Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iTunes Match Questions
- Thread starter ericg301
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I realize they are DRM free, and I don't know if I have any devices that don't play AAC because I've always just avoided ever having any AAC files. If I were going to move away from MP3 I'd go for a lossless format.
But like I said, I guess this will make me back up my collection. I guess AAC will be my daily listening stuff while my archives are MP3s.
So you complain that AAC "isn't so versatile" but that's based on an assumption that you've never even tested? Easy enough to check out, just get a free AAC file from the iTunes store and test it on whatever devices you have. Then you can decide based on whether you actually have a problem instead of assuming things without finding out the facts.
For the record, AAC has better sound quality than MP3 at the same bitrates, it's a newer and better codec.
I think that's probably right, but users have always been responsible for backing up your music anyway, you SHOULD have a backup separate from your iTunes library, right? If so, deleting the music and downloading the higher-bitrate matched copies should be no big deal. You will then always have a local copy of the originals just in case (and in that case, actually you would ideally create a second backup somewhere). Of course you could get away with not backing up iTMS purchases, as they will always be available from iCloud, but you should keep at least one backup of your own (non-iTMS) music.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, I always have current backups, but I want my library to be organized the way it is, with all of the metadata (lyrics, genre changes, etc) exactly how I want it, not only in iTunes but my other devices. So if those downloads overwrote the file completely, than I lose all of that. No way I'd want that, even with a backup.
But I'm still getting different answers with every post here and over the internet. I can't believe that at this point, no one can tell us if we lose metadata or not and if a file is replaced automatically.
I guess it's just wait and see.Tony
The whole "I get to keep my Apple versions if I cancel" seems too good to be true. It basically means I can spend $24 and legitimize 10 years of pirated music if I wanted to.
Not that I pirate my music or anything!
Either way, iTunes match seems like the least talked about and best technology we have seen in the internet services industry in 10 years. What an amazing service it is aiming to be!
Not that I pirate my music or anything!
Either way, iTunes match seems like the least talked about and best technology we have seen in the internet services industry in 10 years. What an amazing service it is aiming to be!
Sorry thats not right
Itunes Match does allow streaming. Check here:
http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/
Sorry thats not right
Itunes Match does allow streaming. Check here:
http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/
Nope. It's been verified by many that it doesn't actually stream live. It downloads and buffers onto your device but you can play while it downloads from what's already partially stored on your device. Practically, there's not a lot of difference except that you have to have enough storage on your device and you have to manually delete the songs when your done if you don't want to keep them on your device (although I'm not sure if there is an autodelete option).
Tony
No, it's based on history.
There, fixed that for ya. I simply don't like it for the same reaons I don't like Sony's memory stick and any other proprietary formats out there. You can argue with me all day long about why I should or why I have no reason to not like it, but you won't be changing my mind. Will I use it and deal with it? Perhaps, since that seems to be my only option. But I would prefer my music in a format that I will never have to wonder if it will play on any device.
----------
Sorry thats not right
Itunes Match does allow streaming. Check here:
http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/
"stream and store"
Don't take it out of context. Streaming alone means there is no file on your device when you are done. This still copies the file to your device. It basically plays while buffering the file to be assembled as a complete file.
Yes, it is streaming, but that is misleading for most people since they also assume it won't take up storage.
If you watch that youtube video a few posts above me then ull see that u can actually stream, without taking up any storage. If you press the song and not the Cloud button then it will stream. I have about 3000 songs that I would love to "legitimize" and download 256 copies. But like someone said that seems too good to be true, and i dont know how legal it is
All the beta testers have said otherwise.
And it may sound too good to be true, but that's how I understand it as well.
apples site states
Heres how it works: iTunes determines which songs in your collection are available in the iTunes Store. Any music with a match is automatically added to your iCloud library for you to listen to anytime, on any device. Since there are more than 19 million songs in the iTunes Store, chances are, your music is already in iCloud. And for the few songs that arent, iTunes has to upload only what it cant match. Which is much faster than starting from scratch. Once your music is in iCloud, you can stream and store it to any of your devices. Even better, all the music iTunes matches plays back from iCloud at 256-Kbps AAC DRM-free quality even if your original copy was of lower quality.
So if i "store" every single of these new 256kbps copies to my iPhone I can easily use an app like CopyPod and transfer all my songs onto my computer with the better quality, then delete the originals....I guess?
----------
Read this in an article a while back
It seems baffling that the record companies would sign up to a program that allows one to download a song illegally and then legitimize it through Apple, but it's not that crazy. Though it often doesn't seem like it, the recording industry has made great strides adapting to the new economic reality of the Internet. They've made songs available for 89¢ and have licensed plenty of free and reasonably-priced legal streaming services. They've likely gone as close to free as they can to compete with illegal downloads.
Still, there are likely billions of songs out there that were downloaded illegally, and there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. So why not get some cash for them, too? The record companies are essentially getting paid retroactively (a little, but more than nothing) for the millions of illegal downloads that are already out there, and they don't have to give up any legal rights to go after infringers. It's a perfectly logical deal to make.
