What do you do when the market doesn't have what you need? If you're the music industry you create a new digital format that will hopefully encourage users to purchase entire albums instead of single tracks.The format dubbed CMX will give consumers more for their dollar when they download albums in the newly created format. Think of current music downloads to be similar to VHS and the CMX format will be more like DVDs in that they offer bonus content in addition to the music.
CMX has a few large backers including Sony, Warner, Universal and EMI but notably it is not being supported by Apple. Initially the group went to Apple and tried get their help so that the format would be supported by iTunes but Apple rejected the proposal and is said to be working on its own format incase CMX is a hit with consumers.
It is unclear if the content will work like previous DRM formats which burned both the industry and the consumer. The group hopes to get the format out to the public by November with a soft launch that may include the upcoming U2 album.
Ogg is quite popular with GNU/Linux users (including myself), but admittedly it isn't as mainstream as it should be. Although if you look on sites like wikipedia, ogg/theora are ubiquitous.
Don't get me started on ATRAC! My dad had his entire music collection in that format and I had the unenviable task of trying to extract and transcode it into ogg; sony truly is the bane of my existence :/ Fortunately I found JSymphonic which he now uses to interface with his sony music player on Kubuntu.
Why?
Why not use FLAC? It's the same quality but approximately half the size.
And unfortunately most are highly restrictive due to the legal minefield of patents. Ogg/Theora is the way of the future...
Well, some say they hear a difference. I don't. I will say that in my experience Apple's format is generally smaller than comparable MP3's, which of course my iPod likes... LOL More music for me!
All proprietary formats are equally insidious, for they are inherently divisive. Ogg and Flac, which are superior both technically and morally, ought to be adopted by the major software companies.
As far as this new proprietary format is concerned, don't we already have enough closed myopic standards?
WMA is also fairly standard and well supported these days, I believe it was standardized to get it adopted on Blu-ray and HD DVD and it competes (with VC-1) directly with MPEG4.
With AAC higher than 192Kbps stereo that "diffrence" is psychological only. I would like to see "expert" who can tell me difference between AAC 192Kbps stereo and 320KBps stereo in double blind tests. And its not only quality. recording noise, ambient noise, voice and instrument imperfections makes imaginable "microbe" picking at sound quality completely pointless.
M4A aint no apple crap, it's one hell of a standard. And the only one with a chance to at least co-exist with mp3, since most dedicated chips that also deal with h264 implement it.
LOL! I know right?
Born out of ignorance and the desire to regain control of a market me thinks
Apple has no interest in it because it is a scam by the record labels (Sony, etc). Why should Apple go along with them?
"Apple rejected the proposal and is said to be working on its own format incase CMX is a hit with consumers. "
Thanks Yoda
You know, you just suggested they put DRM on it ?, we just got rid of it, and you want it back already ?
What scam do you speak of? It may speciously appear overpriced to those proselytised by the lowest denominator component shipping OEM's, but in reality you are paying for the service, peace of mind, quality components, and feature packed system right out of the box; this in addition to an OS that doesn't get infested with every virus ever created within five minutes of use.
Don't do that. It doesn't endear people to you, or your point of view.
***The last comment is based on emtions only, anything read between the lines is based on my opinion and my opinion alone***
The mp3 format is tightly controlled and highly restrictive. Such a statement is fictitious at best. That control you think you have is an illusion, and although you may elude punishment personally, for businesses the complexities of licensing this technology is fraught with dangers.
You keep talking about how evil and limiting propriety formats are but for probably 99.9% of users these limits are virtually non existent. They can download a codec if the OS doesn't already come with it and be done with it.
IMHO the alternatives such as Ogg and LAME which you keep bringing up are far more limiting than any licensing issue MP3 may have due to their lack of support by portable devices. I'd feel a lot more restrained to buying certain manufacturers hardware if I had my music in those formats.
If a business has to license the format then so what? It doesn't effect the end users besides maybe marginally if they have to cover the licensing costs which I will take any day to use a format that for all intents is the universally accepted one for music.
