Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
What I think about Apple Music Hi-Res lossless and I have the data to back it up
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 лип 2021
- I tested Apple Music's Hi-Res lossless audio and I am here to share what I feel about it. And I have the test data to back it up.
If you found my work useful and would like to support it, please visit my Patreon link to contribute to my coffee fund! : / peterpee . Now, only if you really find value! Even if you don’t contribute, I am happy to share my experience with all you viewers on my channel here!
This is the best video about hi-res audio on UA-cam. Thank you for taking such a sober minded approach to this. I’ve maintained from the beginning that the fact that Apple products can’t decode hi-res lossless natively is a major non-issue. The average consumer really isn’t interested in going through the inconvenience (as you so accurately described it) of buying additional equipment for a benefit they will almost certainly not perceive. So it makes sense that Apple’s products max out at standard lossless (24/48) because for that, the average consumer has to do buy nothing-maybe just a DAC like the Lightning to 3.5mm jack that so many have lying around cos they came in the box with older iPhones. The people who care about hi-res lossless already have the equipment to listen to it. I love what you said: let them worry about the sound, let us enjoy the music. Thank you for this video.
The first 3.5 mm adapter. was well at 16 bit
Depending on what music we are talking about, is it pop on the top list or are we talking about real things like Pink Floyd or maybe classical music or jazz, these are completely different things.
That said, the Lightning to 3.5mm dongle is a great little DAC!
I compare hi-res music to organic groceries. I can't always Taste the difference, but I'm pretty sure it's better for me.
Hey, that's a great way of looking at it! I like that!
Yeah.. why not? If your equipment already able to support that life style.. why not? Don’t tell me you think $1mil is too much for you? Someone gave you $1mil, you said nah.. $10 is good.. bread is as good as lobster, they filled my stomach?
It’s definitely better for me, all these days I was wondering why my songs sounded low quality even tho I had really good headphones and after doing some re search I realized that I had to change the Audio quality from “High quality” to “Hi-Res lossless”
Man after this, music sounds exponentially better
The difference is massive for me
Yeah, you do have good ears for that. I personally struggle with the higher frequencies so I don't get much out of it.
I love this channel. He does his homework. It’s just real and authentic.
Thanks Olando. Almost all the videos I make, I try to answer a question that I have for myself too. So I am just sharing what I found out. Am glad that you find this useful too.
Peter it’s your mic limitation. What you are seeing is just DT990 Pro + mic profile thats why you are seeing the same graph. But, I do agree that 16/44.1 is good enough. But Bluetooth at AAC 256 is far from 16/44.1, one of the highest AptX HD could only go to 586kbps… half of 1000 ish kbps required for CD quality of 16/44.1. But for convenient, Bluetooth is great.. hopefully Sonos would come out with a WiFI headphone to overcome Bluetooth narrow bandwidth to at least support 1000 kbps for CD quality
Yeah, it did occur to me too but there are slight differences. It could also well be that the difference is due to the small environmental sounds that seeps into the recording somehow. But the point is, like the mic (and the headphones), my ears will also have limitations. I believe that limitation is replicated or mimicked through the setup too.
@@PeterPee I just did an experiment, you could download Audacity, open a 192khz track. Convert the same track to mp3 320kbps 44.1khz. Invert the 320kbps, play the mixed song. Now you are cancelling off the same frequencies by doing that. The result, I could hear clearly what is missing, high head, the singer singing voices quite loud…. It means what’s missing from Hi-Res is actually audible and obvious…
@@shukhor3010 It's audible on its own which is you totally missing the point of lossy compression since that will throw out data that's masked by other data & therefore unlikely to be heard by the average human being. Other parts of the audio can also be reconstructed from the encoded data.
You've really only proven with your trick that there's data thrown out by a lossy encoder which is exactly the purpose of the format.
Next time maybe listen to both encoded songs, do a blind abx test & prepare to have your mind blown by a modern lossy codec like OPUS (MP3 is ancient history unless you really need it for your ancient media playback devices) 😆
@@MLWJ1993 lossy is lossy… you dropped a penny means you dropped a penny.. doesn’t mean you can pretend to have an extra penny in Your pocket. You gonna to use that penny or not, it’s a different story.. but you must admit that you dropped that penny to begin with. If you accepted that you dropped that penny, and you think that it is ok. Then it’s fine… but when you need that penny, just that penny you’ve lost to be able the buy that bread with cream. but couldn’t and have to settle for just bread without cream. than that’s too bad.. some people have better equipment or ear to notice that lossy codec, you couldn’t that’s all.. nothing wrong with lossy codec. It’s just lossy no matter what you do with it..
