Led Zeppelin - How The West Was Won (Mastered For iTunes)

I realise it's quite well known that the CD of the live album How The West Was Won by Led Zeppelin is very compressed and clipped, which I can easily see.

Imagine my surprise when I saw it on iTunes as "Mastered For iTunes". I thought that surely this would mean that it would be less compressed and not clipped at all. Apple/iTunes say that no clipped recording will be put out on iTunes as "MFiT".

I decided to download one song from the "MFiT" copy. I brought Track 2 which is Immigrant Song. When looking at the sound waves I was shocked to see that it is still just as compressed and clipped as the CD. There was no difference at all. This left me confused after reading about "Mastered For iTunes" and what it is.

I decided to email Apple/iTunes about this. The heading for the email was the artist and album.

This was my email:

"Can you please tell me how this release qualifies for the "Mastered For iTunes" label in more detail? For example, how come when I look at the sound waves the audio is very compressed and clipped?
One thing that Apple said is that no release under "Mastered For iTunes" would be clipped, as you wouldn't allow it. Apple/iTunes have said this themselves, so it looks like iTunes are going against what they originally stated about "Mastered For iTunes" and what it means.
Are you telling me that the "Mastered For iTunes" release of How The West Was Won by Led Zeppelin isn't clipped at all? If so, I'd like an explanation on how this release isn't clipped, and see or read proof of this. Looking at the sound waves it's quite easy to see that it's been smashed to bits during the mastering process with far too much compression and clipping. If you have proof of this I'd like to hear or see this, as I have proof that it is clipped.

Thanks
Andrew Smith"

This was my reply from Apple/iTunes:

"Hi Andrew,

Welcome to iTunes Store Customer Support. My name is Irfan.

I understand that you would like to know why the album "How the West Was Won (Live) [Remastered]” is marked as Mastered for iTunes. I know how eager you are to know about this. I will provide you with the required information.

Andrew, I would like to inform you that the album "How the West Was Won (Live) [Remastered]"does indeed meet a requirement or two that engineering has deemed fit for Mastered for iTunes.

When we're developing products, we consider feedback from our customers to make those products easy to use. If you'd like to send us feedback about this album, visit our Feedback page:

http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html

If you have any issues with your iTunes Store account or with your iTunes Store purchases, let me know. I'll do everything I can to help.

Thank you for contacting the iTunes Store Customer Support. Have a nice day!"


This wasn't good enough for me.

I emailed them again, which is below:

"Hello Irfan,

Can you please tell me how this release qualifies for the "Mastered For iTunes" label in more detail? For example, how come when I look at the sound waves the audio is very compressed and clipped?
One thing that Apple said is that no release under "Mastered For iTunes" would be clipped, as you wouldn't allow it. Apple/iTunes have said this themselves, so it looks like iTunes are going against what they originally stated about "Mastered For iTunes" and what it means.
Are you telling me that the "Mastered For iTunes" release of How The West Was Won by Led Zeppelin isn't clipped at all? If so, I'd like an explanation on how this release isn't clipped, and see or read proof of this. Looking at the sound waves it's quite easy to see that it's been smashed to bits during the mastering process with far too much compression and clipping. If you have proof of this I'd like to hear or see this, as I have proof that it is clipped.

Thanks
Andrew Smith"

My reply from Apple/iTunes:

"Dear Andrew,

Thank you for writing back to iTunes Store Customer Support. My name is Vedavathi and I will be assisting you on behalf of Irfan.

Andrew, I would like to inform you that for further information, for a certain song to be one of the “Mastered in iTunes”, the content provider are the ones who are applying for it. However, we won’t be able to specify the exact qualification on how a song can be part of the “Mastered in iTunes”.

Apple recognizes that no one is better qualified to provide feedback about iTunes than the people who use it.

I encourage you to use the iTunes Feedback page to s_ubmit your comments:
http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html"


Make what you will of that!

 

wow totally generic replies from Apple

go figure!

 

Apple is always going on about making things sleek and simple yet train their employees to say hundreds of words that only ever mean "I Don't Know." Why can't that also be so simple?

