• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Gadgets
  • Tablets and e-Readers
What Is the Problem with itunes? (Genuine question)
carnivalist
22-09-2008
I was just wondering why those who appear to have some experience with alternative applications, routinely criticise itunes?

I've never used it myself, but the problem is I need a high-capacity portable and it seems that the classic ipod is the only one that has the sort of capacity I'm after.

Will itunes really have me tearing my hair out? (What's left of it).

I'm already about to switch from b**stard Windows to Linux - I don't want to have a similarly frustrating experience with another piece of software I'll be using regularly.

Actually, on that note, does Itunes even work with Linux?
beckic
22-09-2008
I've been wondering the same thing.
I have used Itunes for a little over a year now and I really can't see any fault with it. It's so simple to sync everything up and keep music in order, works like a treat. The in-built itunes store is really useful, even if I only use it for looking up and sampling music. Podcasts are kept separate from all my other music... yeah, I can't think of any other points to make now but I'm definitely a happy Itunes user!
I used to use windows media player and now that just seems so messy and basic when I look at it now.
Oh, and I'm not sure about anything Linux so I can't help you there. sorry!
sancheeez
22-09-2008
In my case it's not a case of not liking it, it simply doesn't work properly. (Although, I don't like it anyway .....)

All my MP3's have normalisation information stored in the ID3 tag. By that I mean all the tracks have been scanned to determine their peak level and a +/- dB reading stored in the tag so that when played back on software that uses it, all the tracks play back at the same level. The MP3 itself is not altered in any way, it's just a bit of info in the tag.

iTunes does have a normalisation feature. But it's rubbish.

When you load tracks onto an iPod (using iTunes) with non-iTunes normalisation info in them they don't work properly.

Any +dB reading, it interprets as PLAY IT BACK AS LOUD AS POSSIBLE!

Any -dB reading, it interprets as play it back REALLY quietly so you can barely hear it.

If I load exactly the same tracks onto an iPod using MediaMonkey they work just fine. So, the problem isn't the iPod, it's iTunes.

They may have fixed this in the more recent versions of iTunes ..... I don't know. But it doesn't matter. IMHO MediaMonkey is a far better, faster and more streamlined piece of music management software and it syncs to my wifes iPod just fine so we just stick with that.
analogueagent
23-09-2008
I don't know why anyone would want to use a piece of software for synching their MP3 player. My music is already organised on my computer, why should I be FORCED to install a piece of software to re-organise my music? Just install it as a flash drive, and have done with it.
LozPR
23-09-2008
Originally Posted by sancheeez:
“In my case it's not a case of not liking it, it simply doesn't work properly. (Although, I don't like it anyway .....)

All my MP3's have normalisation information stored in the ID3 tag. By that I mean all the tracks have been scanned to determine their peak level and a +/- dB reading stored in the tag so that when played back on software that uses it, all the tracks play back at the same level. The MP3 itself is not altered in any way, it's just a bit of info in the tag.

iTunes does have a normalisation feature. But it's rubbish.

When you load tracks onto an iPod (using iTunes) with non-iTunes normalisation info in them they don't work properly.

Any +dB reading, it interprets as PLAY IT BACK AS LOUD AS POSSIBLE!

Any -dB reading, it interprets as play it back REALLY quietly so you can barely hear it.

If I load exactly the same tracks onto an iPod using MediaMonkey they work just fine. So, the problem isn't the iPod, it's iTunes.

They may have fixed this in the more recent versions of iTunes ..... I don't know. But it doesn't matter. IMHO MediaMonkey is a far better, faster and more streamlined piece of music management software and it syncs to my wifes iPod just fine so we just stick with that.”

That is (was?) mega annoying, I always just equalise the songs using another program, and have them all at the same set level. The I-Tunes version I have works okay, so I don't bother adding any of the updates either in case they're buggy!
A321
23-09-2008
Originally Posted by sancheeez:
“In my case it's not a case of not liking it, it simply doesn't work properly. (Although, I don't like it anyway .....)

All my MP3's have normalisation information stored in the ID3 tag. By that I mean all the tracks have been scanned to determine their peak level and a +/- dB reading stored in the tag so that when played back on software that uses it, all the tracks play back at the same level. The MP3 itself is not altered in any way, it's just a bit of info in the tag.

iTunes does have a normalisation feature. But it's rubbish.

When you load tracks onto an iPod (using iTunes) with non-iTunes normalisation info in them they don't work properly.

Any +dB reading, it interprets as PLAY IT BACK AS LOUD AS POSSIBLE!

Any -dB reading, it interprets as play it back REALLY quietly so you can barely hear it.

If I load exactly the same tracks onto an iPod using MediaMonkey they work just fine. So, the problem isn't the iPod, it's iTunes.

They may have fixed this in the more recent versions of iTunes ..... I don't know. But it doesn't matter. IMHO MediaMonkey is a far better, faster and more streamlined piece of music management software and it syncs to my wifes iPod just fine so we just stick with that.”

