Re: MP3s etc

["weapons of mass destruction-related program activities" <spamtony>]

Mike Spindloe (mike_alstublief) wrote:
> 
> 20 cents per track seems about right for MP3s, since they 
> contain +/- 10% of the information contained on a CD, which 
> in turn still has artificial limits that make it inferior 
> to analogue. That's two steps backward now from the 
> music industry, all in the name of convenience.

Well, until Tom Verlaine invites me over to listen to
his master reel-to-reels, a CD (at least) will have 
to do.

And it's about more than convenience, for me at least. 

With eMusic, it's about supporting a model of DRM-free, 
untethered downloads, which I get to keep forever and 
ever (unless my backups fail, which they inevitably
will). 

And maybe I don't want to spend $12.99 to find out I 
really don't like "Around" all that much. And I agree
that Mp3s are somewhat less than great. For that reason, 
the 20-cent pricepoint is one that is actually suitable
for me. 

And no one has to give their work away for free. 

And I get to hear a preview of the album. If I really 
really like it, I will, as I have in the past, go on 
to buy the full CD. 

If you don't like the model, don't participate. And
I don't mean that flippantly. There's nothing "inevitable"
about higher and higher prices for crappier and 
crappier "stuff", and it's always a good feeling to
be able to walk away from encouraging that rat race. 
But this particular arrangement works for me right 
here and now. YMMV.