Neat (new?) iTunes Feature

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by MouseWife

I like to do that, too, Stan4dSteph, when I remember.

Isn't there also something about how many times you can copy it? I mean, like transfer it to a cd or something like that? That is what I understood.

From the file you download through iTunes, you can only burn it a limited number of times (5, I believe). However, there's a way around it. Once you burn it, it's just an audio CD, no different than any other audio CD. If you take the burnt CD, and "rip" the file from there back to your computer, you now have a completely unprotected file with none of the security data that Apple encodes in the file downloaded from iTunes. It's an easy, but very time consuming, way around a lot of the "protections".

[MouseWife]

That is what I thought {hoped}...but what about that encryption?

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by MouseWife

That is what I thought {hoped}...but what about that encryption?

Once you burn it, then re-rip it, there is no encryption. It's just an audio file, no different than if you had purchased the CD and ripped it.

[mousepod]

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.

[MouseWife]

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.....

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by mousepod

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.

I thought that one of the advantages to the more expensive EMI music is that the sample rate was also higher. I remember hearing (though don't quote me) that "regular" music from iTunes is sampled at 128k and the new EMI music was at 192.

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.)

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by MouseWife

The loss after recopies.

You shouldn't be getting any loss when making digital copies. It all has to do with the original sampling (see my post above).

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

You shouldn't be getting any loss when making digital copies. It all has to do with the original sampling (see my post above).

Unless you let iTunes re-rip in AAC format (see Jesse's post above).

[mousepod]

128 is lossy. 192 is lossy. Better quality, perhaps, but still not lossless by a long shot.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by mousepod

128 is lossy. 192 is lossy. Better quality, perhaps, but still not lossless by a long shot.

Wouldn't, technically speaking, ANY digital format be "lossy"?

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.