The Beatles catalog comes to Apple's iTunes - Page 10

Originally Posted by success

I think this thread ran out of pages.... when you click page 10 it just keeps going back to page 9.

Originally Posted by John.B

vBulletin, FTW!

Originally Posted by success

ok now it's working, but when I was clicking it wasn't working. Maybe this forum's vBulletin isn't up to date. Who knows.

Originally Posted by theskivvys

I am a little disappointed with the Announcement as I have been hoping for Apple Lossless too and ios4.2. I have all the Beatles albums (non-remastered) and they rarely get a listen out of my 340GB of music.

I am a musician too so we cant make the argument as in previous threads about how they are amazing musicians (the beatles). I even have a song in itunes look it up under Andrew R, DX7 tunes (The DX7 is 14 bit)!!! I play several instruments and I can tell you that when I was playing in bands in the 90s, not many musicians wanted to play the Beatles. From that era far more would play Jimi Hendrix, Pink Floyd & Led Zeppelin! The beatles weren't considered musicians and if any fellow musicians liked them it was sort of considered quirky or odd! Admittedly the 80s went through an era of virtuoso type of music such as Satriani, Steve Lukather of TOTO, Malmstein, Slash,Metallica, Eddie Van Halen, or hard rock, or exploring synths (the beatles just played around with a Moog like a toy in Abbey Rd, nowhere near as creative and inventive as what was to come with Pink Floyd, Tangerine Dream, Jarre, Vangelis, Numan or Kraftwerk!!!)

For those that also think that the sound of 256kbs is indistinguishable from lossless, let me tell you that through apple ibuds or little speakers that might be the case, but if you own a half decent set of full range headphones (such as the Sennheiser HD555) or speakers it is a huge difference, particularly with repeated listens!!

1) M



I first experienced the lossy digital format in 1997 when I purchased a Yamaha 4 track mini disc in my home studio (it used ATRAC). Although fantastic at the time, it would tend to thin out the guitar & vocals as compared to a lossless format. The lossy formats also reduce bit resolution and dynamic range.

I have heard SACD and was unimpressed, it sounded very synthetic, but that might have changed over time (it was only a brief listen). Don't get confused with its 2.8224 mhz, DSD uses a different type of way to get digital data. I have downloaded 24 bit music @ 96khz and yes it is more dynamic but still sounds just as "digital"!!


With my current HD650 headphones I pick up everything, the sampling rate in Windows was set at 48k and I could hear the resampling add distortion!! I also had to turn of the sound enhancer in itunes as it was causing awful distortion. Bit perfect is what us audio purists like.

Also there is a massive difference between analogue sound and digital. But I do enjoy the convenience of listening to digital. (particularly as I dont have to get up and change a record and there is no wear & tear). I own many 70s records and even non-audiophiles friends could hear a "digital ceiling" on records that are analogue but during the recording process have had digital effects put in (usually during the 80s).

The digital sound is discrete and must guess what is in-between (error correction), also analogue sounds have been shown to produce sounds up to 100k and beyond, there is no limit.Also why do you think they remaster music that is already produced on CD???The reason why they remaster is that ADC's have improved and capture the sound more accurately. I discovered that because I couldnt understand why my vinyl version recorded on cd in 1998 through a Yamaha Promix01 sounded better than CD and I realised because the CD was using a Analogue to Digital conversion during the late 80s, it didnt sound as good!!! And they say that digital sound is perfect but yet we have to remaster everything???

Originally Posted by success

No I'm not confusing it. Yes the data on CDs is digital (0s & 1s). Is a CD considered digital in this day and age? Nope. If you say digital download to someone they think iTunes or something similar not CDs.

Originally Posted by piot

Rob Enderle on The Beatles and iTunes.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/app...k=MW_news_stmp

If it happened 10 years ago, it would have been huge, said Rob Enderle of the Enderle Group.

Apple opened the iTMS in April ... 2003.

Originally Posted by solipsism

That why it would have been huge.

Originally Posted by addabox

The Beatles are such a mighty force that they have arranged to make their entire catalog available on a nonexistent electronic download service, to be played on nonexistent portable media devices!

Originally Posted by solipsism

.....The usual stuff he does everytime I post anything...

Originally Posted by success

I love U2...Rattle n' Hum was a good album

Originally Posted by Mister Snitch

He's called out, proven wrong and put in an indefensible position. So all that's left is to lash out and call the other guy a sheep. Yeah, it's pathetic, but completely predictable. I mean, what, you expected him to be a man and admit he was wrong?

And the 'no one buys music anymore' bit - that's just SAD. Yeah, people buy millions of iPods and iPhones each year so they can NOT put music on them. Yeah, that's what's happening. The iTunes store must be a ghost town, no one's going there. Apple must be going broke. This clown isn't clueless.

Originally Posted by AdamIIGS

No we got the point, the point is you are a troll and an idiot that doesn't know what he's talking about. Point well taken! Peace and Love, Peace and Love!

Originally Posted by rtm135

Just because you type words doesn't make them true. What exactly was I wrong about?

Apple still uses DRM. I know this because I have Apple-purchased, DRM-encoded files. And anyone with even an IQ as low as yours knows how to use Google or BitTorrent to download music without using iTunes.

I never anything close to people's iProducts being empty. Put down the crack pipe, son.

Originally Posted by rtm135

But a comment like that DOES make you a moron.

Originally Posted by solipsism

"Who actually buys music anymore anyways--especially music with DRM" Your initial comment was about music, not video nor music videos. It was pointed out, quite correctly, that Apple no longer uses is required to use DRM for music. Youre still stating this is not the case? Really?

"DRM or not, no one buys music anymore." You stated, quite incorrectly, that no one buys music. Not only is this axiomatically wrong there are now stats of exactly how well The Beatles have sold on iTunes in its first week. If we consider that they barely charted on iTunes Top 10 for most of the week that indicates that many other songs and albums were selling more than The Beatles. So much for your foolish claims.



You might want to keep your personal attacks to a minimum.

Originally Posted by rtm135

and calling me a troll wasn't a personal attack? get bent.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.