They Might Be Giants Open Their Own Music Store

slothdog writes "They Might Be Giants have opened their own music store, featuring "highest quality" (256kbps LAME) un-DRM-encumbered mp3's. There are only two CDs currently available (at $0.99/song or $9.99/album), but presumably more will be added as time goes on. Looks like a great way to directly support the artists."

Comments

Sounds good.

[spacecadetglow]

Hey, if I can download particle man, then all is good in the world.

Re:Sounds good.

[MikeXpop]

You can't on there, but it is available on the iTMS

Re:Sounds good.

[kantai]

particle man or particle, man?

If the second one, then I'm glad you have good taste in music- Particle rocks!

Re:Sounds good.

[rakerman]

eMusic | They Might Be Giants Unlimited

Re:Sounds good.

[cjpez]

Too bad emusic's pricing model sucks now.

Nice.

[geminidomino]

Haven't gotten to look at the site yet. I hope they have "Particle Man" and "Blue Canary"

Re:Nice.

[geminidomino]

Nope. :(

Re:Nice.

[Flounder]

"Blue Canary" is actually called Birdhouse in Your Soul. Both "Birdhouse" and "Particle Man" are off "Flood".

Currently, only two TMBG albums are available. "NO!", their children's album, and "They Got Lost", a collection of rarities. But I'm going to assume that they will eventually have all of their albums available. Of course, I already have all of their albums on CD (and several on vinyl).

Re:Nice.

[TexasDex]

I'm sure they'll distribute their own music... unless they don't own the copyrights to it!

Sadly this is more often than not the case. Recording contracts are generally "contractual work" and due to recent changes that were snuck into U.S. copyright law this definition is now binding. If the artists did this for a record label they'll never own it, and have to pay to sell their own music. Which would be such a horrible shame.

I don't know what sort of label TMBG played under, so this may not be the case. They may be free to sell their music whenever they want, and are just starting slowly. I sure hope so.

Re:Nice.

[Wateshay]

Do you have a link to the contractual thing? I'd heard that before, but I thought I also heard that it had been struck down/not passed.

Re:Nice.

[EvanED]

The change of the "work for hire" definition was snuck in via a technical amendment to The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999.

AFAIK, it has not been struck down.

Re:Nice.

[sharph]

Fortunately we have independent artists like TMBG who do own their own music.

Independent...as in...they don't have a label.

They're not just starting to release their music. They've been doing it for a while.

The RIAA doesn't represent the entire music buisness. Go check out cdbaby.com where other indie musicians are releasing their own work, without a contract.

You don't need a label to sing a song. (or be good at singing a song.)

And while we're on the subject of labels and contracts and stuff, let me just plug this now famous document in case you haven't read it: http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

Re:Nice.

[jcsehak]

If the artists did this for a record label they'll never own it, and have to pay to sell their own music. Which would be such a horrible shame.

Don't forget that the record label puts up tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for studio time and marketing, which they most of the time lose to artists who make a crappy record or even blow their advance on coke.

The record is a joint effort, and the label deserves to be rewarded for its speculation. What's a shame is that the standard contracts are "artist gets shit" and there are so many artists who are happy to get even shit that a label can afford to tell a band to fuck off if they don't like the contract.

Re:Nice.

[aka-ed]

If any rights are tied up, it's with Emusic, which distributes VBR mp3's of their catalog.

Emusic used to have a TMBG "boutique" which also featured special free bonuses (no purchase necessary) every month.

They still have an extensive catalog of TMBG, where you can get Canstantinople, Birdhouse in your Soul and Particle Man (all of them on Severe Tire Damage but there's no more boutique, which may be part of the reason TMBG wanted to move on.

According to EncSpot, Emusic is not doing shabby encodes:
Birdhouse in your Soul.mp3
(bitrate graph defeated by LAMEness filter - now that's ironic...or is it apt?)
Type: mpeg 1 layer III
Bitrate: 203
Mode: joint stereo
Frequency: 44100 Hz
Frames: 7351
Length: 00:03:12
Av. Reservoir: 73
Emphasis: none
Scalefac: 29.8
Bad Last Frame: no
Encoder: Lame 3.92
Lame Header:
Quality: 78
Version String: Lame 3.92
Tag Revision: 0
VBR Method: vbr-old / vbr-rh
Lowpass Filter: 19000
Psycho-acoustic Model: nspsytune
Safe Joint Stereo: yes
nogap (continued): no
nogap (continuation): no
ATH Type: 4
ABR Bitrate: Unknown
Noise Shaping: 2
Stereo Mode: Joint Stereo
Unwise Settings Used: no
Input Frequency: 44.1kHz
--[ EncSpot Console 2.0 ]--[
http://www.guerillasoft.com ]--

It's not 256kbps, but my dsl is slow enough that I prefer Emusic's compact VBR downloads. The 3 minute song is 4.66 megabytes, about 50% larger than the 128kbps file they used to distribute.

Anyway, this new TMBG "boutique" is no more "direct from the artist" than Emusic was. The people behind this site are Back Office Music, the same guys who developed the Primus "Boutique." All they've done is change digital labels, really, though I think the "personal service" they're getting from BOM is better for them.

Re:Nice.

[kfg]

Don't forget that the record label puts up tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for studio time and marketing. . .

Don't forget that the artists owe this back to the record company.

. . .which they most of the time lose to artists who make a crappy record or even blow their advance on coke.

They should sign better artists. The recording studio is most often payed directly by the record company, the money for such is rarely in the form of a "cash advance." They know better than that. Unless you're an established artist that recording studio is also likely to be owned by or under contract to the record company. They get the money for every angle possible.

The record is a joint effort, and the label deserves to be rewarded for its speculation.

Certainly, but it is speculation, therefore they should also be prepared to take risks, and lose, just as I should be "rewarded" for speculating on a stock or house. I have to mind my own business, do my research, and take my chances. So do they.

What's a shame is that the standard contracts are "artist gets shit". . .

Ah, yes, you see? This is what they call what they deserve for their speculation. The artist speculates too, and such financial speculation is, these days, often stipulated by the terms of the recording contract and any monies advanced to them by the record companies to capitalize such speculation are loans owed back to the record company, taken off the top of record sales, but often still owed by the artists even if the record tanks. You can go bankrupt with a 100k in unit sales and a good tour.

So, you work for hire, don't get payed, but go massively into debt to boot to the people who "hired" you.

Sounds like a fair deal to me.

KFG

Re:Nice.

[ScottGant]

There also used to be the time when a record company would have faith in an artist. They speculated on an artist and saw great, long term things in them.

For instance, look at Bruce Springsteen's first two albums...they tanked. They didn't do anything. He didn't hit it big until "Born to Run".

Now adays, a band has to hit it in a HUGE way on their first time out the gate for the record companies to keep them around.

Record companies had their day...but that day is over. The future of music belongs now to the artists themselves. For instance, the Foo Fighters proved you don't need a state-of-the-art studio to produce a great album. All you need is a few miked up tube amps, seperate the drummer so there's not much bleed-over from the drums, hit record and then edit in pro-tools (but still recorded live...not pieced together, overly produced non-sense).

Re:Nice.

[kfg]

Nah, I'm not even going to give the record companies any credit for sticking behind artists. In the case of Springsteen what he had was a personal evangelist in John Hammond. John was special.

For instance, the Foo Fighters proved you don't need a state-of-the-art studio to produce a great album.

I thought The Beatles made that point adequately with Abbey Road, but it seems to be one of those lessons that needs to learned over and over again.

KFG

Re:Nice.

[Cereal Box]

Don't forget that the record label puts up tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for studio time and marketing. . .

Don't forget that the artists owe this back to the record company.

Well no shit, it's not a gift, it's a loan. For the artists to go out and accomplish what they could with the money the studio loans to them would require the money in the first place. So either way it's gonna cost them lots of money, whether they pay it back to someone or pay it upfront.

Re:Nice.

[ScottGant]

I thought The Beatles made that point adequately with Abbey Road, but it seems to be one of those lessons that needs to learned over and over again.

This is very true, but when I was commenting on the Foo Fighters, I heard Dave Grohl say that they wanted to make the album in his basement...so his record company wanted to put all these state-of-the-art equipment and soundproofing things in there..and he said, "gee, we thought we'd just mike some amps up and do it that way". They would record a bit, then have cook-outs in the back yard for friends and play the songs and just ask "does this sound any good?".

The Beatles were a special case. They had free run of Abbey Road studios. At the time, they DID have state of the art equipment. Remember, they were one of the first bands to record with the new 8-track recording. In fact, "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" was the first 8 track recording (by anyone) at EMI Abbey Road. And by their last album, "Abbey Road", they master recorded everything to 8-track. But then again, these WERE The Beatles.

But you're of course right, you don't need a multi-million dollar studio...unless you like producing clean, sterile, boring, homoginized, life-less, soul-less...ok, I'm sorry, was going off on a rant there.

But I see great things for the future of music. Sure, in the past a band could record their music on simple recording devices. Hell, I've heard demo-tapes from the 70's that sound better than actual albums. But the catch was, you could have a KILLER tape, but no way to distribute it. No way for people to go out and buy it, listen to it etc etc.

Now we have the Internet, and the record companies are scared. They KNOW they're just the middle-men. The go-between the artists and the listeners. You know it scares the living shit out of them for the artists to make their own music, then sell it directly to the public. But if we only had the record companies to distribute the music, we would have been robbed of recent albums like Wilco's "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" because their record company "didn't hear a single".

Record companies are going to get what they deserve.

Re:Nice.

[kfg]

Well no shit, it's not a gift, it's a loan.

You say that like it's an obvious point, but a) it isn't and b) is a fairly new way of doing things. For most of its history the record industry actually paid for the recording process, simply considering it their capital investment in the product. Go figure, investing capital in your own product.

So, in the days when record companies actually payed for the recording process, and not unfrequently actually did pay the artists money up front, not loan, if they thought they really had winners, records weren't considered works for hire, but now that the money is merely a loan which the artists must pay back they are.

Again, seems like a fair deal to me.

KFG

Re:Nice.

[Lumpish Scholar]

The change of the "work for hire" definition was snuck in via a technical amendment to The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999.

AFAIK, it has not been struck down.

The parent posting is indeed informative; it was all I needed to find this incredibly informative article from August 2000.

It was also enough to turn up this other article from November 2000:

The work-for-hire issue has been a sore point between artists and the recording industry for the past year.

Last year the music labels successfully lobbied to insert into unrelated legislation a clause that prevents copyrights from reverting to their authors. Now, they've agreed with artists to recommend rescinding the change in copyright law.

By adding four words -- "as a sound recording" -- deep within the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999, Congress essentially changed the work-for-hire section of the copyright code.

Artists were enraged by what they considered to be back room dealing between the recording industry and Congress. Led by Sheryl Crow and Don Henley, musicians formed a coalition to begin negotiating with the Recording Industry Association of America and the government to repeal the additions.

In October, President Clinton signed into law a bill that removed those four words.

I wish a happy Independence Day to musicians everywhere.

Re:Nice.

[madfgurtbn]

Hell, I've heard demo-tapes from the 70's that sound better than actual albums. But the catch was, you could have a KILLER tape, but no way to distribute it.

So so so true. I've been saying this for several years on /. when these topics come up. Usually, the focus is on copyright and the lock the major content providers have on copyright law through their bought and paid for congress-critters. The fix is definitely in.

But there is hope, because the copyright really belongs to the artist, as long as the artist doesn't sell it.

In the past, major content providers (news, music, movies) have had near monopolies because they controlled two things--

1. What got produced
2. What got distributed

Making good recordings was very expensive. You had to have special studios with special equipment for every step of the process.

