It may be an audio-visual format, possibly called iTube but more likely with the Cook era naming scheme, 
Tube. 
Tube. 
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.
Apple Working with U2 on New Music Format to Boost Digital Music Sales
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They did on my households trend chart. Don't know about overall, but I would think you raise prices for same product, less people will buy.
absolutely huge in the US in the 80s/90s, but like 'Michael Jackson huge' in a lot of other countries even recently (presently?).
Original studio recording quality: 24bit/192kHz
All I want is the same quality as the studio master, losslessly compressed. Most studio masters these days are 24bit/192kHz.
Just upgrade Apple Lossless to support that, and Airport Express/AppleTV to pass them along digitally to your AV Receiver's fancy BurrBrown DtoA converters (I'm guessing optical TOSLink won't work for 24bit/192kHz(??) and HDMI is the only option??)
If what I just said is Greek to you, you don't have a component audio system and fancy speakers - just forget it, stick to today's iTunes Store AAC format, you will never hear any difference. As is, even on a superb audio system few people will be able to tell.
All I want is the same quality as the studio master, losslessly compressed. Most studio masters these days are 24bit/192kHz.
Just upgrade Apple Lossless to support that, and Airport Express/AppleTV to pass them along digitally to your AV Receiver's fancy BurrBrown DtoA converters (I'm guessing optical TOSLink won't work for 24bit/192kHz(??) and HDMI is the only option??)
If what I just said is Greek to you, you don't have a component audio system and fancy speakers - just forget it, stick to today's iTunes Store AAC format, you will never hear any difference. As is, even on a superb audio system few people will be able to tell.
not in a single file that plays better quality in both itunes and quicktime with some 'revolutionary' compression format that keeps the file size low. which is my guess for all this.
and like another person mentioned, they're gonna have to get record companies to stop mastering for volume, or everything will basically sound the same anyway.
A new music format? Forgive the pun, but cui bono?
We've had basically 2 of them already - mp3 and aac, and the only benefit of the latter was reduced file size for the same fidelity. Nowadays, even phones can come with 128 GB of space. I rather suspect most folks could probably fit their whole library in FLAC in that much space.
Meanwhile, the last time I looked at the psychoacoustic surveys, I saw nothing that suggested that AAC wasn't good enough. If you're going to sit in a soundproof booth with AKG studio monitor headphones on and you have a golden ear, then - yes - you probably can tell the difference between FLAC and 128kbps AAC. But how about in the car during rush hour? Or jogging with earbuds?
The files don't need to get smaller and they don't need to get better. So what's the point, other than trying to get another 99¢ out of us?
We've had basically 2 of them already - mp3 and aac, and the only benefit of the latter was reduced file size for the same fidelity. Nowadays, even phones can come with 128 GB of space. I rather suspect most folks could probably fit their whole library in FLAC in that much space.
Meanwhile, the last time I looked at the psychoacoustic surveys, I saw nothing that suggested that AAC wasn't good enough. If you're going to sit in a soundproof booth with AKG studio monitor headphones on and you have a golden ear, then - yes - you probably can tell the difference between FLAC and 128kbps AAC. But how about in the car during rush hour? Or jogging with earbuds?
The files don't need to get smaller and they don't need to get better. So what's the point, other than trying to get another 99¢ out of us?
U2 IS relevant...but no one can read...
Their last tour was the largest in history. Broke all kinds of records. Highest grossing. Largest attended. Single largest non festival show in the US (this one, I don't get, but still shows as a record)
While YOU may not think they are relevant anymore, and you are certainly intitled to an opinion, it's not really accurate. Do they sell as many records now, as they did in the 80's or 90's? Of course not. Is this new album as good as Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby (or if you are really trying to look cool, Boy, War, etc)? No, it's not.
But I hate to tell you, they are probably the most mainstream relevant band Apple could hook up with. While you may like some other band, Apple knows what they are doing. U2 as well. Neither of them are stupid. U2 now has 16/17 of their catalog albums in iTunes top 100.
By stating they are not relevant, past their prime, etc...YOU look stupid. Look up some facts. The truth is out there.