@@shukhor3010 The question isn't if it's a penny you left at home (you always keep lossless backups from lossy encodes, otherwise you'd be a fool).
It's about how much room leaving that penny at home has been saved while still giving that feeling off a richly filled wallet.
A lossy codec isn't about providing pristine quality audio. It's about throwing out data people aren't likely to perceive to give you a smaller filesize without there being a obvious degradation. Stating that there's data lost is stating the obvious.
If you want to argue that's really bad for audio quality because you can hear the data that's thrown out on its own. Provide blind abx text results to back up the claims that it's indeed very bad... I say you won't do so up front, by that extend you really have nothing to claim about lossy audio quality.
Well put. I can hear the lossless difference in percussion, cymbals, guitar string attack, etc. These things will not show up in a frequency response because they have more to do with phase accuracy of the waveform. But you are right that the mainstream does not notice this. Still, it’s nice to have the lossless (and sometimes hi-res) option for critical listening!
Yes, my testing is more of a blunt instrument. The true test is still our own ears. I want to believe there is a difference too. But I have to say that it is not the day and night difference that we want to hear.
If you can, listen to Down Under by Men At Work, the drumming and cymbols through hi res headphones are crazy!
@@kevanmcnay3079 for me in France, this song is lossless only, no Hires
buying a dac can also enhance the sound from your CD player 🙂 or your computer or mobile phone. There are people and even audio reviewers who are negative about audio through Bluetooth
And they’re right!
Wireless audio has its uses, but soundquality ain't one of those. That's simply the reality of Bluetooth audio. Especially already lossy audio being transcoded into the used Bluetooth codec can end up pretty bad.
when showing a diagram, you should also show diagrams of the dynamics and the noise floor. and a large magnification of the sound wave
And the scaling.
Then the question was, do you have Hi-res headphones, ie headphones that can reproduce frequencies higher than 20 KHZ. . then hi-res is about being able to reproduce weaker sound details gives a larger sound image and let sound a little more analog. and to give an example better contour of the acoustic drum as ex. then it depends on the recording as well. those who record jazz and classical music are probably more careful with the sound quality than those who record synth and pop music. synth machines are probably not in HI-res?
I have hi res kz pros and apple ear buds, bearing in mind I'm using Amazon HD music, there is a difference, not massive but noticble, however the difference between HD and standard is Massive, anyone getting HD or lossless for free using normal headphones will be delighted...
I may have missed it but what resolution were those waveforms recorded at. I wonder if that also lost any additional data being played.
It doesn't matter as you wouldn't hear those frequencies anyway BUT, you will hear the harmonics from these frequencies
Brilliant analysis and conclusion. I enjoyed very much... and agree 100%.
I love this video. I will say this though, the quality difference that you get from improving from Spotify to either lossless Tidal or Apple Music, is more noticeable than what you get from going from lossless to high res-lossless. Also I recently tried Dolby Atmos audio and it was fun for a few minutes but not a game changer for me.
Yeah. The Atmos version of things was intriguing for a while. But it changes the sound so much and the soundstage becomes completely different. If it’s about it accuracy, I don’t even know which is the intended soundstage.
@@PeterPee Atmos is in the early days ... not mastered usually and only mastered with analog by me. Try the new music from Cordae (From a Birds Eye View), Post Malone's new record, and Lizzo. Also The Greatest Showman Soundtrack, or 21pilots VESSEL. That's the best Atmos/Spatial audio. Better than stereo.
You are right except for DSD format, notably when the recording has been made nativly in DSD.
Try to listen on speakers a SACD with native DSD : this is night and day witha CD : the sound is execpetionnal, airy, wonderfull. Try it!
SACD was the Best sound I’ve ever heard and nothing I e heard since compares to it. I don’t have my player anymore and have downsized but I miss it for sure
Thanks for the tip! And I can agree with you. The master needs to be recorded with the end goal in mind. The master copy is everything. Shitty recording at the source doesn't exploit the lossless and hires container.
Chris, it is surely something that has gone down the history books. I think you need to equipment that is capable of resolving it. And I definitely feel that the format is not as convenient. We live in a streaming world today.
I listened to a few Michael Jackson songs in Hi Res and was blown away by the difference, and it was only 24/48. I’m thinking some songs don’t have as much difference than the low res version.
Yes. It all depends on the mastering at the point of recording. If they didn’t record it at a high enough resolution right at the start, they’re not going to be able to add details at the encoding stage.
I am not able to play the same via my shanling q1. Audio isn't coming around tho it says it's playin
One of your best videos so far! Thanks for sharing. It like the idea of Apple Lossless High-Res and I turned it on. But to be honest, I cannot hear the difference 🤷🏻♂️
Glad you enjoyed it! I am just sharing my opinions and I am sure it will drive a wedge somewhere in the general population. But really, to each their own and if there are those who can tell the difference, then I would encourage them to enjoy the difference whilst their hearing (or $) allows it.
Why didn't u try iphone 12 charging cable. Lightning to type c. I think no need connector
When I tried Hi-Res for the first time I though may be I need expensive headphones to experience it. LOL. This video helps with the FOMO. :)
My hearing is not that great these days. I struggle to hear any difference between Apples lossy and lossless. They do such a good job of their lossy codec that there’s not much difference. Convenience is important so just go with lossy for general listening. The quality of the actual recording makes a far BIGGER difference in my opinion.
Most honest video I’ve ever seen
Both hi-res and vinyl records can have a better sound mix than a standard CD. and it probably has to do with the attitude of the record companies. they assume that those who buy hi-res or vinyl record expect high quality and good dynamics. and anyone who buys hi-res or a vinyl record is not expected to hear the music on a cheap boombox or a cheap compact stereo
That's a good point that you are making.
I owned the Norah Jones, CD, Hi-Res 24/192. I can see the waveform is different for CD and Hi-Res. The CD flac rip.. looks somewhat missing some part of the song. Clipping was also observed on the CD. I’m not sure it is the ripping process or what. Due to the clipping effect on the CD, the hi-res sounded more mallow, the double bass goes real deep and percussion sound very real. At the most, I can see with my eyes the waveform is different.
When I connect my JSAUX lightning to headphone dongle to my XS Max, it shows high res lossless when playing Hotel California and other songs tagged hi res lossless. The specs for the dac chip state that it will support 24/192.
Thanks Pete, I was wondering if I should upgrade my Play 1 speaker’s to support the newer high res streaming services. Unlike your other videos, this time you’ve saved me money. My wallet thanks you 🤣 Can’t wait for your review of the Ikea picture frame speaker, finally I might be able to get surround sound - subject to your review
Ha! Great to hear that I am sometimes this angel too! Not always the devil. I am waiting eagerly for the Symfonisk picture frame too.
Hi-rez can not conjure with your speakers if your speakers have a flat light image and poor resolution, so high-resolution resolution in the audio file itself can not affect it. if, on the other hand, you can hear the weakest musical instruments even when you have really low volume then it can be good. the problem is also that today's pop has poor dynamics. on the other hand, albums can have a better sound mix in HI-res, ie they increase the dynamics in the sound mix
I hope you have two because otherwise you do not have stereo sound
I think the big thing that made sacd popular was that it was multi channel that actually sounded good. Dolby atmos has been hit and miss for me but mostly miss I do like lossless audio a lot better than lossy but I do agree that hi res can be a little overboard for mainstream. That being said I do think iTunes should sell lossless at cd quality at the least it just sounds so much cleaner and the file size isn’t that big as well when in glad or ALAC.
I too find Atmos a bit of a hit and miss.
Finally someone that speaks with honesty, no matter what
I expect the audiophiles to hurl insults about your hearing and your gear if you can't hear the differences that they do. Of course, none of them will submit themselves to a double blind test to prove they're really hearing what they think they are.
Funny, but Amir at ASR has several videos where he's able to reliably discern the differences beyond statistical chance. But he's doing A/B loops in music segments where he's knows the codec's limitations lurk. For me, that's not something I'm willing to pay extra for. I'm content with 256 kbps UA-cam Premium, though I wouldn't mind native support for extra audio channels.
Daniel, for Amir, I agree with you that he has been trained to spot the differences. I dare say that most people can't. And the equipment necessary to resolve the difference is probably out of reach for a lot of people too.
Ok this is just my experience. Did hear a massive difference. Use Apple music on Android. I am connecting by Sennheiser HD 590SE directly to my Asus rog 3. What I felt is lossless is really evident in songs mastered with high dynamic range. But nowadays they just try to be loud. I also have Sony xm4 but that does not do justice at all.
I haven’t tried high-res as I have only access to up to 24 bit 48khz through the wired headphone and the usb-c to mini jacks adapter and I am not sure how much it’s the quality of the headphones or the quality of the music files that influences my listening experience I only know I am listening to Mor music than before buying the wired headphones
You are totally right about hearing music. There is no difference yes but you are missing the fundamental nature of sound. Hearing is a physical interaction the body has to sound. You need to look at the feeling your ears have to sound. Hifi sound even though you can hear parts of it you still feel them in your ears. Your ear has nerve bundles that feel the frequencies. It's the tingle you feel. Ex. Sonic weapons are able to effect your body even though you cant hear them.
One reason to go for more bit-rich files is that when you listen to bluetooth you get a second compression of audio(if you have a lossy file) and that can hurt the experience. Having a lossles original file gives you a better experience over BT. Thats why Apple did this IMO.
That’s a good point.
As a musician, let me tell you the reason why the quality is the same is because most of us don't record in 192khz.. typical recordings will be in 24 bit 44khz or 48khz
I'm on the same boat Pete. But just curious, a high res or even standard res lossless would sound more lively and generally better if we ran them through big speakers. I guess this high res stuff will only be real beneficial if we were to run big, high end speakers that are able reproduce frequencies more accurately. What do you think? Plus I think there's more to it than just accuracy, maybe soundstage and stuff?
Yes, I agree that any changes in the chain of signal will of course impact the sound. My setup for testing is simple and for the bigger setup which are more revealing, you might need the higher res. But that's not what must people are listening to Apple Music with. To me, I think a lot of streaming music users are mobile.
I think the DAC makes a difference. I streamed Tidal through Dragonfly Black to my pre-amp, and compared to playing the CD on my CD player (which btw is 25yrs old) and my CD player still sounded better. This is on my QUAD 66/67/606 pre-amp/CD/poweramp and KEF LS50 speakers in my study. Both me and my 19 yr old daughter could hear a clear difference. My CD player still sounded more open and airy and had a better sound stage. You could hear the difference without turning the light off, closing your eyes and total silence in the house. Even my wife could hear the difference and that says a lot. She does not care as long as the music is to her taste.
So my next test will be Apple. If Apple is the same as Tidal (I don't have a DAC which handles MQA), I will move over to Apple by the end of the year. I already have Apple Music subscription.
Yes, I am sure every component in your chain of music reproduction makes a difference. If the listener can hear the difference then it's all great and if it matters to you, then you should by all means use that solution. I hope Apple Music does it for you. It is, afterall, a very convenient solution.
Yes. You are Right! I agree with you. Very Good Video, Thanks very much.
Would have really appreciated if you could have shown frequency response for hi res lossless (not from) and streamed music (from Apple) just to show If Apple Music hi res lossless isn’t at par with industry standard.
Thank You!!! 😃😃😃
Say, this is great! Well done Peter.
I found apple music to be too warm/bassy( like it lacked some air frequencies). Can you do this test with apple lossless Vs tidal lossless?
I wonder if the transmission/encoding/decoding over Bluetooth degrades the quality and if having a higher resolution source can help reduce the loss less into the hearable range.
Yes, it does. And it depends on the codec that is being used too.
Thank Pete. Nice video. Can you get lossless audio through my Sonos set up. I think I remember seeing a video you did on that. What would I have to do?
Yes I can. I used the Apple TV 4K. That's the only way you can get lossless through to the Sonos setup. Apple TV 4K > TV > Sonos Beam/Arc..
The ending was bang on! Awesome Peter 🤣😅👍
You do not have to buy expensive equipment. For example, you can buy a Sony Walkman and plug it into your amplifier. for Apple's hi-res also comes to Android
Great take on hi res music, really enjoying your point of view in all of your videos. You should try the SVS 3000 micro sub and compare it to the Sonos sub, I think you will enjoy it .
Oh that! I am actually very very tempted to look at the SVS SB3000 micro. It's such a cute little sub! And I love everything that SVS comes up with...
Hi Peter, just like to say watched all your vids and you ended up making me make my final decision to buy Sonos five for my dedicated room filling/house party system and my god it’s good! I’m a apple user, So does this lossless/hi res make any difference and a external system?
