Lossless and it is 915 kbps.

[Dave2002]

Thanks Dave.

My files are mainly AAC Audiophiles and I have ripped them over a long period. Many of them are AAC 256 kbps. From time to time I convert these files to Apple Lossless and that gives for example, 480 kbps (on the most recent conversion that I've done).
.

I do wonder why you are converting lossy formats to lossless. That will increase the file size, but won't improve the quality. It would be worth doing that if there are file compatibility issues. Perhaps the FiiO device won't do AAC - in which case you need to find a format it will handle - but if it does do AAC, then why not just copy the files over?

If you are going to do "new" - previously unripped CDs or downloads, then FLAC would be good way to go for the FiiO. FLAC can be converted to ALAC as already mentioned, and the conversions can also go the other way. iTunes doesn't "do" FLAC - without a modification - which is why I decided to use ALAC, but apparently iTunes can be tweaked to recognise FLAC, so if that is done then FLAC would definitely be a good idea.

DBPoweramp would seem to be a good tool to have, as it should be able to convert between most of the formats of interest to you.

I don't quite get your suggestion of "FLAC (or better, if possible)". Regarding quality FLAC should be the best there is, as lossless - and equivalent to all the other lossless formats. However, some don't compress the floes so much, so "better" might simply refer to the extent to which the file sizes are reduced. FLAC and ALAC are pretty much equivalent in that respect, while WAV gives files which use about twice as much storage space.

Some people have agonised about whether even lossless codecs sound different, and there are just about plausible reasons why they could. If there is any validity to a discussion about the sound of different lossless codecs, this could only be due to performance problems in the playback device, as the bitwise output of equivalent lossless codecs should be identical. Probably not worth worrying about, though there is at least one person out there who claims that files converted to WAV sound better. He will only have about half as many pieces of music stored though on his hard drive. It is just possible that something in his system does give a very small improvement using WAV - but if so (and it's a big "if" IMO) it will be very specific to his system.

[Stunsworth]

The Filo supports AAC and ALAC so you could use your existing library. However if you want a new lossless library why not rip your CDs to a new iTunes library? That would mean you would have access to your existing compressed library, but would also have access to the new uncompressed music in the new library.

If you want to move away from iTunes for the ripping, try XLD. I've only ever used it for converting FLAC to ALAC, but it can be used to rip CDs - and it's free.

[richardfinegold]

I do wonder why you are converting lossy formats to lossless. That will increase the file size, but won't improve the quality. It would be worth doing that if there are file compatibility issues. Perhaps the FiiO device won't do AAC - in which case you need to find a format it will handle - but if it does do AAC, then why not just copy the files over?

If you are going to do "new" - previously unripped CDs or downloads, then FLAC would be good way to go for the FiiO. FLAC can be converted to ALAC as already mentioned, and the conversions can also go the other way. iTunes doesn't "do" FLAC - without a modification - which is why I decided to use ALAC, but apparently iTunes can be tweaked to recognise FLAC, so if that is done then FLAC would definitely be a good idea.

DBPoweramp would seem to be a good tool to have, as it should be able to convert between most of the formats of interest to you.

I don't quite get your suggestion of "FLAC (or better, if possible)". Regarding quality FLAC should be the best there is, as lossless - and equivalent to all the other lossless formats. However, some don't compress the floes so much, so "better" might simply refer to the extent to which the file sizes are reduced. FLAC and ALAC are pretty much equivalent in that respect, while WAV gives files which use about twice as much storage space.

Some people have agonised about whether even lossless codecs sound different, and there are just about plausible reasons why they could. If there is any validity to a discussion about the sound of different lossless codecs, this could only be due to performance problems in the playback device, as the bitwise output of equivalent lossless codecs should be identical. Probably not worth worrying about, though there is at least one person out there who claims that files converted to WAV sound better. He will only have about half as many pieces of music stored though on his hard drive. It is just possible that something in his system does give a very small improvement using WAV - but if so (and it's a big "if" IMO) it will be very specific to his system.

I am also at a loss to understand what the OP is attempting to achieve here. At first I thought the goal was to re rip CDs to a lossless format that had been previously ripped to a lossy format. Further posts seem to indicate that he is converting lossy files to a different format with more bps. As Dave points out, once the bits have been discarded making the lossy file,
Converting them to a higher bit rate file won't restore the discarded bits.

Regarding Lossless formats, Dave correctly points out that they should all sound similar. There are differences in the way they treat metadata, such as album notes and covers. I once thought that FLAC files didn't sound quite as good as Apple lossless, but I realize now there is no real difference.

[Beef Oven!]

Once again, thanks for taking the trouble to help with my query

I do wonder why you are converting lossy formats to lossless. That will increase the file size, but won't improve the quality. It would be worth doing that if there are file compatibility issues. Perhaps the FiiO device won't do AAC - in which case you need to find a format it will handle - but if it does do AAC, then why not just copy the files over?

