Not so. Apple Music continues to display 192K / 24 bit when playing to a speaker that cannot handle more than 48K / 16 bit, as I thought I stated quite clearly in my post. Apple Music is showing the sample rate and bit depth of the file. Onkyo HF Player correctly shows that the iPhone resamples a Hi Res file to 48 or 44.1 when connected to a DAC that cannot work at a higher sample rate. Apple Music gives no such indication. Edit: Apple Music continues to display 192K / 24 bit ALAC when I listen to Hotel California on my AirPods Pro. The AirPods Pro will be working at 48K / 16 bit over a lossy Bluetooth AAC 256K connection. Not very Hi Res…
I'm a long-time Apple user and music freak, but I've been reluctant to move to streaming. I use the Apple Music program mainly to import songs from CDs, but I also purchase music from nugs, Bandcamp, and even iTunes. The workflow for ripping CDs through Music has steadily gotten worse and worse, so I've been tracking this feature as a possible replacement for this process. I basically only listen to music on my iPhone, and my service provider includes Apple Music for free, so this is a natural move to make. I've been exploring Lossless and Spatial streaming all week and I'm pretty happy with what I've found. The catalog of available songs pretty much overlaps my listening, and the sound quality is comparable to ripping ALAC files or 320 AAC files. Here's where I'm running into an issue. I'd like to use the option in Apple Music to download songs for offline listening, but I also want to be able to sync from my hard drive, as I've got lots of things that aren't available via streaming. Every time I try to sync from my hard drive to my phone, I get an error and no files will sync. Anyone run into this? Am I trying something that just isn't possible? Thanks in advance for anyone who can offer tech support as I try living in the 21st century...
If you’ve enable Apple Music in the Music app on your Mac & iPhone, Apple expect you to get your own CD rips etc onto your phone via iCloud Music Library. With Apple Music & iCloud Music Library enabled on iPhone and Mac, you can no longer directly sync your ripped files to your phone (I know….) The process with Apple Music enabled is as follows: You rip your CDs on your Mac as usual via the Music app, then the Music app will try and match your ripped files to files in the Apple Music service if you have iCloud Music Library enabled. If iCML is enabled and your ripped files are not matched with anything on Apple Music, the files will be uploaded into iCML, whereupon they will be available to download to your iPhone as per any other track/album from Apple Music. Enabling iCloud Music Library has a tendency to reach into your local library of file in the Mac Music app and play havoc with album artwork and file metadata, especially if you’ve rolled your own metadata vs relaying on grace note etc. It is probably best to maintain two music libraries in the Music app (you can switch between them), one with your own files without Apple Music & iCloud Music lIbrary enabled, and one empty with AM & iCML enabled that you can add your ripped files to for syncing as required.
You need to be wired to get Hi Res from Apple Music. Bluetooth can only handle lossy. 24/48 wired headphones or wired speakers using an iPhone.
Quoting myself here, but I have a correction to make. For Atmos tracks, delivered via an Apple TV 4K via HDMI to an Atmos processor/AVR, I can confirm they are not lossless. I did additional testing with the Apple TV Music app vs. UHD/Blu-rays that have true lossless Atmos tracks (there are hundreds). Lossless Atmos audio streams will always have a "Dolby TrueHD" designator with them, passed along to the decoder. The Apple Music Atmos does not, so by nature, it must be lossy. So you get one or the other, folks!
I believe you are correct but your method of detection is flawed. The AppleTV decodes Atmos in to lossless PCM 7.1 with attached Atmos metadata. They do that so they can mix in system sounds, etc. So, the AppleTV actually is delivering a lossless format (that is not TrueHD, but PCM) to your AVR, but it is decoded from a lossy stream anyway (at least that is what most people believe) so it doesn't really matter.
Which AirPods do you have? Not all version are compatible with Atmos. Also, there is an entire “Spatial Audio” section including albums and individual tracks. It’s right on the main Music page.