I would say you should just enjoy the Sonos Five at the moment with the convenience of Sonos S2 or Airplay. The external DAC to me is too much of an inconvenience and it detracts from the wireless experience.
Hmmm I wonder that the difference is that I’m hearing then with my AirPod Pros
One unclear issue in your test is the original mix of the music you used. Just because some song off of the hotel California album is put into a 24/192 container does not tell us anything about how well that song was originally miked, mixed and mastered. Given the age of that album it almost certainly was not recorded at 24/192 (the 24 bit sampling is relevant when recording, 192 is probably overkill) Additionally, what was the LUF (compression) of the original master? If it used a LUF of 7 or 8 which is typical of popular music then your measurements mean nothing because the mastering at LUF 8 is so compressed that any subtlety is lost. If they used a LUF of 18 (Apple is capable of streaming LUF 18) then you might well see some difference in your graph. I admit that the differences, if any, of well recorded music streaming in high res is only minimally different from AAC at 256 AND you need to be focused on the music and not multitasking AND you need fairly expensive equipment to boot. For most people for popular music, probably pointless but if you listen to well recorded live music (try the album Jazz at the Pawnshop) you will hear some subtle improvements in low level detail, fast transients like the sound of drum sticks on cymbals and the overtones of instruments and other subtleties which together improve the sense of a live performance.
Thanks Peter! Are you able to do a high-res comparison for sportify, tidal and apple on sonos speakers? will there be a significant difference?
Spotify doesn't have hi-res now I believe. And I am not subscribed to Tidal. To say the least, I had all of them at one point in time and I didn't find the difference to be resolvable on Sonos product line...
hello peter nice video! can we listen to (downloaded) losless not high res losless through 3rd party bluetooth earphones?
Yes, you can do that. Apple Music client will play it and you can stream it to any connected Bluetooth speaker.
i already have some of apple friends swear that apple music hires audio sounds a lot better than spotify on their airpods
so yeah apple marketing is topnotch
Or their Spotify handling is bottom of the barrel (I.e. intentionally gimping the competition, it wouldn't be the first time that happened with products).
Hi Peter,
I think it should be possible to stream you're music from Apple music to you're Fiio M6 Via Airplay. After Connect you're Sony wh400mx1000 to youre Fiio M6, and normal you should be able to Hear at least with Ldac file :)
Great video Peter! I think the only breakthrough will be if the rumoured Bluetooth codec with CD quality bandwidth is released or if the Airpods Max (or rumoured Sonos headphones) are firmware updated to stream in CD quality or higher over wifi instead of Bluetooth. Apparently the hardware is capable, just hasn’t been enable in software.
Fingers crossed! I hope too that Bluetooth will improve in some meaningful way. Wireless Audiophile probably only started to mean something within the last couple of years. 15 years ago, if you ask me to listen to music on wireless stuff, it was just heavily compressed and very bad. Convenience was there, and I am just glad that they are tackling the quality after they sorted out the convenience.
@@PeterPee totally agree 👍🏼 I’m sure your channel will help push the movement 😉
Can you try reviewing dual Devialet golds? I’ve heard them and they are mind blowing
Hi Pete, I generally enjoy your videos but was a little shocked when you described the 192kHz in Hi-Res audio as frequency response instead of sampling rate? Maybe I got it wrong but you started to talk about frequencies we can hear which is usually in reference to the response range.
Hi Dave, I am clear that sampling rate is not equals to frequency response. I might have miscommunicated that as you are the second to make this comment. To clarify, a 192KHz sampling rate will be able to encode up to 96KHz frequency response range. But no, sampling rate is not equals to frequency response.
The problem with your reasoning is that you analyzed a 45-year old song that was not originally recorded in high-res. Upsampling is not the same and will never produce the same results. So the results are biased by the song you chose and cannot be used to a generalization on high-res audio quality. Also jazz and classical have higher dynamic ranges than rock. I would like to see you do the same analysis with a jazz or classical track originally recorded at 24/192.
Cool observation and rightly justified. The original recording is the limitation. It's just a song that I am very familiar with.
On the recommendation of testing on a modern recording, I will say this. The master copy is EVERYTHING. In fact, if the master recording is good, even the non hi-res version sounds great!
True, I once try to up sample my CD to 24 flac. I notice there actually no different in file size nor the and changes to the waveform. This is because of the source limitation.
awesome vid! very informative
Glad it helped!
