Slashdot Mirror


'Extraordinary' Soundtrack Will Be Apple-Exclusive

Isbiten writes "Apple has just gotten the rights to the soundtrack of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. There will be no physical CD and it will only be available from the iTunes Music Store. Cnet has the story."

49 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is about as exciting as having dibs on the digitally remastered soundtrack to Highlander II.

    1. Re:wow by Greedo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can't wait to log on to the Apple Music store and download my copy of ...

      Oh wait.

      I don't live in the States.

      I guess I'm SOL.

      --
      Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
    2. Re:wow by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 3, Insightful
      From what I've heard, I think it was actually Fox Music that got the ball rolling on this, not Apple. Fox wanted to do this as an experiment to test the viability of the strategy; that's why it's a niche-appeal album, an orchestral film score, instead of a mass-appeal thing like some pop release - they're not risking "losing" huge sales anyway, so they stand to gain more with the market research it provides.

      I'm sure Apple would dearly love to be able to exclusively offer an entire album by a major mainstream artist who sells in the millions, but the labels aren't ready for that yet.

  2. Yeah, smart move... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "There will be no physical CD and it will only be available from the iTunes Music Store."

    Brilliant. Give non-Mac users a desire to use P2P to acquire the music.

    1. Re:Yeah, smart move... by usr122122121 · · Score: 4, Informative
      Interesting point. But since there's no KaZaa for the Mac...
      And, btw, why the hell isn't there?
      There is, it's called mlMac.
      --

      -braxton
    2. Re:Yeah, smart move... by WatertonMan · · Score: 3, Informative
      There are a few other clients for KaZaa.

      mlMac

      Neo

      However KaZaa has really gone down hill, mainly because of studio action. Most songs I try and download are "tweaked" with yelling in the middle or beeping or are of the wrong sound. It really isn't a good place to find music.

      I personally use Direct Connect. You can find a hub with the style of music you like and are more likely to find obscure music. (i.e. blues, jazz, etc.) Further it has a much better selection of TV shows if you are trying to find a show you missed that week. The Mac client is still so-so, but they fixed the memory leaks of the version from the fall.

    3. Re: Yeah, smart move... by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Actually, there will indeed be a physical CD, for the benefit of people who can't (or won't) use the iTMS; the CD just won't be distributed at retail in the US.

      In the US it'll be available only through the record label's site; outside the US it'll be sold in all the usual ways. Presumably CD stores in the US that carry imports will also get a few copies that way, so it actually should be quite possible for non-iTunes users to get it (and of course, once the Windows version is released, most people will be able to get it that way, too).

      As for whether it's a smart move or not, the point is actually to determine just that. This release is an experiment by Fox Music to determine the viability of releasing something this way. Since orchestral film scores have a highly limited audience anyway (I like to think of them as real alternative music ;) ), they're not risking as much in the way of "lost sales" (ahem) as they would if, say, the latest Madonna album or whatever were an iTMS-only release. While naturally Fox would like the money from sales, it's willing to risk the hit to what would surely be modest sales anyway in order to get the information about how it does, which is far more valuable to them in the long run.

      I actually wrote about this for our gaming clan's website more than a week ago, a couple days before the soundtrack actually showed up at the iTMS (it was released there a week ago as of this posting). My "informed sources" included a record producer at Fox Music, who indicated to me that people above him at FM had decided on this release strategy as an experiment.

    4. Re: Yeah, smart move... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "so presumably the worst-case scenario for people who want this is they'll either have to wait for some indeterminate time between a week and six months to get it from the Windows iTMS"

      Well, that's what sparked my original comment. They won't wait. They'll acquire it via P2P. And if that happens, I worry that it'll be used to justify DRM and legislation and everything else the RIAA has tried to do. I realize this is FOX and not the RIAA, but still.

