I could not agree more with you! And you are right about buying from a Russian service like that. You might as well find a Torrent if you want a low-cost (cough FREE cough), high quality alternative to legal music stores.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Amazon Launches Public Beta of DRM-Free Music Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I could not agree more with you! And you are right about buying from a Russian service like that. You might as well find a Torrent if you want a low-cost (cough FREE cough), high quality alternative to legal music stores.
I have to say Amazon is scoring big on this one. I already loved Amazon, and now they have an awesome music store. DRM-free music, high bit rate, great prices, not shutting off Mac customers, etc. All positive points.
I have to say, if a song is on Amazon store I'll be buying it with amazon instead of iTunes, unless iTunes has it on iTunes Plus, which is hardly any songs I buy. The DRM and low bitrate on iTunes has really started to bug me the past couple years as I realize I will over time have better and better audio equipment, and 128 isn't cutting it. Waiting on CDs sucks, despite it being nice to have the packaging, but at 256 drm-free you really get almost all. A file that can be used on any device, good quality, and great pricing.
I must wonder how much apple will really care. The little Amazon application even puts the file right into iTunes. People will still buy iPods.
I have to say, if a song is on Amazon store I'll be buying it with amazon instead of iTunes, unless iTunes has it on iTunes Plus, which is hardly any songs I buy. The DRM and low bitrate on iTunes has really started to bug me the past couple years as I realize I will over time have better and better audio equipment, and 128 isn't cutting it. Waiting on CDs sucks, despite it being nice to have the packaging, but at 256 drm-free you really get almost all. A file that can be used on any device, good quality, and great pricing.
I must wonder how much apple will really care. The little Amazon application even puts the file right into iTunes. People will still buy iPods.
I agree. No doubt about it, iTunes is mainly an advertisement for iPods. It's almost like the movie business where the theatrical screening is a trailer for buying the DVD. Apple makes a ton of money on iPods, but a really small percentage of the profit from song and albums sold in iTunes.
watermarking
Watermarking scares the crap out of me. I hope it isn't going to be part of the future of DRM-free music.
What if someone rips off my iPod that has several hundred songs (with watermarks) that I legitimately bought? These things make it on a P2P network. I can guess what would happen if the RIAA gets involved. They'll sue anybody, I'd hate to have to plead my case to those buzzards.
Many years ago I had my CD case stolen along with around 50 CD's. I lost my music but at least I didn't have to fear going to jail. What if you lose your watermarked digital files? I suppose you'll have to get a police report or something to at least prove your player was stolen when the RIAA sues you.
Sometimes I wonder if the whole music industry is going to collapse one day.
Watermarking scares the crap out of me. I hope it isn't going to be part of the future of DRM-free music.
What if someone rips off my iPod that has several hundred songs (with watermarks) that I legitimately bought? These things make it on a P2P network. I can guess what would happen if the RIAA gets involved. They'll sue anybody, I'd hate to have to plead my case to those buzzards.
Many years ago I had my CD case stolen along with around 50 CD's. I lost my music but at least I didn't have to fear going to jail. What if you lose your watermarked digital files? I suppose you'll have to get a police report or something to at least prove your player was stolen when the RIAA sues you.
Sometimes I wonder if the whole music industry is going to collapse one day.
Same here. It certainly seems on the verge of collapsing. Great new technology, but an inability to embrace it when Napster came along almost a decade ago is killing the industry. Had they embraced it back then, they might not be in such bad shape today. The other thing is putting out a quality product. You can't expect people to pay for crappy music, which is exactly what 99% of the stuff is in today's industry.
Oh brother, get over yourself.
This has NOTHING to do with Radiohead "selling-out". Radiohead opposed the notion of buying individual tracks off albums; that's why they never offered their library to iTunes or other music download services. The would only offer their music as a whole album.
First of all: I could have sworn that Amazon had individual Radiohead-tracks for sale in their service. And second: I never really bought their argument of selling albums vs. selling individual songs. So they consider their albums to be a coherent whole that shouldn't be split up in individual tracks? Then why do their albums consist of individual tracks that could be skipped at will? Why not make an album with just one 70-minute long track?
That said: I was interested in buying from Amazon, I even created an user-ID to their service. And then I noticed that it's USA-only. Oh well, no money to them, I guess...
