3 ms·
Yes, by selling full CD quality or higher tracks, and with infamous "Steam Sales". There is no incentive for me to buy a lossy track, when I can just go buy the
by overcast 10y ago
Yes, by selling full CD quality or higher tracks, and with infamous "Steam Sales". There is no incentive for me to buy a lossy track, when I can just go buy the entire disc cheap online. I know most people don't care about audio quality, but this is a major contention for me.
- golergka 10y agoDid you do a double blind test between an uncompressed CD track and same track in 320 kbps (same master — not vinyl, not "mastered for iTunes)? Did you really hear the difference in statistically significant number of trials?
- elif 10y agoThere is no reason for a test of perception like this to be blind. You are not trying to isolate a scientific truth, but engaging a lifetime of biased neural pathways with the goal of maximum enjoyment. When listening to music in the real world, your biases will affect your perception so trying to remove specific ones in the name of science is only muddying your measurement of actual preference.
- overcast 10y agoThat's not the point at all. I'm not paying the same or more, for a locked in ecosystem, and lesser quality tracks, regardless if I can perceive the difference.
- reboog711 10y agoYou can now transfer iTunes purchase into mp3s, right in the iTunes software. As such, I'm not sure if I'd call it a locked ecosystem anymore.
- Nadya 10y agoWhat happens when you want to reencode that 320 to 196 or V0 or want to forego MP3 altogether and go with .ogg? You end up needing to transcode to a lossy source from a lossy source - and quality does suffer from doing that.