[IstariAsuka]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yyoo 8 out of 10 times, the iTunes pricing wins. Physical CDs are typically priced more than a few bucks above the standard $9.99 charged by the iTunes Music Store.

Yeah, but you get more than a few bucks worth of added value. For instance, you get acceptable sound quality.

 

[dominator]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yyoo You're not going to buy new hit singles for 99 cents at your local music store and the album prices, at least in the US, seem very fair to me. Occasionally I'll find a better deal on an album at a store, but 8 out of 10 times, the iTunes pricing wins. As for overhead, the materials, manufacturing and distribution can't be more than a buck or two per physical CD, but physical CDs are typically priced more than a few bucks above the standard $9.99 charged by the iTunes Music Store. As the business analysts will tell you, iTMS is not a big profit center for Apple. What it does however is lure people to iPods and keeps them there.

I can't believe people actually use iTunes... it's such a rip-off.

$10 for an album that's just a file on my computer with horrible sound quality, or $12-$15 for an actual CD that I can buy from the store: I think I'll take the CD, thank you very much.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure that if you factor in the actualy CD, the jewel case, colour insert, shipping, packaging, etc., it costs at least $2 or $3 per CD, so iTunes is clearly overcharging you for an inferior product, especially if they're putting all these copyright restrictions on my music.

If I want to get some crappy quality MP3's, I'll get them for free off of P2P, that's what it's there for after all.

 

[oneeyedhobbit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grenert Well, I think that it's pretty ridiculous to feel that it is OK to download from allofmp3 when you know that the performers, writers, etc aren't getting squat from them. Just because Russia doesn't give a damn about copyrights doesn't mean that what they're doing is RIGHT.

Actually, allofmp3.com (claims) to pay the artists a royalty. I've never used the service (don't do the lossy bit anymore), but I've no beef as long as the artists are the ones getting a chunck of my money. I'm with Pink Floyd in Have a Cigar on this one, I'd just as well keep my money out of the hands of record producers/labels, etc.

 

[yyoo]

I normally buy singles off of iTunes, exclusives (like the Complete U2), and deals, like $9.99 albums that are $19.99 at the store. It saves me a lot of money and hassle. I also use allofmp3.com, but allofmp3.com is something of a pain on a Mac since they haven't provided a Mac version of their browser, so more and more I just use iTunes.

Horrible sound quality? Not really. 128 Kbps AAC is definitely tolerable (equivalent to 160-192 Kbps MP3 many say), and sounds better through my rig than a 192 Kbps MP3 sounds on a stock setup. For the stuff I want at high quality, I do buy CDs, but there is plenty of stuff I don't mind buying off the iTunes store.

I don't use P2P. It's an ethical issue for me, though allofmp3.com is itself in a gray area of course. I do have something like 6 bootleg tracks in my collection of 14,000+ tracks, but they're there only because the albums are unobtainable (usually out-of-print foreign stuff).

BTW, if there's a meet in California anytime soon, I'd like to conduct a blind test with head-fiers of the same songs purchased off of allofmp3 and off of iTMS. Some of the allofmp3 stuff just sounds really poor to me, even with LAME alt-preset-extreme.

 

[allenf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yyoo BTW, if there's a meet in California anytime soon, I'd like to conduct a blind test with head-fiers of the same songs purchased off of allofmp3 and off of iTMS. Some of the allofmp3 stuff just sounds really poor to me, even with LAME alt-preset-extreme.

I don't live in Cali unfortunately - Hampshire UK is my "manor", but I definitely agree with this point.

I have a few "320KB LAMEs" from allofmp3: they sound ok but in an A/B with the same track self-ripped (Audiograbber, LAME 3.96.1 (EDIT), 320KB CBR) the self-ripped easily walks it in every respect.

Earlier in the thread someone mentioned transcoding; as allofmp3 offer so many different flavours of each file AND also offer the same file "ripped directly from CD (at a premium)" I would guess that indeed transcoding is the issue.

Under no circumstances would I willingly pay iTunes prices for a download - I download albums not tracks - but I would be happy to pay a "reasonable" amount (or a monthly sub) for a high-quality download, say store£ minus bricks & mortar/manuf/etc costs.

Cheers.

 

[remilard]

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymondlin How do you guys know what you are buying ? the site is in Russian !!!!!!!!!! But if the site is legal in Russia, it'll still make it legal, since Russia is not under US legislative rule.

But US citizens are.

allofmp3 unquestionably violates the intent of US law, if it is legal on a technicality that technicality can be easily eliminated if the record industry ever sees them as a priority.

Even if they pay artists a royalty (and I doubt this happens consistently) and even if you hate the way major record labels operate, the record labels footed the bill for producing, advertising, and distributing the album and they deserve a cut. If you want music distributed differently buy from independent labels who do so. It is a really weak argument to say that you don't want to support a record label because they produce crap albums that are overpriced, but then to say that you can't live without the music and must try to download it for free or at an extreme discount.

You either like commercial music and pay the price, or you don't like it and listen to something else, imho.

 

[allenf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by remilard You either like commercial music and pay the price, or you don't like it and listen to something else, imho.

Sure, and iTunes scalps us in the UK...revenge is a dish best enjoyed cold

 

[Michael1980]

Artists don't see a dime from allofmp3. But you are NOT going to get prosecuted so it is up to the people.

iTMS is a rip-off IMO. They should sell lossless at 1$ a song, that would be more fair.

 

[daphox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael1980 iTMS is a rip-off IMO. They should sell lossless at 1$ a song, that would be more fair.

They probably would if you supported the bandwidth.

From what I've read/heard the rec. companies don't allow downloads over 192kbps, I don't think it's a coinsidence that some sites have this bitrate as the "roof".

 

[Underdog311]

I just hope for the ones that proclaim death to the illegal DLers or for using shady services, I hope you never drive above the speed limit neither.