iPod help needed...


I recently picked up a 40G iPod and am in the process of importing some cd's of mine.

I am using the Apple lossless compression, thinking that would give me the best, near cd quality sound for playback.

Am I correct in using this choice?

Also, if my calculations are somewhat accurate it seems this compression will only allow for about 100 or 110 cd's of music. Yes, that is perhaps 1,500 to 1,700 songs, however that is a FAR cry from 70,000 songs as advertised.

Any advice greatly appreciated!
audiofankj
Audiofankj,

From the threads I've read on this subject that's probably the compression scheme I'd start when I get my iPod. It seems many people feel that for the space it saves the Apple Lossless sounds great. I've heard some say they can't tell the difference between it and uncompressed.

Here are some threads I found helpful:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1090434511

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1084302086&openfrom&4&4#4

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1074737533&read&keyw&zzipod
The 70,000 songs that they advertise are definitely not losslessly compressed songs. They came up with that number considering the file size of a typical song using lossy compression.

As for the quality of the Apple lossless compression scheme... if it's true lossless there will be no loss in sound quality! I've been using other more widespread and useful lossless compression schemes (FLAC and SHN) for a while and they do not do anything to the original waveform. The Apple one shouldn't, either, but I have no personal experience. You wouldn't think they would call it lossless if it wasn't, though.
Well, Ketchup, there IS no loss in quality. See John Atkinson's measuremenst in one of the recent STEREOPHILEs!
Audiofankj - I have the same pod and I can tell you that there is space space space even after having imported the comlete Schostakowitch, the complete Schubert chamber music, the complete Beatles, Pink Floyd and Van Morison let alone the complete Brahms symphonies et al.
All encoded in Apple Lossless which works without loss really. With the proper headphones (Sennheiser 600er in my case) it's pure joy to use the iPod.
A hint: check the net for "Podworks" to enable you to copy stuff FROM the pod TO your comp, which is vitally important if you have more than one Mac or PC or at least different hard disks. I also like this feature because I want to store away stuff from the iPod for future use.
Good luck!
Why not do a little experiment yourself and see what you like best. You can upload the same tracks encoded in different formats to iPod at the same time and listen to the differences in sound quality. Personally, through a pair of HD-650, I could not hear any difference between WAV, Apple Lossless, and MP3 VBR at 320bps. But I have a pair of old ears also, you might experience differently.
Think hard, and perhaps experiment, with your intended purpose. I've been a serious audiophile for several decades so I was real worried about getting an iPod mini and using digital at all, let alone compression! Then do I need to drop $300 on better headphones, do I need a headphone amp.... But hey it turns out I use my iPod mini 90% of the time on a cardio machine, where I want something with a BEAT that is DYNAMIC and portrays the EMOTIONAL content of the music. I find that the default Apple AAC format at default rate (128 I think) along with a cheap pair of headphones is fantastic! I tried a more expensive head phone (shall remain nameless) and it was better in every audiophile way (sweet extended highs, better bass, etc) but not nearly as much fun or inspiring as the cheap pair. So consider carefully your intended application!