To convert or not to convert

[Vertigo Acid]

I have a large FLAC library. >20K songs
I now have a Mac Mini running my HTPC w/ FrontRow
iTunes doesn't like FLACs. I can play them via an OGG container, but tagging support is poor, no gapless playback, etc. All in all, it's a giant clusterfuck
I'm considering transcoding to ALAC
Thoughts?

 

[Moofasa~]

Well if you can (if you have enough space), I would keep all your FLAC files backed up on a separate computer/hard drive (or the same one if you want to) and encode a second copy of your files into high bitrate mp3 (so it's transparent to sound quality loss). I think the highest quality setting for LAME is -V0 --vbr-new (unless if they have changed it). I have a similar setup; all my files are in wavpack for computer playback/archiving, but I also have a separate copy in wma pro (QBR 98) for my Xbox360/Archos 605. That way I can still convert to any audio codec in the future (without degrading sound quality) with ease and still have a portable codec now (one that works on multiple devices). I have close to a terabyte of hard drive space though; I don't know your current situation.

If you plan to only use itunes and an ipod for the foreseeable future, converting to ALAC might not be a bad idea (it would be the easiest solution to do). However be warned that ALAC does not have much support outside the itunes/ipod configurations (so if you ever plan to grow out of you Mac phase, you will probably have to encode your files again ). In really depends on what you want to do.

 

[Vertigo Acid]

I'm not going to transcode FLAC to MP3, keep the FLACs, and then listen to the MP3s... No point in having the FLACs in the first place, then.

No iPod, just the Mac as HTPC, and I'm aware that I may have to transcode back to another lossless format in the future. But besides portability (Amarok on my linux boxen handles ALAC just fine), are there any other downsides to choosing to go from one lossless format to another?

 

[Moofasa~]

I'm not going to transcode FLAC to MP3, keep the FLACs, and then listen to the MP3s... No point in having the FLACs in the first place, then.

Not exactly. Once you encode to a lossy codec, you can never encode to another codec again without severe loss of audio quality. The point of keeping files in a lossless codec is that you can encode to any other codec in the future.

But besides portability (Amarok on my linux boxen handles ALAC just fine), are there any other downsides to choosing to go from one lossless format to another?

Encoding from one lossless codec to another lossless codec will not result in audio quality loss (it's like unpacking a .zip file then compressing it with 7-zip).

But there are differences between lossless codecs; you just have to decide what is important to you.

 

[Decibel]

Why not find software that supports FLAC better? Seems like an easier solution to me than transcoding everything.

 

[Vertigo Acid]

Why not find software that supports FLAC better? Seems like an easier solution to me than transcoding everything.

Well, the whole point of the Mac HTPC is Frontrow, which uses iTunes as the backend, so changing from that isn't going to happen