Thanks, thank you for this topic, but you are forgetting the main thing: what is decisive is the quality of your DAC. I have a mojo chord and it changes a lot of things. Furthermore, your test protocol is irrelevant because your analysis is based, if I have understood correctly, on the recordings that you made with a microphone placed between your headphones and your ears. you add a digital processing which deteriorates the signal; moreover your recordings are made in what format? because what is the relevance of recording audio broadcast in 24bits in 16 bit format. I'm not English so I may not understand your words; but I have to say that using: a Chord Mojo DAC and a Grado GS1000e headset changes everything. it all depends on your hardware.
Hi, a question here. I connect my iPhone using [Lightning > headphone jack] dongle then [headphone jack > headphone jack] cable to my DAC. Will that hold me at 48khz? Since the dongle only supports up to 48khz.
Yes, that will be limited to the resolution of the dongle, which you have rightly pointed out that it is 48KHz.
@@PeterPee Yoo thanks ya!
next phones should have dac built im
Great video!
Thank you for this objective video. You reduced my FOMO about Hi-Res. Actually, after all my experiments with Lossless, I reverted to my Sony XM3-iPhone (with Lossless downloads) setup. It sounds just fantastic. Absolutely convenient.
You are losing out on LDAC if you use XM3 with iPhone. I lost all taste for my XM3 after I heard Hifiman Sundara as well as Blon BL03 with a balanced cable connected to a Hiby R3 Pro Saber DAP.
@@Hari-kx2er Good point. I do have a Galaxy S8+, with LDAC enabled in developer options. Surprising as it may seem, iPhone delivered a richer sound than the S8+ over LDAC. The allure of XM3 and iPhone is that they are "Free" as of now. Any other hardware would need signficant research effort and money. But as you have rightly mentioned, any wired setup would be far better.
@@dayanand1190 Interesting. I have tried my XM3 with both Oneplus7pro (LDAC enabled) and iPad Pro 2017. For me both were quite similar despite iPad Pro lacking LDAC. However, I did not find iPad better.
@@dayanand1190 Hiby R3 Pro Saber + Blon BL03 + BQEYZ 2.5mm balanced cable costs less than a brand new Sony wh1000xm3 / wh1000xm4
@@Hari-kx2er Thank you for this critical input! Off to headphonezone.in :-). Did you include a DAC as well?
Can you give me the specific brand USB Dac to connect to my iphoneX? I have a iphoneX & Apple Music how can I lesson to Apple Music in hi-res lossless without using ime & headphones?
Try Audioquest Dragonfly
There are plenty and the Audioquest Dragonfly as suggested by Edwin is an excellent choice.
Fiio btr5. Better than dragonfly and so versatile it'll make your head spin.
new content style is also great
Thank you! But specifically for this video I accidentally applied a filter and that over exposed the image. I will be careful next time!
LDAC Bluetooth codec developed by Sony supports up to 32 bit and 96 khz and streams up to 990kbps note Android not iPhone. Apple uses AAC that is up to 320 KBs
LDAC stuck in Sony eco and Sony don’t produce high quality headphones on par with Hifiman, beyerdynamic and Sennheiser to be able to pickup the 990kbps benefits
@@shukhor3010 strange because some radio studios use Sony headphones. But then it's with cable
It's a theoretical spec though. It really only works like that in places with no interference whatsoever & requires flipping a switch in Android (It's off by default since it usually drops out audio at that setting). So realistically you don't actually get more than what APTx/samsung scalable would already provide in terms of bitrate due to interference from other wireless signals.
I do like Apple Music, as a student it's cheap for me at just $5 a month and I get Apple TV for free, BUT, the Apple Music app just sucks on android. There is NO app on Windows yet that can even offer lossless. The music suggestion algorithm sucks in my opinion. Thinking about just going back to Spotify and pray HiFi comes out within the next few months.
Oh yes, the music suggestion doesn't give me what I want most of the time. That I agree with you!
Power Amp plays back in FLAC, MP4 etc well worth 2.99
Do not forget Apple music also has Dolby Atmos. It should work with air pods and Beats. with a special ship
Do i need a hi-res wired headphones/earphones to hear hi res lossless?
Yes, you need and external DAC.
@@PeterPee yes I know that i need an external DAC in order to get the hi res lossless out of my device, but what about the headphones? Do i need a headphones/earphones that has a "hi-res" badge on its box?
