oryoki2000 wrote:
> Walter Knapp wrote:
>
>
>>iPod Audio formats supported
>>AAC (up to 320 Kbps), MP3 (up to 320 Kbps),
>>MP3 Variable Bit Rate (VBR), WAV, AIFF(Mac only), Audible
>
>
> Oops! So Mac users can play AIFF files on their iPods. That'll teach
> me to scroll down and read the whole page before forming a
> conclusion.
It would be really, really strange for Apple to put out iPods with no
native AIFF.
I've not played with my wife's iPod in a while. When she first got it my
machine was the only one here that could load it, so I got to play a bit
back then. AIFF played back then, so is not something connected with the
current firmware update. I think the firmware is more that you can
record a audio signal than what format. With the right software I expect
any format it can use will work. Belkin, for their own reasons choose
mp3 and WAV. But let's not assume that's a limitation. It would be
interesting to use AAC, for instance.
> It will be interesting to see if the AAC format, which is part of the
> MPEG4 specification and is incorporated into Quicktime, can make
> progress against the overwhelming popularity of MPEG1 level 3 (MP3)
> format. AAC encoding produces similar sound quality to MP3, but from
> a file that's as much as 25% smaller. Since it's often a challenge
> to squeeze a movie onto a single DVD disc, AAC's smaller file size is
> an important advantage.
Actually, MPEG4 is Quicktime, they just adopted Quicktime as the new
standard and renamed it. Kind of handy for mac users for once.
Audio is being driven largely by video now. So I expect with time that
AAC, which is the official one will take over.
Remember, there is quicktime for windows as well. For those windows
folks that want to play with it.
I've got the software for it, but have been holding off messing with it
much to see if it get's going. Once it does I'll convert my website to
it. Quite a few places have implemented locks against mp3's on their
internet access. My mp3's are not at all connected with music, but get
caught in the same net. Even my wife cannot access our own frog pages at
work.
> Regarding the reverse byte order of WAV versus AIFF, the root of this
> difference is that the Motorola processors in Macintosh computers put
> the most significant bytes in the lower memory locations (so-called
> big-endian byte order), while Intel processors in PCs are little-
> endian. This is of no practical consequence since all CD writing
> programs make the appropriate adjustments without any user
> intervention other than to specify you want an "audio CD."
Not just Motorola, big-endian is standard on the various unix machines
too. Has been so as far back as I can remember, so I'm pretty sure
Motorola copied either mainframes or unix. Intel went off by themselves.
Along with some other oddball stuff still haunting windows.
In all my software I can switch back and forth between WAV and AIFF
storage. It does take processing time to do it. Since there is little
other different, I've always assumed that the conversion of bit order is
the source of the extra time. File size also shifts by a percent or so.
I'd also like to see a closer look at the sound intensity correspondence
between the two. Sound is not a straight line set of values. Matching
curves may be what's taking the effort by my editing software. I have
heard .wav files that sounded different than the CD recorded by others.
I don't, as a routine record audio CDs from .wav, but convert them to
aiff first. I would not assume just because it's automatic and does not
have to be specified that it does nothing. And, it's certainly a extra
processing step in the software.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|