Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,966
1,463
Washington DC
Nice line in snark you have there.

We've gone backwards in audio quality while the quality of video (VHS to DVD to BRD and now 4k) has come on in leaps and bounds in the same timeframe.

Yeah, but Blue Ray (and everything below it) is nowhere close to actual quality. Nor is that 4k video you're about to buy soon. I just think it's funny that people who bitch and moan about audio being compressed have no issue with compressed video.


Straw man aside, the bottom line is that music from the ITMS isn't even as good a quality that as that found on audio CDs. That technology is decades old.

I just think it's funny that you're holding up 44.1 KHz CDs up as your own personal standard.

The ad you quoted claims the audio is "virtually indistinguishable" from the (96 KHz) original recordings. Now, ok, I get that you don't buy that and think they're lying, but do you really think they're lying by THAT much? That when they claim is sounds close to 96 you're saying that it's worse than 44?

If that's true that's a pretty bold lie on their part.
 

diegogaja

macrumors 6502
Sep 16, 2009
368
170
lossless=useless?

Just think about where the average person listens to music. I would guess that 90% of music is 'consumed' in the car or on headphones and maybe in the house.
Lossless is useless if the speakers aren't in an environment that supports the quality. Why offer lossless when HOW the overwhelming majority of people listen to music would make the argument of quality moot?


Nice line in snark you have there.

Straw man aside, the bottom line is that music from the ITMS isn't even as good a quality that as that found on audio CDs. That technology is decades old.

We've gone backwards in audio quality while the quality of video (VHS to DVD to BRD and now 4k) has come on in leaps and bounds in the same timeframe.
 

bradl

macrumors 603
Jun 16, 2008
5,927
17,409
I have to disagree about Lady Gaga. Find me another pop artist that can play 15 instruments, writes their own lyrics, and can sing without synth.

I also thought the same about Lady Gaga, especially since most artists now couldn't play an instrument to save their lives. She is one that proved me wrong, as well Katy Perry, especially if she took her guitar and wares to Nashville to belt out a Christian Album and try to become the next Amy Grant, which she wrote the music for.

But then again, I have high standards; a singer is just that: a singer. A musician is someone who can sing and play an instrument at the same time. Gaga and Perry have that. For that matter, I'd love to see Beyonce could do behind a piano.

BL.
 

w00master

macrumors 65816
Jul 18, 2002
1,126
345
Find it hilarious when folks say "their music taste is better than someone else's."

Quit living in that fantasy. Your music taste is *no better* than anyone else's. Get off your high horse.

Astounding the arrogance of some folks on here. Astounding.

w00master
 

milo

macrumors 604
Sep 23, 2003
6,891
522
Now if it is just for iTunes only, then I would understand. Just saying that it "breaks records" is a bit misleading...

It is just for iTunes only. Again, who said it "breaks records" other than that?

music from the ITMS isn't even as good a quality that as that found on audio CDs.

Again, have you done a blind ABX listening comparison to make sure you can actually hear the difference?
 

Michael CM1

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2008
5,681
276
Same here. I bought the iTunes version of "We Can't Stop" by Miley Cyrus so I could explore it in a non-radio environment. Once I decided that I really liked the song I bought the CD from Amazon.

Not only do I have a durable hard copy the difference between CD "We Can't Stop" and iTunes "We Can't Stop" is dramatic. Had it been released at HDTracks I would have gotten it there and skipped the CD.

iTunes is a great place to buy previews but that is about it if you appreciate high-quality sound reproduction.

What are you using to listen to these? I was never, ever blown away by CD quality on anything I ever used. No, I never spent $200 on headphones.

About the only times I have been able to tell about imperfections is using my car's Bluetooth audio. I can hear a few cracks on certain tracks. But that could just be Bluetooth instead of a direct connection.

I'm looking to buy some decent wireless headphones if I buy anything aside from the ear pods. The only time in the past I have ever been able to tell massive audio quality improvement is when buying movies or music that use DTS. Back in the late 1990s I bought a few DTS audio discs. THAT was like being in the recording studio. Replicate that digitally and I will pay more for it.
 

bradl

macrumors 603
Jun 16, 2008
5,927
17,409
It is just for iTunes only. Again, who said it "breaks records" other than that?

Have you noticed the title of this very thread?

"iTunes-Exclusive Beyonce Album Breaks Records With 828,773 Copies Sold in 3 Days".

Again, if you're going to claim that something breaks records, you should have a good comparison as to what record it broke. In this case, the claim is that many copies sold in that many days. There are stats that show that more copies have been sold in faster time.

BL.
 

macs4nw

macrumors 601

69650

Suspended
Mar 23, 2006
3,367
1,876
England
It's a real shame that in 2013 the music industry is still dominated by clever marketing over good content. Wiggle your fat ass in a music video and you sell loads of records whether or not you can actually sing. Tragic. No wonder the music industry is going down the toilet.
 

bradl

macrumors 603
Jun 16, 2008
5,927
17,409
It's a real shame that in 2013 the music industry is still dominated by clever marketing over good content. Wiggle your fat ass in a music video and you sell loads of records whether or not you can actually sing. Tragic. No wonder the music industry is going down the toilet.

The question left to be asked is...

If the marketing were the same (all's fair in being equal), would we have the same argument here if the artist were, say, Dexy's Midnight Runners, Kajagoogoo, Thompson Twins, Bay City Rollers, Eric Carmen, Martika, Shaun Colvin, Eagle Eye Cherry, and Shelley Farbares (just pulling names out of my head from various decades)?

If so, then music would definitely be in a bad state, because marketing would take precedence over the artist's content.

