Concord on the future of OJCs

[zen archer]

ogg is nothing but an open source MP3. Flac and shn are the lossless files, as far as I know.

And Jim, I did not see Brett Primack here or know that changes were made to a download source file due to complaints.

I'd be more in favor of downloads if the quality was high enough.

but isn't it funny (sarcastically???) that in one hand the industry (and the consumer market) wants us to up grade quality (audio, 16 bits, 20 bits, 24 bits, SACD, DVD-audio, etc, etc, (you name a few), and also for video: VHS, super VHS, DVD, HD-DVD, and television: wide screen, 100 Hrz, HD-TV, etc tect), and wants us to pay big $$ for it, and on the other hand they want us to pay the same amount for crap like music mp3???

JB

John Great post , why is it that movies on dvd are going in one direction Plasmas , big screens ,HD

and music on crappy little ipods, cell phones, something doesn't add up ?

[zen archer]

I'm just wondering what the "object" is with a CD that makes some resistant to the notion of downloaded digital music.

It can't be the disc itself, because you can make one of those yourself after the download (assuming that the industry uses a format that makes that possible, which they'd be crazy not to not at least offer that as an option, which means that anything can happen...). Unless you're really into the "label" of a CD, one's just like the other, especially once it's inside the player.

Surely it's not the jewel box itself. Jewel boxes suck. Digipacks are hipper, but less durable, and I've heard plenty of complaint about them here.

It must be the artwork, the booklet & tray card, that constitutes the "object" that one feels is lost by downloading. Ok, I can buy that, even if, once again, for reissues of LPs they're usually a poor substitute for the originals.

So, what if...

You download (presumably in a high-quality format) an OJC for, say, $7.95 (or, hopefully, less), and pay an additional $2.95 to have the booklet & tray card mailed to you. (Adjust the proces of each to whatever might be more "realistic"). Then you can burn your download to a physical CD, assemble the artwork into a jewel box of your choosing, and voila, there's your object.

Good enough? Or is that nifty yellow & black stuff on the CD face what really matters?

I can resell a CD if I decide I don't like it. I can buy multi-cd lots on ebay at very low unit prices and explore stuff I'm not familiar with. Some CD's appreciate in value (hello Mosaic), so I can buy those and explore, knowing that I can get my money back if I don't want to keep it. I can legally trade one CD for another CD without breaking any copyright laws, thus being able to further explore more music.

Right , you can't resell downloads so in the long run it will become more expensive . I have cds now that i don't listen to and i can turn around make some $$ off of them and reinvest in my collection.

[J Larsen]

John Great post , why is it that movies on dvd are going in one direction Plasmas , big screens ,HD

and music on crappy little ipods, cell phones, something doesn't add up ?

Because there is massive market demand for high-res movies and (especially) video games, but there are very few audiophiles. People don't pay close attention to music as much as they used to; background listening is the norm and hence audio quality for music files is not a big issue. Movies and video games are activities that require one's full attention, so video quality is more important to the average consumer.

In this climate, most people would prefer to have all their music in one tiny little box that fits in their pocket and sounds "good enough to them" than have a big stereo system and cds laying all over the place. I'd prefer to have all my music in one tiny little box as long as the audio quality didn't suffer, but that's where I differ from the mainstream. I'm afraid we're just on the wrong side of the market forces on this one - not an unfamiliar position for jazz fans.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

John Great post , why is it that movies on dvd are going in one direction Plasmas , big screens ,HD

and music on crappy little ipods, cell phones, something doesn't add up ?

Because there is massive market demand for high-res movies and (especially) video games, but there are very few audiophiles. People don't pay close attention to music as much as they used to; background listening is the norm and hence audio quality for music files is not a big issue. Movies and video games are activities that require one's full attention, so video quality is more important to the average consumer.

An important point.

MG

[jazzbo]

Here's what my crystal ball shows:

The industry is going to shift to downloads off the net and even in stores and charge just about as much, and we're not going to have a choice, we're going to either have our heads in the sand (or elsewhere) or participate in this new format change just as we did from analog to cds.

