My First Experience Using iTunes Last Night..

[amit1234]

I'm not sure if any you heard but the Apples iTunes music store was finally made available to us Canucks earlier this week - after years of "view only access" of the U.S. site (meaning we could only browse the catalog but never actually download any of the tracks.)

I decided to try out the service and see if it's all that's it made out to be.

First - the shopping experience was great. I just signed up for an account, entered my credit card information, and off I went. I've never seen such a user friendly legit music download website before.

However, once that was done, I was off to start searching for music that I've previously downloaded illegally on mp3 and wanted a better copy of. Naturally, since Apple's quality control standards are pretty high, I thought the music files would reflect that.

It didn't.

Unfortunately, all of the songs on their service are encoded at 128kbps AAC - something I hate!

I'm a stickler for high audio quality and this just doesn't cut it.

Call my a fussy old bitch but I need to hear a full bass and and feel an artist's presence in the room - all those small nuances in a song that make the listening experience ten times better in my opinion.

Thus far, the only way I've found to maintain that high audio quality standard is by ripping my purchased CD's at 320 kbps AAC. I have no complaints when I do that.

Unfortunately, it looks like my first iTunes shopping experience will be my last for awhile. To add insult to injury, the selection on the Canadian site is also pretty pitiful. For example, I was searching for that 1988 Quincy Jones Back On The Block track "I'll Be Good To You" (featuring Ray Charles and Chaka Khan) and it wasn't available. Ditto for Shanice's "I Love Your Smile" - a pleasant keepsake from the early 90's that would have been nice to own since I'm not ever gonna purchase any of her albums.

What did I end up with? These...

"Stop, Look, Listen (To Your Heart)" - Michael McDonald and Toni Braxton
(A gorgeous interpretation from McDonald's recently release Motown 2 collection - worth the price of admission alone for Toni Braxton whose never sounded this good on record since her Secrets opus.)

"Giving You The Benefit" and "I Can't Help It" - Pebbles
(Two tracks from the underated 80's R&B diva. The latter a remake of the brilliant Michael Jackson Off The Wall album track - not as good as the original obviously, however, nice to hear for Pebbles' imitation of the King Of Pop's vocal mannerisms nonetheless.)

"Wish I Didn't Miss You" - Angie Stone
(Probably the only track I've come to know and appreciate in Stone's repetoire - yes, I know! For shame! I was also going to download the Hex Hector remix of the song but decided against it since I didn't think busy house music would translate as nicely as the original version on my iPod earphones.)

"Out Of Touch" - Hall and Oates
(A classic 80's track from youth. Too bad they don't make pop music like this anymore.)

"Love Come Down" and "I'm In Love" - Evelyn "Champagne" King
(I always heard this lady's name throughout the years and knew she was a big disco artist in the 70's. However, it was only until Janet Jackson's Damita Jo album track "R&B Junkie" (which sampled generously from the glorious "I'm In Love") that I decided to do a little investigating. The two tracks I downloaded probably represent her best known work and serve as a pleasant introduction should I decide to purchase her GH CD later on.)

"I've Been Thinking About You" - Londonbeat
(A guilty pleasure from the early 90's. Of course, who can forget those four guys - what were their names anyway?!?! A huge USA and UK #1 hit and for good reason. It's probably one of the most infectious tracks that finely walks the line between pop and dance.)

"Show Me Love" - Robin S.
(Much like CeCe Peniston, Robin S. will probably only be remembered for her one big hit - but what a hit it was! Another nice trip down memory lane for this bitter old queen.)

Anyways, I transferred all of the above downloads onto my iPod last night and can't say I'm overly happy. Sure, the music sounds great on my computer speakers, however, compared to my CD quality rips, the sound quality just doesn't live up to my standard when I slip on my earphones.



Thoughts?

 

[seashorepiano]

... I was off to start searching for music that I've previously downloaded illegally on mp3 and wanted a better copy of.

Good enough.

I'm a stickler for high audio quality and this just doesn't cut it.

Huh? How can you be a stickler when you go for the hit-or-miss quality of illegal mp3s online? Just a question... Nevertheless, I have been very pleased with all the music I've downloaded from iTunes. I recently downloaded a Bill Evans album that I already own on CD, for comparison and because I don't have all the CD tracks copied to my computer. The difference was minimal, to my ears, except the iTunes edition sounded clearer in some parts. Your points on the convenience are very true; I certainly will second them.

By the way, I live in the States and checked up on that Quincy Jones track from Back On the Block, and apparently it isn't available here, either, so it musn't be at all.

 

[Mike Blakesley]

Quincy Jones' stuff is spotty. I found "You've Got It Bad Girl" and "Theme from The Getaway," two tracks from the never-on-CD YOU'VE GOT IT BAD GIRL album, which I didn't think I'd ever find. But there are vast holes in his catalog, to be sure. I have a feeling it is mostly caused by those pesky guest appearances by artists signed to other labels.

