YART - iTunes sucks supreme donkey

[boggsie]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Baked

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Why don't you just set iTunes you DL your purchased music in the Lossless format then? It'll take a good while to DL, but thats you call.

People blame iTunes for having lossy quality, but are too stupid to look under the preferences and settings to adjust the DL quality.

Edit>Preferences, Advanced Tab, Importing Sub tab will allow you to adjust the level of quality you DL music and the level of quality you rip audio CDs from.

:laugh:

OMFG, I think I just felt off my chair from the self pwnage of his post.

ce la vie...

I almost never come in here (OT) ... I am _SO GLAD_ that I did, tonight.

 

[Goosemaster]

seriously spidey, itunes is not meant for martin logans....that Sony 777es is a nice amp (sony used to have good stuff in their es line).

itunes is basically the test-run for DRM that turned into a hit. It's great for single tracks and for fads, but for your real stuff jsut stick to cds....

For example, there's no way I'd buy "the battle for los angeles" by RATM or "un viaje" by cafe tacuba on itunes and do so for the acoustics....sure I bought a few songs from those artists, but these are my favorites albums from them and I accept that itunes is not enough...


but to write itunes off...well, that's jsut too much....


that's like saying that T-1's have no purpose since DSL is so much faster. Obviously people pay for 5 9's, but not every client needs that, and many get get by jsut fine with one 9 or so. Basically, there is a tiem and a place for everything, and itunes has its niche and I think it is performing in it quite admirably

 

[SSP]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
seriously spidey, itunes is not meant for martin logans....that Sony 777es is a nice amp (sony used to have good stuff in their es line).

itunes is basically the test-run for DRM that turned into a hit. It's great for single tracks and for fads, but for your real stuff jsut stick to cds....

For example, there's no way I'd buy "the battle for los angeles" by RATM or "un viaje" by cafe tacuba on itunes and do so for the acoustics....sure I bought a few songs from those artists, but these are my favorites albums from them and I accept that itunes is not enough...

What about competing services? Are they all on 128bit mp3/wma's?
but to write itunes off...well, that's jsut too much....


that's like saying that T-1's have no purpose since DSL is so much faster. Obviously people pay for 5 9's, but not every client needs that, and many get get by jsut fine with one 9 or so. Basically, there is a tiem and a place for everything, and itunes has its niche and I think it is performing in it quite admirably

 

[Goosemaster]

I'll spoil the fun:


Bateluer,


itunes only offers 128kbps AAC encoded files. The preferences are for importing music from CDs and other files such as wmas and the like.

THE ONLY TIME THAT APPLE LOSSLESS ENCODING SHOULD COME TO PLAY OCCURS WHEN:

a) you are importing songs from an audio cd

b) you are importing LOSSLESS .WMA FILES


Otherwise, the codecs inclusion in the itunes program is moot...for now..until they offer lossless downloads.


That said, because compression rates for lossless files are so low (~40-60%) and their resulting file sizes are so large, it would be impractical for apple to sell them, not tomention that their business model probably couldn't take on the ridiculous bandwidth that would be needed for that.

Hell, even now their network is SICK...

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: SSP

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
seriously spidey, itunes is not meant for martin logans....that Sony 777es is a nice amp (sony used to have good stuff in their es line).

itunes is basically the test-run for DRM that turned into a hit. It's great for single tracks and for fads, but for your real stuff jsut stick to cds....

For example, there's no way I'd buy "the battle for los angeles" by RATM or "un viaje" by cafe tacuba on itunes and do so for the acoustics....sure I bought a few songs from those artists, but these are my favorites albums from them and I accept that itunes is not enough...

Originally posted by: SSP
What about competing services? Are they all on 128bit mp3/wma's?

but to write itunes off...well, that's jsut too much....


that's like saying that T-1's have no purpose since DSL is so much faster. Obviously people pay for 5 9's, but not every client needs that, and many get get by jsut fine with one 9 or so. Basically, there is a tiem and a place for everything, and itunes has its niche and I think it is performing in it quite admirably

serivces liek napster arer offering 192kbps wmas iirc.

Basically, using a generic mp3 encoder, wma and aac fiels encoded at the same bitrate are of superior quality. That said, using LAME and settigns usch as EXTREME and INSANE result in vastly superior results. In many cases, people have trouble tellign them apart from lossless files except on the best of systems.

