That’s what they said about iTunes and the vcr back in the 80s. But what record companies don’t understand is that those services make the United States as a whole more interested in music.
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.
YouTube to Launch Music Subscription Service in March 2018
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I understand wanting to avoid compression wherever possible, but blind tests really do prove that there is almost absolutely no difference between a 320 kbps mp3 and a FLAC. The difference between 160 kbps is even very hard to tell as well. In the long list of factors influencing audio quality, file size compression is fairly close to the bottom in terms of how much it affects quality. Of course, it can be a huge factor if it's something like 96kbps or lower, but above that you have to be fairly discerning, and above 320 kbps it's really just a placebo.
How many failed premium services do Alphabet have to create under the YouTube brand before they realize it isn't working?
“With our first exclusive single from none other than...PEW DIE PIE!”
Which spells trouble for Spotify. Youtube (Google) wouldn't care about the music streaming part not making money, as they are making money from ads. Apple is also similar, as their main profits come from hardware sales. Spotify, on the other hand, will be pushed more and more into a corner.
Ok so there’s YouTube Music and then Google Play Music? Merge the two and make one service.
Why? More competition means cheaper music. Everyone wins
What they already keep doing? Incomplete offering, national restrictions, in screen advertisments, low quality, no standardized formats, [free to enter more]....
Not their forte. They rarely seem to stick with the additional services they offer.
I don't believe so. As has been rumored for months, I think this is a rebranding thing where Google Play Music (never a good name) and Youtube Red will be merged into a new service, hence the remix name. It would make sense since you already get both when you pay for one of the two.
I wonder what that means to grandfathered GPM plans though? I guess we will know in a few months.
I woke up, saw this story and thread and thought I was looking at a very old article. Why is this being touted as something "new" for google? I've been enjoying Google Play Music since it launched. I find it superior to Apple Music and others (completely subjective). I loved when I was then grandfathered into YouTube Red and don't have to deal with Ads on YouTube. I wonder why there needs to be renegotiations and this is being touted as a new space they are entering. So odd.
Don’t stick your nose too high in the air... you’ll give yourself a nosebleed.
I hope they ditch the crappy MP3 currently Play Music uses. It sounds the worst of all the services and many tracks play like a scratched up CD.
[doublepost=1512740453][/doublepost]
Play Music sounds bad. I hope YouTube music uses AAC or there V9 codec something better than MP3.
[doublepost=1512740453][/doublepost]
Then you are deaf. I can easily tell the difference. I guess you can't even tell the difference between 720p and 1080p and it does not matter if you are 5ft away. I just got a 4K 43" TV and I can easily tell the difference between 1080p and 4K. 1080p looks great but 4K blows it away sitting far away on my so called small screen where you say it does not matter.
Play Music sounds bad. I hope YouTube music uses AAC or there V9 codec something better than MP3.
Last edited:
Confusion probably based on a poorly written and researched article by MR. Try this one: https://9to5google.com/2017/12/07/youtube-google-music-service-march-2018/
Not another one. Just a combination of the two you mentioned.
1. Google never care about 3rd world countries.
2. you might never have a real PC or Mac app for that
3. get ready for "machine learning" playlist, guys
2. you might never have a real PC or Mac app for that
3. get ready for "machine learning" playlist, guys
I use GPM. Turn up the quality to High and it sounds great, even on decent headphones. I've not heard any scratchy CD's or low bitrate artifacts on High.
Doubtful if blind and randomized on consumer grade stuff.
You're seeing the increased color information and color space of 4k vs the increased resolution, especially on small sets at a distance away. That's why you "easily" see the difference. The resolution most likely will not be noticed.
They've had YouTube music for awhile now and Google already has Google Play Music. Between those two services, I'm not really sure what Google/Alphabet is thinking. Too much fragmentation!
Believe me, I sit 4 feet from my 40" 4K TV for a reason. There is a clear difference. But video resolution is not analogous to music compression. I have some pretty great headphones: the Audio Technica ATH M50x, and when I take this test I just can't hear any major distinctions between the various compression rates.
It's actually a consolidation. The article is just missing some key info.