Case and point is the massive amounts of lawsuits on young teenagers who share music and other files over the Internet. Now, I am totally guilty of doing this. I too have done it in the past but now that we have places like iTunes what’s the point? I mean really. A bunch of people here on this board have expressed their bias toward paying for downloading music and I say to you, what’s your problem? Think about it this way, when you buy something the money goes to the composer in some way; you are still supporting the composer of your favorite scores.

Personally, I love the idea of iTunes. Granted they have their pesky MP4 codec but there are ways around that. iTunes has given me the opportunity to download my long awaited “Millennium” music by Mark Snow and also Bruce Broughton’s long out of print “Homeward Bound 2.” I think all the people that complain just don’t want to spend the money and it comes down to them being cheap and not wanting to support the music unless it’s via a CD purchase. People who want to pick a fight about how they will not download music, man, that’s just being spoiled and especially if you have a little cash to burn, you really should not be tossing a fit over it.

iTunes and the other services (iTunes happens to be the best) will be here to stay. I think this is a way to please the record labels. Think about it, it’s either this or those Copy Protected CDs and new CD Audio format to support it will come much faster than any of us want. I mean I’m here at college, like I’m gonna bring all my real CDs over here? Hell no! I currently have 28.9 GB of mp3s on my computer and I own every, single, track. Granted there are some things I don’t own, but that’s simply because they were never produced to begin with…you all know what I’m taking about.

So really, take a good look at the music industry that gives us the soundtracks we know and love. iTunes is not the end of the world, it’s just the start of something new. CDs will be around for a long time I think, and with new formats like DVD-A and SACD, the good old Audio CD format has stood the test of over 25 years of selling and will keep selling.

So go check out iTunes and have fun. Maybe buy a track or two…you might be surprised at what you might find.

--Brian

Granted this is true but it applies to any type of compressed audio...so there really is no way around it. And from what I've found, general listening on a car or CD player, the iTunes tracks play decent and are serviceable.

--Brian

quote:

---

what’s your problem?

---

Do I really need to enumerate all of the problems with online music again?

Summary of problems:

• Inferior sound quality (including digital artifacting plus compromised frequency response as mentioned earlier in this thread)
  
• No liner notes (or only "virtual" liner notes, which are not professionally printed on proper paper)
  
• Some online music comes with digital rights management (DRM) that often infringes on fair use
  
• Need CD-R media and jewel cases if you want to listen to it on external equipment or back it up incase of disk failure (if DRM allows this)
  
• The lifespan of CD-Rs is questionable. The lifespan of a typical hard drive is about five years. The lifespan of a pressed CD is at least 20 years, possibly even 100 years. (Ignoring, of course, the rare badly manufactured CDs mostly from the early 1990s.)
  
• Wear and tear on CD burner
  
• Time spent burning CD-Rs and downloading the music
  
• Too expensive for what you get (considering all of the problems listed above) -- $3-5 per album is more like it.
  

At this point they can't even give iTunes tracks away.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crono/Kyp:
[B]Granted this is true but it applies to any type of compressed audio...

---

That's the point.

quote:

---

so there really is no way around it.

---

You say: “I think all the people that complain just don’t want to spend the money and it comes down to them being cheap and not wanting to support the music unless it’s via a CD purchase. People who want to pick a fight about how they will not download music, man, that’s just being spoiled and especially if you have a little cash to burn, you really should not be tossing a fit over it.”

Nice to know that I am “spoiled and cheap” because I don’t like iTunes.

The impression that your post left with me is that you think that people who object to iTunes just don’t want to pay for music and want it free. I really resent that as I spend a couple thousand a year on music of all different sorts and I think iTunes is a bad idea.

(Slightly off topic rant)

You say: “I think this is a way to please the record labels. Think about it, it’s either this or those Copy Protected CDs and new CD Audio format to support it will come much faster than any of us want.”

You know what? F**K the record labels. I don’t want to please them. I hope that they eat a sh*t sandwich and choke on it. They have gouged the public for decades to support their inefficient and stupid decisions. They have engaged in bribery schemes “payola” to control what you get to hear on the radio stations. They have engaged in monopolistic practices and used their power to overcharge us for CDs, in many cases, music we already bought and paid for. In league with Westwood and Clearchannel, they control just about every aspect of music production and distribution (They even managed to drive a stake through the heart of free internet radio). They aren’t about freedom of choice, they are about control of choice and they can rot and burn in hell, the whole corrupt and cocaine sniffing bunch. When they control every aspect of the media, how will any other opinion but theirs be heard?

