Skip to Content

Apple, others in talks to improve quality of music downloads

by Mike Schramm Feb 22nd 2011 at 7:00PM

CNN reports that Apple is in touch with record labels to try and improve the quality of the downloadable music it sells on iTunes and elsewhere. Currently, the MP3s sold on iTunes are formatted as 16-bit files, but under the new proposal, they'd be upgraded to 24-bit files, which means the files would have more audio data included, and thus be able to play out at a higher resolution.

As Chris Foresman at Ars argues, however, it may not matter. While higher quality is always nice to have (and there's no reason Apple shouldn't have it, unless the audio needs to be compressed further for streaming or other memory concerns), most people won't hear the full resolution anyway. You can have the highest quality audio files you want, but when you're playing them through a set of cheap speakers (or even the MacBook's default built-in speakers), you're not going to hear all of the highs and lows that you should.

Still, it will be nice to have the higher resolution, and it'll give Apple and iTunes yet another selling point if the agreement can be made (not to mention sell a lot of higher-quality audio speakers and other products as well). So, I expect we'll see it happen before long. Remember way back in 2007 when Apple raised the encoding rate to 256 Kb/s?

[via Electronista]



View Tags

Related Stories

Categories

iTunes Apple Music

CNN reports that Apple is in touch with record labels to try and improve the quality of the downloadable music it sells on iTunes and...
 

Add a Comment

Sign in »
*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

31 Comments

Filter by:
JAQ

How are they going to improve the quality of the music, when they already have the Beatles catalog?

;)

February 23 2011 at 2:59 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Steve

I'm guessing some of the facts in this rumor are incorrect. 24-bit audio is more useful when recording to give you a lower noise floor and more dynamic range. It's not something that makes much of a difference on final recordings, which have a more limited dynamic range.

Using lossless encoding or higher bitrates would a much more profound effect on iTunes tracks than 24-bit. I doubt that's what they're doing, it would be a waste of time.

February 23 2011 at 11:44 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
tony

Just make it 24bit/48kHz and lossless compression (fully supported by iPod, Apple TV and all other music products) and I willbe more than happy.

We need Apple to make this move and get the recording industry to define an upgraded aoffering, the CD quality level at 16bit/44.1kHz is dying.

But, please Apple, do not think about. upgrading without using lossless comprssion, not AAC any more. AAC and MP3, kill reproduction quality pronably more than bits and kHz.

February 23 2011 at 5:33 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to tony's comment
NitRam Den Gale

Why in the world would you want 48kHz? 48kHz is mainly used for audio visual applications, and if you really need/want a higher sample rate than 44,1kHz I wouldn't settle for anything less than 88,2 or 96kHz. If Apple wants to kill the CD, all they have to do is to offer Apple Lossless files in their iTunes store. Most music production today is done in 24 bit, although the benefit of using 24 bit at the end of the line is greatly exaggerated for popular music. Quantizing to 16 bit using a proper dither algorithm is more than adequate, and saves a lot of space on the consumers hard drive and bandwith when streaming/downloading. When it comes to sample rate I think the ideal situation, at least fidelity wise, would be to offer whatever sample rate the production is made in to avoid the degeneration of a sample rate conversion process. That being said there is a challenge at the user end, seeing as most users haven't a clue what sample rate is - and certainly don't know that iTunes doesn't change sample rate automatically (you have to manually change the sample rate for your sound card in the Audio MIDI setup before you launch iTunes to avoid real-time sample rate conversion during playback) and consumer end sound cards usually don't support sample rates above 96kHz. The most practicable solution would therefore be to offer 16 bit Apple Lossless files in the sample rate of 44,1kHz (which is actual CD quality) in order to avoid too much strain on download bandwith and to ensure proper playback compatibility at the user end. When the bandwith capacity for downloading and streaming audio and harddrive space at the user end becomes non-issues it's time to offer whatever quality available - this also requires iTunes playback to become more intelligent (ie. change between sample rates automatically), perhaps with a cap of sample frequency at 96kHz for regular consumers with an option for "prosumers" to choose 192kHz if they want to.

