Apple Music -- Dispelling Quality Myths

Folks were pretty quick to pick up on (and berate Apple for) their choice to stream at 256kbps, as opposed to oufits like Spotify, Rdio, and Google Play Music (all of which stream at a higher 320kbps). But there's more to it than the numbers (kind of like a 2.4ghz Pentium 4 would get roasted by a modern i5 with a lower clock). Mashable explains:

AAC is a codec — a standardized format for digitally encoding and decoding music in a compressed format, similar to MP3. However, AAC was created specifically to retain better audio quality than MP3 at the same bit rates (i.e. to do more with less), and almost all listening tests confirm that it does so. So format matters just as much as bit rate.

Audiophiles will smirk at 256kbps and Spotify and other competitors will no doubt advertise their higher bit rates as reasons why their services are better than Apple Music, but most people simply can't hear the difference between 256kbps and 320kbps, even with the same format.

As I wrote in my review for Neil Young's PonoPlayer, most regular music listeners either don't know what to listen for when comparing high-quality audio with low-quality audio, or use headphones that simply aren't good enough to render the subtle differences accurately.

So if you're really a true audiophile, the only service good enough to push sound through your golden cochleas is Tidal's extra expensive service. Meanwhile, the 99% will enjoy Apple's choice to balance sound quality with streaming bit rate.

@musicalmac

This didn't dispel anything. Simply put, if you use poor hardware (earPods, Beats by Dre, Bose), the average person will not tell the difference. 256 AAC and 320 MP3 have always been rivals, so you haven't stated anything new. Considering your obsession with things that are on the market at this very second, Apple's 256 bit rate will not always be available depending on your connection. Currently there is no option to manually adjust the stream quality (although that option is said to be coming with iOS 9).

Tidal ($19.99/month) and Deezer ($9.99/month with 1 year subscription) both offer lossless. When used with better hardware, they will offer a difference. Of course people are also likely to use these services with speaker setups in their homes or cars as well, generally places with better audio hardware.

IMO, yes 256KB ACC is better than 320KB MP3. But in the end, FLAC is a whole lot better and Audiophiles will never stream their music compared to actual Vinyl records.

So, for the 1% people that want to pay a premium (or up-front) for lossless audio, and who play it on high-end audiophile hardware, one will notice a difference. Right, that's what I said.

But it sounds like you don't agree with me. What exactly is the point?

Side bar: Being obsessed with what is currently available and refusing to acknowledge things that are not yet available as though they hold an advantage in the market are two very separate things. Surly you're capable of discerning between them.

The title of the thread is "dispelling quality myths". No quality myth was dispelled. Do you not see the problem?

Fact of the matter is, Apple Music is not always streaming at full bit rate, nor is there currently an option to force it to do so (like the competition already has). It also doesn't offer lossless support which can be appreciated on better hardware that's not exclusive to audiophiles (just not crap like earPods, Beats by Dre, and Bose).

The myth is that because Apple Music streams in 256kbps that it is lower quality than Spotify or Google Music because those are streamed in 320kbps. That's just not true, as we've examined above.

Nobody is arguing that the sound quality bests services that provide lossless audio.

Using Spotify, I never used 320. Always kept it at 256. I did not know that Apple Music used AAC, nor did I not know that 256 AAC is better than 320 MP3. So this entire time I've actually been enjoying better quality sound at 256 AAC, which brings me to Musical Macs point: I had no idea there was even a difference between 256 AAC and 256 MP3. I am in no way an audiophile, but I consider myself a stickler when it comes to quality settings. If I could not discern any difference, I'm pretty sure 99% of the average consumer population not only would not be able to tell the difference, but would also could care less.

@musicalmacMyth for who? I feel like we've stepped back to the days of iTunes.

@FireEmblem_Man: always good hearing from my biggest fan