MP3 is a proprietary format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3#Licensing_and_patent_issues , just one that is a de facto standard.
B
Yes, I always have current backups, but I want my library to be organized the way it is, with all of the metadata (lyrics, genre changes, etc) exactly how I want it, not only in iTunes but my other devices. So if those downloads overwrote the file completely, than I lose all of that. No way I'd want that, even with a backup.
But I'm still getting different answers with every post here and over the internet. I can't believe that at this point, no one can tell us if we lose metadata or not and if a file is replaced automatically.
It's a good point, but I just can't imagine they're going to just blow over all your metadata (the only thing that keeps you sane in iTunes). Seems easy enough to read the existing metadata and apply to newly downloaded files. Except for album covers, it's mostly text, which should be fast and easy to sync via iCloud/iTunes Match. I could maybe see them using the Match album art in place of what you have to save bandwidth or storage space.
Might even be an option when you sign up, or on each individual device before you download, a checkbox like "Overwrite existing metadata with iTunes Match metadata".
Which is? You complained that it's not so versatile but still haven't given a single example of what's wrong with it, what doesn't work.
So now you think AAC is proprietary? Where are you getting this stuff?
Not proprietary at all, in fact it's included a part of the mpeg 2 and 4 standards. Any hardware or software can play it back if they implement it.
Actually I can't argue with you because you haven't given a single reason to argue with. So far you haven't listed a single hardware device or piece of software that doesn't play AAC. You haven't given a single real world example of the format not working for you. And you've shown that you don't even understand what the format is, listing things that are flat out false.
Basically it seems like you read some downsides to AAC years ago that are no longer true and never bothered to get the facts after that.
With the exception of really old mp3 players (which very few people are using any more, and which likely won't even play some newer variants of the mp3 format), AAC fits the bill. Any device should be able to play back AAC, it's extremely widely supported. I suppose there may be devices that choose not to support it, but if they're intentionally choosing to cripple their device and not support an open format (not to mention the most widely sold at this point), that's hardly the fault of the format.
If you really think AAC won't play on every device, name one currently selling device that doesn't play back AAC files. Just one. If you can't name one, you're rambling on about a problem that doesn't exist.
I hope you're right, but I wouldn't trust the service until I heard actual confirmation of that.
Perhaps my views on AAC are a bit outdated. And I thought it was proprietary becuase when I first experienced it, seems only iPods played it (or was it Sony devices?)....nothing else. But this was a long time ago.
But if it's so awesome, why hasn't the entire world switched? Why does Amazon still serve up all their music in MP3 format for example?
But if it's so awesome, why hasn't the entire world switched? Why does Amazon still serve up all their music in MP3 format for example?
Probably because there are clueless people out there whose understanding of the formats is outdated and are scared of AAC even though its a better format and works fine on all devices they own. Honestly, it is a dumb move on Amazon's part, no real advantage to their choice of format.
joined tracks in iTunes match
I have a few CDs where I've joined the tracks. An example Abbey Road by the Beatles. Most of the last songs on the disc were designed to flow from one to the next. when I added those songs to iTunes, I joined the tracks. With Match, will those songs stick together or will they turn into separate tracks. Nothing worse durng a shuffle than having a series of :45 second songs.
I have a few CDs where I've joined the tracks. An example Abbey Road by the Beatles. Most of the last songs on the disc were designed to flow from one to the next. when I added those songs to iTunes, I joined the tracks. With Match, will those songs stick together or will they turn into separate tracks. Nothing worse durng a shuffle than having a series of :45 second songs.
I don't want AAC. My car stereo can read MP3 disks, and I can't burn an MP3 disk from AAC.
I was looking forward to Match until this. -.-
And preemptively, if you want me to "buy a new head unit," then you better start coughing up cash into my Paypal account.
I was looking forward to Match until this. -.-
And preemptively, if you want me to "buy a new head unit," then you better start coughing up cash into my Paypal account.
I don't see how a cloud music service would be useful for a car stereo reading burned disks, regardless of format. You burn disks from your computer - if you have an iPhone, iPad, or another computer somewhere else, match will be useful but it won't really make a difference for burning disks.
You apparently think that was the only reason I was interested in Match.
Try again.
I have an iPhone, a MacBook, a desktop, and an iPad.
I wont say it, but have to, but sheesh, maybe you should bro. iPhone/iPad compatible units aren't very expensive at all. Heck you can get a great Clarion unit, with bluetooth, iphone connect, all the bells and whistles for like $115.
And seriosuly, you use a CDR? Welcome to 1999.
(kidding)But that seems like a very weird thing, letting your headunit limit your music listeneing experience, it's supposed to enhance it. Save $1 a day, for 4 months, and you can buy a new great headunit with bluetooth streaming or direct iphone connection and enjoy it in your ride!