      "Hmm... perhaps that's why the CD's getting released after the iTMS file? I wonder... "

      Well, they've got a customer base that cannot possibly use this album, so I can imagine that's their backdoor. However, the whole 'instant gratification' factor becomes a big part of it. With the RIAA's recent announcements to sue individual P2P users, I'm sure there are a signficant number of people saying "I don't need to buy CDs anymore". They may well sell CDs here, but I'd be cautious about using this as a ruler for future business. (I could be assuming way too much, btw. I'm on the pessimistic side. ;))

      "Ah. From this, it sounds a bit like you don't know there's a Windows version in the works. Were you aware of this?"

      Yes, I was. But unless it's coming out within a week or two of the release of this album, I'd say that they're begging for a failure. If Fox were to say "We have a few more albums we'll try it with..." I'd settle down a bit. If FOX says "We released this, and we didn't sell many, but plenty made their way around the net anyway so we won't do it anymore" I'd be rather loud-mouthed about it. Maybe FOX is smarter than that? At some point, somebody has to realize that there's a model to be had here.

      If it's successful, I hope they publish the results of how much it cost to release the album this way sans CD media. (i.e. what'd the bandwidth cost?)

    5. Re: Yeah, smart move... by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 2, Informative
      Mm. Well, you're certainly not alone in your concerns; the messageboards over at Film Score Monthly have had considerable debate on the topic. If you're interested in seeing it, here and here are a couple threads with people debating it; I'm in there, myself, on the side of those who think it's a cool idea.

      It was in the older thread that I first heard about the iTMS distribution; through one of the other posters, I eventually got in touch with the Fox Music record producer who gave me the info that let me write the article for our site (woohoo, I scooped MacCentral, CNet and the Chicago Sun Times - I'm so obnoxiously pleased with myself... :))

      I gather you're interested in getting this soundtrack, as I am; are you into scores?

  3. I hear dracula's bride by Sevn · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    is quite the extraordinary gentleman.

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
  4. What if? by wowbagger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What if I prefer to buy my music in a more lasting form?

    What if I prefer my music to be compressed with FLAC?

    What if I prefer to compress my music with MY parameters, to meet MY standards of audio fidelity?

    While I am all for Apple being able to distribute this electronicly, while I can accept Apple being given sole electronic distribution rights to this music, I don't like that this won't be available as a plain ol' CD.

    1. Re:What if? by Uart · · Score: 3, Funny

      Bah. Its just a soundtrack. As with all movie soundtracks you will be able to find all of its songs on the next "NOW Thats What I Call Music 37" compilation - which you can encode as you see fit.

      --

      Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
    2. Re:What if? by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What if...

      Then don't buy it.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    3. Re:What if? by switcha · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Music is art.

      Just because you are used to one way of purchasing/enjoying art, doesn't make other methods 'unfair'.

      What if I prefer to buy my music in a more lasting form?
      So should sidewalk chalk artists not be allowed to make drawings?

      What if I prefer my music to be compressed with FLAC?
      So, should publishers not be allowed to print a book in whatever size they want, then distribute it on tape/cd/ebook/etc if they want?

      What if I prefer to compress my music with MY parameters, to meet MY standards of audio fidelity?
      So should a painter have to check with the buyer before he decides oil versus pastels, canvas versus illustration board, small versus mural, etc.?

      Sure you can hang it/display it/listen to it wherever you want once you get it home, but as to where you can buy art, it's not 'unfair' that you have to go to a gallery contracted to sell the piece. Art isn't public domain (despite p2p advocates). It's a product, and if you choose to enjoy it, you are stuck with how the artist/rep choose to let you partake in it.

      --
      You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
    4. Re:What if? by dhovis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The way you talk, you'd think CDs were perfect reconstructions of the original music.

      What if I prefer to get the original master tapes?

      What if I prefer to create my own mixes of every song?

      What if I prefer surround sound?

      Every audio format out there has limitations, even CDs. For the price, you can't complain too much. Personally, I'd like to see Apple keep the singles price at 99 cents and drop the typical album price to $4.99. Given the info that leaked about Apple's meeting with the indie music labels, I think that is what Apple would like too. At that price point, it would be hard to complain too much about the audio quality unless you are really psycho.

      --

      --
      The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.

