Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: itunes replacment

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » itunes replacment (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: itunes replacment

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 08-31-2010 04:16 AM

Conversion = loss of quality.

| IP: Logged

Carsten Kurz
Film God

Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009

posted 08-31-2010 04:42 AM

>I found that when you put things into an iPoop, they go into a black hole, and you can not copy things back out again.

My opinion on this is quite different, but anyway, there is free software for Mac and Windows machines to get files back off the iPod. Like a dedicated file browser, it shows all the MP3s on your iPod and offers to copy selections to your hard drive or iTunes library. I don't know wether it's compatible with all iPods, though. I know it works with the classic HD models.
These models offer a certain amount of memory to be used for general data storage, so you can copy the app to it and run it from the iPod on any computer you want to copy stuff to. Some of these apps run without installation and allow this.

Google for iDump, iPod2PC, etc.

- Carsten

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-31-2010 08:31 AM

quote: Joe Redifer
not that I've ever purchased compressed audio in any form.

Likewise. It is uncompressed or I won't buy it.

| IP: Logged

Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 08-31-2010 11:26 AM

Yes, Joe, you're right. Floola does not work on the iPod touch. It should work on my iPod claassic, though.

About everything being so clipped today, I talked with a record producer, he told me that every record company wants their stuff to sound the loudest on KTLA (radio station in LA), so the record companies are cranking up the level going into the CD mastering station. In the digital audio world "0" is a brick wall, nothing can go beyond "0". So all the waveform tops are badly clipped. This is what happens when you let upper management-morons make decisions about things they don't understand.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 08-31-2010 12:59 PM

I'm still suspicious the true reason for the over-driven, clipped idiocy in music mastering has more to do with making an iTunes file sound more like the CD -just make the CD sound like shit. I wonder if guys like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, etc. were twisting arms behind the scenes to make it happen.

Most radio stations, music studios, etc. have compressor/limiter devices which can bring a variety of signal sources down to a consistent volume level. It's clear that more than a few radio stations apply various levels of sweetening (such as unnecessary reverb) to the music.

When the audio wave form is clipped in the mixing/mastering process detail in the audio is literally deleted. Gone! This is basically an audio version of panning and scanning. Do you want to hear all of the audio in a more quiet sounding CD or do you only want to hear part of the audio detail on a loud, shrill CD? Too many people prefer the latter or just buy the iTunes version since they can't tell the difference.

quote: Brad Miller
It is uncompressed or I won't buy it.

I would very much prefer to buy any music singles in uncompressed form. Unfortunately, I don't know of any online music retailers that provide such a thing.

I'm not going to spend upwards of $20 to buy a music CD if I like only one song on the disc. 99¢ for a 256k MP3 is a better deal for one hit wonder material. If a site like Amazon offered lossless or uncompressed tunes I'd be willing to pay double for the higher quality version -maybe even more for high resolution material.

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 08-31-2010 01:03 PM

I love conspiracy theories.

quote: Bobby Henderson
I'm still suspicious the true reason for the over-driven, clipped idiocy in music mastering has more to do with making an iTunes file sound more like the CD -just make the CD sound like shit. I wonder if guys like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, etc. were twisting arms behind the scenes to make it happen.

I don't understand what that means. The CDs and MP3s etc. with that clipping applied all sound like crap. It sure as heck isn't like the digital download version sounds a whole lot cleaner than the CD version.

quote: Bruce Hansen
This is what happens when you let upper management-morons make decisions about things they don't understand.

You think upper management makes those decisions? Please. It's the artist and producer/engineer doing it. The upper level people just look at the flow of money. They couldn't care less how something sounds on a technical level as long as it sells.

quote: Bruce Hansen
KTLA (radio station in LA)

KTLA is a TV station, not a radio station.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 08-31-2010 01:59 PM

quote: Joe Redifer
Conversion = loss of quality.

And the average moron using itunes won't know the difference.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-31-2010 02:25 PM

Forget average -- the vast majority of iTunes users wouldn't know the difference.

I myself am pretty discriminating with sound, but most of my listening is done in a Ford Ranger pickup truck, plus I am about 54, so between age and road noise, I often can't tell the difference between iTunes, CD, MP3, AAC or what-have-you. If I was 25 again I might not say that.

Point being that only a tiny percentage of people listen to music on anything resembling a "good" sound system. So there's not a huge incentive to make music sound great for such systems. It's more profitable to make it sound the loudest on KTLA or whatever.

| IP: Logged

Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 08-31-2010 02:53 PM

I always say: CDs have a 90 db dynamic range, USE IT.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 08-31-2010 05:25 PM

quote: David Stambaugh
I don't understand what that means. The CDs and MP3s etc. with that clipping applied all sound like crap. It sure as heck isn't like the digital download version sounds a whole lot cleaner than the CD version.

I'm not saying the MP3/iTunes AAC version sounds any better, the two hardly sound any different at all.

