Huh? Apple Music has never crashed on me. Might be time for you to reinstall your app or computer if you have issues.
That’s not to say that Apple Music couldn’t be improved. It has usability issues that should be addressed.
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.
Don't Buy Into Apple's Hype About AirPods Max Gaining Lossless Audio
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That’s not to say that Apple Music couldn’t be improved. It has usability issues that should be addressed.
Macs dont have an audio latency problem. Wireless headphones do. Try any wired headphone set, even ones from the thrift store for a dollar. Plug it into the headphone jack on your mac and enjoy high quality latency free audio.
Last edited:
The low-latency only applies when connected with a cable, according to Apple
I disagree with the premise of this article, because lossless is *by definition* the "ultimate upgrade" that can be given to any particular audio file: an audio file either includes all of the source material (lossless) or some material is thrown away for compression purposes (lossy, which includes MP3s and AACs). The fact that a high-quality compressed file may be "virtually indistinguishable" from a lossless file is beside the point: lossless files are a guarantee that you are hearing the best file possible.
A more useful point would be this: Lossless isn't for everyone, and in terms of sound quality, it's a small upgrade rather than a big one. That doesn't mean it isn't "ultimate"; it simply means that: (1) most people cannot perceive minor differences in audio quality and/or do not have the proper equipment and listening environment to do so, and (2) improvements in audio are subject to diminishing returns. With a decent pair of headphones, including the AirPods Max, audio quality is already very high, so the improvement from using lossless files is relatively minor for most purposes.
That said, many of us begged for lossless audio because it is actually a huge deal to start from an audio file that did not discard sound information for compression purposes. And the sound quality is indeed better with lossless, even if most people don't hear the difference. Importantly, most people *can* hear at least some differences with training. Here's a common example: listen to the decay of a note played by a clarinet, or the decay of cymbals (especially if you can find an example where the decay happens over seconds). When material like that is isolated and the equipment/environment is right, the difference is audible. And plenty of people have unusually good hearing or are unusually critical listeners, for various reasons.
It would be better if the author of this piece had started from the premise that something does not have to be useful to everyone -- or even most people -- to be extremely valuable to some of us. There is plenty of mumbo-jumbo in the "audiophile" world, but lossless vs. lossy isn't that. Trying to wordsmith Apple's press releases for a "gotcha" inconsistency isn't particularly helpful, especially since both of the quoted passages happen to be correct. MacRumors' explainers are typically excellent, but this one was . . . lossy.
A more useful point would be this: Lossless isn't for everyone, and in terms of sound quality, it's a small upgrade rather than a big one. That doesn't mean it isn't "ultimate"; it simply means that: (1) most people cannot perceive minor differences in audio quality and/or do not have the proper equipment and listening environment to do so, and (2) improvements in audio are subject to diminishing returns. With a decent pair of headphones, including the AirPods Max, audio quality is already very high, so the improvement from using lossless files is relatively minor for most purposes.
That said, many of us begged for lossless audio because it is actually a huge deal to start from an audio file that did not discard sound information for compression purposes. And the sound quality is indeed better with lossless, even if most people don't hear the difference. Importantly, most people *can* hear at least some differences with training. Here's a common example: listen to the decay of a note played by a clarinet, or the decay of cymbals (especially if you can find an example where the decay happens over seconds). When material like that is isolated and the equipment/environment is right, the difference is audible. And plenty of people have unusually good hearing or are unusually critical listeners, for various reasons.
It would be better if the author of this piece had started from the premise that something does not have to be useful to everyone -- or even most people -- to be extremely valuable to some of us. There is plenty of mumbo-jumbo in the "audiophile" world, but lossless vs. lossy isn't that. Trying to wordsmith Apple's press releases for a "gotcha" inconsistency isn't particularly helpful, especially since both of the quoted passages happen to be correct. MacRumors' explainers are typically excellent, but this one was . . . lossy.
Great well thought out and executed comment. Most folks just listen for the thump of the bass and the sizzle of the treble and miss out on transients and imaging.
Done it. Using the latest version of iOS on 15 Pro kicks me back to the homescreen multiple times a day.
A known problem for some it seems. Quite a few threads on reddit, like this one
That guy doesn’t look too far off of Joswiak’s “advanced age”, so I wouldn’t be throwing shade if I were him.
I’m not sure why the author seems so upset that Apple’s head of marketing is….marketing their product.
Would you rather they not add the feature?
I’m not sure why the author seems so upset that Apple’s head of marketing is….marketing their product.
Would you rather they not add the feature?
Show me a study where anyone can tell the difference.
You couldn’t actually tell the difference when you were in your audiophile phase. You just convinced yourself you could to justify the money you spent and to fit in with the other “audiophiles.”
There isn’t one that exists. It’s all in their head.
I think the critique is don’t go out and buy these if you have the Lightning version because this feature isn’t going to be that great. Is that critique valid? I don’t know, but I thought it was funny how at least in the headline they’re straight up trash talking Apple. Maybe it’s click bait, but it was entertaining for a little bit.
The people in charge of the editorial direction of the site have decided that ragebait articles to draw more comments are the wave of the future.
To be fair, this is the most entertained I have been on this site in years. Laughing my Apples off.
One of the site writers recently commented on a different post about the increase in clickbait titles, admitting that those posts get the most traction.
Isn’t it what the critics of AirPods wanted ? Dammed if they do, dammed if they don’t.
The primary advantage of a RAW file is that you have more flexibility when editing it. Who "edits" music before listening to it, beyond a simple EQ adjustment? Maybe if you listen to something at half speed, or you increase the volume super high so you can listen to a very quiet section (but better hope you don't accidentally listen to a louder section and blow your eardrums out), it will make a barely perceivable difference. Maybe lossless will help if you are looking for images hidden in a spectrogram.
Back around 2004 I did some testing using my kid to rename and mix the files to do a double blind test. My cutoff was 192 kbps. Not surprising since my audio cutoff was about 14 kHz. It's certainly not better now.
These are severely overpriced... The AirMax Pods I got from AliBaba have been great!
I wasn't making an exact analogy.
And no, lossless is easy for me to hear, as well as many other people.
Not sure why all the hate for this.
I don't understand the hype around Promotion. My brain just CAN'T see the different. People report jelly motion with iPad minis for instance...I'm blind to it. But I don't discount people that do.
Accept that some people really want this feature and can hear the difference.
This is such a bizarre story. So, you’re calling out the incompatibility of the 2 overhyped statements? Sure. Lossless is still better than lossy formats for audiophiles. Whether one can hear the difference or think it is worth paying for is sort of personal.
It has on me, but it's really rare. It's running for weeks at a time on the stereo cabinet mini, where running also means sleeping when I let the mini go to sleep. The mini has been rebooted once since the last Monterey update came out.
But I only run on-disk files, no streaming. That might be it.