Apple adding FLAC support with iOS 11

I doubt thats the reason, as there definately is a difference.

More than likely Apple folk aren't generally audiophiles and more into expensive lifestyle brands like Beats and Bose where the difference isn't noticable.

Even when comparing audio quality on the various streaming services, those then stream FLAC are reviewed as having better audio quality.

Reviews are biased.

Blind tests are not and people have failed those over and over again.

I would bet Apple fans as a whole have more audiophiles amongst them simply for their spending habits and presumably having more money to burn on quality.

The Android populace are generally cheap and want everything for free.
 
Last edited:
Reviews are biased.

Blind tests are not and people have failed those over and over again.

I would bet Apple fans as a whole have more audiophiles amongst them simply for their spending habits and presumably having more money to burn on quality.

The Android populace are generally cheap and want everything for free.

I'm an iPhone user and I only rip to ALAC or convert from Flac using DB Poweramp. The difference in lossless and lossy is definitely noticeable on my equipment and to my ears.

I'm not sure I agree that android populace want everything for free. How do you change behaviour when an entire generation has grown up with having music be free? More and more it seems like the album is more like the preview to seeing the artist live and judging by the prices of live tickets and merch, artists are definitely not queuing at the poorhouse.
 
Last edited:
I'm an iPhone user and I only rip to ALAC or convert from Flac using DB Poweramp. The difference in lossless and lossy is definitely noticeable on my equipment and to my ears.

I'm not sure I agree that android populace want everything for free. How do you change behaviour when an entire generation has grown up with having music be free? More and more it seems like the album is more like the preview to seeing the artist live and judging from the prices of live tickets and merch, artists are definitely not queuing at the poorhouse.

So if you only rip to ALAC/FLAC when last did you test anything else?

And can you with complete honesty pass a blind test between ALAC and iTunes Plus (which is VBR 256~ alreasy and very high bitrate lossy).

I'm not trying to say everyone should listen to 128K MP3's over Lossless here.

I'm specifixally referring to iTunes Plus (iTunes Store and Apple Music HQ Streaming) over ALAC.

Sure there might be a very very small percentage of listeners out there who can repeatedly hear the different with accuracy. Statistically though it's been proven that to the majority of listeners it's indiscernable and therefore irrelevant.


As for the cost factor I'm pulling it completely out of my ass but we can agree that Apple market as a whole has money to spend (compared to Android at least which has a much wider range including much cheaper phones and devices and we can take it further to the Mac platform as well) so it stands to reason on a "per device" level they would spend more money on related high quality items like audio equipment.

Anyway with modern streaming services like Apple and Google Music it's as near to free as it can be anyway and people still choose to rather pirate stuff.
 
Whew.

So many things I thought I'd never read from someone like you, Sauron :/
 
Bookmark this post though :

Apple will release lossless streaming in the next few years ( when everyone is on the next best, MQA). At that point, we will hear how the technology was never matured before .... and only when Apple offered, was it viable. Again, Apple nailed the timing too a tee!

Apple did sell Lossless audio before on iTunes and was one of the few to do so and canned it because nobody was buying it.

Sure the streaming game is a little bit different and it's not impossible that they would bring it back but it will be at a higher cost and if the case is still that nobody buys it then why bother?
 
Whew.

So many things I thought I'd never read from someone like you, Sauron :/

Good or bad?

When you take away the marketing and actually listen to the music instead of arguing over the codecs you get things like these...

https://medium.com/swlh/apple-music-better-than-tidal-and-spotify-81f0fa4447f7

Sure it's just one blokes option but I see the logic so often that "it doesn't say Lossless on the box" and people already decided beforehand it's rubbish.

When you get truly objective about it, only then can you make a decision.

Sure if you have the space and energy for the inconvenience and want to go with Lossless to absolutely know for sure you aren't going to lose out on anything then go nuts.

Personally I simply cannot hear the difference and therefore am perfectly happy with my Apple Music subscription and my iTunes Match collection, which travels with me everywhere around the world and at all times.

And no I'm not listebing to it on bloody Earpods or Beats.

"Audiophiles" are often also so deeply stuck up their own ass that their primary motive in life is to shoot everything down that they don't own, or claim there's something wrong with everyone else's ears.

Meanwhile put them in a dark room and blind test them and they fail. But of course then they'll blame anything but just being so far up their own ass.

It's like the Ferrari oke with too much money saying that the other dude with the Ford Focus ST has a **** car, yet that oke is miles away already because he's actually a better driver and not stuck on showing off.
 