Thank you for this! You sold me on stopping my Apple Music Subscription!
great video
Your mics and headphones and even your dac is probably too big a bottle neck to look over. What clued me on to this is your lossy to lossless step you should at least be able to see the effects of AAC's psycoaustic assumptions. Though this could also even be down to the graph since the grap doesn't display temporal effects or tambre chances
I agree that my graph is pretty blunt and single dimensional. It does ignore quite a few things as it just picks up the frequency. A white noise test tone would show up to be better than any of these songs, for example. But what I am trying to show is just the difference between the different encoding for the same song. Take it as relative comparison rather than an absolute test.
The CD is affected by loudness war. especially those produced in the big record companies who want hits that can sell many copies
my phone outputs 384KHZ 32BIT 1764 SAMPLE RATE 🔥🔥🔥👌👌👌
Wow
i'm kinda agree with u on this, but in order to really hear the difference, we need a better equipment for tht which might drain ur pocket. N the percentage of people out there tht willing to pay for that is very minimal.
I think that summarizes my views very well.
Apple already warned that you hardly can hear the difference…Dolby atmos …now that might be a game changer in the coming years
I am testing Dolby Atmos. In fact, I tested Dolby Atmos even earlier but I got all confused by it. The sound stage is different. And after a while, I can't figure out if the Atmos sound stage is the correct one or the original stereo is the correct one. It messes with you that way.
@@PeterPee Is there a way to get the Dolby Atmos in your car vehicle CarPlay? Is there some sort of device that I would have to purchase to decode that in the car?
If you listen to a good masterd hi-res lossless track you can hear diffrence. Every instrument clear and the soundstage is so much better. It’s like you could hear a pin drop. Listen to Joni Mitchell and you will notice.
Apple warned you that tidal and amazon music and anticipating Spotify to charge you with hires audio for $19.99 is just a bullshit marketing so there they dropped the $9.99 no need to raise price lossless audio access then amazon made an about face before controversy and spotify need to retreat the lossless business model launch this year and rethink lol... tidal is nowhere to go as they parade the lossless from day 1 now he is like a homeless guy
Hey Pete! What DAC are you using? If possible, could you provide the link?
Yeah, I am using an old player which is no longer around. There is a replacement model here: amzn.to/2V1nLha. It is updated and currently available for a great price. In fact, cheaper than when I bought mine!
3:50 Is that a Keycron Q1???
That's a GMMK Pro (Ice White).
I might be totally wrong here, but how are you even comparing the 'frequency of the sound' with the 'frequency of sampling', which are completely 2 different things?
The frequency of sound is talking about the sound wave itself right? Different types of sounds have different frequencies and we cannot hear beyond the 20kHz range, like utrasonic sources for instance.
Whereas, the frequency of sampling is simply talking about how many snapshots of the analog sound was made in a second. In real life, this is infinity as we are hearing what happens during every single instant of time.
1Hz means one sample was taken in a second, which will be very choppy.
This is analogous to the framerates in videos. Like 60Hz, 120Hz, etc., which are simply talking about the frames per second.
While there will be a sampling frequency limit beyond which we will not be able to notice the difference, comparing the frequency of the sound wave with the sampling frequency is completely wrong!
You are absolutely right. And to clarify, I am not comparing the sampling frequency with the frequency of the sound. The charts that I pulled up are of the frequency of the sound. The sampling frequency though, will determine the maximum frequency which it can capture. So for a CD, as an example, at 44.1KHz, will be able to capture up to 22,050Hz in terms of sound frequency.
I say mini disc is better.
Hmmm, I forgot about the mini-disc! Yes, that's one wonderful re-writable format.
Are there those who believe? THAT you get higher hi-res quality on a device that is not connected to WiFi and that has no wifi reception or WIFi antenna. Radio interference inside a computer also considers deteriorating sound quality
This hobby is like any other hobby. There will be supporters and there will be detractors. And those who are not in the hobby are wondering what we are doing for any small amounts of gains. It is evident that radio interference is generated in a computer and it messes with the audio quality. But not everyone hears is. And modern stuff are pretty well shielded.
At the extremes, opinions will always be split and there will be differing views from different camps. Case in point, a $500 USB cable to an external dac makes your music sound better???
I’ll stick with my air pod pros.
Most people over 18 can't hear anything above 17KHz. 🙄
I should do a test that lets you guys test your hearing.
