Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#621

Post by movedx » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:12 AM UTC

dmamills wrote: post #613

movedx wrote: post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I abandoned my music library after I went to Apple Music. But 5 years later I'm going back. How do you deal with the cost? I pay $18/month for Apple Music (Family) and I can listen to thousands of tracks in a single day if I wanted to. That same experience would cost me thousands of dollars up front to kick start it. This also isn't to mention the fact that not all music is available to buy legally online. Dimmu Bo…

You consume in a slower manner. You use an example of your ability to stream a thousand tracks in a single day if you wanted to, I don't have the same aspirations, so I'd also not pay thousands of dollars up from to kick start it. To answer your question of how do I curate a library, legally, is just over time. I have a lot of musicians I like, and when I find them, I purchase their music, and I listen to it. I do it…

> You consume in a slower manner.

> To answer your question of how do I curate a library, legally, is just over time. I have a lot of musicians I like, and when I find them, I purchase their music, and I listen to it.

I guess I can just start buying their albums today, slowly, but I often found it difficult to even find a vendor of their stuff online.

Thanks for the response.

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#622

Post by fomine3 » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:16 AM UTC

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #241

marcan_42 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is largely because MP3 is a crappy, old format. Try high-bitrate Opus on most samples and you're a lot less likely to get above-chance results on an ABX test, pretty much ever, at high bitrates. Ultimately though, lossy compression is always program-dependent ("program" here means the song, not the app). The encoders use psychoacoustic algorithms, and there is no way to prove they will perform well on all sample…

> "This is largely because MP3 is a crappy, old format. Try high-bitrate Opus on most samples and you're a lot less likely to get above-chance results on an ABX test, pretty much ever, at high bitrates." I'll add to this that "high bitrate" for Opus can reasonably be considered as 128kbps or above, generally 160 or 192kbps are comfortably beyond what is needed to achieve audible transparency. For anyone who's used to…

I wish Apple devices support Opus.

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#623

Post by fomine3 » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:19 AM UTC

joshspankit wrote: post #599

layer8 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There have been tests showing we cannot hear the difference between minimally lossy audio (e.g. mp3 320kbps) and lossless. Indeed, here is such a test: https://gxip23wuyntw2qbzp2f7yfke6y-ac5fdsxevxq4s5y-www-heise... Even trained listeners using high-end equipment weren’t able to distinguish between CD and 256 kbps MP3 in double-blind tests.

The worst thing we ever did for audio quality was focus on short A/B tests. It seems like a decent idea, and works for big differences, but ears are not great at it. Much better results would be had with 1 month of A, then switching to B.

Any sources?

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#624

Post by joshspankit » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:20 AM UTC

movedx wrote: post #617

joshspankit wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buying direct from the artist can be as low as $1 per album. Buying CDs and records used, then posting (edit: photos / hype about) them on social media is a form of social currency that supports the artist (as well, in some countries there are viable legal arguments for downloading pre-ripped files as a form of media shifting when you own the original, which means minimal hassle for turning a CD in to a FLAC)

> Buying direct from the artist can be as low as $1 per album Not the artists I listen to. They're all signed with big labels, thus you can only buy from that label. > Buying CDs and records used, then posting them on social media is a form of social currency And criminal currency known as Copyright Infringement. I'll pass.

(shaking my head and laughing at myself)

I edited the post, as I meant promoting the artist by posting photos or why you love the music, and not posting the music itself.

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#625

Post by fomine3 » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:22 AM UTC

antiterra wrote: post #459

LgWoodenBadger wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time I bought a cd-looking disc, the "CD" "CompactDisc" logo/words/terms were nowhere on it, inside or out. I seem to recall that meant they weren't actually CDs, they just happened to look exactly like them, and usually function in a CD player. Computers often had trouble with them. I don't know if this is true, or just bs, but there you go.

The logo you want is the CD Digital Audio logo which requires adherence to the red book standard. Music discs with Sony root kit DRM did not have this logo.

Ironically Sony and Philips wrote the redbook.

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#626

Post by joshspankit » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:23 AM UTC

fomine3 wrote: post #623

joshspankit wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst thing we ever did for audio quality was focus on short A/B tests. It seems like a decent idea, and works for big differences, but ears are not great at it. Much better results would be had with 1 month of A, then switching to B.