Agree totally. I've also stated on here in the past that I have had problems with it crashing when over 10,000 songs are loaded, also the beatles and The Beatles (For example) get treated as two different artists.

I've also gone down the MediaMonkey route (Much better at finding missing album art also)
jammers
23-09-2008
So the real issue here is that people use different software to adjust volume levels and then wonders why iTunes does not detect it, has songs that have incorrect ID tags but then blames iTunes and finally someone likes to spend hours creating folders and more folders, that an iPod wouldn't recognsie anyway, instead of just letting iTunes do it for you in a logical manner - artist, album song.

Who wants to spend hours putting new inputs into a fussy homemade filing system?
sancheeez
23-09-2008
Originally Posted by jammers:
“So the real issue here is that people use different software to adjust volume levels and then wonders why iTunes does not detect it, has songs that have incorrect ID tags but then blames iTunes and finally someone likes to spend hours creating folders and more folders, that an iPod wouldn't recognsie anyway, instead of just letting iTunes do it for you in a logical manner - artist, album song.

Who wants to spend hours putting new inputs into a fussy homemade filing system?”

No.

The MP3's are not physically adjusted in any way. It's just a piece of information stored in the ID3 tag.

When transferred to the iPod using software other than iTunes, they play back on the iPod just fine. Every other piece of software I've ever played them with had no problems. Every other portable player I've put them on had no problems. The ONLY device/interface that has any trouble with them is the iTunes/iPod combo.

I don't spend hours "putting new inputs into a fussy homemade filing system?". MediaMonkey has a function which will scan all selected tracks, determine the peak volume, and store that information in the ID3 tag (in the form of a very accurate +/- dB reading .... as it should be). Takes about 2 clicks of the mouse and then you just leave it to it (iTunes would still be loading the file system at this point).

As I mentioned, iTunes has it's own normalisation system, but it's crap. It uses a +10 to -10 slider (or at least it did in when we last had iTunes installed on the PC ..... we don't at the moment), if it has a "scan entire library" option, I never found it.

If you actually have a look at MediaMonkey, you'll find it offers a lot of similar functionality to iTunes. Plus a few extras iTunes doesn't have, minus a few other things that are iTunes specific. It's a very nice piece of software and runs a hell of a lot better than iTunes for me on an XP PC. Hardly a "fussy homemade filing system".

ID3 tags and the information they store were around iTunes. If anything, iTunes should be built to work round them, and not vice versa.

Contrary to what some people believe, the world of digital media was not built upon, and does not revolve around, iTunes.
jammers
23-09-2008
Originally Posted by sancheeez:
“No.

The MP3's are not physically adjusted in any way. It's just a piece of information stored in the ID3 tag.

When transferred to the iPod using software other than iTunes, they play back on the iPod just fine. Every other piece of software I've ever played them with had no problems. Every other portable player I've put them on had no problems. The ONLY device/interface that has any trouble with them is the iTunes/iPod combo.

I don't spend hours "putting new inputs into a fussy homemade filing system?". MediaMonkey has a function which will scan all selected tracks, determine the peak volume, and store that information in the ID3 tag (in the form of a very accurate +/- dB reading .... as it should be). Takes about 2 clicks of the mouse and then you just leave it to it (iTunes would still be loading the file system at this point).

As I mentioned, iTunes has it's own normalisation system, but it's crap. It uses a +10 to -10 slider (or at least it did in when we last had iTunes installed on the PC ..... we don't at the moment), if it has a "scan entire library" option, I never found it.

If you actually have a look at MediaMonkey, you'll find it offers a lot of similar functionality to iTunes. Plus a few extras iTunes doesn't have, minus a few other things that are iTunes specific. It's a very nice piece of software and runs a hell of a lot better than iTunes for me on an XP PC. Hardly a "fussy homemade filing system".

ID3 tags and the information they store were around iTunes. If anything, iTunes should be built to work round them, and not vice versa.

Contrary to what some people believe, the world of digital media was not built upon, and does not revolve around, iTunes.”

iTunes uses ID3 Tags. I use a Mac so am very happy with iTunes. In iTunes preferences under playback there is a check box that will play all songs back at the same volume. It doesn't even need to scan the library. iPods have the same option in their preferences.
sancheeez
23-09-2008
Originally Posted by jammers:
“In iTunes preferences under playback there is a check box that will play all songs back at the same volume. It doesn't even need to scan the library. iPods have the same option in their preferences.”

I believe thats known as "sound check" within iTunes and it's not very good.

Read up on it yourself. As far as normalisation features goes, it's not very good .... or accurate.

Oh, and it does have to scan the tracks. In order to normalise a track, you need to know what it's peak levels are. If you don't scan the track(s), you don't know what peak volume is, so you can't normalise it.

