iTunes

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,038
Location
I am omnipresent
I heard something on the radio this morning and thought "Damn, I really want to get that on CD."
That almost NEVER happens to me - maybe once in five years. In part because the finite amount of music that I listen to was mostly written 150 years ago and recorded 30 or 40 years ago, and in part because I seldom listen to anything but NPR while I'm in my car.

And I'm moving, so ordering something online, which is what I'm forced to do in order to get the music I like, would pretty much be an act of faith on my part. It ain't gonna happen.

Finally, last night I tried to download a trailer for a movie (Serenity) off apple.com, and it prompted me to install itunes.

So I wrote down the title of the piece and when I came into work today I thought "what the hell" and downloaded iTunes to take a look for the piece in question (Ennico Morricone's "Moses and Marco Polo Suite" - basically a couple themes from film scores), after being assured that the music I downloaded would at least be transferrable to a CD.

So here are my impressions:

1. The itunes application is annoying in several minor ways. It is its own, quasi-web-browser, only an annoying one that's too much like Internet explorer. Apple apparently doesn't believe in context-clicking, and I was confused that the "back" button didn't take me all the way back to the start page when I wanted it to. There are no tabs as such, and I miss them.

The user interface is highly apple-centric. Not a big deal but I think I would've been happier to see a real browser-based site along with a player that takes up something less than 75% of a 1280x1024 screen.

I also notice that itunes wanted a credit card number before I could use the program. Bleh.

2. timwhit complained of slowness with the itunes application. I can't say I notice, but I'm sitting in front of a rather muscular PC at the moment (Athlon64 3200/1.5GB). I've heard that itunes is very slow to download music to a device over USB2.0. Is that what you were referring to?
iTunes itself is responsive enough.

3. Music selection - It's just "meh". I see the bewildering array of pop releases I would've expected, but in the genres that I have actual knowledge of - classical music and jazz - the titles tend toward big-name artists performing the same 10 pieces rather than repertoire (e.g. itunes had every classical pianist ever playing Chopin nocturnes, but no recordings at all of, say, frequently performed symphonies by Ralph Vaughn-Williams). I more or less expected that, but it's still disappointing to see. iTunes DID have the music I heard on the radio, though, and a couple of searches got me to a place where I was hearing music I never would've known about otherwise. Serendipity is a good thing.

About 80% of the tracks I looked at had a 30-second sample available for preview. Given that all this music is stored electronically beforehand, I'm not sure why previews weren't available for 100% of the tracks. WTF?

4. Price - $.99 per track of DRM-encumbered .AAC files, or $10 for an album, except some albums. I bought the Ennico Morricone tracks I wanted as a full album, around $6 cheaper than I could've gotten it as a new, pressed CD.

5. Sound Quality - Turns out, AAC is lossless compression. I downloaded a single track from a music CD I happened to have handy, and compared the waveforms in Nero's Wave Editor (Apple says it's lossless, but I'm kind of picky about these things), just to be sure.

6. DRM BS - I loaded itunes on a second PC. I found that I could not access the music I purchased and downloaded. This, of course, is evil, especially since Apple has clear knowledge of what I have purchased.

7. Burning - iTunes lets me burn the music that I have purchased as a "playlist". Each playlist can only be burned a certain number of times (more DRM BS). Bleh. I burned my Ennico Morricone album to a disc. On another PC it was correctly identified by CDDB, which I take to mean that the audio on my burned disc is identical to that on a pressed disc. I *did* have to define a playlist in order to make a disc. That seemed cumbersome to me.

I also went ahead and ripped the CD back into FLAC files. No sense in having a bunch of useless .m4p files, in the event something happens to my PC.

In the end, I think the thing that I like is the chain-of-association browsing, but I can do that at amazon.com as well. I continue to think that online music stores don't have a wide enough selection of music to be useful for anyone but teenyboppers with top 40 tastes, but I'm not exactly in iTunes' target market, either (well, OK, as an under-30 suburban male with lots of disposable income, I probably am, but my personal tastes say otherwise).
I have to think that reason for the popularity of itunes is all about instant gratification. I cant see anything else that's particularly compelling abouit it.
 

CityK

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
1,719
Mercutio said:
5. Sound Quality - Turns out, AAC is lossless compression. I downloaded a single track from a music CD I happened to have handy, and compared the waveforms in Nero's Wave Editor (Apple says it's lossless, but I'm kind of picky about these things), just to be sure.
AAC is a lousy compression codec. More info here.