Besides the costs of recording, there were the costs of actually producing the physical media. Vinyl LP's were pressed in factories where the initial setup was such that you had to press a LOT of copies to justify the setup costs.

And finally, you had to have a distribution channel to get the finished product out into record stores.

That's all gone now-- A guy in his mother's basement could do it all with a $1k computer. Studio, cd factory, worldwide advertising via his website, free samples, downloadable songs, fan club, book tour dates, the works. One single modest computer can do it all.

I could record a song this morning at this desk, mix it, and distribute it free worldwide by this afternoon. In 1990 that would have been incomprehensible science fiction.

Re:Nice.

[celimage]

The idea of an artist selling directly to the public without a record label on the net is wonderful in theory. However, the way things are the labels and the media provide the promotion which creates the demand and it is that demand that stimulates sales of individual tunes on the net as a cheaper alternative to CD purchase. If an artist is not well known and just puts music out for paid download it yields little money. Musical quality is irrelevant it is the listeners perception of getting a bargain that is crucial to making money off downloads on the net. I have had thousands of downloads of my music but when I put a download fee on a tune it is avoided. For instance one tune which has been extensively traded on P2P networks when I put a download fee at my own website earns nothing. Much as I hate to admit it the labels and the media still have their hands on the controls. I dont know the situation for TMBG but I would be surprised if the label did not have their hands in it somehow. Dennis Jennings ASCAP Celestial Image.com http://celestial-image.com

Re:Nice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Back Office does the back end but i'll bet they take a much smaller percentage than a distributor like emusic or a record company. i'll bet if tmbg could program it themselves, they would.

What about outside the US?

[MikeXpop]

Will they be available to customers in Istanbul (not Constantanople)?

Re:What about outside the US?

[paul248]

Will they be available to customers in Istanbul (not Constantanople)?

That's nobody's business but the Turks.

Re:What about outside the US?

[orthogonal]

Will they be available to customers in Istanbul (not Constantanople [sic])?

I loved their video with the dwarfs dancing around a miniature Stonehenge!

Er, or was that another band?

Re:What about outside the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

More importantly, will a band that does not suck do this some time?

Re:What about outside the US?

[John Courtland]

Wasn't that The Safety Dance by Men Without Hats?

Re:What about outside the US?

[kisielk]

I'm feeling generous. Your gmail invite is on the way. Please send soul soon by cheque or paypal ;)

Re:What about outside the US?

[dmaxwell]

That was another band. And no we're not going to do fucking Stonehenge again!

Re:What about outside the US?

[and by]

That was Spinal Tap. I don't remember which consonant to put the heavy-metal umlaut over, so "Spinal Tap" will have to do.

Re:What about outside the US?

[TechnologyX]

You forgot about Star Trek you insensitive.. yeah

Re:What about outside the US?

[general_re]

I don't remember which consonant to put the heavy-metal umlaut over, so "Spinal Tap" will have to do.

Just take a cue from Mötlëy Crüë - thë mörë ümläüts, thë härdër yøü røck. It's some kind of rule or something.

Or was it "the more umlauts, the harder you suck"? I can never remember...

Re:What about outside the US?

[mnemonic_]

a recent featured article: heavy metal umlaut

Re:What about outside the US?

[davidsyes]

"They MIGHT be Giants" once was called "They COULD be Giants" by a pair on NPR somewhen back in 2003 one of whom didn't know the band's name. It was hilarious... "

Guest: "They Might Be Giants did a..."
Host: "They Could be Giants?..."
Guest: "They MIGHT be Giants..." .......

Well,

Is there a "Safety Tap" or "Spinal Henge/Hinge" in the offing?

Now, if they ad Elvis Costello, Weird All Yankovich, Mike and the Mechanics, Peter Dolby, Nina Hagen, Rick Springfield, Blanc Mange, and a few others (Cyndi Lauper and Madonna/Esther/Etheria/Sysperia/Susperia doing duet vocals a-la Benny Hill backup-singers )...

Oh, let's not forget Mini-Me and Jaws (Richard "Jaws" Kiel), Loch Ness, Sasquatch, Witches of Salem, Furbees, Pet Rocks, Gammara/Guldar, the Daleks, and a few other, we might actually, induce the ETs to retrieve their Stones at Stonehenge in the name of protecting their Otherworldly Honor...heheh

"Our Howse, in the MIHDDUL of our HENGE, Our blouse, hides our treasure for to keep..."

This MIGHT be GiGANTIC!

David Syes

Re:What about outside the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody has to say anything bad about TMBG. Their "music" speaks for itself.

Now excuse me while I throw up.

Re:What about outside the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

don't forget microsoft. Say anything bad about microsoft and you'll be shouted down by hundreds of fanboys nowadays.

Re:What about outside the US?

[Robotech_Master]

"Who's 'There May Be Giants'"

Re:What about outside the US?

[Bob Uhl]

There was a great parody website with a band called something-or-other Messiahs, with about fourteen mangled umlauts and other diacritics scattered throughout--like something Brunching Shuttlecocks might have done back in the day. I wish I could find it; I just spent an unproductive half-hour at things:-(

some day...

[maxbang]

Some day middlemen will die and I'll get the money...

Re:some day...

[Anonymous Coward]

RIAA leans down and says 'My sentiments exactly, you son of a bitch'

Re:some day...

[Flounder]

Slashdot leans down and says "My sentiments exactly."

Re:some day...

[Anonymous Coward]

Phooey ... I was hoping that response wasn't already taken.

Kevin

Re:some day...

[isorox]

About 50% of the human race is middlemen, and they don't take kindly to being eliminated.

Re:some day...

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't matter. They're eliminated, see?

Re:some day...

[WarmBoota]

Where's the 'B' Ark when you need it?

Now all they need is someone to back them.

[2MuchC0ffeeMan]

Some huge artist needs to join the bandwagon...

without that, or some pepsi backing, it won't win the 'music store race'

(where's limp bizkit, after their last album they would do something like this for the publicity)

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[NemesisEnforcer]

AYE VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!!

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[FlipmodePlaya]

Seriously. As nice as it is to see someone offering an unDRMed music download service, this is really just a band selling their own music. If it caught on, and tons of bands started doing it, that would be cool. Otherwise, this is of no consequence to anyone but TMBG's fans.

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[the_weasel]

Get a clue. It's called a trend. Just because Britney Spears isn't doing it doesn't mean its not important.

This band is well known, and you may not like them, but enough people do that they have been around for well over a decade. TMBG have been pioneers in bizarre modes of distribution. Check out thier dial-a-song service for an example.

Perhaps another artist will see them succeed with this model, and will consider it for thier own purposes. Thats called leading by example.

They don't need Pepsi of some other 'big business' backing them to be a success, they just need to make enough money to make a profit for themselves, and show that you can make money without DRM.

And isn't that the point?

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[rick-o]

Pepsi? I think not. Flansburgh's sandals are filled with Coca-Cola.

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[ColMustard]

and show that you can make money without DRM.

They aren't going to make a make money without DRM for the same reason true shareware doesn't work. For some reason people have got it into their heads that files on a computer don't need to be paid for. After all, it's all just electricity running through my computer. Shareware is supposed to work by having people try software and then pay for it if they want to keep using it. Shareware isn't supposed to include applications which incorporate these complicated serial schemes and anti-crack methods, yet that's what we've had to do because everyone thinks it's OK to just take all that hard work for nothing! The same applies to music files except that it's even more-so because it's become popular among the kids and even habitual. Why pay for it? I'll just get on kazaa and get it. What do they care about how much work it took to produce it?

So the point is, shareware would absolutely fail without copy protection. I know of one company that discovered that over 65% of people using their software use an illegal copy, and I'm sure that's typical. That's a lot of money not going to hard-working people who (usually) deserve it. Just as shareware needs copy protection, media files need it even more-so. Honestly.

Well, I just stood up for DRM on slashdot. Goodbye karma!

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[scragz]

I've heard the band themselves state in an interview that file sharing has done more good than harm for them as far as publicity, exposure, etc. And the thing about real musicians is that they generally want more than anything else to have their music not so much purchased, but heard. I mean they've had Dial-a-Song going for decades now giving out free music and they always have free mp3s on their Website.

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[Anonymous Coward]

True shareware doesn't work? I've mad USD44000 with shareware, all out of the taxman's sight. For the amount of work I did for my photo gallery thingy, that's pretty damn good.

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[Alsee]

You have it backwards. The only thing DRM does is reduce sales. I defy you to claim that DRM has ever prevented any song from appearing on P2P. However DRM certainly has driven away - customers who do not want a crippled product. Why the hell would I want to buy a product that cannot be played with my music player and with the rest of the music I own?

The RIAA should have started offering MP3 sales back in the mid-late 90's when Napster made it bloody obvious that (A) it was possible and (B) there was a market for it. Instead they refused to permit any legal download sales at all for several years. The whole P2P explosions occurred exactly because the RIAA created a market vacuum. Markets abhor a vacuum just as much as nature does. They created their own worst enemy.

RIAA sales are under 4 self imposed handicaps. (1) They have a several year late entry to the market to overcome. (2) They only offer a limited selection of their catalog for sale. (3) The prices are excessive. (4) they are offering a crippled product. Even after shooting themselves in the foot FOUR TIMES OVER they are still getting several thousand customers. They can't do anything about #1, but they can certainly fix 2,3, and 4. Each of 2,3, and 4 that they fix will multiply their customer base. Sell the product customers want and people will buy it. People want MP3s. No one wants DRM crippled crap.

Oh, and no, SELLING MP3 downloads is not like shareware. If they gave away FREE MP3 downloads and set up a donation system then it would be the same.

Well, I just stood up for DRM on slashdot.

I have no problem with them using stupid and selfdestructive DRM. Let them use it all they like. My problem is stupid laws like the DMCA that imprison innocent and non-infringing people who make perfectly legal and legitimate fair use.

I ask you, do you support the DMCRA? The DMCRA leaves "piracy" a crime, it only decriminalizes non-infringing use.

-

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[ticklemeozmo]

Some huge artist needs to join the bandwagon... Well, not quite just yet. As the music stores are generally old, specific band music stores are quite new. In fact, they probably got a Yahoo! News story or even a Google Headline (I really didn't search). But the point is they got visitors. As specific group music stores start popping up, they will fall under the same umbrella that all other "repeats" do. Not even a mention in a local paper. So, even if they aren't the best, they at least got their name out there first.

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[black88]

And what's wrong with that? Why must everything be a competition, and why do so many folks insist on validation for their lives, their tastes, and their very existence?

What's so bad about this being "just a band selling their own music"?

As an example,

I know this guy, a DJ (drum n bass, (icky)), who when we would talk about music, he would insist that "P Diddy", or whatever his name is this week, is a damn fine artist and musician, because of all the money he has.

Again, I would ask, why must one have validation from other consumers, and why must a band have validation from other bands before they matter?

I do however think that it matters in one specific way: If it does catch on, and many bands started online labels minus DRM and at a fair price, the mainstream music buying public would quickly run out of "pop idols" to faun over, Britney's career would be more over than it is now, and some REAL music, written and performed with the intention of being music, not COMMODITY, would rule the day.

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[ColMustard]

You have so proven my point. Why would you say DRM music is crippled? What DRM does is prevents you from passing around media files, but YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT ANYWAY! In other words, if you DO do that you are breaking the law and are just a dishonest person. DRM keeps honest people honest, and for the rest of you dishonest people you will undoubtedly find a way to get around the DRM and everyone gets what they want in the end.

