 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 24, 2014 - 1:31 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Solium
(Member)
|
Wait, if you sell your CDs you no longer have rights to the digital copies you made of them, what?
Doesn't matter. Like no one ever recorded music off of the radio or television? Made a copy for a friend? Never let someone borrow an LP, cd, a movie? Never made a copy of anything for someone else or for themselves? Yet, a second hand store can sell used books, CD's and movies without compensating the copyright holder. It's a "holier than thou" argument.
I know nothing about how this works, but wouldn't that fall under the Right Of First Sale? You buy it, you can sell it, and because they bought it from you, they can also sell it, too? I don't know, where's SchiffyM to tell us what's what?
Yes, your correct. I personally think the latter law is more harmful than the first. At least the consumer paid the copyright holder when they originally purchased the CD. A reseller doesn't pay the copyright holder anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, no I don't think Apple backs up your local rips from iTunes into the cloud. In that case if you didn't do a backup before resetting your computer you are out of luck. That is why I always suggest backups if you go through the trouble of ripping everything.
Good news, you can now re-download anything from the iTunes store:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5085
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Lukas, I am glad you are discovering some of the advantages of the digital lifestyle. For me, its biggest benefit has been the ability to enjoy a plethora of music throughout a hectic and non-stationary day, which may include traveling, commutes, work, and running errands. I would love to be able to listen to film scores on high-fidelity equipment and to just focus on it, but that is not possible given my current lifestyle. So, I take it whenever and however I can get it.
* Apple offers the ability to store your music on the cloud through their iTunes Match service [1]. If they are albums available on iTunes Music Store, then I think they use that. For most of the releases from the boutique labels this board focuses upon, they are not available and your own personal rips of them should be uploaded.
* Apple is not trying to lock people into services. Typically, companies that do this do so via software. Apple actually has a very open software ecosystem (e.g., their core operating system Darwin and XNU kernel [5], their build system (Xcode, LLVM/Clang development), all of the projects they fund and provide source to on places like macosforge.org, CUPS) because their goal is to make money selling you hardware, not software. If anyone would like to debate Apple’s software goodwill since the debut of Mac OS X 10.0, then please let me know as I would be more than happy to add illumination to this topic and compare and contrast it with their peers, including Microsoft and Google; I am not an Apple fanboy as I spend more time within open source operating systems such as Linux and *BSD and there are things Apple is less than stellar with, but they are far more open than people understand or give credit for. Anyways, Apple’s perspective is that people’s digital libraries are growing, the amount of apps installed is growing, and that it is getting harder and harder to keep increasing local storage capacity when they want to shrink devices and add more hardware capabilities. Moreover, common complaints people have with multiple iOS devices are that the syncing can be cumbersome and slightly painful in that not everything will fit and it can take time (filling up a 64 GB iPad with music and movies can take hours). The cloud is one solution to the problem, i.e., you get a device and have instantaneous access to the full library via streaming. Then, the local storage can be used for applications and things are, overall, easier to setup. For non-tech-savvy individuals, providing management of data to a company that knows what it’s doing is something that they look favorably upon.
* Apple is not going to force the cloud upon you. Yes, they are making it easy to use it because it, like lossy codecs, are a benefit to a majority of people. Apple makes it easy to stream content (music, movies) from device to device (iTunes to iOS, Apple TV, other iTunes) within a network. This is crucial because high-bandwidth internet access is not a given for everyone at all times and there are data caps with mobile providers and, to a lesser-known extent, internet providers. As more content shifts to the cloud (more usage of Netflix/Hulu/HBO GO/etc., iTunes Match, Google’s cloud, Amazon’s cloud, etc.), these data caps will become more prohibitive and will force many to continue with the current device-device streaming that Apple has enabled and, to my knowledge, no other company or ecosystem has provided a compelling alternative.
* Apple is not trying to lock people into file formats. Regarding their formats, their choice of AAC is technically more open than MP3 (read my previous posts on patents). For the lossless crowd, Apple open-sourced their lossless codec ALAC under the Apache license [2] and, as a result, it has been added to many other software jukeboxes. All music downloaded from iTMS or encoded with ALAC can be enjoyed outside of Apple’s ecosystem. Regarding other formats, Apple sees no reason to support them, and I would have to agree with their decision. One tenet of Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines is to present a minimal set of options that cover the range of intended and supported uses (iOS is much less configurable than Android… this is by design and one of the reasons Apple is well regarded with interface design that works for the masses). If it were only iTunes, it would be very trivial to add some additional codecs. However, Apple has built an ecosystem. For instance, Apple gives you the ability to stream music and movies from iTunes to your iOS devices and Apple TV. So, from Apple’s perspective, if they are going to add Codec X to iTunes, now they have to make sure it works in all of these other corner cases of their ecosystem. Why should they go through all that money (time and work) when the codecs offer no advantage to their existing offerings? The common complained-about format in these parts that is not supported is FLAC. I think if one installs the Xiph QuickTime Components, one can play FLAC from within iTunes (not on iOS devices or streaming) and possibly can use iTunes to then transcode from FLAC to ALAC, however if this is not supported, there are many other transcoding options available.
