dazzerfong
1000+ Head-Fier
I agree on the requirement that all versions are from the same master .
I agree on the bandwidth - in that light, MP3s can be the costliest way to buy music.
From your response regarding the "price" of musicians is clear that you do not have a clue how that goes. Whenever a live microphone is on stage, "wages" of musicians go up by at least 30 % - by their contract, union rules - you name it. And one way of recuperating the costs of recording, and I mean NEW recording, is by selling it in various qualities. Sorry, DSD128 and MP3 can not cost the same - despite the fact that additional work is required for converting the DSD128 to anything else.
This consumerism has made the price of the musicianship almost invisible. At least with re-releases of re-releases. It is one hell less expensive to re-release some famous recording from the past every sparrow knows is "good, reference playing" - than releasing a new recording of a local band playing the music of living composers. Not to mention famous musicians playing the music of living composers - do you have any idea how much these rights cost ? Short answer - enough for the most to avoid recording new music - at all. It was so for Bolero from Ravel - not before 75 years have passed from the composer's death ... (if you could not afford the performing rights).
Technical side - whatever it is - costs the least. Or USED to cost the least - prior to hirez. If you really want hirez, it means the change of - almost everything. Faster microphones, faster electronics, faster recorders - which have to be bought new, they can not be part of "heritage" that was "amortized" long ago. In short, it costs dearly. And has to be reflected in price of the recordings to the public.
Yet, it is the only tangible differentiation by which a"front row" and "back seat" "tickets" can be sold. It is the only leverage that can be used to recoup the costs of recording - and new recordings will always be pricier than the older ones. Despite if being on MP3...
Of course recording takes up a large majority of a musician's income. Hell, it's worse in Europe, where they subside off recordings even more than normal (if you believe Naxos, that is, and I do). Problem is, I highly doubt each album takes approximately the same amount of money to produce, yet most albums, when new, are priced the same (niche and exclusives notwithstanding). Who pockets this money? If you say the musicians, I'm calling your BS, because you and I both know the producers take the rest.
MP3 should be the cheapest, not the most expensive, considering if it's going up against hi-res formats, it's the smallest, and if it's up against CD's, there's no physical medium.
Now, back to claims on CD mats and all of it. You're not getting away that easily.