Last edited:
and only when Apple offered, was it viable. Again, Apple nailed the timing too a tee!

I think it comes down to Apple is great at taking existing technology and making it mainstream. The MP3 player, the smartphone, the tablet, etc. They all existed before Apple joined the respective markets.
 
[XC] Oj101;20401577 said:
I think it comes down to Apple is great at taking existing technology and making it mainstream. The MP3 player, the smartphone, the tablet, etc. They all existed before Apple joined the respective markets.

Yup. By and large their secret often is to simply wait until the time is right and whatever technology has matured and is truly ready for market.

Which is a skill in and of itself that nobody ever credits them for.

Others simply run and jump to be first out the gates but then can't finish the marathon because they didn't have the foresight of the long game.

Say what you will about Apple and hate them as much as you like but you don't become the biggest company in the world by getting it wrong repeatedly.
 
So if you only rip to ALAC/FLAC when last did you test anything else?

And can you with complete honesty pass a blind test between ALAC and iTunes Plus (which is VBR 256~ alreasy and very high bitrate lossy).

I'm not trying to say everyone should listen to 128K MP3's over Lossless here.

I'm specifixally referring to iTunes Plus (iTunes Store and Apple Music HQ Streaming) over ALAC.

Sure there might be a very very small percentage of listeners out there who can repeatedly hear the different with accuracy. Statistically though it's been proven that to the majority of listeners it's indiscernable and therefore irrelevant.

I've tested them all. ALAC, FLAC, AAC and LAME MP3 - both at 320 CBR. I also abx test with Foobar and the ABX comparator component. Granted I am using an Essence STX (lo-fi by audiophile standards) and HD 650's so I may not fall under the bulk of the normal curve but the soundstage in lossless recordings is bigger and I can consistently tell the difference.

/edit
I agree that I might not be statistically relevant.

As for the cost factor I'm pulling it completely out of my ass but we can agree that Apple market as a whole has money to spend (compared to Android at least which has a much wider range including much cheaper phones and devices and we can take it further to the Mac platform as well) so it stands to reason on a "per device" level they would spend more money on related high quality items like audio equipment.

Is this still strictly true given that you can pick up an Iphone 5s for like R250 p/m on topup contract? Sure, it may not be the latest and greatest but it still runs iOS 10. Is this purely a spending thing or is it how brands have marketed themselves? I see plenty of iPhone users with Beats headphones. >.<

Anyway with modern streaming services like Apple and Google Music it's as near to free as it can be anyway and people still choose to rather pirate stuff.

But you still have to pay for the data with all those streaming services. With the album download, you only download it once. Like I said, the market has shifted. More and more, artists are having to make their money the old school way, by touring.

/edit
ALAC is also open source.
 
Last edited:
I've tested them all. ALAC, FLAC, AAC and LAME MP3 - both at 320 CBR. I also abx test with Foobar and the ABX comparator component. Granted I am using an Essence STX (lo-fi by audiophile standards) and HD 650's so I may not fall under the bulk of the normal curve but the soundstage in lossless recordings is bigger and I can consistently tell the difference.

/edit
I agree that I might not be statistically relevant.

Well that's fair enough, if you have self-tested and can honestly say you really notice the difference enough for it to matter to you then by all means go large.

But then by the same token you would take it seriously enough to probably not care to play it from your phone anyway.

And as you say statistically not really relevant so it wouldn't make sense for anyone in the business of making profit to go out of their way for you.

Is this still strictly true given that you can pick up an Iphone 5s for like R250 p/m on topup contract? Sure, it may not be the latest and greatest but it still runs iOS 10. Is this purely a spending thing or is it how brands have marketed themselves? I see plenty of iPhone users with Beats headphones. >.<

Yeah I guess there is an element of that more and more these days with the older phones being kept in the line, but I was more looking at sales of the new devices to say there are enough in the wild to draw comparisons from. At the same time I'm still rocking an iPhone 5S quite happily although it's time has now come mostly because I want a Plus as a kind of stop gap for my iPad.

Sadly I see way too many people with Beats headphones, whether connected to an iPhone or otherwise. I guess there is also a perception now that they work better together with iPhones because they belong to Apple, which is technically true of the new wireless series.

That being said I suspect most audiophiles are like myself (I don't claim to be an audiophile) in that they generally want to listen to their tunes in the comfort of their own space without disturbance and therefore don't take their music (and audio gear) "out on the road" in general.

The Beats type of people already settled on mediocre so will listen to their music anywhere and everywhere, maybe partly to show off their expensive (but lacking) head gear.

