Filed under: iTS, Freeware, Internet Tools, iTunes
Advantageous mp3 simplifies Amazon comparison shopping
Basically the Advantageous installer adds both an AppleScript to iTunes and a small application to your Mac. When you're browsing in the iTunes Store if you invoke the script from iTunes script menu in the menubar it will start the little application and search for the track in Amazon (via your default browser). It's not perfectly reliable (for instance, it didn't work with Choosy as my default browser and it messes up some searches), but it is a convenient way to surf for music in iTunes but take advantage of lower prices at Amazon. So now you can do to Apple what you've been doing to Barnes & Noble!
Advantageous mp3 is a free download from Robert Palmer.
[via Engadget]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Galley said 8:29AM on 4-08-2009
Amazon has begun to match iTunes' $1.29 prices.
Reply
Timm said 8:35AM on 4-08-2009
playlist.com is free
Reply
eric f. said 8:38AM on 4-08-2009
I don't think simplies is a word.
Reply
Timm said 8:50AM on 4-08-2009
Back in the day we used it as a short form of 'simplifies'.
g said 8:58AM on 4-08-2009
I've been using this for awhile with no issues. I prefer to shop at itunes music store and purchase from Amazon.
Even if the prices and bit rates were identical, I'd purchase from Amazon as I want MP3s not ACCs.
Reply
Christina Warren said 11:19AM on 4-08-2009
Ditto. I prefer the way Amazon encodes too (they do LAME V0, which is how I always rip my music, so it fits with my work flow). I've been using it since November (http://www.downloadsquad.com/2008/11/05/itunes-search-with-amazons-drm-free-store-advantageous/) with no issues.
Oh - and Amazon usually only does $1.29 for "singles" -- meaning, if the album isn't out, the single might be $1.29. The track price is almost always $0.99 or $0.89. Plus you get the weekly $3.99 or $4.99 new release specials at Amazon that iTunes doesn't offer.
SpinThis! said 1:12PM on 4-08-2009
It's AAC, not ACC.
I fail to see why people would prefer mp3 over the superior quality aac. It's like comparing a divx rip vs h.264. mp3 is like the dinosaur of the audio world. The only advantage is that it pretty much plays in everything these days.
Too bad Apple doesn't provide a lossless format... so you can encode to whatever you want without losing quality or burn to a CD to "archive" and rerip at will or to play in your car, etc.
tom said 4:51PM on 4-08-2009
"The only advantage is that it pretty much plays in everything these days."
Call me crazy, but isn't that a pretty big advantage?
Level 5 said 8:05AM on 4-09-2009
I've had this conversation over at Engadget, and everyone seems to think I'm nuts about wanting lossless. They claim I can't hear the difference. I can, but that's not the blinking red light.
The difference is if you have to re-encode, you WILL LOSE SUBSTANTIAL quality. If I buy a song, I might want it to go onto 4 places.
1 - My iPod for the car
2 - My HTC Touch Pro
3 - My PS3
4 - My as yet unchosen gym MP3 player, which is probably going to be a Sansa Clip
The iPod I can leave as is, but sine it's almost 100% car duty, 128kbps AAC is acceptable. Lossless to 128kbps AAC will sound a little different than 256kbps AAC to 128kbps MP3. The Touch Pro is the same deal. The PS3 CAN play AAC files but it has issues reading the tags, so I normally go to VBR MP3, it's a balance between quality and file size that works well for me. For something like the Sansa, I might want to go as low as 192kbps MP3. Again, further compressing an already compressed file will get you some iffy artifacts in the audio. So what do I wind up doing?
1 - My electronic music comes from Beatport. I can get a .WAV, which are expensive, are worth it because I DJ, and if I'm going to re-encode, AND play the tune out, I might as well have a reference copy. I've got 2TB of disk internally and another backup drive.
2 - My full albums come from CD's. Yeah, I'm old fashioned, but considering you can get the entire album for a comparable price new, or much much LESS used, this is a no brainer. Even 1000 CD's only take up a few boxes in the closet, and I doubt I'll have that many.
3 - My singles I'll probably buy wherever is cheaper, but I rarely buy them, so I'll usually go from the last 2 methods.
Lossless is where it's at folks, for real.
Level 5 said 8:07AM on 4-09-2009
"Lossless to 128kbps AAC will sound a little different than 256kbps AAC to 128kbps MP3."
