Liste des Groupes | Revenir à col advocacy |
Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:I subscribe to a few people on Locals, one person on YouTube and YouTube Premium. I don't watch TV the way that I used to, and my subscription to that is becoming increasingly useless. I'll watch Canadian football during the summer and professional wrestling, but that's about it. My wife insists on Netflix and Amazon Prime though.
On 2024-05-24 11:32 a.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:I have plenty of subscriptions already. Everybody wants a cut.Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:>
>On 2024-05-24 8:30 a.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:>Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:>
>On 2024-05-24 3:00 a.m., RonB wrote:>On 2024-05-24, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
<brevsnip>
>>>Probably because some people think that Apple Music also requires Apple>
hardware. Even without Apple hardware, the sound quality is superior as
is the selection.
You would have better ears than I have to tell the difference.
The ears are one thing, but even if you only know about the
specifications, you would know that what Spotify offers can't compete.
Apple's lossy codec is the best there is, so a song encoded at 256kbps
using it will sound magnificent no matter what kind of speakers you use.
If that is not sufficient for you, it also offers lossless at no extra
charge. Meanwhile, the default for Spotify is AAC at 128kbps, using an
inferior codec that is probably the one offered by Nero. High quality
there is 256kbps, more or less on par with what Apple Music offers at
the low end but, again, with a worse encoder. There is no lossless option.
But is the "loss" noticeable to human ears?
It is. There is an additional punch to the Apple AAC encoder that is
lacking in Nero's. Nero's does a good job, but it isn't as good. It's
better than MP3 though.
>And if so, does it matter? I enjoy a tune the same whether I listen to it>
through earbuds, $15 logitech speakers, whether in quiet or a bit of
background noise. Most of musical information is low frequency (under 5 kHz),
though the harmonics increase that up to maybe 16 kHz.
For people who aren't audiophiles, there isn't a difference in audio
quality, but they will likely notice the greater selection from Apple. I
also think that Apple has an excellent interface, with YouTube's being
the absolute worst.
I stopped listening to YouTube while walking. Sick of commerials in the middle
of a 10-minute tune. Also the slightest accidental touch of the phone screen
can stop the playback.
>
Switched to SomaFM... their Secret Agent channel has some good walkin' tunes.
YouTube Music doesn't have commercials if you pay for it. It also
removes ads from YouTube itself, making for a much more pleasant viewing
experience there too.
I do have a USB-to-Lightning dongle. Might try a thumb drive of my tunes on
it. I copied them all to my Android tablet and can use that... except it's too
clumsy to carry when walking.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.