And by the way, your view of shareware is not correct. True shareware isn't based on donations. True shareware actually costs money IF you decide to keep using the software. It isn't supposed to be optional. If true shareware worked, there would be no serial schemes or copy protection on software, everyone would just honestly pay for what they use. But it doesn't work and neither does un-copy protected media files.

Don't get me wrong. I would love to have artists and software developers just trust me to not steal their software! But that's an ideal, not the reality. People (even people who would never even think to take anything from a physical store) wouldn't think twice about swapping files on a computer, and that's wrong. I don't know where this idea came from, but it's got to be approached from a realistic perspective.

Re:Now all they need is someone to back them.

[Alsee]

Sigh. I am really getting sick of the same old selective blindness and false assumptions.

I asked you a direct question. I am going to repeat that question. Expect to get flamed if you *again* ignore this direct question:

I have no problem with them using stupid and selfdestructive DRM. Let them use it all they like. My problem is stupid laws like the DMCA that imprison innocent and non-infringing people who make perfectly legal and legitimate fair use.
I ask you, do you support the DMCRA? The DMCRA leaves "piracy" a crime, it only decriminalizes non-infringing use.

Do you support the DMCRA? Yes or no?

you dishonest people

Ah yes, it's easy to assume you are right and assume you win. All you have to do is assume I am dishonest and assume that I am defending criminals.

Of course that magical logic of pretending you are the good guy and your opponent is EVIL falls apart when I specificly said I was defending innocent and non-infringing people.

If you support the DMCA and opposed the DMCRA then you are advocating imprisoning innocent and non-infringing people. That makes you the evil one and makes me the good guy.

Why would you say DRM music is crippled?

You ignored my retorical question "Why the hell would I want to buy a product that cannot be played with my music player and with the rest of the music I own?". Because it blocks perfectly legal and legitimate uses.

Moreover I am a programmer and I have an innovative idea - I am thinking of writing some innovative software using that idea. Anyone can write and use new innovative and better software to read/play MP3's and every other non-crippled format, but never DRM crippled files.

DRM restricts all sorts of uses that you are specificly prohibited from restricting under copyright law.

What DRM does is prevents you from passing around media files, but YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT ANYWAY!

Yep, exactly like what my shooting you does is prevent you from stealing my car, but YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO STEAL MY CAR ANYWAY!

Hopefully you now see the problem with your logic? It only holds up so long as you magically pretend that the innocent people don't exist. Shooting/imprisoning people makes perfect sense only when you magically assume they are criminals.

If you want to go after someone who commits copyright infringment, then go right ahead. However you have absolutely no right to enforce DRM against someone who is NOT commiting copyright infringment!

And by the way, your view of shareware is not correct. True shareware isn't based on donations.

Fine, replace "donation system" with "payment system":

No, SELLING MP3 downloads is not like shareware. If they gave away FREE MP3 downloads and set up a payment system then it would be the same

They Might Be Giants is selling MP3 downloads. All of the music services should be selling MP3 downloads, and they should offer OGG and whatever other formats as well. They accomplish absolutley nothing by offering DRM crippled files that no one wants.

The RIAA's biggest fear isn't copyright infringment. It's becoming irrelevant. Independant labels are popping up left and right - and they are seeing double and triple digit growth percentages while the RIAA is whining about single digit losses. The RIAA labels are set up to sell a million copies of a handful of albums in a handful of catagories. They cannot survive the fracturing of markets and huge numbers of artists with tens of thousands of sales. And even the independant labels aren't even required - individual bands can burn their own CD's or sell downloads on the internet, or directly sign up with online stores.

But motivations is a side issue. The real issue is that you have no right to enforce DRM against an innocent non-infringing person. You have no right to i

Dial a song

[LurkerXXX]

Don't forget their dial-a-song site!

They've got some intersting old stuff on it.

Dial-a-Song

Re:Dial a song

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.dialasong.com/songs.txt
interesting stuff indeed

Re:Dial a song

[foo12]

Hell just call dial-a-song for the true experience. (718) 387-6962

Re:Dial a song

[baldw1n]

For those that care, Leo Laporte of Techtv(now G4Techtv) created the dial-a-song system using a linux box and perl.
Also, Leo is bringing back the show Call For Help, but only for Techtv Canada.

Re:Dial a song

[conan776]

Heck ya. Mod parent up!

Re:Dial a song

[scragz]

I've tried but it's always busy or broken. You're not helping things by contributing to /.ing their phone number either.

wha?

[Anonymous Coward]

please do not trade them with your friends or post them on-line as this service is how we are making a living

I hope they don't honestly expect to make a living selling a handful of $0.99 cent tracks.

I hope they don't honestly think that people aren't going to trade them with their friends.

I hope they realize their terms of use is 404.

Disclaimer: I never really got into TMBG (read: I don't like them).

Re:wha?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope they don't honestly think that people aren't going to trade them with their friends.

I hope they realize their terms of use is 404.


Maybe this is why most others in the music/software
business assume that the customer has criminal intent & use stuff like DRM/Activation etc.

Re:wha?

[Jeremi]

I hope they don't honestly expect to make a living selling a handful of $0.99 cent tracks.

TMBG has been around and "making a living" for literally decades. I doubt you need to worry about Them. They'll be okay.

Re:wha?

[Anonymous Coward]

Whyever not?

TMBG do have a large fanbase that would pay the $10/album rather than cherrypick the individual tracks. Those not-really-fans who do buy individual tracks probably wouldn't have ever bought the CD anyway. And even if they only sold 2 tracks to everybody they're probably still going to make more than they would from royalties on a whole album.

They obviously believe that some people are going to trade them with their friends or they wouldn't have even made that statement. But they are _trusting_ their fans, and hoping that trust is repaid.
Every DRM article on /. results in the collective opinion that DRM is bad because not only does it infringe on our freedoms to maintain backups or use the music that we pay for on portable devices, but also that we're pissed off with being treated like scum and that actually most of us have ethics and morals, and should be treated as such.
Yet when a band does that you're critical?! What gives?

I bet they know the score. Kids and poor students will do as they've always done, with vinyl, with cassettes, and with CDs. Prioritise their spending for their absolute favorite artists and copy the rest from friends. People with real incomes tend to buy more.

To give you an anecdote, recently I mentioned to an online friend that he might like one of my favorite bands and pointed him to a server where I had all of their music available in high quality mp3s. He downloaded _one_ track, listened to it and promptly ordered all _ten_ albums. He could have easily downloaded all of it from me, but chose not to. He chose to support the artist. The band in question, Jump (www.jumprock.co.uk) are from my hometown and since I've been watching them gig since 1990 I've got quite an affinity to them. It was a calculated gamble on my part to make my server available to him, perhaps a gamble that was not mine to take (and that's a whole new /. discussion.) But it paid off handsomely for the band.

Don't be too surprised if this pays off for TMBG.

Re:wha?

[Anonymous Coward]

I never really got into TMBG (read: I don't like them).

And why, exactly, do we give a shit what you don't like?

Re:wha?

[fleener]

>I hope they don't honestly think that people
>aren't going to trade them with their friends.

Yeah, I suppose there are crumbbums such as yourself that will try to ruin such wonderful efforts. I have 2 TMBG CDs I bought 10 years ago. I just bought one album online, and will probably buy the other one they're offering. Should I be asked for a copy, I'll gladly refer people to the web site. None of my friends are cheapskates. They can afford $10 for an album purchased directly from the artist.

The world is what you make it. If you want RIAA controling your access to music, by all means, pirate TMBG and screw the rest of us over.

Re:wha?

[scragz]

I have 14 of their albums on mp3 right now and I paid for less than half of them ... but:

• I've seen them live at least 7 times and go whenever they're in town now
• I've purchased lots of merchandise which they probably get more money from
• I've made quite a few fans for them by bringing people to their shows and playing their music

Does this even it out? I don't know. I'd be interested to know what they would think.

Awsome!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope more artists go down the same path.

Re:Awsome!!!

[mnmn]

Indeed, this has been the best idea I've read on slashdot in weeks. Take that RIAA. Profits will go straight to the musicians and sadly will shut down the music stores.

So say you bought a $15 CD and paid $1 per song from a store, how much would the artist really get per track? I'd imagine $0.30 or less. This way they can even bypass the record labels, and end up making much more than they used to. I know despite being able to download music off P2P, 0.99 per track is cheap enough for me, given I can play it on any of my personal players rather than being legally bound to one saved location.

The Internet has done this for other businessess too, taking consumers directly to the producers, killing off the middlemen, increasing profits and reducing costs. The middlemen will eventually become either other producers, or part of other service-based business (Mcjobs arent off the list), thereby increasing the capacity of the market.

Awesome!!!

LOL ... it's DOT COM!

[cagle_.25]

From the website:

TMBG and the fine folks at homestarrunner.com are teaming up for a number of projects. The folks who brought you Strong Bad are working on an animated internet video of "Experimental Film" TMBG's upcoming single off "The Spine." John and John also recently sat down to an impromptu jam session with the Homestar puppet and performed "A Little Help from My Friends" and some Billy Idol songs nobody knew the words for. Hear TMBG music at www.homestarrunner.com (email #99)

hehe.

Great songs....

[MagicDude]

Music Store man, Music Store man Doing the things a Music Store can What's he like? It's not important Music Store man Is he a dot, or is he a speck? When he's underwater does he get wet? Or does the water get him instead? Nobody knows, Music Store Man Music Store man, Music Store man Music Store man hates Napster man They have a fight, Music Store wins Music Store man I-Tunes man, I-Tunes man Size of the entire universe man Usually kind to smaller man I-Tunes man He's got a watch with a minute hand, Millenium hand and an eon hand When they meet it's a happy land Powerful man, I-Tunes man P2P man, P2P man Hit on the head with a frying pan Lives his life in a garbage can P2P man Is he depressed or is he a mess? Does he feel totally worthless? Who came up with P2P man? Degraded man, P2P man Music Store man, Music Store man Music Store man hates P2P man They have a fight, Music Store wins Music Store man

Re:Great songs....

[Three Headed Man]

Who came up with P2P man?

Shawn Fanning?

Re:Great songs....

[jb.hl.com]

Break tag man
Hreak tag man
Needs to be in your post
You twit.

Re:Great songs....

[Anonymous Coward]

Spell check man
spell check man
jb.hl.com man hates spell check man

best part is

[cosmicrob]

They've built a little birdhouse for my soul.

Re:why why why!

[WIAKywbfatw]

why can't these music stores use a more superior format. they can then give more bang for your bitrate. they still stick with the old mp3.

there are portable vorbis players out there, we need more online stores now.

Yeah, because when you want to reach the widest possible audience with your new e-tailing venture, you should always endeavour to avoid selling popular products or using popular technologies in favour of more obsure goods or less supported formats.

Oh, wait, that business model's been patented. Do you remember boo.com?

Almost...

[bokmann]

I haven't purchased a TMBG album since FLOOD (a lifetime ago, I know), but was ready to purchase both the albums just to show support. The little help window mentioned specific browser versions needed on Windows and Mac, and I would have preferred to either see Linux mentioned in that window, or some explanation as to why specific versions were necessary to download. Not sure what would happen with Mozilla, so I figure I'll wait until someone posts here.

I also didn't like the '6 hour time window' in which to download my purchase... I'd like more time to resolve any issues that might come up doring download - in fact, I'd like them to create an account for me, and let me download them at any time - and possibly again in the future if for some reason I lose them.

Re:Almost...

[GnomeAttic]

bitch bitch bitch.

p.s. bitch bitch

Re:Almost...

