IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Does "Mastered for iTunes" matter to music? Ars puts it to t, Article about Apples "Mastered for iTunes" program
knutinh
post Apr 30 2012, 11:29
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 569
Joined: 1-November 06
Member No.: 37047



Thought this might be interesting, and did not find it mentioned in other posts:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2012/04/...-the-test.ars/1
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
stephan_g
post Apr 30 2012, 12:58
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 193
Joined: 6-June 10
From: Bavaria
Member No.: 81240



Comments >> article.

The article illustrates nicely that the underlying motivation for "Mastered for iTunes" is not generally understood. The comment by itsbenaltogether sums up the central points pretty well:
QUOTE
[...] All this article is saying is that it is possible to master a record in a way that reduces artifacts due to AAC compression. This doesn't sound that outrageous to me and the advice Apple is giving people isn't exactly rocket science either. If AAC compression can cause clipping, it's a no brainer to reduce the levels before compression. To do this most effectively, it helps to have the best dynamic range signal available. This all sounds straightforward to me.

Add the point that heavy dynamic compression tends to introduce more high-frequency content which, being harder to encode, either gives higher data rates or reduces overall quality, and you've got the gist. Not rocket science to him or to me or anyone else with some kind of signal processing background, but to the average mastering engineer it apparently is. This article could have done something about this, but as-is it's just yet another missed opportunity.

This post has been edited by stephan_g: Apr 30 2012, 13:04
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


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: 30th August 2014 - 12:08