But, Lon, acknowledge the point I was making, this is a change being pushed by the companies for their profits, not pulled by consumer desire to change to a better format, the way CD's were (at least for many of us). Concord (and the whole industry) was dishonest in trying to indicate that the switchover to digital is due to "customer demand". That's my point.

Uh do you really believe that the changeover to cd was CUSTOMER DRIVEN?

I sure don't. Maybe in a very limited sense customers were going along with it, but I see no real "customer drive" to the changeover. In the sense that I might see some, there is the same happening with younger cats going for downloads for their reasons (obviously not for the reasons we might want to keep to cds, but for convenience, portability etc.)

We're always subject to the companies drive for profits. And as JAZZ customers we really don't count in any significant way.

Edited April 15, 2007 by jazzbo

[felser]

Uh do you really believe that the changeover to cd was CUSTOMER DRIVEN?

I sure don't. Maybe in a very limited sense customers were going along with it, but I see no real "customer drive" to the changeover. In the sense that I might see some, there is the same happening with younger cats going for downloads for their reasons (obviously not for the reasons we might want to keep to cds, but for convenience, portability etc.)

We're always subject to the companies drive for profits. And as JAZZ customers we really don't count in any significant way.

OK, we just have different opinions on CD's then. I love them, always have, saw them as a huge step up from what was available on the market previously (LP's and especially tapes). I remember groaning at how easily LP's would get scratched, or warped, or the jackets would split. Wasted so many hours in second hand stores, looking at LP's in substandard shape. The ability to so easily go from point to point on CD's was great, the sound quality of one done right was such a pleasure.

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

This might sound crazy, but I feel differently about downloads, as if they're not real, cheap, disposable, no quality to them. It's a feeling I can't shake. I prefer something solid in my hands.

Same thing imo with downloadable books. Tried it a few times and quickly bagged it. Yeah, cheaper than buying the book.......but?

[jazzbo]

Uh do you really believe that the changeover to cd was CUSTOMER DRIVEN?

I sure don't. Maybe in a very limited sense customers were going along with it, but I see no real "customer drive" to the changeover. In the sense that I might see some, there is the same happening with younger cats going for downloads for their reasons (obviously not for the reasons we might want to keep to cds, but for convenience, portability etc.)

We're always subject to the companies drive for profits. And as JAZZ customers we really don't count in any significant way.

OK, we just have different opinions on CD's then. I love them, always have, saw them as a huge step up from what was available on the market previously (LP's and especially tapes). I remember groaning at how easily LP's would get scratched, or warped, or the jackets would split. Wasted so many hours in second hand stores, looking at LP's in substandard shape. The ability to so easily go from point to point on CD's was great, the sound quality of one done right was such a pleasure.

I don't disagree about cds. I just think it's a coincidence that you were driven for your reasons to change over to cd. . . you would have been driven by the companies otherwise (I was, I wasn't really wanting to become a cd collector but so much stuff came out on cd that I wanted!)

Ironically, downloads don't get scratched at all, and when done right they sound great.

[JohnBlutarski]

John Great post , why is it that movies on dvd are going in one direction Plasmas , big screens ,HD

and music on crappy little ipods, cell phones, something doesn't add up ?

Because there is massive market demand for high-res movies and (especially) video games, but there are very few audiophiles. People don't pay close attention to music as much as they used to; background listening is the norm and hence audio quality for music files is not a big issue. Movies and video games are activities that require one's full attention, so video quality is more important to the average consumer.

An important point.

MG

sure, but not the complete story. If the focus was only on video, then the industry would never have develloped SACD or audio-DVD.

JB

[JohnBlutarski]

John Great post , why is it that movies on dvd are going in one direction Plasmas , big screens ,HD

and music on crappy little ipods, cell phones, something doesn't add up ?

Because there is massive market demand for high-res movies and (especially) video games, but there are very few audiophiles. People don't pay close attention to music as much as they used to; background listening is the norm and hence audio quality for music files is not a big issue. Movies and video games are activities that require one's full attention, so video quality is more important to the average consumer.

An important point.

MG

sure, but not the complete story. If the focus was only on video, then the industry would never have develloped SACD or audio-DVD.

JB

or to be more precise, if they wouldn't think they couild make a lot of money with those systems, they wouldn't have develloped them..

JB

[Guy Berger]

I think I understand people's resistance to downloadable music. As a result, I suppose, no one will probably want to download this not-very-interesting Duke Ellington album on Reprise ...

Duke Ellington: Afro-Bossa

I don't think Jim A will be psyched about a link to an illegal copy of an in-print CD.

Guy

Edited April 16, 2007 by Guy

[Chuck Nessa]

I think I understand people's resistance to downloadable music. As a result, I suppose, no one will probably want to download this not-very-interesting Duke Ellington album on Reprise ...

Duke Ellington: Afro-Bossa

I don't think Jim A will be psyched about a link to an illegal copy of an in-print CD.

Guy

You can buy it in the same transfer as the Mosiac from Collectibles or buy the Euro version coupling it with Concert in the Virgin Islands. Not like it is difficult to find.

Bad choice.

Why promote this crap?

[Guest donald petersen]

latoon, i like that website. but yeah, no reason to throw it out there in this context.

seems like the wrong thread....

[JSngry]

Let me see if I got this right...

When weighing the possibility (in theory, of course) of

A) Having easy, legal, ongoing access to quality (in theory, of course) downloads of music that would otherwise maybe or maybe not be available due to "market forces" through a business model that would still make provisions for appropriate royalty payments, etc. (in theory, of course)

against

B) Having this same music go in and (mostly) out of print (and all that that entails) and/or being subject to Andorran-like exploitation (and all that that entails)...

There are people who favor the latter scenario simply because of...

...perceived loss of potential resale value?

[JSngry]

John Great post , why is it that movies on dvd are going in one direction Plasmas , big screens ,HD

and music on crappy little ipods, cell phones, something doesn't add up ?

Because there is massive market demand for high-res movies and (especially) video games, but there are very few audiophiles. People don't pay close attention to music as much as they used to; background listening is the norm and hence audio quality for music files is not a big issue. Movies and video games are activities that require one's full attention, so video quality is more important to the average consumer.

An important point.

MG

sure, but not the complete story. If the focus was only on video, then the industry would never have develloped SACD or audio-DVD.

JB

or to be more precise, if they wouldn't think they couild make a lot of money with those systems, they wouldn't have develloped them..

JB

And to be even more precise, have they? Will they? Can they?

[JohnBlutarski]

John Great post , why is it that movies on dvd are going in one direction Plasmas , big screens ,HD

and music on crappy little ipods, cell phones, something doesn't add up ?

Because there is massive market demand for high-res movies and (especially) video games, but there are very few audiophiles. People don't pay close attention to music as much as they used to; background listening is the norm and hence audio quality for music files is not a big issue. Movies and video games are activities that require one's full attention, so video quality is more important to the average consumer.

An important point.

MG

sure, but not the complete story. If the focus was only on video, then the industry would never have develloped SACD or audio-DVD.

JB

or to be more precise, if they wouldn't think they couild make a lot of money with those systems, they wouldn't have develloped them..

JB

And to be even more precise, have they? Will they? Can they?

yes, yes, yes

[JSngry]

Really?

[Aggie87]

Some people are collectors, and like a legitimate, physical item, pressed and issued.

I love music, but I'm not interested in purchasing MP3's. I know you can make a CDR copy of the MP3s that you download, but that still doesn't (to me) seem a legitimate, company issued item.

I don't mind them as an augmentation of existing CD's and vinyl - like the freebie things that Osby, Steve Coleman etc put up on their websites. But given a choice (that's a key point), I will never choose to purchase an MP3 album over a CD.