[AuMatar]

Perhaps you should send these ideas to their contact email danamil@mindspring.com. I doubt specific versions are needed, usually versions on a website means "don't bug us if you use something older". And anything that works on Netscape 4 or later has a 99%+ chance of working under Mozilla.

Think of this as the store version 1. They wanted to get something up, I'm sure they'll take ideas for improvements.

Re:Almost...

[Stinking Pig]

so buy them from emusic.com, where all those requirements are met and where there is more TMBG catalog available. By the way, you've missed out, there's some pretty cool stuff in their latest and greatest albums. I just bought They Got Lost and am listening to it now.

Re:Almost...

[Anonymous Coward]

funniest slashot post ever. i wish i could mod you up higher.

Re:Almost...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, but the whole point of this TMBG store is that it's run by the band, thus they get most of the proceeds from the purchases of their content. Not some emusic store or other publisher that takes 80% of the purchase price.

Re:Almost...

[Richard_at_work]

in fact, I'd like them to create an account for me, and let me download them at any time - and possibly again in the future if for some reason I lose them.

Now, on the face of it I would agree with you, as I still havent found a way to redownload my iTMS purchased goods (anyone know if you can?). But then I got to thinking. They allow you to download it once, from then on its your responsability to look after your purchased goods. If you had to download it a second time, then thats more bandwidth costs they have to eat. If they can put a time limit on the downloads, then they can estimate how much bandwidth they are going to use, and alter other things appropriately.

Re:Almost...

[supmylO]

Yeah. They should do that with CDs too, say, if I 'lose' one I should be able to get another one for free. Them sending you the song costs money (see: bandwith) I see no reason for them to have to cover for your losing the mp3.

Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[nmoog]

Clicking on the "You dont have flash - click here for the text version" pops up a TMBG guy telling me "Get flash you hippie"

Way to shame me into it.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[TechnologyX]

Flash only + Shitty band? MY EYES

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[Loligo]

> Clicking on the "You dont have flash - click here
>for the text version" pops up a TMBG guy telling me
>"Get flash you hippie"

In today's computing environment, if you can't show Flash, odds are you can't play MP3s reliably.

They aren't cutting a single person out of their _target_ demographic.

-l

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[fucksl4shd0t]

You weren't kidding were you? Bastards. If TMBG have gotten so un-tech-friendly by now....

(I recall they were among the earliest electronic musicians, using computers to make music, they fucking better...uh, well, fuck it)

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[Anonymous Coward]

What about those who prefer to use a systen other than an Apple Macintosh with MacOS 9 or 10, or an Intel x86 system with Windows or GNU/Linux (not even BSD, and almost certainly not any non-GNU Linux systems)? What about those who prefer to keep their use of closed source software? (Note: MP3 *is* non-free in many parts of the world but MP3 players *can* have source code available.) What about those who prefer to refrain from the use of Flash (with Flash-blocking software, use of Lynx or merely refraining from downloading the plugin in the first place)? What about the blind?

All of these people potentially have the ability to reliably make use of the MP3 files, and are yet arbitrarily denied from being allowed to buy them.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[aurelian]

... pops up a TMBG guy telling me "Get flash you hippie"

Fairly certain that's supposed to be Richard Nixon.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[Anonymous Coward]

This my friend is just total crap.
I can't play flash because I didn't bother to install it, and to this day I have never missed it.

I listen to mp3 all the time though, because I don't own a cd-changer and it's just so much nicer having your entire collection in one place.

Of course, the odds that you can't play mp3 are there, they are just very very small.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, _I_ can't play MP3's reliably, but my computer can :-P

In fact, I it play mp3, ogg, avi, divx, even obscure formats like most wmvs and .mov play just fine on it. But I de-installed in purpose the flash plugin and set up Provoxy to filter out all the flash - no flash ads for me thank you.

So, they _did_ at least cut out one single person from their target demographic. Me.

best wishes,

Tels

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[stephentyrone]

Look, I like TMBG and all, but they were most definitely not among the earliest electronic musicians, nor were they among the earliest computer musicians.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[Anonymous Coward]

They aren't cutting a single person out of their _target_ demographic.

They just cut me out.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[fucksl4shd0t]

That's fine, but what I actually wrote was: (emphasis added):

I recall they were among the earliest electronic musicians, using computers to make music,

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[stephentyrone]

yes, i know. and was was making the point that they weren't. various people have been making electronic music since the 19th century, and have been using computers to do it since the johns were toddlers. I would say that this makes it clear that they were not "among the earliest".

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[fucksl4shd0t]

Heh. I'm not trying to argue, really I'm not. But I'd say they were the earliest just like the Wright brothers were the earliest in flight. See, they weren't, but they were one of the first to do something practical that was also very noticeable. And there's a lot of points to be had for people who are early enough that they're pioneering the field, no matter how many others came before them.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[Anonymous Coward]

... and are yet arbitrarily denied from being allowed to buy them.

Because all those people are perfectly capable of stealing them.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[soliptic]

If you read his links, you'd see the likes of Schaeffer were "pioneering the field" in the 1950s. Honestly - TMBG are nothing like the Wright Brothers when it comes to music.

Re:Thanks for the non-flash version guys!

[Maserati]

More like Mojo Nixon.

That's nobody's business but the Turks

[Avenel]

So mind your own business!

That's nobody's business but the Turks! [n/t]

[Anonymous Coward]

i like a shoe horn

the kind with teeth

Re:That's nobody's business but the Turks! [n/t]

[madfgurtbn]

i like a shoe horn

the kind with teeth

A shoehorn with teeth?
You know there's no such thing.

Note to other bands thinking of doing this

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not keen on giving out my credit card number to every single band's website. I've enjoyed lots of music I bought via Bitpass and have found the process to be easy and fast. I've even got a few bucks left in my account earmarked for the next indie band I like.

If you're going to set up a store, please make Bitpass one of your payment options. Thanks.

Re:Note to other bands thinking of doing this

[TommydCat]

The band is trying to sell their music to you directly. It's bad enough that the credit card companies are taking a slice - why do you insist more middle men jump in line with their palms facing upwards ready to receive your/their money?

Re:Note to other bands thinking of doing this

[fucksl4shd0t]

It's not a vote for Kerry; it's a vote against Ashcroft

It's not a vote for Brutus; it's a vote against Caesar.

Re:Note to other bands thinking of doing this

[TommydCat]

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

Re:Note to other bands thinking of doing this

[Anonymous Coward]

Bitpass is better because it allows artists to charge lower fees for their music and make the same profit. It's as simple as that.

I also like it because it's a lot faster and more convenient. 3 clicks and my music is downloading and my account's been charged. I'm not expected to tell every single band my freaking address and mother's maiden name.

Try it, you'll probably like it.

Re:why why why!

[VicStar]

Because vorbis is not as popular as mp3, I would rather have FLAC though for best quality

Re:why why why!

[Sancho]

Just like most of the world, people tend to cater to the majority. Most people do not use Ogg. Most people use MP3. Fact of life.

In fact, I suspect that there are a huge number of MP3 hardware players compared to Ogg. I only know of one or two dedicated hardware players capable of playing Ogg files. A few more that do WMA, and I could list probably twice as many MP3 players. Do the math. You want to sell to the most people, you give them the format that's used most often.

this is great

[jdkane]

Wow, and I'm not encumbered by the choice of which music to buy. I hope they don't add to much more music. It's just perfect as is! It's also great for the /. crowd: one site, one crowd, two CDs to rule them all.

Not practical or profitable

[adzoox]

less people will know that They Might Be Giants have their own stuff.

They would almost certainly be more profitaable in the long haul even if they get less from iTunes/Apple, but I guess having the two is a good idea too.

They seem to be on all the major online stores and have their own - good move.

What they should do is offer a discount of whatever they get from iTunes/Apple for those that have bought iTunes Music Store Songs.

Pricing

[magarity]

I realize that simplicity in pricing is their goal, but it seems odd that little between track oddities lasting 34 seconds are priced the same as a 'real' song.

TMBG put on the most entertaining concert I've ever attended. The skit with the puppet heads in the spotlight 15 feet over the stage was a scream. And lugging the glockenspiel all the way to Colorado for one note during one song was a nice touch.

Re:Pricing

[line.at.infinity]

It seems like iTMS is just as simple-minded when it comes to pricing. E.g. for the album "Pull My Finger," an album full of fart tracks that don't last more than 10 seconds* - much shorter than the 30 seconds preview - however they all cost 0.99 cents each.

* To be fair, I should mention that a few tracks last longer than 10 seconds, including the best selling track on the album, "Yankee Doody Daddy," which is 1:18 long.

Re:Pricing

[Cereal Box]

I find it humorous that Slashdotters go on and on about how terrible mainstream music is and then listen to artists who produce albums full of fart jokes.

Laws of Karma

[Anonymous Coward]

My band has given away online tunes free for a couple of years now. At least you can play it through the site, you can probably figure out how to save them with a bit of geekery and craftiness, I am sure.

Despite giving away the music, we get at least a couple of CD sales through the internet every week!

Karma seems to be working in this case, because people often email in and say they heard the band on the radio, loved the music, did a web search, listened to a lot of the tunes, and wanted to own a copy for themselves or as a gift.

Not sure if this will work in 5 years if people don't buy CDs any more, but it's working for us at the moment.

Shameless plug - go to www.oninvisiblewings.com to see what I mean. If you listen to some tunes and decide to buy the album, then you will have proved the theory! A good intoduction the music is A Formidable Marinade.

Regards,

The Baron von Babyface

(with the face of a boy on the body of a middle-aged man)

baron@oninvisiblewings.com

Re:Laws of Karma

[Anonymous Coward]

since you are getting your five minutes of fame on /.

you should recommend us all with a mp3
in apache so we can listen to it without
hunting something down.

i would gladly switch from gunsmoke stream i am listening to, to yours. but alas i am lazy.

Re:Laws of Karma

[Anonymous Coward]

> baron@oninvisiblewings.com

Poor email address, your going to be spanked with tins of spam now.

Re:Laws of Karma

[EvanED]

Poor email address, your going to be spanked with tins of spam now.

I can't tell if this is a typo of 'tons' or if it's a clever pun on the fact that Hormel Spam comes in tins...

But it's amusing either way.

Re:Laws of Karma

[Anonymous Coward]

Your site uses flash only, and I don't have flash. So no sale from me.

Cheers,

Tels

ah......

[Anonymous Coward]

what a TMBG set up!

My Dad is Dead has been doing this for a long time

[Derge]

...for free

http://mydadisdead.com/

Well, They might be giants...

[IamGarageGuy 2]

But their site is obviously not.

Re:Well, They might be giants...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, They Might Be Slashdotted...

Re:why why why!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not like you could provide both MP3 and Vorbis like machinae supremacy is doing to reach *both* normal people and Vorbis geeks. Machinae has gained quite some publicity under geeks for their Vorbissupport - they were one of the first after all.

This is fantastic

[stoneymonster]

This is the sort of thing that will peck away at the music behemoth. However, only certain bands will be able to do this contractually. I wouldn't expect any big names (not that TMBG is not a household name) to follow suit any time soon, but maybe in a few years if a few of the independent bands succeed with this things will change.

Re:why why why!

[Anonymous Coward]

uh. Vorbis isn't so much better than MP3. Certainly not worth the loss of compatability. If anything wm9 or AAC are superior to Vorbis still and all players are WM9 compatible and many more are compatible with AAC than with Vorbis.

I fail to see how your argument supports Vorbis audio over other alternatives.

