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

Apple Laying Groundwork for Apple Music Classical Feature Launching in 2022

ackmondual said:
No suggestions for Haydn or Bach songs. Instead, we think you'd like... Taylor Swift :D :p
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm missing it on Spotify but why is it so difficult to find the last 100 songs you have played? It feels as if the people designing these streaming services have no earthly experience of actually using them on a daily basis.

I know this is about Apple Music but I suspect they have the same problem.

Update: OK, also what I hate about Spotify, the home screen on the IOS app and the webplayer seems to change all the time, sometimes they have recommended daily albums, other times it is missing, anyway I see Recently Played, has about 20 songs, but no way to get more, show me what I played for the past six months to one year, I would use the service more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phrehdd
CyberGene said:
Anybody who thinks it's a good idea to integrate a specialized classical music search and browse into the existing Apple Music app, which is already bloated beyond recognition, is clearly not a diehard classical music fan. We need the IDAGIO equivalent and that's what the dedicated Apple Classical Music app is for. I'm pretty sure the entire classical music catalog will remain in the regular app to be accessible for people who do mixed playlists of hip-hop and classical, you just won't use the new app, so all will be good, all right?
Click to expand...

Lets pray that's true I need my classical in my playlists with Drake and Doja Cat.
 
MacRumors said:


Apple appears to be preparing for the upcoming launch of Apple Music Classical, a standalone classical music app that will be available alongside the Apple Music app.

apple-music.jpg

Mentions of Apple Classical have appeared in backend code used by Apple, suggesting that we could perhaps be seeing Apple Music Classical debut in the near future.


Apple Music Classical will be built around Primephonic, a classical music service that Apple purchased more than a year ago. When Apple acquired Primephonic, the company promised an improved classical music experience for Apple Music subscribers.

Apple said there would be a "dedicated classical music app" coming in 2022, with the app combining Primephonic's classical user interface with "more added features." With roughly 90 days to go until the end of the year, there isn't a lot of time left for Apple to make the promised 2022 timeline.

There are no new signs of Apple Music Classical that have been added in the iOS 16.1 beta as of yet, so Apple could be saving it for a future iOS 16 release that's planned before the end of the year.

Article Link: Apple Laying Groundwork for Apple Music Classical Feature Launching in 2022
Click to expand...
We have had how many, 10, 15, 20? years of a totally lame Apple Music. This upgrade is that late in making it to the market. This belated upgrade has even been beaten out by the restoration of mail merge to Pages, which disappeared for around 10 years. As much as I appreciate Apple products, they often have ill-considered holes in them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Cromulent said:
Does it matter? FLAC and ALAC have the same quality if they have the same input. OK, it might take a little while to convert from FLAC to ALAC, but you only need to do it once and back up both FLAC and ALAC files, so you never need to worry again.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. A FLAC to ALAC convert takes less than a second per song on my intel Mac.
 
MrRom92 said:
It does matter, why would I waste an extra 4TB of space and god knows how long for a conversion just to store a second copy of my library in an Apple friendly format? Why would I want to maintain double the amount of data? Apple should simply support what the rest of the music industry is actually using. Hint: it’s not ALAC
Click to expand...
The music "industry" isn't using FLAC at all. And why would you just not delete the FLAC on convert?
 
ErikGrim said:
The music "industry" isn't using FLAC at all. And why would you just not delete the FLAC on convert?
Click to expand...
Yes, the rest of the market has adopted FLAC to the point that it’s become synonymous with lossless audio in general. You only ever hear people mentioning ALAC in the context of having some kind of problem with an Apple product.
Why would I convert my library to a larger and less secure format and then delete the verifiably good original? Why not just delete my entire library at that point? Why ask strangers to convert instead of asking a trillion dollar tech company to support a common file format that no other company seems to have an issue with?
 
whsbuss said:
I’m a jazz head… how about one for us
Click to expand...

That would be great.
Particularly useful would be support for adding metadata listing each musician/instrument on a recording and being able to search on this. Classifying which subgenre of jazz an album contains would be useful as well, as would being able to list recording vs. release dates, or multiple recording dates etc. etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whsbuss
MrRom92 said:
No citation necessary - just use the encoders and see it for yourself. ALAC files are inflated relative to a FLAC -8 and don’t store an MD5
Click to expand...
Most file types don't store an embedded MD5.

FWIW, I currently have about 20 TB of data, and over the last 10+ years, I've copied/moved it between numerous hard drives on the same PC using USB2/3 docks and different PC's over wired and wireless networks. I keep two backup sets, one stored in a separate location and rotated monthly. About 2/3 of my 600 GB audio library is lossless, and individual albums checked out with Accurip before I added them. I've maintained a separate hash database of all 20 TB all this time, and I've never found a single discrepancy in my local copy or the backups. Reviewing my logs, I've been verifying each set 2-4 times per year, right after copying and just for the heck of it. Thus, even if you're lazy, I don't think you have to worry much about silent corruption, and even if you think you do, what are you doing about all your other files? I think it's a lot more likely to have a drive failure than a "file failure".

OTOH, I can't really object to storing checksums inside (nominally) write-once files. For example, I wouldn't want to use an archive format that didn't self-verify its contents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim
I would expect classical music will continue to be available on the standard Apple Music app and the new classical App will cater for classical enthusiasts for the extra features it will provide - so no big deal. I like both modern pop music and baroque so will continue just using the Apple Music app. If Apple provides a free trial I will try it for sure!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back