BL.
 

the8thark

macrumors 601
Apr 18, 2011
4,628
1,735
As in mutually exclusive.
Not so. Good things can be popular. But in case they are not.

I have not listened to it yet, mainly because I have never really been all that into Beyonce, but from all of my entertainment friends, dancers, DJs, etc, it appears that this album is VERY good. Again, I have not personally listened to it, but there has been no negative on it.
Good in this instance is very opinionated. You could say it sold well therefore it's good and you'd be correct. Someone else could say the music quality is bad therefore it's bad and they'd be correct too. It all depends on what aspect you are saying is good or bad.

Completely agree.
Thank you.

This is true: Quality is subjective. Popularity is objective.

Also, did you even listen to the album or are you just posting for the sake of saying something snarky?
Quality is subjective. I agree.
Popularity is objective. I disagree. Popularity is relative. People always say something is more popular than something else. In this instance this album is more popular than other albums on iTunes.

I have listened to the iTunes previews and the album is just as good as her others. Not the worst thing I've ever heard but not even close to anything I would call good. But quality is subjective. And you can't say high sales equals quality. As mindless sheep of people have brought bad things before en mass.

The album is more popular than other albums on iTunes in sales. That is fact. Each person will make their own mind up if they like the album.
 

69650

Suspended
Mar 23, 2006
3,367
1,876
England
The question left to be asked is...

If the marketing were the same (all's fair in being equal), would we have the same argument here if the artist were, say, Dexy's Midnight Runners, Kajagoogoo, Thompson Twins, Bay City Rollers, Eric Carmen, Martika, Shaun Colvin, Eagle Eye Cherry, and Shelley Farbares (just pulling names out of my head from various decades)?

If so, then music would definitely be in a bad state, because marketing would take precedence over the artist's content.

BL.

Not sure I follow your argument but sadly the music industry has all too often been about style over substance to make a quick buck for record companies, as your list clearly demonstrates.

I've heard better singers busking on my local high street than Beyonce but she sells records because she has the marketing juggernaut behind her.
 

tevion5

macrumors 68000
Jul 12, 2011
1,966
1,600
Ireland
What? Your subjective taste in music is different than someone else's? Tell me more.

Sorry dint mean to be a snob. I like almost all types of music. Just not pop. Which is interesting becaus that the opposite to most. The more music I hear, the more respect I gain for a style, from classical to rock to hip hop. But at the same time, pop becomes duller and duller.

----------

Did you know that "pop" is short for popular music? You just said, "I'll never understand [popular] music's popularity."

That's all there is too it. Pop music is what's popular. That's it. It changes with what's popular.

_______


Question: what artist/band held the record before this?

Yeah I know, just personally I fond the popular stuff, the least musically interesting :p
 

bradl

macrumors 603
Jun 16, 2008
5,927
17,409
Not sure I follow your argument but sadly the music industry has all too often been about style over substance to make a quick buck for record companies, as your list clearly demonstrates.

Sorta my point. Some of those in that list clearly had more substance than style, but if it weren't for the marketing behind Beyonce, wouldn't have carried those numbers.

And seeing the numbers that some artists have put up that were clearly based on style or some sort of gimmick over the past few years, you can easily tell when things really picked up, then went downhill.

Choose your decade: 1990s? Right around 1996/1997.

1980s? 1983, and 1987.

1970s? I would say 1977, though could have been earlier.

My point: we've seen enough sales like this to almost go 'ho hum' about it over the years. Now.. If Paul McCartney's new album did this, then there would be something to talk about, because there would be very few living artists that could have that number of album sales in at least 5 different decades.

I've heard better singers busking on my local high street than Beyonce but she sells records because she has the marketing juggernaut behind her.

Agreed.

BL.
 

AFDoc

Suspended
Jun 29, 2012
2,864
629
Colorado Springs USA for now
ZZZZzzzzZZZZzzzz


Glad she sold so many and made a ton of money. I have no respect for the woman because she can't be honest with the world and tell us she used a surrogate for her first child. Don't be ashamed, someone did a wonderful thing for you, be honest about it and tell the world.
 

Stewie86

macrumors member
Mar 19, 2009
74
2
Houston, TX
Okay.. flame suit is ready, so anyone who gets uptight about it, fire away.

I'm trying to figure out how this is a 'record breaker'. Let's do the math here. From the OP:




This means that to make that 828773 number, another 211,560 albums were sold in that three days time. But let's also just take the US numbers alone. That 617,213 was in three days. So let's whack that into thirds:

617213 / 3 = 205737 albums per day.

By contrast, on VH1 Classic Albums: Hysteria, Mercury Records VP David Leach mentioned that during the run of Def Leppard's Hysteria, because of Pour Some Sugar On Me, they had sold 450,000 copies of Hysteria, in one day.

That's nearly going Gold, in one day, where Gold is 500,000 albums sold.

Beyonce's album sales per day still has another 250,000 to go to even catch Hysteria, and that was done 27 years ago.

So how has this broken any records?

BL.

Simple. iTunes is digital. It broke the digital record. The album isn't available physically yet.
 

Mr Bigs

macrumors 6502a
Jan 28, 2010
500
7
Bklyn N.Y
I don't care for her music, I never liked all that r'n'b-pop stuff, but I definitely wouldn't consider her talentless, she's doing well at what she is doing and the execution of her music is flawless (something that many bands in the stale (and by now embarrasing) "future pop" scene could use)...

Anyway, it's hard to tell if this is a one time success stunt which can be repeated by others equally successful, especially as she's a major act which has been established for years now. Reminds me of the NIN "free music" phase before Reznor went crawling back to the majors admitting that he relied on them.

Please don't group R&B with pop its already mis categorized as it is.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.