Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Sony BMG to Offer DRM-Free Music on Apple's iTunes?

flottenheimer said:
DRM free music is the only way forward.
The next thing Apple needs to do is to drop AAC (which isn't compatible with everything) and switch to MP3 (which is compatible with everything).

...oh, and before you even get started:
Click to expand...

Just to add to that, Apple will NEVER do it. Why? Because it would actually cost them so much to do so.

Good 'ol Wikipedia said:
No licenses or payments are required to be able to stream or distribute content in AAC format. This reason alone makes AAC a much more attractive format to distribute content than MP3, particularly for streaming content (such as Internet radio).
Click to expand...

So try and factor in how many songs Apple sell, then how much per track they'd have to pay to distribute in MP3. You're talking about a lot of money :eek:
 
flottenheimer said:
DRM free music is the only way forward.
The next thing Apple needs to do is to drop AAC (which isn't compatible with everything) and switch to MP3 (which is compatible with everything).

...oh, and before you even get started:
Click to expand...

OR you can just go to Amazon which already offers one-click purchases of (DRM-Free) MP3s encoded at 256 kbps. The downloader even imports them into iTunes automatically.

Hmm. Looks like the Big 4 have a strategy in place after all. Don't know why most of the posters here can't comprehend that. Oh, that's right it's always cool to "stick it to the man".
 
This is all well and good, but isn't Sony BMG on the verge of splitting back up into its two constituent elements, Sony Music Entertainment and Bertelsmann? Where would that leave such an agreement?
 
flottenheimer said:
DRM free music is the only way forward.
The next thing Apple needs to do is to drop AAC (which isn't compatible with everything) and switch to MP3 (which is compatible with everything).

...oh, and before you even get started:
Click to expand...

I think the real problem is the mp3 patent and licensing issues. For every track sold on itunes in the mp3 format money would need to be paid for use of the mp3 format in a commercial store (see mp3licensing.com). I was under the impression that this, as well at the higher audio quality at a given bitrate was the reason apple chose AAC?
 
Does any one know if apple uses a variable bit rate (VBR) encoder for their itunes plus encoding or any more details besides just 256 because there are different qualities of 256kbs

and...
flottenheimer said:
The next thing Apple needs to do is to drop AAC (which isn't compatible with everything) and switch to MP3 (which is compatible with everything). :
Click to expand...
Almost all mp3 players in the past year have been able to play AAC/m4a
 
Now that we have HD video in Itunes I really want LOSSLESS audio too!!!
Comon Apple!
 
sawtdk said:
Now that we have HD video in Itunes I really want LOSSLESS audio too!!!
Comon Apple!
Click to expand...

Given the average file size of the HD offerings, I wouldn't hold my breath for lossless audio. Considering that the audio track(s) could easily add a GB or two to the file size.
:eek: You meant music.... hmm, would the increase in files size be worth it?
 
First of all, Apple will NEVER put lossless music up for sale, so STOP YOUR B*TCHING!!! :mad::mad::mad:

Second of all, Amazon MP3 does NOT have the same kind of selection as Apple's iTunes, including the Walt Disney Records catalog.

So, here's my dream announcement: WDR and Sony BMG are both going iTunes Plus!

BJ
 
Need lossless

While I have and will continue to buy music from iTunes, Apple really needs to get in the business of offering a lossless format. While people continue to use MP3, it is for all practical purposes a dead technology...with storage no longer a premium, lossless should be the standard.
 
The record companies are acting like a bunch of immature children.

Seriously, I don't understand why the artists bother working with them. Skip the retarded record company and put your stuff straight on iTunes. What the heck does the record company do? Take money away from the artist? Negotiate terrible deals? Oh, right, they advertise the artist. Seriously, I can't remember ever buying a song because I saw an advertisement anywhere but on iTunes (or because I heard it from someone else.)
 
Restraint of trade?

In a more sensible era, what the record labels are doing in treating iTunes differently from Amazon would've been called restraint of trade. It would've been illegal and immoral. Today, it's just immoral, and, well, totally stupid. They somehow seem to think that iTunes is their customer, but it's really US they're messing with.
 
Hooray! I hope this comes true and Sony BMG comes to the iTunes party.

You Americans, you're so spoilt for choice ;). Here in Australia, we have no Amazon MP3 or eMusic. The only real competitor to iTunes in Australia in digital stores is Bigpond, which is conveniently not compatible with iPods because they sell DRM-loaded WMV files.

And it seems that Amazon isn't interested in Australia, either. I e-mailed them about their MP3 downloads and I got a 2-line reply that they don't sell to Australian addresses and don't have any plans to. Thanks a bunch guys.

And by the way, how on earth does Sony BMG offering music for sale on iTunes give away power. That's got to be the most ridiculous thing I've heard - the same could be said whenever any record labels sell to any distributor!

Why won't the record companies realise, it makes sense for them to sell their product on iTunes - it supports the world's most popular MP3 player! Duh!
 
ArtOfWarfare said:
The record companies are acting like a bunch of immature children.

