What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Killer Gift For A Movie Buff view!
bestbuy.com - Insignia Blu-ray player instantly streams Netflix movies right to your TV & comes with a free disc.
38 Comments
- airencracken, on 10/12/2007, -1/+32I'd like to see DRM free and lossless music. FLAC would be great.
- redrabbit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19appetite:
why can't you just purchase the cd and rip it DRM free to your computer?
If you're asking for Amazon to ship the CD with the purchase, isn't that the same as just buying the CD? :S - jodofashodo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Another step towards an RIAA-free world
- clempka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The more competition, the more likely we are to have device-independent formats in the future. This is very good for the consumer in the long run. Unfortunately, according to the article, that format (for now at least) is MP3...
- mjsteinbaugh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7An added benefit of using FLAC is that it is an open source codec. Amazon will have to pay MP3 licensing fees just like Apple, who pays a (reduced) fee for AAC.
- jandeloo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Yeah, us lossless fans get left out quite a bit. Still the best choice ever, though.
- calinthematrix, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9It's about time! If their selection is at least what Itunes is I will convert. DRM sucks! Nothing pisses me off more than paying for a CD and getting hit with authorization ***** when you try to play it on another PC. The RIAA has made legally obtaining music such a pain in the ass that it has gotten to the point where piracy is WORTH THE EFFORT!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Too bad it's illegal
- airwalkery2k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's also a step for more choices for my iPod's music.
I'm already a big eMusic supporter! - xmuzik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I shop at amazon alot so I know I will at least try the system out
- Shaman760, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6***** the RIAA.
- stevealford, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4If only we lived in a world where you could freely enjoy music like you can any other form of art: you buy a book or painting once and you can enjoy it any time, any place all you want. Musicians make their money on a 50% share of your $40 ticket purchase to concerts while the RIAA gets rich on album sales. You'd think musicians would just follow Trent Reznor's lead.
I'd be willing to bet that within ten years any band worth a ***** will give you a password to their own websites when you go to a concert so you can download all their songs for free. As long as they sell tickets to live shows, they aren't losing revenue, only the RIAA is... which is why they keep telling us that we're only hurting the artists. I'll send a thousand dollars via PayPal to anyone who can name a famous musician (still selling out at least half the house for live shows) who had to stop being a musician because people downloaded their songs for free and they went broke. - zip22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3romprom7, that test is very old and it only had one participant.
heres that had more participants from around the same date
http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/results.html
heres a newer one also with more participants.
http://www.listening-tests.info/mf-128-1/results.htm
also note we are talking about higher bitrates anyways. - shawnanigans, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Dude getting an OiNK account is nearly impossible. I've tried.
- ahmerhussain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If it's high quility encoding (at least 192 vbr LAME), and is cheaper than wal-mart's music store, AND DRM free. then I might just buy something form them.
ALso, if they acept paypal. - scottix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You lose quality everytime you convert so that may not be good lol. Until drm lossless comes out im not paying for online music...to expensive for dumbed down quality.
- zip22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2itunes DRM free AAC is 256kbps. converting from lossy to lossy degrades quality and i would not recommend it unless it was absolutely necessary.
- rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6@jermm: Not necessarily. http://www.xciv.org/~meta/audio-shootout/
"If you care about audio quality and listen to a lot of electronic music, avoid MPEG-4 AAC, particularly if you use bit rates below 160kbps. iTunes MP3 at 160kbps is better than AAC at 128kbps if you can afford the extra file size. If you really want CD quality, you'll need to use Ogg Vorbis or LAME MP3 encoding.
If encoding speed or iPod compatibility is important to you, use AAC--but don't go below 160kbps."
And with the DRM, why would you stick with iTunes? - zip22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1your crappy little 128MB player couldn't even fit 4 songs in WAV. what good would that be? you can transcode from FLAC to anything (even a bit perfect WAV).
- 2gooder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@mjsteinbaugh
Actually, AAC doesn't require royalty payments on distributed music. Apple has to pay a (smaller than mp3) fee on their encoders and decoders, but not for the music they sell.
Since Amazon is just distributing the music, they wouldn't have to pay anything. - noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yeah, I love having my albums take up 400 MB each (FLAC). Personally, I can't usually distinguish between FLAC and 128 kbps MP3, and I definitely can't distinguish between FLAC and 256 kbps MP3 or 128 kbps OGG (which is higher quality, I believe).
- zip22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i wonder if the will (or can) use lame. are there any restrictions to lame for commercial purposes?
- JJRules, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I hope that Amazon's thousand-pound-elephant status will influence other music retailers to take notice. It seems like market pressure is the best hope of eliminating DRM.
- jessem19, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Finally! I figured Google would do something like this, but Amazon would be great too.
- TehMuff1nM4n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is great, if Amazon becomes successful maybe more online music stores will go towards the DRM-free route. Hopefully this is another step for iTunes to also offer the DRM-free tracks for the regular .99 price instead of another 30 cents more.
- DogBotherer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I prefer Musepack. I mean, I'm aware it'll probably always be a bit player (no pun intended), and it's proprietary, but for lossy sound quality it's about the best in the field.
- unitedkronos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Because my little crappy 128MB MP3 player from Asda doesn't support FLAC, and I also like to encode my own tracks when archiving them.
- zip22, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1why would they do that? lossless files are around 40% smaller (while holding the exact same information) and can contain things like tags and album art.
- jbond, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0They bought, AllOfMp3.com, right?
- appetite, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6If Amazon had a sweet online store like iTunes but also shipped a hard copy with the purchase, I'd be all over it.
- belegdae, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Yea, i agree! who's with us?
- sodade, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0The price is the real issue here. I will not pay a buck for a ***** song. Period.
- mrsteveman1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0No, just letting them sell DRM free music doesn't help. The RIAA has ***** up repeatedly and doesn't deserve any more chances at anything. If we really want anything to change we have to go after the RIAA itself.
- unitedkronos, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1As soon as one of the major digital music sellers starts to provide CD quality WAVs, I'll be happy.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2@ calinthematrix
Piracy doesn't take any effort.
This is great, but I'll stick to pirating. - jermm, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4AAC is better then MP3
I will still use iTunes - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2its called *iNK
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Or Use*et
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is