[deutschmann59]

I thought I'd finally go legit with my music downloads. I downloaded one song and listened to it through my stereo and I could hear the distinct "cymbal swishing" of a low-bitrate music file :mad:

I can see why most people would want smaller files so they can fit them on their ipods, which I guess the quality would be good enough for that purpose. But what is the purpose of BUYING music that is less than CD quality???

I can't belive they get away with this.

[Enroutte]

Yeah, itunes pretty much makes me mad.

You can always ask your friends to borrow their CDs and put those songs on your iPod. ORRR ... just use limewire.

[Curt3s]

Apple Uses AAC for "Lossless' encoding, so digital compression artifacts like you are describing should not be present, empashis on the should. I've downloaded thousands of songs from the itunes store, and have been more than happy with the quality. Even when converted to MP3. And the audio quality is excellent via Airtunes on my THX 7.1 Home Theater Setup in the living room.

Many things could be happening,
It could be your setup.
it could be the original encoding of the file you are listening to.
try another file/artist.
perhaps you are just incredibly audibly gifted and hear things I or other millions of iTunes users simply don't hear.

[deutschmann59]

I'm listening through my home theater system, and through the front speakers, the music sounds fine. However, through the rear, it is actually annyoing how poor the sound quality is. I'm telling you, I'm pretty picky when it comes to music. These itunes files are definitely NOT a 320k bitrate, which is CD quality.

Most Ipod users wouldn't be able to hear this...even front primary speakers probably couldn't pick this up. However, the rears produce a full, irritating sound with itunes files.

[Curt3s]

Originally Posted by sharp1183

I'm listening through my home theater system, and through the front speakers, the music sounds fine. However, through the rear, it is actually annyoing how poor the sound quality is. I'm telling you, I'm pretty picky when it comes to music. These itunes files are definitely NOT a 320k bitrate, which is CD quality.

Most Ipod users wouldn't be able to hear this...even front primary speakers probably couldn't pick this up. However, the rears produce a full, irritating sound with itunes files.

You're complaing about the rears? Weird man, they're definately not 5.1 files, but you should be able to get a decent pro logic stream out of them.

I still reccomend trying another artist/file.

[eleven24]

The iTunes Music Store is certainly not meant for audiophiles, which it sounds like you are. I consider myself one as well, which is why I buy a lot of stuff from the iTMS. If I really like it, I'll go buy the CD and listen with my higher end stuff, not the iPod.

Related note: I love my Etymotic headphones. Coupled with a mini amp, they really sound great with my CD player (and even iPod).

[RBBMWE46M3]

I was thinking about buying the e2c Shure earphones...has anyone heard how good or bad these are...for my ipod?

[vladinecko]

i agree with curt3s, try downloading another song and see if it's doing the same distortions as the one you have now. AAC is a very good compression technology and 128k encoded MP3 and AAC are definitely not comparable, AAC wins without a compromise. maybe it was just that one song...

[deutschmann59]

Originally Posted by vladinecko

AAC is a very good compression technology and 128k encoded MP3 and AAC are definitely not comparable, AAC wins without a compromise. maybe it was just that one song...

You're definitely right about that. An AAC is definitely better than a standard 128k MP3...but I can instantly tell the difference between the two files--320k vs. 128k-- even on my crappy PC speakers.

When you compress music, the encoder deletes "non-essential" music data from a particular song. This is unacceptable to me when I'm paying $0.99 a song. 15 songs equal the price of one CD, where I could have gotten true CD quality in the first place by buying the CD! Why would I consider paying for less quality...because I can make my own custom CDs? Please!

I hope they've got a better reason that that. I think I'll buy best of CDs if I'm after only a few songs. I think there's more value in that.

[deutschmann59]

Sure I guess you could argue that by using Itunes, you only have to pay for songs you want, as opposed to entire CDs...but I still feel cheated by getting music files are that of a lower quality than they should be.

To me, it feels like I'm paying for half of a song.

[deutschmann59]

Hmmm...I think I found the audiophiles' online music store :rocks:

http://www.musicgiants.com/

[uofmtiger]

MusicGiants is audiophile quality, but they have DRM that makes them incompatible with iPod.

[vladinecko]

holy shit, 1092kbps?!?! that is insane!!!

the thing is that yes, you pay $0.99 per song, but if the albus has, let's say 15 songs, you only pay $9.99 for the entire album. so it's not that bad. also, you're paying for the convenience of sitting at home, browsing through millions of songs and being able to choose only the ones that you want. as oppose to paying for a whole CD where you really only want 2 songs off of it.

but if you're and audiophile, that other site is just insane!!

[uofmtiger]

the thing is that yes, you pay $0.99 per song, but if the albus has, let's say 15 songs, you only pay $9.99 for the entire album. so it's not that bad. also, you're paying for the convenience of sitting at home, browsing through millions of songs and being able to choose only the ones that you want. as oppose to paying for a whole CD where you really only want 2 songs off of it.

I do not download from iTunes because the compression makes them disposable for long term archiving.

