Apple Releases iTunes 10.5.1 Beta 3 for More iTunes Match Testing

[Nunyabinez]

Does the transferred metadata include lyrics? In previous versions it was reported that those weren't included in files from Match along with other metadata.

Also, can audio files be excluded by changing them from Music to another type (like Audiobook or voice note)? I'm sure I'm not the only one with a bunch of files that have no reason to be included in Match.
.

Unfortunately, I don't have any lyrics stored so, I can't tell if they are preserved. I would assume that they are preserved. There isn't a way to get a "pure" file without it being based on your existing meta-data, so Apple isn't going to replace or add info, but I don't think anything gets stripped. I do know that commends are preserved, which makes me think that lyrics would be if you have added them yourself.

Audiobooks are excluded, but not files that have Audiobooks as the genre, so if you convert them to a true audio book then it should be excluded, but then it will be in the books area.

----------

wont they need to wipe it again because of beta 3? the public release is probably farther away than if that is the case.

In iTunes it still reminds you that you are using a beta and that you should not delete any files from your computer that you want to retain, so I am almost certain that there will still be one more wipe before it goes live. So, we will probably get a few day's notice before it launches, which means it is at best a few days away, but more likely a week to ten days.

 

[Nunyabinez]

Try reading my post again.

So, are you saying that someone would delete all their music off all their devices and then not renew iTunes match? If that's the case then they are too stupid to own music and deserve to lose it .

But, seriously, if that is not what you are saying I don't understand you. A matched file that has been downloaded to your computer is completely independent of your relationship with Apple or with Match. It is an AAC file that behaves exactly like a file ripped directly from a CD. Since Match is not designed to be a streaming service, not renewing the service only stops you from downloading from the cloud. You could still put your music on a thumb drive and move it to another machine.

I know that there will be people who rely on match as the repository for their music and only keep a few of their songs on their machines, but that is incredibly foolish. What I am doing is designating one Mac as my music master device. Everything will be kept on that machine (most of it in Lossless). On my MBP, iPhone, iPad, etc. I will only keep the songs that I am actively listening to. So, if any of you are considering having songs only in the cloud (at least for more than a few seconds), I would ask you to reconsider.

----------

Does the transferred metadata include lyrics? In previous versions it was reported that those weren't included in files from Match along with other metadata.

Ok, you got me curious. So I went and pasted lyrics into a song in my Mac Pro library (my main library). I walked over to my MBP (which I emptied all the songs from to see what the cloud looks like) and downloaded the song. Sure enough the lyrics were there. I didn't even have to update Match, within just a few seconds, it copied it up to the cloud.

So, it will preserve your lyrics, but as I said, nothing will get added or changed by Apple.

 

[Defender2010]

Roll on iTunes match

 

[KeithJenner]

But, seriously, if that is not what you are saying I don't understand you.

It's quite simple.

People keep on questioning whether upgraded files will still work if they don't renew iTunes Match, and they are given the same answer stating that the files are DRM free. It seems that in many cases that doesn't convince people.

What I am saying is that, forgetting the technical reasons for a while, Apple wouldn't use files that will expire anyway because if they did then many people would find that they are left with no working file at all if they let Match expire. The press coverage etc if Apple did that would be horrendous.

I gave an example such a situation. That's all.

Whether anyone would be wise to do what I demonstrated in the example is irrelevant. The fact is that people will do so.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

Sure, the matched music you GET won't have DRM, but what's to stop them using this to catch people who try to match music that has been tagged as pirated.

That won't help much. I don't believe Apple is out there to catch people with pirated music. They are basing their service on trust.

I don't believe there's such thing as music tagged as pirated. Even if there was, ID3 Tags embedded into songs can be edited to say whatever you want.

Now, whether Apple uses DRM or not... they say they don't, but if you find otherwise, well... let us know.

 

[KeithJenner]

That won't help much. I don't believe Apple is out there to catch people with pirated music. They are basing their service on trust.

I don't believe there's such thing as music tagged as pirated. Even if there was, ID3 Tags embedded into songs can be edited to say whatever you want.

Now, whether Apple uses DRM or not... they say they don't, but if you find otherwise, well... let us know.

The principle that the Music Industry could seed files onto Torrents etc that have some way of being identified as coming from that source is almost certainly possible. In theory, iTunes Match could be used to spot those tracks to identify people obtaining illegal downloads.

I have even seen it suggested that Apple are working with the Record companies to do this.