Were you paid to say that? I just downloaded the new Ben Lee album off Amazon and it sounds like crap. The previous album, from iTunes at 128kbps AAC sounds better. Of course neither is CD quality, bit mp3 is just junk. I won't be buying any more Amazon DLs unless they offer something worth paying for.
Well, it is a beta after all. I'm sure they'll make it a more worldwide service sometime in the near future.
Neither is my taste in music, which is why I've subscribed to emusic for 6 years.
iTunes is getting better though. But what really infuriates me about iTunes and Amazon is:
Because some of the stuff I listen to has songs longer that 8 minutes I can't buy individual tracks, they are only availble as part of the album.
So, do you think that because SJ said once that "PPC is better than x86", it means that PPC will be better than x86 for all eternity? Back when they made those "PPC vs. x86-shootout", PPC was more than competetive with Intel. But as time went on, that was no longer the case.
Maybe Amazon got a better deal with the labels? Maybe Apple is being greedy? We can't know for sure, but either one is a valid reason.
Quality Matters
Hi all,
first: iTunes is just the vehicle to sell iPods. With Amazon mp3 compatible to iPods this is just another plugin into the iPod/iTunes environment.
second: Quality matters. Many buyers of Apple and iTunes don't care about the price of a song being .99 or 1.29. The choice is different:
- We play our music on our home HiFi equipment. There are speakers which clearly make a difference between FM radio and a CD or a classical venyl.
- The iMac with iTunes (e.g.) is connected via Toslink cable to the tuner.
- We choose when buying "The Art of Fugue" by J.S.Bach not between the 9.99 album or the 17.99 album. We choose because we want original played on a piano or transcripted for orchestra. We choose by the style of playing by the artist. We choose - indeed - by the quality of encoding.
- We like to hear the differences between the loud brass and the diffuse strings in the back (o.k., that's not the Bach, that's Beethoven, but the example was so nice).
- There is NOT plenty of time to enjoy music for us. When there is half an hour to sit in the living room to hear "The Art of Fugue" then the following things are important:
-- Easy setup, installation and usage of the whole system - Apple delivers.
-- Quality - the venyl, the CD and AAC 256 delivers.
-- Price tag between 0.99 and 1.29 - clearly no. We have just spent five minutes before going into our cellar and choose between the Bordeaux or the Rioja to enjoy with the Bach. That moment we made a one time choice between 3 or 5 bucks without hesitation.
My resumé: I think it was an US president who has stated, that he has been a soldier, so that his son can become a farmer, so that his grandson may become an artist. This is development of society and culture. But this needs the people to recognize the worth of culture and accept a fair price, so that culture can be developed and artists can live and be productive.
I know great musicians who can't earn a living from their music. When hearing or reading discussions about "the right to copy free all music" or the choice between .99 and 1.29 for a song I get
Hi all,
first: iTunes is just the vehicle to sell iPods. With Amazon mp3 compatible to iPods this is just another plugin into the iPod/iTunes environment.
second: Quality matters. Many buyers of Apple and iTunes don't care about the price of a song being .99 or 1.29. The choice is different:
- We play our music on our home HiFi equipment. There are speakers which clearly make a difference between FM radio and a CD or a classical venyl.
- The iMac with iTunes (e.g.) is connected via Toslink cable to the tuner.
- We choose when buying "The Art of Fugue" by J.S.Bach not between the 9.99 album or the 17.99 album. We choose because we want original played on a piano or transcripted for orchestra. We choose by the style of playing by the artist. We choose - indeed - by the quality of encoding.
- We like to hear the differences between the loud brass and the diffuse strings in the back (o.k., that's not the Bach, that's Beethoven, but the example was so nice).
- There is NOT plenty of time to enjoy music for us. When there is half an hour to sit in the living room to hear "The Art of Fugue" then the following things are important:
-- Easy setup, installation and usage of the whole system - Apple delivers.
-- Quality - the venyl, the CD and AAC 256 delivers.
-- Price tag between 0.99 and 1.29 - clearly no. We have just spent five minutes before going into our cellar and choose between the Bordeaux or the Rioja to enjoy with the Bach. That moment we made a one time choice between 3 or 5 bucks without hesitation.
My resumé: I think it was an US president who has stated, that he has been a soldier, so that his son can become a farmer, so that his grandson may become an artist. This is development of society and culture. But this needs the people to recognize the worth of culture and accept a fair price, so that culture can be developed and artists can live and be productive.
