[kwitel]

Anyone going to use this?
24.99 per year to back up all of your files on the iCloud, have it accessible on multiple devices and, it automatically changes all of your sub 256k songs to 256. Unfortunately, it does not store anything at a higher rate than 256.

 

[TheGomdoRi]

Transcoding?

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Anyone going to use this?
24.99 per year to back up all of your files on the iCloud, have it accessible on multiple devices and, it automatically changes all of your sub 256k songs to 256. Unfortunately, it does not store anything at a higher rate than 256.

Why not just buy CDs, rip them to lossless, store them on an external hard drive, and encode to MP3 for portable use, all for free?
 
This is why I would never want to let my music get locked into a program like iTunes to begin with.

 

[khaos974]

Quote:

Transcoding?

No, it basically replaces the lower quality file you had on you HDD (say a 128 kbps mp3) by the version they sell on iTunes which is a ~256 kbps mp4 which approximately what most would call "as good as it gets" with lossy codecs, a huge plus.
I predict the issue will be rarer track, the system may have problems with limited/exclusive editions, or small labels which haven't signed with iTunes, even though the iTunes database is probably very very extensive.
 
 

 

[kingoftown1]

Sounds like a mess.  Sounds like itunes.

 

[kwitel]

us

 
Quote:

Why not just buy CDs, rip them to lossless, store them on an external hard drive, and encode to MP3 for portable use, all for free?
 
This is why I would never want to let my music get locked into a program like iTunes to begin with.

The cloud is the future.
All of us will one day very soon have all of our informtion on servers somewhere.
I dont know about you but I put tremendous value into my music collection. To have my whole collection backed up somehwere for a measly 25 bux, just in the remote chance that I have a fire in my apartment or some other disaster, is well worth money.
II have done everything you have mentioned above but, I welcome storage redundancy when it comes to securing 3,000 some odd albums collection that has taken me 20+ years to put together...


Quote:

Sounds like a mess.  Sounds like itunes.

A mess?
Sounds simple and brilliant. In fact, it couldnt be any simpler.
My only gripe is the lack of LOSSLESS or 256+ storage.
Im sure they will come out with another more expensive plan for audiophiles at some point in the future.

 

[kingoftown1]

Well for starters, I don't want to be forced to use AAC.  I have nothing against it, but my entire collection is MP3 320/V0, and FLAC.  So none of my actual music gets uploaded in reality.  They just take a list of my library and make an attempt to replace it with whatever's in their itunes store.  Unfortunately, a pretty sizeable portion of my library won't be found there.  Also, there's a cap of 25,000 songs.  No dice.
 
Basically, just another cloud service with one unique feature that can just as easily be considered a drawback.

 

[kwitel]

Quote:

Well for starters, I don't want to be forced to use AAC.  I have nothing against it, but my entire collection is MP3 320/V0, and FLAC.  So none of my actual music gets uploaded in reality.  They just take a list of my library and make an attempt to replace it with whatever's in their itunes store.  Unfortunately, a pretty sizeable portion of my library won't be found there.  Also, there's a cap of 25,000 songs.  No dice.
 
Basically, just another cloud service with one unique feature that can just as easily be considered a drawback.

Understood. For me, everything I have is in AAC so it makes sense.
I had no idea there was a 25k cap, although im sure theyll have somehting for larger libraries in the future.
I think im more enamored with this whole transition to the cloud and how its going to change the way we use/store data and less specifially, with Apples cloud product.
 

 

[kingoftown1]

I wonder if they'll incorporate ALAC into it at some point.  That would be a nice touch, especially since it's their own codec.

 

[ekliptiko]

sounds like you dont even 'upload' anything to the cloud per se. 
 
imo, it sounds like the itunes store is really just making a list of your songs; and then make 'your' music available to you out of the itunes store's collection of tracks. I dont think any replacing of your tracks goes on at all. I think the itunes store is simply making a list of the tracks you own, datamining it, and making a download link permanently available to you. If the itunes store doesnt have that track, it skips it. 
 
hmmmm...smells like an apple
 
 
dont forget to read the terms & conditions
 
 


Quote:

Understood. For me, everything I have is in AAC so it makes sense.
I had no idea there was a 25k cap, although im sure theyll have somehting for larger libraries in the future.
I think im more enamored with this whole transition to the cloud and how its going to change the way we use/store data and less specifially, with Apples cloud product.

 
i much prefer to keep my backups in a physical media in my possesion at this point. more cloud = more bandwidth. the internet in america blows relative to europe, and would need to improve to make full migration to the cloud a legitimate option.

 

[TheGomdoRi]

^ I like your rig looks very interesting I wonder what it sounds like.
 
Back on topic: If it replaces it then no biggie but I thought they "convert" the original files. I'm sure many iPhone users would love this.

 

[nikp]

It turns pirated copies into original legit ones. How good is that? 

 

[kingoftown1]

Quote:

It turns pirated copies into original legit ones. How good is that? 

and how is pirated music any different than legit music?
 

 

[Iniamyen]

Hmm...
 
-Apple gets to know what music you like (advertising currency)
-Apple gets $25/yr from you
-You get to download 256k versions of the music
 
Not worth it to me.

 

[lextek]

I've spent more for less.