However, back in the real world, as I said earlier Apple quite like having customers. It would take a hell of a legal battle for Apple to give up such information that may be on their servers as a result of iTunes Match. They are certainly not planning on doing so, and I'm sure their legal teams will have looked into it if there is any possibility of them being forced to give any info in the future.

I think that this is a case where theoretical possibilities are nothing like reality.

 

[gnasher729]

It's interesting how people think paying $25 to Apple frees them from the consequences of piracy.

It destroys the evidence.

On the other hand, there is already no way to distinguish between a song that I ripped legally from a CD I own, a song that I ripped legally but kept illegally after selling the CD, a song that I ripped illegally from a CD that I borrowed or rented, and a song that is an illegal copy of your legally ripped song.

 

[KeithJenner]

It destroys the evidence.

On the other hand, there is already no way to distinguish between a song that I ripped legally from a CD I own, a song that I ripped legally but kept illegally after selling the CD, a song that I ripped illegally from a CD that I borrowed or rented, and a song that is an illegal copy of your legally ripped song.

Has anyone ever been prosecuted for ripping CD's and then selling the CD, or for copying CD's from friends?

I haven't heard of it, but I'm no expert. I thought that the prosecutions were a result of people being caught downloading (or sharing), rather than actually having the dodgy MP3.

If that is the case then this really does nothing with regard to legality. It just makes the dodgy copy potentially sound better.

It does seem to me that the "piracy immunity" point is being overplayed here. If you ever find yourself in trouble for downloading, the fact that you have run your MP3's through iTunes Match will be no defence. They would still want to know how you got it in the first place.

 

[gnasher729]

Has anyone ever been prosecuted for ripping CD's and then selling the CD, or for copying CD's from friends?

I haven't heard of it, but I'm no expert. I thought that the prosecutions were a result of people being caught downloading (or sharing), rather than actually having the dodgy MP3.

If that is the case then this really does nothing with regard to legality. It just makes the dodgy copy potentially sound better.

It does seem to me that the "piracy immunity" point is being overplayed here. If you ever find yourself in trouble for downloading, the fact that you have run your MP3's through iTunes Match will be no defence. They would still want to know how you got it in the first place.

Downloading an illegal copy from some website and making an illegal copy from a friend's hard drive is legally exactly the same. But the second one doesn't leave any traces on the internet that could be easily followed, that's why nobody gets taken to court for it.

Another reason is that downloading is a minor offence compared to making songs available for download by others, and there is software around that makes songs on your hard drive available to others, possible without you realising it. Court cases that you heard about were always about that, and in that case it makes no difference whether you allow others to make copies of dodgy mp3s or high quality AAC files directly from the Apple store.

So I would say that iTunes Match makes no legal difference if you own pirated music, it makes no practical difference if you get caught using software that makes music on your hard drive available for copying, but it makes a practical difference by destroying evidence after you stop using such software.

 

[KeithJenner]

but it makes a practical difference by destroying evidence after you stop using such software.

Does it though?

I'd imagine that, in the unlikely event that someone is going through your files, the fact that it is an iTunes Match obtained copy would be irrelevant. The issue you would have to deal with is that you can't explain how you came to have any version of the file at all.

It's all fairly irrelevant, as it is the act of sharing or downloading itself that will get you in trouble, rather than actually owning the file.

Anyway, I think we're fairly well in agreement. iTunes Match is only any possible help if you are no longer downloading or sharing, and if that's the case you are extremely unlikely to get in trouble anyway.

 

[gnasher729]

Unrelated question but if you use a period instead of comma, how do you specify fractional numbers when you are doing math?

Unrelated answer: Where in English text you would write for example $1,234.56, in German text you would write 1.234,56$. For the curious, go to System Preferences, Language & Text, then click on "Format".

I'd imagine that, in the unlikely event that someone is going through your files, the fact that it is an iTunes Match obtained copy would be irrelevant. The issue you would have to deal with is that you can't explain how you came to have any version of the file at all.

If it was a criminal case, then having an mp3 file with a tag "made available by mega thiev" is proof against you, the fact that you can't prove where an iTunes Match file was bought isn't. In a civil case, it is "preponderance of evidence". A court would have to decide which is more likely. I think I would admit that having only iTunes Match files and no download software wouldn't be a 100% defense, but it might be in many cases, depending on the situation.

 

[tasset]

Does it though?

I'd imagine that, in the unlikely event that someone is going through your files, the fact that it is an iTunes Match obtained copy would be irrelevant. The issue you would have to deal with is that you can't explain how you came to have any version of the file at all.

It's all fairly irrelevant, as it is the act of sharing or downloading itself that will get you in trouble, rather than actually owning the file.

