Legal replacing illegal in iTunes?

messiahtosh

Is anyone else doing this? I am currently, basically subsonsciously replacing songs in iTunes with the legal music and throwing out the stolen music. This is not to say that if I already have a downloaded song, I will trash it and buy its legal version of the file, I dont do that. What I have been doing is, deleting songs I dont listen to very much and then buying a legal song almost immediately to replace it. I have spent 140 dollars on the iTMS this way.



Anyone else sort of doing the same thing?

murbot

I don't know man, that's a lot of money for a clear conscience.

stevegongrui

yeah, really



140 bucks is more than half of how much the ipod mini costs.

ebby

First of all, most of the music on my iPod is downloaded however very few songs are illegal. Those that are, I've tried to find in stores and on the ITMS but can't.

I don't throw away songs, but I will gladly replace the songs if they were offered. The only thing Peer-to-peer has that ITMS doesn't is a HUGE selection.

sunrein

I don't mean to play the 'goody two shoes', but I only download music illegally to have a listen to it. If I like the music, I'll go buy the CD or get individual songs from iTunes. Either way, I delete the illegal downloads after I've made up my mind.



I know that having access to the music via file sharing has increased the amount of money I spend on music; and I spent a lot beforehand. I own about 1700 CDs right now and I'm 27. Perhaps I'm in the minority on using file sharing this way? If not, it would be a persuasive argument in favor of keeping it around.

ipeon

Thus far I've spent $279.78 at iTMS.



I'm not all that concerned with the music I've downloaded for free. If I download something that isn't at iTMS, I could care less. I will pay for it if they make it available at iTMS, if it isn't there, not my problem.

mac write

I never have and never will spend a dime at iTMS. Why? Most of there prices are too high. and the quality is crap for someone with a very good ear like me.



I use 320kbps AAC and will be moving to AIFF as soon as I can get the storage space ( I have it actually 150GB free, but that's mostly on my scratch drive).



I own 125 Albums (with some being box sets or 2 disc Albums) consisting of over 2,200 songs. I plan to get at least another 25 Albums this year.



I am focusing on getting all the best songs from 50's to present. I use iTMS for finding music. Like the right song/artist/album. Then I go to the local store and buy it. on My moms computer once I redo it (allot of songs skip we both have DP 1.25GHZ with 160GB HD's and I also have a 120GB for my OS/Apps/Docuemtns). I think the non Toshiba Combo Drive is the problem (not sure of the brand) She has over 200+ Albums. Drool

kraig911

Yeah I know what your saying man, I'm doing the exact same thing. Sometimes I have a really hard time finding something I like, and I can't stand ordering a cd online when, ITMS exists... There's a lot of music I like that is a hard time tie find at times, and though waterloo records is in town sometimes they don't even stock them and have to order them. I think I've spent $320 so far, and frankly I think the quality is good. My only concern is say 10 or 5 years down the line, or when dvd-audio comes around?

dave k.

Quote:

Originally posted by Messiahtosh

Is anyone else doing this? I am currently, basically subsonsciously replacing songs in iTunes with the legal music and throwing out the stolen music. This is not to say that if I already have a downloaded song, I will trash it and buy its legal version of the file, I dont do that. What I have been doing is, deleting songs I dont listen to very much and then buying a legal song almost immediately to replace it. I have spent 140 dollars on the iTMS this way.



Anyone else sort of doing the same thing?

Absolutely. I try and do this as often as I can. I even setup a "stolen" playlist in iTunes. When I buy a song that I previously downloaded illegally, I then remove it from my playlist.

stevegongrui

Quote:

Originally posted by Mac Write

and the quality is crap for someone with a very good ear like me.



I use 320kbps AAC and will be moving to AIFF as soon as I can get the storage space ( I have it actually 150GB free, but that's mostly on my scratch drive).

Damn, that's a high AAC bit rate to be using. I always thought I had a good ear because I was only barely happy with 224 Mp3 vbr but 320 AAC....



Could you please share what exactly you find to differ in the song quality from iTMS and AAC 320 please?





Here's what I feel the problem with iTMS is, that the sound does not sound alive, as if it lacks the spirit or anima to the texture of the music. I cannot offer anything more objective though, so I don't know if it's just me.



