Playing FLAC files in iTunes & Lion

Back to the topic: I found it pretty easy to convert FLAC files to MP3 files with free Audacity software (works both on a PC and on a Mac).

On top of that, if you want you can do some editing of the audio file too (like cutting, merging, fading, et cet.)...

Bump

I'd also like to know a solution besides running iTunes in 32 bit all the time...

Or maybe a good alternative...

tvick47 wrote:

Or maybe a good alternative...

what you can do is convert the FLACs to Apple Lossless files. either of these free apps can do that for you.

To run iTunes in 32bit mode, right click iTunes.app -> Get Info. There you find the option "Open in 32-bit mode". Now, Fluke For Mac can perform its magic: FLAC playback in iTunes. For me this works perfect.

Importing FLAC to iTunes and playing FLAC in iTunes are not so hard. You just need a very detailed guide and a useful tool to help you.

<Link Edited By Host>

I'd highly recommend FLACTunes. Super simple. Worth every cent!

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/flactunes/id517984121

Running iTunes in 32-Bit mode with FLUKE installed is working fine for me on Mountain Lion (10.8.1). No need to drop $3.99 unless you really want to.

Fluke for MAC worked perfectly. I had to download from http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/28768/fluke and double click on the installer and tell it to open with installer and I had to accept installing from an untrusted source. No big deal. This is just apples ways or getting you to download everything from the app store. I has untimate converter that I use to convert my video files and it has a built in audio converter and it converted all my files no problem. One song went from 3.3 mb to 1.1 mb. I have read that the flac files are larger and then I read that they essentially zip the file to make it smaller. I would say that it makes it smaller. I am going to delete all my music from my iPhone 5 and put my music on my SG3S. This is going to save space and keep the quality of the file perfect.

Hi all,

To play FLAC files in itunes there are 2 ways as discussed above:

First by running itunes in 32 bit mode via Fluke

Second by using the app FLACTunes (can be bought for $3.99) through mac appstore

If you use Fluke than it will compress your files so there is going to be data loss and whats the point of buying or downloading FLAC files if you are anyways goin to compress them. Better use mp3s.

So the only proper and easy way is to buy FLACtunes which really is a wonderful app and hardly takes a few seconds to convert the FLAC files into Apple Lossless and syncs it to itunes too.

I thank and congratulate Matthew for developing this wonderful App. Thanks!!!

"If you use Fluke than it will compress your files so there is going to be data loss..."

Not true.

Fluke does no transcoding. It gives Quicktime the FLAC codec and convinces the operating system that iTunes ought to use Quicktime (behind the scenes) for playback of those .flac files touched by set-OggS.

That's it. The FLAC files will appear in your iTunes library, and when you play one of them iTunes uses Quicktime (invisibly) for said playback.

http://soundunreason.com/TheInkWells/index.php/2009/04/the-mac-flac-itunes-blues /

At $3.99, the app is the best thing you'll find for flac conversion. fluke, and other free alternatives are time consuming, and there is a clear reason why Matt developed the tool in the first place.

Thanks man!

ainflorida wrote:

This is just apples ways or getting you to download everything from the app store.

I'm amazed how people like this get through life, when they go around making completely fabricated statements that have no basis in reality.

This guy (awkwardly) suggests that Apple wants people to download everything from the App Store [sic]. (Since we're talking about music, I presume he meant iTunes, not the App Store, because, with the exception of apps that contain music, music is not purchased on the App Store.)

Let's look at his claim:

He suggests Apple has "crippled" iTunes by not allowing it to play Flac files in order to force people to instead buy their music on iTunes. Well, if that were true, why wouldn't Apple "block" more audio formats? iTunes currently plays the following:

AAC (Advanced Audio Coding)

AIFC

AIFF

ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec)

Audible.com (formats 2, 3, and 4)

Audio CD

MP3

MP4

QDesign

QuickTime audio (audio-only movies)

SND (System 7 sound)

uLaw (AU)

WAV

If Apple wanted to "force" people to buy their music on iTunes, why allow iTunes to play any of these formats at all (besides Apple's own formats)? iTunes songs are AAC files. So, by this guy's logic, why doesn't Apple just block everything except AAC? I mean, if that's their agenda, wouldn't that be the way to do it?

I think it's safe to say that the most ubiquitous format is mp3, right? For the sake of discussion, let's assume it is. If Apple's goal were to prevent people from playing their own audio files (i.e., those other than AAC, which is sold in iTunes), wouldn't it make more sense to block support for mp3s? I mean, if we're talking "bang for the buck," wouldn't that make more sense and have the most "impact"?

