26 ms·

I refuse to buy music off iTunes and generally end up having to pirate artists' music if it's not available to buy in a lossless format. I don't understand how

I refuse to buy music off iTunes and generally end up having to pirate artists' music if it's not available to buy in a lossless format. I don't understand how bandcamp can offer me a choice of whatever format I want, yet apple still expect me to pay the cost of a CD for an inferior substitute. The galling bit will be when they do start selling in ALAC, they'll probably charge more for it - at which point I'll still refuse to pay for anything from iTunes.. EDIT: Downvoted why? Because I buy music off places where it's offered in good quality and not from places where it's not? This is not a hard problem to solve, hell bandcamp solved it ages ago - as did what.cd....

Zev 15y ago
The galling bit will be when they do start selling in ALAC, they'll probably charge more for it - at which point I'll still refuse to pay for anything from iTunes.. On one hand, Apple did charge 30 cents to upgrade to the higher quality AAC from the DRM'd versions. On the other, they're providing even higher quality versions of any song they can now, for free. (Not lossless, but, 256kbps AAC is far beyond the point where most people can tell the difference.)
- te_chris 15y ago
  Exactly, they're not lossless. I don't know if they're deliberately doing it, but they've decided that audiophiles don't matter, much as they always do (see people who used to use expresscard on MBP's, film makers etc etc), and just plain ignore people who want to purchase high-quality content. Thankfully bandcamp exists and I buy off there all the time.
  - Zev 15y ago
    Do you really think that most people care about their music being lossless? Let alone know what "lossless" even means? Most people want more music on their phones and iPod's, not less. Now, and not later in the afternoon after they've downloaded something 5-10x the size for a quality difference that they cannot notice. Most people don't fit into your niche usage. Apple is doing the best they can for the majority of the people, while still making the labels happy. Yes, it sucks if you happen to be in the minority[1]. But, you can't claim Apple isn't making a good business decision. 1. I speak as an iPhone and Mac developer who is used to Apple doing the best thing for the user, and not the developer.
    - te_chris 15y ago
      I wasn't questioning apple's business decisions, I was questioning their emerging monopoly on digital content that is making the digital market even more homogenous than the physical market was. At least in the physical market anyone could open up a music store because there were independent distributors whose sole incentive was to move product, now the incentive is to extract margins on product as Apple and Amazon negotiate directly with the labels and shut out competitors from being able to properly compete because they can't get the content. Some platforms are doing ok in this (bandcamp) but most aren't as the reality of music retail is not the long tail but the centre of the bell curve. I'm also an Apple developer.
smoody 15y ago
If you really cared (about the artist), you'd buy music in CD form and rip it, wouldn't you? Does not buying in iTunes mean that pirating is the only other option?
- te_chris 15y ago
  The music lobby has decided that (in some cases) iTunes is the only digital retailer they'll supply, so actually yes, it sometimes does. Sums it up nicely: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones
  - georgieporgie 15y ago
    Uh. Can you give an example of music that you want to download, but can't buy on physical CD?
    - danieldk 15y ago
      There's plenty of older music that is not available on CD anymore (or has never been), but can be purchased via iTunes. To give an example: most of Sam Rivers' albums. Or Old and New Dreams (ECM).
    - CrazedGeek 15y ago
      A random recent viral example: http://amzn.com/B003MV33JY http://amzn.com/B003MV33JY Video game soundtracks tend to be hit hard by this too -- roughly half the soundtracks I want are download only, and about 2/3 of the ones available on CD are Japan only (and frequently out of print).
unimpressive 15y ago
Minus the pirating bit, this; a thousand times this! This is one of the reasons that I'm actually sad to see the CD go. When producers mastered for CD, you got the best quality that they could produce or that the CD could hold. (Whichever came first.) Now that the CD is fading into irrelevance, theres the worry that digital distribution will make the average quality of a track worse instead of what it should be, better than CD. (Though at this point I'd take parity with CD quality.) Yeah, I get it, lossless tracks take up a lot of memory. They should still be an option to purchase though. Lossless is the default state for recordings anyway. I don't even have the equipment required to hear the difference. It just doesn't sit right with me to support a business that blatantly panders to the LCD at the expense of everyone else. "Mastered for Itunes" Just reaffirms this for me.
- ugh 15y ago
  I can’t tell the difference. I really can’t. Why do you think you would be able to?
  - georgieporgie 15y ago
    How much have you tried? At lower bitrates (160 and under, mp3) I wouldn't notice a sound quality issue so much as I noticed that I consistently became fatigued faster than when I listened to CDs. I honestly don't know if the same holds true of higher bitrates, since by the time I started encoding those, I was listening less and the convenience outweighed potential irritation.

