The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The music industry is ill, well kind of unwell as CD sales go down and down. This is a problem mainly caused by the MP3 market and the Internet. Less and less people are buying music CD's and opting to download an MP3 and a reduced cost or some even illegally for free from the various web pages and FTP servers which offer these services.
The music industry is huge and makes millions if not billions every year, so to do the successful artists so is this loss really important?
One of the starts to this problem came from Napster. Napster was a piece of software which allowed users to log on and share music files with others all over the world. So you swapped music with people all over the world for free. It was great for those who used it as you could find almost any song you wanted and get it for free. But it had it's affects on the music industry. Less people opted to going out and buying a CD as they could just download it for free. Also people could download the MP3 burn it onto CD and use it in an MP3 player or convert it to a Wav and burn it onto a CD which would then work on ordinary CD players.
Napster was ordered to shut down eventually but I think that potentially Napster could have been used to help the music industry. It already had a huge fan base so why not create a charge for every song, make it small so people still use it but enough so that the music industry make something out of it. Also other sites like Napster, Audio galaxy for example allow up and coming bands to show of some of their stuff and try make a name for themselves in an industry which seems to be changing.
So how is it changing? Well look at some of today's bands, their talents don't seem to match what I would call outstanding and they don't deserve the credit they get. They don't play instruments, sure some can sign but they don't even write their own songs which. Manufactured bands is who I describe them, some rich bloke finds a gap in the market which will bring him more cash and fills it with some group to do the job he requires. What happened to the natural talent? There are bands out there who can't make the big time as the industry is occupied with the "manufactured" ones. I'm not going to go on about this anymore, I'm sure most know what I mean and it isn't really a main point in this post.
One thing I think is that people don't have the time to go around looking for the music they want and many see the web as an easier option. I think instead of increasing the prices of CD's, tapes, LP's and concert tickets maybe they should try get new ways of distributing the music.
New technology which is set to take of in the music industry is CD's which can't be copied or used on PC's so if you want a copy for the car no longer can you copy it onto tape or MD. Instead you have to buy another copy. If you want a version which will run on your PC you have to buy the music file as well. This annoys me a little as I usually put songs from CD's onto minidisk for my train journey to Uni. Surely if you already own a copy then you should be allowed to copy it for your OWN use? I personally can see this having an even worse affect on the industry as it may drive more people to downloading MP3's from the net.
So what is the answer? Well in short there isn't really one. People have been copying music for their own use and to sell for years. It is only now due to the internet that people can get free copies of music that it is becoming a bigger problem. These problems could disappear in the future, new storage is probably a set that will be taken in the future just as we went from tapes to CD maybe we will move on from CD's to something new. For a while the new storage may slow the problem down but it is sure to come back. Maybe also the cost of new releases should be addressed, how much profit do big named artists make from albums and singles? Surely reducing the cost isn't going to have as drastic an effect as the publishers make out to believe.
This just goes to show that the music industry piracy problems are similar to the gaming industry and in some cases they could be described as being worse. Like the gaming industry, the music industry's problems are only a small percentage of the profits they make but it does look like they are going to get bigger before we see a change. Will it be a change for the worse or the better though?
I would like to hear your views on this so start posting.
The music industry is huge and makes millions if not billions every year, so to do the successful artists so is this loss really important?
One of the starts to this problem came from Napster. Napster was a piece of software which allowed users to log on and share music files with others all over the world. So you swapped music with people all over the world for free. It was great for those who used it as you could find almost any song you wanted and get it for free. But it had it's affects on the music industry. Less people opted to going out and buying a CD as they could just download it for free. Also people could download the MP3 burn it onto CD and use it in an MP3 player or convert it to a Wav and burn it onto a CD which would then work on ordinary CD players.
Napster was ordered to shut down eventually but I think that potentially Napster could have been used to help the music industry. It already had a huge fan base so why not create a charge for every song, make it small so people still use it but enough so that the music industry make something out of it. Also other sites like Napster, Audio galaxy for example allow up and coming bands to show of some of their stuff and try make a name for themselves in an industry which seems to be changing.