The last couple of songs on amit's list are great ones....I need to get those two!

As for the sound quality...I think they're trying to strike a balance to make it affordable. And, they also probably know that the vast majority of the people listening to downloads are people with car stereos, boomboxes and such -- not people with high-end systems. Take me -- I do most of my music listening in my vehicle or on my computer, so the iTunes music sounds just fine to me.

Just give it a few years. Probably by the end of this decade, iTunes as we know it today will seem old, quaint and clunky compared to whatever we have by then.

 

[Rudy]

They have to keep the files to a manageable size--broadband users are still in a minority. That said, a lot of us wish places like iTunes would offer customers a few different compression rates: 128kbps is fine for the majority of iTunes users, but those of us who want high quality would prefer something at 256 or above, or even a lossless compression like FLAC.

If I absolutely needed a track that was compressed, and could not find it anywhere else, I'd consider downloading. Beyond that, I definitely cannot listen to them at length--I can easily hear the artifacts of compression. AAC does have better compression encoding than some MP3 encoders, so 128k in AAC would probably beat many 128k MP3 encoders.

 

[Vinylalbumcovers]

How can you be a stickler when you go for the hit-or-miss quality of illegal mp3s online? Just a question...

More the point, how can one be a stickler for high-quality audio and have anything to do with .mp3s? I, too, am merely asking a question...

Ed

 

[seashorepiano]

How can you be a stickler when you go for the hit-or-miss quality of illegal mp3s online? Just a question...

More the point, how can one be a stickler for high-quality audio and have anything to do with .mp3s? I, too, am merely asking a question...

Ed

Right on, Ed. I agree, although my experience has been mostly with mp3s. I'm no audio technician or expert by any means. I don't know how to look for the artificiality of compressed files. However, I appreciate some clarity in the music I own and hear. My question effaced the obvious contradiction in the first post of this thread. Someone wants files that sound relatively good - all compression analysis aside - and plays a hit-or-miss game by downloading potentially harmful (besides illegal) music files online. The chances of downloading a mislabeled song, offensive material, or virus-laden file are great. I will admit I've downloaded only two illegal tracks in my entire life, years ago. (One of the songs was cut off halfway through and startled me with a very loud "pop." I'm sure many others have worse horror stories of murky downloads.) The rest of my collection was legitimately purchased. I, like all the rest here, want good-quality files. But to say that one wants the good, and then looks in the wrong area (like illegal sharing services) persistently, is silly.

 

[Rudy]

Some MP3s sound better than others--maybe the downloaded MP3s were at a much higher bitrate, or variable bitrate? Certainly possible. MP3 can still sound good, as AAC files can sound good if ripped at a high enough bitrate. Yeah it's not uncompressed music, but it'll do, especially in a portable device.

 

[aymnostalgico]

It is a Russian site, has english version and it is legit! I've been using it for 1 1/2 yrs with no problem. I just finished the 10 dollars I put in january 2003. Songs are like 5 cents . I have downloaded over 100 files with 10 dollars. I have placed credit again. The drawback for me specifically is that they don't carry to many music files in Spanish. They do have U.S top 50 charts as well as European charts. very Up-to-date with the current american hits and movies. Check it out. www.allofmp3.com by the way , they are very good with encoding high quality 320kbps and other formats

you want the new U2 album? they have it cheaper! the entire album $2.30 with original cd da original source
if you want MP3 format that cost $1.15 the entire album What a bargain!!
How much is itunes? buck a song? x 11= $11

DRAWBACK---ONLY 300.000 FILES AVAILABLE , BUT THE NEW STUFF IS THERE. i HAVEN'T SEARCH FOR ALPERT'S STUFF IN HERE YET.

 

[Vinylalbumcovers]

Some MP3s sound better than others--maybe the downloaded MP3s were at a much higher bitrate, or variable bitrate? Certainly possible. MP3 can still sound good, as AAC files can sound good if ripped at a high enough bitrate. Yeah it's not uncompressed music, but it'll do, especially in a portable device.

That's what I was getting at. .mp3 is compressed data so it could never be termed "high quality" - regardless of how high the bitrate is. Some of the sound is still being removed to compress the audio.

Ed

 

[amit1234]

Hey guys - Just because I'm a stickler for high quality audio files doesn't mean I can't enjoy an mp3 now and then - especially since most of them are FREE.

Hello?!?!

*Taps my microphone*

Is this thing on??

Besides, with Winmx.com, I can search for mp3 files by bitrate (incidentally, I always choose a minimum bit rate of 192kbps and end up with some pretty great sounding files.)

However, when it comes to PURCHASING music, I demand CD quality sound. It's only fair, right?

