Apple Music macht den Abgleich mit der »Cloud« über Tags, und nicht mittels Fingerabdruck wie bei iTunes Match.
http://www.mcelhearn.com/apple-music-matches-files-with-metadata-only-not-acoustic-fingerprinting/
» Apple Music, however, works differently. It does not use the more onerous
» (in time and processing power) acoustic fingerprinting technique, but
» simply uses the tags your files contain. And it can lead to errors. Here’s
» an example of how this can be a bit surprising.[…]
»
» Since Apple Music matches only using tags, it can’t tell the difference
» between, say, a studio recording and a live version of a song. Or an
» explicit version and a clean version. This explains why, for example,
» Macworld editor Susie Ochs found that a live Phish album was replaced by
» studio versions of the same tracks.
»
» Note that, in my example above, even the duration was ignored: a 1:57 track
» was “matched” to a song that’s 3:36. […]
Das kann ja nur schiefgehen. Dafür, dass Apple gerne erwähnt, wie Musik doch Teil ihrer »DNA« wäre, gehen sie ganz schön sorglos mit eben jener ihrer Nutzer um.
» Apple Music, however, works differently. It does not use the more onerous
» (in time and processing power) acoustic fingerprinting technique, but
» simply uses the tags your files contain. And it can lead to errors. Here’s
» an example of how this can be a bit surprising.[…]
»
» Since Apple Music matches only using tags, it can’t tell the difference
» between, say, a studio recording and a live version of a song. Or an
» explicit version and a clean version. This explains why, for example,
» Macworld editor Susie Ochs found that a live Phish album was replaced by
» studio versions of the same tracks.
»
» Note that, in my example above, even the duration was ignored: a 1:57 track
» was “matched” to a song that’s 3:36. […]
Das kann ja nur schiefgehen. Dafür, dass Apple gerne erwähnt, wie Musik doch Teil ihrer »DNA« wäre, gehen sie ganz schön sorglos mit eben jener ihrer Nutzer um.