Many of the tech specs became irrelevant once everybody realized that digital media has no wow, flutter, etc.

But you have a really good point. Converting iTunes to something else is going to lower its quality.

The point that makes all the business models work, though, is that most people really don't care. I haven't gotten rid of my LPs and cassettes, but you know what, they sound like crap. Especially the cassettes. The LPs, well, I never had the best turntable, so after listening to scratchy music for 15 minutes and having it end because it's the end of the side and I have to flip it over, iTunes AAC don't seem too bad. Apple knows all this. Steve Jobs went on stage and used the word "audiophile" while describing the iPod Hi-Fi. Because he knows most people really don't care about quality or haven't heard what audiophile really means. They just want it to be loud. With more bass. Or cowbell.

Amen to this. My philosophy over the years has been to listen to components and speakers and buy the (best I could afford) OR (best for which the next model up produced no noticeable difference) whichever came first. Perhaps not surprisingly, the no noticeable difference criterion often ruled.

I really think that is the most sensible criterion. But I do notice a world of difference between 320 kbps and lower resolutions. And I think it is strange that there isn’t a larger choir of protests demanding better quality from download stores.

After all, the customer pays for it; so the customer should have some option in regards to the quality of the tracks they download. All it would cost Apple is a bit more bandwidth.

My apologies if I threw the discussion off on a tangent... :o

The points about effects of DMCA / DRM that are harmful and unintended (or to which the RIAA is simply indefferent) are fascinating, and some of them little discussed.

It was also an enlightening historical lesson to read the three-year-old Forum discussion.


With best regards,
ArcticStones

"But I do notice a world of difference between 320 kbps and lower resolutions. And I think it is strange that there isn’t a larger choir of protests demanding better quality from download stores."

I cholk that up to the average customer's ignorance. My mother, for instance, thinks that the Apple Store's 128Kb AAC is of the highest quality, despite what I've told her. Her logic: CDs are the digital and they are better than anything previous. DVDs are digital and they too are better than anything previous. ITMS is digital and came after CDs and DVDs so they much be better than anything previous. Incorrect, but certainly not "left field" for the the masses who use computers everyady but have yet to understand how they work.