Can any of you fathom this move for the FSM line of soundtrack albums themselves?

One day it just might be that albums are produced strictly for download, each with a pdf file complete with detailed liner notes and photos (like the annotated score pdf recently offered with the LOTR music).

As for music, I hardly own any digital files myself. Just never got into it. If I am forced to start getting them because "that's the way it's going," that's where I'll stop. I have many 1000s of CDs to keep me busy and happy for the rest of my life. Wow, woah.... I just realized (discovered) the reason I keep every CD I buy. I never realized it until now, but there it is!

I have a friend who is trying to get me into it and it just doesn't work for me.

With film scores there is rarely a time when you just want to listen to one cue where as with popular music the interest in just one song is more common.

Plus there is the whole transferring of music to your iPod that is too cumbersome and annoying to me.

As for album purchase online, I really don't think it's that great a savings for me when you factor in the time to download and burn a CD, as well as the cost to print the booklet (if those files are provided), etc.

I agree. People boast how good iTunes and the iPods are but personally I really don't see how great they are. As I stated before I would rather have physical CD's then rip the CD's and compress them to low quality bit rate in order to transfer them to an iPod or some osrt of Mp3 player. iTunes and the iPods are over-rated in my opinion.

I do have scores that are mp3 but those are the complete/expanded/promo scores that will most likely never see the light of day for a legit release because of reuse fees. However if they do get a legit release I'd buy them in a heart beat. I do need to continue re-buying the CD's I once had but were damaged because my idiotic self when I was young didn't know how to take care of them properly. Now that I do they will last a long while. I definitely need to get them though before it is impossible to find them plus get ones I want to add to the collection.

A CD will last a long time, depending on how well you take care of that CD. Same for a DVD.

And I still don't understand why you would want to watch a Lord of the Rings--or any movie--on a screen the size of your hand. I mean I remember having to watch "Spartacus" on a 12" screen and the thing was in widescreen. Everytime someone spoke in a crowd I had to run up to the screen to see who it was.

When a CD becomes an "itunes exclusive" I cringe because I realize that I will never be able to hear the music in CD quality.

What's so great about the iPod is that I can have 60GB of my favorite scores with me all the time. I commute to work everyday. It takes me an hour each way. Having that much music with me in the car is incredble.

And Bond... I listen to just one track from a score all the time. I love creating playlists (ie Best of Williams, Love Themes, Main Titles, Action Music, etc) My favorite playlist at the moment is one simply called Scores of 2005. I have 122 tracks in that playlist which gives me a great overview of what 2005 was like score wise. Can't do that with an 80 minute CD.

Anyway, I too think that iTunes should start increasing their AAC bit rate. 128K AAC is just as good as 192k MP3... but a 192K AAC sounds just as good as a 224k MP3 which sounds just as good as CD quality. Honestly, you can't tell the difference.

My two cents.

-Erik-

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erik Woods:
Honestly, you can't tell the difference.

---

Yes I can. All it took was a single college course in sound editing and the world of compressed digital media was destroyed for me.

And it's especially noticeable in orchestral music. Strings particularly sound thin, watery, and metallic. And yes, I'm talking about MP3's encoded at 192kbps. Even 320 makes me cringe sometimes.

Even if I'm in the minority, I don't see why people who can tell the difference should have to settle for an inferior product just because "most" people can't. I would expect the musicians themselves would be particularly upset about this. In that John Williams interview in the Hollywood Reporter linked in another thread he even decries some digital recording (and he's talking about state-of-the-art stuff, not compressed files) in favor of "the old mag six-track."

If the day arrives when uncompressed audio can be transferred over the internet quickly and cheaply, I will accept the advent of technology. But until that day arrives, I'll stick to my CD's and LP's.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dinko:
AAC sucks posteriors. Frosty glaze over brass, loss of depth, metallic strings. AAC is the absolute worst codec for reproducing orchestral music. Even mp3 has a warmer and more natural tone!

---

So put them on as .wav files or high resolution mp3s. This involves changing an option in the preferences.

quote:

---

iPods are also pretty shitty (poor sound, battery life, scratches, album stops as opposed to continuous playback, lack of on-the-go features, lack of direct FM radio & FM recording, etc). Particularly compared to better devices from Samsung, Cowon & Toshiba, which don't restrict users to buying 128kbps AAC files, and instead offer a wider choice of 192kbps WMA locations.

---

Digitise it any way you want - what's all this nonsense about only getting 128kpbs AAC files?

quote:

---

As for having 60GB in your hands... it's pretty cool. If only you could listen to more than 1GB at a time (something to do with 12-15 hours battery duration).

---

I buy CDs and if I want it for portability, I'll rip it at a high bit rate or VBR for my mp3 player. I only listen to compressed music when I commute. When I'm at home I listen to the CDs.

I won't get into downloading until the audio quality being offered is better. Call me a snob if you like, but I can damn well hear the difference between a compressed audio file and a CD. I don't understand how anybody who listens to orchestral music can't hear it.

In terms of large capacity on an mp3 player... it isn't about what you listen to at any given time, it's about what's available to you all the time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by franz_conrad:
Digitise it any way you want - what's all this nonsense about only getting 128kpbs AAC files?

---

Apple's iTunes Music Store downloads are limited to 128kbps AAC (as Erik mentioned earlier). Other online stores which offer downloads in the Windows Media Format typically use 192kbps, and some people say that Sony's CONNECT store gives you the option of a 132kbps ATRAC3 file, or a 256kbps ATRAC3 file (I have not verified the 256kbps claim myself as CONNECT is not available in Canada). eMusic offers mp3 files at a variable bit rate ranging from 192 to 320kbps.