Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
High Definition iTunes Music Downloads May Be on the Horizon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There are people who claim they can hear the difference between 44-96-192 and 16-24. I'm not one of them. But it depends on your setup as well. I have a very expensive setup but my room is not treated. So even with this high end setup I can't tell the difference between CD and 192/24.
Roll out at WWDC? Unless they've got a developers kit for it, I'm not sure how this fits into a developer conference that has nothing to do with music.
I really can't remember when they announced iTunes Match (but that was an iOS feature) so who knows...
Gary
I appreciate your honesty. I can't imagine I'd be able to tell either, despite my obsession with increasing my aural palette. However to call it a 'placebo' as Razeus did is going a little far, I think.
It is better to have options. If you do not want it, then simply do not buy it. I am thrilled to have this available and will purchase some tracks/records worthy of the file size.
They'd definitely need to upgrade the codec. They're behind in that respect to some android device makers who have gone in on higher quality codecs.
My thought as well.
This is similar to the wine or cigar aficionados that claim they taste huge differences in wine or cigars over the price ranges. This may be true to them, but for the general population the difference isn't noticeable. So it is a big deal to a select population and not a deal at all to the others.
You're acting as if streaming can't go this route. The industry already has the 24-bit/192k files archived. It's not like they'll have to scramble to make them.
No, you can keep them just they way they are. Just like you never needed to upgrade from cassette to CD.
But seriously: I'm sure Apple will offer an upgrade path like when they started upgrading music before. What did they have us do before, pay the difference (maybe a little less for a full album)?
It'll be interesting to see how they integrate this with iTunes Match.
Stream the 256k version but make you download the larger files?
ITunes Match HD? (for $100 a year, we'll upgrade all your files?)
If you really can't hear the difference, I'm sure it's worth waiting a few years for the price to drop (and maybe future iTunes match integration).
I wouldn't have been shocked if iTunes match eventually got upgraded to 320k files, they might have to compete with other music services (but if there is a HD service, who knows).
Gary
iTunes Plus was the same way when it was introduced--either get the 128 Kbps music with DRM, or get the 256 Kbps file as plain AAC for a little more. You could also "upgrade" previous purchases to iTunes Plus for less than the price of a re-purchase.
I suspect they will have an upgrade option available for the "high def" files. Of course, now iTunes Match exists, as well, so who knows what file type it will choose to match with now. I assume, however, that the 24-bit files will eventually become the norm.
we bought zeppelin on
vinyl
reel to reel
8-track
cassette
cd
mini disc
sa cd
hd dvd
blueray
mp3
m4a
aiff
wav
ringtone
flac
and now they want to make a new format ?!
No Thanks!
If you already have it on FLAC, shouldn't you be able to convert it to whatever format you want without any degradation beyond whatever may be inherent with your destination format? And you don't have to buy a 24-bit file if your 16-bit file is working just fine. Unlike trying to use your cassette tape songs on an iPod, this will keep working just fine.
All streaming services that I know of allow you to download files to your device with a paid subscription. The talk about data caps is moot. Streaming is the future.
nice theory, now back to practical issues
Hi-res is all well and good but poor resolution is not the big problem facing Apple and iTunes. And - good luck with trying to charge a buck-per-track more for hi-res versions. My habit is to buy the physical CD from Amazon and rip that to Apple Lossless, except when the CD price is excessive (mostly older stuff). It costs a buck or two more (per CD, not per track) and I have the ability to do with it whatever I want. Although Amazon does Auto-Rip for many CDs I prefer to do the lossless thing myself.
iTunes Radio could be a good boost for sales of tunes but Apple does NOT have its act together. This could be -- could be -- the easy way to introduce people to new genres and new artists. But the playlists are way too shallow, and songs repeat too soon so that listeners are discouraged and go elsewhere.
If Apple wants to move in the music area then it would do well to focus on iTunes Radio. Hi-res is fine and some people will like it but it is not where the action is.
Hi-res is all well and good but poor resolution is not the big problem facing Apple and iTunes. And - good luck with trying to charge a buck-per-track more for hi-res versions. My habit is to buy the physical CD from Amazon and rip that to Apple Lossless, except when the CD price is excessive (mostly older stuff). It costs a buck or two more (per CD, not per track) and I have the ability to do with it whatever I want. Although Amazon does Auto-Rip for many CDs I prefer to do the lossless thing myself.
iTunes Radio could be a good boost for sales of tunes but Apple does NOT have its act together. This could be -- could be -- the easy way to introduce people to new genres and new artists. But the playlists are way too shallow, and songs repeat too soon so that listeners are discouraged and go elsewhere.
If Apple wants to move in the music area then it would do well to focus on iTunes Radio. Hi-res is fine and some people will like it but it is not where the action is.
Not Dr. Dre Beats, I hope
AKG's with plenty of ampage. Don't be ridiculous in your attempt to ridicule.
I've got some volcano insurance I'd like to sell those people - wonder if Apple would give me their contact info....
Finally, something that can take full advantage of the sonic potential heretofore hidden within Apple's earbuds.
I'd imagine there'd be an "upgrade" option like when there was one previously.
I love listening to music but know my speakers/headphones are nothing special and doubt I'd notice the difference.
and to people asking: NO, you don't NEED to buy it again. Apple is NOT FORCING anyone to buy songs again.
They will tout it as Retina for your ears or something and how the clarity brings out the 'true' audio flavor...it will feel like you are listening live and experience a concert in your head. Basically they will make you WANT to buy the music again and in the new HD format.
I love listening to music but know my speakers/headphones are nothing special and doubt I'd notice the difference.
and to people asking: NO, you don't NEED to buy it again. Apple is NOT FORCING anyone to buy songs again.
They will tout it as Retina for your ears or something and how the clarity brings out the 'true' audio flavor...it will feel like you are listening live and experience a concert in your head. Basically they will make you WANT to buy the music again and in the new HD format.
But... if you can iTunes match all your 128K ones...
I wouldn't be surprised if they'd let you. The music industry has already resorted to giving away their music for pennies anyway.
I still keep my music in digital file form, so it's not like I'm getting rid of them. I still have my CD's boxed up in a storage closet because I can't get the nerve to get rid of them. But I'm making a strong move to archive my digital music files and go strictly stream service with the offline download options.
On the contrary -- audio quality has got better. It's dynamic range that's suffered.
I really hope they wouldn't think the HD quality would be worth quadrupling the price of the existing service....double MAYBE. Though I'm thinking more like $34.99 - $49.99.