IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
itunes store aac vs. normal itunes ripped aac
paperskyline
post Sep 28 2012, 14:04
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 4-May 12
Member No.: 99476



i just want to know which is better, purchased itunes store aac vs. normal itunes ripped aac?
does the quality differ?

This post has been edited by paperskyline: Sep 28 2012, 14:07
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dynamic
post Sep 28 2012, 15:59
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 795
Joined: 17-September 06
Member No.: 35307



iTunes software's own ripping engine probably isn't as 'secure' as EAC, dBpowerAMP or CueRipper, for example. That's probably more important than the AAC encoder, especially at 256 kbps or so.

Also, you control which release you rip (for example Dark Side Of The Moon comes in about 4 or 5 versions, some with more dynamic range compression than others, and you can choose the one you prefer).

The AAC encoder used by iTunes Store was issued by Apple in their "Mastered for iTunes" initiative, I believe, for mastering engineers to be able to test the destination format, so you could compare that against a 256 kbps encode in your version of iTunes.

This post has been edited by Dynamic: Sep 28 2012, 16:02
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mix3dmessagez
post Sep 28 2012, 22:50
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 87
Joined: 22-March 09
Member No.: 68252



Itunes plus is the same exact thing used in the itunes store to encode.

Except for mastered for itunes titles which take the high resolution files and they are carefully downsampled and abxed to minimalize the impact of audio compression *not sound compression*
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 29 2012, 01:46
Post #4





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (Mix3dmessagez @ Sep 28 2012, 14:50) *
Except for mastered for itunes titles which take the high resolution files and they are carefully downsampled and abxed to minimalize the impact of audio compression *not sound compression*

You cannot be sure anything was done carefully or that anything is ABXed. Furthermore the idea that people are tweaking the audio beyond preventing unwanted audible clipping in order to minimize coding artifacts is quite dusturbing. Claiming to have done so should instantly raise suspicion of ignorance as well as incompetence.

This post has been edited by greynol: Sep 29 2012, 02:55


--------------------
YOUR EYES CANNOT HEAR!!!!!!!!!!!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Sep 29 2012, 11:31
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



If “Mastered for iTunes” is anything more than a marketing spin (an open question, to be polite), then my first hunch would be that the substance is a “stop sending us these £$€& mp3s” request to the record companies and managements. Remember that there are quite a few “iTunes exclusive” tracks, in which case they need more than ready-mastered fileset which was put on CD. Oh, it could be some volume adjustment too, but that might possibly even be for the worse.


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gymnos
post Oct 1 2012, 21:36
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 10-September 12
Member No.: 103044



CD rip will contain dither that will (depending on the signal) take some of the bitrate to be encoded. Apple recommends that masters for iTunes are 24 bit undithered so theoretically the encoder spends more bits encoding actual HF signal rather than dither.
I'm not claiming this is audible or impacts perceived quality. I just say the resulting AAC files in many cases will be different.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd July 2014 - 12:02