When the peaks of an audio waveform are clipped a lot of subtle details in the audio are deleted in the process. A Music CD preserves subtle details in audio a lot better than a lossy compressed MP3 or AAC file. If many of those details are eliminated via clipping it makes it much more difficult to tell the difference between the lossy compressed MP3 version and the CD version. The bad practice may actually make it easier to lossy compress the music file more effectively -after all there's not as much detail there to compress as there would be with a waveform that was fully intact.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 08-31-2010 05:52 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
I'm still suspicious the true reason for the over-driven, clipped idiocy in music mastering has more to do with making an iTunes file sound more like the CD -just make the CD sound like shit.

I had to LOL at that one because it is true that most CDs sound like shit these days. However I don't think that is the reason since this has been going on for nearly two decades now. As for audio clipping to sound the loudest on radio stations, isn't that pointless to master the CDs that way since radio stations run all their crap through normalizers first?

quote: Chris Skylord (yes, that's how I often mispronounce your name)
And the average moron using itunes won't know the difference.

True dat.

quote: Mike Blakesly
Forget average -- the vast majority of iTunes users wouldn't know the difference.

I'm pretty sure that Chris is insinuating that the average iTunes user is, in fact, a moron.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 08-31-2010 06:04 PM

I wouldn't merely insinuate it... [Smile]

Note: I do use itunes myself to control my ipod touch so although I haven't needed to open it [itunes] in some time.

| IP: Logged

Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003

posted 09-01-2010 08:54 PM

quote: Bruce Hansen
Also, what MP3 ripper does everybody like?

If you browse through most any forum topic on the subject, you'll find that most people like the LAME MP3 encoder. With the proper quality and bitrate settings, it does the best job (at least according to those who have spent lots of time examining such things in minute detail).

Personally, what I use and really like is the dBPowerAmp CD Ripper and Batch Converter. I rip my CD's (yes, I buy my music in best format possible, no pre-compressed music for me) to lossless WMA format. I store the lossless source files as my "negatives" and then use the Batch Converter to convert from lossless WMA to 192kbps variable bitrate MP3 using the "best quality" setting in the LAME encoder option that is provided in the tool.

Now that I no longer have devices that require the lowest common denominator of MP3, I could re-convert all the source files to something more efficient and higher quality, like a high bitrate AAC. MP3 is an old format, and it was developed when 128kbps was considered CD quality (hence, the iTunes 128kbps default). A 128kbps AAC or WMA file is going to sound better than a 128kbps MP3 file because those formats are (reportedly) better at the psychoacoustic modeling than the old standby is.

My biggest problem is having to reestablish my playlists and ratings in iTunes, since those things are tied to the MP3 files that I have, and not the original lossless files that I would have to go back to in order to do the reconversion. That's time I just don't want to spend right now.

If iTunes were totally awesome, it would take the lossless files (I can convert easily to Apple Lossless using the Batch Converter, it's really cool) and then down-convert those files on the fly when it came time to sync to my iPhone or iPods. My Squeezeboxes could play the larger and higher quality lossless files, and the portables would be happy with the lower-quality versions. That's asking iTunes to do more than its mission is to perform, which is to keep things as simple as possible for the point-and-click crowd.

In regards to sound quality, I've never had an issue with the sound quality of the 192kbps MP3's that I've created. My anal retentive brain tells me that they could be better, but in reality, there are so many other factors that are keeping pristine audio from reaching my neurons that I think my current solution is doing its job nicely. To get a small increase in quality would mean hours of work, and that's not going to bear fruit in a car environment, even with a premium sound system.

My suggestion is take a piece of music that you are very familiar with that you enjoy, and encode it with a couple of different settings that you are considering. Pick the one that sounds the best that also fits your storage requirements and enjoy your music.

| IP: Logged

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 09-01-2010 11:32 PM

quote: Scott Jentsch
My anal retentive brain tells me that they could be better, but in reality, there are so many other factors that are keeping pristine audio from reaching my neurons that I think my current solution is doing its job nicely.

I'm in the same boat. I have a large library, most of it now in 256 AAC, that I'd love to do in lossless but it just isn't worth the effort, especially when most of this is being listening to via ear buds, the car, or the office.

If I were doing any "serious" listening to my digital library, I'd revery back to my source CDs or vinyl collection.

128k AAC while driving to work in the morning is not that bad. The iPod/iTunes model is not designed by nature for audiophiles. Sure, you could utilize it for such purposes by going lossless, but the vast majority of us have no need for that.

One caveat to my argument: I do like my classical stuff at higher bit rates or lossless: the differences are much more noticeable.

AJG

| IP: Logged

Jack Ondracek
Film God

Posts: 2348
From: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 09-02-2010 12:37 AM

quote: Bruce Hansen
CDs have a 90 db dynamic range, USE IT

Not hardly likely.

Once audio became digital, compression and "distortion cancelled" clipping became commonplace on retail CDs, making many of them about as obnoxious to listen to as a New York rock station.

Take a look at some of those CDs on a scope... frequently, the audio is flat-topped.... producing, maybe, 5dB dynamic range. [thumbsdown]

The world should immediately convert back to vinyl, analog tape and 8-track carts! [Big Grin]

Oh... and transistors must be banned. Tubes forever!

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.