hey all. wanted input on it's been boggling me bit. let me first explain know how digital audio works, know formats, know lossy , lossless is, know how encode, how work..all stuff. highly biased towards aac lossy implementations know aac successor to-and performs better mp3 in more ways few. aac supported on audio platform can imagine now. nice see mainstream realize change welcome.
before continue post , it's about, i'm not bashing apple or itunes store, i'm curious , point out there few songs seem affected strangely poor mastering or bad transcode rather full lossless aac re-encode.
ok i'll continue.
-----
i'm not happy [small handful] of songs on itunes store. itunes match woke me this, knew song or two. on computer... if listen apple lossless song in it's original super-quality glory - enjoy it. being biased best lossy format on other hand, can listen songs low 128kbps on aac , still pick out how superior mp3 , notice how audibly close lossless or average equipment, prefer aac 192 , settle 256 lower capacity mobile devices ipod.
have itms?
technically speaking of course - know itunes store supposed offer music in form of digital audio files encoded @ 256kbps aac. when apple made change, said offering music @ higher bitrate (or "itunes plus" make sound grand less technologically-knowledgeable folk) , satisfy users song closer original recording previous 128kbps aac files before.
want know why songs in library @ alac or 128-320 aac still sound better affected song itunes store? more put, 256 vs 256, still differ , mine still wins. can compare few more (less 5 of library's songs affected) songs because of itunes match. can encode alac 256kbps aac, , pull [matched] 256kbps aac 1 available on itunes store. though i've noticed difference in riffs out of song preview itms, difference still obvious here when compared side-by-side.
have convert both wav , put them in audio editor , invert one. if there sound, audio files differ. done before user can't remember name of on ethier mac rumors or different forum, credit goes him, if reads this, knows is. did determine if flac/aiff/wav , alac same. were. can compare lossy original lossless way determine how data thrown away. didn't need perform test out subject songs because doesn't take rocket scientist hear bad compression artifacts in audio file.
itms version if it's song affected (which supposed "closer original recording") aka. cd 256 aac sounds has major wet/swashy artifact sounds on it. vocals, cymbals, guitars.. it's affected. why? accident, or did apple justify songs (namely metal genre) not need re-encoded lossless because swashy enough? yes, affected songs rock/heavy metal etc... artifacts still obvious sound between 2 non-audiophiles myself, obvious artifacts ara put-off , listen affected songs on ipod (and new 4s) had put versions in app goodreader if wanted listen them without crappy artifacts.
after re-downloads first time around, i've deducted enough evidence know wasn't botched download. of songs sound way in previews. overall though, amount of songs i've noticed affected less 10, it's highly negligible. has oversight on apple's end. big apple , has amazing services user's, hardly, hardly imagine apple botched , transcoded songs bitrate show higher never re-encode lossless. there many hardcore audiophiles on apple's nerves them crap on music enthusiasts this.
what recordings in particular talking about? lot of times songs sold on apple store digital remasters if older recordings, step in terms of overall audio quality.
can take files , @ waveforms in audacity compare contrast dynamic range and/or inverting them see if there's differences.
also, if original recording bad begin with, higher quality aac file bring out said bad recording. washy/underwater effects tell/tell sign of compressed , distorted treble.
Forums Special Interests Digital Audio
- iPhone
- Mac OS & System Software
- iPad
- Apple Watch
- Notebooks
- iTunes
- Apple ID
- iCloud
- Desktop Computers
- Apple Music
- Professional Applications
- iPod
- iWork
- Apple TV
- iLife
- Wireless
No comments:
Post a Comment