Q: iTunes 10.6 released, lists Match improvements

I'm gonna wait before getting Match until they fix these issues with albums not fully matching and especially the explicit/clean... that's a real let down!

Same for me too, Explicit/Clean still messed up, but he album art seems to be sorted, if I change it in itunes now it filters through when i play the track on my iPhone. Happy about that at least!

I just laugh a little because while you guys are trying to get more songs to match, I'm sitting here wishing I could get some songs not to match and just upload.

I listen to film scores mostly and buy a lot of albums from La La Land Records, Film Score Monthly and Intrada that are expanded and remastered.  Problem I have is that iTunes Match will match some tracks to the original non-remastered album in iTunes.  There is a noticeable quality difference and I didn't pay good money for the albums to have iTunes Match force me to listen to an inferior version.  Just very frustrating and if there isn't some kind of "force upload" option by October, I may not renew my subscription.

RollTide1017 wrote:

 

I just laugh a little because while you guys are trying to get more songs to match, I'm sitting here wishing I could get some songs not to match and just upload.

 

I listen to film scores mostly and buy a lot of albums from La La Land Records, Film Score Monthly and Intrada that are expanded and remastered.  Problem I have is that iTunes Match will match some tracks to the original non-remastered album in iTunes.  There is a noticeable quality difference and I didn't pay good money for the albums to have iTunes Match force me to listen to an inferior version.  Just very frustrating and if there isn't some kind of "force upload" option by October, I may not renew my subscription.

That does sound frustrating, however iTunes Match doesn't alter your original files.  As mentioned earlier, I ripped all of my Beatles library at 320kbps.  Even though most of those tracks are matched, the files on my computer are not altered in any way and continue to be high(er) quality than iTunes Match's standard/maximum 256kpbs files. 

Of course when you listen to an iTunes Match track on another computer or iDevice it will always be a 256kpbs file.

So the quality of your original files should be as good as they ever were.  The only situation where that could change would be if an original track were deleted (without deleting it from iCloud) and then downloaded to your computer directly from iTunes Match.  That would deliver a 256kpbs file which could be inferior to your original file.

Maybe I missed something?

richsadams wrote:

Of course when you listen to an iTunes Match track on another computer or iDevice it will always be a 256kpbs file.

RIght. That is exactly what RollTide is complaining about. He wants his original track to be "uploaded" instead of "matched" so he hears exactly what he wants to hear.

Michael Allbritton wrote:

 

richsadams wrote:

Of course when you listen to an iTunes Match track on another computer or iDevice it will always be a 256kpbs file.

RIght. That is exactly what RollTide is complaining about. He wants his original track to be "uploaded" instead of "matched" so he hears exactly what he wants to hear.

Ah, understood, and that would be nice but iTunes Match has always been a 256kpbs file system.  They've never indicated that larger files could be up or downloaded.  Presumably that's to reduce storage but more importantly bandwidth when files are downloaded.  Otherwise it could get pretty ugly depending on one's download speeds, particularly for folks using an iDevice via 3G (or I guess 4G LTE with the new iPad).  I guess some folks could bump up against their monthly data plans if a lot of larger files were downloaded too.

I use my Apple TV2 to listen to music on my home theater system.  Depending on the situation I have used both iTunes Match as well as streaming directly from my iMac.  iTunes Match quality is quite good but if I really want to listen to über HQ audio, I can still switch to iTunes, or 'gasp' play a CD. 

All of that said, basically, if you want true CD quality (which uses compressed bit-rates from the original analog or digital masters) from the files on your  music server, you must use WAV or AIF encoding or FLAC, ALC, or WMA Lossless. Both MP3 and AAC introduce fairly large changes in the measured spectra, even at the highest rate of 320kbps. There seems little point in spending large sums of money on superbly specified audio equipment if you are going to play sonically compromised, lossy-compressed music on it.

The bottom line with regard to what level of compression you're willing to accept (if any) when listening to your music is a personal choice of course...all ears are not created equal, nor is all music.  How and where you listen to music and on what equipment also needs to be factored in.

So I agree that it would be nice to have higher quality files uploaded -- and distributed to other devices, but that's probably not going to happen with iTunes Match. 