But you still have to pay for the data with all those streaming services. With the album download, you only download it once. Like I said, the market has shifted. More and more, artists are having to make their money the old school way, by touring.

I see data usage as a separate thing and really shouldn't relate to the music service itself. You've either accepted your habits as a high data user and it's become irrelevant to you, or you simply don't use data and opt for the offline download when on Wireless etc.

Ultimately you could really use a Streaming service exactly like a direct purchase one and simply pay a monthly fee to download whatever you like when you like just like you did when purchasing outright.

For me personally as someone who travels a lot A/FLAC would just make my life hard through either being very limited in what I can take with me or having to schlep a hard drive around. As it is now I load a few albums on my phone or tablet and off I go for the odd bit of listening I might do on the plane which almost never actually happens as it feels like a broken experience.

Once I hit my hotel or office on the other side I have access to WiFi and just live stream whatever I feel like with access to millions of tunes.

Even if I did consider FLAC superior that portability would be a worthwhile compromise for me.

The other night in a moment of nostalgia I even broke out some of my old SACD's and after the drama of having to make it work with an actual physical connection to something and moving chairs around and what not I ended up switching to the Apple Music version half way through just to be somewhat free and wireless and it was indistinguishable outside of the convenience factor.

/edit
ALAC is also open source.

I actually forgot about that. Probably did it after they stopped selling Lossless.
 
I've tested them all. ALAC, FLAC, AAC and LAME MP3 - both at 320 CBR. I also abx test with Foobar and the ABX comparator component. Granted I am using an Essence STX (lo-fi by audiophile standards) and HD 650's so I may not fall under the bulk of the normal curve but the soundstage in lossless recordings is bigger and I can consistently tell the difference.

/edit
I agree that I might not be statistically relevant.

See the forum is on the blink so may as well use this duplicate post.

As I recall the iTunes Plus format is minimum 256 VBR scaling up to higher bitrate as required but not sure what the maximum is.

But from what I read about it way back when it seemed like the perfect compromise of quality vs space, whereas Lossless would make for a huge file even if it didn't contain much in the way of audio information.

Essentially iTunes Plus is supposed to just strip out the non-essentials.

I use a pair of Sennheiser Game One's now most of the time which I believe is the same as the 599 but in a ****tier plastic body. Also lo-fi I guess but a hell of a long way from Beats and closer to reference.

Have a pair of Ultimate Ears from way back when before Logitech took over but I always find with in-ears you can't get the fit just right every time and therefore it can be inconsistent. When they work they work great though and I use them when I want the isolation from the world especially with the memory foam buds. Cable rustle is a huge pain in the ass though.

Keen to try the HD 4.50 BTNC for a fully wireless option. Maybe even take a look at the Bose QC35's but the QC25's didn't massively impress me back when they launched.
 
Last edited:
I'm on a phone and battling to quote, but here's a few points :

There's always this thing that iPhone users are rich and Android poor. Yet on a contract which most users take - it's like R200.00pm ....

Business ARE making a model. Tidal offer both FLAC and MQA ; with Deezer and Spotify following. Apple are lagging as usual, but it's a question of when are rather then if.

I didn't read the full review (on a phone) but for every review that says there is no difference, I have two saying there is a difference (not on Bose or B&O). Did that review say HOW he was streaming and on what package?

EDIT : Go to the avforums for guys - really qualified guys - and see their real world thoughts
 
I'm on a phone and battling to quote, but here's a few points :

There's always this thing that iPhone users are rich and Android poor. Yet on a contract which most users take - it's like R200.00pm ....

Business ARE making a model. Tidal offer both FLAC and MQA ; with Deezer and Spotify following. Apple are lagging as usual, but it's a question of when are rather then if.

I didn't read the full review (on a phone) but for every review that says there is no difference, I have two saying there is a difference (not on Bose or B&O). Did that review say HOW he was streaming and on what package?

EDIT : Go to the avforums for guys - really qualified guys - and see their real world thoughts
PS Tidal with a MP3 sound is the same price as Apple. It's double with FLAC and MQA only. As for the library mentioned in your review being less, I really cannot find music unavailable at all. I'm using Tidal, Spotify and Deezer and 99%of the stuff is the same
 
Anyway ... I hate these arguments or debates as there a few guys that join that can't hear any difference between any speaker. Then, they argue that anyone that spends anything on audio is pompous and arrogant.

So, I rather avoid the trolls when they inevitably join
 
Well that's fair enough, if you have self-tested and can honestly say you really notice the difference enough for it to matter to you then by all means go large.

