Sayonara, DRM. Hello Amazon MP3!

[viscousmemories]

Amazon MP3 offers over 2 million songs — all in MP3 format, which means they can play on any digital media player, including the iPod.

Most songs are between $0.89 and $0.99, and most albums are between $5.99 and $9.99.
Amazon.com Digital Music: Getting Started with MP3 Downloads (http://www.amazon.com/gp/dmusic/help/faq.html/ref=sv_dm_hp_nav_lk_0/102-2319185-7373739)

[Ensign Steve]

Sweet. That's cheaper than iTunes' DRM-free selections.

[Ymir's blood]

OMG, the record industry is doomed!!1 :onfire:

[D. Scarlatti]

I was just looking for a few tracks; Amazon didn't have any of 'em. Sucks.

[viscousmemories]

Damn, that does suck. I haven't even looked, but I do expect their offerings to grow exponentially as the idea catches on.

[D. Scarlatti]

Well they put Nick Lowe up as #13 "featured artist (http://www.amazon.com/Nick-Lowe/dp/B000QJJVL4/ref=dm_hp_ayl_13/104-1075344-2413520?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-6&pf_rd_r=1EF2PY5HH6T7BA6M8QD3&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=311495601&pf_rd_i=163856011)" so I'll give 'em props for that (even though they've only got two records).

[Blake]

I want mp4s! Damnit.

[MonCapitan2002]

This seems pretty sweet.

[Stormlight]

As required by our Digital Content providers, Digital Content will, unless otherwise designated, be available only to customers located in the United States.

:brooding:

[viscousmemories]

:sadnana:

[MonCapitan2002]

As required by our Digital Content providers, Digital Content will, unless otherwise designated, be available only to customers located in the United States.

:brooding:
That is unfortunate. Hopefully Amazon will be able to launch international versions of its digital download store. I happen to think being able to purchase digital downloads of songs in MP3 format is far preferable to other formats.

[Ensign Steve]

Really? But MP3 is so lossy.

[MonCapitan2002]

While that is indeed true you can do anything you want with the files. There is also the benefit that MP3's are essentially a universal format that almost all media player programs and digital music players (such as iPod's and Zunes) can play. That widespread utility somewhat makes up for its lossy aspect. While there may be other DRM free audio formats none are as universal as the MP3 to the best of my knowledge.

[viscousmemories]

Did y'all just read somewhere that MP3's are 'lossy' and are repeating it here to sound all knowledgeable, or do you really notice some discernible difference in quality between MP3's and other audio formats?

[MonCapitan2002]

I do not at all. More than likely the only people who would notice are devoted audiophiles and professional musicians.

[Ensign Steve]

While that is indeed true you can do anything you want with the files. There is also the benefit that MP3's are essentially a universal format that almost all media player programs and digital music players (such as iPod's and Zunes) can play. That widespread utility somewhat makes up for its lossy aspect. While there may be other DRM free audio formats none are as universal as the MP3 to the best of my knowledge.
That's weird. I've heard of issues where .mp3's are hard to deal with on some linux distros, because it is still a closed format. I can't say from experience, though, because I never bothered, I just do everything from within iTunes.

Did y'all just read somewhere that MP3's are 'lossy' and are repeating it here to sound all knowledgeable, or do you really notice some discernible difference in quality between MP3's and other audio formats?
Neither.

I know what lossy is. I deal with file compression all day every day, in music, images, and video, as part of my job.

I don't notice the difference until you get down below a bitrate of about 96 kbps, but I am also hard of hearing, especially in the extremely high and extremely low frequencies, which is the first part of the range the MP3s lose.

I have no problem with MP3, I use them all the time. I like the small file size (yay compression!). I just haven't heard of someone saying they actually prefer MP3 quality over other formats.

[Ari]

I think she meant to say lousy (since the majority of downloaded formats are lossy).

Yay for no DRM. I find it funny companies are so scared of apple they are willing to get rid of their God and protector from all that is unholy just to keep apple from becoming the main seller on the internet. Here's hope that Amazon is willing to stand up to them and not take the wuss way like microsoft.

[Ensign Steve]

I don't notice the difference until you get down below a bitrate of about 96 kbps, but I am also hard of hearing, especially in the extremely high and extremely low frequencies, which is the first part of the range the MP3s lose.

I take it back. I'm listening to a CD ripped at 192 kbps through some really amazingly good over-the-ear headphones, and the sibilance hurts my teeth. I think I finally understand why the iPod ships with such shitty headphones.

[JoeP]

That's weird. I've heard of issues where .mp3's are hard to deal with on some linux distros, because it is still a closed format.
The only 'issue' I'm aware of is that because MP3 involves some licensed/closed source bit in the decoder somewhere, it goes against the FOSS principle of e.g. Canonical/Ubuntu. You have to manually click the option to download additional formats. And that's "hard to deal with". :wink:

[JoeP]

I don't notice the difference until you get down below a bitrate of about 96 kbps, but I am also hard of hearing, especially in the extremely high and extremely low frequencies, which is the first part of the range the MP3s lose.

I take it back. I'm listening to a CD ripped at 192 kbps through some really amazingly good over-the-ear headphones, and the sibilance hurts my teeth. I think I finally understand why the iPod ships with such shitty headphones.

Yay for not being an audiophile. I have any number of rippings that sound shitty, but none that I have not been able to get better MP3 rips of. Not that I bother very often.
Quadruple negative?

[Ensign Steve]

Yay for not being an audiophile. I have any number of rippings that sound shitty, but none that I have not been able to get better MP3 rips of. Not that I bother very often.

The rub is that it's a rip from an actual CD that I owned. I ripped them all and then donated most of them to the library. I chose 192 kbps, figuring that was going to be enough, but after yesterday, not so much. Maybe I'll just save myself the hundreds of dollars and never buy decent earphones.

[seebs]

I ripped nearly my whole collection at 160kbps with LAME, and it mostly sounds fine to me -- even on decent speakers. I probably ought to redo it with variable bit rate or bump up towards 240 or so, but really, I don't think it's so bad. 128 was bad. 160 seemed okay to me.

[JoeP]

Yay for not being an audiophile. I have any number of rippings that sound shitty, but none that I have not been able to get better MP3 rips of. Not that I bother very often.

The rub is that it's a rip from an actual CD that I owned. I ripped them all and then donated most of them to the library. I chose 192 kbps, figuring that was going to be enough, but after yesterday, not so much.
uh-oh. :scaredbaby:

Maybe I'll just save myself the hundreds of dollars and never buy decent earphones.
:sadyup: