Music industry plans new digital format

[Grahame]

Music industry plans new digital format - The Inquirer

Anyone from generation XYZ care to comment, or was the article too long for you?

Anyone else remember the Hawk Log mentioned in the comments?

[acidbasement]

[url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1528839/music-industry-plans-digital-format] Anyone from generation XYZ care to comment, or was the article too long for you?

I stopped reading here:

Those of you old enough to remember vinyl LPs from the olden days blah blah blah

But in seriousness, I think most gen-xyz'ers don't care enough about liner notes and cover art to switch formats. It's all lamentably about portability these days, and cover art does nothing for the jogging-, bus-riding-, cycling-, walking-, etc-while-listening-to-background-music masses.

[Duggeh]

MP3 tags already support cover art and a notes field.

[catscratch]

I wonder what kind of DRM this will use and what other tricks it will have to limit Fair Use and in general bully consumer rights, and do all that other stuff that everyone loves the music industry for. Album covers and lyrics are great but come on, the main reason IMO why this format would exist is to give the big labels even more control over the content of (not)your (licensed) music library.

I'll stick to FLAC for now.

[Fitz]

MP3 tags already support cover art and a notes field.

Yeah, but they can't exercise any control or restrictions on ordinary MP3s.

[parhelictriangle]

Since we're playing the overgeneralize game, the only people I know who actually go out and buy CDs are generation X, while old hypocritical boomers like to point out that they have a scratched up vinyl of Abbey Road but actually buy shit from iTunes.

Actually, the only people I know who buy records anymore are Gen X.

Ok, but I'm really just being hypocritical too, since I'm totally pissed off that you're lumping people born roughly 30 years ago with the little emo twats that grew up thinking Avril Lavigne was actually punk. Get offa my lawn!

[Hopstretch]

Mmm, emo twats.

Somebody, stop me!

[Grahame]

I stopped reading here:

But in seriousness, I think most gen-xyz'ers don't care enough about liner notes and cover art to switch formats. It's all lamentably about portability these days, and cover art does nothing for the jogging-, bus-riding-, cycling-, walking-, etc-while-listening-to-background-music masses.

I think this comment from the comment section summed it up nicely

No one cares about liner notes

For years now we have been hearing about the "value adds" that liner notes an album art brings to some nonexistent view of music listening. You know what? NO ONE GIVES A CRAP ABOUT ALBUM ART OR LINER NOTES. That stuff might have been vaguely interesting before everyone had unlimited access to a band's web site, but now it's all just garbage. The only utility in the art is that it shows a nice icon on my ipod. That's not something worth paying for, and no way in hell people are going to drop mp3 or aac just to get them.

Indeed, try google, wikipedia and allmusic, for starters to supplement the "official" web site.

Then there are the obsessive fan sites that seem to know more about the artists and their work than the artists themselves. Handy for dead/obscure artists / pre-internet groups.

[Fitz]

Since we're playing the overgeneralize game, the only people I know who actually go out and buy CDs are generation X, while old hypocritical boomers like to point out that they have a scratched up vinyl of Abbey Road but actually buy shit from iTunes.

Actually, the only people I know who buy records anymore are Gen X.

Ok, but I'm really just being hypocritical too, since I'm totally pissed off that you're lumping people born roughly 30 years ago with the little emo twats that grew up thinking Avril Lavigne was actually punk. Get offa my lawn!

I'm Gen Y but I still buy CDs all the time (I probably have around 100-150 CDs I've never listened to yet)... not to mention things like paying $60 for one album like I did the other day. \

[tkam]

just what we need another format, it's just a ploy by the recording industry trying to get everyone to re-buy their music

[GPH]

Unfortunately, the only good online ressources to obtain music right now are illegal. I'd gladly pay for a service like what.cd or waffles.fm that would offer a huge archive of albums in FLAC, but until then, I'll continue to buy music in CD format and I'll download what I can't find in stores.

I'm part of Generation Y and I kind of like album art and sleeve notes, but in the end what I want is music and I'd take a big archive of FLAC albums over crappy MP3s with album art.

[n_maher]

Mmm, emo twats.

Somebody, stop me!

You got a one track mind today Stretch.

[Grahame]

just what we need another format, it's just a ploy by the recording industry trying to get everyone to re-buy their music

Buy? as in own, or subject to First-sale doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ?

More likely just a license to listen that can be revoked at any time.

Ask the kindle owners about the copy of 1984 they thought they bought.

The Customer Is Always Wrong: A User's Guide to DRM in Online Music | Electronic Frontier Foundation

You got a one track mind today Stretch.

Today? seems its lasted a bit longer than that

[Hopstretch]

I blame society.

[aardvark baguette]

Anyone from generation XYZ care to comment, or was the article too long for you?

Did you write the article? Because it was essentially the same speech, only longer.

[tkam]

Ask the kindle owners about the copy of 1984 they thought they bought.

That's a slightly different circumstance, the version that was purchased was sold by a publisher that didn't have the rights. Yes it sucks that it was removed but they were refunded the purchase price. That and Amazon already said it was a mistake to remove it and they won't do that in future cases. Not really sure what else you can expect.....

[Grahame]

Did you write the article? Because it was essentially the same speech, only longer.

No, I was not the author. I think there's a clue in the

By Stewart Meagher

at the head of the article

Its not often I'm accused of brevity or conciseness. I'm flattered

[Grahame]

That's a slightly different circumstance, the version that was purchased was sold by a publisher that didn't have the rights. Yes it sucks that it was removed but they were refunded the purchase price. That and Amazon already said it was a mistake to remove it and they won't do that in future cases. Not really sure what else you can expect.....

Amazon Kindle doomed to repeat Big Brother moment ? The Register

That's why having to trust third parties to always do the right things carries its own risks. e.g. revocation lists, or assuming that authorization servers will always exist, and be reachable.

A right is not what someone gives you; it's what no one can take from you.

Ramsey Clark

Back to our discussion on music....

[Sherwood]

tl;dr

If it was about some new way to sell music, my suggestion is to make it easier than stealing music.