Skip to main content

Apple Music will stream at 256kbps like iTunes Match

Specific details about Apple Music are still rolling out after the iPhone maker announced its new subscription music service at WWDC yesterday. Music quality for streaming and offline playback is bound to be one concern for potential members and it appears Apple will be taking a conservative approach, according to Slashgear.

Apple Music will be at 256 kbps. In comparison, Beats Music uses a 320 kbps bitrate, as does Spotify, while Tidal offers a high-bitrate option.

By default, Beats Music only streamed at the higher 320kbps MP3 quality on the web and when the setting was changed within the mobile app. Download quality, however, did default to the higher quality version of tracks when available.

Apple Music’s streaming quality is on par with iTunes Match, which plays tracks back at 256kbps AAC quality. Apple doesn’t publicly document what bitrate iTunes Radio audio uses.

And while it’s possible to find higher quality music on Apple’s iTunes Store, the 256kbps bitrate is also the standard for most of the music Apple actually sells so Apple Music won’t be a change from this.

Apple Music’s 256k AAC playback is a higher quality than the 320k MP3 format that services like Spotify use. Apple’s solution is also a smaller file size than its competitors.

Spotify also defaults to lower streaming quality on mobile:

~96 kbps

Normal quality on mobile.

~160 kbps

Desktop and web player standard quality.

High quality on mobile.

~320 kbps (only available to Premium subscribers)

Desktop high quality.

Extreme quality on mobile.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. PMZanetti - 9 years ago

    The only actual step up from 256 kbps AAC would be Apple Lossless.

    320 mp3s are by no means better than 256 AAC.

    • Rich Davis (@RichDavis9) - 9 years ago

      320kbps AAC is better than 256kbps AAC. 320kbps MP3 is about the same as 256kbps AAC. But both MP3 and AAC is Lossy and information from the uncompressed file gets thrown out and then it’s compressed, which is why Lossy isn’t as good as Lossless. Lossless is identical to uncompressed whereas Lossy isn’t. It also matters what original version you are using. Apple’s Mastered For iTunes leverages extra bits and they using 24 Bit files and then using AAC compression and they sound pretty damn good, but the problem is that there isn’t as much of this type of content since the majority of the digital versions were 16 Bit vs 24 bit. It’s only been recently where recordings were done in 24 bit basic tracks or converted to 24 Bit from the analog masters. Many of the old analog recordings were archived in DSD format and they can convert to PCM 24 Bit which is what the labels are releasing to companies like HD Tracks. I think that’s where they got most of those Mastered for ITunes recordings, but there aren’t that many of those at this time.

      It’s still a mess and there is little consistency with what is getting released in Lossless.

  2. you can’t get higher quality on itunes that 256kbps aac m4a. and this format is superior to 320kbps mp3s. please correct that.

    • kevicosuave - 9 years ago

      “you can’t get higher quality on itunes that 256kbps aac m4a.”

      This is an awkwardly worded comment, but yes you can. iTunes itself allows 288kbps and 320kbps AAC. iTunes itself also offers ALAC, lossless encoding. The iTunes Store only offers a maximum quality of 256kbps AAC.

      And yes, 256kbps AAC is much better than 320kbps MP3.

      • Well, I’m talking about the iTunes music store. Not something you compress yourself. In the store you can only get 256 Kbps AAC, that’s a fact.

  3. 256 kbps AAC is about equivalent to 320 kbps MP3 in terms of quality according to listening tests. Spotify also uses Vorbis on some platforms (desktop), and AAC is a way better codec than Vorbis as well.

    • davidgoscinny - 9 years ago

      AAC might have advantages over Vorbis (such as smaller files) but it doesn’t have better quality.

  4. rnc - 9 years ago

    AAC 256kbit > MP3 320kbit

    And leaner on the data tool too…

  5. Robert Nixon - 9 years ago

    Man, does it ever piss me off when tech blogs make the mistake of assuming that a higher number is better. 256kbps is *objectively* better sound quality than 320kbps MP3.

  6. CrypieHef (@CrypieHef) - 9 years ago

    I will likely stick to Spotify then. I have been streaming full quality audio from Spotify through my AppleTV to my stereo system while cleaning the house. After yesterdays announcement I thought to myself, “how does the audio quality on iTunes radio compare?” Well, after playing the same song via iTunes radio I realized that Spotify’s quality was exponentially better. After switching to iTunes Radio I had to turn up the volume about 20 percent more to hear somewhat equal decibel and clarity of the music. I say somewhat because obviously the difference in bitrate matters on a good sound system; Or, good headphones. That said, I think Apple will still dominate the scene in this space due to contracts (number of albums and artists), as well as Beats1. I will likely end up using both Spotify and iTunes Music in the end. I agree that 256k bps is more than just fine for most people using headphones and a stereo. I’m the exception. There are a few to many more of people like me but I will probably still end up using both services.

    • Mark Johnston - 9 years ago

      You clearly don’t understand compression if you think that you need to turn up the volume to make something equally as loud and in turn of the same “quality”. You are right, the exception, you are the person that companies look for that are gullible enough to believe bigger numbers are always better. At least most on this thread get it.

      • CrypieHef (@CrypieHef) - 9 years ago

        I do understand compression. I totally understand the difference between a frickin AAC, MP3, OOG etc.. I was just using a real-world example. Spotify sounds epically better on my monitor cans, my home theatre stereo and in my car than iTunes Radio. I’m not saying Apple doesn’t have a great service either. Just that I prefer Spotify in most cases. Read the whole post troll.