Zev 15y ago

The galling bit will be when they do start selling in ALAC, they'll probably charge more for it - at which point I'll still refuse to pay for anything from iTunes.. On one hand, Apple did charge 30 cents to upgrade to the higher quality AAC from the DRM'd versions. On the other, they're providing even higher quality versions of any song they can now, for free. (Not lossless, but, 256kbps AAC is far beyond the point where most people can tell the difference.)

te_chris 15y ago
Exactly, they're not lossless. I don't know if they're deliberately doing it, but they've decided that audiophiles don't matter, much as they always do (see people who used to use expresscard on MBP's, film makers etc etc), and just plain ignore people who want to purchase high-quality content. Thankfully bandcamp exists and I buy off there all the time.
- Zev 15y ago
  Do you really think that most people care about their music being lossless? Let alone know what "lossless" even means? Most people want more music on their phones and iPod's, not less. Now, and not later in the afternoon after they've downloaded something 5-10x the size for a quality difference that they cannot notice. Most people don't fit into your niche usage. Apple is doing the best they can for the majority of the people, while still making the labels happy. Yes, it sucks if you happen to be in the minority[1]. But, you can't claim Apple isn't making a good business decision. 1. I speak as an iPhone and Mac developer who is used to Apple doing the best thing for the user, and not the developer.
  - te_chris 15y ago
    I wasn't questioning apple's business decisions, I was questioning their emerging monopoly on digital content that is making the digital market even more homogenous than the physical market was. At least in the physical market anyone could open up a music store because there were independent distributors whose sole incentive was to move product, now the incentive is to extract margins on product as Apple and Amazon negotiate directly with the labels and shut out competitors from being able to properly compete because they can't get the content. Some platforms are doing ok in this (bandcamp) but most aren't as the reality of music retail is not the long tail but the centre of the bell curve. I'm also an Apple developer.

smoody 15y ago

If you really cared (about the artist), you'd buy music in CD form and rip it, wouldn't you? Does not buying in iTunes mean that pirating is the only other option?

te_chris 15y ago
The music lobby has decided that (in some cases) iTunes is the only digital retailer they'll supply, so actually yes, it sometimes does. Sums it up nicely: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones
- georgieporgie 15y ago
  Uh. Can you give an example of music that you want to download, but can't buy on physical CD?
  - danieldk 15y ago
    There's plenty of older music that is not available on CD anymore (or has never been), but can be purchased via iTunes. To give an example: most of Sam Rivers' albums. Or Old and New Dreams (ECM).
  - CrazedGeek 15y ago
    A random recent viral example: http://amzn.com/B003MV33JY http://amzn.com/B003MV33JY Video game soundtracks tend to be hit hard by this too -- roughly half the soundtracks I want are download only, and about 2/3 of the ones available on CD are Japan only (and frequently out of print).

unimpressive 15y ago

Minus the pirating bit, this; a thousand times this! This is one of the reasons that I'm actually sad to see the CD go. When producers mastered for CD, you got the best quality that they could produce or that the CD could hold. (Whichever came first.) Now that the CD is fading into irrelevance, theres the worry that digital distribution will make the average quality of a track worse instead of what it should be, better than CD. (Though at this point I'd take parity with CD quality.) Yeah, I get it, lossless tracks take up a lot of memory. They should still be an option to purchase though. Lossless is the default state for recordings anyway. I don't even have the equipment required to hear the difference. It just doesn't sit right with me to support a business that blatantly panders to the LCD at the expense of everyone else. "Mastered for Itunes" Just reaffirms this for me.

ugh 15y ago
I can’t tell the difference. I really can’t. Why do you think you would be able to?
- georgieporgie 15y ago
  How much have you tried? At lower bitrates (160 and under, mp3) I wouldn't notice a sound quality issue so much as I noticed that I consistently became fatigued faster than when I listened to CDs. I honestly don't know if the same holds true of higher bitrates, since by the time I started encoding those, I was listening less and the convenience outweighed potential irritation.