I don't really understand all this techie stuff - I thought that converting to Apple Lossless, I'd be improving quality! I won't do it anymore if it's pointless.

I don't want to copy anything over from my iTunes, I just want to park it and set up a new library alongside it to rip my CDs to FLAC files so it will be better quality. And I'm not worried about file size because I'm increasing my hard rive to 2 TB.

If you are going to do "new" - previously unripped CDs or downloads, then FLAC would be good way to go for the FiiO. FLAC can be converted to ALAC as already mentioned, and the conversions can also go the other way. iTunes doesn't "do" FLAC - without a modification - which is why I decided to use ALAC, but apparently iTunes can be tweaked to recognise FLAC, so if that is done then FLAC would definitely be a good idea.

I want to forget about iTunes for now and set up a new library and rip my CDs to FLAC in it, and listen to them. I will also transfer some file to an SD card so I can listen on a portable device, on the go.

DBPoweramp would seem to be a good tool to have, as it should be able to convert between most of the formats of interest to you.

Thanks, I'll look into that one.

I don't quite get your suggestion of "FLAC (or better, if possible)". Regarding quality FLAC should be the best there is, as lossless - and equivalent to all the other lossless formats. However, some don't compress the floes so much, so "better" might simply refer to the extent to which the file sizes are reduced. FLAC and ALAC are pretty much equivalent in that respect, while WAV gives files which use about twice as much storage space.

If FLAC is best, then that's what i'll be going for. As I said, I'm not worried about storage space.

Some people have agonised about whether even lossless codecs sound different, and there are just about plausible reasons why they could. If there is any validity to a discussion about the sound of different lossless codecs, this could only be due to performance problems in the playback device, as the bitwise output of equivalent lossless codecs should be identical. Probably not worth worrying about, though there is at least one person out there who claims that files converted to WAV sound better. He will only have about half as many pieces of music stored though on his hard drive. It is just possible that something in his system does give a very small improvement using WAV - but if so (and it's a big "if" IMO) it will be very specific to his system.

It's best that I stay away from these discussions - I'm clearly sufficiently confused already!!!

[Beef Oven!]

I am also at a loss to understand what the OP is attempting to achieve here. At first I thought the goal was to re rip CDs to a lossless format that had been previously ripped to a lossy format. Further posts seem to indicate that he is converting lossy files to a different format with more bps. As Dave points out, once the bits have been discarded making the lossy file,
Converting them to a higher bit rate file won't restore the discarded bits.

Regarding Lossless formats, Dave correctly points out that they should all sound similar. There are differences in the way they treat metadata, such as album notes and covers. I once thought that FLAC files didn't sound quite as good as Apple lossless, but I realize now there is no real difference.

Perhaps because I am confused in the first place, I'm communicating in a confused manner!!

Let me try again.

What I want to do is create a music library for about 500/600 of my favourite CDs.

I want to rip my CDs to FLAC and store them in that library.

I don't want that library to be an iTunes library (I've already got one of those and I want to ignore that for the purposes of this project).

I need to find out what there is out there that will let me do this. I'm using a MacBook.

[Beef Oven!]

The Filo supports AAC and ALAC so you could use your existing library. However if you want a new lossless library why not rip your CDs to a new iTunes library? That would mean you would have access to your existing compressed library, but would also have access to the new uncompressed music in the new library.

If you want to move away from iTunes for the ripping, try XLD. I've only ever used it for converting FLAC to ALAC, but it can be used to rip CDs - and it's free.

Thanks Steve.

I think I want a new non-iTunes library, rather than setting up an additional iTunes library. I want all my files in this library to be FLAC.

I'll look into XLD.

[Dave2002]

I understand that you don't want to copy anything over from iTunes, though it is in fact very easy to do, and shouldn't take long. You should be keeping copies of your files on suitable external drives anyway, as if you can cope with the organisational aspects, that'd give you some protection against file loss. Nowadays portable drives are pretty cheap.

We can argue for years about the merits of large drives (say 2Gbytes) vs small ones etc. I don't think anything is perfect, and there is nearly always the possibility of losing files due to various disasters. I do think there's some sense in smallish drives such as these Samsung ones - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Slim...nal+hard+drive I have several of those, plus some Buffalo, Seagate, Toshiba etc. At that price they are cheap enough.

For a larger drive I have a Seagate - like this one - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-Expa...+drive+Seagate which is also at a good price now.

The danger with large drives is that if you put everything on one and it fails, you've lost the lot. There is merit in ripping the files from CD, then just copying everything onto one or two backup drives - and maybe everything you have would go on a 1 Tbyte drive right now.

You can even copy everything off to a disc in a format which Windows can read, which makes some things easier - if you still have Windows systems, or if you think you might use a Windows system in the future.