Incorrect all airpods are compatible Atmos. Either a W1 or the new H1 chip. The original Airpods have the W1 chip, the new AP have H1.
That was the "old" behavior. As of the latest tvOS release, my Apple TV 4K is able to "bitstream" and the input signal on my Marantz AV-8805 now shows the input signal as "Dolby Atmos". For UHD discs via an OPPO or similar, it's "Dolby Atmos - TrueHD", and other sources will show the input signal designation as PCM, Dolby Digital, DTS, etc. Also, if the Apple TV decoded the signal as 7.1 PCM, you wouldn't even be able to get Atmos Because you need a compressed signal (i.e. not PCM) to embed the Atmos metadata. You can't bolt the Atmos metadata to PCM, only DD+ or TrueHD.
You are correct. Older AirPods are not compatible with Atmos audio in movies/tv only. They all work for Atmos music.
"Certain content devices, such as Xbox One X/S and Apple TV 4K, come with a Dolby Atmos MAT encoder, which is designed to encode, decode and incorporate Dolby Atmos metadata into lossless pulse-code modulation (PCM) audio, allowing listeners to experience Dolby Atmos even in PCM audio." The Ultimate Dolby Atmos Guide | Nakamichi USA | True Surround Soundbar with Dolby Atmos & DTS:X The AppleTV outputs Dolby Atmos lossless over HDMI, no matter what the encoding of the source. Sorry.
I know; I was making the point that the phone still displays Hi Res when the listening device is anything but Hi Res!
That's a new one to me, learning something every day Regardless, the output from my AppleTV 4K is now indicated by my Marantz as Dolby Atmos, not PCM.
So, if you disable “Sync Library” on your iPhone, it will remove Apple Music songs. You can then connect your phone to iTunes / Music and sync content from your own music library. If you then re enable “Sync Library” your synced music remains on the phone and you can then access Apple Music’s library. I have been doing this to sync my own ALAC rips from my Windows PC and access the Apple Music library without issue for years.
Music Blogger Bob lefsetz just sent this out. It is concerning if Apple are seeking to make these versions the new standards. A good reason to keep buying physical "I got the following e-mail from a producer/engineer: "I just want to try and alert you to the potential seismic scam happening with this Atmos roll out. Atmos catalog remixing is being done by the truckload in a handful of Nashville, LA, and NYC rooms right now and has been for a couple of years, and almost none of it is being overseen or approved by the artist or original producer or mixer. And these versions- according to Apple- will be the new standard versions, superseding the original versions, now designated by Apple to the dustbin of history. I have heard some Atmos mixes which were indeed an improvement. However, most are not. And I would like to steer you toward this demo from Apple to get a sense of their mindset Introducing Spatial Audio In the rush to make content for Apple, labels are jamming this crap out with little QC and -again- almost no input from artists. This format has real potential but if they continue to try and tell us that **** like this 'new' version of 'What’s Going On' is better than then original, then it will be seen as a counterfeit and a fraud, and will go the way of the Home Pod. I know how you feel about catalog being remixed and this has potential to be a worst case scenario." And then my inbox filled up with more, and iMessage started to ring from other professional engineers. Now wait a second, this was supposed to be a breakthrough. But is it more of a marketing gimmick? A way for Apple to gain subscribers? So I pulled it up. You can hear it, it definitely sounds different, but is that a good thing? And here's where I venture out beyond the limits of my knowledge, to what these people are telling me. There are over a hundred reference points in Dolby Atmos. As in this is far beyond conventional 5.1. Think of a movie theatre, where the sound moves around, now you get the idea. But that's movies. We're talking about music, sans pictures. Now the truth is almost all music today is ultimately released in stereo. You record it, someone mixes the multiple tracks down to two, and then a mastering engineer EQ's it. The artist supervises the entire process. But when it comes to Atmos... Let's say you have the equipment and ability to make an Atmos mix. My understanding is right now, you send the end product to Dolby and they use their special sauce to create the final product. Furthermore, they have special sauce to turn the same Atmosfied music into two track stereo. So, in a business where how it sounds is critical, Dolby is the ultimate