Apple rumored to be developing new audio format designed for iCloud streaming
Apple is said to be working on a new audio file format that would help to bolster its iCloud service by focusing on "adaptive streaming" for users on the go.
In addition to improving streaming of music, the new audio file would also offer "high-definition" quality to users who have more bandwidth and storage available on their iPhone, iPad or iPod, according to The Guardian. The new file type is reportedly expected to upgrade the $24.99-per-year iTunes Match service as well, which allows users to access music they obtained from sources outside of iTunes over the iCloud service.
"A source with inside knowledge of the process says Apple has asked a London studio to prepare audio files for a new streaming format that will adapt to bandwidth or hardware capabilities," the report said. It quoted an unnamed person who said users' libraries would "improve in an instant," and nothing would need to be done to upgrade files from the current AAC format to high definition.
With the new method, users will reportedly be able to obtain high quality audio when they are over a faster connection, like Wi-Fi. But when on the go using 3G, bandwidth could be conserved by automatically accessing a lower quality file.
The U.K. publication said the timing of the rumor "suggests it will showcase the new streaming technology alongside the announcement of the third generation of its iPad tablet." Apple is expected to hold a media event on March 7 to unveil its next iPad.
The first indication that Apple was working on a high-definition audio format came from artist Neil Young, who said at a conference last month that he worked directly with late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs on the project. Young indicated the new music format would offer fans uncompromised studio-quality sound in the form of digital music downloads.
"Steve Jobs was a pioneer of digital music," Young said. "His legacy is tremendous. But when he went home, he listened to vinyl. And you gotta believe that if he lived long enough, he would have eventually done what I'm trying to do."
Rumblings of a high-definition audio format from Apple are not new. Last February, one report claimed that the company was in talks with record labels to improve the quality of song downloads available from the iTunes Music Store. Current downloads from iTunes are 16 bits, but it was said that Apple wants to increase them to a 24-bit high-fidelity format.
Apple previously upgraded the quality of the audio files it sells in 2007 with the release of iTunes 7.2 and iTunes Plus. iTunes Plus tracks feature high-quality 256kbps AAC encoding and are void of any digital rights management protection.
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
Apple is said to be working on a new audio file format that would help to bolster its iCloud service by focusing on "adaptive streaming" for users on the go.
...
The first indication that Apple was working on a high-definition audio format came from artist Neil Young, who said at a conference last month that he worked directly with late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs on the project. Young indicated the new music format would offer fans uncompromised studio-quality sound in the form of digital music downloads.
Just what we need - another proprietary Apple format.
And the Neil Young thing has nothing to do with what Apple is said to be working on. Neil wants a high definition recording - while the Apple thing is a method for streaming variable quality renditions of existing recordings. It has nothing to do with making recordings in a higher quality than at present.
Freaking awesome news! Too bad my hearing isn't what it used to be.
May be the adapative nature of the format will deal with this as well !
*sigh* Still no ALAC.
ALAC is unnecessary for high quality audio. Anything above 160 kbps AAC sounds good to most people.
Anyway, the whole cloud concept is hugely oversold as it is of very doubtful utility in many cases.
Who cares. With data caps in the US, what's the point? You'll still run into a wall.
^^^^Didn't read^^^^
With the new method, users will reportedly be able to obtain high quality audio when they are over a faster connection, like Wi-Fi. But when on the go using 3G, bandwidth could be conserved by automatically accessing a lower quality file.
ALAC is unnecessary for high quality audio. Anything above 160 kbps AAC sounds good to most people.
Yes, most people.
Anyway, the whole cloud concept is hugely oversold as it is of very doubtful utility in many cases.
Indeed. I find it wonderful that they now allow redownloads of purchased music, but I couldn't care less about actually storing my music in the cloud. All on my computer, period. That's still the only place I'll trust the actual files.
*sigh* Still no ALAC.
And if it doesn't support Ogg Vorbis then forget it.
