What is Digg?49 Comments
- inactive, on 10/15/2007, -3/+10Nobody should be paying for compressed music. Disk space is cheap, and everyone has high-speed connections now. FLAC or some other truly lossless format is the only thing worth paying for.
Actually, not even that, since everything is now ruined by dynamic compression (rather than data compression) before it's ever released. - kilimangaro, on 10/14/2007, -1/+6Hey RMS, why don't you ask them yourself ?
- macbwizard, on 10/14/2007, -3/+7Just be happy that they released their album in DRM-free mp3 for whatever you want to pay for it.
- velocitychannel, on 10/14/2007, -3/+7Another example of people never being satisfied. A popular band releases a new record, without a label, without DRM, FOR FREE and people still aren't satisfied. "But they didn't release it in Ogg Vorbis! Whaaaaaa. Whaaaaaa."
- gwhardyiv, on 10/14/2007, -0/+4Isn't it just as easy to ask them to release it in FLAC?
- keyo, on 10/14/2007, -2/+6Is stallman's website from 1995?
- r3bol, on 10/14/2007, -0/+4Use bittorrent
- niallabrown, on 10/14/2007, -6/+10It would be good exposure to the format if they did. It might get other big acts saying, what is that new format? ;)
- Karmavs, on 10/14/2007, -2/+5and get everyoen else saying "Why the hell won't this work on iTunes, my iPod, Windows Media Player, etc. I payed a whole $0.00 for this… oh, wait..."
- d1rtfarm, on 10/14/2007, -2/+5Exactly. Ogg has been out for years and now has a grand total of 7 people who use it. I'll use ogg when
1. I can buy audio off the net that comes as ogg
2. If you could buy an audio player that would play ogg
3. linux fanboys stopped being linux fanboys - dcherryholmes, on 10/14/2007, -0/+3Why the hell should any Windows-only software be converted when 90% or more of your customers are using that? Because software patents are evil and open standards are good. Just because mp3's exist in your cognitive blind spot doesn't make it any less important.
- Clordio, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2Or at least FLAC in an OGG container.
- Megatog615, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2Ironically my MP3 player supports OGG.
- inactive, on 10/14/2007, -3/+5And then everyone will have to reencode it to mp3 just so they can play on their iPods or share with other people.
- inactive, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2OGG has been engineered to avoid patent problems, also what are they going to sue for? MP3 patents expire in 2011 anyway so even if they where violated I don't see OGG as being important enough to sue before then.
With that said I also don't see OGG taking off before then (or ever) and when the MP3 patents expire MP3 will be free since we already have the code to read it.
Personally I like FLAC, its both free and lossless. - lengau, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2I don't think anyone was suggesting that they release it *only* in Ogg Vorbis, but rather that they allow those who have bought it to download an Ogg Vorbis version. I personally would greatly appreciate that, as I much prefer how Vorbis files sound to MP3s. It would also be nice if they'd release FLACs (or some other open lossless codec) so I could burn it to CD.
- aliguana, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2yeah, but it's false economy. They're putting people off buying the digital format with the crap bitrate. It should be at least a Lame --extreme, or 255 AAC a-la iTunes plus. Better Flac. They should host the files with AmazonA3 or something - no bandwidth worries then.
- elmphlemp, on 10/14/2007, -1/+3one would prefer to stay away from rhcp altogether
- chedabob, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2You make a good point. But one of the reasons they only released the album in 160kbps MP3 was bandwidth. Shifting a 250mb album to 1 million people is one hell of a job. The site is still struggling, even with the low bitrate MP3.
- inactive, on 10/14/2007, -1/+3He didn't say it should be in only OGG , just that they should support it too.
- chedabob, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2That would be the common sense thing to do, but so far in the entertainment sector, Blizzard are the only people to utilise it effectively.
- inactive, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2Or they will just download the MP3 version, he didn't say they should release it only OGG format and not in another just give people a choice.
I would also have to reencode it to mp3 for my ipod but it doesn't matter, it happens fast and automatically with the software I use to put it on to the iPod, the important thing is i have the media in an original nonencumbered format (well for most stuff I have it in MP3 but I choose FLAC or ogg when available).
Also you can get rockbox for iPod which plays the formats and is a freesoftware project. Personally I prefer it in many ways to the iPod software.
Next media player I get also probably won't be an iPod.
Release groups would do good to release in FLAC and include a .exe (that runs under Mono too) that reencodes to whatever format you want, that way people can choose without loosing any quality. - redlaser, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1ask them and kill the golden goose
- d1rtfarm, on 10/14/2007, -1/+2Or bad exposure.
