difference between mastered for iTunes and previous versions?

If you have good audio equipment and good listening conditions (e.g. not on a moving subway train) you may well notice an improvement. But it is a personal thing. Feel free to buy a few tracks and do an A-B comparison, and see if the improvement is worth it to you.

To get a little more technical infromation about the "Mastered for iTunes" program, see this article:

http://www.apple.com/itunes/mastered-for-itunes/

Hi Kub,

You may have seen a reference to an audiophile technique called A-B-X testing, but that is more than you need.

I was just suggesting a simple listening comparison of the two versions of the same track. Listen to a section of the song in its current format, and then the same section in the Mastered for iTunes version. (There is only one trick to it, and that is to make sure you listen to both samples at the same actual volume level. Otherwise most people's ears will think the louder one has better quality.)

Do it for a couple of songs that you like, and formulate your judgment about how they compare. As you know, the upgrades to "Mastered For iTunes" are not free, so you can then decide whether going to the upgraded masters is worth it.

OK,

I have a practical question. I read the article and it sounds impressive.

Let's say I take a CD and import it at Apple Lossless. Will that file sound better when played on my iPod plugged into a high quality Denon pre-amp than a Mastered for iTunes download from the Apple Store?

How about if I need to burn a copy, will there be a difference between the imported Lossless file and the Mastered For iTunes files?

I believe the imported Apple Lossless file is rated at 850-1,000 kilobits. What does the Mastered For iTunes file measure?

thanks

I believe the imported Apple Lossless file is rated at 850-1,000 kilobits. What does the Mastered For iTunes file measure?

256 kb/s.

As you may be familiar from 80s-vintage CDs versus newer remastered CD versions of the same album, the mastering can make a big difference, and is independent of the encoding.

For a few bucks, you can avail yourself of a few Mastered for iTunes tracks, and do an A-B comparison, as did Kub@k!3. if you do so, the community would be very interested in your findings.

I just might give that a shot.

I have noticed that some of the vintage CDs that get remastered have changed the pitch of the vocals and other instruments so much that they only resemble the original recordings that you heard on the radio. This tends to affect earlier recordings, late 60s psychedelic and garage.

One of the inexpensive compilation downloads I purchased on iTunes was terrible, I'd much rather listen to the original mix of " I had too much to dream last night" than the remaster, which destroyed the song completely.

I guess I'm suspicious of iTunes files in general. I am a dying breed, using separate amps and pre-amps and real speakers as well as Ultimate Ear earbuds and a great car system. The cuts that are engineered for iTunes are mixed for lo-fidelity appliances and just don't sound that good.

One of the inexpensive compilation downloads I purchased on iTunes was terrible, I'd much rather listen to the original mix of " I had too much to dream last night" than the remaster, which destroyed the song completely.

Well, there is really no way to improve on the sound of The Electric Prunes coming over an AM transistor radio!

I guess I'm suspicious of iTunes files in general. I am a dying breed, using separate amps and pre-amps and real speakers as well as Ultimate Ear earbuds and a great car system. The cuts that are engineered for iTunes are mixed for lo-fidelity appliances and just don't sound that good.

There are online download stores that cater to a more audiophile crowd. Check out HD Tracks.

Kub, That is good to know, thanks.

Enjoy some good music in 2013!

Ed