February 26 2011 at 8:09 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
alasdair

This comment is probably too late now, but please don't feel I'm "having a go". All those who don't know what "dynamic range" is, seem to be getting excited. Please stop now - don't get excited by this announcement - there seems to be some confusion about the quality of downloads.

The bitrate of digital downloads will affect the quality of the sound you hear. To sum up this article (please read all of it):

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded

...it's not an opinion, it's just science. I urge the TUAC writer to read this article and still get excited about this announcement. It's almost a pointless announcement.

You will *not* hear any difference from 16-bit to 24-bit audio. The extra 48dB dynamic range is unecessary. I guarantee none of you have equipment capable of taking advantage of this, and if you did - and you cranked it up - you'd literally be dead. Please read the article.

If you want to use iTunes downloads to mix or sample, or create your own music, this might have digital benefits for you if your other equipment is 24-bit, which it probably would be. But if that were the case, you wouldn't use music from iTunes. You'd buy CDs.

This announcement has nothing to do with playing or listening to music, or sound quality. No headphones in the world will help you notice the difference between 16-bit and 24-bit audio.

What we all want is higher bitrates or lossless file formats such as FLAC/ALAC - I agree. But that's not what this announcement refers to at all.

February 23 2011 at 4:24 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
AlexK

Off topic somewhat and on the topic of App Store purchases, but in a price context... Can anyone explain to me why Australian consumers pay $1.19 for apps that American consumers pay $0.99 for? Especially when the AUS dollar is at parity with the US dollar...

February 22 2011 at 11:40 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
2 replies to AlexK's comment
Brett

My guess would be taxes... in the US the price quoted is before taxes, so when I buy a $0.99 app I'm actually charged $1.06 because my state charges 7% sales tax. I believe most of the rest of the world is intelligent enough to include the sales tax (VAT, etc) in the quoted price.

February 23 2011 at 9:11 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
AlexK

Thanks Wonderboy.

February 23 2011 at 5:53 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Stephen

for serious art music, AKA "classical music," 24-bit recordings are incredible. I cherish the ones I own.

February 22 2011 at 10:34 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Mrrichardlewis

I'm not going to use the iTunes store for music until they offer Lossless music. CDs offer higher quality, provide the user with the encoding option, are backups against data loss and are often available cheaper than iTunes. Particularly here in New Zealand where the iTunes store rips us off compared to the USA.

I never buy single tracks, preferring to purchase whole Albums. I add everything to iTunes in Apple Lossless format and use the DAC in my home theatre system via an Apple TV. Not quite Audiophile, but sounds great.

February 22 2011 at 10:13 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Bill Tilstone

Try it for yourself - go to HDTracks.com and download the free sampler. You'll also need to download VLC to play the FLAC files. And beg, borrow or buy a decent pair of 'phones.

FLAC file sizes are not too bad, smaller than AIFF.

February 22 2011 at 9:16 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Bill Tilstone's comment
Bill Tilstone

PS: For a great article on the tech stuff, go to http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/index.html


February 22 2011 at 9:25 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
strilo

Yeah doesn't the iTunes store use AAC mp4s exclusively? I've never gotten an mp3 from them.

February 22 2011 at 8:14 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
AppleZilla

I bought the Uncompressed 96kHz/24bit version of 'Band on the Run' a while back. It's fantastic.

I also bought a $129 USB DAC to take full advantage of the sound quality. The headphone output on MacBook Pros sound noisy with better headphones.

I would welcome a lossless format in iTunes. I rarely buy from iTunes because CD are frequently cheaper and I can pick the conversion method.

February 22 2011 at 8:08 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to AppleZilla's comment
Erwin Heiser

Same here, the moment the iTunes store offers lossless downloads is when I buy there, right now I prefer to rip my cd's.
Which USB DAC did you get? Have a link?

February 23 2011 at 7:05 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.