.aiff files


I just converted some flac files to aiff with roxio toast. They don't show up in sonos after updating music library. Sonos can play aiff files...Yes?
Any help?

10 replies

Why did you convert from FLAC to AIFF? AIFF has patchy metadata support and is deprecated by Sonos. In fact they recommend conversion from AIFF to FLAC or ALAC.

https://sonos.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/80

If you have a look in the Folders view of the library you may find the AIFF files there, listed by file name.
I thought I remembered that sonos can aiff. files. I wanted embed the artwork in itunes add itunes won't open flac. How can I add artwork to flac files?
If you're an iTunes user I suggest you use ALAC. iTunes can't support FLAC natively.
😮 D'oh, I don't know why I didn't realize Toast converted to apple lossless.
Thanks
Userlevel 3
Badge +1
...AIFF has patchy metadata support and is deprecated by Sonos.

I don't recognize this at all. 95% of my music library consists out of .aiff files, the rest apple lossless.
Both file types are perfectly supported by SONOS and regarding metadata, I do not see any difference. Not in iTunes and not in SONOS.

I'm confused now.
Perhaps "patchy" was the incorrect term. From https://sonos.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/80:
AIFF Details

Audio Interchange File Format (AIFF) is an uncompressed and lossless audio format.

Sonos does not recommend choosing AIFF files for your library because of AIFF's outdated metadata support. You can acheive the same audio quality by using FLAC or Apple Lossless, both of which fully support metadata and album art.
Userlevel 3
Badge +1
Hmmm…. personally I think on the long run ALAC will slowly make room for AIFF or any other uncompressed format.

Storage is getting more cheap by the week, and FLAC and ALAC only compress about 30% of the original file.

What I consider a big plus for uncompressed vs compressed files is speed; ripping a CD and changing metadata is considerably faster with uncompressed files.

Anyway, I think this is a nice discussion for a new post 😉
Hmmm…. personally I think on the long run ALAC will slowly make room for AIFF or any other uncompressed format.
Seriously? Outside of professional applications, network bandwidth and metadata support are still going to be issues even if storage space isn't.

So will Windows users migrate to WAV? I hardly think so.

What I consider a big plus for uncompressed vs compressed files is speed; ripping a CD and changing metadata is considerably faster with uncompressed files.
The rip is a one-time operation. And sensible tag editing reads the metadata off the start (or end) of the file, not the whole file. It doesn't care about the music data itself.

Even if a tag editor were to read the entire file is your argument that a big file is read from disk or across a network more quickly than a smaller one?

One assumes that Sonos know a thing or two and they advise against both AIFF and WAV, largely owing to the outdated metadata support. "Outdated" suggests to me that the trend is away from these formats, not towards them.

What I consider a big plus for uncompressed vs compressed files is speed; ripping a CD and changing metadata is considerably faster with uncompressed files.


You have a point, but I'm not sure if there is a clear "win". If one stores music on a resource out on the network, a faster processor might result in faster turnaround working with a compressed file than a slower processor waiting for larger file transfers across the network.

Tagging issues are what they are, irrespective of ultimate file size.

When I rip, I keep a stack of discs by the computer, set the ripper to open the tray as a disc finishes, and I feed the tray as needed. I don't pay much attention to each rip unless there is some sort of major issue. After the discs are done, I'll check and correct the tags.

The actual ripping is a background task that does not require much of my concentration. Tagging requires full attention. I'll make sure that the new files are stored on my computer because tag editing is so much faster if there is no network access required. Eventually the files are moved offline to the NAS.

There may be a setting in your ripper that will accelerate slow tag editing. One ripper that I have used opened a minimal tagging area at the beginning of the file. Later, as I edited the tags, if the tagging area turned out to be too small, the whole file needed to be copied in order to expand the tag area. Over a network this copy took a while and it was very annoying. Eventually I found the option and expanded the tagging area allocation at rip time.

If you can find a suitable tagging scheme, rip uncompressed to save time, then batch convert to a more modern format for SONOS play and tag support. For most home users the computer is in idle mode most of the time, give it something to chew on. If the batch runs for a few hours or more, it does not matter in the overall scheme of things -- you don't need to watch or nurse the process.
Userlevel 2
yeal, apple lossless m4a is more recommend

Reply

    Cookie policy

    We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

    Accept cookies Cookie settings