What's the betting this new CMX format is so heavily burdened with layer upon layer of the usual sort of Digital Restrictions Management,
that the pirates have it completely cracked wide open in under a week, possibly within a day or so of it becoming available to the public,
and the genuine customers that have no knowledge or interest in piracy, lose out and get royally screwed over yet again?
CMX has EPIC FAIL written all over it!
Listen up labels: We don't want you to raise production costs. Instead, CUT OUT the marketing and LOWER the cost. If you want marketing, let people blog about what songs they like and host clips for people to insert into posts, it's free press and it gets the same job done. Oh, and free ringtones. That's probably the best marketing you can get. Stop trying to squeeze every last cent out of people, that's why they're buying less music, it's getting too expensive for the whole "experience." (Hey gamers, does this seem familiar? *cough*DLC*cough*preorderbonus*cough*incomplete$70games*cough*) Let's be smart about this.
Last edited by HalcyonX12 on 11 Aug 2009 - 19:07
true that
Apple... when will you learn... But good for them, if this CMX Crap catches on, then apple will have good competition, with all there market share...
This will NOT Catch on... Sink-Sink-Sink, especially if it might be pushed with the U2 Album
The format is available at fine music retail outlets around the world and online from retailers like Amazon. At no extra cost, this format includes printed liner notes which can include lyrics, photos, and other information on the full album purchase.
What could be better than that?
The format is available at fine music retail outlets around the world and online from retailers like Amazon. At no extra cost, this format includes printed liner notes which can include lyrics, photos, and other information on the full album purchase.
What could be better than that?
Classic. :-)
LOL xd
Didn't you notice a small sticker on most new CD's that state "Will not play on PCs/Macs"? What happens if I want to play it on my Linux box, or I don't like CD's and prefer my music in FLAC/Ogg ?
I guess if you disable auto-run the nasty stuff cannot run. And Sony don't include root-kits anymore. Most good albums aren't SONY BMG artists anyway.
+1
FLAC rocks
Wrong. The album is very much alive and well. When done properly, the album is greater than the sum of all the tracks on it. Most top 40 artists don't have the artistic vision to release an album with overarching themes and tones.
These guys are really just a joke nowadays. As soon as they touch the IT industry, they fail. DRM worked for a while, but it was a flawed concept all the way, and it's finally failing as well, with any company backing the marketing of such music with a brain pulling out of that now. Now they're trying something new, but few software companies, if any, are prepared to support them, and there are probably copy protections there too, making you not "own" your music, just "lease" it under their conditions.
One can ask oneself why? But it's all really simple. They don't want to listen to their customers. Instead they prefer to criminalize them. What in the f***k kind of business model is that.
Last edited by Jugalator on 11 Aug 2009 - 19:36
A good parallel is this: why would someone want to buy a house instead of renting an apartment?
@ LoveThePenguin: Your comment doesn't make a lot of sense. Are you just saying that the subscription music model hasn't been as successful as, say, iTunes?
I was alluding to the failure of the subscription model in general.
Yeah, but what bearing does that have on me not understanding why people have rejected subscription services in favor of pay-per-download services?
I thought the entire point of buying individual songs online was to make your own playlist and avoid paying for songs you didn't want/like...
Nope.
This would of been a good idea 8 or 10 years ago though. I like the idea behind it, I'd love to hear some commentary tracks similar to a DVD on some albums I had or even have the music videos or interviews incorporated into a digital album. I think the idea behind it is good, I think they've just waited too long and of course go about this the wrong way. I think its funny that its taken a decade for the music industry to try an create an innovative product for the digital age. Maybe they've realized that they should try and adapt their business model?
You need to re-read
Or ogg
You mean license? The plastic you own, but the content is only licensed to you. That's the whole problem with the record companies; they license intangibles, then expect to have the same rights as tangibles, when in fact the economic model is entirely different due to scarcity, or lack thereof.
Set sail for FAIL!
Last edited by Leeoniya on 11 Aug 2009 - 22:43
Oh very poor analogy.
Tom Siegel
www.onlineartistpromo.com
OMG. They still don't get it.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.