Apple to offer hi-res files via the iTunes Store.

Crimson · « **on:** 10 Apr 2014, 08:33 pm »

24/96 at a minimum?

http://www.macrumors.com/2014/04/10/high-definition-itunes-music-downloads/

RDavidson · « **Reply #1 on:** 10 Apr 2014, 08:52 pm »

About flippin' time. I VERY rarely buy/bought music from iTunes because of low, not even standard CD, quality.

WC · « **Reply #2 on:** 10 Apr 2014, 09:13 pm »

Quote from: RDavidson on 10 Apr 2014, 08:52 pm

About flippin' time. I VERY rarely buy/bought music from iTunes because of low, not even standard CD, quality.

+1

Jazzman53 · « **Reply #3 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 12:47 am »

I stopped actually buying music from Itunes years ago but it's a handy format for importing CD's into for playback thru my Logitech Transporter. I buy used CD's off Amazon for about the same price Itunes sells a low rez album. There are a few very fine albums (Patricia Barber's Cafe Blue, for example) I would pay the higher price for in 24/96 resolution. I'm a cheap bastard so I don't see me buying a whole lot of tunes at that price.

Crimson · « **Reply #4 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 01:13 am »

Come on, folks. If true, we're talking a paradigm shift here. Or, at a minimum, the next logical step in the progression of quality downloadable music.

jarcher · « **Reply #5 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 01:18 am »

Always a welcome thing to have more choices - particularly ALAC as that's what I use. But really don't what to pay DOUBLE the cost. 20-50% more perhaps.

Now if they had an upgrade option for iTunes Match subscribers, that would be great. I subscribed just to upgrade / scrub a lot of lower res stuff I used to have.

WC · « **Reply #6 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 01:24 am »

Quote from: Crimson on 11 Apr 2014, 01:13 am

Come on, folks. If true, we're talking a paradigm shift here. Or, at a minimum, the next logical step in the progression of quality downloadable music.

It would be a major shift. I have been trying to buy as many new releases as I can in lossless format. It is not easy. Currently, you have only indie record labels selling lossless digital files or bands/labels using Bandcamp as a distribution platform. Sure you can buy from HD tracks, but I don't even look there since their CD quality lossless files cost more than I can buy the CDs for. Not sure I will buy HD files from iTunes for $2 to $2.29 per track. Guess we will see what the album prices are.

Crimson · « **Reply #7 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 01:31 am »

Progression:

2007: 128 kbps AAC is the standard @ 99c, while 256 AAC kbps is $1.29.
2011: 256 kbps AAC is the standard @ 99c, while 'Mastered for iTunes' (256-320 kbps VBR AAC) is $1.29
2014: Mastered for iTunes is the standard @ 99c, while 24/96 is $1.99.
.
.
2018(??) 16/44.1 is the standard @ 99c, while 24/192 is $1.29.
.
.
2020(??) 24/192 is the standard @ 99c/track.

Progress.

wushuliu · « **Reply #8 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 02:49 am »

The Pono is making some waves and Apple is finally getting off their ass to cut Neil Young off at the knees.

paul79 · « **Reply #9 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 03:46 am »

Ya, and if they come out with an audiophile player, and playback software, they will cut even more knees off. They definitely have the money and resources to pull it off. My question is why have they waited so long?

HT cOz · « **Reply #10 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 03:56 am »

They waited only because they realized they need to differentiate from streaming.

JerryM · « **Reply #11 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 04:30 am »

Quote from: wushuliu on 11 Apr 2014, 02:49 am

The Pono is making some waves and Apple is finally getting off their ass to cut Neil Young off at the knees.

You're right. This is going to be fun to watch. And we get better downloads, to boot. Go Pono!

Have fun,

Jerry

scb · « **Reply #12 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 12:51 pm »

Quote from: wushuliu on 11 Apr 2014, 02:49 am

The Pono is making some waves and Apple is finally getting off their ass to cut Neil Young off at the knees.

Apple has never been a reactive company. If they offer 24 bit downloads, I highly doubt it has anything to do with fear of the Pono

Nick77 · « **Reply #13 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 01:20 pm »

Maybe there is light at the end of the tunnel for more competitive/lower pricing on HiRez.

smargo · « **Reply #14 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 01:33 pm »

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2014/04/24bit-downloads-coming-soon-to-the-itunes-store/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=24bit-downloads-coming-soon-to-the-itunes-store

craig223 · « **Reply #15 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 02:46 pm »

I am hoping for a new iPhone that will have a good DAC, headphone amp and improved blue tooth connection. They could sell the phones for $100 more and everyone would opt for the higher storage option also. iTunes will make more money and my kids and I will trade up to the new phone.

iTunes has been collecting high rez files for a while. Apple is always looking for a way to get 2 years ahead of the competition in the phone/content provider arena and this may be the ticket.

RDavidson · « **Reply #16 on:** 11 Apr 2014, 03:11 pm »

Quote from: scb on 11 Apr 2014, 12:51 pm

Apple has never been a reactive company. If they offer 24 bit downloads, I highly doubt it has anything to do with fear of the Pono

I agree. I think the decision is obviously multi-faceted.

1. Storage is cheap and plentiful. Go to about an trade show and you're bound to end up with a hand full of 4GB jump drives for free.
2. People, are becoming more aware of sound quality differences, thanks in part to the booming headphone market.
3. It is obvious that people are willing to pay for "premium" things here and there. Look at the booming headphone market again.
4. I'm sure there's market data out there showing that hi-res downloads are becoming more popular. The catalog at HD Tracks isn't huge, but it is booming compared to where it started with just a hand full of classical and jazz music downloads.

While I hate Beats, I think they've played a great role in moving the industry forward for all.

wushuliu · « **Reply #17 on:** 12 Apr 2014, 02:08 am »

Quote from: paul79 on 11 Apr 2014, 03:46 am

Ya, and if they come out with an audiophile player, and playback software, they will cut even more knees off. They definitely have the money and resources to pull it off. My question is why have they waited so long?

Why spend more if you don't have to? Be it resources, time, or money. Apple is making oogobs of money feeding people compressed music and the music industry is perfectly happy with that. Win-win for both.

wushuliu · « **Reply #18 on:** 12 Apr 2014, 02:10 am »

Quote from: scb on 11 Apr 2014, 12:51 pm

Apple has never been a reactive company. If they offer 24 bit downloads, I highly doubt it has anything to do with fear of the Pono

Riiight, they've been talking about this for several years and just hey decided now would be a good time. Nothing to do with Pono buzz pulling in $5,000,000 in a few days for a competing product.

RDavidson · « **Reply #19 on:** 12 Apr 2014, 02:41 am »

Quote from: wushuliu on 12 Apr 2014, 02:10 am

Riiight, they've been talking about this for several years and just hey decided now would be a good time. Nothing to do with Pono buzz pulling in $5,000,000 in a few days for a competing product.

Not trying to stir the pot on this argument, but you realize that $5,000,000 is but a small blip on Apple's financial radar, right? Apple is the market leader regardless of small blips by Amazon, Pono, etc.

I stand-by what I said earlier regarding market trends. Apple didn't get where it is by playing catch-up with anyone. They, in fact, are the primary trend setter in the industry. Pono is doing nothing revolutionary. All they're doing is copying what Apple did over a decade ago, only they're doing it with high res DL's, not mp3's. If Apple provides high res DL's, it won't be because of pressure from anyone other than consumers.