 |
 |
iTunes Plus
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Pardon this newbie to music question. With the aid of a cochlear implant I am a deaf person new to music. Seeking the highest quality music seems logical hence iTunes Plus "256 kbps AAC encoding" seems to be a smart way to go. Before I commit to sending my first born to Apple in exchange for the Plus version of my music I'd like to ask - does this encoding bring a lot to the quality party?
thanks!
PS We'll discuss that Mr. Dylan fellow in another post..... 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
It all depends on how good the cochlear implant is making your hearing now. You can import songs from your own CDs, do one version at AAC 128K and one version at 256K of the same song. Play them and see if you notice a difference. For me it is so small (except on some classical pieces) that I have stuck with the iTunes standard for now.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PDX
Status:
Offline
|
|
I agree, I think that this sort of thing is an individual preference. Some people can tell the difference, others can't. And being that you use a cochlear implant, I would guess that your personal preference will differ from almost anyone else's. I would do a test like zerostar said. Encode the same song at the 2 different bit rates and compare. Definitely pick a piece that has a good range of sounds.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Arizona
Status:
Offline
|
|
Itunes Plus is also DRM free.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
if your buying a whole album, go for iTunes plus if its an option. The cost (for a whole album) is the same, and the quality higher w/o DRM.
On a per-song basis, go with the suggestions above and your personal preference.
|
|
/Earth\ Mk\.\ I{2}/
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm guessing that your cochlear implant is not high enough res for you to hear the difference, but why not splash out the 1.25 on a song to test yourself?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thanks to you all for your input - much appreciated. With a cochlear implant there is a long training curve so while I might not hear the difference today I might over time begin to differentiate between AAC encoding quality. Based on the replies its hit and miss even for normal hearing folks.
Again - thanks!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Congrats on the implant! My cousin is an audiologist and works with implant patients. By chance are you from Arizona?
I second/third the motion of encoding some of your own music at different bit rates. My level of encoding preference is 192 kbps, so I try to avoid Apple's 128 kbps encoded music when I can. DRM-free is nicer as well if you have a lot of computers or don't like hassling with "blessing" your computers to play iTunes flies.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