So how is it changing? Well look at some of today's bands, their talents don't seem to match what I would call outstanding and they don't deserve the credit they get. They don't play instruments, sure some can sign but they don't even write their own songs which. Manufactured bands is who I describe them, some rich bloke finds a gap in the market which will bring him more cash and fills it with some group to do the job he requires. What happened to the natural talent? There are bands out there who can't make the big time as the industry is occupied with the "manufactured" ones. I'm not going to go on about this anymore, I'm sure most know what I mean and it isn't really a main point in this post.
One thing I think is that people don't have the time to go around looking for the music they want and many see the web as an easier option. I think instead of increasing the prices of CD's, tapes, LP's and concert tickets maybe they should try get new ways of distributing the music.
New technology which is set to take of in the music industry is CD's which can't be copied or used on PC's so if you want a copy for the car no longer can you copy it onto tape or MD. Instead you have to buy another copy. If you want a version which will run on your PC you have to buy the music file as well. This annoys me a little as I usually put songs from CD's onto minidisk for my train journey to Uni. Surely if you already own a copy then you should be allowed to copy it for your OWN use? I personally can see this having an even worse affect on the industry as it may drive more people to downloading MP3's from the net.
So what is the answer? Well in short there isn't really one. People have been copying music for their own use and to sell for years. It is only now due to the internet that people can get free copies of music that it is becoming a bigger problem. These problems could disappear in the future, new storage is probably a set that will be taken in the future just as we went from tapes to CD maybe we will move on from CD's to something new. For a while the new storage may slow the problem down but it is sure to come back. Maybe also the cost of new releases should be addressed, how much profit do big named artists make from albums and singles? Surely reducing the cost isn't going to have as drastic an effect as the publishers make out to believe.
This just goes to show that the music industry piracy problems are similar to the gaming industry and in some cases they could be described as being worse. Like the gaming industry, the music industry's problems are only a small percentage of the profits they make but it does look like they are going to get bigger before we see a change. Will it be a change for the worse or the better though?
I would like to hear your views on this so start posting.
to right most of the stuff that is ripped off is boy band cack anyway
Couldn't give a toss, really. Music was corrupt enough anyway. Let people download mp3's, stop those damn pop "artists" raking it in.
misterhappy wrote:
> Common misconception:
MD's hold more than CDs
wrong!
Cd's can hold more
> physical data than an Mindisc. That is a fact. Using ATRAC compression the
> Minidisc was first able to hold 74 minutes, the same length as a CD. Now due to
> a new compression tecnology pioneered by SOny, MDLP, you can hold 296
> minutes.
Now let's figure out why...
The minidisc just stores data. If you
> make the music files smaller you can fit more on to the disc. Imagine that the
> disc was a warehouse and the songs were boxes. The compression technology means
> that instead of fitting 20 boxes in your warehouse you can flat-pack the boxs
> and fit 200 in there instead.
So will this kill off the cd and mp3? Well no
> actually. If you listen to a MDLP recorded song it sounds like absolute pants
> because it's so heavily compressed. The reason why ATRAC worked and was a good
> form of compression was because it compressed songs by deleting all of the stuff
> outside the human range of hearing. Because you can't hear the stuff it makes no
> difference to sound quality but makes the filesize smaller. MDLP goes further
> which means you lose sound quality. My sister has an MDLP recorder built into
> her hi-fi and when she records at maximum compression the songs all sound very
> flat and it loses the 'life' from the music.
The only other way of fitting
> more on to an MD is to record in mono instead of stereo. This again incrases the
> number of songs you can fit on to an MD but it makes the sound very flat and
> uninspiring.
I just thought I would share that...
This is very true, i have a mini disk but it just isn't the same as MP3.
