iTunes lossless or from somewhere else?

It's about bit rate. Apple and MP3 downloads often were 128kbps in the past, now 256 is more common. Supposedly many have difficulty distinguishing better audio quality after 192kbps, some say they can. For some 320kbps is more than enough, some want lossless (about 800-840 for the little Apple lossless files I've got). I've got some files at 1411 kbps (WAV files). On a really good system you might be able to determine some differences but I think for the most part, for myself, 256-320 kbps works well enough. I'm still a relative newcomer to digital audio (and BTW it can be fed from your computer, a usb stick or a player like an ipod....assuming you've got the appropriate connector)

I am pretty sure that iTunes does not offer any true lossless music downloads, unless something has changed recently.

You might consider simply ripping your CD collection into iTunes with Apple Lossless as the import format and using that as the foundation of your digital music collection. Then you can start chasing higher resolution versions, either from HD tracks or by ripping from SACDs or DVD-audio discs. I'm pretty sure that iTunes will play higher resolution than CD resolution.

To connect that music to your new setup you have numerous options, of which iPod into the receiver is only one. Many receivers support Airplay or network-based connectivity and playback, and you could also get a digital-to-analog (DAC) device to take high-resolution audio from your computer and input into the receiver via analog connection....

First off, isn't an iPod a crappy way to get the songs for the outboard speaker playback.? I would imagine that the DAC in the iPod really sucks and being that it doesn't have any analog outs, you are basically stuck with the iPods internal DAC. I would look into a Samsung type player and get rid of the iPod. That is jmho.

Also, I have always understood that iTunes can not, and does not, support the bit rates and resolution in lossless music formats. Is this not still the case? Assuming that we can all hear the differences in these types of playback codecs, isn't iTunes sort of less than optimal?

Of course I know that in a double blind, placebo controlled test, most of us could not even begin to tell the differences between a track downloaded from iTunes in a lower bit rate and resolution, compared to s track downloaded from HdTracks in a much higher bit rate and resolution. BUT...

I know that for myself, if I consciously know the music I have downloaded is in any way inferior to other downloading methods, then I will sub-consciously bias myself against the iTunes versions and thus end up un-happy.

The iPod DACs are excellent. As for not having analog outs, what do you think a headphone jack is? It sounds like you are utterly unfamiliar with iPods.
It was never the case. iTunes has always supported three lossless formats: AIFF, WAV, and ALAC 9aka Apple Lossless). It sounds like you are utterly unfamiliar with iTunes.

Not at all.

You obviously haven't studied up on this issue. the DACs in iPods have always been about as good as the ones in a good CD player.

In what alternative universe? iPods all have analog outputs, if nothing else in the form of a 3.5 mm jack.

...which is clearly not the worst day of your audio life! ;-)


Whether your opinion is humble might be controversial but what isn't controversial is that it lacks being well-informed. ;-)

This was never true. Boy, your posts are just chock full of disinformation. Do you work for an Apple competitor? ;-)

Since you repeated the question, I'll repeat how clueless this statement appears to be. ;-)

Never heard of lossless AIF I take it?


That all depends on bit rate and encoder. Since just about everything from soup to nuts has a lower bitrate than a lossless format, its not really clear where you are going on here.


If you are that bound up in your prejudices, why advertise it????????????