BIOS: "Downloading Is The Future Of The Music Industry"

[Kent Pribbernow]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.biosmagazine.co.uk/op.php?id=139' target='_blank'>http://www.biosmagazine.co.uk/op.php?id=139</a><br /><br /></div>"Before the launch of iTunes, music was already becoming a download market. The proliferation of MP3 players and illegal file sharing services such as Audiogalaxy and Kazaa paved the way for a legitimate download industry. As a result, by the end of 2003 the US iTunes service had delivered around 70 million tracks, demonstrating that it is possible to download music legally and make money for artists in the process."<br /><br />Marc Aafjes makes some interesting points in his article, particularly the bits about Apple and its closed nature. Although AAC is an open standard, no media player hardware outside of Cupertino yet supports this format. As Aafjes points out, the first online music store to offer music in <i>multiple</i> formats could become most successful. Will it be Europe based OD2? Possibly, but I expect the legal music download market to become highly polarized, and remain so for at least the next 3-5 years. With Microsoft and Apple fighting it out for world domination. Then we have a new MP3 format coming down the pike which supports its own copyright protection technology. Could this MP3 format become the dark horse, upstaging both Microsoft and Apple?

[Montego]

Ahh...Audiogalaxy. Loved it.

Once the RIAA Stormtroopers began their lawsuits, I decided to go legal. I've used Rhapsody (I liked the GUI, but not the monthly charge), and now I'm using The Sony Connect service. Not great, but not as bad as the press is saying. I have been using minidisc for about 4 years now, and it is nice to be able to download and go direct to my MD recorder. BTW, you CAN burn normal (non-ATRAC) CDs with the service.

However, the author's point about users downloading one or two tracks as being good for CD sales I don't think is entirely correct. All of us know that there are a gazillion albums out there with only a couple of good tracks. I think a LOT of people just want the one or two tracks that are good, and have no intention of purchasing the entire CD.

Having said that, I do sample quite a bit of stuff I'm not familiar with using Sony Connect, but I won't pay the $9.99 Sony wants for the entire album. If I want the album I just go to Amazon and find it used, and I can usually get one for $2-3 cheaper (and that's with a case and cover/liner notes), and the CDs are always in excellent condition. So, I'm not adding any to CD sales by buying used.

If Sony or other online services lowered per-track costs to 75-80 cents and albums to $7-8 I would certainly download much more than I do now.

[Felix Torres]

" Although AAC is an open standard, no media player hardware outside of Cupertino yet supports this format.

AAC may be (technically) open, but Fairplay isn't.
That is why nobody but Apple supports AAC in hardware.
(or in downloadable music; just ask Real/Rhapsody.)

And that is *exactly* the way Steve Jobs wants it.
Not going to change anytime soon.

So, as I've said before, there will be no universal music format any time soon.
Unless SONY gives up on ATRAC and adopts WMA.
Which is about as likely as Apple adopting WMA.
No use pondering the imponderable; it just ain't gonna happen.

Now, considering how the EU is stepping up its war against MS into the DRM arena, they will likely insist that d/ls sold in europe use the Philips DRM, not JANUS or FAIRPLAY, (but not necessarily Mp3pro files; that would be WTO-actionable) so things are going to get even stickier than they are, as there will likely be 7 formats fighting it out in the near term.

CDs are looking better and better by the minute.

Happy Fourth of July!

[Jonathon Watkins]

CDs are looking better and better by the minute.


Agreed. I'm just not tempted by downloading anytime soon. I just like ripping to my preferred format on 192Kbs MP3 format. Plus I have the artwork and physical media, often for less than the cost of downloading.

[Felix Torres]

Plus I have the artwork and physical media, often for less than the cost of downloading.

Ding-ding-ding!!!
We have a winnah!

Music d/ls use *lossy* compresion formats.
Which means the waveform is not identical.

So if the product is inferior, why pay the same (or higher) price?

Given that ripping music is hardly brain surgery, there are really only two reasons to buy d/ls:
1- "I want it now!" syndrome. As the saying goes, buy in haste, repent at leisure. Unless I'm dealing with a known quantity, I make a point of waiting before I buy any music. I have way too much music as is. :-)
2- One hit-wonders, new singles wrapped in greatest hits albums, and special remixes. And even there, I want at least 320kbps wma files like Musicmatch offers. Ideally the d/ls should be in lossless format if the price is to compare with cds.

I understand that d/ls are really replacements for radio and cassettes (in convenience and audio quality), not cds, but cassettes *are* cheaper than cds.

Pricewise, I'd say Wal-mart has the right range on singles but nobody has it right on albums, price or quality.
Fortunately, since the business is in its infancy there is time for vendors to learn how to properly price and package the product.

[RenesisX]

OD2 is totally "format agnostic". They only went with WMA because it was the only practical solution.

They have no qualms about adopting another format and DRM if needs require it.

[andrei]

So far the best music download site I found is allofmp3.com (http://www.allofmp3.com/index.shtml?r=284856732). It might not be 100% legal (according with the Russion law is OK), but it is by far the best out there. Most formats are supported (including AAC) and you can even download uncompressed files if you want to. And the price is just $0.01/MB. I wonder how long it will take RIAA to close it, although they've been trying for 2 years.