Why is iTunes music still in 128k?

[Joseph F]

128k sounds like nails on a chalkboard. Why does iTunes still sell this shit when we have gigantic storage capacities nowadays?

Why does iTunes still sell this stuff? Answer: it doesn't.
admin allisolm

 

[rudeguy]

bandwidth

But mostly because sheeple still buy it.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Wait, is it really?

 

[SSSnail]

Because stupid people will buy anything?

 

[lokiju]

I blame their push to flash based players.

Capacities have gone down but are slowly climbing again.

We went from 120GB plus iPods to 8Gb and toping out at 64GB flashed based itouches and nanos, which are their big sellers now.

 

[gevorg]

Because 90%+ of Apple sheeple use ibuds.

 

[makken]

I thought they moved to a lossless format =X

 

[Joseph F]

Because 90%+ of Apple sheeple use ibuds.

I seriously don't understand how a LOT of "sheeple" and normal consumers alike will spend $300 on an iPod but think it's silly to buy a $30-50 set of Headphones or IEMs.

 

[SSSnail]

I seriously don't understand how a LOT of "sheeple" and normal consumers alike will spend $300 on an iPod but think it's silly to buy a $30-50 set of Headphones or IEMs.

Because, they're not Apple's, duh!

 

[DaTT]

I like your hair.

 

[Joseph F]

I'm getting a haircut soon so enjoy it while it lasts. xD

 

[mugs]

I just checked some random songs I've purchased and they're all 256 kbps.

 

[Saint Nick]

Think about it. Think about Apple and what Apple is. Soon, they'll come out with a new "proprietary" format that will simply be a glorified 192kbit mp3, labeled at the next "big" Apple add-on. And, they can charge MORE!

 

[Joseph F]

I just checked some random songs I've purchased and they're all 256 kbps.

Hmm... Perhaps I'm a bit behind on the times.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Huita. I saw 256kb recently. But iTunes is stupid.

 

[Shawn]

I thought it was because AAC files supposedly had a better compression algorithm and 128k AAC sounded better than 128k MP3.

 

[Capt Caveman]

I thought it was because AAC files supposedly had a better compression algorithm and 128k AAC sounded better than 128k MP3.

Correct and iTunes music has been 256k AAC for over a year. Not sure what's sadder, hating Apple or being stupid. Unfortunately, a lot of people here are both.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I thought it was because AAC files supposedly had a better compression algorithm and 128k AAC sounded better than 128k MP3.

Depends on the encoder, but 128kbps is still not good regardless of format.

Apple added a bunch of higher bitrate (256) songs, I think they designated it +, although I haven't used iTunes in a while so I don't know how many songs are available (I was thinking though that most had the option of the + for like an extra $0.30 though, so songs were $1.29 instead of $0.99).

There's been rumors that they're going to add 24 bit, likely lossless. I'm mixed on that, as right now the biggest issue in sound quality isn't the bit rate/depth/etc, its the mixes that are destroying fidelity. Maybe pushing higher quality will lead to them doing something about stuff like that.

I also wish Apple or some company would put some money into developing a binaural processor (or license it, like Smyth has been trying to do with their tech), which would be a perfect fit for iPods where the listening is done primarily over headphones.

 

[Joseph F]

Depends on the encoder, but 128kbps is still not good regardless of format.

Apple added a bunch of higher bitrate (256) songs, I think they designated it +, although I haven't used iTunes in a while so I don't know how many songs are available (I was thinking though that most had the option of the + for like an extra $0.30 though, so songs were $1.29 instead of $0.99).

There's been rumors that they're going to add 24 bit, likely lossless. I'm mixed on that, as right now the biggest issue in sound quality isn't the bit rate/depth/etc, its the mixes that are destroying fidelity. Maybe pushing higher quality will lead to them doing something about stuff like that.

I also wish Apple or some company would put some money into developing a binaural processor (or license it, like Smyth has been trying to do with their tech), which would be a perfect fit for iPods where the listening is done primarily over headphones.

QFT

 

[ViRGE]

Hmm... Perhaps I'm a bit behind on the times.

I'm afraid so. The entire catalog has been 256K since April of 2009. Now preexisting downloads aren't automatically converted, those are still 128K - you can upgrade them, but it's something like $0.30/each (Apple wanted free, the labels did not).