Their last tour was the largest in history. Broke all kinds of records. Highest grossing. Largest attended. Single largest non festival show in the US (this one, I don't get, but still shows as a record)
While YOU may not think they are relevant anymore, and you are certainly intitled to an opinion, it's not really accurate. Do they sell as many records now, as they did in the 80's or 90's? Of course not. Is this new album as good as Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby (or if you are really trying to look cool, Boy, War, etc)? No, it's not.
But I hate to tell you, they are probably the most mainstream relevant band Apple could hook up with. While you may like some other band, Apple knows what they are doing. U2 as well. Neither of them are stupid. U2 now has 16/17 of their catalog albums in iTunes top 100.
By stating they are not relevant, past their prime, etc...YOU look stupid. Look up some facts. The truth is out there.
I think people are being shortsighted thinking this is just about music format and quality of audio. It might entail other things. Apple is with U2, Iovine and many other people and these are very smart folks. They know it's not only improving the audio quality to sway people into buying music.
I don't know what could be but I can see having a richer multimedia experience like videos, access of video streaming of live concerts, great artwork on the form of PDFs or any other way, app integration, etc. things that could make worthwhile buying a song and album that you would never get just listening to the music. We will find out and I hope they will succeed.
Apple will create a new format, and then someone else will have an MP3 converter out the next day.
Yes!
I always really really enjoy reading your posts ^_^
As a composer and constantly performing artist and musician, I think my physical CD sales out surpass my online streaming paid subscribers and royalties from many publishers/distributors online. People still really LOVE seeing music happening in front of their eyes and they are very willing to pay up to 20 bux for a cd-r.
Paying for music goes beyond that itself, paying for music for most people I meet on the streets I perform on, is that they really - sincerely love your gift of music, your skills and your personality, they talk to you, interact personally with you, that is an incentive for them to "invest" in your future as an artist, that is what helps me to sell hundreds of CDs a week while I street perform since 1998. There is no decline in my sales at all.
People know the quality of music lies beyond all that is discussed or concerned about in the article here. People value the deep nature of music itself, that is that it is from an actual source - an actual musician they can get to really know and they can somehow be a part of that musician's eternal growth and yes, well being too. It pays for my essentials and it helps me to produce new offerings for the world.
So i encourage the "industry" to give MORE back to independent artists on the ground level up Just spread the wealth, give everyone choices, many people still choose to buy physical CD-rs or pressed CDs from me just the same, since good ol' 1998
I LOVE you all!
I always really really enjoy reading your posts ^_^
As a composer and constantly performing artist and musician, I think my physical CD sales out surpass my online streaming paid subscribers and royalties from many publishers/distributors online. People still really LOVE seeing music happening in front of their eyes and they are very willing to pay up to 20 bux for a cd-r.
Paying for music goes beyond that itself, paying for music for most people I meet on the streets I perform on, is that they really - sincerely love your gift of music, your skills and your personality, they talk to you, interact personally with you, that is an incentive for them to "invest" in your future as an artist, that is what helps me to sell hundreds of CDs a week while I street perform since 1998. There is no decline in my sales at all.
People know the quality of music lies beyond all that is discussed or concerned about in the article here. People value the deep nature of music itself, that is that it is from an actual source - an actual musician they can get to really know and they can somehow be a part of that musician's eternal growth and yes, well being too. It pays for my essentials and it helps me to produce new offerings for the world.
So i encourage the "industry" to give MORE back to independent artists on the ground level up
Just spread the wealth, give everyone choices, many people still choose to buy physical CD-rs or pressed CDs from me just the same, since good ol' 1998 I LOVE you all!
No, that's not why they bought Beats. They bought Beats so that they could effectively hire Jimmy and Dre, and because Tim liked the differentiator (human curation of some sort) in their streaming service.
Are you kidding me? Lady CrapGa? Who listens to her garbage? People with no taste, that's who. Or kids.
I believe that format converter will be called "iTunes."
Nobody said it was going to be a protected format.
Music in their DNA is starting to look like a mutation, instead of a good thing.
