how is the talk of data caps moot?
Have you seen the rapage by canadian Telcom's? most plans are only 500mb to 2gb a month.
They charge up to $2 / MB overage.
not everyone lives in the centre of the universe bubble that you do
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.
High Definition iTunes Music Downloads May Be on the Horizon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
how is the talk of data caps moot?
Have you seen the rapage by canadian Telcom's? most plans are only 500mb to 2gb a month.
They charge up to $2 / MB overage.
not everyone lives in the centre of the universe bubble that you do
Especially when you consider everyones discernible audio spectrum differs from person to person, especially as you get older.
we bought zeppelin on
vinyl
reel to reel
8-track
cassette
cd
mini disc
sa cd
hd dvd
blueray
mp3
m4a
aiff
wav
ringtone
flac
and now they want to make a new format ?!
No Thanks!
Hmmm...I notice that you spell every format name correctly except for blu-ray.
I wonder why...
Wha?
Have you heard of wi-fi. Did you even read my post? Data caps are MOOT since you can download files from your streaming service to your device. So it's not like you're going to use all this data just to listen to music. There's no bubble I live, just reality without hyperbole.
we bought zeppelin on
vinyl
reel to reel
8-track
cassette
cd
mini disc
sa cd
hd dvd
blueray
mp3
m4a
aiff
wav
ringtone
flac
and now they want to make a new format ?!
No Thanks!
Good to see you're drawing a line in the sand somewhere
Technically, yes, practically, no. and this is assuming you have the amp and the headphones to match the source. a midrange in ear monitor will cost you $500 on average.
I would be willing to bet that even using high-end headphones + amp noone would be able to tell the difference between lossless CD rip and itunes 256kbps vbr.
this extra 'bump' in quality is beyond the human hearing threshhold.
44.1khz sample rate covers 20hz-20,000hz of sound. most people cant hear anywhere near as low as 20hz or as high as 20,000hz
Ampage?
Anyway, didn't mean to ridicule you. It was your initial claim of it being a placebo that made you look ignorant -- sorry I immediately assumed that.
I can hear the difference between CD and <192k file. At 256k I can't tell 95% of the time. This is with high end AKG's and close to high end Grado's and an amp/dac.
That's why I stick with that tier of quality and don't even bother archiving a backup with FLAC/ALAC anymore like I used to. I figure a new format is just around the corner so those 16-bit lossless files are useless anyway. And with iTunes HD files, looks like I made the right call.
I'm good with 256k for now.
Sorry if this has already be covered.
But, what device are we playing this great new option Apple is giving us?
Is there a current device Apple makes that can play 24bit files natively?
I'm sure they can update the iOS to allow it, but will they or just wait for the next iPhone to come out?
But, what device are we playing this great new option Apple is giving us?
Is there a current device Apple makes that can play 24bit files natively?
I'm sure they can update the iOS to allow it, but will they or just wait for the next iPhone to come out?
and you're saying you can hear the difference between 44.1k vs 96k in a double blind a/b test?
Ampage?
Anyway, didn't mean to ridicule you. It was your initial claim of it being a placebo that made you look ignorant -- sorry I immediately assumed that.
http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-ampage
Since you're having such trouble...
My iPhone 4 always complains that any of my high-quality music is encoded at a bit-rate too high for it to handle, and I end up with converted doubles in my iTunes just for syncing.
Obviously it's an older model, though. I don't know about an iPhone 5S or anything. And Apple would only offer a quality the chips could handle, otherwise it defeats the very purpose of this proposed new business model.
I just started using HDtracks to get a few of my favorite albums. All are 24-bit with sampling rates of 88-192 kHz. And, of course, they are sold as uncompressed full-wave PCM in various forms. Since I also have the iTunes Plus versions of the same albums, it's been interesting to compare. I have a high-quality home-theater system with relatively nice speaker. I compared by creating a USB stick with both the iTunes AAC versions and the 'high-res' versions. My Pioneer SC-72 can play both versions directly.
So is there a sound difference? Yes. The high-res versions feature treble which is less 'harsh'. So there's less ear-strain. That's good. The high-res versions have more dynamic range with less compression (thank goodness). But the biggest difference is that the bass has more definition. For example, Michael Jackson's Thriller shows the biggest difference for me. The bass lines actually sound like a real electric bass as opposed to the lower-res versions where the bass is just low notes.