  7. Brian Niesz - 9 years ago

    I’m glad to see the existing comments are all exactly what I was going to say: 256kbps AAC sounds significantly better than 320kbps MP3.

    • babywrinkels - 9 years ago

      I consider myself a bit of an audio guy (I’ve a objectively good sound setup at home) and I had no idea this was the case. Very good news to hear!

      • bullettoothtony81 - 9 years ago

        This is largely the case, but also genre dependent. If you’re listening to Simon & Garfunkel, I dare anyone to say they hear a difference even going to FLAC or ALAC. If you’re listening to faster songs or more complex mixes, especially moving into metal, yeah… there’s a difference.

    • sometoast - 9 years ago

      I program a streaming music feed that broadcasts at 128kbps MP3 and also forks a private monitor at 64kbps HE-AAC (the source files are 256kbps AAC). The AAC stream has audio quality equal/superior to the MP3 stream and at half the hit to my iPhone’s data plan! : D

    • Only that is inaccurate. They sound exactly the same. And it is highly unlikely you can tell the difference.

  8. Rainer BeardMan - 9 years ago

    Helloooo!!!! 256 kbps AAC isn’t below 320 kbps mp3.
    You guys from 9to5mac should know that!

    • dstin2014 - 8 years ago

      256 AAC is below 320 OGG, which is Spotify. Spotify does not use mp3. They omitted Spotify’s format for just this reason.

  9. Potver3 - 9 years ago

    How can you write about Apple and not know that AAC is far superior to mp3?
    320 kbps in this comparison means absolutely nothing, I’d gladly have the 256 kbps AAC any day.

    • Because AAC is not superior to MP3. At least not anymore. It may have been the case 10 years ago but it is not the case anymore. They are pretty much equal. You would be hard press to be able to tell the difference between 256AAC and 320MP3. And it is unlikely you could the difference between 256AAC vs 256MP3

      • dstin2014 - 8 years ago

        AAC is superior to mp3, but Spotify uses OGG, which at 320 beats AAC 256

  10. Centre Itech - 9 years ago

    Reblogged this on lecentreitech and commented:
    Nouveau flux de musique en continue pour 10 dollars mensuel disponible en juillet

  11. jefe - 9 years ago

    Why are people busting on this article? Paragraph 5 clearly states:

    “Apple Music’s 256k AAC playback is a higher quality than the 320k MP3 format that services like Spotify use. Apple’s solution is also a smaller file size than its competitors.”

    Try reading before critiquing.

    • Johan - 9 years ago

      The article has been modified after most comments appeared. Original headline was “Apple Music will stream at 256kbps, like iTunes Match but below Spotify’s top tier”.
      The paragraph you mention wasn’t there when first published. Instead it read: “Spotify, Tidal and even Beats Music offer higher quality playback options (…)”.
      Hence the busting. Duh.

      • señor jefe - 9 years ago

        Ha, wow. I stand corrected.

        So yeah, those guys suck! :)

    • dstin2014 - 8 years ago

      Spotify uses OGG, which at 320 does beat 256 AAC. True fact.

  12. davidgoscinny - 9 years ago

    Spotify doesn’t use the MP3 codec, it uses Ogg Vorbis:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorbis

  13. Susan (@shoshido) - 9 years ago

    I haven’t heard Pono or the equivalent, but Tidal HiFi is said to be lossless and sounds terrific on an iPod Touch with Bose IE2 earbuds. Definitely notice the difference, very clean and resonant. Worth the extra $10 as far as I’m concerned.

    • babywrinkels - 9 years ago

      Are you comparing apples to apples? (e.g. set your Spotify quality to “high” instead of it’s default 96kbps?) At my home setup (Dedicated Amp & DAC, AKG reference headphones), Tidal was basically indistinguishable, but slightly noticeable on treble-heavy tracks and on the edges of some vocals. On the go (Bose QC20i), I honestly cannot tell the difference between 320k MP3, 256k AAC, and whatever Tidal is using. At least not to the degree that something is really worth $120/year.

    • Jerry (@cliffjumper68) - 9 years ago

      Pono’s 24bit/196khz FLAC is better than “CD” quality but does not stream and few songs are available in that quality (few are recorded to that quality). When they are available they sound awesome. I really enjoy mine and prefer owning my music. Streaming is nice for discovery purposes. For streaming its hard to tell the difference between 256k aac and 320k mp3, internet lag, interference, local hardware (DAC’s) really have a bigger influence than file codec. Downloading usually makes a improvement which many of these services support.

  14. Guys, it’s 320 kbps Ogg Vorbis, not MP3. You also have the control to choose different bitrates on the Spotify mobile client, unlike the Apple Music app.

    https://support.spotify.com/us/learn-more/faq/#!/article/What-bitrate-does-Spotify-use-for-streaming

  15. dstin2014 - 8 years ago

    OGG is another story. They’re only telling you Spotify’s bitrate, no mention of format . OGG is slightly less efficient than AAC, but at 320 it makes up for it and then some. OGG is not mp3 by a long shot. Winner: Spotify

Author

Avatar for Zac Hall Zac Hall

Zac covers Apple news, hosts the 9to5Mac Happy Hour podcast, and created SpaceExplored.com.

Manage push notifications

notification icon
We would like to show you notifications for the latest news and updates.
notification icon
Please wait...processing
notification icon
We would like to show you notifications for the latest news and updates.
notification icon
Please wait...processing