As a tangential point, people *in general* are listening to the best audio quality they've ever listened to. Audiophile turntables and amps were always a niche thing. Pre-mp3, people were listening to music on off-brand Walkman clones and crackly nasty supermarket all-in-one turntable 'n' tape deck combos. Cheap headphones are better than they've ever been. The frequency range of even mid-grade mp3 is way, way higher than tape was. And so on. The idea that we've entered some dark age of low-quality listening equipment is nonsense.

I'm not entirely sure on the tagging issue Mike but a quick glance at how the iTunes setup seems to work from my daughters iPod any suppoting material is related to a unique ID tag which can be updated independently to the file itself.
 
I'd get Bob's book if I were you and catch up on what's current.  I think I'll pass on it though.

I think today's mp3 tagging is far superior to the cassette tagging I grew up with.

I guess one of the points I wanted to make was what the whole Mastered for iTunes thing is about.

Many seem to think it's about remastering something to compensate for the destination format. 

But just read the Apple documentation on it and ask yourself, "Is this to address problems with the codec or is it to address problems with the people who are supplying us with content?".

Undoubtedly the latter.
 
They are mostly trying to address the problems of content supplied by people who frequent forums and take their guidance from the conflicting opinions found there.
 
Good for Apple for making it as bullet-proof simple as it can be in this case.
 
It's a guideline, doubtless there will be reams of hot air expounded over its virtue or otherwise hopefully though people will just follow the plain simple common-sense contained in it.
 
( Then I can make MY stuff LOUDER and have more BASS than anyone elses... )

Honestly guys, I don't know. A mastering engineer said it was worth a read. 

Personally, I've given up on the idea of learning the art mastering in this life. I'll leave that to a pro when we get there. Hopefully he'll be up to speed w/ iTunes.

Songwriting, engineering, mixing - or even just improving my chops as a guitar player is enough to keep me busy for as long as I can imagine. 

I'd pick up sumi-e painting before mastering.


Until then, if I ever get to the point of sharing our work w/ you guys, I'll stick to a bit of limiting...

OK, I'll give you the free version based on Amazon's synopsis:

Topics covered include:

• Contrasting the production of CD albums with iTunes albums - Don't know about this one. Maybe this will cover tracks vs. albums? Or just old vs. new?

• High Resolution audio - He'll talk about bit depth, sampling rates, etc. 

• Dithering - He'll explain dithering, and he'll almost certainly get it right (unlike many explanations you might read elsewhere). But I will be happy to either point you to a reasonable reference or explain it in excruciating detail if you'd like.

• Distortion (and how to avoid it) - Maybe this is about clipping? Or maybe about how other processing (overcompressing) distorts audio?

• Lossy Coding - He'll give an overview of how lossy codecs work. I don't know how detailed it will be, but I suspect he will get it right, as (unlike many writers) he tends to do his due diligence for things like this. 

• Loudness Metering - Jeff will be happy to explain K-system to you for free. In fact, he will be unable to resist explaining it to anyone willing to listen.  

• Sound Check and how it affects our production techniques - Overcompression is even dumber (if that were possible) when your audience's iTunes player is going to automatically turn down overcompressed audio anyway - effectively undoing the loudness "benefit" you got from all that compression, but leaving all the horrible detriments intact.

• Apple’s tools for Mastered for iTunes - What Apple's tools are and how to use them. Because Apple's stuff is always so incredibly hard to figure out on your own. 

Foreword by renowned mastering engineer Bob Ludwig. - Sorry, you'll have to pay for this part.


Now don't get me wrong. Katz is a good writer and a good guy who bothers to get the technical theory type stuff correct (as opposed to the mastering/engineering stuff that you'd just expect someone like him to have expertise in). His Mastering Audio: The Art and the Science is a great book that everyone should read.

I sure it's actually a very good book.

The point is that there just really isn't much to Apple's Mastered for iTunes initiative. It's just a bunch of very basic common sense guidelines and some new tools. I just can't imagine it's worth buying a $30 book on it, particularly when a lot of the information is probably the same as Katz' mastering book already.

Why focused 'only' on iTunes?,.. for example; album and single releases are handled by 'a' distributor; those very same tracks are all distributed to hundreds of other music sites worldwide. Some of those sites also sell CD's.   

So no matter the target (retailer) the final master has to be very well done -- but I suppose this book may have some new tricks up it's sleeve. 

I too don't think you need this book, Rain. The key to beating this mp3 monster is to read up on what each digital download company expects. If they allow a wave file to be uploaded so it can be converted by them, your best bet is to totally avoid any loudness wars with limiting and keep the master file at -0.3 at all times. You shouldn't get any clipping and your mp3 conversion or whatever they use should be good also. The only time you may notice something is when a song is long which may force a lower encoding.

If the mainstream encoding turns out to be something around 160 kb or under, you're doomed with a long song no matter what you do. As long as it's 192 kb or above, you should just about always be in good shape. Keep volumes sane, watch your limiting and you should be in good shape.

Some guys export their mastered mp3 right from a project. I don't condone doing it this way because if you are at 24/48 and are going to export a 16/44 mp3 out, once it converts, the levels you had for 24/48 will not be the same for 16/44. So if you are exporting a 24/48 out of your DAW that will be converted to 16/44 mp3, the overall level is going to be different and if you're mixing pretty hot already, by the time you go to 16/44 mp3, you'll be clipping if you used the same output level. So you have to be careful here.

I have plugs that allow me to monitor what a file will look and sound like at 16/44 even though I'm at 24/48. This also shows me where my overs will be because once you convert to 44.1 and dither, you're going to lose that headroom. If I see a reading of -0.3 in my project at 24/48 while using my limiter, rest assured if I export, dither and convert my sample rate, I'll be clipping when I listen to that 16/44 file. This is what you don't want in an mp3 situation....or any situation actually. 

Loudness eliminated, a great mix and easy on the limiter are the best ways to beat this animal in any format. If you get a record deal, it's one less thing you need to worry about. But for the stuff that's for your head or whatever, you should be able to get great results without a book. There's no real science to this in my opinion. Garbage in, more garbage out due to encoding artifacts. Add loudness and excessive limiting on top of it...and man, you're in for a horrible sounding song. That's been my experience. Even my 128 kb tunes sound pretty good to my ears. Of course I prefer 192 and above because I honestly can't tell a difference between them and a 16/44 wave file unless I really listen close for every little detail part at a time over and over. If you can't tell a difference on something after listening 3 times, it's not worth forming an opinion on it really. So keep some of this in mind brother...it works for me all the time. :)

-Danny

Danny Danzi

I have plugs that allow me to monitor what a file will look and sound like at 16/44 even though I'm at 24/48. This also shows me where my overs will be because once you convert to 44.1 and dither, you're going to lose that headroom. If I see a reading of -0.3 in my project at 24/48 while using my limiter, rest assured if I export, dither and convert my sample rate, I'll be clipping when I listen to that 16/44 file. This is what you don't want in an mp3 situation....or any situation actually.