Thus far, iTunes hasn't giving me a reason to come back (unless they pull a U2 again and sell an online Michael Jackson boxed set and customized MJ iPod) so I guess I'll be sticking with CD's for awhile. Not that I'm complaining. I need that physical connection (artwork, liner notes, packaging) with music so it's probably all for the best anyway.

 

[Murray]

However, when it comes to PURCHASING music, I demand CD quality sound. It's only fair, right?

Thus far, iTunes hasn't giving me a reason to come back (unless they pull a U2 again and sell an online Michael Jackson boxed set and customized MJ iPod) so I guess I'll be sticking with CD's for awhile. Not that I'm complaining. I need that physical connection (artwork, liner notes, packaging) with music so it's probably all for the best anyway.

I purchased a few legal tunes from another Canadian service, Puretracks.com. Their files are WMA format, but they are 192kbps, so the quality isn't too bad. Downloading from there is a convenient way to get the odd single, but I would never consider purchasing a complete album download. At 0.99/track, it costs as much or more to download the whole album as it does to buy the CD, which is higher quality, includes the artwork, and I don't have to burn it myself.

What I would like to see is complete albums offered in a lossless format, and high-quality scans of all the artwork/liner notes that I could print. That way I'd at least feel that I've gotten value for my money.

Murray

 

[Mr Bill]

To me "paying for JUST an mp3" seems crazy. My mp3 collection is (for the most part) culled from own CD/LP collection so I have the "original CD/vinyl quality copy." Having merely a download of an album is an intangible to me -- I want something I can physically hold in a nice jewel case or digipac, with liner notes etc. Owning a download is on par with possessing a box of freedom or a can of love.

I still wig out watcing kids buy CDs, walk out of the store and toss the jewel case, booklet etc in the trash so they can stuff the CD in their stupid "CD wallet." And most modern discs don't even have the artist or tunes listed on the disc itself (just some wacky art) so how do they know who it is or what track they're looking for? Gee, if I did that with my LPs I could consolidate my 12 crates to maybe 8 or 9...

On top of that there's the notion that "everything is available on iTunes" that most of my Mac Nazi friends espouse. Of course these are people who don't know that for every artist that gets radio play there are 100 who don't. I'd say most people fall into that category 'cept us music savvy folks! Anyway, my friend said he'd prove it to me so I gave him list of about 30 A&M and I.R.S. artists and he logged on to iTunes telling me he'd guarantee at least one song by each artist. Of course, after finding NONE of the artists he changed his approach to an attack on my musical tastes, which was not the course of the original disagreement.

--Mr Bill
a curmudgeon when it comes to the younger generation, disposable/on demand society and Mac Nazis...

 

[Dave]

...Gee, with my LPs, I can consolidate my 12 crates to maybe 8 or 9...


--Mr Bill

Hey, It Works!! I did that with a lotta MY albums...!! Just saved the info on the Back Covers and put TWO LP's in ONE Blank 12" Sleeve, Per 2 Albums...! If the vinyl is worn out, I can put a CD or two in there in one or two of those Real Small "mini-cases"...!

"Making 'Two-Fers', online...!!


Dave

A/K/A/ "Dooforus-Twoforus"... ...Hey, Not Bad!!! :goofygrin:

 

[Mr Bill]

You scare me.

--Mr Bill

 

[Dave]

...I just don't have "front covers" in my collection; just BACKS... With a few exceptions...!

I just enjoy listening and reading to what "I enjoy, the way I enjoy", that's all...

Dave

[Edited, so "Protective-Services" doesn't come and take my records away... ...'Sides I need FOOD and CLOTHES...]

 

[Rudy]

To me "paying for JUST an mp3" seems crazy. My mp3 collection is (for the most part) culled from own CD/LP collection so I have the "original CD/vinyl quality copy." Having merely a download of an album is an intangible to me -- I want something I can physically hold in a nice jewel case or digipac, with liner notes etc. Owning a download is on par with possessing a box of freedom or a can of love.

Cans of Whup-Ass don't count though.

I have no problem buying a single song if it means I don't have to pay for an album that's 90% crap with one good song on it. I just see iTunes as replacing the "single" we all grew up with. It has its purpose, but still, for older releases, I'm with you and would rather have an original single or LP on hand.

 

[Mike Blakesley]

Mr. Bill said:

On top of that there's the notion that "everything is available on iTunes" that most of my Mac Nazi friends espouse.

Now there's a misconception if there ever was one. Out of about 15 or 20 old obscure tunes I wanted to find, only one was on iTunes. And I'm forever hearing good stuff on XM, writing it down with the hope of buying off of iTunes, but finding they don't have it.

There's still no substitute for the best musical combination: the well-stocked music store AND the special-order desk in that store.