I know great musicians who can't earn a living from their music. When hearing or reading discussions about "the right to copy free all music" or the choice between .99 and 1.29 for a song I get
Actually, your anemic response TAKES THE CAKE!
Well as much as I revel in having my posts called moronic (did you just steal my line? I use it all the time on here.) I would truly love to actually hear an argument in favor of that characterization. Do you actually have a rational counter argument to my post or are you just throwing out baseless insults?
I'm unable to really follow the rest of your schizophrenic response since you jump back and forth so much. Was that little snippet about the movie industry being more strict with their content a response to my post?
That's all I got from you so I guess I'll respond to that. What you are not understanding is the fact that Amazon was such a pushover when it came to their video download service. The end-user agreement of that service is one of the worst I've ever run into and certainly I am nowhere NEAR the only one who feels that way. Apparently you either didn't read my whole post before replying with your vitriol or you actually consider the terms and conditions I pointed out in Amazon's end-user agreement as fair and necessary.
Well as much as I revel in having my posts called moronic (did you just steal my line? I use it all the time on here.) I would truly love to actually hear an argument in favor of that characterization. Do you actually have a rational counter argument to my post or are you just throwing out baseless insults?
I'm unable to really follow the rest of your schizophrenic response since you jump back and forth so much. Was that little snippet about the movie industry being more strict with their content a response to my post?
That's all I got from you so I guess I'll respond to that. What you are not understanding is the fact that Amazon was such a pushover when it came to their video download service. The end-user agreement of that service is one of the worst I've ever run into and certainly I am nowhere NEAR the only one who feels that way. Apparently you either didn't read my whole post before replying with your vitriol or you actually consider the terms and conditions I pointed out in Amazon's end-user agreement as fair and necessary.
I REALLY doubt Amazon had ANYTHING to do with pulling off the DRM. Its much more likely a ploy by Universal to limit Apple's market share and therefore influence. This has nothing to do with an effort by Amazon to push the concerns of consumers to the forefront of music downloading.
Oh believe me, they know. I have been talking with one of our users at the workplace who wants to get certain song. She would also like to move that song to her cell-phone and use it as a ringtone. Simple enough? Well, no. She doesn't want to buy the whole album, she wants that one song. She can't buy it from iTunes since it wont work on her cellphone (she would also listen to that song on her cellphone). How about other online-stores? DRM'ed, so they wouldn't work either. The whole ordeal is very confusing and complicated.
Not to mention all those times when user has called me and asked "why doesn't this music-CD I bought work in my laptop?". "because it uses copy-protection....".
Believe me: they know.
hmmm
yes, that is weird, but the consumer wins here, as long as the quality and ease of 'shopping' for music is the same. I think I'd still favour iTunes, due to it's integration. But I am open to this. Perhaps it will mean that once contracts run out, Apple's prices will come down too, but it's not good for small independent artists, who do not sell in large volumes, lower prices mean an obvious lower income to those.
yes, that is weird, but the consumer wins here, as long as the quality and ease of 'shopping' for music is the same. I think I'd still favour iTunes, due to it's integration. But I am open to this. Perhaps it will mean that once contracts run out, Apple's prices will come down too, but it's not good for small independent artists, who do not sell in large volumes, lower prices mean an obvious lower income to those.
Oh, but it was okay for Apple to have exclusive deals for years while other music services got left out in the cold? Now the shoe's on the other foot and you're crying foul. Nice.
Um, how exactly were other services "left out in the cold"? They had more or less the same selection as Apple had, with more or less same prices.
I guess my intent was not to say you'll get wrapped up in terms and agreements with their music service, at least not now, while Universal is going to try to assist them in pulling market share from Apple. My point is that even though they may be different services, Its still the same damn company.
Therefore It's absolutely legitimate to compare the practices of the company in one area with their practices in another. If they rollover that quickly to the whims of one group (MPAA), why would ANYONE expect them to not do the same with the other (RIAA)?
Universal is behind all this, and they know how to draw customers away from Apple. I can only imagine the what they are cooking up in the labs over there for when Amazon becomes a popular service. (if ever)
Regarding my original post, I may not have explained my objections clear enough or I might have wrote too much without getting to the point.
There is a link there pointing to an article on BoingBoing.net that paints a better picture of the UNPRECEDENTED nature of Amazon's horrendous user policy with their unbox service.
Was I maybe too dramatic or enthusiastic about my disdain for their TOS in the post? Possibly. Should people take it seriously? Damn right.
