Buying music online

[Purrrfect]

So I got an ipod way back and thought the itunes store would be the answer to everything for getting music easier. Fast forward to today and my ipod has 0 battery, and my droid has more space anyways, so I'm wanting to basically ditch the ipod and just keep everything on the phone (plus, I need to investigate bluetooth head units to handle car audio, but that's another topic). I'm wondering what would be the best way to go about buying music online that would be compatible with more than just Apple's platform? Is Amazon the choice for this? I'm planning on sticking with Android phones, at least for a good while, I don't like how Apple bullies you into their software.

[Cream Soda]

Do you have any objections to downloading music? Most stuff you can pay for isn't even 320kbps. If you're going to pay for music, there is no reason it should be lower quality than what you can download for free.

[rezn0r]

check out Spotify on your pc, if you think you'd like it, put the money you'd be paying for albums towards the $9/month plan that gives you mobile access. advanced-sorry to any record execs lurking on BG

[Kerberoz]

"What's the best website for paying my favorite artists $0.01 per track??"

[Heslon]

So I got an ipod way back and thought the itunes store would be the answer to everything for getting music easier. Fast forward to today and my ipod has 0 battery, and my droid has more space anyways, so I'm wanting to basically ditch the ipod and just keep everything on the phone (plus, I need to investigate bluetooth head units to handle car audio, but that's another topic). I'm wondering what would be the best way to go about buying music online that would be compatible with more than just Apple's platform? Is Amazon the choice for this? I'm planning on sticking with Android phones, at least for a good while, I don't like how Apple bullies you into their software.

or you just download the music from itunes, because you can use the format for many other phones, not only apple stuff and you can even convert the music into mp3 with itunes itself

@cream soda maybe because he want the music legal and at the 320kbpsmost people dont even hear the sound difference, the 256kbps from itunes is enough for example

(edited a little so it doenst seem so mad/angry :D )

[dejet]

Say that if its a orchestra or something. Ya hip hop stuff is really hard to tell the rates but anything with real instruments it shows.

[Heslon]

Say that if its a orchestra or something. Ya hip hop stuff is really hard to tell the rates but anything with real instruments it shows.

yes thats right if you compare "free downloads" like youtube(lol) or w/e with bought music there is a big difference, i dont like hip hop so im talking about rock / metal songs.
but what I wanted to say is that bought music like itunes/amazon?/etc are mostly "good enough" sure I would think a CD sound is still a "little" better but do you really here the difference as a normal person, and is the difference that big that you really need it? downloads a mostly much cheaper then cd´s. I dont notice the difference between bought download music and cd´s but if you are one of these person then fine =)

and @OP like I already said, if you used itunes and you liked it then you can just keep using it because A, most phones suppport the itunes musicformat anyways or B, you could convert it with itunes itself to mp3 or w/e
and sry because of the post with illegal music etc but im from eu (also sry for my bad english) so maybe there are better download ways in usa and maybe its not illegal to download free music over there^^

[Cream Soda]

or you just download the music from itunes, because you can use the format for many other phones, not only apple stuff and you can even convert the music into mp3 with itunes itself

@cream soda maybe because he want the music legal and doenst want to steal it illegal (no idc how or where you download, if you dont pay for the music its still illegal) and lol at the 320kbps bs, people like to throw out numbers but most people dont even hear the sound difference, the 256kbps from itunes is enough for example

When you have an expensive pair of headphones and a couple hundred dollar amplifier, you can tell the diff. I can't turn 256 all the way up w/o distorting the sound.

If I didn't use the amp, you're 100% right, I can't tell the difference between the two. My point still stands. If you're paying for it, there's no reason for it to be dumbed down to 256

[Isiolia]

When you have an expensive pair of headphones and a couple hundred dollar amplifier, you can tell the diff. I can't turn 256 all the way up w/o distorting the sound.

If I didn't use the amp, you're 100% right, I can't tell the difference between the two. My point still stands. If you're paying for it, there's no reason for it to be dumbed down to 256

That sounds a lot less like an issue with sampling rate, and more with peak level. A poor bitrate would sound bad even at low volume. 256 shouldn't sound that off even then, from a good encoder anyway.

