[Macworld]

Post your comments for Convert iTunes Store music files here

[meta]

Really, though, a better idea is to get an up-to-date device that plays MPEG-4.
I mean, everything from my BlackBerry to my old Sony Ericsson phone to my Nintendo Wii to my PS3 will play MPEG-4.

[Will27]

Two comments with respect to converting old iTunes files with DRM. First, there is software available that performs the function of ripping to CD and re-importing and is more convenient. Second, you should still re-rip at 256 kbps even if the original file was 128 kbps AAC. Remember, the bit rate at which you re-rip determines how much you will lose from the original file. You will lose less if you re-rip at a higher bit rate, regardless of the bit rate of the original file.

[Shon]

Curious... What's the software that you're talking about...?

And, doesn't this eliminate the DRM in the process, then...?

[newpolluter]

This is simply misleading information. To say that people who think these kinds file conversion are "heresy" that have no basis "in reality" makes it sound like a matter of opinion or a snobbish audiophile talking point. In fact, information (ie, quality) is always lost in this process. (See wikipedia article "Lossy compression.") This isn't difficult to understand. Kirk, you might have written,"some people don't care about these things," or "most people might not notice," or "everyone's ears are different, so know the facts before you do this." To simply dismiss it out of hand is just misleading and technologically inaccurate.

[newpolluter]

Shon: burning your purchased files to cd and then re-importing them has always removed the DRM on iTunes files. I'm guessing from Will27's comment that some other software simply strips the songs of their DRM, but personally I haven't come across it.

[newpolluter]

and, while i'm at it, you can do this without even using physical media if you have Toast. simply create an audio disc, save it as a disc image, mount it from the finder (or disk utility) and then reimport using iTunes or 3rd party solutions like iTunes-LAME.

[totoro]

Does the iTunes Plus Watermark information stay thru the conversion to MP3?

[poochie]

I wonder why this article doesn't mention the right-click shortcut. Select a track, then control-click or right-click and select Create MP3 Version.

[LouKash]

1) If you're over 30 years old, the chances are that you won't hear any difference between AAC and MP3 at 256 kbps or higher. But the FACT is: when (re)compressing music files, the MP3 algorithm kills almost ALL signal above 16 kHz to save bandwidth. That's true even for 320 kbps MP3 files. See http://external.loukash.com/steelydanpegsonograms_linear.pdf (While that definitely doesn't bother me anymore due to my age, it definitely would have bothered me when I was around 20. At that time I had to spend quite a lot of money on a decent analog tape recorder because the mid-range devices just didn't capture the frequence range I used to be able to hear then... So, if you're young enough to hear above 16 kHz and you didn't ruin your ears yet, don't waste your time with MP3 in the first place. :)
2) If you have iMovie HD (from iLife 06) installed, you can convert protected AAC files without burning them to disk. There's even an app that will do it automatically for you: http://seidai.50webs...20Software.html - But again, don't waste your time with MP3, convert to unprotected AAC 192 kbps or higher to make sure you don't degrade the audio quality that much.

[consumer_x]

Requiem will remove the DRM without quality loss. It is not a pretend-to-be-a-CD solution, but a genuine Fairplay stripper. iTunes updates tend to kill the app's function (but the developers try to update when necessary), so make sure you that the most recent copy is compatible with your iTunes version.
The email address for the iTunes account is still embedded within the stripped file, but there are other applications that allow you to modify the metadata. However, that probably means you want to share it, and well, that is naughty.

[Steve_S]

newpolluter said:

This is simply misleading information. To say that people who think these kinds file conversion are "heresy" that have no basis "in reality" makes it sound like a matter of opinion or a snobbish audiophile talking point. In fact, information (ie, quality) is always lost in this process. (See wikipedia article "Lossy compression.")

Agreed. Kirk tries to skate around this issue by using weasel words such as "you won't hear" the degradation as opposed to actually claiming no degradation will occur. Overall, for the masses, this is a reasonable work around. However, I think it's both misleading and irresponsible to not acknowledge what happens to your music during the transcoding process. Converting from AAC to MP3 results in a lower quality file, no matter how you slice it. The question is, is the degradation in quality significant enough for the masses to care?

[kirkmc]

You're going from lossy compression to lossy compression. Even though the compression algorithms are different, what was lost the first time won't be lost the second time. There are very, very slight differences between the two, but rare indeed are people who can hear them.

[kirkmc]

What you call "weasel words" is just a way of saying the truth. You won't hear the degradation; the degradation will exist, and it will be so minor that you won't hear it. If you don't believe me, try it for yourself. I've been running, the past few weeks, a blind listening test with a group of classical music reviewers, most of whom have expensive sound systems. Not one of them could reliably tell the difference between uncompressed WAV files and AAC files ranging from 96 to 320 kbps. In many cases, they thought the 96 kbps file was best, but the results are close to what you'd get with a totally random set of answers. I've done this in the past - and done it myself - and the results are always the same.