Seriously, I don't understand why the artists bother working with them. Skip the retarded record company and put your stuff straight on iTunes. What the heck does the record company do? Take money away from the artist? Negotiate terrible deals? Oh, right, they advertise the artist. Seriously, I can't remember ever buying a song because I saw an advertisement anywhere but on iTunes (or because I heard it from someone else.)
Click to expand...

Having a few friends in the music industry, I can say that record companies are a necessary evil. They give financial backing and a stable footing, as well as promoting you. These things are damn hard when you first start out. Of course, when you're a big name, you can ditch them and start up your own record company (like a lot of the big names have) :D
 
This is good news. These stories about Studios and Networks are usually pretty accurate, so I believe it. Hopefully this will sway the other two. Apple needs to throw their weight around a little more and demand DRM-Free whenever these contracts come up for renewal. Enough is enough.

As for Loseloss, I would welcome it as long as there was an option to "Transcode on the Fly to the iPhone/iPod." I expect Lossless will come, but not for a while.

As for switching to MP3, Apple will never do it. Most people play their iTunes music on iPods, which handle AAC fine (not to mention most "Mp3" players handle it as well as long as there is no copy protection). AAC is also superior codec.
 
I thought Sony & BMG were told to demerge and Universal borught BMG. I'm confused will someone please explain?
Thanks.
 
Hopefully this comes to pass. I always thought that the way it would happen is one of the holdouts would see the light and give in to DRM-free and the rest of the stragglers would hopefully fall like dominos in short order.

Jon

PS, I just don't see the business sense of 'sticking it to Apple'. With their dealings with Amazon, Wal-mart et al., they're already providing DRM-free tracks and I have to assume either receiving the same or less revenue from the alternative distributor than with Apple. In other words, they're missing out on revenue by spurning Apple. (also, I'm not a legal expert but I have to question whether their practice of enforcing DRM on one distributor while allowing others to go DRM-free sets them up for some type of violation of law somewhere.)

Do they think that if they can somehow weaken Apple that this will allow them to return to the dream of strict DRM, high prices on tracks ? Sorry, that bird has already flown. The BEST thing they can do from a financial standpoint is to drop the DRM nonsense with Apple ASAP and try to pick up whatever residuals might still be available from people interested in upgrading their old DRMed catalogs, otherwise that source of money will slowly erode with time.
 
MacTraveller said:
No, your statement is wrong. The Big Four, at this moment, would not cede any further bargaining power to Apple if they are now to allow their DRM tracks to Apple. Fact is, The Big Four have already made their DRM tracks available to other venues such as Amazon.... so it's NOT like Apple iTunes will be some all-godly-powerful exclusive seller of their DRM tracks. Customers will have a choice to obtain DRM tracks from other sellers other than Apple.... be it Amazon, Walmart, or whomever.
Click to expand...


But wouldn't that give them power over Apple by NOT allowing iTunes to have the DRM-free music? That's where I'm coming from. If the DRM music sells well in those other places, they can come to Apple and say, "Look, we're doing fine selling through x,y,z companies... if you want our music DRM-free you'll have to make some concessions."
 
organerito said:
Hi,
Those are my reasons why I won't buy music from itunes or limewire. Once it is DRM-free and encode higher than 160Kbs, I'll consider the idea.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough, a significant percentage of the music that iTunes sells is DRM-free and encoded higher than 160k. That's what this article is discussing.
 
lossless and HD music

A lossless and HD music format choice would be nice too. I stopped buying iTunes (even Plus) when I discovered SACDs. Before you go on about there being no SACDs out there, I listen to classical music, and there are 1000s of classical SACDs released.:p
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5F136 Safari/525.20)

Sony, in addition to their own music players, sells iPod accessories. :)

Thanks, Sony!
 
ArtOfWarfare said:
The record companies are acting like a bunch of immature children.

Seriously, I don't understand why the artists bother working with them. Skip the retarded record company and put your stuff straight on iTunes. What the heck does the record company do? Take money away from the artist? Negotiate terrible deals? Oh, right, they advertise the artist. Seriously, I can't remember ever buying a song because I saw an advertisement anywhere but on iTunes (or because I heard it from someone else.)
Click to expand...
Read an interesting article not long ago that basically said the only real role left for record companies is financial backing to get tours going.
 
I buy a little music from Amazon, but usually end up at iTunes. I would guess the decision was entirely economic as they realized that, by trying to keep Apple in check, they were actually losing potential customers.
 
It actually makes a lot of sense that they did this.

I was exclusively an iTMS customer until Amazon started selling DRM-free on all labels. Now I'm almost exclusively an Amazon customer.

I may go back to buying some music on iTunes if they get DRM-free from other labels, but at this point, the labels managed to break Apple's monopoly in my case.

I bet I'm not the only one. This sucks that they had to do this, but I can see why they did it. Either way I get DRM-free goodness, so I'm not going to complain much. The positive side is that iPhone and iPod Touch users will now be able to buy more DRM-free tracks from their devices without needing a computer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back