I agree with the principle, but that tends to lead to just buying the CDs and ripping them to whatever you want.

[Cream Soda]

Well, I see what you're saying. I can def tell a 192kbps right off the bat, for example, but with 256 vs 320, for me anyways, the sound has to be driven a bit or taken to a higher volume before the diff is noticeable. 256 is the lowest acceptable quality I take though. If it's lower than that, I either find another version of the song, or just do without.

[Isiolia]

You may also want to do a double-blind test or something. See if it's not, at least in part, psychological. IE, if you don't know you're listening to a 192kbps file, can you tell?

[Cream Soda]

Yea, I truly can. With the amplifier, it makes a really nasty sound It's not just a difference, it's a damn noticeable one. Playing out of my laptop speakers, definitely cannot tell the diff, but w/ my headphones/amp, it's literally unbearable.

I'll download some songs and just put them in the media player and hit play. Less than 3 seconds, I go "yea this is shit quality, need to download another version) and it's 192 or lower after I check.

These days, I mostly go on the assumption that any song I download will at minimum be 256, so I don't rly bother to even check unless it just sounds like regurgitated ass

[Cream Soda]

To confirm though, I have 2 albums one in 320 one in 192 (obviously just was too lazy to delete the 192) put them all in the same playlist and put it on shuffle. 100% accuracy on my guessing of 10 songs on whether they were 192 or 320

[Isiolia]

Shouldn't sound that bad. If it's a garbled mess you may have an issue other than the bitrate of the file. I've got MP3s from rips/downloads stretching back to before Napster. Low quality is noticeable, sure, but from decent headphones to shaking the house with my living room receiver/system, something like 192 is not unbearable. 128 or lower is noticeably bad, usually, but still listenable IMO.

[Cream Soda]

Well, like I said it's not as noticeable without the amp (still noticeable, but listenable. W/ the amp, I can't listen to it at all). It's like it makes good sounds and makes them sound better, but makes bad sounds and makes them worse, lol.

[rezn0r]

Shouldn't sound that bad. If it's a garbled mess you may have an issue other than the bitrate of the file. I've got MP3s from rips/downloads stretching back to before Napster. Low quality is noticeable, sure, but from decent headphones to shaking the house with my living room receiver/system, something like 192 is not unbearable. 128 or lower is noticeably bad, usually, but still listenable IMO.

your old school files don't happen to be Prodigy tracks do they... they were my first group downloaded, i had some shit ass tiny hard drive dedicated to .wavs of them right before .mp3s started to show up. memories! jericho & hyperspeed were two of my first songs, i probably still have that drive in a box somewhere haha.

[Kerberoz]

It's quite easy to tell the difference between <256 and >256, as long as you're not using shitty ipod earbuds outside in the wind, and haven't had any grenades go off near your head. Now, most of the extreme high-end stuff "audiophiles" swear by, like $3000 wires, is placebo bullshit, but mp3 vs lossless is nowhere near that level. Also it's fucking retarded to pay for lower quality than you can get for free.

[Isiolia]

your old school files don't happen to be Prodigy tracks do they... they were my first group downloaded, i had some shit ass tiny hard drive dedicated to .wavs of them right before .mp3s started to show up. memories! jericho & hyperspeed were two of my first songs, i probably still have that drive in a box somewhere haha.

Heh, a few maybe, but not much.

It's quite easy to tell the difference between <256 and >256, as long as you're not using shitty ipod earbuds outside in the wind, and haven't had any grenades go off near your head.

Telling the difference and having it be utterly unlistenable are two very different things. Especially since you're going to hear -plenty- of stuff at that compression level elsewhere - lotta game audio, streaming video, DVD audio if you consider it per-channel (5.1 or even 7.1 at 448kbps for DD), and so on.

[Kerberoz]

Telling the difference and having it be utterly unlistenable are two very different things.

...your point being?

[Isiolia]

...your point being?

Did you read Cream Soda's description of sub-256kbps files via his better audio gear?