As for the bitrate thing... it's a bunch of bullshit anyway. MP3 player capacities increase all the time. Nobody uses 40 gb, they don't even use 20 gb in an iPod. Also internet connections are fast enough so that a tiny smidget better bit rate is a non-issue for downloading considering the size of mp3 audio files. A 1.5 mbit DSL connection is less than $30 in my area now. I can even get 3 mbit for $40 and often times faster for even cheaper. Who gives a fuck if it's 1.2 mb vs 2.1 mb? It takes about 1.5 seconds either way.

Re:why why why!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not cater to the APE geeks? and the FLAC geeks? And the WM9 geeks? And the SHN geeks? And the AAC geeks? And the WAV geeks? And AC3 Dolby Digital geeks?

Exactly. What makes the Vorbis people any more special than people who want uncompressed audio, multichanned AC3 audio they can send to their stereos, WM9 audio for Windows, AAC audio for their iPod, etc? I'll tell you what: absolutely NOTHING.

Continuing a long tradition

[iamdrscience]

They Might Be Giants were one of the first artists years ago to release an album ONLY in MP3 emusic.com which, while it's not as cool now, for a little while was pretty nice, it was cheap, DRMless and available in multiple formats at multiple bitrates.

Beyond that though, they regularly put songs up on their website, including exclusive unreleased songs (similar to their dial-a-song service where you call up and hear a new song on their answering machine).

Re:Continuing a long tradition

[seasleepy]

As another example of their commitment to online music, it's also worth pointing out TMBG Clock Radio, which has several hours worth of full streaming songs... live, album versions, and rarities.

As a note, the "PC" version works swimmingly with Wine under Linux.

Re:Continuing a long tradition

[Seattlejo]

Not only did they do emusic, but they treated the emusic subscribers really well. For signing a year contract I got a signed copy of Mink Car, and a sweatshirt. Pretty sweet deal. I really dont think many bands are embracing the new technologies as much as they are. They did Emusic. They have 4 albums and 2 EPs on Listen.com's Rhapsody Service. They also have 6 albums and 2 EPs on Itunes. I'd say thats embracing technology. Seriously who compares? Metallica's Backstage area?

Who are they ? What do they want ?

[zymano]

I don't like todays music.

No one can play instruments anymore.

I like Neil Diamond . Don't tell anyone.

Re:why why why!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well really 160 vs. 256 is more like 5 megs vs. 10 megs which on a 64 meg players makes a big difference.

Not everyone has cash for the latest toys on MTV.

TMBG has always been into this stuff

[NotAnotherReboot]

TMBG was one of the really early adopters of Emusic.com's service which was around long before iTunes and the new Napster. They even released an Emusic-only album.

It looks like they're using some company named "Back Office Music" to provide the actual payment/delivery system. It would be interesting to know what kind of a cut they take for this service.

Re:TMBG has always been into this stuff

[sharph]

My guess is that they take around 35% of it.

Re:why why why!

[WIAKywbfatw]

It's not like you could provide both MP3 and Vorbis like machinae supremacy is doing to reach *both* normal people and Vorbis geeks. Machinae has gained quite some publicity under geeks for their Vorbissupport - they were one of the first after all.

If you can show me one digital music player that plays Vorbis files but won't play MP3s then you might have a point. But you can't do that, can you? Even then, as the other person who's already replied to your post pointed out, why stop at the tiny fraction of one percent of the market that wants Vorbis but won't accept the same music in MP3 format? Why not go after every other "xxx but not MP3 at any cost" market?

Yeah, I'm sure there's a lot of money to be made converting, storing and serving files in every possible audio file format under the sun. To hell with the law of diminishing returns, streamlining your business to be as efficient as possible, or anything else resembling a sensible business model...

High bitrate is all well and good...

[winsk]

and I can understand mp3 (although a choice of other formats would be nice too), but why waste such valuable space by using CBR? They could even use --alt-preset extreme and have files average out to the same size!

Re:High bitrate is all well and good...

[treat]

--alt-preset is gone, it's just --preset now.

And you are right. Using anything but --preset extreme will probably sacrifice quality.

Re:High bitrate is all well and good...

[neurojab]

>but why waste such valuable space by using CBR?

This is just a subjective opinion, but I prefer CBR at bitrates greater than 192 kbps. The reason is that with VBR, the more subtle cues in the music can get a bit dishwatery, even at very large values of --preset. A CBR bitrate of 256 using LAME will result in a very nice sound, one that is already hard to distinguish from a CD. I'd pit that against a similar-sized VBR file in terms of pure sound quality any day of the week. VBR (and ABR) are very nice alternatives to 128kbps or 160kbps CBR, but 256kbps CBR is tough to beat (except with higher file sizes). Again, just my subjective opinion, I don't have any data to back it up.

Sweet

[XMichael]

Man ohh man am I ever excited! Finally a easy way to get tunes, and support the artist; all without leaving my home!

Ohh wait, who are these guys, ewwwwww, have you tried the "free sample" yuk..

Gosh I hope my favorite artist Justin Timberlake starts doing this ... that'd be sweet!

Security Cameras

Re:Nifty

[notanatheist]

Let's hope they're past college as I heard of them about 8 years ago.

Flash Required.. yawn!

[Vskye]

Just a personal gripe about needing "flash" to use their web site. Why people design sites like this is beyond me. I can see a flash and a non-flash version, but what the hell?

Re:Flash Required.. yawn!

[Anonymous Coward]

It just done by people who want to be sued by a blind person for discrimination.

Re:Flash Required.. yawn!

[Spydr]

people like flash because it's popular, it looks good, and it's relatively easy to find developers to make things with it.

the alternative (javascript) is more of a pain in the ass to develop (and much harder to find good developers) for if you want to get the same audience reach that flash has.

you are definitely in the minority if you don't have a flash player installed.

Re:Flash Required.. yawn!

[llopis]

TMBG is one of my favorite groups, so I was ready to go ahead and buy whatever they had there to support them (I already have all their albums). But no, they had to go and make a flash-only site. Sorry, but you lost my sales. I have no flash installed and I have no interest in having it, thank you very much.

Re:why why why!

[Maestro4k]

• why can't these music stores use a more superior format. they can then give more bang for your bitrate. they still stick with the old mp3.

  there are portable vorbis players out there, we need more online stores now.

  well, if they don't want to, nothing we can do about it.

First of all Mp3 is the format with the widest support -- period. You may not like this but it's reality. Secondly this is a small store run by the group, it's a bit unrealistic to expect them to support multiple formats. Thirdly we should be thankful they're releasing them in a format that doesn't have DRM restrictions. If they were using DRM restricted files I'm quite sure everyone would be complaining about that instead.

Ogg's a nice format (for audio, I have had nothing but problems with it in video files) but it's support is still limited. You really can't expect a small store like this to support it. (Well you can expect it but realistically it's probably not going to happen). There's nothing wrong with promoting the format and hoping it's more widely adopted but until it is online music stores won't support it. It's a bit of a chicken or the egg problem.

Re:why why why!

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes the Vorbis people any more special than people who want uncompressed audio, multichanned AC3 audio they can send to their stereos, WM9 audio for Windows, AAC audio for their iPod, etc?

@ FLAC, APE, ...: First of all it's lossless so it doesn't matter which one is used because you can transcode without quality loss. Second it costs more bandwidth so this might be a reason for not providing flacs.

About the other ones - I have never seen anyone who "demands" a specific format besides MP3 and Vorbis. This makes Vorbis somewhat "special".. wouldn't you say so?

The reason for MP3s is obvious and clear: hardware MP3 players.

The reason for Vorbis is obvious too - it has much better quality than MP3. (especially when using GT3bX)

I know that there are other formats with comparable quality and I would be fine if they provided Musepack encoded songs or something similar but first Vorbis is more popular, so it has better hardware support (yes) and the fact that it's built upon free technology & not patented is a nice goodie.

A step in the right direction

[acousticiris]

I have to say the one major hurdle that has steered me away from downloading music from the iTunes and others has been the DRM. I'm sure there's few among this crowd that would disagree. I realize, I could still burn my downloaded music to a CD and do what I please with it, but it's really the principal of the fact.

But my complaint comes out at lossy codecs. Maybe I'm just being too picky, but the less compressed the better. A few years ago I put my whole CD collection in MP3 format for my computer/portable listening enjoyment. All at 160K CBR using XING. Of course, with the availability of an ogg player for my handheld PC, I have converted again much of my CD collection to ogg format for my computer/portable listening enjoyment.
If I hadn't had the uncompressed quality of the CD, I'd be stuck with my older MP3 encoded files. I had heard of a project earlier put forth where the company/band was releasing tracks in multiple formats, including FLAC (curious if anyone has a link or knows what I'm talking about?).
I personally wish that others would go this route--more choice.

I'm done complaining though. Seeing artists walk away from DRM is a great thing. Seeing them recognize the importance of the higher bitrate is also very encouraging. I hope this causes more of a rift between the good bands and the strong arm of the RIAA. It can only be a move in the right direction for consumers.

Re:A step in the right direction

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be Magnatune at http://www.magnatune.com

Re:A step in the right direction

[capz loc]

Primus also sells live recordings in MP3 and FLAC formats at Primuslive.com. MP3's cost $9.99 for a show (2-3 CD's) and FLACs cost $14.99.

Re:A step in the right direction

[EvilLordSoth]

There are definitely a lot of other people who know about non-DRM non-lossless encoding of music, if you check out www.etree.org you can find a lot of good information on other people distributing LEGAL music with the main two different kinds of lossless encoding, FLAC and SHN. As far as BANDS distributing their own albums in lossless format, I don't know of any, but both Primus and Phish make their live shows available for download pretty shortly after the show (a week or so) in either decent quality mp3 or FLAC. However, while we're on the topic, I have had a lot of trouble with certain FLAC files, both in my own encoding and in downloading it off of other people on etree and even from livephish.com There are times when decoding a track to WAV that I end up getting errors in the decompression of the file, yet when listening to the flac file itself (using FUBAR) there is either no distortion at all or possibly a very minor distortion near the beginning or end. I have no idea why it would be located within the first or last 10% of the song instead of anywhere else in the song, nor can I find anyone else who has any explanation/fix. And using FLAC (but not necessarily mp3) to encode files ripped from a CD, if the machine you're using has spotty ram, can cause all sorts of problems as well, so it is useful in situations like system testing/benchmarking for checking your settings in the bios to see if they are too extreme. Latz

FTFTMBGW:

[DrunkenTerror]

Why are you using the MP3 standard?

We want to make things simple for you. MP3 is the standard Internet audio format, and the easiest to work with. MP3 files are compatible with all popular media applications and home/portable digital audio devices. TMBG MP3s are encoded at 256kbps using the LAME MP3 encoder for superior audio quality. In this case, LAME means good. TMBG MP3s are professionally encoded to ensure a much better quality file than MP3s downloaded over P2P networks by brigands and thieves. MP3 files are also easier to download over the Internet because of their smaller file size. (Roughly 1.5MB per minute of audio)

Makes a lot of sense

[line.at.infinity]

Makes a lot of sense to get rid of DRM since people can already buy audio CDs anyway which are DRM free. And might as well sell it in a format currently most popular amongst consumers, mp3, although I wish they'd also sell it in AAC format (comparable audio quality takes up less space on my hard drive).

Regarding other artists that also give away free mp3s, I find a lot of artists on the Kill Rock Stars label give away free full length mp3s, especially Stereo Total (factsheet) and DeerHoof (factsheet, Puzzling Music Archive).

Re:why why why!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I'm sure there's a lot of money to be made converting, storing and serving files in every possible audio file format under the sun. To hell with the law of diminishing returns, streamlining your business to be as efficient as possible, or anything else resembling a sensible business model...