But then by the same token you would take it seriously enough to probably not care to play it from your phone anyway.

And as you say statistically not really relevant so it wouldn't make sense for anyone in the business of making profit to go out of their way for you.

This is a fair point. I have a 5S too and for my phone I got to 256 AAC. At home it's different though and if it wasn't for the phone and iTunes, I'd probably still have my collection in FLAC


Yeah I guess there is an element of that more and more these days with the older phones being kept in the line, but I was more looking at sales of the new devices to say there are enough in the wild to draw comparisons from. At the same time I'm still rocking an iPhone 5S quite happily although it's time has now come mostly because I want a Plus as a kind of stop gap for my iPad.

Sadly I see way too many people with Beats headphones, whether connected to an iPhone or otherwise. I guess there is also a perception now that they work better together with iPhones because they belong to Apple, which is technically true of the new wireless series.

That being said I suspect most audiophiles are like myself (I don't claim to be an audiophile) in that they generally want to listen to their tunes in the comfort of their own space without disturbance and therefore don't take their music (and audio gear) "out on the road" in general.

The Beats type of people already settled on mediocre so will listen to their music anywhere and everywhere, maybe partly to show off their expensive (but lacking) head gear.

I just think it's marketing.

Have a pair of Ultimate Ears from way back when before Logitech took over but I always find with in-ears you can't get the fit just right every time and therefore it can be inconsistent. When they work they work great though and I use them when I want the isolation from the world especially with the memory foam buds. Cable rustle is a huge pain in the ass though.

Incidentally, I had a pair of UE Superfi's. Those were some superb iems. Small double flanges always get me the best isolation/convenience.

I see data usage as a separate thing and really shouldn't relate to the music service itself. You've either accepted your habits as a high data user and it's become irrelevant to you, or you simply don't use data and opt for the offline download when on Wireless etc.

Ultimately you could really use a Streaming service exactly like a direct purchase one and simply pay a monthly fee to download whatever you like when you like just like you did when purchasing outright.

At home this may be less of an issue but mobile data is still expensive for most. Also, in a country like South Africa can the bulk of all who fall under the normal curve claim this?

For me personally as someone who travels a lot A/FLAC would just make my life hard through either being very limited in what I can take with me or having to schlep a hard drive around. As it is now I load a few albums on my phone or tablet and off I go for the odd bit of listening I might do on the plane which almost never actually happens as it feels like a broken experience.

Once I hit my hotel or office on the other side I have access to WiFi and just live stream whatever I feel like with access to millions of tunes.

Even if I did consider FLAC superior that portability would be a worthwhile compromise for me.

Yeah, this is why I go to AAC for my phone.
 
Last edited:
Lol ahhhh but when will Android support ALAC ? Apple have had that since forever ;) Btw Playstation ftw! *sarcasm*

Perhaps the proprietary nature of ALAC kept others from using ALAC - wiki:
After initially keeping it proprietary from its inception in 2004, in late 2011 Apple made the codec available open source and royalty-free.
Seems to me that when Apple realized it had lost the Lossless compression adoption to FLAC, it gave up.
 


So I got to reading the review.

The results he got don't reflect the same results elsewhere. In many tests, you often get a 'no difference' - but very, very few come out with Apple being better. In fact, he says 'clearly Apple on top'. But the guys is clearly a massive fan - he's got a plethora of iPhones, iPads, Airports and his Twitter has so many references to Apple. I bet digging harder would show him CultOfMac. I wouldn't even take this review with a pinch of salt ;)

But let's pretend it's object - I don't understand how he connected the phone to the HiFi for the test? He says this :

Update: I probably should have mentioned that we were streaming from an iPhone 6, an iPad Pro, and an iPad Mini to an old Airport Express connected to the preamp with an optical cable.

He starts with a R500,000.00 audio system to compare audio quality - and that's how he does it? :/

Then read the reply in the comment regarding XB testing :

com.jpg
 
Last edited:
I also think if there was truly no difference or Apple was far superior, there would be no reasons for Tidal, Spotify and Deezer to go the expense of offering lossless?

I think the fact that other streaming services are going that was, means there may be some merit. Yes, I do understand that not everyone can hear it or has the equipment to hear it - but there certainly are people that can.

As I said earlier, everyone is going that route and Apple will eventually go that route as well (though, by then, I suspect all other services will again be generation ahead with MQA streaming).

On the library - what songs does Apple have that I wouldn't? Some arb Russains bands or something? I find everything has the same as what I need - and in fact Spotify had a few songs (local) that Tidal had.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X