MP3's can be downloaded, no CD and no MD needed just a PC and a harddrive plus with more and more DVD players being able to read CD's with MP3's then there is a huge difference. you can get over 100hours of music on a CD if stored as MP3.
i'd go and learn more about what your talking about before making comments like that. although if a MD could store MP3 files that would be cool and these MP3 player that are about are cack i mean 64mb memory come on
> Common misconception:
MD's hold more than CDs
wrong!
Cd's can hold more
> physical data than an Mindisc. That is a fact. Using ATRAC compression the
> Minidisc was first able to hold 74 minutes, the same length as a CD. Now due to
> a new compression tecnology pioneered by SOny, MDLP, you can hold 296
> minutes.
Now let's figure out why...
The minidisc just stores data. If you
> make the music files smaller you can fit more on to the disc. Imagine that the
> disc was a warehouse and the songs were boxes. The compression technology means
> that instead of fitting 20 boxes in your warehouse you can flat-pack the boxs
> and fit 200 in there instead.
So will this kill off the cd and mp3? Well no
> actually. If you listen to a MDLP recorded song it sounds like absolute pants
> because it's so heavily compressed. The reason why ATRAC worked and was a good
> form of compression was because it compressed songs by deleting all of the stuff
> outside the human range of hearing. Because you can't hear the stuff it makes no
> difference to sound quality but makes the filesize smaller. MDLP goes further
> which means you lose sound quality. My sister has an MDLP recorder built into
> her hi-fi and when she records at maximum compression the songs all sound very
> flat and it loses the 'life' from the music.
The only other way of fitting
> more on to an MD is to record in mono instead of stereo. This again incrases the
> number of songs you can fit on to an MD but it makes the sound very flat and
> uninspiring.
I just thought I would share that...
This is very true, i have a mini disk but it just isn't the same as MP3.
MP3's can be downloaded, no CD and no MD needed just a PC and a harddrive plus with more and more DVD players being able to read CD's with MP3's then there is a huge difference. you can get over 100hours of music on a CD if stored as MP3.
i'd go and learn more about what your talking about before making comments like that. although if a MD could store MP3 files that would be cool and these MP3 player that are about are cack i mean 64mb memory come on
Common misconception:
MD's hold more than CDs
wrong!
Cd's can hold more physical data than an Mindisc. That is a fact. Using ATRAC compression the Minidisc was first able to hold 74 minutes, the same length as a CD. Now due to a new compression tecnology pioneered by SOny, MDLP, you can hold 296 minutes.
Now let's figure out why...
The minidisc just stores data. If you make the music files smaller you can fit more on to the disc. Imagine that the disc was a warehouse and the songs were boxes. The compression technology means that instead of fitting 20 boxes in your warehouse you can flat-pack the boxs and fit 200 in there instead.
So will this kill off the cd and mp3? Well no actually. If you listen to a MDLP recorded song it sounds like absolute pants because it's so heavily compressed. The reason why ATRAC worked and was a good form of compression was because it compressed songs by deleting all of the stuff outside the human range of hearing. Because you can't hear the stuff it makes no difference to sound quality but makes the filesize smaller. MDLP goes further which means you lose sound quality. My sister has an MDLP recorder built into her hi-fi and when she records at maximum compression the songs all sound very flat and it loses the 'life' from the music.
The only other way of fitting more on to an MD is to record in mono instead of stereo. This again incrases the number of songs you can fit on to an MD but it makes the sound very flat and uninspiring.
I just thought I would share that...
MD's hold more than CDs
wrong!
Cd's can hold more physical data than an Mindisc. That is a fact. Using ATRAC compression the Minidisc was first able to hold 74 minutes, the same length as a CD. Now due to a new compression tecnology pioneered by SOny, MDLP, you can hold 296 minutes.
Now let's figure out why...
The minidisc just stores data. If you make the music files smaller you can fit more on to the disc. Imagine that the disc was a warehouse and the songs were boxes. The compression technology means that instead of fitting 20 boxes in your warehouse you can flat-pack the boxs and fit 200 in there instead.