Anyway, I think we're fairly well in agreement. iTunes Match is only any possible help if you are no longer downloading or sharing, and if that's the case you are extremely unlikely to get in trouble anyway.

There is a ton of hypothetical scenarios. Like, what if you Match hundreds of CD's and put away the physical media for safe keeping, only for it to be destroyed in a fire or flood? Stolen? Lost in a move? That's great iTunes Match will be an invaluable insurance policy. But are you supposed to delete the Cloud because you know longer have the physical copy?
I also agree there's no way Apple wants to be some intermediary in court, I'm sure they paid handsomely in their licensing agreement to avoid this. Even though the past still lingers in our memories I really expect all parties are ready to move on with new profitable distribution methods (Cloud storage, streaming, etc).

 

[KeithJenner]

There is a ton of hypothetical scenarios. Like, what if you Match hundreds of CD's and put away the physical media for safe keeping, only for it to be destroyed in a fire or flood? Stolen? Lost in a move? That's great iTunes Match will be an invaluable insurance policy. But are you supposed to delete the Cloud because you know longer have the physical copy?

Interesting question, and obviously we're going fairly well off topic here. I honestly don't know the answer. Probably you should delete them, but you're unlikely to get prosecuted if you don't.

Actually, it makes you wonder what you would do. I have my CD's/DVD's specifically insured for a significant amount. If they all got stolen then I would get a big payout on the insurance. Would I go and rebuy it all, given that I have digital copies of everything? Almost certainly not.

But as I say, way off topic.

 

[doctor-don]

Lets say I have a CD ripped to my iTunes library at 128 that is not available in iTunes. I sign up for iTunes Match, that loads those particular songs to the cloud at 256? This is where people seem confused. Some say it will keep the 128 while others say it will "upgraded" to 256.

Problem is if you use iTunes to convert a 128 file to 256, it acchives nothing because the original file is lower quality. The only thing you are doing is lowering the quality a little bit but increasing the size of the file two times.

Hopefully, you kept the original songs which are probably AIFF. If you "Created mp3 versions" of a lower quality for use on other devices without taking up 40-100 MB per song, then you probably don't notice too much difference in quality with ordinary headphones. That is what I did with a couple of devices that plug into my car's cigarette lighter outlet and play music over the FM station.

If you want to increase the quality- and you probably will not be able to discern the difference- you should go to the original and re-create the mp3 at the higher bit rate.

Yeah i have done this before.. lowered some of my songs from 320 to 128 to save space on my iPod and than later converted them back to 320 and lost quality. hope this iTunes match gets them back to how they where before i converted the quality down.

go to the original and re-create the mp3 at the higher bit rate.

If the content is not in iTunes catalogue then nothing is upgraded you will just upload the 128 file!



----------

Well engage your brain and explain to me how you can take a 128 file and convert it to a 320 file. You already lost the audio quality going from 320 to 128... You can't magically restore that from a 128 file. Only way to do so is to re rip from the disk.

I seriously am questioning the intelligence of some of the forum users. Between this thread and the one regarding iPod replacements I have read some of the most retarded comments and statements of my life!

Anyone with iTunes can select "Create mp3 version" and create a 128 kbps version of a tune. Then, later, one can select "Create mp3 version" where he has selected 320 kbps. The audio quality may not be any different, but it can be accomplished.

And you should consider your words before referring to anyone as retarded.

 

[Tinmania]

I just installed the latest beta of iTunes, and while it does definitely download and not stream on my iPad. It IS streaming on my other Mac. I have my iCloud library setup on my Mac Pro and from my MacBook Pro I connect up with my iCloud library and it DOES NOT download the tracks when I play them.

It simultaneously streams and downloads on the iPad or any iOS devices other than ATV (which just streams).

You can easily see the status of the download on iOS as the cloud icon changes to a circular download indicator while the song is playing and also being downloaded. If you stop the song before download is complete the download indicator stays, showing that the song was incompletely downloaded. So obviously it is streaming as the song starts playing within seconds of starting to play it.

iTunes works a little differently: it only streams. But you can download if you click the cloud icon, or right-click and choose to download. You can select more than one track to download.

I think this approach makes sense. I love it for my macbook air where I really don't want iTunes downloading: prefer it stream.

On my iOS devices I prefer it to download so I can listen again without net access or using 3G data for the same song I played the day before. I can wipe anything downloaded if I need to free space.




Michael

 

[madmod20061]

Go figure. The newest beta is the only one I've ever had a problem with. Mine gets to the end of the Gathering Info stage and just hangs. It doesn't freeze and I can still use itunes while it does it, but it never gets to the sending info to apple phase. Weird. Oh well.

