iOS 14.6 Beta 1 Code Hints at Upcoming HiFi Apple Music Support

[chucker23n1]

LOL!

People can hear the difference in high resolution audio, study finds

Listeners can hear a difference between standard audio and better than CD quality, known as high resolution audio, according to a new study. The study compared data from over 12,000 different trials from 18 studies where participants were asked to discriminate between samples of music in...

www.sciencedaily.com

https://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20210503/18296.pdf

"Conventional wisdom states that CD quality should be sufficient to capture everything we hear, yet anecdotes abound where individuals claim that hi-res content sounds crisper, or more intense."

"LOL" indeed.

 

[Jakob99]

That would be incredible. And something only Apple would do. Not sure if they actually will do it, but there's a chance, considering their precedent in upgrading 128kbps to 256kbps for free years ago.

The upgrade from 128 to 256kbps (aka iTunes Plus) wasn´t free though. When the higher bitrate was launched with the EMI catalog, the charge to upgrade a song was 3 cents and for an album 3 dollar.

Apple Launches iTunes Plus

www.apple.com

But I agree a free upgrade would be more appropriate, and in video the upgrade from HD to 4K was free, so let´s hope! I mostly stream with Apple Music, but still have quite a few albums bought on iTunes from back in the day

 

[HDFan]

Sure, premium cables deliver zeros and ones better. (No, they do not.)

He can, since his statements aren't based on anecdotal evidence but actual studies.

For a digital source which HDMI cables are. Really? Come on dude, look at the science and try and explain that one objectively...

I find it sad that people accept these mantras "all hdmi cables are the same", "studies show that you can't tell the difference between compressed and hires" without question. I suppose it makes sense in that unless you have a problem you aren't going to question the premise.

I too didn't think the cables would make a difference, but when I found how they improved my personal setup I looked for explanations of why it could be true. Posted a video link that explains why a premium cable can do a better job of delivering 1's and 0s (cable length, noise isolation being big factors) and I would be interested in hearing people's opinions on what they said, but no one seems interested in considering anything but the commonly accepted view.

As for the studies saying that people can't hear the difference, I can quote studies which state that they can, such as the one above which was posted as I was writing this:

People can hear the difference in high resolution audio, study finds​

People can hear the difference in high resolution audio, study finds

Listeners can hear a difference between standard audio and better than CD quality, known as high resolution audio, according to a new study. The study compared data from over 12,000 different trials from 18 studies where participants were asked to discriminate between samples of music in...

www.sciencedaily.com

I did my hires testing decades ago by taking the same source and rendering it at different bitrates. The differences between 256 kbs and cd quality from a good source were dramatic. As we move beyond that, to 96/24 or DSD I'm just not sure if I can tell.

 

[Wildkraut]

"Conventional wisdom states that CD quality should be sufficient to capture everything we hear, yet anecdotes abound where individuals claim that hi-res content sounds crisper, or more intense."

"LOL" indeed.

Not others fault, your ears lacks HiFi

 

[chucker23n1]

Posted a video link that explains why a premium cable can do a better job of delivering 1's and 0s (cable length, noise isolation being big factors)

That makes sense for analog cables. HDMI is a digital signal. If the cable is too long or the noise too high, you don't hear "worse" audio. You simply don't hear any audio whatsoever (or, worse, you hear random garbage that clearly wasn't intended to be audio).

 

[chucker23n1]

Not others fault, your ears lacks HiFi

Hey, I get it, everyone needs their superstitions.

 

[adrianlondon]

That makes sense for analog cables. HDMI is a digital signal. If the cable is too long or the noise too high, you don't hear "worse" audio. You simply don't hear any audio whatsoever (or, worse, you hear random garbage that clearly wasn't intended to be audio).

Which ... makes it sound worse.

 

[chucker23n1]

Which ... makes it sound worse.

I highly doubt people mean "the audio is uninterrupted! it's amazing!" when they say "hi-res content sounds crisper, or more intense".

 

[Wildkraut]

Hey, I get it, everyone needs their superstitions.

Well, that study I've posted proves that people can hear more that 1411kbps/16Bit (CD quality), and Dr Joshua Reiss from QMUL's surely has far more knowledge than you at this.

Prof. Josh Reiss, Queen Mary, University of London

Create, or post a newer study that names this one and disqualifies it, and we talk again.
Posting sentences out of context won't make your statements more qualified.

 

[chucker23n1]

Well, that study I've posted proves that

Science doesn't "prove" things.

people can hear more that 1411kbps/16Bit (CD quality), and Dr Joshua Reiss from QMUL's surely has far more knowledge than you at this.