So will this kill off the cd and mp3? Well no actually. If you listen to a MDLP recorded song it sounds like absolute pants because it's so heavily compressed. The reason why ATRAC worked and was a good form of compression was because it compressed songs by deleting all of the stuff outside the human range of hearing. Because you can't hear the stuff it makes no difference to sound quality but makes the filesize smaller. MDLP goes further which means you lose sound quality. My sister has an MDLP recorder built into her hi-fi and when she records at maximum compression the songs all sound very flat and it loses the 'life' from the music.
The only other way of fitting more on to an MD is to record in mono instead of stereo. This again incrases the number of songs you can fit on to an MD but it makes the sound very flat and uninspiring.
I just thought I would share that...
I just find it hilarious that loads of rich artists insists that for them it is all about the music, and they love their fans etc. when really they are so rich, so why can't they charge a little less for CDs? All the people that get into the charts regularly are making millions from a single record, and still insist it is about the music, but then still keep the CD prices high.
I mean, sure the record company is going to set the final price, but the artist must have SOME say in it all.
I mean, sure the record company is going to set the final price, but the artist must have SOME say in it all.
Aswell as MP3's bringing CD's business' down, don't forget mini-discs/MD's!! They're becoming HUGE!! Especially as you can store hours more on an MD then you can on a CD.
I really don't see the point in buying MD's with music already on them, unless they have several albums instead of just one!! Otherwise you're wasting hours of space on one MD, and you can't record over these ones either!!
Tapes have surely already gone but I don't think CD's will for many, many decades to come!! MP3's will be forgotten long before CD's!!!
I really don't see the point in buying MD's with music already on them, unless they have several albums instead of just one!! Otherwise you're wasting hours of space on one MD, and you can't record over these ones either!!
Tapes have surely already gone but I don't think CD's will for many, many decades to come!! MP3's will be forgotten long before CD's!!!
The music industry is ill, well kind of unwell as CD sales go down and down. This is a problem mainly caused by the MP3 market and the Internet. Less and less people are buying music CD's and opting to download an MP3 and a reduced cost or some even illegally for free from the various web pages and FTP servers which offer these services.
The music industry is huge and makes millions if not billions every year, so to do the successful artists so is this loss really important?
One of the starts to this problem came from Napster. Napster was a piece of software which allowed users to log on and share music files with others all over the world. So you swapped music with people all over the world for free. It was great for those who used it as you could find almost any song you wanted and get it for free. But it had it's affects on the music industry. Less people opted to going out and buying a CD as they could just download it for free. Also people could download the MP3 burn it onto CD and use it in an MP3 player or convert it to a Wav and burn it onto a CD which would then work on ordinary CD players.
Napster was ordered to shut down eventually but I think that potentially Napster could have been used to help the music industry. It already had a huge fan base so why not create a charge for every song, make it small so people still use it but enough so that the music industry make something out of it. Also other sites like Napster, Audio galaxy for example allow up and coming bands to show of some of their stuff and try make a name for themselves in an industry which seems to be changing.
So how is it changing? Well look at some of today's bands, their talents don't seem to match what I would call outstanding and they don't deserve the credit they get. They don't play instruments, sure some can sign but they don't even write their own songs which. Manufactured bands is who I describe them, some rich bloke finds a gap in the market which will bring him more cash and fills it with some group to do the job he requires. What happened to the natural talent? There are bands out there who can't make the big time as the industry is occupied with the "manufactured" ones. I'm not going to go on about this anymore, I'm sure most know what I mean and it isn't really a main point in this post.
One thing I think is that people don't have the time to go around looking for the music they want and many see the web as an easier option. I think instead of increasing the prices of CD's, tapes, LP's and concert tickets maybe they should try get new ways of distributing the music.
New technology which is set to take of in the music industry is CD's which can't be copied or used on PC's so if you want a copy for the car no longer can you copy it onto tape or MD. Instead you have to buy another copy. If you want a version which will run on your PC you have to buy the music file as well. This annoys me a little as I usually put songs from CD's onto minidisk for my train journey to Uni. Surely if you already own a copy then you should be allowed to copy it for your OWN use? I personally can see this having an even worse affect on the industry as it may drive more people to downloading MP3's from the net.