    5. Re:What if? by n.wegner · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >Art isn't public domain

      To paraphrase the US constitution:

      Culture is the public domain. Art is one form of culture, and culture contributes to art. The public has the right to freely enjoy its culture. The US constitution makes it very clear that copyright is only granted, for a limited time, to reward the public for creating and expanding the public domain, and the public's culture. The burden of proof lies with you.

      >Just because you are used to one way of
      >purchasing/enjoying art, doesn't make other
      >methods 'unfair'.

      In the general sense, yes. But when Apple only sells music in a worse (more lossely compressed than CD or Flac), or the Louvre only sells copies of the Mona Lisa on postcards, or Pendant publishing won't even print old liturature, then it's both unfair and unethical to deprive the public of enjoying its culture.

    6. Re:What if? by switcha · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The public has the right to freely enjoy its culture.
      And likewise, freely make their own art/culture contribution if they don't like what's offered. With all due respect, the way you phrased your initial comment could be twisted to include 'code poetry'. Yay, software piracy is for the 'greater good'.

      The US constitution makes it very clear that copyright is only granted, for a limited time, to reward the public for creating and expanding the public domain, and the public's culture.
      Very clear also, is copyright law that says you can do what you want with your work until the time you aren't protected by that law, and the 'common good' stuff kicks in. As far as I know, the soundtrack was just released and has a ways to go before it's in the class of American Standards.

      --
      You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
    7. Re:What if? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      What if I prefer to buy my music in a more lasting form?
      Tough shit.

      What if I prefer my music to be compressed with FLAC?
      Tough shit.

      What if I prefer to compress my music with MY parameters, to meet MY standards of audio fidelity?
      Tough shit.

      I don't like that this won't be available as a plain ol' CD.
      Tough shit.

    8. Re:What if? by switcha · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Copyright was made to reward the public, and law provides protection from copyright infringement.
      What about rewarding innovation? Allowing inventors and creators to profit from their work before it goes to the people?

      Why did you bring up a straw man argument? What you said is similar to saying good will is communism.
      You hammered in the stake and brought the bale of hay. You insisted that copyright law is more for the public's good than protection of creation. I was trying to point out that software protection is mainly the protection of innovation.

      ... but the public still deserves to enjoy it if they can.
      What bothers me most about naysayers to Apple's deal is the assumption that it's somehow our right to have the maximum quality possible. I understand you don't think it's illegal, simply unfair. But the public still can enjoy it. If this were actually good music, I could play it and hear it and enjoy it. Considering the equipment the bulk of America listens to their music on, they don't care that much about super high fidelity either. They just want to enjoy it.

      --
      You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
    9. Re:What if? by n.wegner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >Allowing inventors and creators to profit from their work before it goes to the people?

      Which is why they are protected under copyright law, as I said.

      >You insisted that copyright law is more for the public's good than protection of creation.

      I insist that the protection of creation (as explained in the US constitution) is for the public's good.

      >they don't care that much about super high fidelity either. They just want to enjoy it.

      When the copyright expires, though, I'd rather have CDDA or Flac copies available to those who want them, instead of only have AAC.

    10. Re:What if? by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Music is art."

      Yeah, that could be said. (though the formula for it makes people question the artistic nature of it...)

      However, art is not just about self expression, it's about entertainment. Read on.

      "So should sidewalk chalk artists not be allowed to make drawings?"

      If their goal is to entertain, then sidewalk chalk artists wouldn't have much of a living. You have to admit, though, you have reached a ridiculous extreme here.

      "So, should publishers not be allowed to print a book in whatever size they want, then distribute it on tape/cd/ebook/etc if they want?"

      In any case where art is mass produced for consumption, then a reasonable attempt has to be made to satisfy the target audience. An artist would be a fucking moron if he published a book as at 8' by 8'. If he just made a few of these books for individual sale, that'd be one thing. If Barnes and Noble carried it, a lot of people would be saying 'WTF? If I mass-produced an album called "60 minutes of Silence", and it really contained 60 minutes of silence, I'd be making 'art' but I wouldn't be entertaining. As a matter of fact, I'd probably be up on charges of fraud.

