No Disc Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Apple computer today announced iTunes software for Windows computers. This software available only on Macintosh before today. Download it and check it out... it's very slick piece of software. It's a FREE download. http://www.apple.com/itunes/ tb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I just downloaded it and I agree really slick program ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dflip Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I also assume that it is only available in the US still? That has been the policy with macs so far. I have both capabilities, mac and windows, but north of the border = out of luck! Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Disc Posted October 16, 2003 Author Share Posted October 16, 2003 I forgot about that. Some licensing red tape I imagine. I don't think that will be ALWAYS like this though. So what happens if your not in CUSA, it won't let you download the software? - tb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I tell you what I love the album prices and the convienence of buying them and burning them in minutes ! This stuff should really catch on I would think. Napster and other peer to peer is more trouble then its worth ! For $10 just pay for the album and download in seconds. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Disc Posted October 16, 2003 Author Share Posted October 16, 2003 I believe this "Connivence" is the appeal of the service. Certainly Apple has found a method by which consumer and provider are happy with the arrangement. If your into connivence, you can't beat it. Be forwarned though, Apple does not encode the mp3 files with the highest possible quality encodings. You get slightly less than CD quality with these. It's not for me. I do use the sampling feature to find out what I do like and what I will purhcase elsewhere. I also like and use the "Radio" feature that lets me tune into streamed music. Internet Radio at it's best. For portability, the integration with the "iPod" is unequaled. You can have your complete set of playlists arranged in any fashion you like on your computer, and just by connecting your "iPod" you can sync your entire Playlist to your iPod for portable listening. With firewire, it's very fast and worry free. Burning playlists to CDs is also easy as can be. If I still travelled as much as I did in the past, I would own an iPod. I'm firmly planted now, so for me, there is no need. - tb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEC Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 tb I think Apple's iTunes Music Service uses AAC encoding. Supposed to be better than MP3. AAC: MPEG-4 audio AAC (for Advanced Audio Coding, a big part of the MPEG-4 specification) is the cutting-edge audio codec thats perfect for the Internet. AAC encoding compresses much more efficiently than older formats like MP3 (which iTunes still supports, by the way), while delivering quality rivaling that of uncompressed CD audio. In fact, some expert listeners have judged AAC audio files compressed at 128 kbps (stereo) to be virtually indistinguishable from the original uncompressed audio source. iTunes 4 and QuickTime (6.2 and higher) are all you need to get started. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Tim, What makes you think the quality is less then what is considered CD quality for MP3 (128) I just messed with one of the files and encoded the identical song in MP3 and if you go by file size its larger in the Mac format then in a 128 MP3 file. I still say that once you burn these files back to CD and the file is decompressed you have a exact copy of the original CD although I too like to have my MP3's sampled at 224 . Remember your PC sound card and speakers are never going to sound like your Cornwalls and SET ! Craig PS I have some 24 gigs of 224 MP3's on my PC ! With my Klipsch Promedia's and Phillips Acoustic Edge soundcard it sounds pretty darn good for a PC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Disc Posted October 16, 2003 Author Share Posted October 16, 2003 Apple uses 128 kbps sampled AAC. Whichever the case, it still it not CD quality. That rate is comparible to 160 kbps mp3. See the latest Stereophile for a complete review of the iPod along with an analysis of the different compression formats and quality settings. Unfortunately it was appearent at the very end of the review that the reviewer did not seem to understand that AIFF (Audio Information File Format) is in fact, the same format that used on CDs. - tb ---------------- On 10/16/2003 9:05:53 PM BEC wrote: tb I think Apple's iTunes Music Service uses AAC encoding. Supposed to be better than MP3. AAC: MPEG-4 audio AAC (for Advanced Audio Coding, a big part of the MPEG-4 specification) is the cutting-edge audio codec thats perfect for the Internet. AAC encoding compresses much more efficiently than older formats like MP3 (which iTunes still supports, by the way), while delivering quality rivaling that of uncompressed CD audio. In fact, some expert listeners have judged AAC audio files compressed at 128 kbps (stereo) to be virtually indistinguishable from the original uncompressed audio source. iTunes 4 and QuickTime (6.2 and higher) are all you need to get started. Bob ---------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Tim, read my post above what is your take on the files once decompressed onto a CD. Do you think in the compression process it tosses out imformation ? I find this hard to understand because once decompressed and burned onto a CD the amount of the CD used is Identical to the original CD seems Logical to me that it must be Identical but I'm not computer or compression wizz ! Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Disc Posted October 16, 2003 Author Share Posted October 16, 2003 Craig, The simple fact that mp3 is a compressed and what is considered a "lossy" format. mp3 was designed to highly compress the audio data sacrificing quality for a smaller size. Read the latest stereophile article regarding the iPod, and the analysis of the compression formats available. Just so you know, the data on CDs is called AIFF - Audio Information File Format. AIFF file on CD are usually about 40-70 MB each. Which is why only about 15 or so fit on a 700 MB CD depending on the length of the tracks. MP3 and mp4 file take up a fraction of that space, but they do, in fact, degrade the quality of the audio. When you burn those mp3 or mp4s back to CD, you are taking highly compressed audio data (with some data thrown away) and uncompressing them to AIFF to fit on CDs playable on any CD player. You can test this out yourself if you like. iTunes can "RIP" your existing CDs to iTunes. For an extreme example of the degradation of quality, go into itunes preferences under "importing" and set a 16 kbps stereo sample bit rate and play the resulting sample within iTunes. Have fun. Just understand what you are getting for those $1 tracks. My belief is that Apple and Universal music are hoping that most consumers of their music just wont care they are getting "less" quality so long as they can download it. - tb P.S. If you want to read up on what is mp3 and to understand a bit of the technology behind it.... http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/mp3/chapter/ch02.