I'm a popular band who's decided to release my new album over the WWW without the help of a record company. Do I choose to release it as an .mp3 which is supported by every audio player and audio software on the player? Or, do I choose an obscure format that 99% of my fans have never heard of? Should I expect my fans to pay for my music when they will have to search for some kind of software that will play it? Have you met the average user? Do you think they would be telling folks at work or school about "this great new format that only took two hours on google to get to play"? The average person just wants to buy some music and have it work. If people want ogg support, they need to get the software and hardware companies to support it first. Trying to get Joe Consumer to use ogg, which presently is a pain in the ass, just isnt going to happen. - TheSeeker11, on 10/14/2007, -2/+3True that. One only has to listen to the last few RHCP albums for an example of hyper compression.
- masterofshadows, on 10/14/2007, -1/+21) iirc allofmp3 used ogg as an option
2) iriver supports ogg, as well as a variety of other formats including flac
3) agreed - cubeeggs, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1Actually, at 128 (a very common bitrate), Vorbis comes out on top by a bit. Vorbis being patent-free is a good reason to use it. Many commercial games use it for that reason. Vorbis is definitely not bad.
- timdorr, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1No, it won't actually. The thing that everyone is missing is that the quality issues aren't the result of what format they released the music in, it's amatuerish recording quality from the source material. Almost every track clips the master recording levels. The stereo imagery is not subtle at all. They recorded it themselves and it really shows. I'm willing to bet money that the final CD version isn't going to sound any better no matter what format you encode it in.
- inactive, on 10/14/2007, -1/+2Actually 1996, check the copyright.
Not everything has to have buttons so shiny they aircraft flying over head run the risk of being downed and javascript so excessive that firefox locks up. Its probably also designed to be browsable on odd environments such as text based from the lynx in a GNU/Hurd terminal etc... So that rules javascript out and excessive use of images.
It would be better if he did it in XHTML/CSS etc... but they weren't around in 1996 and he probably made a custom managment system back then with bash scripts and such that he likes. - OneAndOnlySnob, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1I think it'd be really cool if they would offer the songs in pretty much any format people could possibly want. That means FLAC and wav files too.
- Samburger, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1yea yea lossless is better blah blah. Nobody is talking about how great an album it is though!
- neko, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1Agree with everything you said except the .NET .exe. Gods no.
- neko, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1I do like ogg, and I'm deliriously happy with my 2G iriver player which can handle them (as well as being plain-and-decent USB mass storage), but really, Radiohead is taking a huge leap already by releasing this way. I paid for my mp3s, and I think they're fine. OGG, FLAC, yes, they'd be a bonus, but one step at a time, ok?
- Karmavs, on 10/14/2007, -1/+1and a .app & a whatever a linux application is called…
(and the word is 'Losing') - inactive, on 10/14/2007, -3/+3God no. I am not supporting this. MP3 is good enough. Its the defacto standard and if you dont like it then convert it on your own time. why the hell should normal radiohead fans spend time re converting ogg back to mp3 so they can play it back on their portable media players and infact most other gadgets.
- Karmavs, on 10/14/2007, -2/+2If you look at that study - HE-AAC consistantly outperforms OGG, & that OGG is last out of the different formats. With HE-AAC being a standardised format (unlike WMA Pro, which also outperforms OGG), why not use it?
- Dolomite, on 10/14/2007, -3/+3ATRAC would probably make alot of people happy too. Can you also ask them about that in your email?
- ThinkBox, on 10/14/2007, -1/+1I CANT believe that on this whole page of comments, nobody else is making the same point as you.
They just recorded an album and released it for free, and now you want to bitch about the format? 99% of the people who will stumble across these songs will not know what Ogg is! And, as we know, the general consumer population is not smart enough to understand a choice between a regular format and an obscure codec.
How does this lame ass opinion whining about this ***** frontpage? - cubeeggs, on 10/14/2007, -3/+3No it isn't. It's on the same level as HE-AAC and WMA 11 Pro.
http://www.listening-tests.info/ - inactive, on 10/14/2007, -3/+3You ideas are highly intriguing. I would like to subscribe to you journal.
- JoEBlack982, on 10/15/2007, -3/+3what a bunch of whiners. it sounds great in the current format. not to mention its free. beggers can't be choosers.
- podperson, on 10/14/2007, -4/+4One of the problems with Ogg Vorbis is that it's only going to be "free" for sure until it becomes economically significant. Right now, it's not worth suing. (It's like all the folks crawling out of the woodwork to sue Apple for bits of QuickTime hoping to get a slice of iPod revenue ... where were they in 1991 when Apple released QuickTime?)
- spikeb, on 10/14/2007, -3/+3might work
- elmphlemp, on 10/14/2007, -1/+1prominent band radiohead should release all their albums in streamless w64 format just to really keep the consumer on their toes
- fulgore, on 10/15/2007, -20/+18who cares about ogg vorbis. ogg is *****, piss off
- everlast88, on 10/14/2007, -8/+2Ogg is the ***** format ever, no MP3 player on the planet supports it and i'd say roughly 98% of the world doesn't know what it is
- asylumet, on 10/14/2007, -12/+5would have dug it but this person spammed an irc channel with this link :(
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is