Unless of course you care nothing about the type of company you are supporting with your dollars and just want the cheapest product. If that describes your attitude, then keep moving along with the heard. Just know you are part of the problem, not the solution. The corporations in America are becoming more emboldened with each passing day to take advantage of the ignorance and indifference of the consumers in this country with their business practices. And since the politicians in Washington have abdicated their responsibilities to protect the consumer and insure a just and competitive marketplace, the last remaining bastion of hope is the consumer with the power to vote with his or her dollar. Barring that, everyone should expect a steady march towards the day when the corporate sector and government all but merge and the country becomes a complete Corporatocracy in everything but name.
It works in Australia - i bought a song today, though I did select a US state and Zip code it processed my credit card just fine.
Were you paid to say that? I just downloaded the new Ben Lee album off Amazon and it sounds like crap. The previous album, from iTunes at 128kbps AAC sounds better. Of course neither is CD quality, bit mp3 is just junk. I won't be buying any more Amazon DLs unless they offer something worth paying for.
Were you paid to say that? You're the only person I've heard say that 128kkps AAC is better than variable 256kps Mp3. Do you honestly think var256kps is junk in comparison? Come on now!
I've tried and tested many bitrates over the years, and there is no way in hell 128kps AAC is better.
I have two iPods and two Macs but I listen to my music on other machines besides Apple based systems. When I'm at work I use WinAmp because it is a million times faster and less obtrusive than iTunes for Windows. DRM-free means I have the ability to listen to my music on any device that I wish. Just like I can take my store bought CD and put it in any CD player without hassle.
Believe it or not, there are other people in the world besides you.
Early 80's all over again
I think through this whole Universal/NBC fiasco part of the blame lies with Apple. The reality of the situation is that from a consumer standpoint, Apple has probably the best end-to-end user experience with purchasing and player digital music. Unfortunately they're being more rigid than they have to. If the issue is a more flexible pricing structure where the older catalog is a little cheaper and new releases are a little more - I would be cool with that. But Apple's being Apple. They can claim its all about the consumer, but its really all about them keeping their dominance in the market. Sound familiar? It's exactly what happened in the early PC market. Apple made the best product, but price and openness are what people want - at least the illusion of a choice would be good. I say open it up. The iPods are the best players in every class. They'll continue to outsell the competition. But forcing people into this iTunes-iPod situation where songs are all the same price is going to cause more and more of a squeeze. Then before you know - 96% of the world has a ****-brown Zune. I don't about you, but thats not a world I want to live in.
The reality is Apple better get off their high-horse and make some reluctant decisions or be doomed to repeat history.
I think through this whole Universal/NBC fiasco part of the blame lies with Apple. The reality of the situation is that from a consumer standpoint, Apple has probably the best end-to-end user experience with purchasing and player digital music. Unfortunately they're being more rigid than they have to. If the issue is a more flexible pricing structure where the older catalog is a little cheaper and new releases are a little more - I would be cool with that. But Apple's being Apple. They can claim its all about the consumer, but its really all about them keeping their dominance in the market. Sound familiar? It's exactly what happened in the early PC market. Apple made the best product, but price and openness are what people want - at least the illusion of a choice would be good. I say open it up. The iPods are the best players in every class. They'll continue to outsell the competition. But forcing people into this iTunes-iPod situation where songs are all the same price is going to cause more and more of a squeeze. Then before you know - 96% of the world has a ****-brown Zune. I don't about you, but thats not a world I want to live in.
The reality is Apple better get off their high-horse and make some reluctant decisions or be doomed to repeat history.
Still it is win for the consumers... For Now. I like my iPod and all but I don't feel the urge that everyone should have one. Using an Open DRM Free music format allows all players to play it, whereever. Burn them to CD's and play them in MP3 aware CD Players. Also it will allow for other players to grow and flurish without fearing locking. So if the guy likes his Zune he can use it but not worry about Microsoft Dominating the Music Market. In every case it would be a win for the customer... For Now... The down side if they decide to go DRM again we all except for whatever popular music player at the time will be locked out.
Maybe it is just a loop hole they will fix quite quickly (I hope not!), but I just managed to buy a track off Amazon.com.
I have a One-Click account, but with a UK credit card and address.
There is a notice: Downloads only for US buyers or something like that I turned a blind eye
I have a One-Click account, but with a UK credit card and address.
There is a notice: Downloads only for US buyers or something like that I turned a blind eye