This is supposed to read 256kbps AAC to 128kbps AAC. Coffee hasn't happened yet ;)
EJ said 12:06PM on 4-08-2009
Meh, I'm quickly migrating to Lala.com, which is cheaper than either and grants you the right to stream any song you buy (and your whole library of mp3s, for that matter) from their slick website wherever you are. Also, you can stream any song on their site in it's entirety one time before you have to buy it. Selection is about as good as iTunes. Apple and Amazon really need to step up their game IMO.
Reply
jonathan said 4:05PM on 4-08-2009
i agree. i recently got put on to lala.com and i havent stopped since that day. all day at work i get to listen to a new album that i had never heard before...in its entirety. then u only have to pay .10 to continue to listen to it online, or if u want the download, pay an additional .79 (for a grand total of .89) and u get to keep it.
they also have a syncing service that will match ur library of mp3s at home to their library and give u access to all those songs online...how freakin cool.
SaintStryfe said 6:47PM on 4-08-2009
the only problem is you can get a lot saved up. My brother dropped Lala because he was sending out lots of good disks and getting almost nothing - to a point he was begging friends and family for older discs they wanted.
EJ said 7:19PM on 4-08-2009
Stryfe,
Lala has completely changed their business model. CD trading has nothing to do with it now - now it's a combinations of an iTunes-style store an a very rich flash media player that lets you stream your songs from anywhere. You can even buy cheap "streaming only" albums for under a dollar.
John.B said 12:46PM on 4-08-2009
Cool, so we'll be able to compare $1.29 AAC tracks from iTunes with $1.29 MP3 tracks from Amazon. http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/08/amazon-and-wal-mart-mp3-stores-adopt-variable-pricing/ Jobs pioneers DRM-less online music sales and practically gets hung in effigy for his trouble, but all the other download services follow suit one day later.
FWIW, I hate VBR songs. I have a few VBR MP3s from Amazon that take as long as 8 seconds to start playing (no matter which PMP or software I use), even though Audacity shows the tracks start immediately.
Reply
darkpaw said 2:00PM on 4-08-2009
The url this script fires off includes an Amazon affiliate tag, "&tag=advantagmp3-20". This means that the developer gets a small percentage of every purchase you make via this script.
I have no problem with this; I just thought people should know. There was a backlash against the developer of Inquisitor for not informing people of this, and I can't see anything on this guy's website about this.
Reply
kompakter said 2:08PM on 4-08-2009
That's a handy little script. I wish there was a script, app, or even site that could check multiple download vendors (iTunes, Amazon, Beatport, Bleep, etc.) and compare prices automatically. THAT would be a real time-saver for me.
Reply
jonathan said 4:05PM on 4-08-2009
amazon changed their price structure. as did walmart. and not just for "singles"
i'd hate to link to another site...but this is where i learned from.
http://bit.ly/vTJFD
Reply
Zak said 4:37PM on 4-08-2009
I seriously don't understand how all these writers are getting this wrong: Amazon has ALWAYS had variable pricing. ALWAYS. Looking at TUAW, MacWorld, MacUser, MacNN, even Engadget - EVERYBODY is getting this simple fact wrong.
For some reason people either think Amazon just got variable pricing today, or Amazon's tracks are all 99 cents. What? I was looking at tracks on Amazon last year that cost $1.29 each. Yes, that means some tracks on Amazon cost more than tracks on iTunes.
"with many popular tracks now priced at $1.29. Needless to say, this makes Amazon MP3's 99 cent tracks that much more attractive."
Except that there are plenty of Amazon tracks that cost more than $.99, and it's usually the popular ones. It's been like this since the dawn of the Amazon store. Is there some way to spread that around? Because it seems to me like the vast majority of tech writers haven't figured it out yet.
Reply
Chad said 1:52PM on 4-09-2009
Even though Amazon now has an adjusted price system, they are still in great shape to catch up with iTunes. Overall, their prices are simply better and that means everything in this economy. And on top of that, they do a great job with daily promotions and deals which people eat up! For example, I love their daily mp3 album deal which is a complete album download for usually around $2 or $3. That is an affordable way for me to build up my mp3 collection while not spending a fortune. You just need to be patient while you wait for an album you like. I use the following page and google gadget to track the deal so I never miss one:
http://www.frugalgadgets.com/amazon-mp3-daily-deal.php
Reply