Be funny, just on topic. Believe me, I'm pretty sure the moment this thread starts being about people complaining about the very concept of Mastered for iTunes is the moment this thread becomes nearly only people complaining about the very concept, and that would be a shame and contrary to the thread's purpose. You can see where many of us don't want that to happen, I hope. Have a great day! Shalom, y'all! L. Bangs
A quick glance at iTunes shows that the new Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers album, "Hypnotic Eye" and the Allman Brothers Band "1971 Fillmore East Recordings" are Mastered for iTunes.
There are also more James Brown albums up, but they are spotty and make little sense. You just have to click on each one to check. Shalom, y'all! L. Bangs
On the UK iTunes the ABB 1971 Fillmore East Recs does not have "Mastered For iTunes" label, maybe it is US only.
I did some random crosschecking with new releases from HDTracks, and discovered that Freddie King Is A Blues Master in mono is available as Mastered for iTunes.
Does iTunes usually not make any indication if something's in mono? Or would the average iTunes listener notice?
At least for the US store, iTunes has denoted when an album is mono (for example, Freddie King Is A Blues Master and Dusty in Memphis). I'm not sure if they go so far as denoting individual tracks for a compilation album, though. As to whether the average iTunes listener would notice?
Leonard Cohen and Lady Gaga are the two big additions I notice this week. I'm sure they'll prove friendly neighbors. Shalom, y'all! L. Bangs
Any opinions on the Aerosmith MFiT? I have Toys remastered CD from 93 and want Pump, Get a Grip, Permanent Vacation, Rocks. I can get the CDs used in my city but wondering if the itunes albums would be better or if it even matters.
I have many copies of Rocks (easily my favorite Aerosmith disc). I have vinyl copies, original issues, and the Vic Anesini remasters from the early 1990s. I do not have the SACD. The Mastered for iTunes is the version I listen to the most. It has all the roar and fury of the 90s disc, but the treble seems a bit toned down, and the midrange appreciates the spotlight. Otherwise, I only have the CD issues of Toys. Again, I like the MfiT version. I do also have Pump and some assorted songs MfiT, but I honestly haven't much to compare them to. That's my quick take. I have not had the opportunity to sit down and directly compare these, so I'm relying (too much) on my memory. Shalom, y'all! L. Bangs
A fatal combination of existing iTunes credit, £25 iTunes cards going for £20 in Asda, a phase of early Beatles fixation and a tough time in life otherwise have all conspired to me being forced (forced!) to buy the MFiT Beatles U.S. albums box set - currently downloading. Still have some excess credit so looking at either upgrading my 1994 Japan CD of Beatles Live at the BBC vol1 to the 2013 MFiT version or soliciting recommendations from the good people of this thread for MFiT music.
You might be interested in the band "Apple Jam". They do early Beatle-style covers of early songs the Beatles wrote, but didn't record. "Off The Beatle Track" is their main album. They also have an "On The Wings of a Nightingale" EP. (I just verified they're on the UK iTunes.)
If you still have some iTunes money left and like early Beatles, you might want to wait until December, when the "Bootleg 1964" iTunes set should be released.
Just done Preview All on the album in the UK iTunes store - fun to hear I'll Be On My Way & Hello Little Girl done in a studio as it's tracks like these that make Anthology 1 & the two BBC albums such a joy to listen to (along with Beatley banter on the latter). Might be me but the vocals sound slightly 'processed'. Definite contender for a spend though. Haven't got around to buying the 1963 bootleg yet. I'm slightly wary of it as it all looks uncurated, as opposed to Anthology/BBC which have had some thought given to running order and flow and also come with the benefits of liner notes. On the other hand 1963 does look to have plenty of BBC material; spent plenty of time over the past few weeks listening to BBC 1 & 2 and the occasional drop in audio quality is more than made up for by the sheer joy of listening to the band in their early live prime, mostly sans screaming. Without wanting to change the focus of the thread, is a 1964 bootleg looking likely? I can never get enough of AHDN era material (2009 Uk stereo & mono, US stereo & mono (as of today, yay!), Anthology 1 & BBC) so more would always be welcome. Speaking of the MFiT US Albums box set, so far I'm made up with it. Whatever compression & equalisation has been added to the 2009 remasters together with the sequencing is making for terrific listening, a real alternate listen to the UK canon catalogue. As with previous Beatles MFiT purchases the files themselves sound as though someone has cared what the final result sounds like. I've managed to extract the .jpg files that comprise the booklet and front/back LP covers and inner sleeves out of the iTunes LP file. At 720x720 they're not the highest quality that they could be and this shows up even more on an iPad minis retina screen. Still readable but the lack of resolution hurts a little. Still, more than many do for downloads on iTunes/Amazon/Hi res stores so can't complain. Appreciate both of your suggestions though. Nice to have options, even better to have the credit on hand to realise them
Not sure if The Velvet Underground interests you but I recently picked up White Light/White Heat super deluxe for 19.99 MFiT, absolute bargain.
I wonder what "mastered for iTunes" is going to mean for ECM. Hopefully nothing different from their CDs.
From the article, it seems the label is mostly excited about making the files from high-resolutions masters, but I've no idea... Shalom, y'all! L. Bangs
