Moving away from iTunes on a Mac

[Nick Armstrong]

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!!

OK I'll shut up about iTunes, Airports and Porsches

I will read with interest and look forward to hearing that your St George's flag is planted triumphantly at the top of Mount Technology!

[Dave2002]

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.

I wasn't sure if you'd already got the 2 TB hard drive. As you noted, the Seagate one I mentioned is currently almost "cheap as chips", though it's a bit chunky.

There are smaller portable drives which may be as good, and do have the merit that they can be moved around between computers. In the past the larger ones were perhaps supposed to be more rugged and more reliable, and used to have either an external mains power supply, or an inbuilt one, but the world moves on and the portable ones simply take power from the computer. That's OK as long as the computer can deliver sufficient power via the USB ports - though that can in some cases be a source of problems.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Slimline-Portable-Hard-Drive/dp/B00FZU9JYI/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&qid=1426598022&sr=8-12&keywords=amazon+hard+drive

[Beef Oven!]

I wasn't sure if you'd already got the 2 TB hard drive. As you noted, the Seagate one I mentioned is currently almost "cheap as chips", though it's a bit chunky.

There are smaller portable drives which may be as good, and do have the merit that they can be moved around between computers. In the past the larger ones were perhaps supposed to be more rugged and more reliable, and used to have either an external mains power supply, or an inbuilt one, but the world moves on and the portable ones simply take power from the computer. That's OK as long as the computer can deliver sufficient power via the USB ports - though that can in some cases be a source of problems.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Slim...zon+hard+drive

As I said in earlier posts, capacity has never been an issue and I'm ok about hard-drives.

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.

[jayne lee wilson]

Does it have to be freeware?

I've tried quite a few, far & away the best is JRiver ($50 or so), for effortless functionality (file conversions, playlists etc.), library organisation, analysis etc.. ultra-clear analytical sound. Looks good too.

I enjoy listening to Audirvana (warmer sound), but find its functions awkward - BUT, there is a version that syncs with iTunes, Beef, you could have a look at that - it may work better.
All paid-for players offer a trial version for about 3 weeks or so, you don't have to pay upfront. Just try a few out, it's the only way to find a good one (that works for you) really...

[Beef Oven!]

Does it have to be freeware?

I've tried quite a few, far & away the best is JRiver ($50 or so), for effortless functionality (file conversions, playlists etc.), library organisation, analysis etc.. ultra-clear analytical sound. Looks good too.

I enjoy listening to Audirvana (warmer sound), but find its functions awkward - BUT, there is a version that syncs with iTunes, Beef, you could have a look at that - it may work better.
All paid-for players offer a trial version for about 3 weeks or so, you don't have to pay upfront. Just try a few out, it's the only way to find a good one (that works for you) really...

No, doesn't have to be free.

Thanks very much for the tip. JRiver sounds like the kind of thing I'm after. I must investigate.

The trial period facility isn't something I'd thought of, but that will be a big help

I think I may have said earlier in the thread that I'm not looking to link/synch etc with iTunes

[Dave2002]

As I said in earlier posts, capacity has never been an issue and I'm ok about hard-drives.

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.

I know all that. You've said so before. What I wasn't sure about was whether you had the kit already.

I notice that Caliban is waiting for you to put a flag up when it's all done.

Are you doing this out of need, or is it simply a challenge?

[Beef Oven!]

I know all that. You've said so before. What I wasn't sure about was whether you had the kit already.

I notice that Caliban is waiting for you to put a flag up when it's all done.

Are you doing this out of need, or is it simply a challenge?

I'm doing this because I'm a bit fed up with iTunes and I feel there is a better quality audio experience to be had. Both in terms of what I play through my laptop set up (MacBook Pro & Genelec 2 active speakers and portable device (currently iPod Classic)).

I don't want to dump iTunes (so far 400gb ripped of my CDs), that would be silly, so I will to set up a library alongside it that allows me to rip and listen to music in higher quality audio. I will also transfer some of it to a better quality portable device (I've decided on a Fiiop X3 generation ii).

[jayne lee wilson]

No, doesn't have to be free.

Thanks very much for the tip. JRiver sounds like the kind of thing I'm after. I must investigate.

The trial period facility isn't something I'd thought of, but that will be a big help

I think I may have said earlier in the thread that I'm not looking to link/synch etc with iTunes

I only got that synching feeling because it might be useful as future-proofing, sorry...
Just thought of one more - Amarra. Never tried it but gets Rolls-Royce reviews, different versions, prices go from $30 to... $600 +....