Prof. Josh Reiss, Queen Mary, University of London

Create, or post a newer study that names this one and disqualifies it, and we talk again.

I'll talk when I feel like it. I appreciate Reiss's effort to sell gold-plated connectors, though.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

They will, and they must!
…
Sir, You‘re clearly lacking technical knowledge.

No, I just lack the ability to grasp at straws and leave common sense out of it. Sorry.

I’m more than happy to allow time to pass (rumors say sometime soon) and be enlightened.

 

[GadgetBen]

Just looking through comments on first page …




I’m MORE focused on finding out:
- what will the codec be?
- what will be the full Hz and nitrate average?
- which units ’could’ support the new lossless codec?
- which units will require a major firmware update to support lossless Apple Music audio?
> WHICH tracks that have already been streamed and added to an Apple Music playlist locally on devices (Macs, iPhones, iPads, heck does HomePod/HomePod mini cache music?)? More importantly our PURCHASED music from years before Apple Music became a streaming services WILL:
automatically (no fee) get the Lossless version ~ without giving us the ‘clean‘ version meant for kids vs the original content, usually having ‘R’ rated lyrics for tracks we may own/purchased?!!!!
Which tracks will we NEED/HaveTo pay for the new lossless version of songs we’ve already purchase and own in our library?!

THESE should be the questions most of us SHOULD be focusing on.

You worry too much

 

[Handsome Bacon]

After 6 years on AM, went to Spotify and didn't look back. Way better experience.

 

[DeepIn2U]

You worry too much

You and my old mom should've been married 4 decades ago ! lol.

Honestly I just like having the options

 

[DeepIn2U]

After 6 years on AM, went to Spotify and didn't look back. Way better experience.

Launch Date: June 30, 2015; 5 years ago.

I tried Spotify the free service. It had a hard time finding the tracks I wanted to listen to and create limited playlists with always ended up with completely OFF tracks from other genre's that did not match.

 

[guzhogi]

As for the whether premium cables make a difference, I would say yes. I've had low quality cables at work where the audio/video would cut out or be distorted. Bought a higher quality cord, and problems went away. Plus, for cables in general (not just AV cables), premium cables are more reliable and don't break/fray as easily. I particularly like braided cords. They don't fray nearly at all.

 

[Handsome Bacon]

Launch Date: June 30, 2015; 5 years ago.

I tried Spotify the free service. It had a hard time finding the tracks I wanted to listen to and create limited playlists with always ended up with completely OFF tracks from other genre's that did not match.

Early adopter of AM, whenever it was. The switch was mostly painless, including moving years worth of playlists over.

 

[cmaier]

As for the whether premium cables make a difference, I would say yes. I've had low quality cables at work where the audio/video would cut out or be distorted. Bought a higher quality cord, and problems went away. Plus, for cables in general (not just AV cables), premium cables are more reliable and don't break/fray as easily. I particularly like braided cords. They don't fray nearly at all.

There’s a difference between “good cables don’t break and therefore the digital signal is properly transmitted” and “this cable has special unobtanium alloy, and is directional, so that when listening to music you can hear extra rich sound, and your video will be extra vivid.”

 

[cyb3rdud3]

There’s a difference between “good cables don’t break and therefore the digital signal is properly transmitted” and “this cable has special unobtanium alloy, and is directional, so that when listening to music you can hear extra rich sound, and your video will be extra vivid.”

Exactly. Too many people don’t seem to get the difference anymore.

there was a little bit of truth in it in the analogue days, but even then a lot of it was hot hair and marketing bs. Now in the digital age it is only about build quality but a well build cable really doesn’t have to be expensive and definitely doesn’t need connectors made from gold with a unicorn shielding around the cable, nor those special directional cables 🤣 woven in a figure eight.

 

[dude-x]

Premium cables do make a difference. Since electricity is "analog" and creates EM waves, a good cable has better shielding to protect it from EMI and better build quality for the wire to bend around (bend wires too much and the metal can soften and break).
I had a cheap 5.1 speaker system (a Logitech z5500 or something) and using a higher gauge cable (thicker copper wire) made a difference in the sound (it was a bit louder), but it was enough to make watching 5.1 tv/movies more satisfying in the surround experience.
For HDMI cables, getting a good cable should eliminate HDCP errors and video dropouts, something I've experience with cheaper monoprice cables.

But getting back to the Apple HiFI thing, it would probably would have to be a better wireless codec than AAC. It seems that Apple could do two things to bring HiFi audio, introduce a higher bitrate Bluetooth codec and use ALAC/FLAC or some other high resolution format.