If you don't believe me: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2425

Also, have a read though this: http://forums.ilounge.com/showthread.php?t=61187 (About half way down page three is where they start pulling it apart)

A few people in there mention why sound check isn't very good.

If you are happy with sub-standard normalisation, on you go ....
kingdave
24-09-2008
The issue I have with iTunes is that it just will not add my music to the library. When I click on Add Folder it starts whirring away and then just hangs.

I do have quite a large music collection on my PC but I don't want to have to copy it to where iTunes thinks it should be. I have very specific folders for music, video, games, programs etc all on different drives. Very frustrating!!
Bassthound
26-09-2008
I must admit to rarely using ITunes but Mrs B has an ipod and a Iphone so I am unfortunately forced to sometimes. It's possible that some of my issues could be resolved by some digging.

With several PC's and laptops around the house it could very easily be a different PC that I connect the IPod to when I get asked to put a new album on it. The MP3 Collections might be setup with a different drive mapping than the last time it was used so it takes a long time to reset all the folder locations.

Playlists - WHY !!!!!! - Not surprisingly the MP3 collection is larger than the Ipod. As per previous issue - different playlists on different PC's end up differently.

Why oh why does it delete a track from the Ipod if it happens not to be available to the PC that it's connected to at the time ??

I could go on but it all stems around the fact that ITunes presumes the user doesn't have a brain.

Basically - ITunes isn't flexible. If you've got One PC , with your MP3 collection in one place then it's probably just about usable. Want to use it in a flexible multiiple config environment forget it.

Add - I'd agree with comment that I've already orgainsed my music collection so ITunes should just leave me to it.

I spend an awful lot of time commuting so have just over 1TB of video and music , using an Archos as a drag and drop device is an awfult lot easier and less time consuming than getting ITunes to work.
kingdave
26-09-2008
The simple solution is, however, to use SharePod instead of iTunes.

This has the benefit of being a drag and drop type interface but it will also put your music on your iPod and allow you to take it off when you get to another computer, in the same way if you were transferring files on a USB flash keyring.
sancheeez
26-09-2008
Originally Posted by Bassthound:
“Basically - ITunes isn't flexible. If you've got One PC , with your MP3 collection in one place then it's probably just about usable. Want to use it in a flexible multiiple config environment forget it.

I spend an awful lot of time commuting so have just over 1TB of video and music , using an Archos as a drag and drop device is an awfult lot easier and less time consuming than getting ITunes to work.”

Yup.

I'd say you've pretty much hit the nail on the head there.

For people with one PC, enough storage on the iPod to fit their entire collection, and happy to let iTunes do everything for them - no problem.

But ....

More than one PC, more music/video than can fit on an iPod, and additional tweaks or manually applied organisation to your files and iTunes just turns into a big, clunky, restrictive PITA.

As long as you're happy to operate within it's boundaries/limitations, it's fine.
frasera
26-09-2008
it was a bit slow on pcs at first.

and pc users that complain tended to have a different mentality. they did not like the simplification/opaqueness of interface that apple likes. of course since many did not own ipods anyways they complained even louder:P they didn't get to enjoy the smooth integration of ipod with itunes with all the little things that make using the ipod easier. many still like to drag and drop to their devices, you can't please such folk.
sancheeez
26-09-2008
Originally Posted by frasera:
“and pc users that complain tended to have a different mentality. they did not like the dumbing down of interface that apple likes.”

There you go.

Fixed that for ya.
steveOooo
28-09-2008
Originally Posted by sancheeez:
“Yup.

I'd say you've pretty much hit the nail on the head there.

For people with one PC, enough storage on the iPod to fit their entire collection, and happy to let iTunes do everything for them - no problem.

But ....

More than one PC, more music/video than can fit on an iPod, and additional tweaks or manually applied organisation to your files and iTunes just turns into a big, clunky, restrictive PITA.

As long as you're happy to operate within it's boundaries/limitations, it's fine.”

who has over 120gb of content (audio/videos) ?
sancheeez
28-09-2008
Originally Posted by steveOooo:
“who has over 120gb of content (audio/videos) ?”

Me.

I have more than 120gb of music alone ..... never mind video!
DOS
28-09-2008
itunes seems to corrupt my itunes library far too often, and messes up the meta data. Really need to re-rip my cds then keep backups with correct data, not really got time to do that though.
moisie
29-09-2008
Originally Posted by analogueagent:
“I don't know why anyone would want to use a piece of software for synching their MP3 player. My music is already organised on my computer, why should I be FORCED to install a piece of software to re-organise my music? Just install it as a flash drive, and have done with it.”

Personally I found it far easier to set up my 46 smart playlists via iTunes (or other software) on a 24" monitor than it would be via a flash drive.

My music is organised but I don't just listen to it via the folders I've organised it into, I rate it, I sometimes only want short songs, songs I haven't listened to recently, songs I've played a lot and so on. Software allows me to manage that.
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map