Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Music Classical

learn.applemusic.apple

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 473 posts

Re: Apple Music Classical

#331

Post by JumpCrisscross »

pwinnski wrote: post #241
mbo wrote: post #173

> There’s no separate subscription for Apple Music Classical. It’s included at no extra cost with all Apple Music subscriptions except the Apple Music Voice Plan. Bit of a missed opportunity here to provide a cheaper subscription just for Classical. Apple could have captured Spotify users who would be willing to pay a small premium for a nicer classical UX, but would be unwilling to take out an additional full-priced…

People who care deeply about classical music will use this even at the same or higher cost than Spotify's now-inferior product. People who don't care at all about classical music won't use this at any price. People who like classical sometimes but don't listen to it exclusively should be happy that neither costs extra, both are included in the normal price. I'm not seeing any market opportunity for charging a lower a…

> People who care deeply about classical music will use this even at the same or higher cost than Spotify's now-inferior product

I care deeply about classical music. But I'm already in Spotify's ecosystem, and don't want to bother with the switching cost. I would absolutely pay an add-on for Classical only, but don't want to pay for the whole Apple Music bundle.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#332

Post by thewebcount »

tw600040 wrote: post #311

Please if someone from Apple is listening: Please pay some attention to Indian music as well. I mostly only listen to Tamil songs and when Apple came out with iTunes Match or something where they analyze your library and match it to what they have in cloud, they just incorrectly matched songs with the Telugu version and ones from other languages and totally messed up my collection. And, this day and age, why should a…

You can file your feedback for Apple Music here:

https://www.apple.com/feedback/apple-music.html

That's the only way your voice will get heard.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#333

Post by 1123581321 »

thewebcount wrote: post #327
lifefeed wrote: post #226

I would love to see something like this for jazz, which has musicians constantly moving through groups and albums as musicians and composers and writers. Like take "Take Five", one of my favorites. It was written by Paul Desmond for the Dave Brubeck Quartet, with solos by Desmond on alto sax and Joe Morello on drums. Those are all fun pieces of information that I wish I could click through to see more of. Just like c…

I want that for pop music, too! I don't understand why Apple (and other companies) don't get that there are users who want to slice and dice music in this way for every genre. When I go looking for "No-one is to blame" by Howard Jones, I want the version from "Dream Into Action" not the crappy radio remake he did with Phil Collins on the drums. When I listen to "Leave it" by Yes, I may want to make the connection tha…

One impediment is the pop industry doesn't organize it that way. Classical does, so PrimePhonic/Apple didn't have to invent a new taxonomy to make a classical service.

Apple and Spotify could use their market power to make labels backfill a more complex data format for pop.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#334

Post by bryanmgreen »

earthnail wrote: post #305

Oh my, 192kHz/24bit. One would expect Apple would not need snake oil to sell their product. To those not so familiar with audio DSP: 192kHz and 24bit make perfect sense if you intend to mangle the audio a LOT afterwards. At 192kHz, you can pitch shift your audio down by two octaves and still have frequency content in the entire CD spectrum. Very useful, and common, for movie effects. And 24bit, or better even 32bit,…

Is 192/24 discernible to most people with mostly common listening equipment? No.

Should we be complaining that an audio streaming service is offering the highest quality audio? No. Especially because they're not charging a premium for it.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#335

Post by ocimbote »

lifefeed wrote: post #226

I would love to see something like this for jazz, which has musicians constantly moving through groups and albums as musicians and composers and writers. Like take "Take Five", one of my favorites. It was written by Paul Desmond for the Dave Brubeck Quartet, with solos by Desmond on alto sax and Joe Morello on drums. Those are all fun pieces of information that I wish I could click through to see more of. Just like c…

I'm a happy user of Qobuz, which I find to have mapped quire nicely the composer/author/musician graph, at least at the API level.

You might want to check it out.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#336

Post by 1123581321 »

lwhi wrote: post #90
lelag wrote: post #24

Strange feelings looking at this... This is almost exactly the product I failed to get into YC with back in 2017... All the same ideas as far as the UX goes with one main difference: the business model. I wanted to apply the Steam business model where people would actually buy album again (and not tracks a la iTunes). The issue is that while it's nice to have a UX tailored for classical, this won't likely help the cl…

So a band camp for classical music is required?

Bandcamp isn't nearly as well organized as this new service, but its feed of new releases sorted by genre exposes me to lots of indie classical music recordings.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#337

Post by cpach »

ninkendo wrote: post #182
falcolas wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the way. It’s perfectly acceptable to bounce off a book after five pages. Off a podcast with poor production quality. Off a song after the first measure. Tastes differ, so don’t feel bad if you dislike something the zeitgeist adores.

Back when scarcity was a thing, the act of powering through with media you didn’t initially like was one of the primary ways of maturing your taste and learning to like new things. Only consuming media which hooks you instantly is a good way to achieve the media equivalent of a sugar-only diet. I don’t have an answer for this to be honest, it’s just an observation.

IMHO this is especially true for classical music, which is generally less approachable than pop music.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#338

Post by cyberpunk »

lolsal wrote: post #214
cyberpunk wrote: post #187

Am the only person who finds it completely ridiculous that not even APPLE can launch the iPad version of this app at the same time as their iOS one? I launch it on my iPad (which is hooked to my external dac/amp setup via usb-c) and I see.. This: https://imgur.com/a/cAX0zZA

They are being pretty agile and releasing something for iOS and will iterate to release a custom iPad version later, relying on the fallback mechanism that has existed for years for app scaling. Why does this upset you so much? Just because they are big doesn't mean they have to do everything all at once, all the time. They are dog-fooding their own multi-device app tech. I think it's great.

I mean I'm not really upset or anything -- I will live with it of course.

I only mentioned it as.. Well. Don't you find a crappy experience from a company that obsessives so much over user experience a little surprising?

You'd have thought if anyone could nail an iDevice software release it would be Apple..

Re: Apple Music Classical

#339

Post by biftek »

lynx23 wrote: post #80

192kHz/24 bit, what a wonderful piece of snakeoil... What do they actually record with this frequency, bats talking to each other about classical music?

A higher bit rate lets you digitally process audio without introducing artifacts. It's very common to record, mix, and master audio at 192/24 and even oversample well above 192k.

It has nothing to do with snake oil or hearing things above 22k it's about not introducing aliasing and other digital artifacts, and on highly dynamic content like classical can definitely be heard in the audible spectrum.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#340

Post by mihaaly »

earthnail wrote: post #305

Oh my, 192kHz/24bit. One would expect Apple would not need snake oil to sell their product. To those not so familiar with audio DSP: 192kHz and 24bit make perfect sense if you intend to mangle the audio a LOT afterwards. At 192kHz, you can pitch shift your audio down by two octaves and still have frequency content in the entire CD spectrum. Very useful, and common, for movie effects. And 24bit, or better even 32bit,…

192kHz is overkill of the overkill, but 10bit, seriously?! That is 1024 levels for the whole dynamic range, you are cutting it down to its 64th fraction man! With classical music where it is not filled up to the level of clipping but silent parts contain plenty of details you really must be joking with 10 bits or perhaps rely on listening experience of rap with through the roof bass and inarticulate jabber, there even 6bits may be too much, I give you that.

Also the standard 44.1kHz is good to have so the waves could be followed with little deviation and for the sake of reproduction. 192kHz is really snake oil but please do not jump over the horse to the other side in the frenzy of compensating.

Please study https://www.headphonesty.com/2019/07/sample-rate-bit-depth-b... or others.

Post reply on HN