[Beef Oven!]

I only got that synching feeling because it might be useful as future-proofing, sorry...

Just thought of one more - Amarra. Never tried it but gets Rolls-Royce reviews, different versions, prices go from $30 to... $600 +....

30 bucks, maybe. 600 bucks, I'll wait for you to copy it for me

[Stunsworth]

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

An ALAC file isn't a lesser file to a FLAC one. Both are compressed, but lossless formats. If you convert a FLAC file to an ALAC file there is no loss in quality. Both can support up to 24/192 (at least).

AAC on the other hand is a compressed _lossy_ format.

[Stunsworth]

Just thought of one more - Amarra. Never tried it but gets Rolls-Royce reviews, different versions, prices go from $30 to... $600 +....

I use Audirvana. That can ether piggyback on iTunes, or work as a standalone player.

[Dave2002]

An ALAC file isn't a lesser file to a FLAC one. Both are compressed, but lossless formats. If you convert a FLAC file to an ALAC file there is no loss in quality. Both can support up to 24/192 (at least).

AAC on the other hand is a compressed _lossy_ format.

Agreed about ALAC not being a lesser format - but in Caliban's context he might be making the point that the Airport express and similar devices he uses will down sample to 48 kHz (I think) and maybe even truncate to 16 bits anyway, even if he does buy a FLAC or ALAC "master" download.

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/travel/apple-airport-express.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AirPort

http://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-Apples-Airport-Extreme-support-Airtunes-audio-streaming

http://kenrockwell.com/apple/airport-express.htm

I'm sure I saw the details of the audio links a few weeks ago, but right now I can't find them. I suspect that Apple does reduce all the audio to 48kHz 16 bits - which is CD quality - thought the rockwell article does indicate that the quality is reduced slightly compared with a direct output from the source player.

Earlier I wrote that there is no point in reencoding a lossless file using a lossless encoder. There is one circumstance where that might be a good idea - even if the file size does increase. That's if a file has to be moved to a device which does not support the original lossy format. In that case we have the following:

Scenario A: (1) lossy data - (2) decoded in software/hardware -> (3) reencoded using lossless compression - (4) lossless file **

** (but with some loss from (1) and (2) but not from (3)

On the other hand if the file is reencoded to a lossy format, either the same type as the original, or with different parameters, or a completely different lossy format we have:

Scenario B: (1) lossy data - (2) decoded in software/hardware -> (3) reencoded using lossy compression - (4) even more lossy file ****

**** (but with some loss from (1) and (2) and also from (3). There is also a distinct possibility of unwanted artefacts being encoded into the final file (4), as different encoders may effectively interfere with each other if attempts are made to use a succession of lossy codecs. This was noted by various people, including some BBC engineers who were apparently surprised at the poor quality of audio through some of their systems. If they transmitted "live" or studio quality audio there was little problem, but if they transmitted previously encoded material - which sounded OK on replay before transmission - then sometimes it was audibly worse after going through the transmission chain. This was eventually discovered to be effectively because of the use of several stages of lossy compression in the transmission (with perhaps also a few decoding steps).

Scenario A should give better audio quality, as there should be less overall loss compared with the original.

[richardfinegold]

I agree with Steve's suggestion earlier in the thread about XLR. I've used it for high resolution downloads. It's free and works well and plays nice with itunes .
as I also stated earlier, I don't think there is any difference sonically between non lossy formats. FLAC, Apple Lossless, all soiund the same. What may matter is if your computer or streamer can't handle a given format, and the metadata. FLAC is the standard for metadata. Thus the need to use XLR, or Audionirvana, or whatever with a Mac, since Macs can't natively decode FLAC.

[Stunsworth]

Thus the need to use XLR, or Audionirvana, or whatever with a Mac, since Macs can't natively decode FLAC.

Small point, it's XLD and Audirvana.

I think Macs can decode FLAC, I'm pretty sure they can be played in Preview. I could be wrong, I'll try when I get home.

[richardfinegold]

Small point, it's XLD and Audirvana.

I think Macs can decode FLAC, I'm pretty sure they can be played in Preview. I could be wrong, I'll try when I get home.

When I started downloading a couple of years back, I was told they could not, and thus the need for one of these other programs.