I have tried using the large drives for backup - but now I'm searching through all my files for some photos which I took last year. Something has gone wrong, and I may have lost them. Usually having multiple copies helps to reduce the likelihood of this possibility. I fear that having labels and paper record keeping on all the drives may be the best way to go. Relying too much on computers is not always a good thing.

[Dave2002]

I need to find out what there is out there that will let me do this. I'm using a MacBook.

This gives some idea of free music players for the MacBook - http://www.digitaltrends.com/computi...yers-mac-os-x/

I notice that Winamp is mentioned - I thought that had become obsolete, but it seems to have survived.

Songbird, OTOH, has become defunct. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songbird_(software)

I think that some other paid for software may do what you want. I've not tried, but isn't Audirvana one which has been highly recommended? http://code.google.com/p/audirvana/ I think that will cope with so-called hi-definition audio files.

You should be able to get 500-600 CDs easily on to even a 500 Gbyte drive, and that's in FLAC or ALAC lossless formats. You'd probably get more than twice that number if you tried.

However if you start doing downloads of master tape material from firms such as Linn, then you'd need more space as each CD equivalent could take one or more Gbytes.

[Beef Oven!]

I understand that you don't want to copy anything over from iTunes, though it is in fact very easy to do, and shouldn't take long. You should be keeping copies of your files on suitable external drives anyway, as if you can cope with the organisational aspects, that'd give you some protection against file loss. Nowadays portable drives are pretty cheap.

We can argue for years about the merits of large drives (say 2Gbytes) vs small ones etc. I don't think anything is perfect, and there is nearly always the possibility of losing files due to various disasters. I do think there's some sense in smallish drives such as these Samsung ones - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Slim...nal+hard+drive I have several of those, plus some Buffalo, Seagate, Toshiba etc. At that price they are cheap enough.

For a larger drive I have a Seagate - like this one - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-Expa...+drive+Seagate which is also at a good price now.

The danger with large drives is that if you put everything on one and it fails, you've lost the lot. There is merit in ripping the files from CD, then just copying everything onto one or two backup drives - and maybe everything you have would go on a 1 Tbyte drive right now.

You can even copy everything off to a disc in a format which Windows can read, which makes some things easier - if you still have Windows systems, or if you think you might use a Windows system in the future.

I have tried using the large drives for backup - but now I'm searching through all my files for some photos which I took last year. Something has gone wrong, and I may have lost them. Usually having multiple copies helps to reduce the likelihood of this possibility. I fear that having labels and paper record keeping on all the drives may be the best way to go. Relying too much on computers is not always a good thing.

I have some 400gb Seagates that I use. They are quite old and cost more than that 2 TB one you link to! Prices have tumbled!

To go back to my query, I just want to set up a library on my Macbook that is not iTunes and I want to rip some of my favourite CDs to FLAC and store them in that library.

[Nick Armstrong]

Am reading this thread with interest, as it is slightly frustrating that there's no point (using iTunes as I do) in buying a studio master Flac, as it has to be converted to a lesser ALAC to play. But the downside of non-iTunes library is that it wouldn't play over my big HiFi via the Airport, and that's when I want maximum quality. I'm less concerned about what I can listen to on the move through headphones or in the car.

The only contribution I can make is re hard-drives - I'm a big fan of the LaCie range which seem to work brilliantly and reliably with Macs http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_...ve+porsc%2Caps

[Beef Oven!]

Am reading this thread with interest, as it is slightly frustrating that there's no point (using iTunes as I do) in buying a studio master Flac, as it has to be converted to a lesser ALAC to play. But the downside of non-iTunes library is that it wouldn't play over my big HiFi via the Airport, and that's when I want maximum quality. I'm less concerned about what I can listen to on the move through headphones or in the car.

The only contribution I can make is re hard-drives - I'm a big fan of the LaCie range which seem to work brilliantly and reliably with Macs http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_...ve+porsc%2Caps

I will be keeping my iTunes library (which I've been trying to keep out of the conversation!) for a number of reasons including playing music, like you, through a big Naim HIFI via the Airport!!!

I think that the hard drive is a distraction too. I tried to keep it out of the conversation by stating from the off that storage would not be an issue!

As an Englishman, I want to exercise my right to set up a non-iTunes library alongside my existing iTunes library and rip my CDs to FLAC and store them in said library. Problem is, I don't know how to do it!!

[MrGongGong]

The only contribution I can make is re hard-drives - I'm a big fan of the LaCie range which seem to work brilliantly and reliably with Macs

The one thing you can be certain of is that one persons wonderful experience will be a nightmare for someone else

I had nothing but trouble from LaCie and they have (In my experience) terrible after sales service, refused to replace a duff firewire hard drive.

BUT others have a different story