Is Apple backtracking on its commitment to high-def music?
An interesting article on the CNN website, in which singer-songwriter Neil Young (above) claims Apple's ambition to improve the quality of song files it sells on iTunes has lapsed since the death of founder Steve Jobs.
Last year Universal Music Group was working with Apple and other download sites to move to high-resolution 24-bit audio files.
To make the switch, Apple would have to retool future versions of iPods, iPads and iPhones so they could play higher-quality files.
But now Neil Young – with whom Apple consulted on the project – has told News Corporation's D:Dive into Media conference in the US that "not much" has happened with Apple's high-definition devices and downloads project since Jobs died in October.
Young says Jobs was directly involved in the high-definition initiative, speaking directly to him about it.
Should Apple ressurect the plan? Would you buy high-resolution tracks on iTunes? Let us know what you think in the Comments box below.
Follow whathifi.com on Twitter
Comments
In the news it has been said that Apple had been working on a format that sounds more like records and Not Hi Res music
I don't see how Apple can "backtrack" on a "committment" it has never made.
I echo the opinion on the fact that the hi-res download market is too small. But there is good market space for CD quality download. I don’t use iTunes downloads today just because it supplies compressed audio format. It would be a totaly different story for me should iTunes provide CD quality downloads. I believe that is a better start for Apple’s “hi-res project”.
"Same as CD" res would do me fine.
However, the dynamics of my own 256k AAC VBR rips - from CD - are far better than iTunes 256k downloads of the same tracks. So I fear the same for any higher res files they may provide one day.
Personally I believe the market for hi-res audio files is too small at the moment. The vast mjaority of consumers say 14yrs -34yrs I suspect aren't willing to pay a premium for this and subsequently vendors like Apple et al are not going to invest money and resources for a small audience. Plus, most people using their standard earphones/headphones plugged into their IPODs and home hi-fi aren't going to hear and appreciate higher fidelty, especially as most moden music is encoded at loud volume levels.
The exception would be the classical market who tend to appreciate better audio quality in their playback devices who may be willing to pay the extra. Again, this will re-enforce the hi-res market becoming a niche area.
Jobs would bet the company providing what customers didn't know they wanted. Sounds like the 'suits' now in charge are all MBA drones who rely on "focus groups"
That said, 24bit doesn't mean much when 99% of pop/rock is mastered slammed against the limiters with 1dB of dynamic range to 'sound loud'.
Apple wouldn't need to retool anything - iTunes will already play and stream 24-bit Lossless files (and iDevices will play 24-bit files up to a sample rate of 48kHz).
iTunes may be the biggest when it comes to music downloads, but the quality of the files is the lowest available anywhere. It's also expensive compared to 7Digital, fairsharemusic and pretty much any band that offers music themselves. Unfortunately, until the majority of users catch on to these two points, there will be no urgency for Apple to change things.
Dito...I've never purchased from iTunes but definitely would if they were available in hi-res!
High resolution tracks would be the only reason I would buy tracks from iTunes or anywhere else online. Even if they had sold Lossless I would have been tempted a few years ago, but now hi-res is the minimum.
Otherwise Hybrid SACD will have to continue to be where my money mainly goes, or last resort, on well mastered redbook CD. There are no excuses for poor quality today.