REALITY CHECK:
When I read about the hand-wringing over the fidelity of AAC vs AIFF for a portable player, I have to laugh. We are talking about a portable device for listening to tunes on, not an audiophile listening device for a studio.
Before you complain about the "lossiness" of AAC, I would ask a few questions first:
1) Are you listening on the provided earbuds or a set of $300 studio headphones?
2) How much ambient noise is there in your car/gym/neighborhood when you are using it?
3) How "perfect" does the playback have to be for you to happily continue jogging/lifting/driving?
Two decades ago a high-end Sony Walkman playing audio cassettes (with Dolby NR--woo hoo...) cost almost as much as an iPod Mini, and people loved them. Tape hiss like a DC-10 at lift-off, warble, flutter, and the occasional munched tape.
One decade ago, the Discman was the rage. Great bitrate, but a joke to run with--skip to my lu, my darlin'.
Now we have a device that is no bigger than a box of Chicklets, holds the best songs from every album you'll ever own, and plays back at least 25 minutes without a single skip. Oh, and the artists who write and record all that music have their intellectual property rights protected--all while allowing the user extremely liberal rights to the use of that music.
The whining is ridiculous. For what it is intended for, AAC is playback quality overkill, especially when in noisy environments using lo-fi ear buds.
Apple's DRM scheme is the perfect balance between the artist and the user who buys his/her music. I don't trust MS to keep its controlling mits off of that relationship. I do, however, trust Apple to keep that balance intact without screwing it up for everyone.
I am a musician who has spent hundreds of hours in a recording studio environment. Yes, I CAN tell the difference between mp3. AAC, and uncompressed 44.1/16bit audio. I just don't care. My expectations for a portable unit are different than those for a home stereo or studio monitors. The playback equipment's ability to broadcast the sound should determine how good the sample rate must be. Earbuds have far more limited frequency response and far less accurate renderings of the audio spectrum than more expensive phones or speakers. For the sheer joy of listening while performing some other task (working out, gardening, housework, long drives, etc.) AAC is fabulous.
Apple's protection schemes are so liberal that they are essentially transparent to a lawful user. Only thieves are frustrated by it. To those of you who hate DRM because you can't steal music as easily as you once did, I say: quit acting like you have some God-given right to all the recorded music of the world. Stealing someone's intellectual property is illegal and immoral. If you don't want to pay for music, then don't: write your own songs.
I am glad Apple turns a deaf ear to the "we must be compatable with MS" crowd. Remember everyone complaining about the $249 price tag for the iPod Mini? "Won't compete--too expensive--we must petition them to drop the price!" was the cry. Well, 100,000 sight-unseen preorders tells me those people were and will continue to be dead-wrong. In two years from now when they sell their millionth iPod Mini, with 70-80% of them sold @ the $249 price point, you should all post your sheepish apologies for whining that Apple didn't give away the store.
I think Apple is on the right track with their iPod strategy. Be the best. Not the biggest. Keep the premium price, but always make it worth the extra expense. Lead--don't follow.
When I read about the hand-wringing over the fidelity of AAC vs AIFF for a portable player, I have to laugh. We are talking about a portable device for listening to tunes on, not an audiophile listening device for a studio.
Before you complain about the "lossiness" of AAC, I would ask a few questions first:
1) Are you listening on the provided earbuds or a set of $300 studio headphones?
2) How much ambient noise is there in your car/gym/neighborhood when you are using it?
3) How "perfect" does the playback have to be for you to happily continue jogging/lifting/driving?
Two decades ago a high-end Sony Walkman playing audio cassettes (with Dolby NR--woo hoo...) cost almost as much as an iPod Mini, and people loved them. Tape hiss like a DC-10 at lift-off, warble, flutter, and the occasional munched tape.
One decade ago, the Discman was the rage. Great bitrate, but a joke to run with--skip to my lu, my darlin'.
Now we have a device that is no bigger than a box of Chicklets, holds the best songs from every album you'll ever own, and plays back at least 25 minutes without a single skip. Oh, and the artists who write and record all that music have their intellectual property rights protected--all while allowing the user extremely liberal rights to the use of that music.
The whining is ridiculous. For what it is intended for, AAC is playback quality overkill, especially when in noisy environments using lo-fi ear buds.
Apple's DRM scheme is the perfect balance between the artist and the user who buys his/her music. I don't trust MS to keep its controlling mits off of that relationship. I do, however, trust Apple to keep that balance intact without screwing it up for everyone.
I am a musician who has spent hundreds of hours in a recording studio environment. Yes, I CAN tell the difference between mp3. AAC, and uncompressed 44.1/16bit audio. I just don't care. My expectations for a portable unit are different than those for a home stereo or studio monitors. The playback equipment's ability to broadcast the sound should determine how good the sample rate must be. Earbuds have far more limited frequency response and far less accurate renderings of the audio spectrum than more expensive phones or speakers. For the sheer joy of listening while performing some other task (working out, gardening, housework, long drives, etc.) AAC is fabulous.
Apple's protection schemes are so liberal that they are essentially transparent to a lawful user. Only thieves are frustrated by it. To those of you who hate DRM because you can't steal music as easily as you once did, I say: quit acting like you have some God-given right to all the recorded music of the world. Stealing someone's intellectual property is illegal and immoral. If you don't want to pay for music, then don't: write your own songs.
I am glad Apple turns a deaf ear to the "we must be compatable with MS" crowd. Remember everyone complaining about the $249 price tag for the iPod Mini? "Won't compete--too expensive--we must petition them to drop the price!" was the cry. Well, 100,000 sight-unseen preorders tells me those people were and will continue to be dead-wrong. In two years from now when they sell their millionth iPod Mini, with 70-80% of them sold @ the $249 price point, you should all post your sheepish apologies for whining that Apple didn't give away the store.
I think Apple is on the right track with their iPod strategy. Be the best. Not the biggest. Keep the premium price, but always make it worth the extra expense. Lead--don't follow.