On another PC it was correctly identified by CDDB, which I take to mean that the audio on my burned disc is identical to that on a pressed disc.
CDDB identification is based upon track length not the bits. See here.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,038
Location
I am omnipresent
Hm. Perhaps I needed to zoom in more on my waveforms during visual inspection. :(

Oh well. I ordered the real CD anyway. I like liner notes too much.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,862
Location
USA
I'm happy to read your review of their application. I've read similar comments about the usefulness and performance of iTunes. Because of those comments, I specifically refused to install their tool on my system in fear of adding additional clutter. This is exactly why I'm giving away my iTunes songs.

In regards to iTune’s selection, I can’t blame them for targeting a popular audience. Music is a subjective pleasure, and for them it’s a money making tool. Why would they not focus on their prime audience? The question becomes; who is the best music store to download per audience. Is there anyone geared for individuals such as Mecutio? Does anyone know of any reviews that have been done between the main-stream services and the less-know services? This might make for an useful article.
 

iGary

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
236
Location
iLand
Mercutio said:
...In part because the finite amount of music that I listen to was mostly written 150 years ago...

What, the late Romantic period?

I liked the music from closer to the turn of the (20th) century a little more (more like about 90 ~ 120 years ago).

 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,038
Location
I am omnipresent
Well, technically those composers would probably be nationalists or impressionists or simply more evolved romantics.
I like lots of classical music, even to the point of enjoying 12-tone, serialist and minimalist music, but the insistance on formal composition in baroque and classical styles is off-putting in my opinion. My personal cut-off date is basically about 1800.

Back to iTMS, one has to wonder why they bother at all with genres outside the immediate interest of an MTV/CMT/BET viewer. Walmart's music store doesn't touch classical music, and only does that most despicable form of jazz known as "Smooth" (Kenny G, Al Jarreau. No John Coltrane)

Also I'm not sure what the harm would be in allowing full-length or at least longer samples. It bothers me that I can only get a 30-second sample for a piece of music that's 9 minutes long.
 

iGary

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
236
Location
iLand
Mercutio said:
Well, technically those composers would probably be nationalists or impressionists or simply more evolved romantics.
I like lots of classical music, even to the point of enjoying 12-tone, serialist and minimalist music, but the insistance on formal composition in baroque and classical styles is off-putting in my opinion. My personal cut-off date is basically about 1800.

The nationalists and the impressionists are much more in the timeframe I was referring to earlier (late 1800's very early 1900s -- pre WWI). But, then again, I really don't care too much for many of them. Of the ones I do, I tend to like some Ravel, some Bartok, and some of the better-known Russians. I'm generally sick to death of the Viennese School as a whole.

Even though I can't say I *ever* gave a damn about Italian opera, I tend to like it a tiny bit more than the Bayernische / Wagnerian type of opera sometimes. As far as the Romantic period goes (i.e. - post-classical, post-Beethoven/Mozart), there was indeed a lot of interesting stuff created during the Romantic period, but I never did care for the music styles like Schubert (lieder) or much of the piano insanity of Liszt and imitators. Heh.
 

timwhit

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
5,278
Location
Chicago, IL
Mercutio said:
2. timwhit complained of slowness with the itunes application. I can't say I notice, but I'm sitting in front of a rather muscular PC at the moment (Athlon64 3200/1.5GB). I've heard that itunes is very slow to download music to a device over USB2.0. Is that what you were referring to?
iTunes itself is responsive enough.

I have 35GB of music loaded in to iTunes. When I scroll through the music it is slow. When I right-click on a specific song and click "Get Info" it pauses for a second. Nothing that you could time on a stop watch, but just enough to bug me.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,038
Location
I am omnipresent
Interesting thing: The obscure album I bought from itunes classical store a week ago is still listed as a "Top Album". I checked it on someone else's PC (one my account has never logged into).

So now I'm thinking "Wow, the itunes classical store doesn't even sell 10 different albums in a week."

And that is distressing.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,862
Location
USA
Where would you guess an individual might listen to classical or jazz music (house, car, office, etc)? In your case, you've given me the impression that you enjoy high quality sound equipment (speakers, amps, and so on). I'm going out on a limb here to say that classical (and jazz) music can benefit more from this type of environment than say, something from 50 cent. So, you might be more likely to "want" classical music for you hi-fi system, rather than trying to enjoy the tonal qualities of snoop dog.

Now with that said (andquitepossiblyveryinaccurate), your average listeners of classical/jazz (and other variants) aren't looking for an iPod or other portable media players. Because of this, iTunes doesn't need to cater to this small group of people who do want iTunes for their iPod, or possible their hi-fi capable PC. All the others are going to buy the CD media for their home system.
 
Top