Basically, even at 192kbps, if you haave a good system, you will notice the compression. Tracks with loads of samples and "loud" music won't show, but if you put on some "grieg" or "Sibelius," or even some Radiohead, you WILL notice the compression...


For stuff like Radiohead, hefty compressions jsut ruins it

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Baked

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Why don't you just set iTunes you DL your purchased music in the Lossless format then? It'll take a good while to DL, but thats you call.

People blame iTunes for having lossy quality, but are too stupid to look under the preferences and settings to adjust the DL quality.

Edit>Preferences, Advanced Tab, Importing Sub tab will allow you to adjust the level of quality you DL music and the level of quality you rip audio CDs from.

:laugh:

OMFG, I think I just felt off my chair from the self pwnage of his post.

ce la vie...

gotta work on your french skills goose!

c'est la vie!

 

[SSP]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: SSP

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
seriously spidey, itunes is not meant for martin logans....that Sony 777es is a nice amp (sony used to have good stuff in their es line).

itunes is basically the test-run for DRM that turned into a hit. It's great for single tracks and for fads, but for your real stuff jsut stick to cds....

For example, there's no way I'd buy "the battle for los angeles" by RATM or "un viaje" by cafe tacuba on itunes and do so for the acoustics....sure I bought a few songs from those artists, but these are my favorites albums from them and I accept that itunes is not enough...

Originally posted by: SSP
What about competing services? Are they all on 128bit mp3/wma's?

but to write itunes off...well, that's jsut too much....


that's like saying that T-1's have no purpose since DSL is so much faster. Obviously people pay for 5 9's, but not every client needs that, and many get get by jsut fine with one 9 or so. Basically, there is a tiem and a place for everything, and itunes has its niche and I think it is performing in it quite admirably

serivces liek napster arer offering 192kbps wmas iirc.

Basically, using a generic mp3 encoder, wma and aac fiels encoded at the same bitrate are of superior quality. That said, using LAME and settigns usch as EXTREME and INSANE result in vastly superior results. In many cases, people have trouble tellign them apart from lossless files except on the best of systems.

Basically, even at 192kbps, if you haave a good system, you will notice the compression. Tracks with loads of samples and "loud" music won't show, but if you put on some "grieg" or "Sibelius," or even some Radiohead, you WILL notice the compression...


For stuff like Radiohead, hefty compressions jsut ruins it

Thanks, and sorry about the fscked up post. I had no idea I wrote it in your reply.

 

[LumbergTech]

i love lossless formats ..dont pay attention to those who cant tell the difference..i mean if they dont care then they dont need to worry about it but it bothers those of us who can

 

[spidey07]

Goose,

the 777es is my source, not an amp.


I guess I was just ticked that was I so happy to find a song I was looking for, only to have it be such crap.

It's like going on a date with somebody you've never met - all these wonderful pictures. Only to find out they were not of her.

 

[ultimatebob]

Oh well. You can still get lossless MP3 downloads from Allofmp3.com, or at least until the Russian government shuts them down due to pressure from the RIAA. Judging from what I've been reading, that will probably happen soon

 

[Shawn]

--alt-preset-standard FTW!

or --alt-preset-extreme if you don't care about file size.

 

[Ameesh]

Originally posted by: spidey07
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Everytime I hear a good song I get it on iTunes. Purchase it and download it.

So happy that I have that, that soothing sound turns out to be a nasty piece of crap.

Nasty. Hunk of scrappy, tinny, nasty stuff. It's god dang awful. I don't care about compression techiques, bs me to the end.......it sounds like crap.

I'm sticking to vinyl for decent audio, or CDs. Good god this crap is awful.

you are a moron

 

[randomlinh]

i wish itunes could encode mp3s using LAME. i for one can't really tell a difference, so I'm happy I don't have audiophile ears. not that this post has anything to do w/ the itunes store. i just thought the misunderstanding btwn Bateluer and everyone else was hilarious

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: Shawn
--alt-preset-standard FTW!

or --alt-preset-extreme if you don't care about file size.

Bah... I go with: -V 0 --vbr-new. The lossless options are nice, but my MP3 player doesn't do lossless and VBR 0 is more than enough for me.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Goose,

the 777es is my source, not an amp.


I guess I was just ticked that was I so happy to find a song I was looking for, only to have it be such crap.

It's like going on a date with somebody you've never met - all these wonderful pictures. Only to find out they were not of her.

oh...I missed the "decent amps"