I didn't say "every possible audio file format". I said Vorbis. It's not that unpopular anymore. On SN there currently apppear about 2 or 3 Vorbis album releases every day. I'd say this makes it the second-most popular format on SN. And SN is not the typical "foss-linux-zealot-lair".

You won't find much WMA on it. And quite some people do care about quality there.

Still you can download many WMAs from "legal" sites. What do those bussiness rules say about fucking selling what the customer wants?

It fits them for sure.

[ChrisHanel]

TMBG have had Dial-A-Song since they started (and still do!). It doesn't surprise me at all that they'd find yet another way to get their product direct to their fans. Just give me Ana Ng and Minimum Wage, and i'm as sound as a pound. -Chris

Re:Who are they ? What do they want ?

[Anonymous Coward]

I like Neil Diamond . Don't tell anyone.

Don't worry, your horrible secret is safe with us.

News?!?

[Err]

Don't get me wrong, I love TMBG...

But what makes this newsworthy?

A lot of artists, like Stuart Davis have been selling high quality MP3s à la carte for song time. Most of Stuart's are ripped using LAME --alt-preset extreme, now --preset extreme, for even higher quality than TMBG's CBR rips. And, Stuart even offers free songs.

Re:News?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

It appears TMBG still holds quite a grip on its fan base from the 1980s. The albums they put out back them were pretty good. They have a uniqe sound.

I am betting that the reason this turned up on this site is exactly the reason above. Slashdot editors are day dreaming about younger days.

I have to say, when you play there music today, some songs truly hurt the ears.

I still want to go see them live, but i think it just wont be the same band i remember from long ago. TMBG probably is long past those days.

Re:News?!?

[Err]

Hmmm... Now I wanna listen to them to see what I think.

The question is, do I want to enough to either fire up my presently offline server or wander across the room and dig through a pile of disks? I suspect laziness will prevail on both counts.

Re:News?!?

[and by]

Because we're nerds and TMBG, by the nature of their music, appeal to us. When the intersection of a popular (among us) band and current happenings in online music coincide, it's "News for Nerds," and thus /. fodder.

Re:News?!?

[Stinking Pig]

Who the hell is Stuart Davis? I'll go click your link after I hit submit here, but I honestly have no idea.

The newsworthy bit is that most people on Slashdot know who They Might Be Giants are, like them (yay!) or not (philistines).

It's sort of like when someone at Microsoft scratches their crotch, that's news, right? Your roommate does it all the time and no one cares, but someone at Microsoft is important.

Re:Nifty

[EvilMagnus]

Only eight years ago?

Get with the program, bub - their seminal work, Flood, opens with the lyrics 'A brand new album, for 1990...'. And I remember when it came out. :)

Flood is a work of genius. Not too keen on their later stuff, though.

Re:why why why!

[SnakeJG]

Oh, wait, that business model's been patented. Do you remember boo.com?

Actually I don't, and a google search doesn't give me any information either. So, care to enlighten?

This is good, to be sure...

[John Courtland]

but I really wish someone would get up and offer unencoded raw music files. At 48,000kbps sampling rate. This lets me choose what lossy format I want to use, and I would seriously start buying entire albums like candy.

Re:This is good, to be sure...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called a "CD". Buy one.

Re:This is good, to be sure...

[sharph]

Ok first of all, thats 48khz, or 48,000hz, not 48,000kbps.

Second, 44.1khz is fine for listening to music, because most lossy formats that you will want to use will lowpass under 22khz. CD's are 44.1khz.

Don't mind me i'm just picky about stupid things.

Re:This is good, to be sure...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called a "CD". Buy one.

Um, Unless i'm sadly mistaken, a CD is 44.1Khz @ 1200kbps (150KB/sec). DVDA maxes out at 9600kbps @ 96khz multi-channel. I'm not sure if the poster ment to say 48khz audio, which is lightly higher then CD, common on dat and sound cards. I.e. not a CD. Uncompressed 48,000kbps would be 6GB/sec. My 120gig HD could do 20 seconds of audio at this bitrate.

Re:This is good, to be sure...

[Shinglor]

There's Magnatune but you'll have to look through a lot of crap to find music you like. Drop Trio are awesome. Also have a look at Kenji Williams' music if you like electronic

Music is downloadable in FLAC, WAV and MP3.

Re:This is good, to be sure...

[John Courtland]

Yeah, I've been drinking. I meant hz or sapmles/sec... Forgivaness a-puhleeze.

Re:This is good, to be sure...

[John Courtland]

Ah, fuck me, I meant "samples" not "sapmles"... Alcohol will be my downfall...

Re:This is good, to be sure...

[Maserati]

Yeah, but it's a good ride. E-ticket all the way.

Do not suck? They got a cameo role...

[leonbrooks]

...in Terry Pratchett's Soul Music ! They've gotta be good!

'So what do you call yourselves?'

'Er - dwarfs, Mr Dibbler,' said the lead dwarf.

'"Dwarfs"?'

'Yes, sir.'

'Why?'

'Because we are, Mr Dibbler,' said the lead dwarf patiently.

'No, no, no. That won't do. That won't do at all. You gotta have a name with a bit of-' Dibbler waved his hands in the air, '-with a bit of Music With Rocks In . . . uh . . . in. Not just "Dwarfs". You gotta be . . . oh, I don't know . . . something more interesting.'

'But we're certainly dwarfs,' said one of the dwarfs.

'"We're Certainly Dwarfs",' said Dibbler. 'Yes, that might work. OK. I can book you in at the Bunch of Grapes on Thursday. And into the Free Festival, of course. Since it's free you don't get paid, of course.'

The last line proves that Terry really does know about the music industry. (-:

Re:Do not suck? They got a cameo role...

[Ben Hutchings]

Pterry is fairly well known as a fan of TMBG. He also used their lyrics as input for a dissociated-press type text generator, resulting in the phrase "millenium hand and shrimp" which is used by insane characters in a couple of his books.

Re:Do not suck? They got a cameo role...

[J. J. Ramsey]

Maybe those dwarves should do a stage show where they dance around an 18" tall model of Stonehenge. ;)

Live Phish

[dopaz]

http://www.livephish.com/

They have both MP3 and FLAC of their shows, and they are available within a day or two of the show. They have "every show Phish has played since 12/31/02" along with some other shows too.

Re:My Dad is Dead has been doing this for a long t

[deminisma]

Yeah, but it doesn't count if it is a band no-one would pay to listen to.

Which makes you wonder how "They Might Be Giants" are getting away with it, doesn't it?

Nice idea

[Anonymous Coward]

I like their idea, particularly the part about not assuming their listeners are thieves and locking down the content with draconian DRM schemes. Unfortunately I am not a fan of They Might Giants.

Re:Nice idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, it should be "Unfortunately I am not a fan of They Might be Giants".

I bought it

[fname]

I just bought it for a few reasons:

1) I like TMBG.
2) It helps support the artist very effectively.
3) If enough people buy it, it will send a message to the RIAA that selling unencumbered MP3s is a better business than selling all these DRMed tunes.

By the way, no problems during the download process. Very easy, but not as seemless as iTMS. Still fun, and I was happy enough spending the $10.

Re:I bought it

[evilviper]

2) It helps support the artist very effectively.

How sure are you of that, exactly? They pay to have the webpage up. They pay for the store. They have to pay a fee to the credit card companies for every transaction. They could quite possibly be giving a percentage to some producer, agent, etc.

3) If enough people buy it, it will send a message to the RIAA that selling unencumbered MP3s is a better business than selling all these DRMed tunes.

Yeah, that's what they'll see... They won't realize that it's merely the same price as iTunes, and lacking their beloved DRM. Thereby making iTunes seem even better of a deal.

I'm sure, it won't send them the other message, that people are willing to pay massively inflated prices for music.

$10 for a CD would be rather high. $10 for lossy digital files, with DRM, and no physical media, is unconscionable.

Buy it if you want, but don't dilute yourself into thinking that by doing so, you are sending them a compelling message, that might convince them to be less evil.

Flash

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer flash over some crappy Javascript and html that works on windows in ie 6.0 only, so what exactly is your problem with flash? Yawn. go back to your 90ies.

Re:Flash

[Technician]

so what exactly is your problem with flash?

Flash advertising.

The player has no user control unless the content provider provides it.

If the player simply had a always there set of user controls including close, stop, rewind, etc, then I might consider flash.

Hitting Yahoo or other site and have some flash thing jump out of it's sandbox and spill all over the content I'm trying to read with absolutely way to tell it to stop is unacceptable. It's as welcome as the 3 year old that jumps up in front of the TV everytime there is about to be a touchdown just to get your attention. Sorry, but get that kid outta here during the game. I told flash to stop the only way left, it's removal. Until they fix the end user player, it's staying off. Are you old enough to remeber ANSI BBS'es? Remember the hated blink tag? Flash can be like a blink tag on steroids. User abuse by advertisers is the problem.

have to give them credit

[humankind]

TMBG is a band that has worked their asses off for years and years. While not "commercially viable" according to what corporate overlords dictate, they've managed to garner a cult following and become a success. I remember being in Manhattan more than a decade ago and I couldn't walk a few blocks anywhere in the city without seeing their flyers all over the place. If any group deserves success and attention, it's these guys.

I heard them on Air America Radio the other day and they were great... I especially loved the bit where they "accidently" gave out the 1-800-AFAMILY telephone number of the right wing religious nutjob organization that apparently sent out a missive to people with Michael Moore's personal contact information and suggested he be harassed for releasing the "un-american" movie Fahrenheit 911.

What's the music like?

[Joe Tie.]

I havn't bought anything from They Might Be Giants in a while, since flood I belive. I really liked their stuff from around that period, but havn't heard any of the offerings on the page. One's listed as childrens songs, which dosn't fill me with a huge amount of confidence. Children tend to not be the most demanding audience. The other is listed as rarities, and I've found that quite often those are rare for a reason, and not one that would lend well to wanting to put money down on it.

But I am curious how their music has evolved since I last heard them, and I'm very eager to support this kind of distribution system. Any comments on how the music being sold holds up to, say, flood?

Re:What's the music like?

[conan776]

> I havn't bought anything from They Might
> Be Giants in a while, since flood I belive

People should get beat up for stating their beliefs

Re:What's the music like?

[p_trekkie]

One's listed as childrens songs, which dosn't fill me with a huge amount of confidence. Children tend to not be the most demanding audience.

It's just like the rest of their music: quirky, random and guaranteed to get stuck in your head. The song "In the middle, in the middle, in the middle" is about looking both ways before crossing the street, but it still refuses to leave my head! The subjects may be childish, but the music is still as upbeat and catchy as always.

In California....

[Anonymous Coward]

..They Pay people to do that. ..Or are you saying you're from California?

That is cool.

[mcc]

You should also be aware seminal european electronic music label Warp Records does much the same thing with their catalog.

You rang?

[ParticleMan911]

My ears are itching. [ /Jessica Simpson Voice]

Can we have some real discussion?

[MatrixBandit]

Seriously tho, my immediate reaction to this is of course very positive. I like the idea of cutting out the BS middle man and actually paying the artist directly. The idea that the artist in this case still actually owns their own music (which should just be a given) is rather nice. But it brings up some questions.

I keep going back and forth with this in my head and I still haven't found a complete solution. Given that the "problem" if you will is that artists in the past haven't been able to equip themselves readily with the means to provide their own distribution and sales, they've classically been forced to utilize record companies not only to take care of these needs but also to promote their work, and in the end they get the short end of the stick, even if it has been their best option. (I.E. making pennies on the dollar per cd sale net profit).