arbiter. The writer at the top is right. It is sacrilegious to remix/Atmosfy classic tracks. They weren't cut that way to begin with. It even bugs me that they're using remixed tracks from "Abbey Road" to Atmosfy, now you're multiple steps from the original. Now if we look at the history here... The big breakthrough came in the mid-sixties, when there were two formats, mono and stereo. At first albums came in both iterations, then stereo only. And the goal was to buy the best home stereo you could afford, so you could hear the end product the way it was made, so you could get closer to the music. Then they introduced quad. There were two competing formats, they both failed. And then, this century, there was surround sound, a lot of money was dropped and consumer adoption was extremely low. Once again, the albums were being bastardized, this is not how the band and producer and engineers envisioned the sound to be, this was an afterthought. And it also required a special system to hear, which most people didn't own, the script had flipped, from buying ever better, more expensive stereos to boom boxes and then headphones. And right now the standard is AirPods/earbuds, which ironically don't even work with Apple's Spatial Sound/Dolby Atmos. But if you have a wired connection... I fired up Apple Music last night on my iPad. There's Zane Lowe's dog and pony show linked to above, but there's also 127 demo tracks, as in Apple is trotting these out to demonstrate the greatness of Spatial Audio. I pulled up ones I was familiar with. Now I was listening on wired Sennheiser headphones, which retail for about $300, far better than what most punters are listening on, never mind the bass-heavy, distorting of the music Beats, talk about a marketing job. And the tracks were, as I said, definitely different. Not radically different, but there was more space... But then I started getting reviews e-mailed to me. And just now I went back. Now I'm listening via my computer, with $700 Audeze headphones with a separate headphone amp. And what I've learned is...the Spatial Audio and stereo versions are not only different, the process affects the punch, the essence of the originals! I compared Spatial Audio tracks to their HD equivalents on Amazon Music and I found exactly what one writer said: the vocal gets lost. Instead of being up front and in your face, it's buried more in the mix. Let's start with Apple's demo track, "What's Going On." In the stereo mix Marvin Gaye is up front, the band is backing him, in the Spatial Audio version, the band is surrounding him, on the fringe, background vocals popping up way up to the right, Marvin is just an element, not the essence, it's a cornucopia of music, but it's not the legendary track, it's absolutely different, a sacrilege. Same deal with the Doors' "Riders On the Storm." Pat Benatar's "We Belong." Let's talk Bon Jovi's legendary "Wanted Dead or Alive." Listen to the stereo version and it's like there's a band on stage, the members are not all standing in the same place, but they're definitely on stage, in front of you, you've got a cohesive sound. Now on the Spatial Audio take... It's like you're in the arena and sounds are not only coming from the stage, but off to the right and left of it, from other places in the arena. It's an immersive experience akin to a...movie. But is music a movie? I don't think so. And in this movie, the instruments dominate, Jon Bon Jovi is fighting for attention, and he's losing the battle. Wait, it gets worse. Forget the big budget records, more and more music is being made by individuals in bedrooms, home studios, on a budget. They have neither the equipment nor the skill to mix in Dolby Atmos. As for just sending the file to Dolby to be processed...that's like finishing a painting and having an amateur come in and completely change it, make it 3-D. Actually, the more I listen to these Spatial Audio cuts, the more offensive they become. Kind of like those Beatles remixes. These are not the original records, they've been messed with, they're not even facsimiles, they're bastardizations. Now the truth is this is a headphone genre. Which at the moment doesn't support Bluetooth, which is how most people listen to music on headphones today. So they can't hear the space, but somehow they're going to listen to two channel Atmosfied mix-downs. Oh, there could be two takes, like with mono and stereo in the sixties, but that's far too confusing, we need one standard, the marketplace needs one standard. So, maybe there's a future for Spatial Audio...if it's mixed that way to begin with. But as demonstrated now, it's a hell-bent drive in the wrong direction."
