As someone said, we've already got FLAC (and MP3) - what more do we need?
not we, but seems someone have not enough money and has dreaming to implement something to receive royalties for it.
As someone said, we've already got FLAC (and MP3) - what more do we need?
The thing is to sell us better quality recordings in the first place. From there we can convert to MP3 or other file format if need be depending on want/needs and devices. As it is, folks are paying the same old CD price's for MP3, but getting less than CD quality.
This. This. This. This. This.
Forget surround. Forget everything. If you want to know why the industry, in 2012, is in the shitter, and why no one is happy, this.
Again--Totally agree. But what is proposed here isn't selling anything but a cloud subscription. The music wouldn't belong to you anymore than the music on MOG or Spotify or whatever the kids use these days. That's my only objection. Give me the files and let me do with the file what I like. This is all about not selling you music but purchasing the rights to listen to that music. Big difference. One gets you at least something tangible even if it's only a sector on a HDD. The other gets you access to that file with an active internet connection, compatible portable playback device, and up to date payments. And the file sits on a server somewhere. Anyway I am all for something I can own, back up, convert, share, archive, delete, or destroy if the mood strikes me. This offering by Mr. Young does not seem to be what either of you are suggesting. If he were selling something tangible either to download or own I think we would all be in agreement. BTW this is my major objection to the cloud offering by Apple as well. If it doesn't belong to me...well, it doesn't belong to me!
Enter your email address to join: