Apple lossless official announcement

[Jhify]

Thanks for posting the logos. After many years away, I didn't know what to look for.

What is Apple Digital Master?

https://www.apple.com/itunes/docs/apple-digital-masters.pdf

Some requirements such as loudness and minimum dynamic range for exemple and specific encoding. Long story short, it doesn't mean anything for the listener, it's just a cool logo.

 

[DimitryZ]

https://www.apple.com/itunes/docs/apple-digital-masters.pdf

Some requirements such as loudness and minimum dynamic range for exemple and specific encoding. Long story short, it doesn't mean anything for the listener, it's just a cool logo.

Looks like spend some effort to optimize AAC and built some tools for that.

I will give my current favorite - Melody Gardot's Sunset in the Blue - an Apple spin.

 

[Jhify]

Looks like spend some effort to optimize AAC and built some tools for that.

I will give my current favorite - Melody Gardot's Sunset in the Blue - an Apple spin.

I'd be more inclined to think it is about the producer delivering a master optimised for apple's standards of loudness and DR. Recording label tend to do a "One for all" master to be cost effective and then streaming services adapt the file to their standard. If it's been specifically mastered for apple, then they just put the file online as is out the studio and it makes it "more exclusive" for the customer.

 

[DimitryZ]

I'd be more inclined to think it is about the producer delivering a master optimised for apple's standards of loudness and DR. Recording label tend to do a "One for all" master to be cost effective and then streaming services adapt the file to their standard. If it's been specifically mastered for apple, then they just put the file online as is out the studio and it makes it "more exclusive" for the customer.

It does sound very good. AAC is an excellent lossy codec.

I look forward to their new offerings!

 

[Jhify]

I'd be more inclined to think it is about the producer delivering a master optimised for apple's standards of loudness and DR. Recording label tend to do a "One for all" master to be cost effective and then streaming services adapt the file to their standard. If it's been specifically mastered for apple, then they just put the file online as is out the studio and it makes it "more exclusive" for the customer.

It does sound very good. AAC is an excellent lossy codec.

I look forward to their new offerings!

I totally agree. I was having a thought about what could be the marketing message for the average customer behind this logo.

Me too. If it's as good as expected Tidal will be dead to me.

 

[mSpot]

It does sound very good. AAC is an excellent lossy codec.

I wonder how it compares with the other lossy codec (MQA) when running at the same data rate.

 

[tmtomh]

I wonder how it compares with the other lossy codec (MQA) when running at the same data rate.

Is that even possible? I would think MQA's minimum data rate - undecoded 16/44.1k - is still significantly higher than AAC's commercially available maximum data rate (256k), yes?

 

[Jhify]

Is that even possible? I would think MQA's minimum data rate - undecoded 16/44.1k - is still significantly higher than AAC's commercially available maximum data rate (256k), yes?

It needs to be proven by MQA but no data has been given by the company yet. From what some users have investigated, MQA is lossy compare to 16/44.1 flac but still provide heavier files. https://audiophilestyle.com/blogs/e...-encoded-flac-vs-normal-optimized-hires-flac/

AAC has the advantage to save bandwidth and Flac has the advantage to be lossless whereas MQA has none of that from what I could find so far.

I've got no idea if MQA is subjectively better and all you can do is to trust their claims. Anyway redbook is plenty enough for casual listening is it worth paying more ? it's up to one's choice.

Although it did happen I found on tidal MQA tracks and whole albums that were not mastered or even mixed the same way as the redbook format. Even remember an album where the vocal recordings of the female singer where different and better recorded on the MQA version which could explain a preference. It was a weird find. I'll post it if I find it back.

 

[tmtomh]

It needs to be proven by MQA but no data has been given by the company yet. From what some users have investigated, MQA is lossy compare to 16/44.1 flac but still provide heavier files. https://audiophilestyle.com/blogs/e...-encoded-flac-vs-normal-optimized-hires-flac/

AAC has the advantage to save bandwidth and Flac has the advantage to be lossless whereas MQA has none of that from what I could find so far.

I've got no idea if MQA is subjectively better and all you can do is to trust their claims. Anyway redbook is plenty enough for casual listening is it worth paying more ? it's up to one's choice.

Although it did happen I found on tidal MQA tracks and whole albums that were not mastered or even mixed the same way as the redbook format. Even remember an album where the vocal recordings of the female singer where different and better recorded on the MQA version which could explain a preference. It was a weird find. I'll post it if I find it back.

Understood. And to be clear, I agree with you: there is no evidence that MQA sounds better than even 16/44.1k FLAC, which therefore would suggest that redbook FLAC is equally good sonically to MQA while taking up less file size/bandwidth (perhaps the same in some cases, but 16/44.1k FLAC would be smaller in most cases). Even 24/48k FLAC will be the same size or smaller in most cases than MQA.

RE AAC, I would guess that most (though not all) people could not distinguish it from lossless in a blind text, and of course its data rate will always be smaller than FLAC and MQA.

Finally, RE some MQA files apparently being from different sources or masterings than their FLAC/regular PCM counterparts, yes - there have been reports, and I believe at least some of them have been confirmed, that some MQA releases are based on new/unique masterings and therefore no apples-to-apples FLAC-MQA comparison can be made.

