or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple again pushes iTunes subscriptions, attempts to block Spotify
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple again pushes iTunes subscriptions, attempts to block Spotify - Page 2

post #41 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I believe the term you are looking for is AirPlay.

Or Apple could quit creating it's own "standards" and use the ones that already exist and have wide support. Like DLNA, which they apparently refuse to support.
post #42 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

The labels wouldn't allow Apple to sell music on the same terms as Spotify even if they wanted to.

Why not? Can't Apple make as much money for the labels as Spotify?

Why is the deal OK for Spotify, but not OK for Apple?

What is the sticking point?

Do you have any facts?
post #43 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

That's a good point, those formats seemed like BS. My impression is that the biggest reason those formats sounded better is because the sound didn't have aggressively applied dynamic range compression, and we can get better from CD if customers only demanded it. While the fanss of SACD/DVDA were talking about how it sounded so much better because of the sample rates and the detractors were talking about how the sample rates are overkill, both sides missed the possibility of differences in DRC accounting for the differences in sound quality, in other words, a lot of posturing that focused on the wrong things.

I'm pretty sure that audiophiles pay attention to dynamics.

The audiophiles didn't miss the other improvements, the ones besides sampling rate. Indeed, I would think that only the otherwise good-sounding recordings would be resampled, and that the new recordings wold be made carefully.

One of the actual real advantages of traditional CDs over vinyl is that long passages can nevertheless retain their dynamics. With vinyl, the big bass excursions need to be pared back to save physical space, as do the other loud passages if the record is anywhere near 25 minutes. With CD, you get x dB of dynamic range, no matter if the composition is 70 minutes or 5.
post #44 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Then convert your lossy files to lossless.




That would be like taking a blurry 2 meg photo and upsampling it to 120 MP. It would do nothing except make an excellent copy of a bad original.


Look - the labels screwed themselves by releasing the moral equivalent of their master tapes. In a format that can be copied perfectly and nearly effortlessly. The CD.

The genie is out of the bottle. No amount of lossy releases will put it back.

Before the CD, no perfect copies could be made of the master tapes. Now it is trivially easy to make multiple copies of the label's gold standard recording. They got nothing left, nothing exclusive, once a digital recording gets issued on disk or a lossless recording is downloaded.

They cannot put the genie back into the bottle. Inconvenient lossy cassette copies of vinyl were OK - perfect copies of the product, unlimited in number, and identical to the original - that is not OK.
post #45 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post


Eventually all of the lossless music we're buying won't work on future hardware due to different formats that will be created. Then we'll need to repurchase our music or buy conversion hardware and software.


Eventually?

I have gigs of .flac lossless music. It won't work on current hardware: My iPhone.

I will not repurchase my music. I bought it on vinyl and cassette and CD.

Instead, I use free conversion software to downgrade it into something that that iPhone is able to handle.

It is a total PITA. But your predictions for the future are here already, and there is no need to repurchase the music, because consumers have it in the best-available quality already.
post #46 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Or Apple could quit creating it's own "standards" and use the ones that already exist and have wide support. Like DLNA, which they apparently refuse to support.

In principle, I agree, but I've never had a good experience getting DLNA to work well. Does anyone else really support it very well? It feels like a standard where everyone picks and chooses what parts of it to support. Everyone calls it something different too, so going through the device's documentation doesn't help if you don't know the company's trade name for the feature, I end up finding help on a web forum.
post #47 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Problem is, it's not a level playing field. Spotify can get deals from the labels that Apple struggles with. Which I don't think is too fair.

I wouldnt be to paranoid about spotify. Its still has quite major obstacles to cross on its own. The big labels for one. The big lables own much of spotify and arent eager on the whole thing. Its no big suprice that its not making nearly enough money as it should be doing. So something is going to have to change or the labels are going to step out and take the music with them.

One or more of these things could happen:

1. They will have to have more annoying advertiacements inbetween songs, which is a problem for some. Either you chose to pay to not get the advertisements or you have to go to other sevices.
2. The free choice is going away
3. Its not makingh enought money so the labels wote for driving prices up: premium price is doubled.
4. It wont make enought money for the labels on its own and 1 or more labels are getting out after all choices have been exhausted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple again pushes iTunes subscriptions, attempts to block Spotify