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Tim, You completely skipped over my main point here. Your say it discards information. I say it does not I think this is just another rumopr went array. I completely agree that sound quality is lost when listening to the MP3 or the Mac format (whatever it is called). But I do not agree that once uncompressed back to a Redbook CD that there is any difference compared to a store bought CD. After all what is the definition of compression ? My understanding is that nothing is discarded or removed in a compression program it is just simply compressed ! Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Disc Posted October 17, 2003 Author Share Posted October 17, 2003 Craig, Both mp3, and mp4 format are "lossy" formats. meaning they throw away information in order to achive their smaller size. Read the link I supplied, it describes this process well. That you cannot hear a difference is attributed to how well he compression algorithms work. Or perhaps the build up of wax in your ears, who knows. Heh. It's far from rumor. - tb ---------------- On 10/17/2003 7:28:09 AM NOSValves wrote: Tim, You completely skipped over my main point here. Your say it discards information. I say it does not I think this is just another rumopr went array. I completely agree that sound quality is lost when listening to the MP3 or the Mac format (whatever it is called). But I do not agree that once uncompressed back to a Redbook CD that there is any difference compared to a store bought CD. After all what is the definition of compression ? My understanding is that nothing is discarded or removed in a compression program it is just simply compressed ! Craig ---------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin_tx_16 Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 I have been trying forever to load http://www.apple.com/itunes/ but it never does, grrr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Justin, Maybe you shoulda brought a Mac to school... fini Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 "But I do not agree that once uncompressed back to a Redbook CD that there is any difference compared to a store bought CD. " You are wrong. Do a bit for bit comparison of source vs pre/post compression and you will find that the data isn't the same. File size alone tell you nothing, you need to compare the actual data in the file. "My understanding is that nothing is discarded or removed in a compression program it is just simply compressed !" Depends on the type of compression. MP3 isn't the same as something like Zip. Zip is a non-lossy compression. What goes in is what comes out. In the case of MP3 (or any other perceptual encoder like DTS, DD, AAC) one stage of the compression is determining infomation that won't be missed by the listener. It is literally thrown away and not included in the compressed file. How much is thrown away will depend on your bit rate. Even using standard MP3 some encoders will do a better job then others at the same bit rate and you will hear quality differences. A non-lossy compression of an audio file won't be able to reduce the file size nearly as much as lossy compression can. When you decompress back to a WAV that info is still gone and is no different then when you play the MP3 directly. If you are hearing differences here it is due to some other factor. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Tim, That artical is great at explaining what happens in the process of MP3 encoding but reall never says a thing abouit wat happens in the reverse. As far as looking at the files I have no clue what to look for so that tells me nothing. I want to know what happen to the file when encoded back to redbook. If imformation is lost for ever what takes its place to end up with the same file size. This constant slam of people's hearing/writing and reading on this forum is really getting old !! Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Disc Posted October 17, 2003 Author Share Posted October 17, 2003 Constant? When, if ever, did I ever before poke fun at you? Lighten up - your getting WAY too sensitive. tb ---------------- On 10/17/2003 8:41:29 AM NOSValves wrote: This constant slam of people's hearing/writing and reading on this forum is really getting old !! Craig ---------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 "As far as looking at the files I have no clue what to look for so that tells me nothing." All you need to do is a file compare between the two (there are many programs that will do this for you) or run a checksum. If they don't come back identical (which they won't) you will see that the end result isn't the same as what went in. "If imformation is lost for ever what takes its place to end up with the same file size." The MP3 encode/decode keeps the length of the music the same. XXX amount of music will *always* take YYY number of bytes. That is all the file size shows you... it has nothing to do with the content within that length/bytes. For example if you create a 10 second wave file with nothing but silence in it (all bits zero) then create a 10 second wave file with a 1khz tone you will find the file size is the same. Obviously the content isn't the same. Or a simpler example... open up a test editor. Type in: AAAA then save the file. Create another text file with BBBB in it and save the file. The two files have the same file size. File size tells you nothing about content. A file compare or a checksum will show that the content is different. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgb Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 MP3 and anyother compressed format audio lose quality, but since it is a fixed alogarithim (sp?) it can be reveresed with a decoding program. I've done this with quite a few mp3s and have been pleased with the results. The difference is like looking at photo print from a negative and a 72 dpi jpg on your computer screen. At a glance, or from a distance there isn't much difference, but when look closely, you can see a huge difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.