 

[DimitryZ]

I wonder how it compares with the other lossy codec (MQA) when running at the same data rate.

They are just very different animals. Also, MQA data rate is essentially that of a standard CD, so much higher than AAC.

But it's remarkable that AAC at 256 is as good as it is.

 

[mononoaware]

I would even prefer that Apple provides a PEQ with lots of bands that can be saved on the headphones themselves .

Santa is real. And what he can deliver must be realistic. . .

 

[Jhify]

Understood. And to be clear, I agree with you: there is no evidence that MQA sounds better than even 16/44.1k FLAC, which therefore would suggest that redbook FLAC is equally good sonically to MQA while taking up less file size/bandwidth (perhaps the same in some cases, but 16/44.1k FLAC would be smaller in most cases). Even 24/48k FLAC will be the same size or smaller in most cases than MQA.

RE AAC, I would guess that most (though not all) people could not distinguish it from lossless in a blind text, and of course its data rate will always be smaller than FLAC and MQA.

Finally, RE some MQA files apparently being from different sources or masterings than their FLAC/regular PCM counterparts, yes - there have been reports, and I believe at least some of them have been confirmed, that some MQA releases are based on new/unique masterings and therefore no apples-to-apples FLAC-MQA comparison can be made.

My two most revealing speakers are a pair of focal shapes and genelec's 8030c in a decent studio and honestly I can not tell appart 16 bits and 24 bits playback. There might be some freaks out there who can do that, I don't know, but I can not. 24 bits is essential for recording and producing though as you have more headroom to work with, so since you have the files why not selling them for a higher price. But to me MQA is just pointless has I don't consider hirez as useful for casual listening. It's actually a shame that Tidal, a plateform which was supposed to give a better share in revenue to the artists, adopted widely a format that is proprietary.

 

[mSpot]

Is that even possible? I would think MQA's minimum data rate - undecoded 16/44.1k - is still significantly higher than AAC's commercially available maximum data rate (256k), yes?

I don't know of anybody commercially encoding AAC audio at CD data rate, but the format is very flexible and capable of handling it. I'm just curious what kind of result you would get if you did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding​

AAC supports inclusion of 48 full-bandwidth (up to 96 kHz) audio channels in one stream plus 16 low frequency effects (LFE, limited to 120 Hz) channels, up to 16 "coupling" or dialog channels, and up to 16 data streams.​

​

 

[DimitryZ]

I don't know of anybody commercially encoding AAC audio at CD data rate, but the format is very flexible and capable of handling it. I'm just curious what kind of result you would get if you did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding​

AAC supports inclusion of 48 full-bandwidth (up to 96 kHz) audio channels in one stream plus 16 low frequency effects (LFE, limited to 120 Hz) channels, up to 16 "coupling" or dialog channels, and up to 16 data streams.​

​

Once it gets to 1/2 compression ratio, I don't think anyone could tell. It's already very good at 1/4.

But for those who insists on lossless, this would be a nonstarter.

 

[mSpot]

Dolby Atmos now available:
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-music-and-spatial-audio-what-you-need-to-know/
Did they say anything about it or lossless during today's WWDC keynote?

 

[sweetchaos]

Did they say anything about it or lossless during today's WWDC keynote?

Spatial Audio is not available yet, hopefully will be, today. Latest discussion: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apple-musics-new-spatial-audio-feature-launches-today.2299543/

 

[SKBubba]

So, the WWDC today appears to be a big nothingburger in terms of any news about hifi.

As suspected, Apple is just checking a box and aren't serious about it. Similar to Amazon.

Next up, Spotify. Not holding my breath for anything different.

Roon + Qobuz is still as of today the best solution.

 

[voodooless]

So, the WWDC today appears to be a big nothingburger in terms of any news about hifi.

As suspected, Apple is just checking a box and aren't serious about it. Similar to Amazon.

Why? Just because they did not talk about it during WWDC? Why would they? It was already announced. Just a few more days and we’ll see..

 

[BlackH20]

My two most revealing speakers are a pair of focal shapes and Genelec's 8030c in a decent studio and honestly I can not tell apart 16 bits and 24 bits playback. There might be some freaks out there who can do that, I don't know, but I can not. 24 bits is essential for recording and producing though as you have more headroom to work with, so since you have the files why not selling them for a higher price. But to me, MQA is just pointless as I don't consider hirez as useful for casual listening. It's actually a shame that Tidal, a platform that was supposed to give a better share in revenue to the artists, adopted widely a format that is proprietary.

Audio albums all the way back to the sixties are shaved, you can only get so much material on an album side, the same issue through almost every format for the last 60 years. Albums, depending on the artist or studio (who had "more power" at the time) usually made the call into how much was reduced from the Master tapes. A great number of reissues have been released if the artist retained the rights, or the label can make some profit from a remastered recording. I remember Kansas in the seventies, signed their initial and only contract which gave up all the rights to all their music to promotor Don Kirchner, but today, still say they made enough to retire comfortably for life and have no hard feelings and doubt they would have made it without him. Think I may be a tad miffed at that one, but the only instrument I play is my stereo.

 

[Zensō]

Collection of albums and playlists in Spatial Audio/Dolby Atmos and Lossless: https://music.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewMultiRoom?fcId=1561370672