1 2 3 Previous Next 43 Replies Latest reply: Mar 10, 2012 9:03 AM by richsadams Go to original post
  • 30. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    RollTide1017 Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    I'm not worried about a higher bit rate quality download, but a better "sounding" quality because the track I have was remastered.

     

    I'll give an example, I just bought the remastered complete score album for "The Great Train Robbery" from Intrada.  The new album sounds great for a score from 1979.  I ripped the CD at 320kbps mp3 and iTunes Match uploaded every song except one, track 27 "Departure", this track was matched.  Problem is that when played back on my AppleTV, iPhone or work PC, the matched track is obviously one from a very old album and doesn't sound as good as the same track in my iTunes Library on my home computer (the original file).

     

    It's pretty much the same issue as the explicit/non-explicit problem but mine is just a newly remstered/old non-remasterd version problem.  Also like the people who have original mono versions of some songs but they get matched to a newer stereo version.  It's not about getting higher bit rate version from the system but getting your music in the cloud.  I just want my music in the cloud, right now it is mostly my music and some of what Apple thinks is my music.

     

    If the album I mentioned above was in the iTunes Store and every track was matched, I wouldn't have a problem with that.  I'm not trying to upload my entire collection, I just want the option to upload songs that Apple thinks it matched correctly but didn't quite get right.  There system may think that a 30 year version is the same as a remastered version released last year but, it's not.  I'd even be willing to pay an addition $10-$15 a year for the ability to force an upload on some tracks.

  • 31. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    OWN3D Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    This stinks, another new release and still no fix for explicit tracks being swapped for clean versions. 

  • 32. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    roebeet Level 2 Level 2 (430 points)

    Same - 320kps MP3's have been uploaded for me, if not matched.    As for a "force upload" option, I've been asking for that since December.   Would be very nice to have.

     

    Honestly, the only way Apple is going to keep me a subscriber past November is going to be if they actually deploy this rumored "adaptive streaming" technology, and if it ends up being HD-AAC (which supports lossless) and if that can be downloaded and re-transcoded to something like FLAC.  THAT would be amazing.  But that remains to be seen.

     

    In the meantime Apple, please fix my explicit songs!  

  • 33. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    richsadams Level 1 Level 1 (70 points)

    Okay, I think I have my head wrapped this now.  I also have thousands tracks that I ripped at 320kbps in my iTunes library; listed as both matched and unmatched. 

     

    However if an original 320kbps track which was matched is deleted and then downloaded from iTunes Match again, the downloaded file will NOT be 320kbps, it will be 256kbps...the maximum iTunes Match offers.  That's where my confusion came in so I had to confirm it for myself.

     

    This first graphic shows the 2009 Mono Remaster of the Beatles Magical Mystery Tour in my iTunes Library...all tracks, matched and unmatched, are listed at 320kbps.

     

    MMTour 1.jpg

     

    I then deleted the entire album from my library but NOT from iCloud.  The tracks that were previously listed as "Matched" instantly changed to 256kbps and the tracks listed as "Uploaded" remained at 320kbps.

     

    MMTour 2.jpg

     

     

    So I stand corrected about the upload bit rate, it can indeed be 320kbps.  Thanks for setting me straight on that...you learn something every day.

     

    I also confirmed that all tracks downloaded to another computer or an iDevice that were origanlly not matched and uploaded at 320kbps will download at 320kbps...but that "Matched" tracks will download at 256kbps even though the "original" track was ripped at 320kbps...hence the call for a "forced upload".

     

    I get it now.  Phew!

     

    Cheers!

  • 34. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    KeithJenner Level 4 Level 4 (1,020 points)

    roebeet wrote:

     

    Honestly, the only way Apple is going to keep me a subscriber past November is going to be if they actually deploy this rumored "adaptive streaming" technology, and if it ends up being HD-AAC (which supports lossless) and if that can be downloaded and re-transcoded to something like FLAC.  THAT would be amazing.  But that remains to be seen.

    I think that's possible, but in order to secure all you subscribers in the US isn't required for another six months. There's plenty of time for it to arrive.

  • 35. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    richsadams Level 1 Level 1 (70 points)

    RollTide1017 wrote:

     

    I'm not worried about a higher bit rate quality download, but a better "sounding" quality because the track I have was remastered.

     

    I'll give an example, <snip>

     

    Got it...and agreed.  By the example in my post above I can see how a "mixed" album of matched and unmatched tracks, could easily come out sounding less than optimal. 

     

    If they won't allow us to "force" an upload (which I doubt will happen) they should at least allow us to upload an entire album IF all of the tracks are not matched.  That way the sound quality would at least be consistent.

     

    Perhaps some more feedback might get through...

