yes, this has become one of the 'big debates'. Record industries vs MP3s.

Before I got sucked up in the mp3 bizz, I was heavy into Pink Floyd. As some of you might know, one of the founders was Syd Barrett. After the release of Floyd's first album he went a bit nuts and got kicked out of the group. Mental instability and drugs caused his problems. Anyway, he released 2 solo albums and some other things like live singles and such, all around 1970-ish.

Now, in 2001, EMI releases a 'new' album. Priced at $21.99 they dare to release an album with 22 songs of which 21 have already been released. It's basically a compilation of all the previously released stuff, with 1 single new song. This song was known to exist, and now finally it's out in the open.

Does EMI expect us to actually cough up $22 for a single song? Are they out of their frikkin minds?

See here what amazon buyers write in a review: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005ABWV/o/qid=99281160 2/sr=2-1/ref=aps_sr_pm_1_1/102-3503696-9753737 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005ABWV/o/qid=992811602/sr=2-1/ref=aps_sr_pm_1_1/102-3503696-9753737)


So after being majorly turned off that this 'new' album only has old stuff on it, I went onto kazaa (a new napster) and got the song. Lo and behold what the comment in the ID3v2 tag said:

"I can't believe that I actually paid £16 for this album when I, like many, own all the tracks except this one. This is a ridiculous price for us dedicated Barrett fans to have to pay for ONE song, so this is why I have done this MP3. I wouldn't mind so much if this money (after costs) went straight to Roger himself but this is EMI were talking about.

EMI- YOU MONEY GRABBING FUKCS!"


yes, its another Barrett fan that feels fukced over by the record company. And it's not the first time they pull stunts like these, and it won't be the last.

And yet they blame Kazaa, MP3.com, Napster etc for their 'decreasing sales' while sales in 2000 have actually been like 16% higher than in 1999! What's their frikkin problem ffs?

What are your thoughts on all of this? Do you feel morally wrong if you download an mp3? I could go on like this for pages and pages but I'm curious what you think so I'll join again later in the discussion.

[This message has been edited by tam (edited 06-17-2001).]

Well, floyd should have died 20 years ago, but thats another thread. I, for one, BOUGHT MORE CDS because of MP3. My coworkers download stuff and play it on the jukebox all the time. Whenever I hear something I like, I just lean over see who it is and but it the next day. Until they had this MP3 player, I hadnt boughten a CD in 3 years!!!

------------------
Winner of the "peoples Choice award" for supreme advocate for the people!

I'm not "always right", it just seems that way

Spelling is for kids! I think you got the point!

I agree with you, Tam... which is why the CD burner was the ultimate piece of PC equipment made since the original Pentium chip.... now if they'll get some decent connection speed out my way....

Mp3s have not stopped me from buying CDs. I've kept my buying habits fairly constant. I buy them for gifts and I also buy them when I really like something...the quality of MP3s don't approach the quality of an original CD (but still better than cassette tapes by a long shot). I don't care what anyone says, MP3 audio quality is sub-standard.

However, MP3s are great for on the computer or in the car (road noise drowns out the perceptible difference in audio quality).

The reality is that I used to download more stuff than I could possibly afford to buy...and only the songs I liked. So, in reality the record company lost nothing because I wasn't going to buy the stuff to begin with. And, I didn't have to deal with a situation that tam is talking about...or when a band comes out with an album that has only one decent song on it (typical).

Amazingly, here in Chicago, there is only one half-way good music radio station...and they don't play nearly the variety of music I like to listen to. So, I consider MP3s to be my alternative to radio.

That all being said, the fact remains that intellectual property is a very important part of our society. Music is intellectual property, either of the artist or the studio. They do have a Right to enforce their copyrights...and they should. But, it is too late for CD. There are so many millions of people who have the ability to make perfect copies. There is no way to stop them all.

The music industry should just change their focus. Instead of trying to police MP3, they should hasten the adoption of DVD audio and SACD by making it more attractive to the consumer than CD is. The technical advantages are obvious, but it must be marketed.

Both DVD Audio and SACD can be encripted and would virtually destroy the music copying and MP3 subculture overnight (unless they could be cracked). But, in order for them to be successful, three things must happen.

1) DVD audio and SACD discs must become cheaper...probably about the same price as today's CDs. We know this can be done because you can buy DVD movies for less than the cost of a music CD right now. It would be best if DVD/SACD could be priced lower than today's CDs...that would make it a real incentive for music consumers. If you saw an album you wanted on CD for $20, but could get the same one on SACD for $16 or $18, you'd probably consider getting some new equipment.

2) The hardware must be attractively priced too. Maybe they could offer some kind of rebate if people want to turn in their old CD players and "upgrade" to the new format (of course the new players would still be able to play all your old CDs).

3) They'd have to stop producing regular audio CDs within a fairly short time span (one or two years).

In short, they should work out something that allows them to control their property...but that also gives the consumer some advantages. They have to give something.

Screw the 'big labels'. They've made their beds, they can sleep in them.

MP3's are here to stay. They could have embraced this technology, and made money from it. Instead they shot themselves in the foot.

I bought my first new cd last week. Nirvana Unplugged.. only reason why is because I couldn't find a decent ripped MP3 in the last 2 years!

Before that, my last cd was the Matrix soundtrack, when it first came out!

yeah, mp3's have kept me from buying overpriced CD's. I love my mp3 car stereo!

Originally posted by DngrMse
They could have embraced this technology, and made money from it.That's what I hear people saying...but exactly how would that work? How could they make money on it?

I have to agree. It sucks to buy a cd (or back when I was young an album) and have only one new track on it and the rest are old songs or fillers that no one particularly likes. I used to like Napster but now am a Kazaa fan. I didn't even own a cd player until 97, because the cost of the disc was so high I could not justify buying them. Have a question though. I download a lot of MP3's from Kazaa....What the heck is an MP3?

mp3 is a compressed digital file format, kinda like "avi" or "mpg" is for the movie file.

My Mac buddy just told me today that Apple is going to introduce a file sharing program for their OS.

I can not remember the last CD I bought or when I bought it. I try not to give any of my money to the entertainment racket