Yet, in reality, FLAC -- the format that isn't supported -- is a fairly obscure format. When you consider the hundreds of millions of Apple customers, how many of them do you think are forced to buy their music on iTunes, simply because iTunes doesn't support FLAC? Furthermore, the types of users who use FLAC are also the types of users who are more likely to search the internet for -- and find -- a solution to the problem. Since FLAC users are (more or less) audiophiles, I challenge you to find serious FLAC users who, in their frustration, gave up on using FLAC and bought all their music again on iTunes -- in the lower-quality AAC format. Do you really think this person exists? Or is it more likely that people who actually use FLAC are far more likely to find another solution, rather than "give up" and buy AACs instead of converting their FLAC files.

You see? When you use your brain to think critically, you start to understand that kneejerk reactions are usually illogical.

So, rather than spewing out opinions, as if they were facts, I'm going to state some actual facts:

1. FLAC is a lossless format. Apple has its own lossless format (ALAC). (Is it possible Apple believes their lossless format is actually a better, lossless format? Who knows.)

2. Casual reading on the internet reveals there may be some legal issues with Apple including FLAC. (True or not, it's certainly more plausible than blocking the obscure FLAC as a way to force people to buy music on iTunes.)

3. Apps that convert FLAC to iTunes-compatible formats are readily available -- even on Apple's Mac App Store!! If Apple didn't want anyone using their FLAC files, why would they allow conversion apps in their own store? (Even if Apple's percentage from the developer is $1, that's far less than they'd make by blocking the apps and making people buy album after album in iTunes. So, again, this invalidates the cynical claim.)

4. FLAC files require heavy computations (decoding) on the fly, which would quickly drain the batteries of iPods, iPhones, and iPads.

(This, BTW, is the same reason that iPhones and iPads don't play Flash web sites. Because Flash drains batteries like CRAZY. On a desktop computer that's plugged into the wall? No problem. But play flash sites on a phone, and you'd be REALLY ******, REALLY fast.)

Whether you're aware of it or not, these music files don't just "play" magically on your devices. As they play, intense calculations (processing) are taking place -- "interpreting" those losslessly compressed files and converting them back to audio that you can appreciate. ALAC files require LESS processing to decode than FLAC files, which is the most plausible reason for Apple's not supporting FLAC.

(No doubt, the very people complaining that FLAC isn't supported would be the first to complain that their handheld Apple devices are "crap," because the batteries don't last.)

Yes, Apple could allow FLAC files to play in iTunes on a computer, but many users would be confused when those files didn't transfer and play on their iPods, etc. Of course, iTunes could be made to convert FLAC files before sending to an iPod, etc., etc., but for whatever reasons, Apple has decided not do do so.

Now, having said all that, I do think FLAC should be supported in Apple products. We should have the option. But, just like this guy -- making ridiculous claims, despite not knowing what he's talking about -- users would be upset if FLAC drained their batteries quickly -- but it would never even occur to them that the reason for the battery drain was the FLAC files that they prefer. They'd simply say the devices were crap.

We don't know the actual reasons Apple eschews FLAC, but critical thinking shows that blocking FLAC as a way to force people to buy music on iTunes would be a very ineffective strategy, if for no other reason than the painfully small percentage of users who even know what FLAC is, let alone prefer to use it.

Let's use our brains, folks.

Synocpator:

ainflorida was actually referring to the need to approve one's computer opening software "from an untrusted source".

Now, let's use our Valium.

He was referring to when you download and install apps OS X quite often asks you if you want to allow that app permission, since it isn't from the app store. "un-trusted sources" whatever you want to call it. He wasn't referring to buying music. And those of us that do use trading communities to share live shows from our favorite bands, must keep those files downloaded, flac, shn, etc... in our share folders. To play them we either have to convert them to a format that iTunes understands, or use a different media player that doesn't allow for sorting and organizing music as well as iTunes does. The first option (converting and playing with iTunes) means we have to have 2 copies of every downloaded lossless song, the flac to share with the trading hub, and ALAC or whatever we converted it to for iTunes to play back. That means almost double the storage capacity for each song. Just because the average music listener is content with crummy sounding compressed mp3s, AACs, or whatever other compromising format they are willing to subject their music listening ears to, doesn't mean that those of us that can actually hear the difference between lossless and lossy 16-bit formats should be neglected by Apple's decision to not support more formats of audio. Some of us still listen to vinyl LPs because they sound that much better than CDs. But we also understand that digital audio is capable of greater dynamics and resolution than the terrible CDs that were so commonly used, and would like to see more support for lossless, high resolution, higher bit rate formats as well as the compressed stuff the masses are listening to. The sad thing is, that aparently the average music listener either can't tell the difference, or doesn't care. Because instead of bettering the audio quality from CDs, the norm went the other way, and decided CD quality takes up too much data, let's compress it even more into mp3s. This was all fine and good when storage prices were expensive, but they aren't anymore. We should see a trend of audio blossoming back towards the audio quality of vinyl, but it's going the other direction.

Fine. His statement is still false.