Audio quality - regular downloads - iTunes, Amazon, other?

[Dave2002]

I wonder if there is a significant difference in sound quality between the "regular" downloads from sites such as iTunes and Amazon. This could depend on the codec used (iTunes = aac vs Amazon = mp3) and the bit rate, but also on the way in which the digital compression is done. Where there is little price difference, is there an advantage in one over the other? I suppose I tend to feel that iTunes is slightly more convenient, but that's not always the case.

I'm not thinking of specialist downloads - so-called HD ones, which I'd expect to cost more and preferably in a minimum of 16 bit FLAC, but other formats are possible.

For a simple example, Toscanini's Beethoven symphonies are available for under a £5 from either Amazon or iTunes. Also, are there other sites which are cheap offering similar recordings? I gave up on emusic after a long period because of their lack of carry over. There may be other services offering cheap downloads of well known recordings - obviously there is CMM - Classical Music Mobile - 1 Euro per "track".

[Cockney Sparrow]

Sorry I can't speak as to the question you pose, in a not very thorough way, I have come to the conclusion I can't tell much difference between 320kbs and lossless FLAC, although in general I download FLAC where it is available. This is in expectation of, some day, having time to listen on my high quality system and make these comparisons. At the moment, when I get the chance, I just concentrate on the music.
However, a discussion elsewhere brings up the new "Mastered for iTunes" (initiative in progress, to improve quality of the recording). In general there is a feeling that the original recording quality / mastering /digital transfer is a big factor - a good audio system will reveal a poor recording for what it is, but let a good one reach its potential. But, on non-classical recordings in particular (I think) with different re-issues there are different production techniques applied.

http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?pid=167523#p167523

[richardfinegold]

I wonder if there is a significant difference in sound quality between the "regular" downloads from sites such as iTunes and Amazon. This could depend on the codec used (iTunes = aac vs Amazon = mp3) and the bit rate, but also on the way in which the digital compression is done. Where there is little price difference, is there an advantage in one over the other? I suppose I tend to feel that iTunes is slightly more convenient, but that's not always the case.

I'm not thinking of specialist downloads - so-called HD ones, which I'd expect to cost more and preferably in a minimum of 16 bit FLAC, but other formats are possible.

For a simple example, Toscanini's Beethoven symphonies are available for under a £5 from either Amazon or iTunes. Also, are there other sites which are cheap offering similar recordings? I gave up on emusic after a long period because of their lack of carry over. There may be other services offering cheap downloads of well known recordings - obviously there is CMM - Classical Music Mobile - 1 Euro per "track".

You can do your own experiment. Find some Historical Recording that is public domain and available on both sites and download the same track and compare.
Make sure that you are listening to the same remastering.

[akiralx]

Sorry I can't speak as to the question you pose, in a not very thorough way, I have come to the conclusion I can't tell much difference between 320kbs and lossless FLAC, although in general I download FLAC where it is available. ... At the moment, when I get the chance, I just concentrate on the music.

Yes, I would tend to agree, mp3 at no lower than 320kbs is fine for my morning commute. I regularly listen to SACD (stereo-only) via Stax earspeakers but at the end of the day I am focusing on the music not the delivery.