I came up with one idea, whether it's feasible or not you decide for yourself. The main reasons I have a hard time paying for a cd is the price, the fact that so little of that is going to the artist, and that in doing so I'm essentially funding the same effort that is trying to lock everything down and take away our basic fair use rights. So it seems the evil that is done outweighs the good when you buy a cd in the store. SO my idea is this: Why not set up a website, where people who have already gone wherever it is that they go, and downloaded their music illegally, where they can go and "make a donation" so to speak based on selecting specific tracks or albums that they have acquired. The website would ring up the "donation" based on what you select, run a paypal transaction and forward the money to the artist. Basically a very professional looking honor system. The artist of course can still be through whatever record label they choose unless accepting donations is specifically prohibited by their contract. The prices could be insanely competitive and still pay the artist alot more than the cut they currently get.

The problem (other than the obvious honor system pitfalls and possible legal issues) that I see here is that if you eventually cut out the middle man (record labels) entirely, what you are left with is just bands, their music, and their fans. While this model words great for established groups, it doesn't appear to leave much room for new bands.

Maybe in the end it would be enough for the record labels and this honor donation system to coincide, as that would obviously provide competition and motivation for the record industry to reduce its bloated infrastructure, lower overhead and in the end cut prices to compete with the honor donation system.

I don't know, what do you guys think??

Re:Can we have some real discussion?

[Joe Tie.]

I'm a bit hesitant to even mention this, as the information is basically just "some guy told me". But I've heard that a lot of contracts specify that the artist can't accept any money for their music that dosn't come through santioned routes and materials. If that's not the case thogh, it sounds like a good idea to me.

entirely, what you are left with is just bands, their music, and their fans. While this model words great for established groups, it doesn't appear to leave much room for new bands.

I think internet radio combined with word of mouth might be enough to launch new bands into the public view. The vast majority of bands whose music I own came to my attention soley through shoutcasts.

Re:Can we have some real discussion?

[teamhasnoi]

I think that a band that concentrates on great music is going to get fans via word of mouth. Every band I hear is recommended by pals or random discussions I find on the net. What's on the radio may work for people who don't care so much, but when playlists are predictable to the hour, the RIAA suing people who buy CDs, and the general quality of music pandering to the lowest common denominator - I see the 'base' of the RIAA looking for alternatives.

I highly doubt the RIAA would let their artists collect any money from any independent website - to allow it in any capacity would be admitting that they are obsolete. I could see indy artists using this service, but I can't see people actually paying... Which sucks, as I am a musician, who hates the RIAA, and has seen first hand how they can make the process of making music not fun.

I dunno.

[StarKruzr]

I've just never gotten the buzz over TMBG. EVERYTHING they've ever done with the exception of the Malcolm In The Middle theme song has sounded like children's music to me that required approximately the musical talent of my mom to perform and/or compose (hint: my mom has no musical talent).

Re:I dunno.

[Anonymous Coward]

Two pieces of advice: 1. Learn to be playful. 2. TMBG' music is kind of like a musical -- listen for the picture they are trying to paint. (At least for Constantinople, it helps to have had a general knowledge of world history.)

If you still don't like them, then TMBG is not for you.

Re:I dunno.

[Anonymous Coward]

i've listened to them for years. while they can be entertaining (playful if you will) they're virtually unlistenable due to the johns' tendencies to use their dreadful lounge voices to sing, well, midtempo electro-pop songs about nothing. yes, i said it, tmbg is unlistenable.

Re:I dunno.

[StarKruzr]

Hey, I can dig "playful." I'm a huge BNL and Guster fan. (While their lyrics are not always the least serious, they're hilarious in concert.) I'm all about playful.

I'm thinking TMBG is just not for me.

Re:I dunno.

[poot_rootbeer]

EVERYTHING they've ever done with the exception of the Malcolm In The Middle theme song has sounded like children's music to me that required approximately the musical talent of my mom to perform and/or compose (hint: my mom has no musical talent).

It must run in the family, then. TMBG's music may often be accessible to children, but that doesn't detract any from the depth of the songwriting or the cleverness of the lyrics.

Thanks for sharing your opinions, though. You really contributed a lot to this discussion.

magnatune.com

[Anonymous Coward]

For good music by less famous artists, check out magnatune.com

Complete streaming albums at 128 bits free, with higher rate and even wav files available for purchase.

If the music just has to be good, not famous, it's a great site. I've bought/downloaded several of their albums with no problems.

Re:Already up for sharing...

[sharph]

You suck dude.

If an artist requests that you don't file share their music, don't. If they support filesharing, then fine, thats where most of the good music is anyway (even though i am a HUGE fan of TMBG).

If they're giving you (trusting you with) good-quality non-DRM mp3s (mp3's yeah yeah ok ogg is better), don't abuse that.

I hadn't noticed

[winsk]

--alt-preset is gone, it's just --preset now.

I'm still on 3.90.3 (as per hydrogenaudio's reccomendations) either the --alt-presets are still used in that version, or they're mapped to the --presets for compatibility.

And you are right. Using anything but --preset extreme will probably sacrifice quality.

Quality will still be lost, but less.

TMBG Wiki

[mnemonic_]

This Might Be A Wiki: TMBW.Net
(isn't that cool?)

It goes over the "n".

[Gordonjcp]

Yes, the "n". No, it's not in *any* normal character set.

Smashing Pumpkins - ahead of the game ;)

[Tezkah]

There's tons of The Smashing Pumpkins stuff that Billy (lead singer) got people to release. Some major stuff, like a 5 disc set of B-sides (Mashed Potatoes).

Most of this stuff here was made by Billy himself, and given to an online fan with the message to "circulate this". He's a pretty cool guy, and he's going to be releasing a new album.

Re:Smashing Pumpkins - ahead of the game ;)

[Qrlx]

it sucks downloading mp3s from that site. there's some dumb click-through and then the files are .zip files. it really pisses me off because billy corgan wanted that stuff to be free on the internet and now there's some dumb anti-leeching click through visit our sponsors crap. it's like ads on public tv. bollocks.

Re:why why why!

[Gordonjcp]

If you want Ogg support, go and buy everything you can off them in MP3 and ask them for Ogg support too. Tell them - write to them, you know, on paper - that you want to buy their music but you would like them to support Ogg too. Don't drivel on and on about how much better Ogg is and how mp3 suxx0rs because it's owned by an evil capitalist corporate villain. That won't work.

This is how we will win, guys. I don't care if you don't like They Might Be Giants, buy everything in sight off their store. It's only 20 dollars, ffs. When the marketing types see that offering people the music, without pushing it at them, and offering it *the way we want to have it* sells, and sells a fuckload, the whole thing will tip over and suddenly mp3 will be the good and right thing to do.

Re:why why why!

[Cecil]

I only know of one or two dedicated hardware players capable of playing Ogg files.

Not trying to shoot down the rest of your post, but:

All of iRiver's iHP series hard-disk players, and many of their iFP series flash players support Vorbis. I have an iHP-120 and it works flawlessly and transparently with my Ogg Vorbis files. The Neuros line also supports Vorbis. The Rio Karma supports Ogg Vorbis as well. There are plenty of smaller manufacturers out there also creating Vorbis-capable players, but I won't bore you with that list. The three aformentioned makers are the big ones. Even with those 3 companies, that's quite a bit more than just one or two players.

TELEFUNKEN

[Anonymous Coward]

telefunken.webula.net

Re:Already up for sharing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Meh. Get over it -- it's completely moral and legal in many places. Besides, TMBG are talentless hacks, so its not really a loss or anything.

Yea, but its already...

[222]

Yea, Flood, the album everyone wants is already on Rhapsody. Its no itunes, i guess, but as a mobie tech, my music follows and i pay 10 bucks a month for as many new albums as I choose to support, and a crapload more. So uhh yea, once again, real isnt the company you want it to be, Apple isnt always the best choice, and ill always get modded down. Thx slashdot!

Ouch

[Joe Tie.]

I walked right into that one. :)

Re:why why why!

[fucksl4shd0t]

Mmm, with codecs standing as they do, it's possible to have the server convert on-the-fly.

Not that I'm saying they should do this. Jesus fucking christ, imagine the load on the server if they ever get that busy! (Yeah, I know, they can cache each conversion, in this manner they wouldn't have to convert for every download, just for formats on files that haven't been requested yet).

Just pointing out that it's not the technical challenge it might at first appear.

Not Likely

[Tem Noon]

I think you are right that most people don't mind paying when they think the money is going to the musician, if they like the music. But running a site for accused criminals to make voluntary donations to the companies that lobbied to put those laws on the books might have its drawbacks.

Or wait, you intended to bypass the record companies and give money directly to musicians. Yes, there may be some litigation.

But there is a system that comes close. Check Weed.

Re:why why why!

[Sancho]

Fair enough. I hadn't really heard of the iRiver series. I was thinking of Neuros and Karma when I posted...although I'm even hesitant to inclue the Neuros since it (currently) requires a firmware flash to get Ogg support (Well, maybe not the Neuros 2.. is that one out yet?)

So you are free to shoot down my specific statement about only knowing of one or two OGG players, but you still can't argue with the statistics that there are considerably more players that play MP3 and do NOT play Ogg :)

Weedshare.com sets a nice balance - Weed files.

[Tem Noon]

I love "The Might Be Giants," and it's nice to see them taking this step, but not every musician can start their own on-line store. With Weed files, you just need to have the files on a web site.

With Weed, musicians always get to set the price of the song (usually about a dollar, of course) and get 50% from every sale. Weed publishers Shared Media Licensing, Inc gets just 15%. 35% goes to the people buying then sharing the music. (20%, 10%, then 5% commissions) And sites like ShareNewYork.com make it very easy to buy Weed files, upload them, and review why it's and great song, why you chose it. Whatever the cost of the song, if 5 people buy it, the song has paid for itself. It's also a great place to look for new songs, because most songs are posted with a few words from a fan.

Weed files are legal to share, and will play 3 times for free (on Windows Machines. Macophiles, I feel your pain) They are ideal for new musicians, since it is usually free to get your music in this format, and the music must be original. Now that CD Baby has endorsed Weed, 65,000+ musicians can convert their files by oping in to Weed as part of digital distribution, again for free.

Oh, and Heart's new Album, Jupiter's Daughter, is available in Weed.

For some reason, this Weed - CD Baby deal is completely below the notice of the media. I think it's the biggest deal in OMD since MP3.com went public, but the media doesn't get it. Anyone see anything about it here on /. ? What's up with that? CD Baby gives that needed catalog of 100,000+ files. As a whole, CD Baby represents 230,000 songs, but it remains to be seen how many will opt in.

With Weed files, there's actual potential for income for everyone ... musician, distributors, and even fans! The better each does their job, the more everyone will make. Music becomes a capital investment. it makes new business models of music possible. Now is the time to get involved.

Re:My Dad is Dead has been doing this for a long t

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I've downloaded 4 random of their songs, and now I understand why they give them away for free. They were repetitive random notes for the worst ones, and just naive music as I did with a synth when I was 14 for the best ones. They should not allow people to listen to them for free if they want to make some money, at least they could get a few bucks from people who try their chance !

Since none of you actually went to the site....

[Linegod]

... the FAQ contains this little tidbit:

MAC Internet Explorer Users:
We highly recommend that you use the Safari or
Firefox browser to download songs.

...I don't want the world, I just want your half...

Unsustainable.