Any sources?

I can’t find the references I got that from (it was decently respected people in the audiophile world talking about their experience with AB tests over a decade or two), but it’s also true in my own experience.

As well, I feel like the same concept is being used when people listen to the same recording of the same track every time they are trying out new headphones or speakers.

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#627

Post by drivebycomment » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:27 AM UTC

Slow_Hand wrote: post #586

jachee wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My "listening space" seldom exceeds an inch from my head. Either AirPods Pro or Sennheisers right in/on my ears. That's going to be the target audience of the majority of these changes. I choose 'phones because my music taste diverges too much from my wife's to make open air play an option, if I want to maintain peace.

You're right that wearing headphones sidesteps that issue entirely. It's only an issue when there is an acoustic space for the waves to interact with. I'd also agree that Apple's choice seems to be targeting headphone users as a result of their product ecosystem. Interestingly, people in the other discussions are pointing out that Airpod Pros and Airpods Max are incapable of higher sample-rate audio due to their code…

I absolutely agree with your both posts. I would also claim that the differences between headphones is far, far greater than hi-res audio vs high bitrate compressed audio, thus it's nearly pointless to even discuss hi-res even for headphone users.

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#628

Post by threeseed » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:29 AM UTC

ehsankia wrote: post #313

Workaccount2 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly suggest that people check out/try out "ABX comparator" plugin for Foobar2000 player. You give it two files (say a 128kbps mp3 version and a lossless flac verison) and it runs you through a double blind test of the two versions, quizzing you along the way. It's not just "listen to A" "listen to B", it gives you lots of options to listen to them and compare them in different ways, including obfuscating what tr…

+1 I have nothing against NPR but that has like 5 samples and absolutely nothing about methodology. As far as I know, the goto test is: http://abx.digitalfeed.net/ They have a few other tests heres: http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html

I wish people would stop posting this useless test.

It compares FLAC with 320 Kbps AAC which no streaming service uses (Apple uses 256 Kbps) and is a very high bit rate.

And its choice of indie tracks isn't suited for demonstrating codec artefacts. At least have classical, EDM etc as well.

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#629

Post by mguerville » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:32 AM UTC

stingraycharles wrote: post #518

blackearl wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss what.cd Despite what anyone thinks about music piracy, what.cd had hands down the best music organization I've ever seen. I wish they had just dropped the torrents and kept the indexing features

Yeah good times, I’m nostalgic about managing my own music collection using directory structures, everything consistent and well-organized. Tagging metadata using musicbrainz, listening with foobar2000. Nowadays I’ve been sucked into the Spotify vacuum because of convenience, but I do miss out on more obscure music. And I have no idea how to find that, except from sites like SoundCloud and mixcloud, but their UX is h…

I’ve kept my library on an external hard drive and recently abandonned Deezer and Spotify because of the same issues mentioned in this thread. Plex (on a VPS) has been a godsend, and hype machine for discovery is top notch, check it out if you want to find obscure but great music

Re: Apple Music Announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

#630

Post by Drew_ » Tue, May 18, 2021, 1:33 AM UTC

tristanc wrote: post #85

ivraatiems wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed - Spotify's UI is bad and getting worse, and its quality is meh, but its discovery features are top notch and it has the biggest catalog. I have audiophile equipment - $900 MSRP Hifiman headphones, discrete DAC and amp - and I tried Tidal to see if I could hear a difference. 99% of the time, I can't... and Tidal's MQA format is questionable anyway. (Not sure about Apple's "ALAC" either.) I used a playlist impo…

Over and over again I’ve been impressed with Tidal’s song radio functionality. Unless you’re trying it out with very obscure songs that might only have a few listens total on the platform, Tidal’s radio always recommends tracks that are specific to that track’s subgenre/region. Meanwhile Spotify always seems to recommend songs that are only mildly related and that I’ve already listened to. Other than playlists, it fe…

Is shuffling large playlists still broken on Android for Tidal (only shuffles the first 30 or so and then nothing)?

That problem got me to unsubscribe even though I was loving the HiFi streaming. It was broken around Christmas 2019 and still was broken months later. They're Android app receives little to no support.