[JohnBlutarski]

Really?

they will always devellop new systems, that must replace older systems, whether they say the new system will be beter, faster, handier, cleaner, whatever

it's no different than develloping a brand of washing powder, only cooler to talk about at a friends birthday:

more cool to say that you work on a new audio system, or you work with a company that devellops new talent on the hitparade, so that can get you free tickets at a party for your friends, or guest list tickets, then to get your friends free washing powder

Edited April 16, 2007 by JohnBlutarski

[JohnBlutarski]

Really?

they will always devellop new systems, that must replace older systems, whether they say the new system will be beter, faster, handier, cleaner, whatever

it's no different than develloping a brand of washing powder, only cooler to talk about at a friends birthday:

more cool to say that you work on a new audio system, or you work with a company that devellops new talent on the hitparade, so that can get you free tickets at a party for your friends, or guest list tickets, themn to get your friends free washing powder

but in the end, the company alwayst has to make a way make money...

JB

[JSngry]

I'd think that if SACD & DVD-A were going to become a viable "format of the future", they'd have done so by now. Instead, they're....Betamax. Superior format, not enough customer support to make it an ongoing proposition.

[ghost of miles]

I'd think that if SACD & DVD-A were going to become a viable "format of the future", they'd have done so by now. Instead, they're....Betamax. Superior format, not enough customer support to make it an ongoing proposition.

Well, you know, Jim, it's the fault of you and me and thee... according to that very ticklish fellow Greg Maltz.

Edited April 16, 2007 by ghost of miles

[JohnBlutarski]

I'd think that if SACD & DVD-A were going to become a viable "format of the future", they'd have done so by now. Instead, they're....Betamax. Superior format, not enough customer support to make it an ongoing proposition.

maybe, but they sure have made some money out of it, and if not they come up with a new one after that.

the last 100 and more years count a lot of systems that didn't really made it..

Edited April 16, 2007 by JohnBlutarski

[JSngry]

Some people are collectors, and like a legitimate, physical item, pressed and issued.

I love music, but I'm not interested in purchasing MP3's. I know you can make a CDR copy of the MP3s that you download, but that still doesn't (to me) seem a legitimate, company issued item.

And that, I think, is the real issue - having a sense of "ownership" of a "product". While I can respect that (hell, I've been there more than a little....), in the end, the whole "digital revolution" is forcing a redefinition of exactly what "product" is. Is it the content, or is it the medium of delivery?

This was not an issue in the analog world. You bought an LP, and anything else, short of the original master tapes, was substandard. The medium of delivery and quality of product were intrisically interwoven.

Not so with digital. 0s & 1s are 0s & 1s if you pay $17.95 for them in a fancy package or if you steal them off your next door neighbor's dog groomer's cousin's PC. All things being equal as far as bitrate & such goes, the "product" is now entirely the packaging.

Don't think so? Well then, pop a burn of a CD into the player and listen. Can you tell that it's a burn? No. It's the same music in the same quality as the original. So what's missing, what differentiates this copy from the "real thing". The packaging, pure & simple.

Ok, good, fine, but packaging costs money, which means that it has to be sold at a profit, which means that there has to be a combination of audience & delivery system that makes it a viable ongoing proposition. And that's a paradigm that is rapidly changing, like it or not. The end is in no way near, but at the same time, things ain't what they used to be, nor will they ever be again.

Objectification of packaging is fine. We all do it (I'd not have a copy of the original Miles Ahead cover in my collection if it didn't "matter" to me at some basic level). But let's be honest with ourselves - it's in no way shape or form about the music.

We're now seeing a redefinition of product that seperates music (content) & packaging (product) in such a way that creates two distinct, as opposed to intertwined, categories of product. In my opinion, it's exponentially more important to keep the music available than it is the packaging. Because as much as I enjoy the packaging (sometimes...), I need the music in a way that I don't need the packaging.

Time marches on and shit changes. Gotta roll with it & keep what really matters in the mix.

[JSngry]

I'd think that if SACD & DVD-A were going to become a viable "format of the future", they'd have done so by now. Instead, they're....Betamax. Superior format, not enough customer support to make it an ongoing proposition.

Well, you know, Jim, it's the fault of you and me and thee... according to that very ticklish fellow Greg Maltz.

Guilty as charged. And it makes me feel so...fuquitous...