"In good conscience"
Your methodology is incorrect. Your microphones are not up to the task that you are trying to accomplish. Also, the only experiment worth doing is whether you can hear an actual difference. And if you can’t hear the difference between lossy, lossless and especially 24-bit vs 16-bit you either are limited by your headphones or you’re not that picky. Either one is absolutely fine but I hear a tremendous difference between 16 vs 24 bit. Also, if the album was recorded at a higher bitrate (96 or 192 khz), depending on the skill and method used by the recording engineer, there will be a difference even at 16-bit 44.1Khz and it will be more pronounced at higher quality. A good album to try is Nine Inch Nails’ “Head like a hole (remastered)” vs the original 1990 recording.
Hey, thanks for the tip and sharing this. I will listen out to your recommendation. Yes, the mic could be limited, and my ears could also be limited (with age too).
Minimum for me is spotify's high quality stream. Below that, I'll pass. But I'm still open for lossless streams, of course.
listen to a real CD. Spotify today is probably still only 320 kbs
Sony is also one truly company
You r 100% right brother
There are those who believe that a downloaded hi-res sounds better than streamed hi-res music, especially if the music has passed through the public internet. of course you will not be able to stream native DSD or hi-res in WAV or AIFF for a long time and definitely not DXD en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_eXtreme_Definition
This may be because of buffering on slow internet, e.g UA-cam blurring sometimes, when bandwidth not enough, the player play at a lower rate to keep the music going. My setup is on my LAN and the song was stored on a SSD network drive. Since I am running a gigabit network, it is more then enough to play any Hi-Res song
@@shukhor3010 There are various theories as to what may be the cause
I am not sure if music tracks are dynamically variable bit rate. I know songs can be recorded at a variable bit rate, so that the quieter and less dynamic portions of the track takes less to encode. But to have it dynamically adjust on the fly based on the bandwidth availability is something that I am not sure about.
Try vinyl 😬
And apparently Vinyle has the means to resolve up to 50KHz!
@@PeterPee try another graph
From lossy formats to high res or CD makes a huge difference. The music sounds more airy and my ears don't hurt that much. Using dsp to enhance the music does not make sense as they try to extenuate frequency to make the sound look like high res. I would prefer CD or high res to lossy formats. I disagree it's a gimmick. As good speakers really show the difference. Personal experience.
A totally facile analysis
Sometime, that 1% precent difference can massively change the experience
You have err lost me Bluetooth can’t transmit lossless and the xm4 which I own in terms of its drivers and acoustics if you can’t tell the difference between that and say another even bt headphone or LDAC compared to AAC then oh dear. Even LDAC on the XM4 sound better than sbc or aac but again u really can’t hear a difference with a wired headphone with just lossless even???
I believe the difference to be very small with lossless and even hi-res lossless. I am not saying that there is no difference. There is but it is so small that it starts to detract from enjoyment of the music. One starts to listen out to the technicalities of the song and recording but if that's what you are looking for then it's still all good. This is a hobby and I respect all angles. There will be people who are in love with the music, and then there are people like you and me who are in love with the electronics and technicalities.
@@PeterPee this I don't find, often for instance I have been listening over bluetooth and thought this dosent sound right 0, bass is muted and mids are unpleasant y grainy, when I have checked it's because it's an aac not ldac connection for instance, both lossy. Now LDAC compared to higher res wired I admit depending on how well the bluetooth is handled can be very similar to lossless. the issue then is that the better headphines don't have native bluetooth and apple only go as high as AAC. So I tend to use a pocket amp dac and an android phone, or low end DAP like the hibby r2 for less than 100 bucks that support LDAC. When at rest I use wired as I may as well get the extra resolution etc it gives. Anything over CD quality I agree is starting to be pointless or diminished returns
Hai I’m Ashok india lossless not coming india sir
About an hour after you posted your comment, they started to roll it out in India!
9to5mac.com/2021/07/19/apple-music-in-india-now-rolling-out-lossless-and-spatial-audio-support/
I always got the vibe that apple is really confident in their AAC codec and didnt really endorse listening to lossless.
Well, they have now jumped on the lossless bandwagon. I think it's great that they are not charging extra for it so in a way, they are still sending out the same message, if you get what I mean.
F
くさんありますありがとうございます」、
Ah so🤡
Another guy that has no clue what he is talking about.