So what is the answer? Well in short there isn't really one. People have been copying music for their own use and to sell for years. It is only now due to the internet that people can get free copies of music that it is becoming a bigger problem. These problems could disappear in the future, new storage is probably a set that will be taken in the future just as we went from tapes to CD maybe we will move on from CD's to something new. For a while the new storage may slow the problem down but it is sure to come back. Maybe also the cost of new releases should be addressed, how much profit do big named artists make from albums and singles? Surely reducing the cost isn't going to have as drastic an effect as the publishers make out to believe.
This just goes to show that the music industry piracy problems are similar to the gaming industry and in some cases they could be described as being worse. Like the gaming industry, the music industry's problems are only a small percentage of the profits they make but it does look like they are going to get bigger before we see a change. Will it be a change for the worse or the better though?
I would like to hear your views on this so start posting.
The music industry is huge and makes millions if not billions every year, so to do the successful artists so is this loss really important?
One of the starts to this problem came from Napster. Napster was a piece of software which allowed users to log on and share music files with others all over the world. So you swapped music with people all over the world for free. It was great for those who used it as you could find almost any song you wanted and get it for free. But it had it's affects on the music industry. Less people opted to going out and buying a CD as they could just download it for free. Also people could download the MP3 burn it onto CD and use it in an MP3 player or convert it to a Wav and burn it onto a CD which would then work on ordinary CD players.
Napster was ordered to shut down eventually but I think that potentially Napster could have been used to help the music industry. It already had a huge fan base so why not create a charge for every song, make it small so people still use it but enough so that the music industry make something out of it. Also other sites like Napster, Audio galaxy for example allow up and coming bands to show of some of their stuff and try make a name for themselves in an industry which seems to be changing.
So how is it changing? Well look at some of today's bands, their talents don't seem to match what I would call outstanding and they don't deserve the credit they get. They don't play instruments, sure some can sign but they don't even write their own songs which. Manufactured bands is who I describe them, some rich bloke finds a gap in the market which will bring him more cash and fills it with some group to do the job he requires. What happened to the natural talent? There are bands out there who can't make the big time as the industry is occupied with the "manufactured" ones. I'm not going to go on about this anymore, I'm sure most know what I mean and it isn't really a main point in this post.
One thing I think is that people don't have the time to go around looking for the music they want and many see the web as an easier option. I think instead of increasing the prices of CD's, tapes, LP's and concert tickets maybe they should try get new ways of distributing the music.
New technology which is set to take of in the music industry is CD's which can't be copied or used on PC's so if you want a copy for the car no longer can you copy it onto tape or MD. Instead you have to buy another copy. If you want a version which will run on your PC you have to buy the music file as well. This annoys me a little as I usually put songs from CD's onto minidisk for my train journey to Uni. Surely if you already own a copy then you should be allowed to copy it for your OWN use? I personally can see this having an even worse affect on the industry as it may drive more people to downloading MP3's from the net.
So what is the answer? Well in short there isn't really one. People have been copying music for their own use and to sell for years. It is only now due to the internet that people can get free copies of music that it is becoming a bigger problem. These problems could disappear in the future, new storage is probably a set that will be taken in the future just as we went from tapes to CD maybe we will move on from CD's to something new. For a while the new storage may slow the problem down but it is sure to come back. Maybe also the cost of new releases should be addressed, how much profit do big named artists make from albums and singles? Surely reducing the cost isn't going to have as drastic an effect as the publishers make out to believe.
This just goes to show that the music industry piracy problems are similar to the gaming industry and in some cases they could be described as being worse. Like the gaming industry, the music industry's problems are only a small percentage of the profits they make but it does look like they are going to get bigger before we see a change. Will it be a change for the worse or the better though?
I would like to hear your views on this so start posting.