Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Apple Music Launch


samy316

Recommended Posts

How are people liking the new Apple Music Streaming Service?  This debuted yesterday morning, and I'm liking the feature already.  Beats 1 Radio is interesting, but its too bad that they play censored music

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it. Can't get enough of the new Pharrell track.

I pay for Spotify right now. Hopefully Apple will supplant Spotify for my music needs. Like that AM mixes both elements of Pandora as well as Spotify.

I like listening to album music so Apple's selection is second to none. No Beatles on AM but the good news is I already have all of the Beatles on my phone and AM integrates seamlessly with what music I already have.

I like the "for you" section although I feel like it doesn't give me a broad range of music to choose from. The radio stations are cool but I haven't really done anything extensive with them at all.

Spotify has a great indie section. I listen to the indie pop channel on Spotify regularly and I think it'll be hard to match that type of channel on AM and their indie music station is fairly jumbled at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The part I really like is a can save music to the music I already have and when I hit shuffle it shuffles with both Apple Music and my music. That pretty much sold me.

 

Not coming off as an Apple hater (have a Macbook and iPad) but Google Play Music has had this for quite some time now.

 

I can't get into the streaming music business. Free Pandora works just fine for me. To me, it sucks because of not having unlimited data anymore. Streaming music for a few hours a day would destroy data. Otherwise, I think I would do it since it's cheaper than SiriusXM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want something that works better than Pandora (which works fine but has commercials) and Spotify (which works fine but I have to pay for) combined.

I don't need to buy albums any more. I don't need to buy CDs or tapes or records. It's all there, and more than I could ever ask for. I don't even have to download it... and it sounds just as good!

This is my mentality. If Apple can do that and put a shiny little bow, then great.

One thing that I liked yesterday on the "for you" section... They suggested a playlist of Eminem tracks that were produced by Dr Dre. That was pretty deep right there. Right now, it suggested Outkast from the 2000's. Not only do they suggest stuff, but it's certain aspects of that artist.

Very cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just used it because of this thread...

 

They have a nice plethora of Christian Rap on here already. A lot of them have been pushing iTunes hard. So much so, a lot have actually visited Apple over the last year or two. So I'm guessing, they're going to be represented heavily on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not coming off as an Apple hater (have a Macbook and iPad) but Google Play Music has had this for quite some time now.

 

I can't get into the streaming music business. Free Pandora works just fine for me. To me, it sucks because of not having unlimited data anymore. Streaming music for a few hours a day would destroy data. Otherwise, I think I would do it since it's cheaper than SiriusXM.

get tmobile 4 free streamin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

If you  have high quality playback gear, think higher resolution audio files sound better to you vs 256 AAC (Apple) or 320 MP3 (Spotify/Google) codecs, and are willing to consider paying a premium for such---$20 a month instead of $8-10---check out Tidal. They offer a comparably extensive library in most instances, but  featuring "CD-Quality" (1411 kbps)  streaming.

 

 

If your budget further allows it ($120 per year or $500 life), for an "ultimate" music service, Roon Labs is very impressive in its curator (content suggestions/matches) capabilities and music knowledge base (former creators of Soloos for Meridian) and will be incorporating some of the most advanced playback and DSP software (i.e. HQPlayer) available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ps I fixed my problem.

I think Tidal's idea is great but I have a few issues just in my own perspective...

#1. I love convenience. Apple Music makes stream as convenient as it possibly could be. It even integrates all of the music I have on my iPhone into it (The Beatles anyone?).

#2. I like new and ingenious ways to discover music. Apple Music's "for you" tab is pretty nice. Also, they have all of iTunes rankings in every category, so you can see not only what is hot in all music but what is hot in hip hop, alternative, dance, indie and whatever else independently. That much puts it way over Spotify to me.

#3. I fancy myself and audiophile but most of the times I'm listening is over Bluetooth either to headphones or to my car. Even if I plugged an auxiliary cable into my phone and listened to hard wired headphones or hard wired to my car I don't think I'd realize the purest sound that a high bit rate format would offer. I think, to truly appreciate a program like Tidal or better, you really need a hard wired non-wifi internet connection and an optical or hdmi cable connection from your PC to your receiver that can put out some serious sound. In short, I don't think that my listening habits necessitate a high bit rate audio file.

That's why I'll be sticking to Apple Music as long as it doesn't piss me off too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you have hypersensitive hearing I seriously doubt you will hear the difference between a 128kbps compressed audio format and CD-quality audio.  I know there have been A/B/X studies in controlled environments and trained listeners can't tell the difference.  This is probably even more true given that newer recordings have way less dynamic range than older recordings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice the "richness" of the sound. I'll admit that Spotify may sound a hair better then Apple Music. Playing a CD in my car is a noticeable difference in sound quality.

It isn't a listenability comparison. Apple Music is far from unlistenable, but there is a marked difference between a CD playing in my car and my iPhone playing via Bluetooth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you have hypersensitive hearing I seriously doubt you will hear the difference between a 128kbps compressed audio format and CD-quality audio.  I know there have been A/B/X studies in controlled environments and trained listeners can't tell the difference.  This is probably even more true given that newer recordings have way less dynamic range than older recordings.

  

 

That's why I almost held to my rule and didn't even post the comment abut Tidal (which I don't use)--because inevitably someone makes a post like this.

 

Not aimed at you, balik, but one reason there are some topics i'm very expert in that I don't post on is because of the internet-exacerbated phenomenon of people reading enough to allow them to believe they know enough to opine (making statements about the topic as opposed to asking questions) on a complicated matter.

 

But even adding this much generally leads to "more of the same", so understand that I'm not saying anything you posted is "wrong" or "stupid", just very limited as stated within the scope of the subject (btw, even most of the diehard "can't hear the diff" crowd has bumped that 128 mp3 standard to the 256 AAC codec as to where "transparency to the source recording" starts and ends for the "average joe"). And DR (dynamic range) and the "loudness wars" are just one aspect of fidelity. But meaning no offense, i'm also done here.  :P

 

BTW, audio websites (logically enough) are just like any other special interest websites (like ES etc)---full of all the same "kinds of stuff" in argument behaviors that you see right here---and there are even subdivisions within the audio sites (just as with other topics).

 

Spring, the aptx codec is a good one for Bluetooth audio, and more and more work is being done with it in home and mobile sound.

 

i'll close with listening to music should be an enjoyable thing---stick with gear you enjoy when you're evaluating it and can afford. Even when it was my profession I'd tell folks "you can enjoy a good song out of your kitchen radio or an elaborate system, or you may hear an elaborate system and wonder why the guy bothered."

 

There is good cheap stuff and bad cheap stuff. There is worthy expensive stuff and expensive stuff that is a rip-off. There is a whole "world" of both objective and subjective criteria involved in making such judgments.

 

And then there's each individual's perceptions of value to them.There is science involved in recording/reproduction, but we're still learning a lot, too--especially about our hearing and brain auditory processing. Go with what works for you.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...