      "So should a painter have to check with the buyer before he decides oil versus pastels, canvas versus illustration board, small versus mural, etc.? "

      If an artist was mass-producing art that was intended to be pasted on the side of a house, he'd be in serious trouble if it couldn't withstand sunlight or rain. I'm not sure what the legality of that would be, on the other hand he's failing to entertain, thus his mission would fail.

      "Sure you can hang it/display it/listen to it wherever you want once you get it home, but as to where you can buy art, it's not 'unfair' that you have to go to a gallery contracted to sell the piece."

      I really tried to understand your side of it here, but there's still the little matter of supply and demand. When one can easily produce something to your satisfaction, it's hard to fathom that they'd try to force you into buying an expensive product you had no intention of ever purchasing. Again, this isn't art as expression here, it's art as entertainment. You'd like to be entertained, but they have to meet you half way. I'm curious if you'd be posting this if movie theaters required climbing a gym rope to buy a ticket.

      " Art isn't public domain (despite p2p advocates)/"

      I don't recall any P2p advocates claiming art is public domain. BTW, I'm an artist who hopes to one day have content to release on the net. I'm a P2P advocate. If I sell something that people want, but can't stand the format, then I need to fill that demand. Competition is good, even in the art arena. P2P is competition, not a war.

      " It's a product, and if you choose to enjoy it, you are stuck with how the artist/rep choose to let you partake in it. "

      You're right. It is a product. And as such, there are expectations that have to be met. The recent court case against copy restricted CDs comes to mind. CDs were created that don't work in some CD players all in the name of fighting piracy. As a result, some people couldn't access the content. A lawsuit was issued, and the consumers won. The point here is that as a product, they can't just dictate every little detail about it. If it's intended to work a certain way, then it must work a certain way. Sure, they can release the soundtrack to LXG only on iTunes. However, their goal of entertain is being thoughtlessly restricted to a very narrow audience. They're choking themselves for money and potentially (assuming the soundtrack is any good) creating demand they refuse to fill. Illegal? No. Unethical? Grey Area. Stupid? Yes.

      An artist whose goal is to entertain should never EVER ignore the comments of his customers involving delivery of the product. If they say "we want higher quality", he shouldn't say "I'm the artist and I say it's this way."

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    11. Re:What if? by Llywelyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >What if I prefer to buy my music in a more lasting form?

      Then purchase it from the iTMS, insert a blank CDR, and burn a copy from the playlist.

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    12. Re:What if? by derch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I prefer that the government would give me a boat and pay me a million dollars to fish.

      We're both SOL.

      Can't you see the announcement is only for the free advertising? A month after they release the movie, Apple and Fox will quietly release the soundtrack on CD. Neither will sacrafice the chance to make extra money.

    13. Re:What if? by hype7 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But when Apple only sells music in a worse (more lossely compressed than CD or Flac), or the Louvre only sells copies of the Mona Lisa on postcards, or Pendant publishing won't even print old liturature, then it's both unfair and unethical to deprive the public of enjoying its culture.


      Which is no different to selling on CDs. It's not the quality of the original. It's compressed to facilitate distribution.

      To insist on getting original quality for every piece of artwork is totally infeasible - it either requires everyone to be at the source, or a massive reproduction and distribution network to be set up.

      -- james
    14. Re:What if? by stanmann · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, the public is quite happy with AM or FM quality, and NCD quality is more than they want.
      Now I know all you music freaks with more money than brains can "tell the difference" between CDA and DVDA, but the rest of the world doesn't care, and doesn't have the equipment to care.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
  5. This is a test from the labels... by gozar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a test from the labels on how safe their music is in the iTunes store. They will know that the only way this music will make it to the various P2P apps will be from some Apple user who buys the album, burns a CD, then rips it to MP3 to distribute.

    They can then use this to show that the protection in the iTunes store is not enough, and try to force Apple to change it before iTunes comes out for Windows.

    All IMHO... :-)

    --
    What, me worry?
    1. Re:This is a test from the labels... by mallie_mcg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a test from the labels on how safe their music is in the iTunes store. They will know that the only way this music will make it to the various P2P apps will be from some Apple user who buys the album, burns a CD, then rips it to MP3 to distribute.

