9 216 Kbps Songs Download

[Kenneth]

Isthere still an option within iTunes, whilst syncing to another device, to "Convert higher bitrate songs to 128 kbps AAC"? I've read about it, and I'd like to try it to maybe squeeze more songs onto my iPhone when syncing from my Mac; a lot of my songs are about 10Mb each, and I think this would reduce some of them as they transfer. But I can't find the option / switch. Thanks....

Want to upgrade songs on iTunes Match that are less than 256 Kbps and don't know how to accomplish. I have checked various forums for answers, but everything I'm reading are responses from 2012, which is obviously out-of-date. None of the articles are current, thus if anyone knows how to upgrade songs on iTunes Match, I would greatly appreciate the assistance. PS- using "Help" on Apple hasn't provided any solutions or answers either. Thank you!

Check that a song you want to upgrade is marked as matched in the iCloud Status column. Right-click on it and click Remove Download from the context menu. Click the cloud icon that appears to download the 265k matched copy. I would recommend that you backup your library first, just in case the matched copy doesn't meet your expectations, e.g. you a clean version instead of an explicit version. Once you're happy with the process you can apply it to a batch of tracks rather than working one at a time.

I constructed a playlist in iTunes so it would fit on my iPod nano. I just synced that playlist on my iPod and the file size was about half of that on the computer. All the songs were converted from CD's to iTunes. After some research I found that all the CD's had been converted at 256 kbps but when I synced the iPod the converter bit rate was set at 128 kbps(default setting in iPod Summary Options) which explains why the resulting file size on my iPod was about half the file size of my iTunes playlist. OK. Got that. My question is how good is the resulting quality of the 128 kbps songs on my iPod? Probably not so much difference with ear buds but what about when I play through a higher quality in home sound system? Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.

This is something of a "how long is a piece of string" question ... one of the variables involved is the type of music you listen to: a reduced bitrate may have obviously detrimental effects - even on standard earbuds - when applied to recordings with a wide dynamic range, particularly classical or jazz. Contemporary popular music, or "remasters" of older recordings that suffer from the "loudness war" where recordings are compressed to sound as loud as possible may suffer less.

Having said that, across a reasonable wide range of music within my library I find that 256k AAC / 320k MP3 is acceptable across several different platforms: iPod with mid-range Sennheiser earbuds (not ridiculously expensive but considerably better than those supplied by Apple), PCs with desktop speakers, hi-fi system with Bluetooth audio adapter (though in the last case I'll still listen to CDs by preference). With a few exceptions I would normally be able to detect a lower bit rate recording (though without doing proper double-blind testing there's always an element of subjectivity). I certainly don't see any benefit to me of downsampling as I sync to an iPod (my default device is a 16GB nano 7G, so at 256k/320k I still get around 100 hours of music on there).

Also note that the "shrink-and-sync" capability creates compressed files for the iPod, but does not alter the original file that is in your library. If you change your mind, you can simply resync your iPod with that setting on 128, 192, 256, or turned off altogether.

I guess you are saying I might experience some loss especially with better quality ear buds or when playing on a better quality sound system via blue tooth. My intention was not to further compress the music from my iTunes playlist to get more on the iPod. It was an accident because the bit transfer was set at 128 kbps. I am wondering if I should go back and redo the whole process at 256 kbps.

Usually. The MP3 default is 128 kbps, however, a lot of the music available for download is lower than this. Unless you ripped the music yourself and chose a higher bit rate your MP3s will be 128 kbps or lower. iTunes music is lossless, so saving to AAC 128 will be a significant reduction in bandwidth, which may or may not be noticeable to the average user. Probably not noticeable to anyone unless you have $1,000 earphones or a high quality external speaker.

Higher bit rate songs are either Apple Lossless format or AAC 256kb/s usually. By converting them you compress their size at the expense of some quality. If you are only listening on cheap headphones there's not reason not to convert. After converting most songs will take up about 1/3 less space. The conversion (which is one time) will take several seconds per song, so if you have a lot of music it can take a long time.

Does it convert the songs without duplicating them first because my entire iTunes library,at least my music,consists of 1693 songs and has a file size of 8.34 GB,if i choose this option for my old 3rd generation iPod nano,which was my first Apple product,will it copy all of the songs to my iPod directly after converting them,leaving my iTunes Media folder unaffected or does it copy them to my iTunes Media folder first,i had duplicates everywhere and it was a pain to clean them out,i do not want duplicate items scattered everywhere

I need to know this too, although I'd assume it would just create a shadow copy at most, storing it locally only for use to transfer to the iOS device. I'd hate for it to create an actual copy to show up in the library, cluttering it all up.

iTunes is complaining about three tracks from an album I recently ripped every time I sync my phone. It claims they can't be converted (I rip as Apple Lossless). Unfortunately there's not much in the way of detailed information in the error messages iTunes is giving me.

Does iTunes maintain a parallel, down-sampled, library on disk when I check this option? Could I downsample my Apple Lossless files myself, save them in this parallel library, and stop iTunes from trying to do the conversion on sync? I took a look in my iTunes Media folder for a parallel library but couldn't find anything.

I had a similar problem with few of my tracks. The conversion is done live, while syncing. Basicly the problem is with the particular sound track, not the lossless codec (ALAC) itself. I used a third party utility to re-encode the original (keeping it to ALAC) and then iTunes managed to re-encode the track back to 128kBit AAC. Hope this helps.

I had two songs that did not work. One could be fixed by "remove download" and then pressing the cloud symbol and redownload the song. The other one is still problematic and me be it has to be recoded. I guess apple repaired one of the songs.

I downloaded HDtracks free ultimate down tracks, 24/96 FLAC. When I play them through my NAS and a USB thumb drive, my player shows 3072 kbps. I know that this is 16/96. I called the manufacturer and they said that FLAC has a variable bitrate and the kbps will vary based on the file size and other things. I think this is a load of crap but don't know how to prove it.

I'm sorry but I don't completely understand, if the recording is created 24/96, even if the FLAC is compressed, it is uncompressed at playback, why shouldn't it play back at 4608 kbps. Trying to test my system I thought that if I choose a file that HDtracks was using to show off their capabilities it would take full advantage of the 24/96 and play back at 4608.

1. Does my Marantz NA7004 truly have the capability to play 24/96. I am suspicious because it says that it only plays swav files which are 16/96. Also, isn't 3072kbps exactly 16/96, which is what I got playing the two HDtracks files I tested.

2. I am trying to test that the ethernet cable/ router interface I am using to pull the files from my NAS does not have a bottleneck which might limit the kbps. That is why I tested from the NAS and the USB thumb drive, with the same results.

Again, it depends on the compression. That's determining the number you're reading. It has nothing to do with whether you are getting the equivalent of the playback uncompressed. You are. That simply isn't the number you are seeing.

For heaven's sake: playback bit rate is NOT fix for FLAC and hence cannot have linear relation with bit depth and sample rate. 3072 is not weird at all, customer support was right and you were wrong in thinking it's all crap.

To turn it the other way around a little : tell me how big the chance would be that the 3072 (which *is* 16/96) is coincidentally the compressed rate ? (which would be at the low-compressed side in the mean time)

Does my Marantz NA7004 truly have the capability to play 24/96. I am suspicious because it says that it only plays swav files which are 16/96. Also, isn't 3072kbps exactly 16/96, which is what I got playing the two HDtracks files I tested.

3a8082e126