 

[JeffPerrin]

I have to say that I find it amusing

i'm sorry - is this intended to be satire? I don't have anything personally against the CD. Heck, I have over 10,000 CDs in my collection. I found the CD to be an improvement over the LP and cassette in many respects. But to suggest that the CD is the highest quality media format ever produced is laughable. Like other formats that preceded it, the CD involved compromises. In terms of sheer audio quality, I'd choose a 15ips tape copy of an original analog two-track master recording over a CD in a heartbeat. Of course that's not a viable option for most people. But if you've ever heard reel-to-reel recordings made straight off the master, I don't think you'd argue with me. In terms of digital formats, for analog source tapes, I'd choose 96/24 FLAC over CD - again, assuming access to the same master tapes. For digital recordings, I'd take a straight copy of the digital master - same sampling rate, same bit rate. Some Redbook digital transfers made 30-40 years ago may sound better that high res digital transfers made today due to deterioration of the master tape. But again, all things being equal, I'd take hi res FLAC over CD. I find hi res digital files more convenient. My only real disappointment with hi res digital files is the lack of artwork - I never understood why it didn't become standard for digital music files to come with a PDF containing all the album artwork, production credits, liner notes, etc.

I was referring to consumer-based media. FLAC is technically superior, of course, but hardly a readily accessible consumer format. That is... the average consumer does not realize where to buy, or how to play back, official FLAC recordings. (And no argument that wide 15ips tape sounds great too, but again that's hardly a mainstream format.)

More importantly, I said CDs produced in the 80s and 90s. As you elude to in your comment, it's not the medium that matters so much as the source. Even if you have FLAC downloads, chances are they are produced from the same over-compressed and distorted masters used to create mp3/m4a versions for digital stores. As such, a 16/44 version from 1990 (ie. a CD) will likely sound sound much more dynamic and have little to no digital distortion compared to a 96/24 transfer from a master produced in the last 20 years. Things are looking bright for the future, however, as Apple and other streaming services have been pushing for an end to the "loudness wars" with required loudness requirements.

This video demonstrates what's been happing in the music mastering process for the vast majority of commercial music in the last 20 years. (And is chiefly why I believe CDs from the late 80s and 90s have the best quality overall.)

 

[cmaier]

Premium cables do make a difference. Since electricity is "analog" and creates EM waves, a good cable has better shielding to protect it from EMI and better build quality for the wire to bend around (bend wires too much and the metal can soften and break).

The analog electricity is encoding a 1 or a 0. As long as the signal is not degraded enough to make a 1 a 0, the cable makes no difference. And if a 1 becomes a 0, the error correction fixes it. The only thing that matters is shielding -if you have a continuous source of noise, an unshielded cable will give you a completely mangled picture/audio (not "worse" picture/audio).

Cables make no difference in sound or video quality. You either get the sound/picture or you have broken cable. I've studied this for years, and have a Ph.D in electrical engineering.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Premium cables do make a difference. Since electricity is "analog" and creates EM waves, a good cable has better shielding to protect it from EMI and better build quality for the wire to bend around (bend wires too much and the metal can soften and break).
I had a cheap 5.1 speaker system (a Logitech z5500 or something) and using a higher gauge cable (thicker copper wire) made a difference in the sound (it was a bit louder), but it was enough to make watching 5.1 tv/movies more satisfying in the surround experience.
For HDMI cables, getting a good cable should eliminate HDCP errors and video dropouts, something I've experience with cheaper monoprice cables.

But getting back to the Apple HiFI thing, it would probably would have to be a better wireless codec than AAC. It seems that Apple could do two things to bring HiFi audio, introduce a higher bitrate Bluetooth codec and use ALAC/FLAC or some other high resolution format.

You seem to be very confused and mixing up a variety of cables and utility yet apply the same principle to them.

Yes for speakers both the distance and impedance of the speakers dictate the gauge of wire that is required. That had absolutely nothing to do with hdmi cables for a digital only signal.

 

[robbietop]

If they have one more version number, they'll tie iOS 13 for the most dot revisions (13.7).

 

[sdz]

LOL!

People can hear the difference in high resolution audio, study finds

Listeners can hear a difference between standard audio and better than CD quality, known as high resolution audio, according to a new study. The study compared data from over 12,000 different trials from 18 studies where participants were asked to discriminate between samples of music in...

www.sciencedaily.com

https://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20210503/18296.pdf

The meta study showed that the so called audiophiles guessed 47% of the samples wrongly! LOL
So they are slightly better than chance.

Reminds me of the Wine Someliers that did not detect the cheap wine in the test. Maybe it was a very tasty cheap wine. They exist.

High Fidelity subscriptions are a ripoff.