<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>AIFF. ;)<p><hr></blockquote><p>That's why I still buy CD's!<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>all depends on the type of music you listen to<p><hr></blockquote><p>Agreed. All my classical is being ripped lossless, rock and roll at 256.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Acumowcheck-- learn form my mistakes!<p><hr></blockquote><p>No guarantees!<br>I'm basically using the Touch and iTunes as a portable greatest hits solution when I'm on the road.<br>I can always use the CD's to rock the house (and my neighbors house!), if I want to hear the entire album.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>As far as the Apple in-ears are concerned, stay away from them<p><hr></blockquote><p>I understand they are about to release new, high end, in ear headphones with microphone.<br>A microphone would be nice. I'm hoping for an App Store VOIP solution one of these days.<br>(HEY! I can dream, can't I?)<br><br><br><br><br><br>And if my thought-dreams could be seen<br>They'd probably put my head in a guillotine<br>But it's alright, Ma, it's life, and life only.

VOIP is a sure bet. I think Skype has official plans (don't quote me) and I'm sure others do to.<br><br>Apple said VOIP will be allowed--just not over the phone network (obviously). On WiFi, yes.<br><br>nagr[color:red]o</font color=red>mme<br><br>I require stroyent!<br>TeamMacOSX.com | MacClan.net

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I think Skype has official plans<p><hr></blockquote><p>Nope.<br>Sorry.<br>Too late.<br>I'm quoting you.<br>(But Nagromme said…)<br><br><br>And if my thought-dreams could be seen<br>They'd probably put my head in a guillotine<br>But it's alright, Ma, it's life, and life only.

Apparently these will all do VOIP on iPhone... they're what came up when I Googled for Skype <br><br>http://www.truphone.com/iphone/<br><br>http://www.shapeservices.com/en/products/details.php?product=skype&platform=iphone<br><br>http://www.fring.com/download/iphone/<br>(Jailbreak app, not yet on the official store?)<br><br>nagr[color:red]o</font color=red>mme<br><br>I require stroyent!<br>TeamMacOSX.com | MacClan.net

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>There's always Apple Lossless to save to some space!<p><hr></blockquote><p>Honestly I think Apple lossless colors the sound, I don't like it.<br><br><br><br><br>Hey I'm an F'n Jerk!®

Lossless means bit-for-bit exact, so it must be a psychological effect. (Like a PNG is a perfect lossless image reproduction, even though compressed in filesize. Or like a zip for that matter.) Do you hear the same coloring when you rip to AIFF? (Audio listening tests tend to give different results when they're blind tests vs. when you know.)<br><br>You could use various software to compare the Lossless version to an original, and it would be able to tell you if any bits of data didn't match. But I'm sure that's been done by others, and if Apple lossless were not lossless we'd know by now. (I think Apple has a video codec that's NEAR lossless and they use some weasely phrase that they don't use for their Lossless audio. Like "perceptually lossless" or something.)<br><br>nagr[color:red]o</font color=red>mme<br><br>I require stroyent!<br>TeamMacOSX.com | MacClan.net

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p><br>Lossless means bit-for-bit exact, so it must be a psychological effect.<p><hr></blockquote><p>No, it's not a psychological effect. After all, it is a codec and must be decoded into the analog realm. Not unlike how MP3 sounds different than AAC, which sounds different than WMA when decoded. Just as one sound card sounds different than another, despite decoding the same file.<br><br>128bit AAC has been shown to be a very close match to source material. I think we're all in agreement it doesn't sound as good as higher bit rates or the source file. Perhaps we're all psycho. ;)<br><br>Perhaps what I should say then is I really dislike the decoder for Apple lossless. To me, 320K AAC sounds richer and fuller off my iPod, Apple lossless sounds terribly flat and has weak bass response.<br><br><br>Hey I'm an F'n Jerk!®

I believe you are wrong about what lossless compression is.... but I'd be very interested in learning otherwise or learning more about the issue <br><br>* Never-compressed -> read as a stream of bits -> converted to analog<br><br>* Apple Lossless -> read as the EXACT same stream of bits (the meaning of "lossless") -> converted to analog<br><br>By the time the analog conversion is taking place, the two data streams are identical. So the conversion to analog would indeed vary with the sound card, but the source data is identical and would not vary between the original and the lossless files.<br><br>Compare to:<br><br>* High-end AAC -> read as a very similar but NOT exact stream of bits -> converted to analog<br>(So there IS a difference there, and people can sometimes detect it. And as you say, MP3 and WMA are different too.)<br><br>Which raises an interesting possibility:<br><br>In some past surveys (I forget the codec--MP3?) blind listeners could tell compressed from uncompressed audio... and they happened to prefer the compressed! Which makes some sense: everything we hear is distorted from the live performance, which would itself sound different depending on where you sat. One set of speakers will sound different from another, and one person will prefer on of them--maybe it's warmer, or crisper, or whatever. They're not judging which is closest to being their live (they don't even know what that would have been like) but they know what sounds good to them.<br><br>So maybe it's not that you dislike the distortion caused by Apple Lossless (there is none), but rather that with your gear and your tastes, you LIKE the subtle difference introduced by AAC. Maybe AAC boosts bass enough for you to notice, in a way that has good results with the iPod and your 'phones. And why not? It's no worse than adjusting an equalizer for specific speakers and environment.<br><br>The real test would be to listen blind to Apple Lossless vs. original (AIFF) data and see if you can consistently tell which is which. You wouldn't--but you probably COULD tell the AAC version, if your ears are as good as they seem to be.<br><br>(Aside: codec and DAC/ADC are two different things. Codec is from one digital form to another--a small file into a full audio stream. DAC/digital-to-audio-convertor is the next step: conversion of that digital stream into analog waves. So the codec is not involved with the analog conversion. If a codec creates the same data as the original file, then the next step--the sound card's DAC--is working from the same exact audio and will create the same result.)<br><br>nagr[color:red]o</font color=red>mme<br><br>I require stroyent!<br>TeamMacOSX.com | MacClan.net