      I think you forget Europe, Australasia etal, where there is no iTunes store available, the media moguls would have only given iTunes the rights to US distribution, besides, most of the sound track will probably be available today for download of the p2p networks as well as purchase from Music stores. (you would probably have to buy several albums to get it all though).

      --


      Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
      --I'm not actually after an answer!
    2. Re:This is a test from the labels... by chrisbw · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well we already know how to get around it...

      Burn it to a CD then re-rip it, capture it digitally and re-rip it, hell you can even make a tape of it if you want. I think think this is a good test of "is it still possible to P2P the stuff," because well, obviously it is. Look at how much material comes out pre-release when it gets leaked from the companies themselves.

      There will ALWAYS be a way to pirate things, it's just a tradeoff of quality, time, and cost. At $.99 for the original high-quality (AAC 128k arguments aside), I think I'd rather just buy music I'm interested in than mess around with the P2P alternatives.

      YMMV, of course.

      --
      Chris -- http://www.bitter.net/
  6. Testing the waters. by piznut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You have to figure that a soundtrack is a pretty profitable item in terms of the cost to create. There is no real new work that needs to be done other than compiling existing music into a nice package.

    It is probably a fair generalization to say that soundtracks rarely sell in the same volumes as albums from pop artists. The loss of profit by reducing to such a niche market will probably be mostly offset by the higher profit margin associated with not actually having to create or mfg'r any media or packaging materials.

    If they (being the publisher) lose a little money on this, it won't be much and can probably be chalked up as the cost to test this particular market.

    Where am I going with this? Nowhere really...just some observations.

  7. Re:Encode quality? by switcha · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If I hand over the ten bucks for the album, how good of an encode do I get?

    My guess would be about $10 worth. The premise of online music distro is that not everyone is an audiophile, and some people just want to rock out at OK quality for a nice price.

    As someone already pointed out, you can have the master tapes of you are that 133t. It just might cost you a few million bucks.

    --
    You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
  8. Re:What about the Apple Records suit? by coolmacdude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Enough with Apple records already. I don't think they care anymore. Do they even still exist? Even if they did, they would never survive against the beast that is Apple Legal.

    --

    -You may license this sig for only $6.99.
  9. Apple's got something up their sleeves. by sonicsft · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you look at surrounding evidence that's popped up recently:
    -Job posting for Windows iTunes developer
    -Numerous bands are being scheduled to play Friday in apple stores, etc....
    -This album announcement

    I'd say Apple is about to release iTunes for windows. But I'm never very accurate on this guesses by it makes sense to me...

    -sonic

  10. They're experimenting by jlower · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just wait, when they debut the Windows version of iTMS, there will be another exclusive, probably much bigger than this one, to go with the launch.

    They're just experimenting now -- testing the waters.

  11. But.. by n-baxley · · Score: 4, Funny

    What if one of those 5 people who want it doesn't have a mac?

    1. Re:But.. by questamor · · Score: 4, Funny

      They'll just have to find one of the 5 mac users that're still left, of course.

      (yeah, it's a troll, and I'm a mac user too :P)

  12. It's an original score...not a compilation. by caleugene · · Score: 3, Informative

    The majority of the tracks are original compositions by Trevor R. Jones performed by the London Symphony. Two tracks are more ethnic African tunes from Lady Blacksmith Mumbazo...this was all mentioned in the C|NET article.

    1. Re:It's an original score...not a compilation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's not true at all. The music for the film is recorded in a completely different set of recording sessions than the music for the soundtrack album. The acoustics of the studio are different, and the placement of microphones is changed to record for a two-channel mix versus a six-channel mix.

      Score albums are entirely different recordings from the scores themselves.

  13. simple by SHEENmaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Start up MoL on any PowerPC, dump sound to a WAV while playing the proprietary files, compress and distribute.

    An easier way would be to burn it to disc and rip that disc. It won't sound as good, but figuring out the compression part of the iTunes format and overlaying that onto another format could fix such problems. Then again, we can always distribute a ~50mb WAV for each song if we're desperate enough.