 

Stock replies. "Insert customer name here" and click 'Send'.

 

MfiT guidelines are recommendations, not rules. Very simple.

 

Most of them are guidelines but no clipping is a must. I would provide the link to this info, but I'm on my phone at the moment.

If they are just guidelines then that means that any artist or record company can put their music up on iTunes as "MFiT" regardless of how it's mastered.

This makes "Mastered For iTunes" pointless.

 

Is there a non "Mastered For iTunes" version of "How The West Was Won", and if so, is the "mastering" the same?

 

https://www.apple.com/itunes/mastered-for-itunes/docs/mastered_for_itunes.pdf

"Whatever you decide—exquisitely overdriven and loud, or exquisitely nuanced and tasteful—we will be sure to encode it and reproduce it accurately. We only ask that you avoid clipping the signal."

In fairness, it also mentions this - "Although iTunes doesn’t reject files for a specific number of clips, tracks which have audible clipping will not be badged or marketed as Mastered for iTunes."

Somehow, though, I doubt iTunes is going to ruffle the Led Zeppelin's camp feathers over this. Ask for your money back.

Many MfiT files are quieter than their CD counterparts - George Harrison's Early Takes, McCartney's Ram, the recent Clash remasters.

 

There you have it. And we all can hear just when clipping is audible for all recorded music, right?

 

Most of the time, Mastered for iTunes means "encoded for iTunes". Apple requires (or recommends) that the studio produce the AAC files from a higher source, a digital master (like a 24-96 or 24-192) instead of encoding it directly from the 16-44.1 CD.

What was confusing for many people, is that when they did relaunch the entire Led Zeppelin studio catalogue as MFIT, those were in fact made from a brand new tape transfer that we had never heard before.

Many people claim that encoding an AAC 256 from a 24-96 with the Apple encoder will produce better results than encoding an AAC 256 made from a 16-44.1.

Make sens in many ways, but I would be curious if a real expert here could make a real test and explain us why and how.

P-

 

It's a shame because all the other "Mastered For iTunes" Led Zeppelin releases are very good indeed and aren't mastered too loud. The same goes for the CDs and the 24bit/96kHz high resolution copies. I realise that the master has to be 24bit and is converted straight to 256 AAC, but if it's smashed to pieces during the mastering process it won't sound good on any release (high resolution release included).

I've emailed them again, and this time I've asked for a reply from someone who knows about "MFiT". It will be interesting too see what they have to say when I mentioned How The West Was Won by Led Zeppelin.

 

Does it make sense though? I struggle to believe you will end up with a higher quality lossy AAC file encoding from a 24/96 file instead of 16/44.1. It's just marketing nonsense.

 

Certain individuals have suggested it - http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue58/ludwig.htm

An excerpt: "It is a complicated answer, but a 24-bit AAC encoded file can thus sound better and measure better in certain cases than a normal 16-bit Compact Disc, which unfortunately has been regarded as the gold standard for sound in these comparisons." - Bob Ludwig

 

I forgot to say that the master submitted to iTunes must be a 24bit master if an artist or record company want there music on iTunes labelled as "Mastered For iTunes". Another must is that the master has to be a new EQd master from the mix master, rather than an old EQd master that's just had even more EQing added to it on top of previous EQing.

 

I emailed them back asking if I could get an answer from someone who knows or specialises in "Mastered For iTunes". This time I got a bit more of an answer. They even said they'd refund me for the one track (Immigrant Song) which I downloaded from the "MFiT" copy as a test to see what the audio quality was like and to look at the sound waves.

It seems they are investigating this issue now.

The is the latest email I got from Apple/iTunes:

"Dear Andrew,

This is Reina and I’ll be your iTunes Store Customer Support Advisor and I will be happy to assist you with your concern. I understand that the song you purchased is labelled as “Mastered for iTunes” and yet it is very compressed and clipped.