* Every time iTunes or digital consumption is mentioned, the codec/bitrate “discussion” is rehashed. Unfortunately, it almost always turns into a statement of personal preference without any scientific rigor to back it up (e.g., ABX testing [4]). Everyone is different. Everyone’s needs are different. Everyone’s use cases are different. There is no single, correct solution for everyone. There is a lot to learn in the digital vs analog mindset on both sides and helping people, in this case Lukas, learn and make informed decisions, to me, is what I would like this thread to be focused on.
* From my own experience on my low-mid-range audio equipment, I notice far more differences across different masters than from codecs. The latest example is The Blue Max. When I play Intrada’s version next to LLLR’s version, I can definitely tell them apart. When I play LLLR’s The Blue Max encoded via AAC versus FLAC, I find it much more difficult to distinguish them apart. I know part of this is masked by my poor equipment and that the difference would likely be much greater “at scale,” however I think it is an interesting point to make because some very harsh opinions are given regarding “lossy” formats which, if applied to my observation, would lead to even harsher opinions of old masterings, which I still enjoy in many cases.
[1] http://www.apple.com/itunes/itunes-match/
[2] http://alac.macosforge.org
[3] http://www.xiph.org/quicktime/
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test
[5] http://www.puredarwin.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like CDs as tangible artifacts and I'll keep them forever as a backup, but I've digitized every one of them and do all my listening on an iPod.
Where I draw the line is that I will never rent my music from a streaming service. They own it and can retire a title when they decide interest has faded? No thanks. I need my own copies on my own hard drives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Its only lately that I've been dumping everything into iTunes and then syncing the iPods shortly after. And unless its a score I really love and enjoy, some of them only end up with like maybe 2 or 3 tracks in my iTunes library. Meanwhile the CDs sit there. But I love having the CDs because I love the idea of physical media. If the drives go bust, I can always do it again...even if it is a pain in the butt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
One thing I predict: Vinyl will survive iTunes.
I am confident my descendants will appreciate me leaving vinyls and CDs to them instead of some hard disk full of mp3.
To me, digital is not meant as a replacement but an alternative. I prefer purchasing physical CDs of music I know I will cherish for a long time. In other cases, I may opt for a cheaper digital download. Even when I purchase the physical CD, I still make a lossless archival of it as “insurance” (e.g., my LLLR First Knight has some issues (pops during the climax  ) with it now that it didn’t have when I first purchased it and there are 0 scratches) and a lossy copy for portable use. In this scenario, I’ve utilized digital technology to provide myself with an exact copy to protect my investment and another copy that can be easily used and enjoyed in the many environments where the lossy codec is indistinguishable from its source due to noisy environments. I don’t think it is advantageous for anybody to be too firm into one camp or the other. I do, however, see advantages for embracing both. Everything breaks and degrades. Vinyl albums require maintenance to keep in good shape and, even with that it may further degrade as it plays and as time progresses. CDs can scratch very easily and degrade as well. Hard drives storing digital break down and experience the even scarier phenomenon known as bit rot (everyone should be aware of this and do what you can to safeguard against it). Digital has an advantage, though, with easy copying and transferring to many types of media located in different locations.
If I approach the prediction above literally, I would have to agree since there are not too many examples of programs that have lasted decades. However, if you really meant that vinyl will outlast digital, I do not think that is plausible in either implied scenario, i.e., as a general market prediction or with individual examples (if you buy a vinyl album and I get the same one digitally, I guarantee I can preserve mine longer than you can, and I will also be assessing degradation). For better or worse, computer-like devices are integrating themselves into more and more used-daily items, e.g., phones, watches, refrigerators, eyewear, cars, homes (security systems, monitoring, etc.). It is very likely that in a short amount of time, people will have access to a plethora of devices that can all playback music. Computer-based technology is not going anywhere. Effectively, this will bring the cost to virtually nothing. Of course, most of the devices and methods used will not be audiophile-approved, but those are requirements of a minority of the overall market.
Assuming one’s descendants actually like the music being passed on, I think they would appreciate being handed physical + digital (assuming sensible codec+bitrates) so they can choose their own preferred method of playback. As mentioned earlier, everyone is different. Some like the warm sound and experience that comes with vinyl, some like the clarity and closer-to-recorded sound that comes with CDs, and some like digital so they can mold music into their lifestyle [1].
[1] http://www.npr.org/2012/02/10/146697658/why-vinyl-sounds-better-than-cd-or-not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent post!
Maybe, the freedom of listening to the music the way you used it is perhaps long gone and now perhaps you want to optimise with an alternative method of embracing the music and getting best of both worlds (Pun intended). The added responsibility of neighbour hood rules notwithstanding of course. Being recently married, I feel I have given less time to myself alone with the collection. But I do book times with myself to engage with the latest cd set in my collection or an existing favourite cd time to time (mostly weekends). 