I can do little other than voice my opinion about these bozos, but I have taken the only step I can. I do not and will not EVER buy another new CD from the record labels (Basically any Label that subscribes to RIAA’s cultural Gestapo) . I’ll buy ‘em used and not contribute to their bloated expense accounts and persecution of 12 year olds and grandmothers.

(Back to on topic rant)

I won’t reiterate the points that Jonathan Little made as you haven’t addressed them yet, but I agree with most of those points and will add a few more:

1. You have to se iTunes Software to burn the actual CD’s. I like to edit my wav’s and clean up any digital artifacts or in the case of homemade compilations adjust the volume level to a consistent level so that I don’t have to jump for the volume knob every time a new song starts. I don’t like recorders that decode on the fly while burning and would prefer to use the software of my choice for my burner, not whatever Apple thinks is right just because I bought music from them.

2. Sure, OOP stuff can resurface (Homeward Bound II, etc). It also means that the chance of that stuff every coming out on CD is greatly reduced because people who will accept inferior audio quality have already bought it and thus the market is even smaller. So if you don’t buy it from iTunes, you just don’t get to listen to it. Too bad about all those music fans who don’t own a computer or live in a country that iTunes can’t or won’t service.

3. Some of the albums on iTunes are available at Amazon for less than the cost of downloading the album for iTunes. Consider the album by Jimmy Buffet, White Sport Coat and A Pink Crustacean. Amazon’s price for a new, shrinkwrapped CD is $9.98. Granted this might be a rare case, but there are many CD’s available for a dollar more. I already think CD’s are overpriced, why shouldn’t I conclude that iTunes is VASTLY overpriced at 9.99 an album since they don’t even have the physical cost of the CD to cover?

Finally, let me add this. What I am “tossing a fit over” is the limitation of choices and my freedom to choose what I want to do. When iTunes gets an exclusive like “Millennium” or “Homeward Bound II” I have to agree not just to crappy compressed music, but also a whole other range of restrictions on how I use it and what I use it for.

Then there's the rest of the mess. Because of the iTunes software's limitations, information on the titles is often limited by space, erroneous or incomplete.
"Tchaikovsky, Symphony # 6, Muti / Phil. Orch. / EMI Classics" is not good enough.
What am I buying? Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony, originally released by EMI in the late 1970's, conducted by Riccardo Muti and played by the Philharmonia Orchestra? Or Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony, originally released by EMI during the 1980's, conducted by Riccardo Muti and played by the Philadelphia Orchestra?

quote:

---

Inferior sound quality (including digital artifacting plus compromised frequency response as mentioned earlier in this thread)

---

quote:

---

No liner notes (or only "virtual" liner notes, which are not professionally printed on proper paper)

---

quote:

---

Some online music comes with digital rights management (DRM) that often infringes on fair use

---

quote:

---

Need CD-R media and jewel cases if you want to listen to it on external equipment or back it up incase of disk failure (if DRM allows this)

---

quote:

---

The lifespan of CD-Rs is questionable. The lifespan of a typical hard drive is about five years. The lifespan of a pressed CD is at least 20 years, possibly even 100 years. (Ignoring, of course, the rare badly manufactured CDs mostly from the early 1990s.)

---

quote:

---

Wear and tear on CD burner

---

quote:

---

Time spent burning CD-Rs and downloading the music

---

Keep in mind of course as well, many people now like to transfer their music to the iPod, which means no CD-Rs need to be made at all.

quote:

---

Too expensive for what you get (considering all of the problems listed above) -- $3-5 per album is more like it.

---

quote:

---

You have to se iTunes Software to burn the actual CD’s. I like to edit my wav’s and clean up any digital artifacts or in the case of homemade compilations adjust the volume level to a consistent level so that I don’t have to jump for the volume knob every time a new song starts.

---

--Brian

quote:

---

AAC is considered the "Cadillac of codecs" (not my quote, I found that in Stereo Review). And it's only going to get better.

---

AAC audio, "Cadillac of codecs" or not, is still compressed audio. I'd rather see albums released on DVD-A instead of online as AAC files.

quote:

---

You also need CD-Rs and jewel cases to back up pressed CD's as well.

---

Do you really do this? I have about six CDs of about 350 backed up, and those are rare items that I play often and could never replace without paying through the nose. My biggest fear is not of these CDs self-destructing with age but rather my clumsiness leading to fatal scratches.

quote:

---

Burn the music to a CD-RW. Re-rip it into wav or aiff file. Edit to your hearts delight. Burn the final project to a CD-R with your preferred CD burning program. Then erase the CD-RW and use that for your next project. I've done many LP transfers over the years using the same 2 CD-RWs with this method.

---

Again, this stuff takes time. Of course it's possible to multitask on a modern PC, it's just I don't enjoy jumping through hoops for fair use. When I'm using the computer I don't want to be a part-time disc jockey.

quote:

---

Now we get to the real issue. You think the downloaded music is too expensive. Fair enough. I think CDs are too expensive, and that they should be selling new for no more than $10.

---

OK, you say CDs should be $10 and I agree. But at the same time you think an iTunes album at $10 is a good deal? I think at this price iTunes is a much bigger rip off than the CDs in the stores. (Limited editions are a separate issue. I'm pretty sure these wouldn't be happening as $10 [or $20] online-only gimmicks because collectors want a physical CD and liner notes.)

quote:

---

AAC audio, "Cadillac of codecs" or not, is still compressed audio. I'd rather see albums released on DVD-A instead of online as AAC files.

---

quote:

---

Do you really do this? I have about six CDs of about 350 backed up, and those are rare items that I play often and could never replace without paying through the nose.

---

quote:

---

Again, this stuff takes time. Of course it's possible to multitask on a modern PC, it's just I don't enjoy jumping through hoops for fair use.

---

quote:

---

OK, you say CDs should be $10 and I agree. But at the same time you think an iTunes album at $10 is a good deal?

---

Given a choice between either downloading or buying the same music on CD, I'll go for the CD in a heartbeat. Why? Well, just personal taste, really. I like having the physical presence of a real pressed album. I can make CD-Rs. I can make pretty nifty covers for them, too. But (and I will admit I have no good reason) it just doesn't feel the same to me. If that's all there is, then that's all there is and I'm perfectly satisfied. But if I have the option of an actual CD, that will be my first choice. I don't have anything against downloaded music per se, but I hope I'll be a senial, doddering old fool before it becomes the only option.

Of course, I still don't own a cell phone and I think Pink Floyd sounds ten times better on vinyl, so maybe I'm just living in the past.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indysolo:
I bought the score to Troy for $9.99 at the iTunes store today. I haven't bought a new Horner score since 1997 (The Devil's Own).

Neil

---

I figured this might be a good one to go and perhaps download from somewhere.

Guess what... it's only available as part of the full album.

So let's see... to get that one cue, I'd have to spend $9,99 for a download (with everything that means), or I could go to Future Shop later tonight and get the physical CD (with all that means) for 11$. Gee, that's a hard choice.
That's iTunes of course.

Just curious....Aside from the first couple minutes, that suite is nothing more than a cut-and-paste job of earlier cues. If you liked the suite, why didn't you like those?

Got a lovely "F**k Off" request from the software:

quote:

---

Could not complete the Music Store request. The store may be busy.
Check your Internet connection or try again later.

---

I use the mp3 format for portability, but I have an excellent sound system at home, and when I spend money, I want only the best possible quality for it. While I will grant you that DVD-A and SACD are pretty much only for home use, they sound fantastic. That's the point. They are audiophile formats for people with uncompromising tastes in home audio reproduction.

CDs sound much better than any compressed audio format I've come across. I'm not just talking about artifacting (although that does occur), but just the overall quality of the sound, the fullness and detail. Mp3, mp4, OGG Vorbis and all of them can sound okay, certainly fine enough for me to listen to while driving in my car, but they can't hold a candle to what a well-mastered CD can sound like. Someone who listens to film music, which is often orchestral, should be keenly aware of the sonic limitations of compressed audio formats.

I certainly agree that CDs are way too expensive. They are made out of garbage, and cost way too much for the investment the companies make to them. Cost for a store for a CD is typically much less than we end up paying for it... less, even, than what one usually finds at an online outlet as well. The labels are bleeding us. Unfortunately, I have to say that I prefer the sound that comes from a CD to that which can, at the moment, be downloaded.

NOTE: My comments in the last paragraph are about mass market CD releases, not specialty items such as those produced by FSM, Varese and the like. I don't mind spending what FSM asks for, because I feel that's fair for what you're getting. These releases are being prepared especially for us, and have been lovingly crafted.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swashbuckler:
CDs sound much better than any compressed audio format I've come across. I'm not just talking about artifacting (although that does occur), but just the overall quality of the sound, the fullness and detail. Mp3, mp4, OGG Vorbis and all of them can sound okay, certainly fine enough for me to listen to while driving in my car, but they can't hold a candle to what a well-mastered CD can sound like. Someone who listens to film music, which is often orchestral, should be keenly aware of the sonic limitations of compressed audio formats.

---

No doubt that uncompressed CD is better, but I have never felt "keenly aware" of the limitations of MP3, when used properly (good encoder, reasonable bitrate, etc). It sounds way better than any non-CD source - radio, TV, cassette, etc.