I'm sorry to learn that this item did not meet the standard of quality you have come to expect from the iTunes Store. I have s_ubmitted this item for investigation. Apple takes the quality of the items offered on the iTunes Store seriously and will investigate the issue with this item, but I can't say when or if the issue will be resolved. Please try again in a few weeks.

I have reversed the charge for "Immigrant Song (Live) (How the West Was Won (Live) [Remastered])". Within 10 business days, a credit of 0.99 GBP should be posted to the credit card that appears on the receipt for that purchase.

Please wait at least two weeks before repurchasing this title. This will give us time to investigate the issue and make any corrections that may be necessary.

I have also gone ahead and made this issue heard from our iTunes feedback page in hopes that this will be implemented in the future. I recommend you send your own as well so that Apple can have a firsthand account of this. Apple does a great job at considering common Apple Users concerns and does understand that the feedback can help improve our welfare to our customers. I encourage you to provide a feedback on this page:

http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html

I trust this ease your concern. If you need more assistance, please feel free to email me again. Thank you for being an iTunes Store customer. Always take care! Have a wonderful day!

Sincerely,

Reina
iTunes Store/Mac App Store Customer Support

Please note: I work Sunday-Thursday, 5:00 PM to 2:00 AM CST"


It will be interesting to see what they say after they have investigated this issue that I raised with them. It says that if the problem I'm complaining about is correct, they will correct this problem within 2 weeks. I find it hard to think that they're going to contact the record company, do a new remaster from the original tapes and sort out all the other legal stuff as well all in that time frame.

I will wait now for a reply.

 

Allegedly, the DVD-A of HTWWW, both 5.1 and 2.0, is less compressed and not brickwalled. I have no idea if it's still available. A fan named Winston "remixed" his 5.1 into a new stereo mix. This mix is superior to the official one in every way. Blame the Caveman...

 

Take a listen yourself to see if I'm right about excessive compression and it being clipped. Below is a link to the first 1min 30sec of the live performance of Immigrant Song, taken from How The West Was Won (the MFiT copy). The full running time for this track is 3min and 41sec.

In order to split the track I had to convert it back to 24/96 WAV and then back to 256kbps VBR. The original downloaded file from iTunes was 268kbps AAC and the new cut file is 272kbps AAC. Even though I had to do this converting, it doesn't hide the excessive compression and clipping, although the sound waves look more clipped on the full-length copy than they do on this 1min 30sec sample. I noticed this before transferring it back to 24/96.

Litsen to it, look at the sound waves if you can and tell me if I'm correct and it is clipped.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vc61qns1e71qruy/02 Immigrant Song (Live) (2).m4a

 

I listened to that clip -- a muddy mess on the bottom. Painful on the top.

 

I know it doesn't sound very good anyway, but is it clipped with excessive dynamic range compression? Maybe the poor sound is due to the original source material, but that's a completely different subject to the way it was mastered.

 

When did iTunes start selling 24 bit AAC files?

 

I think he means AAC files that have been sourced from a 24bit master which have then been converted down directly to 256kbps AAC, which is a requirement for "Mastered For iTunes".

 

Well, that particular quote seems to refers to 24 bit AAC files and whether they can sound as good or better than CD, and isn't relevant to whether a 16 bit AAC file derived from redbook or high res will sound better or not. Maybe he didn't word is right. I'm surprised Ludwig is still in the mastering business tbh, according to Wikipedia he's around 70.

 

Compressed or not, I'm enjoying this, so thanks for bringing it up:




A pity LZ went with the brickwalling/compression on this, although it does give them the chance to reissue it in a few years and make that money all over again.

 

The way I understand it, AAC does not have a "fixed" bit; if you run the Mastered for iTunes application on a Mac, a 24-bit file gets temporarily converted to a 32-bit CAF file, then a 256 AAC file is created.

 

It was mastered to 2003 standards so it is what it is. Unlike the reissues of the main catalog, to my knowledge this title has not been remastered so it does not surprise me that it is still the very loud version. For the record, I do love this album and would welcome a future better sounding version.

I agree with OP that it should not have been given the MFiT tag when that seems to imply a higher standard of quality.