[Marbles]

The cover story of this months Fortune mag is of Apple's new digital music store.

You will be able to download a song for $1.  You can do what you want with the song, but if you change the format from ACC to mp3 it will sound like crap.

Also it cannot be transfered to more than 3 Computers and if you burn it to more than 10 CD's, you have to change the order of the songs on it to discourage pirates.

Anyway it looks very exciting.

Right now you need a MAC to get the music but it will be available to microsoft based pc's by the end of the summer.

This is supposed to revolutionize the distribution process of CD's.


Now if we could only burn LP's this way  

[eico1]

If anyone doesn't know, Dolby aac is a better codec than mp3 when comparing bit/rate, way to go if you can. Probably re-compressing any format will suck.

steve

[Mathew_M]

As a Mac user I've sampled the service and yes it is extremely convient and addictive to use.  The AAC sound quality is on par with CD.  With that said I just don't see myself using it much.  I still enjoy the physical act of going to a store and buying music.  In fact I look forward to the nice Sunday's where I drive down to the loop in St. Louis and stop in Vintage Vinyl and then catch a movie at the Tivoli.  Maybe for those impulse purchases or the ones I'm embarrased by (I came close the other night to d/l the 8 Mile Soundtrack but pulled myself away at the last minute).  I do love my iPod though and wish mine had the secret recording feature available on the new model so I could record all of my vinyl.

[Brad]

Mathew,

Have you been to Euclid Records in St Louis?
I've ordered quite a bit from them in the last couple of years.

I do like the idea of converting vinyl to AAC  

[Tom Bombadil]

The Apple iTune store is very easy to use and has a decent selection, although is missing many major artists.

The audio quality of the downloaded songs is okay, nothing great.  They are in 128K AAC, which sounds a lot like 160K MP3.

I performed a comparison of the following (all using the same 2 songs):

1) Downloaded 128K AAC
2) Ripped 128K MP3
3) Ripped 192K MP3
4) Ripped loseless
5) Actual CD

I used a Sonica USB to digital converter to run the output from my Apple Powerbook into my $2000 Parasound DAC.   My CD transport runs through the same DAC.

The worst was the 128K MP3.  Had a hashy, boxed-in sound.  Listenable as casual background music but it annoyed me if I paid attention.

The Apple 128 AAC was better, but still had a compressed, slightly hashy sound.  Enough better that I could listen to it, while not expecting audiophile quality, and get past the compressed nature, but definitely short of CD-quality.  I had my wife run the switches of my DAC to switch between CD and AAC and could pick which one was which almost immediately.

192 MP3 was just a touch better, in some areas, than the 128 AAC.  Note this was not a converted AAC file to MP3.  Haven't tried that.

Loseless through the powerbook was pretty good, but still not quite as open and natural as playing directly from my CD player.  Good enough to do the trick unless one is in serious critical listening mode.

My overall opinion of the Apple downloads is that if you are going to use medium-priced headphones in a mobile, slightly noisy environment, then they are acceptable.  In a lower-end home audio system they may also be quite usable.  In a higher-end system, I would only buy songs if you really want a copy of a song and don't want it so bad that you want to drop $12-$15 on a CD.

Older songs that weren't recorded all the well to begin with, will show less degradation and thus be a more inviting target to buy this way.

[nathanm]

Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow
Bright gold his ears are
And his Powerbook's yellow

I had my wife run the switches of my DAC to switch between CD and AAC and could pick which one was which almost immediately.

That makes me wonder, is GAF an issue in your house?

But seriously folks...Interesting concept, but it isn't any cheaper than the already overpriced CD.  Why should I pay a buck a song when I am not even getting any tangible item whatsoever?  And only 128k for the privledge?  Come on!  Make it 25 cents per song then we'll talk.  Somebody ought to Think Different about that pricing scheme methinks.

[Haoleb]

I dont know why people are downloading soo much off there when they can get it for free. It never ceases to amaze me! Just download 320 bitrate tracks only, and you can usually find whatever your looking for. And its free. At a buck a song, and having to burn it yourself, and to not get the booklet and stuff seems like a real ripoff to me. Id much rather spend a buck or two more ( usually LESS ) and get the real deal!