I checked just there. It is present on the 2015 Paisley Park remaster in Hi-Res. Both through the iPhone 12 Max. Pro speaker and headphones. I’ve reported it to Apple.
I might be either misunderstanding you misunderstanding the technology, but I have AirPods Max which I believe fully support spatial audio (albeit not lossless). Do you believe otherwise? My experience is a little more rounded than yours. I’ve found the application of spatial audio to be hit and miss. For example, St Vincent’s Daddy’s Home works really well (in my opinion). But I expect that the album was cut with spatial audio in mind (given that it is a very recent release. Similarly, the effect on Art Blackey’s Moanin’ is (in my opinion) subtle and enhances the listening experience (to my ears, the instruments sound more present, more life like). However, Weezer’s Buddy Holly is not well done. The guitars seem to be panned hard right and hard left which makes the whole thing sound weedy and unbalanced and exposes the vocals in a very unflattering light. Folsom Prison Blues isn’t awful, but the way in which it randomly foregrounds the piano, in places, is just weird. Although the vocals do sound more present. Again, to my ears, Abbey Road is largely redundant. I can hear it in places, but it doesn’t seem to be consistent across all tracks. In places, it perhaps makes it sound more spacious. However, unlike Buddy Holly and Folsom, I never found it distracting. And so, for me, when it works, it works. But it is hit and miss. Now having said this, I do get the principled objection to retrospectively applying the effect without the artist’s involvement. I did, however, have a question. If I turn off spatial audio on a dolby enabled track, am I listening to the original master, or a dolby version converted back to standard stereo? I presume it just defaults back the original version?
Another way of tackling this: Use either Foobar2000 or Onkyo HF Player to sync the songs not available via streaming and just leave Apple Music for streamed music. Files can be synced using the file transfer option in iTunes / Music. Advantage: these apps will play other formats such as FLAC, and Onkyo HF Player can play DSD. If you use an external DAC HF Player gives you a better idea of what the DAC is doing as per my previous posts. Disadvantage: they don’t work as well as Apple Music does with CarPlay, which is why, having used this method for a while, I switched to Apple Music alone when I got a car with CarPlay.
It’s the modern day equivalent to mono recordings that were electronically processed into stereo or fake surround modes on AV receivers. When I had a proper 5.1 system in the early days of DVD I quite often used the five channel stereo or Dolby Pro Logic 2 Music modes for casual listening, but there was never any danger of me mistaking it for a proper 5.1 or quad mix, and listening to a stereo recording in stereo remains my preference. I am not anti surround music at all; when I had a 5.1 system I loved listening to any quad or 5.1 mix I could get my hands on, and I would really like to hear a proper Atmos surround recording, as long as it is a mix intended to be released by the artist played on a proper surround system. Unfortunately, it sounds like Apple are rushing to process a bunch of recordings for surround with minimal QC and no artist approval. Having done that, the only way most people will hear them is over a lossy Bluetooth connection to some AirPods. Fake surround; the Emperor’s new clothes.
'' Ok, you seem to know what you're doing. I use Roon for my personal collection of downloads and album rips. I do have a limited collection of iTunes purchases (consisting almost exclusively of copyright collections, like the Motown unreleased series) and am starting to stream on Apple Music for the first time in a long time due to the availability of hi res content. What I'd like to do is have one Apple Music library containing my iTunes purchases, and then additional Apple Music libraries for hi res albums available for streaming on Apple Music that I have saved to the library. Because Audio Midi doesn't automatically adjust the audio output to reflect the sampling rate of the file being played, I was thinking of creating one library for 192/24 albums and another library for 96/24 albums. Just one problem - I haven't figured out how to do this. I don't seem to be able to add albums from Apple Music to my library without activating library sync, and the end result is that Apple Music ends up combing the contents of my separate libraries. Which completely defeats the purpose of maintaining separate libraries. Does anyone know if there's a way to do what I'm trying to do?