I'd love to hear what you all have to say cause I'm a bit lost with AAC perception.

ipodandimac

Quote:

Originally posted by Mac Write

I never have and never will spend a dime at iTMS. Why? Most of there prices are too high. and the quality is crap for someone with a very good ear like me.

everyone bow the almighty listener! youre one of those people who claim they can hear really high pitches and everything. well, i have a story for you:



in one of my lecture classes, the professor brought out a box that was basically just a speaker and a dial to adjust the pitch of a tone. he turned it on and asked the class (of about 300 people) how many could hear a the tone. there were probably about 75 people that raised their hands (i wasnt one of them cause i couldnt hear the tone). he turned the dial to raise the pitch, and about 20 people said they could hear it. he did the same thing a couple more times, and there was one guy with "a very good ear" that could still hear the tone. well guess what! the box was just a hunk of wood--nothing inside, and no tone coming from it. my point proven

sunrein

Quote:

Originally posted by ipodandimac

everyone bow the almighty listener! youre one of those people who claim they can hear really high pitches and everything.

I get that you're trying to show what a condescending person he's being, but both of you are only partially right.



Does it take a 'really good ear' to hear compression in music? Not at all. Is it all about the ability to hear really high pitches? Not really. Do people exaggerate the degree with which they can detect compression? For sure. Does it depend on what kind of music you're listening to? Definitely.



Acoustic instruments suffer much more from compression than amplified or synthesized sounds. The waveforms of an acoustic instrument are much more complex and depend upon many frequencies throughout the spectrum in order to be accurately reproduced. The sound of a piano is one of the easiest instruments to detect the degrading effects of digital compression. Of course, if you listen to primarily electronically synthesized and/or processed music (which is a lot of music these days), you'll never know much difference between the source and a compressed file. The waveforms produced by this kind of music depend much less on the upper frequencies of the sound spectrum (i.e., overtone/undertone harmonics).



It goes without saying, that the quality of equipment you listen to your music on, will also have a great impact on the ability to hear the degrading effects of compression.



P.S. - There is actually a scene in the movie "The Red Violin", that covers harmonic resonance of an acoustic instrument fairly well, from a lay standpoint.

mac write

I am legally blind and since my vision isn't good, I have better hearing. I have 45% classical music. I also listen to through my Mini stereo, which means bigger speakers.



I by a CD for the quality not not down sample it. If I wanted poor quality I would by a tape.



By 2006, my entire collection will be AIFF. Now how do you rip DVD Audio DVD's? I refuse to by a big clunky unreliable slow DVD changer to get the functionality that iTunes provides me for FREE.

ipodandimac

Quote:

Originally posted by Mac Write

I am legally blind

and you typed that how?



back on "topic" though, if all your songs are in AIFF, how are you possibly going to fit those on to a hard drive, not to mention an ipod?

torifile

Quote:

Originally posted by Mac Write

I never have and never will spend a dime at iTMS. Why?

You're in Canada, that's why.





When you get used to iTMS, you'll use it a lot. Especially for music that doesn't require such high fidelity. I use the iTMS for some stuff that I don't feel needs to be in great quality. If it's something I *really* care about, I still buy the CD.



iTMS will not replace CD buying for me, it will likely just supplement it.

ghost_user_name

I wouldn't go so far as ripping my music to AIFF. That just seems a little wasteful. I'd investigate using a codec like FLAC. Even on monitor headphones I have a hard time hearing quality fall in higher bit-rate AAC or MP3 files. I love my music's acoustic integrity as much as the next guy, but ripping to AIFF seems just a tad ridiculous. I liken it to all of the people on Slashdot that get up in arms that our privacy is being severely invaded because the grocery store has people watching the security cameras now.



As for how the guy can see when he is legally blind... you people realize that "Universal Access" built into Mac OS for years and years is there specifically for people that have hearing and vision problems, as well as others. Apple used to be a real leader in that area. They still kind of are, just little innovation as of late.

mac write

I am visually impared I can still see. and I don't use zoom etc. I run 1152x870 on my 17 CRT with 14-18 font size.



I have the space for AIFF. people I know truely can tell the difference. Oh course they have audio training. Even when iTMS comes to Canada I still won't use it EVER. AIFF will be supported for years to come AAC Uh. I want freedom not restrictions.

ipodandimac

alright--i understand the legally blind thing--sorry....



and if you have the room for AIFFs, then go for it i guess