Red Hill Mining Town 2017 is on iTunes

[WookieeWarrior10]

I would assume the answer is yes... that recording is an MP3 file whereas the iTunes version should be ALAC (Apple's version of FLAC, or Free Lossless Audio Codec), which is the best digital audio quality.

iTunes sells files in "m4a" format at 256 kbps, which is essentially the same as a 320 kbps mp3. I think ALAC is only used if you rip your CDs through iTunes using that as an option.

My bad, I don't actually use iTunes, so I wouldn't know for sure.

256kbps, to most ears, will sound about as good as 320kbps, while 320kbps will sound about as good as lossless (FLAC) to most ears. Those who are audiophiles (myself being one) can tell the difference, but most won't be able to. That said, an iTunes or Spotify version of a song at 320kbps or 256kbps will almost always sound better than a recording of a streamed song because the streamed version is usually lower quality and then you're often recording an even lower quality version of that one. So while the "leaked" version going around has a VBR of 322kbps, it's not nearly as good as the 320kbps version on Spotify.

Right, I get that. When you purhcase the song from iTunes, you actually download it to your device, correct? I'm not talking about Apple Music or whatever streaming services...

[WookieeWarrior10]

After finally giving it a proper listen with my headphones, Bono's vocals in chorus is definitely a recycled recording. Seamless transition, though, if there is anything well-produced to be taken from this.

[THRILLHO]

I would assume the answer is yes... that recording is an MP3 file whereas the iTunes version should be ALAC (Apple's version of FLAC, or Free Lossless Audio Codec), which is the best digital audio quality.

iTunes sells files in "m4a" format at 256 kbps, which is essentially the same as a 320 kbps mp3. I think ALAC is only used if you rip your CDs through iTunes using that as an option.

My bad, I don't actually use iTunes, so I wouldn't know for sure.

256kbps, to most ears, will sound about as good as 320kbps, while 320kbps will sound about as good as lossless (FLAC) to most ears. Those who are audiophiles (myself being one) can tell the difference, but most won't be able to. That said, an iTunes or Spotify version of a song at 320kbps or 256kbps will almost always sound better than a recording of a streamed song because the streamed version is usually lower quality and then you're often recording an even lower quality version of that one. So while the "leaked" version going around has a VBR of 322kbps, it's not nearly as good as the 320kbps version on Spotify.

Right, I get that. When you purhcase the song from iTunes, you actually download it to your device, correct? I'm not talking about Apple Music or whatever streaming services...

yah dude. you put it on your iphone/ipod etc.

[zeeTV]

Its on tidal too

Loving it

[blovesu2]

It's a beautiful new mix. However, it lacks some of the guttural yearning of the original. Vocals are now less to the front when compared to the original.
The background was more naked in the original, now that old space that existed with vulnerability is filled with some nice backing layers - but not as beautiful. To put it more simply, I find the new version less vulnerable, less courageous.
The new version is too smooth, is it (?) Maybe.
But, beautiful nonetheless.

[trevgreg]

My bad, I don't actually use iTunes, so I wouldn't know for sure.

No worries. I'm sort of surprised they or any of the other big online file sellers have offered anything lossless yet, honestly. Even some of the bands that sell their live shows to the public offer multiple formats now.

256kbps, to most ears, will sound about as good as 320kbps, while 320kbps will sound about as good as lossless (FLAC) to most ears. Those who are audiophiles (myself being one) can tell the difference, but most won't be able to. That said, an iTunes or Spotify version of a song at 320kbps or 256kbps will almost always sound better than a recording of a streamed song because the streamed version is usually lower quality and then you're often recording an even lower quality version of that one. So while the "leaked" version going around has a VBR of 322kbps, it's not nearly as good as the 320kbps version on Spotify.

Pretty much agreed. I read up on stuff like this a long time ago, and the impression I got was that unless you have great ears and a great speaker or playback system, anything above 192 kbps is basically going to sound the same. Streaming obviously affects things too, but even if iTunes files are 256 kbps or your CD rips are 320 kbps, you're already on solid ground there. Anything after that would only be worth the system you're playing it on... and great ears, obviously.

[Chip]

It's a beautiful new mix. However, it lacks some of the guttural yearning of the original. Vocals are now less to the front when compared to the original.
The background was more naked in the original, now that old space that existed with vulnerability is filled with some nice backing layers - but not as beautiful. To put it more simply, I find the new version less vulnerable, less courageous.
The new version is too smooth, is it (?) Maybe.
But, beautiful nonetheless.

Ditto for the most part. The rawness of the original has always made the TJT version compelling to me. (It was originally my favorite song off of the album when I first heard it in '90.) The new version is way overproduced, and the added strings (? -- I think, but could be wrong on that) are not at all to my liking. And the third verse, so darkly contemplative and devastating in the original, loses its power here.

[eddyjedi]

The brass is all intentional in its flatness, listen to the Lillywhite interview with fanning.
I think it's a really good new version especially at full blast on vinyl!

[Stateless]

The other thing we have to remember, we have been listening, well most of us, have been listening to the original version for 30 years....so of course a newer remix would take a while to sink in since we are so use to the original.  I really like the remix, but if I had to choose only one it would be the original..ask me again in 30 years and that might change!!! 

[trevgreg]

The other thing we have to remember, we have been listening, well most of us, have been listening to the original version for 30 years....so of course a newer remix would take a while to sink in since we are so use to the original.  I really like the remix, but if I had to choose only one it would be the original..ask me again in 30 years and that might change!!! 

Sort of like when we hear a demo or live version of a song before even hearing the studio version, and then always finding something to nitpick!