![]() |
Quote:
|
That is what I thought {hoped}...but what about that encryption?
|
Quote:
|
Well.... except that the version that you buy from iTunes is lossy to start with, as opposed to a lossless CD. Although Apple does have a lossless codec that you can use when ripping from a CD, the quality of music downloaded from iTunes doesn't start out as good. When you burn and then rip to AAC or mp3, you further degrade the sound.
Apple doesn't sell lossless music because none of the lossless codecs so far (Apple, ape, shn, flac) support DRM. Now that EMI is allowing Apple to sell music with no DRM, it would be nice to see if they start offering true CD-quality music for sale. |
See I wondered about that, too.
The loss after recopies. Well, I just burned myself a copy of my new 'Era Vulgaris' to play in my car. I know it won't be prime because A} it is a copy and B} my stereo sucks. But, no matter what issues arise from all of this, the iPod is still so much better than hand-starting my turntable as a teen..... |
Quote:
Unfortunately I do not have time at the moment to verify the numbers, but the basic logic (I think) holds true (I guess I am having commitment issues at the moment.) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
128 is lossy. 192 is lossy. Better quality, perhaps, but still not lossless by a long shot.
|
Quote:
And it varies at what sampling rate one finds the loss unacceptable. I have my standard (for ripping of any CD) set at 256. The iTunes default (unless it has changed) is 128. If I am making a copy of a CD for use in my car, I use Jam to copy. I am curious what others have their iTunes ripping sampling rate set at. ETA: To clarify my earlier post about how MG shouldn't be getting any loss on copies: I was thinking of making copies a la Jam. |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:58 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.