6 Pop Songs Great for Audio Demos
Worst DIY Installs Ever Part 7
10 Must-Have Products for Your Next Install
6 Amazing High-End Home Theaters
Print
Email
Comments (10)
Share
iTunes Needs to Improve Quality of Music Downloads
Apple is an innovator in the worlds of computing and home entertainment, but it has fallen behind niche audio services like HD Tracks and iTrax that offer higher quality music downloads.
Now with the introduction of Apple's iCloud and other cloud-based storage services, storage issues will soon be a thing of the past. Music lovers will no longer be limited to the restrictions of physical storage and will no longer need to buy low-resolution AAC or MP3 files.
With iTunes entrenched as the No. 1 music retail service, millions of consumers are accustom to the sound quality (or lack of) associated with iTunes content. In response, a growing number of consumers are turning to vinyl or other high-resolution download alternatives such as HD Tracks and, to a lesser extent, iTrax to get their fix of high-quality music.
There were rumors earlier this year that Apple was in talks with several music labels to bring higher resolution files to iTunes, so the Cupertino, California-based company is aware of the public's hunger for better quality music downloads. But how proactive is Apple in pursuing the delivery of high-resolution music files? It's time for Apple to offer something better than its current best offering of 256kbps files.
HD Tracks and iTrax could also step up their respective games. Their products are priced too high, they don’t offer enough variety, and they need to take a page out of Apple's playbook by allowing consumers to easily purchase individual songs.
I checked HD Tracks' Specials of the Week and, after scrolling down a good chunk of the page, finally hit an artist I know: Steve Vai. This week the site is pricing a 24-bit/96kHz version of Vai's Where the Wild Things Are for $14.38 and individual downloads from the album at $2.49. As much as I respect Vai, he's not exactly a household name. HD Tracks gets nearly three times the price for one of its songs as Apple.
This won't fly with the masses. And, to be honest, I will not drop $17.98 on content I already own in other formats, like a 24/96 version of Rush's Moving Pictures or a 24/88 version of The Rolling Stones' Beggars Banquet for $19.98. HD Tracks doesn't even allow single-track downloads from these albums, forcing consumers to spend more for content they probably already own.
Give HD Tracks credit for offering high-resolution content, even if they are asking for a lot of money. I can't say the same for iTrax. I consider myself fairly knowledgeable about music, and if I didn’t play guitar or have associations with iTrax's founder, I wouldn’t know any of the artists featured on its site.
iTrax's price per 24/96 download ranges from $1.99 to $3.79 and albums run about $22. This is a lot of money to spend on an artist you may not know. iTrax does offer a lot of variety in the type of media it offers. Users can download single songs in a number of formats, and there are a choice of mixes titled "audience" and "stage," as well as a choice of 2.0 stereo and 5.1.
Things are looking much better than they did a few years ago, but they're not where they need to be.
|
McIntosh MX121, MX151 Control Centers Debut Atlona at ISE 2012: 4X4 HDBaseT, More Wireless Coming DVDO Air WirelessHD Streamer Gets Rid of Wires Peerless PeerAir Combines Mount with Wireless HD Streaming Dynaudio Unleashes Xeo Remote-Controlled, Wireless Speakers Iogear Wireless 3D Media Kit Streams Content 100’ from 5 Sources ZyXEL Enters IP Camera Surveillance Market More filed in Wireless A/V |
Controlling a $15M Bel Air Mansion
 85” Plasma Shines in Manhattan Apartment  |
 15 Keys for Picking a Wireless TechnologyDownload this paper and learn what you need to consider before making a decision. |
|
Presented by IOGEAR
|
||
Subscribe to the CE Pro Newsletter
About the Author
10 Comments (displayed in order by date/time)
I totally agree with Mark. I have built a library of nearly a terabyte of songs, ripped in lossless. The majority of the CDs purchased have been used bought through local stores or on shopping sites such as Amazon.
Why not buy the CD at half price, rip it to a portable hard drive that will cost you $80? I am running a server with mine in a RAID 5 configuration so that I always have a backup. But for the masses, a portable hard drive would suffice.
While I support the push for higher quality files, the bigger concern is the mastering (and often times remastering) of albums. The limiting used on many of today’s releases has far more impact on the sound quality than the compression algorithms used IMO.
Bradon, you are correct in the grand scheme mastering is a bigger issue. We tackled that topic just last week: http://www.cepro.com/article/dont_blame_the_format_for_bad_sound_blame_the_suits/
This is a separate issue however and it will become a greater topic of discussion as cloud computing becomes bigger. I just signed up for Apple’s service this past weekend and was surprised to learn that Apple creates its mirrored copies of your iTunes with 256k files. My collection is a mix of AIFF, WAV, AAC and MP3 and 256k is a far cry from the 1,400+ bit rates of WAV & AIFF.
I was also surprised to learn that it doesn’t backup your videos. I hope Apple does step it up with higher bitrate backups and video backups at some point.
@Robert - and if they already have that song/album on file, they use their copy, rather than uploading and storing yours.
I agree with Mark & Patrick re: ripping CDs, except for “lossless” in iTunes. Rip a track in Apple Lossless and again in AIFF . . . you will hear a noticeable difference (the AIFF is superior.) There is much less sonic difference when comparing Apple Lossless to their 256k AAC+ codec.
As for $15 -$18 for high-quality albums, i don’t think that’s too bad . . . I used to pay that much for CDs. the bigger question is: given a great recording/digital file, what are the playback options? Certainly not from the computer’s audio card. I guess if you had a networked receiver capable of decoding/reproducing the different file types?
@ Dan, (curious) how do you substantiate the the aac @ 256K is sonicly close to ALAC @ 600K~ 800Kbps, since you start with the same “space” 44/1- 16 (given the same recording / master).
As for HD Tracks, Much of their music is 96/24 from masters recorder in 24bit space (native)
A portable USB should not be considered a reasonable back up for the masses if it in fact stays on line / connected. If you backed up your RAID to a USB which will go off line, then it is acceptable. Otherwise, you have literally put all of eggs in one basket.
@Dah Finstah, my point is that now that storage isn’t as much an issue anymore as it used to be, why can’t the iTunes Music Store offer at least 16-bit/44kHz files. Today people are less concerned with the space it takes up for these larger files and with cloud services they can in theory use their hard drives for something other than music.
As for the pricing of HD Tracks, most of the records aren’t $15 to $18, they are $20 to $22 and in all likelihood you probably own that content. I’ll use Rush’s Moving Pictures as an example. I bought the Blu-ray 24/96 package of the album that also contains a surround mix, a CD and videos for $26. I’d rather spend the extra $6 to get three formats and videos than $18 for a single format. I also own the album on CD and vinyl. My example isn’t unusual either.
HD Tracks is asking consumers to spend up quite a bit for something that requires a substantial hardware investment on top all of that to play these files at their native resolutions.
As was said above, it doesnt matter the compression scheme used when most music today is mixed “hot” and sounds terrible. Older stuff still tends to be taken care of but really, how many times am I going to have to purchase Hotel California?
Even when we set clients up for iTunes I typically change the CD import to 320 and to mp3…. the site of HD Tracks will not sell much… I still buy CD’s and then rip them into my collection. I went from wav to mp3 no wav suport from iTunes. I aggree iTunes needs a full restart, make it load faster and ability to hit near CD quality without much cost increase.
If you want better quality than iTunes but don’t want to pay the high fees of HD Tracks, just buy the CD and rip it (to whatever format you want).. that might be the best compromise until one of the companies offers HD with the iTunes business model.