And if it doesn't support Ogg Vorbis then forget it.
I mean for purchase from iTunes.
And the difference here is that ALAC's actually a good format.
^^^^Didn't read^^^^
Yes I did. It said could conserve over 3G....but I doubt that a song that takes 3 megs (random number) to stream will go down to 50k.
I mean for purchase from iTunes.
And the difference here is that ALAC's actually a good format.
The ironic thing about the ALAC/FLAC wars is that we're pretty much talking about the exact same data (ripped CDs...previously known as AIFF). The only difference is the file structure and method for lossless compression. Once uncompressed, both formats should be identical.
For this audiophile, if Apple can actually do a streaming file with better resolution, than hallelujah! As it stands now, even CDs aren't giving you the whole picture of the recording. That's what we had SACD, DVD-Audio and now Blu-Ray audio. And of course, there's still some vinyl out there.
here is some good reading:
http://images.apple.com/itunes/maste...for_itunes.pdf
Right now it's doesn't change a lot the quality, but it open the way for the future. Apple will archive every Mastered for itunes song in full 96khz/24bits and compress on demand to feed the user.
May be the adapative nature of the format will deal with this as well !
That would be something
Apple will archive every Mastered for itunes song in full 96khz/24bits and compress on demand to feed the user.
Perhaps with this new format they're working on it'll be dynamically scalable, but my understanding of the Mastered for iTunes thing was so they would have the best quality masters available to them. This way, they could always go back to it as processing power and storage continues to improve (this is what they say in the PDF) to create files with bitrates that improve upon iTunes Plus (256kVBR). Either way, it's cool news.
I'm doing something similar with my personal collection where I'm re-ripping all my CDs (again) in ALAC. I'll be keeping that on a separate drive for archival purposes and creating more "portable" versions (256k & 320k VBR) for use on my iDevices.
Indeed. I find it wonderful that they now allow redownloads of purchased music, but I couldn't care less about actually storing my music in the cloud. All on my computer, period. That's still the only place I'll trust the actual files.
But that's the beauty of iTunes Match. All of the music is still on your computer, but you can also stream and download from other devices connected to the cloud.
I'd all but given hope, thinking the "you can't hear the difference" brigade had won the day. Try getting a decent effing HiFi system before making any such comments to me.
I wonder if those people look out of the window and say to themselves "we don't need any sunshine it's warm enough for most people".
Steve was one of my role models, but he did not pioneer digital music. He just made it popular.
Steve preferred analog sources.
"CD quality" is a massively dumbed down recording format from the Master Tape or even consumer analog (Vinyl/tape). The CD, with 16 bits and 44.1kHz sampling sound, leaves the listener well short of a fully emotional engaging reproduction of the original performance. Please read the Tim de Paravicini interview for a great explanation:
Uber Pro Recording Guru Tim de Paravicini interview:
"When it comes to digital, it's how to operate it, how many bits we devote to it, and the sampling frequency, as to how we store that information. The original digital system of CD, with 16 bits and 44.1kHz sampling, was what the mathematicians deemed to be the minimum acceptable to human hearing for so-called hi-fi. They never looked at all the artifacts and all the problems. And they never did enough analysis of the human hearing mechanism to realize that we don't stop hearing at 20kHz; people can discern and detect sound up to 45kHz. We have, as I say to people, an equivalent risetime of 11 microseconds in the hearing mechanism. And the ability to resolve detail in those digital systems wasn't quite good enough.
"In analog, you can change the thing and keep on aspiring to perfection without a compatibility issue. With digital, once you change any parameter, you've got a compatibility issue. Now, you can record on ProTools at 24-bit/192kHz, but it's not compatible with CD. I did my own summation, and this is from 20 years ago, that if we did 384kHz at 24-bit, we'll have a system that will resolve on a par with the best analog. That's the holy grail. And the problem, for the computer people, is having the balls to go that whole hog.