    As soon as someone cares enough to make the tools, high quality rips of iTunes music will be available on filesharing networks.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  14. It's a singles thing by borkus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A soundtrack/score could do well this way. I may not be willing to buy an entire CD, but if I may for one or two tracks.

    While the iTunes store is pretty limited, the label can find out if this is a more profitable way to handle this kind of recording. Many record companies have large libraries of tracks that are out of print - putting those tracks online could give them a new stream of revenue.

  15. Re:I predict 4% on the Tomatometer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just for that, this Joe Midwest is going to buy the damn album. See, I've already got a Mac, an iPod, an iTunes account, 'lectricity AND indoor plumbing. Let me guess, you're on a coast aren't you?

  16. Re:What's That? by Dr+Reducto · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's exactly what I meant. Now that Apple is publishing CD's itself (exclusive distribution), Apple records has a strong standing if it wants to file an injunction against Apple computers.

  17. Oh well, can't buy it. boohoo. by Muggins+the+Mad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And for those of us where iTunes Store isn't supported.... (ie. the rest of the civilised world)

    It's only a bit of music, I'm not going to lose any sleep over not being able to buy this one, but exclusive deals in any form just suck.

    I tend to shy away from services that are full of "exclusive this, exclusive that" as they're just damaging my freedom of choice.

    - Colin

  18. Re:What about the Apple Records suit? by Farley+Mullet · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think that offtopic was being used as a proxy for the non-existant clueless moderation.

  19. Never happy..... by kilauea · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, the "slashdot Community" justified their piracy on the grounds that the music Industry doesn't sell the music in the form they want it in.
    So someone has done exactly that....and now you want it on CD, encoded differently, whatever.

    Your getting what you asked for. Will you all now admit you just dont like paying for music regardless of format or delivery mechanism?

    Gaz.

  20. Right now, bad idea by LordBodak · · Score: 2
    At this point, I have to think this is a bad idea. Macs just aren't common enough for albums to be exclusive to iTunes. Once the Windows version is out, it is feasible.

    The worry I have is that since there aren't very many Macs, it's going to sell relatively few copies (compared to your average new movie soundtrack CD), and the labels are going to turn around and say "hey, we tried it, and it didn't sell!" as an argument against the iTunes model.

    --
    LordBodak's journal.
  21. I actually bought it... by mbbac · · Score: 4, Informative

    I bought the album last night from iTunes Music Store. It's a pretty good soundtrack. If the movie is anywhere near as good as its soundtrack, it'll be exceedingly better than my expectations.

    Anyway, $9.99 for 13 tracks of nicely composed orchestral work and two excellent world music songs is pretty good. I'm listening to it on my iPod as I type this.

    --

    mbbac

  22. Re:What about the Apple Records suit? by Dylan+Zimmerman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Apple Computers was originally banned from doing anything music related by their agreement with Apple Records. They were allowed to make system beeps, but nothing more. As you can imagine, that created problems when they wanted to add a software synth to their computers in the form of QuickTime. So, before they actually published anything with MIDI capabilities, they paid Apple Records a fairly large amount of money to rescind the agreement and never sue them again. This is also why the iPod is legal, iTunes is legal, and that system sound is named sosumi (pronounced so-sue-me).

    This all happened quite some time before they ever released QuickTime. It's almost as ignorant as asking a Mormon how many wives he plans to have.

  23. AAC beats CD format becasue of.... by ihatewinXP · · Score: 2, Informative

    While AAC is lossy it supports 5.1 Channel Sound. Lets see your CD and/or FLAC do that.

    Sometimes you get what you pay for (which is why im glad i bought a mac).

    --
    ---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
  24. Re: What if? Then here you go. by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can now get the CD version directly from Varèse Sarabande at their site. The "iTMS-exclusive" means it won't be sold at retail in the US, or through online resellers like Amazon, CDNow or whatever, but those unable or unwilling to use the iTMS can still get a conventional CD directly from the label. It's more expensive, of course, but if the difference is worth it to you to specifically seek this version over the other, presumably it's worth paying more as well.