I haven't used it, but I understand that Google Music does allow for 320kbps files to be uploaded and will stream them at 320kbps as well.  Again, I don't know all of the in's and out's of Google Music and I'm not sure if that would address RollTide's needs but that's another option.

It isn't just a quality issue, it's about having the correct versions available.

I use match as a way of keeping my libraries in sync between different computers and devices. At the moment, if I listen on my Air or my phone then there is a chance that I won't get the version of a song that I should. Listening to albums can be jolting when the transitions are wrong, or the volume changes.

I can live with that at the moment, but I agree with RollTide that, whilst many people want improved matching, for many of us consistency is the key. This consistency is probably only achievable with forced uploading.

I do understand, by the way, that other services are upload only so would solve that, but I want to stick with match, which integrates so well with my setup. I'm willing to live with the deficiencies because of that, but hat doesn't stop me wanting it to be better.

Mike Connelly wrote:

 

richsadams wrote:

 

Ah, understood, and that would be nice but iTunes Match has always been a 256kpbs file system.

 

Match uploads 320 files.

Really?  I have not seen any indication that iTunes Match uploads 320kbps files.  In my experiments it certainly doesn't download 320kps files, only 256kbps.  Links? 

Yes it does.

KeithJenner wrote:

 

It isn't just a quality issue, it's about having the correct versions available.

 

I use match as a way of keeping my libraries in sync between different computers and devices. At the moment, if I listen on my Air or my phone then there is a chance that I won't get the version of a song that I should. Listening to albums can be jolting when the transitions are wrong, or the volume changes.

 

I can live with that at the moment, but I agree with RollTide that, whilst many people want improved matching, for many of us consistency is the key. This consistency is probably only achievable with forced uploading.

 

I do understand, by the way, that other services are upload only so would solve that, but I want to stick with match, which integrates so well with my setup. I'm willing to live with the deficiencies because of that, but hat doesn't stop me wanting it to be better.

Agreed...all that makes perfect sense.  Having the original/uploaded track rather than a "matched" track would certainly be best.  Again, however, I don't think Apple envisioned iTunes Match doing that...where in their minds "match" means matching what they have been given from the recording companies. 

We all know that there are a lot of variations of the exact same track in the wild.  Over the years I've even seen re-issues of the exact same album including tracks that are slightly different, even if only in timing, by a second or two. 

Ultimately Apple is at the mercy of the recording companies with respect to what they'll have on their servers. They certainly do need to iron out the explicit/non-explicit versions though.

I guess other music services like Google Music which require you to upload everything would be the answer for folks that want an exact copy of their original material available.  I'd be happy if iTunes Match went that direction, but I don't think that's going to be their business model.

KeithJenner wrote:

 

Yes it does.

Again, source?  TIA.

This is what I could find on Apple's site regarding this...

About file formats and iTunes Match

• Songs encoded as MP3 or AAC that have been matched to the iTunes Store will be made available for download as 256 kbps as AAC from iCloud.
• Songs encoded as MP3 or AAC that cannot be matched to the iTunes Store will be uploaded as is. These songs will be made available for download in the same format it was uploaded in.
• Songs encoded as MP3 or AAC that do not meet certain quality criteria will not be matched or uploaded to iCloud.
• Songs encoded as ALAC, WAV, or AIFF, will be transcoded in iTunes to 256 kbps AAC when uploaded to iCloud.
• Song files over 200 MB will not be uploaded to iCloud.
• Matched songs in your local library will not automatically be transcoded to 256 kbps AAC. To obtain a higher quality transcoding, download the matched songs from iCloud.

It's still not clear to me about the 320kbps Vs 256kbps difference, but it does sound like it's possible so I stand corrected if that's the case.

Of course that doesn't address the higher-quality download issue for RollTide, but good to know.

Have to run now, but it's an interesting discussion.  I'll check back later today.

Cheers!

richsadams wrote:

 

KeithJenner wrote:

 

Yes it does.

 

Again, source?  TIA.

My iTunes library

KeithJenner wrote:

 

My iTunes library

Same for me. I have 320 Kbps MP3 files in my library that were uploaded because they were not matched.