[Anonymous Coward]

They Might be Giants benefitted tremendously from years upon years of RIAA-member sponsored (or organized) marketing, promotion, organization, manufacturing, access to the right people, etc... you know.. all that actually quite important middleman stuff that many slashdotters routinely simply pretend doesn't exist or isn't important. Without such support, it is highly unlikely that you would have ever heard of TMBG enough to give a damn whether or not they opened their online store. Artists opening their own store may be fine for established (and monied!) artists like TMBG who are presumably no longer tied to their previous contracts (and who can now afford to play without excessive worry about where their next meal is coming from), but this is hardly a solution for the vast majority of artists or the industry in general.

Re:Unsustainable.

[Qrlx]

that was one of the lamest trolls ever.

Re:Unsustainable.

[hyphz]

> They Might be Giants benefitted tremendously
> from years upon years of RIAA-member sponsored
> (or organized) marketing, promotion,
> organization, manufacturing, access to the
> right people, etc... you know.. all that
> actually quite important middleman stuff that
> many slashdotters routinely simply pretend
> doesn't exist or isn't important.

Well, no. It's wrong to say that it's as simple as not being important. The point is, though: it's a racket - the only reason why any band needs it, is because other bands have it.

If no band had those things, there would be no need for any band to have them. Take marketing for instance: if some bands have marketing and others don't, then ones that want to survive have to get it. But if no bands have marketing, then anyone who wants to listen to any music at all has to seek out the music for themselves, which is the only truly level playing field.

Re:Unsustainable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolute Bullshite.

Your logic is based on the notion that there is some market of fixed size for music enjoyment; That the world as a whole has some magic dollar amount that it will spend on music each year.

Sigh - i was going to write more, but what's the point? maybe you'll learn a little basic economics when you enter junior high.

No! is good, see online sampler

[Xtifr]

It doesn't say "children's songs", it says, "for the whole family". I know - that's usually shorthand for "for kids", but in this case, it seems, they meant it. I think it is at easily their best album since Flood, and it might even be better.

Think of the song Particle Man. You could call that a kid's song - it's bouncy and fun, and kids love it. But it's quirky and odd enough to keep adults entertained too. No! is like that, except more so, and it's got a lot more depth and range.

But don't just take my word for it! If you have flash, you can judge for yourself. They have samples of most of the songs at www.giantkid.net. (The CD version of the album also includes a much more extensive version of the same flash game/thingie.)

Pre-chewed baby food

[zenmojodaddy]

Sounds good to me. If more bands take control of their own output like this, that can only be a good thing. I used to think it might just be me getting older, but modern music really is rubbish: it's pre-chewed baby food and has to be, because there's so much money involved in marketing and packaging and lawyers that it has to be dumbed down for the largest possible audience just to make any kind of profit.

What would work even better is if a band's CD also acts as a passport for added-value services on the website - so if you buy a CD, you can also download MP3s, bonus tracks, wallpapers, ringtones and so on from the website at no additional charge. Real fans buy the CD and get extra goodies. Passing fans just download MP3s cheaply and delete them if they get tired of them. Anyone who just wants to check out the band will pick up some MP3s from their favourite P2P network and either buy more or decide they suck, so it's not like the band loses out.

See? No need for DRM if you DIY. I'm in a band myself... if we ever get round to recording anything, that's the way I want us to go. I'm too old to go selling my soul to a record company.

Re:why why why!

[dago]

allofmp3.com someone ?

Nice one

[t_allardyce]

I think they will be pleasently surprised at how many people go and buy their music. But i couldnt find low-quality/30sec previews of their songs, people who dont know them would probably get them off p2p to hear and then just keep the mp3s.

Its a good thing for bands to start doing this tho and thats basically the story of the internet - people making sites out of their basement that become big. CDs are just going to become secondry items to downloading, the record labels hopefully will loose out and go under (all the execs have big crack problems). New bands will start off with a website distribution model and make a bit more money - thats going to make them think twice about signing a contract unless they get a better deal and the end result will be cheaper and better music and less boy-bands which is good for everyone except cookie-cutter wannabes and crack sniffing execs and lets face it - who gives a shit about them?

480000kbs...erm, are you sure about that?

[lxt]

A 48,000kbps sampling rate would make a 60 minute CD take up roughly 172 gigabytes. So it might let you choose what "lossy codec" you want, but probably take you a rather long time to download...

Re:why why why!

[Anonymous Coward]

TMBG would suck ass in any format. Apparently there's not a format out there that's lossy enough to make their shit sound good.

Metallica

[ZxCv]

While maybe not popular here on /., Metallica does exactly what you're talking about. They sell soundboard recordings of every concert in both MP3 and FLAC, usually within 48 hours of the show. For those that care, its here.

From what I understand, just like the service Phish has. I just wish more bands did the same.

Spinal Tap umlaut

[Anonymous Coward]

Not strictly true:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_umlaut

And my God continue to bless the Wikipedia.

Re:My Dad is Dead has been doing this for a long t

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy Shit! Haven't heard MDiD for over 10 years!!
Truely the best one man and his multitrack band out there.

Now if only I could find a mp3 of "Bus Thru The Barrier" by Klaus Flouride, I would be a happy man.

Re:My Dad is Dead has been doing this for a long t

[Anonymous Coward]

there are lots of mp3s from great bands if you look hard enough.

E.g. www.pitchshifter.com

Am I missing something?

[CrazyTalk]

Or is there no "preview" mode. I might be tempted to buy a song or two, but I'm only familiar with a couple of TMBG songs, so I would want to hear what I'm getting first.

a great idea..

[sucati]

but on a side note, they picked an unusual port (8543) to run their secure server. This means a small percentage of users won't be able to use their site.

Re:My Dad is Dead has been doing this for a long t

[Anonymous Coward]

Britney Spears he ain't, but there is so much music by so many bands that the big labels just wouldn't even have the time to even look at so I welcome it.

Change in Venue?

[p_trekkie]

The album "No!" used to be on iTMS, but no longer is. However, it is on their new site. Perhaps They are looking to ditch iTunes entirely?

I'm a what?

[leonbrooks]

Which of us is posting as an AC? And probably from IE, as well? May Mrs Cake join every group or society you're a member of.

Millennium hand and shrimp

[leonbrooks]

Notably Foul Ole Ron. Buggrit. I tole 'em!

Re:why why why!

[Schnapple]

Akin to that, as much as I like alternative formats - my car plays MP3's. My boom box plays MP3's. My DVD players play MP3's (though one also does WMA). I hate it when I download something and it's in OGG or MPC or some other offbeat format. If my players don't support it I'm not interested. Sure, I could go out and re-buy everything and make sure I support whatever wacky formats people devise, but why bother when 95% of the things I need are in MP3 anyway?

So..

[Retep Vosnul]

The statue really got them high !.

nice,

Fairtunes

[KjetilK]

It was tried: Fairtunes did this. It is now dead. It didn't work.

The problem is in fact that however you do it, the costs of making the money transaction in a reasonable reliable way (and Paypal is an example of the contrary) is still so expensive it just isn't doable. I think it is the incredible conservativeism of banks that are the problem.

But I agree with your main thesis: That we need some way to get the money directly to the artists. But the problem is that we, hackers, need to design and implement the system on our own. We can't expect any help from financial institutions, from current distributors, and only from very few artists.

And I don't think a conventional website will cut it. I think it is important that every player (or browser, or whatever), keeps track of what you like for you, and then now and then presents you with a suggestion of what you should pay. Then, the costs of actually paying must be small, which it isn't today (getting any small amount from the US to Norway through the banking system costs about $40....).

who cares..

[Anonymous Coward]

WHO CARES??? THEY SUCK!

"Get flash now you hippie!"

[Hobart]

http://www.tmbg.com/hello.html

(I couldn't find it clicking around on the site, Google helped. :)

TMBG Live

[Control-Z]

If you ever get a chance to see TMBG live, do it! Their live show rocked, unlike their studio recordings, IMO.

This ain't so good...

[dozer]

I paid my $10.00 to download They Might Be Lost just before bed last night. It can download all night, then I have new music to listen to in the morning!

Except that they give you a page with 21 download links on it! That's right: click on the first track, click save. Click on the next track, wait for the save dialog to show up, click save. Click on the third track, wait a LONG time for the save dialog... It's insane.

But it gets worse. Each file wants to be named "tmbg_6134634563543_12.mp3" instead of, say, "12 - Reprehensible.mp3". I haven't managed to download any tracks yet so know about the tagging but, given the file names, I don't expect much...

And, they give you only a six hour window in which to download everything! I was too tired to go through the hassle last night, so I went to bed. This morning, of course, I'm locked out.

You've got to be kidding me. I still buy my music because I believe artists should be paid for their hard work (buying CDs direct from the band in small venues is my favorite). But, let me tell you, file sharing is one hell of a lot easier to use than this site! At least I can download all the tracks at once, have it work overnight, and they're usually named something sensible.

Please contact me when I can click *one* link, then download properly named files. Anything else is just a waste of my time.

Good thing I paid by credit card...

At Last!

[Thedalek]

Now you can have your favorite TMBG music right at your (Say it with me) Finger Tips!

Re:Already up for sharing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah, and I'm sure all the music up for sharing have the permission of the artist to be there..

TMBG Clock Radio

[laard]

You can download TMBG Clock Radio off their site which is essentially a flash app that streams mp3s. I noticed that after listening that the mp3s showed up in my Internet Explorer cache and could be easily saved, no DRM or anything. I did a little searching through the newsgroups and found out the files are served by http and the only security is when the server does a browser check and denies download unless the browser is the flash app. Some sneaky people even use WGET's user-agent flag to download the files directly from TMBG. Probably not legal, but seems like they haven't done much to protect themselves.

They Might Be Giants

[Alexis de Torquemada]

but I've never heard of them.

Stop panicking, willya?

[Medievalist]

Yes, when you enter the non-flash portion of the site there is a graphic of Richard Nixon saying "Get flash you hippie".

Yo, slashdotlings, this does not mean that TMBG's site requires flash! It's just a graphic on the first page of the non-flash section. It will not bite you. Geez, people, get a grip (and a sense of humor).

Best ways to promote this...

[jovetoo]

There are two ways the community can support this.

First, we can actually buy the songs (I have no idea who these guys are though... and I bet I am not alone).

Second, not every musician is a php/asp/(insert favorite cgi language here) programmer or has to money to hire a few to set up a site like this. A open source solution would definitly help.

Providing the platform would also be the best way to ensure a platform we would like.

I've not seen a Stonehenge analog in Discworld

[leonbrooks]

Lots of individual monoliths and small groups of same, even visits to South-American-analog stone temples but not AFAIR an actual Stonehenge. Perhaps we should suggest it to him? (-:

Royal Bunker does this since 2003

[bodoschlecht]

Well, they really are notthe first ones to do this... I programmed this for the Hip Hop Label "Royal Bunker" from Berlin more than six months ago: MP3, no DRM, 192 kBs. There are about 30 of their Albums online at present: http://www.royalbunker.de/bezahltedownloads/ (german laguage)

Re:why why why!

[Coneasfast]

Don't drivel on and on about how much better Ogg is and how mp3 suxx0rs because it's owned by an evil capitalist corporate villain. That won't work.

you're right. it won't work. but i never said anything about who owns what. i don't like vorbis because it's open source, free from patents, etc etc. i like it because it is superior in quality.

Oh yeah totally

[Gordonjcp]

If I'm ripping stuff to listen to in the car, I rip in Ogg Vorbis at -q-1 (yes, quality set to -1). It's about 56kbps. Subjectively it's about as good as ordinary audio tape, and since I'm feeding it into ordinary crappy car speakers, the quality is going to get pretty mangled anyway.