I thought CD quality was 128kbps… guess I'm wrong?
The Mac speakers are mediocre at best...Apple will improve the audio quality when it improves the speakers on its mac products. The speakers on apple system are good, but apple will take it to the next level. Unlike other firms, apple does not simply give out good things by itself, they always compliment it with a better product or technology.
It's hilarious that you're assuming I'm a middle aged man when I'm only 17.It's hilarious to hear from audiophiles about the quality of encoded music when the majority of them are middle aged men who have a now impaired hearing range. But hey, whatever gets them through the day. :/
Okay, I honestly didn't think Id be listening to 256kbps in 2012. What gives? I mean, why can't they sell CD quality at the very least?
As stated by others in the thread, with good hardware and a reference pair of IEMs or headphones it is easier to hear the difference. Especially if we're talking master recordings.So you can hear the difference between 256 KBit/second AAC, especially 256 KBit/second AAC created from 24 bit, 192 KHz masters, and CD quality? Complaining about sound quality is easy, actually hearing the difference is a lot harder.
It's hilarious to hear from audiophiles about the quality of encoded music when the majority of them are middle aged men who have a now impaired hearing range. But hey, whatever gets them through the day. :/
CD is about 1434kbps or over 11x as much.
That's just the data rate of the PCM stream though. You can easily get that number down to 700kbps or less using lossless compression without losing any quality at all (I have ALAC encoded piano pieces with a bitrate below 400kbps).....
I fully understand this and have all (>97%) my music ripped using ALAC. I was simply and correctly answering to the poster that thought CD was 128kbps.
The Mac speakers are mediocre at best...
----------
It's hilarious that you're assuming I'm a middle aged man when I'm only 17.
CD is about 1434kbps or over 11x as much.
If you notice their new retina display laptops are being made with relatively small HDs. e.g. 128 GB, 256 GB. They are offering 512 GB as the most expensive model. This tells me that they won't increase kbps. In fact, everything is moving toward cloud based streaming. e.g. iTunes Match. Streaming requires 0 space. They are looking to downgrade, not upgrade. Lol.
It's almost as if the recorded & factory-pressed CD, from about 1984 until the late 1990's (when mp3's came into vogue) will historically represent the "pinnacle" of distributed audio sound.
And that we've been going downhill since!
Who wants 30MB files that would only provide a very slight improvement over 8MB ones?
At least get your facts straight. You clearly don't own one of their retina Laptops as I do. I have a high-end configuration with a 768GB SSD.
They aren't looking to downgrade. For the average listening, Apple's losless 256kbps format is perfectly fine outputting from a Mac. For those who want audio-phile quality audio, why would you even be using iTunes to purchase the music anyhow?
Some people are really oblivious to reality, and realistic usage scenarios.
A lot of people that listen to music on their computers have amps and reference headphones worth more than a used car. Hell, I've seen a lot of people who carry amps along with their media device.256kbps AAC is more than good enough. Most people listen to their music on the computer, at the gym/on their iPhone/iPod, and in the car. Who wants 30MB files that would only provide a very slight improvement over 8MB ones?
Was discussing movie HD audio the other day. Told him most people can't tell the difference between SD and HD audio. He disagreed and told me he could tell the difference so he wanted a system that would give that capability to him. He then proceeded to tell me he had to go to an audiologist the next week to be fitted for a hearing aid!! Isn't life funny?It's hilarious to hear from audiophiles about the quality of encoded music when the majority of them are middle aged men who have a now impaired hearing range. But hey, whatever gets them through the day. :/
And since when is a 256kbps iTMS file "lossless"?
I would be flustered if Apple started selling lossless. *sigh*My mistake... they are in AAC format! *lowers head in shame* haha Just checked my collection. I'm not sure why I was "sure" it was in the Apple Lossless format.
Do you folks know of any website that sells downloads of NEW lossless files?