I prefer subscribing to Rhapsody and having access to millions of songs for a monthly fee. It is $15 a month (with Rhapsody to go), so it may not be for the casual music fan. On the other hand, Yahoo Unlimited is less than $60 for a year for a similar service. The other catch is that neither service works with iPod. I had to buy a Creative Zen to download their "to-go" music.

If Music Giants would drop the digital rights management, they would be my choice.

[deutschmann59]

Originally Posted by uofmtiger

If Music Giants would drop the digital rights management, they would be my choice.

I'm having a hard time finding info on exactly what digital rights management is. I've found a few articles, but none of them explain what it does and what limitations this causes...

[RedStripe]

Originally Posted by Enroutte

Yeah, itunes pretty much makes me mad.

You can always ask your friends to borrow their CDs and put those songs on your iPod. ORRR ... just use limewire.

Yeah! I use limewire too!

[Armen52]

Originally Posted by Curt3s

Apple Uses AAC for "Lossless' encoding, so digital compression artifacts like you are describing should not be present, empashis on the should. I've downloaded thousands of songs from the itunes store, and have been more than happy with the quality. Even when converted to MP3. And the audio quality is excellent via Airtunes on my THX 7.1 Home Theater Setup in the living room.

Many things could be happening,
It could be your setup.
it could be the original encoding of the file you are listening to.
try another file/artist.
perhaps you are just incredibly audibly gifted and hear things I or other millions of iTunes users simply don't hear.

I'd like to jump in here. The iTunes Music Store is using AAC encoding which is generally better than standard MP3 at similar bitrates. The songs sold on the store are *NOT* however lossless by any means and I have never seen any claim stating as much.

That said, and coming from a Mac user and iPod owner, I don't understand the success of the iTMS. I don't consider myself an audiophile but I am a big fan of music. I don't understand the logic behind paying $10 for a sub-par copy of an album, that you're also RESTRICTED from using/copying/playing as you see fit. Why wouldn't I pay the extra $3-4 for the real CD minus any DRM?

The day I start buying tracks on the iTMS or equivalent is when they remove the DRM and they make it SO cheap that I don't care about the quality loss. I'm talking half or less than the cost of the CD in the shops. Under $7 for an album. I will not hold my breath for this day since record companies want to jack prices up even further.

I am secretly hoping that all these stores fail so that DRM fails.

[Broken1]

Music quality is seriously reduced from the iTMS. Even in 160k Mp3's. I can't here it if I listen on my laptop, or PC speakers but I can hear it if I listen in my car. I can also hear it when I play in on my home theater or anything with a decent sound quality!! I don't mind some of the quality loss, if that means I can hold millions of songs at one time - but I don't like only having the low quality version of my favorite song.

[scottz5]

limewire

[uofmtiger]

I'm having a hard time finding info on exactly what digital rights management is

Here is a decent article related to it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management

That said, and coming from a Mac user and iPod owner, I don't understand the success of the iTMS. I don't consider myself an audiophile but I am a big fan of music. I don't understand the logic behind paying $10 for a sub-par copy of an album, that you're also RESTRICTED from using/copying/playing as you see fit. Why wouldn't I pay the extra $3-4 for the real CD minus any DRM?

You can buy a lot of music from yourmusic.com for $5.99 an album with no shipping or handling costs. I understand convenience since I subscribe to Rhapsody, but the cost per song on iTunes is too high for the reasons you mentioned.

[Lost Rider]

Originally Posted by RBBMWE46M3

I was thinking about buying the e2c Shure earphones...has anyone heard how good or bad these are...for my ipod?

I have been using e3's on tour for 1 1/2 years, and love them.
They will rattle your jawbone, and sound amazing.
Even with no music playing, the sound isolation is excellent, the best in a professional environment.
Most performer's use e5's, but I've listened all of them and prefer the e3's for everyday listening.


If you really want the best sound quality/isolation, I recommend having the custom ear molds done for the headphones. You'll find the info for getting the molds done in the manual

[deutschmann59]

You know, it is just mind boggling to me about this whole music file-sharing debate with the RIAA. Someone mentioned limewire, and while I'd like to use this program, the risks of being named in a lawsuit scares the living crap out of me.

I've read all about the statistics about how only file share-ers (downloading and uploading) have, at least up to this point, been named in lawsuits or letters of demands to financially settle. It seems, for the moment, that downloaders-only are ok.

But I really must question the tactics of the RIAA for all these ridiculous lawsuits. It is even more upsetting to me that some of the defendants can hardly even turn the computer on--their kids, usually under 18, downloaded the files.

And while it is the parent's responsibility to tell their kids about the perils of the Internet, don't you think the RIAA should just lobby congress into putting on something like a monthly $3.00 surcharge on all ISP bills that would go directly to the recording companies, and therefore allow all users free, unlimited downloading of whatever they want?

That sounds like a much better idea to me, but then again what do I know? Then again, do recording companies actually deserve this, considering not everyone downloads music on the Internet?