But I can't hear a night-and-day difference with other recordings. Listening to Miles Davis' Kind of Blue (greatest jazz album ever, for sure) gives better definition, but I still don't feel like I'm standing in the same room with him.
Maybe my expectations were too high. Maybe my system just can't really bring out the changes. Maybe I just can't hear them.
Listening to the files on a lower-quality DAC (like an iPhone, or even a Mac) will be even more of a waste. A listener would hear a difference, but would it really be that big for files that are 10 times the size? High-res albums take 2.5-3.5G as opposed to 250-350M.
I would be interested if Apple were to release high-res versions. But I would really limit the number of purchases I did with high-res.
So is there a sound difference? Yes. The high-res versions feature treble which is less 'harsh'. So there's less ear-strain. That's good. The high-res versions have more dynamic range with less compression (thank goodness). But the biggest difference is that the bass has more definition. For example, Michael Jackson's Thriller shows the biggest difference for me. The bass lines actually sound like a real electric bass as opposed to the lower-res versions where the bass is just low notes.
But I can't hear a night-and-day difference with other recordings. Listening to Miles Davis' Kind of Blue (greatest jazz album ever, for sure) gives better definition, but I still don't feel like I'm standing in the same room with him.
Maybe my expectations were too high. Maybe my system just can't really bring out the changes. Maybe I just can't hear them.
Listening to the files on a lower-quality DAC (like an iPhone, or even a Mac) will be even more of a waste. A listener would hear a difference, but would it really be that big for files that are 10 times the size? High-res albums take 2.5-3.5G as opposed to 250-350M.
I would be interested if Apple were to release high-res versions. But I would really limit the number of purchases I did with high-res.
Dude, get some good gear. Had some very expensive headphones and put on the Nevermind CD, and played Come As You Are, specifically listening to the intro and the bass response, etc. Then I put on the same song purchased in iTunes, 256 AAC, and it was night and day. I could hear the difference big time. I also have done some amateur recording most of my life, so I have a keen ear, but I can hear the difference hands down in my test, and that was with 16/44.1 CD.
Just like some say they can't tell the difference between retina displays and non-retina.... you can be both blind and deaf, or either...
The only problem is download size and storage space. With SSD drives now, this could get expensive. I have 5k songs in my library, and the cost of upgrading to this new higher quality, plus storing it.. that will be the challenge.
But yeah, no placebo here. Since when does lossy music sound the same as lossless. If that's the case, artists have been doing it wrong all this time recording in high fidelity.
They need to in-place upgrade Match for this to be any good.
Hell even charge an "extra" premium for Match HD...I'm fine with that.
Hell even charge an "extra" premium for Match HD...I'm fine with that.
well so you cant or you can? I'm not putting words in your mouth, but buying 'placebo' means youre buying something for the 'feel-good' of having it, not because of a tangible difference that the product gives you.
if you can't hear the difference...isn't it placebo then?
Oh, no trouble at all. I knew what it meant, for what it's worth -- I was more confused about your terminology being completely wrong. I'm pleased that you found the definition of it, though.
"AKG's with plenty of ampage."
I'll let you figure out where you went wrong.
It's like he didn't even read my posts people.
Since iTunes become the #1 seller of music.
----------
Oh, no trouble at all. I knew what it meant, for what it's worth -- I was more confused about your terminology being completely wrong. I'm pleased that you found the definition of it, though.
"AKG's with plenty of ampage."
I'll let you figure out where you went wrong.
I've moved on. So should you.
see this is why I hate forums sometimes, becasue of comments like this. it's bad for my industry.
you cannot hear the difference between cd and 256kbps vbr aac like 'night or day'
that is pure exaggeration plan and simple.
source: countless, and i mean countless of double blind a/b tests done by various true enthusiast community/actual recording professionals.
Hidef audio is bollocks
Really? I'd love set up a double-blind ABX listening test for you on equipment of your choice to see if you can tell the difference, if you're in the Toronto area.
Spoiler alert: you can't.
Really? I'd love set up a double-blind ABX listening test for you on equipment of your choice to see if you can tell the difference, if you're in the Toronto area.
Spoiler alert: you can't.