 

[damir00]

I have backed up those tracks to an external now for safe-keeping and to test the DRM I moved a few to a Windows computer, an Android phone, and even Google's Music beta service. All work without a problem. I really doubt these tracks have a time bomb that self destructs in a year either.

If you do the Match process...delete your original...Match replaces it with a sanctioned 256k AAC...you Skype me that AAC...I toss it into iTunes...hit the "Update Match" button...

Will I get matched from your (apparently identifiable) file, or will I get an RIAA-flavored nastygram?

 

[Tinmania]

If you do the Match process...delete your original...Match replaces it with a sanctioned 256k AAC...you Skype me that AAC...I toss it into iTunes...hit the "Update Match" button...

To be clear iTunes match downloaded tracks are exactly like iTunes plus downloaded tracks: No DRM but your name and iTunes ID are embedded in the files.



Michael

 

[damir00]

To be clear iTunes match downloaded tracks are exactly like iTunes plus downloaded tracks: No DRM but your name and iTunes ID are embedded in the files.

Understood. That's what I'm asking about - will it match a file it "knows" comes from another Match user because it sees that the iTunes IDs don't match?

 

[AidenShaw]

And you should consider your words before referring to anyone as retarded.

He did say that the comments were retarded, not that the poster was retarded.

That makes it somewhat less offensive ....

Agree that "stupid comments" or "ignorant comments" would have been a better choice.

 

[Tinmania]

Understood. That's what I'm asking about - will it match a file it "knows" comes from another Match user because it sees that the iTunes IDs don't match?

Yes it will match.

What I have not tested is downloading the matched tracks again: I don't know if they would have your ID or the original ID. I deleted the tracks with which I tested this so I can't try that now. I suspect original ID since it preserves metadata. This would also allow tracking to the original sharer and if people are aware of that they might be less likely to share them in the first place. Well, duh... that is kind of the whole point of embedding that in the first place.



Michael

 

[damir00]

Thanks Tinmania, that's very interesting. And starts to make financial sense of the whole thing, as the $25 charge then resembles a music "tax" that lets you (more or less) have whatever music you want, when you want.

I am also confident that within 24 hours of the service going live, there will be an app to scrub iTunes IDs from the tags.

 

[TheIntruder]

Fixed

Excellent. Thank you.

Reminds me again why I try to resist the x.0 iTunes releases.

 

[madmod20061]

Yes it will match.

What I have not tested is downloading the matched tracks again: I don't know if they would have your ID or the original ID. I deleted the tracks with which I tested this so I can't try that now. I suspect original ID since it preserves metadata. This would also allow tracking to the original sharer and if people are aware of that they might be less likely to share them in the first place. Well, duh... that is kind of the whole point of embedding that in the first place.



Michael

I have tested it and will, at least in the beta, replace it with your info. I have a UK itunes account and it matched those tracks and replaced the ID with my US account ID. In the early beta it actually redownloaded them as purchased tracks, not matched, but changed the data to my US account name so it said I purchased the tracks that are not available in the US store.

 

[milo]

So, are you saying that someone would delete all their music off all their devices and then not renew iTunes match? If that's the case then they are too stupid to own music and deserve to lose it .

He's talking about

1) Delete (or move) a file
2) Download the higher bitrate file
3) Let Match expire

which should be absolutely fine to do. Technical issues aside, if Apple were to do that, they'd be encouraging people to upgrade (which involves deleting the originals) then taking the upgraded files away. Not gonna happen.

Ok, you got me curious. So I went and pasted lyrics into a song in my Mac Pro library (my main library). I walked over to my MBP (which I emptied all the songs from to see what the cloud looks like) and downloaded the song. Sure enough the lyrics were there. I didn't even have to update Match, within just a few seconds, it copied it up to the cloud.

Thanks for testing that, it's good news since none of the other betas preserved lyrics. Now my only major reservation about the service is that it always loads up mobile devices from Apple's server instead of local copies. That would be extremely slow for me and a ridiculous waste of data.

go to the original and re-create the mp3 at the higher bit rate.

You still don't understand how Match works? No reason to rerip, or reconvert an aiff (seriously?) to 256. Any matched files can be downloaded at 256. No converting necessary, just dump the old file and download a new one to take its place.

I am also confident that within 24 hours of the service going live, there will be an app to scrub iTunes IDs from the tags.

Since songs bought from iTunes already have embedded buyer data, wouldn't that app exist already? Just checked and it looks like there are multiple ways to do it.