     

    http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html

  • 36. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    KeithJenner Level 4 Level 4 (1,020 points)

    richsadams wrote:

     

    So I stand corrected about the upload bit rate, it can indeed be 320kbps.  Thanks for setting me straight on that...you learn something every day.

     

    I also confirmed that all tracks downloaded to another computer or an iDevice that were origanlly not matched and uploaded at 320kbps will download at 320kbps...but that "Matched" tracks will download at 256kbps even though the "original" track was ripped at 320kbps...hence the call for a "forced upload".

     

    I get it now.  Phew!

     

    Cheers!

    You nearly got it, until the last bit.

     

    If isn't the bitrate that is really bothering us, but the fact that the songs are matched to the wrong versions. I want forced uploads so that an album streams through without the transitions sounding odd and the volume changing.

     

    If I understand RollTide, he wants forced upload so he can listen to the remasters he paid good money for rather than an old version.

     

    The bitrate is secondary to that.

     

    Edit: You just beat me to it.

  • 37. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    roebeet Level 2 Level 2 (430 points)

    KeithJenner wrote:

     

    I think that's possible, but in order to secure all you subscribers

    in the US isn't required for another six months. There's plenty of time

    for it to arrive.

     

    Agreed.  Even if Apple ends up being sneaky and rolls it out JUST before November, I'll probably bite. 

  • 38. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    KeithJenner Level 4 Level 4 (1,020 points)

    roebeet wrote:

     

    Agreed.  Even if Apple ends up being sneaky and rolls it out JUST before November, I'll probably bite. 

    I suppose as we're so predictable we can hardly blame them for taking advantage.

  • 39. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    richsadams Level 1 Level 1 (70 points)

    KeithJenner wrote:

     

    richsadams wrote:

     

    So I stand corrected about the upload bit rate, it can indeed be 320kbps.  Thanks for setting me straight on that...you learn something every day.

     

    I also confirmed that all tracks downloaded to another computer or an iDevice that were origanlly not matched and uploaded at 320kbps will download at 320kbps...but that "Matched" tracks will download at 256kbps even though the "original" track was ripped at 320kbps...hence the call for a "forced upload".

     

    I get it now.  Phew!

     

    Cheers!

    You nearly got it, until the last bit.

     

    If isn't the bitrate that is really bothering us, but the fact that the songs are matched to the wrong versions. I want forced uploads so that an album streams through without the transitions sounding odd and the volume changing.

     

    If I understand RollTide, he wants forced upload so he can listen to the remasters he paid good money for rather than an old version.

     

    The bitrate is secondary to that.

     

    Edit: You just beat me to it.

     

    Yep, that makes sense...or doesn't, but that's how it is at least for now.  This mismatching issue could cost Apple some customers if they don't change their ways no doubt.

     

    I can see folks that are interested in a consistent listening experience (not a mix of "Matched" and "Uploaded" tracks), or others like RollTide who want to hear the music that they actually purchased -- on another computer or device, leaving iTunes Match.

     

    I really enjoy the fact that my iTunes library is available on all of my computers and devices and think it's well worth $2/month...but I may consider a better listening experience elsewhere if someone else offers something as simple to use and Apple doesn't resolve this.

  • 40. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    KeithJenner Level 4 Level 4 (1,020 points)

    For me it is more than worth the £2 a month. However, 90%+ of my listening is done on my main library, and I have actually experienced relatively few problems yet. For me it is mainly a way of making sure that I have music available if I need it when either I haven't got my iPod or the song I want isn't on my iPod.

     

    I know a lot of people want to rely on this for all their music listening away from home. In fact, I'd like to take the iPod out of my music listening, but I can't at the moment. One reaon is battery life, but the other is the mismatches.

     

    We will get there eventually I'm sure. I'm willing to work with it at the moment, but I imagine that Apple have some work to do to keep others onboard at the moment.

  • 41. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    Beyo Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    For me after 10.6 and ios5.1 upgrade I cannot listen on my iphone itunes library...it is not shared completely I see grey circle to 50% and then stopped and in the result I dont see any songs..

  • 42. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    nwfsmith Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    To test the improved matching, I've deleted. re-imported and rematched a couple of albums worth - albums where some tracks had matched and others uploaded the first time round.

     

    Result:

    • nothing that uploaded first time was matched with 10.6
    • four or five tracks that had matched last time, didn't match this time

     

    So, lesson learnt - only attempt to rematch things that uploaded last time.  Still waiting to see the improvement.

  • 43. Re: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements
    richsadams Level 1 Level 1 (70 points)

    Beyo wrote:

     

    For me after 10.6 and ios5.1 upgrade I cannot listen on my iphone itunes library...it is not shared completely I see grey circle to 50% and then stopped and in the result I dont see any songs..

     

    See my reply to your other posts here:

     

    https://discussions.apple.com/message/17817222#17817222

1 2 3 Previous Next