Slashdot Mirror


The Death of the Music CD

Rick Zeman writes "According to the Washington Post, the next new music format will be...no format. From the article: 'What the consumer would buy is a data file, and you could create whatever you need. If you want to make an MP3, you make an MP3. If you want a DVD-Audio surround disc, you make that.'"

45 of 483 comments (clear)

  1. Sound's Great... by yotto · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...Until they DRM it every way but sideways.

    1. Re:Sound's Great... by LourensV · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, that may not be so bad. The reason that policy issues like extending copyright or introducing DMCA/EUCD-like laws are so hard to decide in 'our' favour is that nobody cares. And the reason for that is that these laws aren't enforced all that much.

      If Microsoft really cracked down on Windows piracy, many more people would consider an alternative. GNU/Linux can compete with Windows on price and freedom to help your neighbour, but only if people actually are forced to pay for Windows, and kept from sharing proprietary software.

      Indie music that is sold on reasonable terms (unencumbered CDs or DVDs, non-DRMmed Ogg Vorbis or MP3) or distributed under a Creative Commons licence that allows redistribution can compete with RIAA music on ease of use (i.e. pay once, listen anywhere), but only if the RIAA's restrictions are enforced.

      I say let them DRM the hell out of everything. Hundreds of millions of people and the whole open counterculture that's come into being in the last decade versus the powerful media conglomerates. I think we'll win.

    2. Re:Sound's Great... by kenthorvath · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I say let them DRM the hell out of everything.

      Sure, just don't legislate DRM making it illegal for me to use the product the way I want. Make it a challenge, but don't put me in jail for coming out on top.

    3. Re:Sound's Great... by EpsCylonB · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It will take more than DRM to safegaurd digital media. The problem is the existance of formats that don't have DRM, as everyone on /. knows you only need to break the DRM once, convert it to a non DRM format (say Ogg Vorbis) and then the cat is out of bag. It's foolish to think that Microsoft and the media companies don't realise this, which is where TCPA comes in. Their ultimate goal is not to allow a user to access DRM media on any device that also lets the user encode or decode non DRM formats.

      The repurcussions of this are that in the future we may see normal PC's and media PC's become seperate markets. The media companies won't allow you to download or play a DRM media file on a normal PC but they will on your **AA company approved media center PC.

      The future could be very bleak for the computer as we know it.

    4. Re:Sound's Great... by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You know, when I bought groceries the other day, I went back to the store to tell the store manager that it wasn't a cash transaction that had occured at all, but in fact I had actually entered into a contract with him. He had implicitly agreed to this contract by allowing his cashier to take my money. He was pretty steamed about it all, but I just had my attack lawyers rope him up while I appropriated his car, home, and wife, as the terms of our implicit contract unambigously state are now mine.

    5. Re:Sound's Great... by Marvelicious · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My question is... What format will the datafile be in?

      --
      Send whiskey and fresh horses!
    6. Re:Sound's Great... by kenthorvath · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The "product" is a licence, that is, a contract.

      Sorry, but a physical disc is not a license. Does anyone here know what types of things can actually be licensed? Can Mars Incorporated license me a Snicker's bar under the conditions that I won't share it with my friend?

      Certain types of things do seem to be licensable. As far as I can tell, it seems that intellectual property and other things that a person has exclusive rights to can be licensed. That is, they can extend those rights to someone under the terms of a license. However, there are also first sale rights that come with the purchase of a product, such as a CD. I have the right to burn it, destroy it, or do whatever else I want with it as the owner. That includes shining a laser onto it and reading off the reflected beam.

      I don't think anyone would argue that I have the right to read what's on the disc, license or not. It doesn't seem like the type of thing that is licensable.

      In fact, if it were, then there would not be a need for the DMCA, because breaking DRM would have already been illegal. But, it appears that it was not. It required legislation to forbid such behavior.

    7. Re:Sound's Great... by cyberformer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why should such a licence not be enforceable? Why should you not be liable for breaking the contract?

      Several reasons:

      1. I may not actually have read it or agreed to it. With software, you often need to buy the product before you see that what you are purchasing is actually not a product at all, just a license. Will music be any different?

      2. I don't have the opportunity to negotiate it. The contracts are written by the lawyers for big media companies, and are deliberately one-sided, often containing terms that are not even legally enforeable.

      3. Advertising (particularly for DVDs) frequently tells me that I can "own" content. If what I am really buying is a license, this is deception and fraud.

      4. I may be a minor. In most jurisdictions, people under a certain age (usually 18) cannot enter into legally binding contracts. These people make up a large proportion of the target market for games, music and (especially) music.

    8. Re:Sound's Great... by Znork · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Copyright law says that you need permission from the owner of the copyright for those bits, and that allows that owner to set the terms."

      Eh, no. Copyright law says you need permission from the owner to copy those bits. Once you purchase them, you hold all property rights and can do whatever you wish with the bits, except copy them, as the right to copy them is taken from you and given exclusively to the author for the duration of the copyright term.

      Take some time and read up on the first sales doctrine, and dont mistake intellectual property for physical property. The 'property' in 'intellectual property' is not the product itself, it's the right to prevent others from exercising their own right to copy their property. The fact that someone owns the _copy right_ should not be confused with the ownership of the _copy_.

      That said, DRM is a grey area and the lobbying propaganda usually tries to argue that it's only intended to stop illegal copying, which would fall within the legitimate realm of a copy right. However, we all know that is not the case; DRM usually expands far beyond that exclusive realm, and tries to control what devices you can play things on, where you can play them, when you can play them, etc.

    9. Re:Sound's Great... by kenthorvath · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're definitely correct. And Microsoft agrees with you. Last year I decided to sell my copy of Office 2000 on eBay. It is a retail-box version, which is not tied by an OEM license to any hardware.

      Unfortunately, I have misplaced a few bits and pieces of the box it came in. I was ordered by the eBay authorities to delist my copy of Office. Owning the CD, with the jewel box, the CD Key, even the user's manual, does not 'license' me to that copy of Office.

      Yes, but your inability to sell your copy of office on eBay is an eBay policy, not a legal issue. If you stood on the street corner and held up a sign that said "Office $10", then you would be within your rights (zoning restrictions, tax law, and all other business regulations not withstanding) to sell your copy of Office for $10.

      It does not necessarily follow from that, however, that another user is entitled to execute the bits that are on the CD, if it is in violation of the click-through EULA that he must agree to to continue using it. But EULA's are another story, and quite seperate from the issue of whether music CD's are licensed.

    10. Re:Sound's Great... by AlexTheBeast · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does it really matter?

      You can always bring everything down to *.wav and then convert it to whatever you wish.

      Converting DRM protected WMA files to WAV (and MP3s)

    11. Re:Sound's Great... by bluGill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Small correction: copyright law does not allow you to do whatever in all situations. You cannot publicly (which generally means charge money) show a DVD, even though you bought it. You cannot play a CD at your place of business (this might have changed in the last few years) I think there are a couple other exceptions which are generally designed to charge businesses extra money without interfering with people.

      Of course if you have any questions or MIGHT be coming close to some such situation you need to see a lawyer.

  2. IOP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Newsflash!

    Not everyone in the world is a nerd.

    Keep things simple. Buying CDs are simple. Hence, people will buy CDs.

    1. Re:IOP by TekMonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Millions of people download music and movie files from P2P networks. They know how to play an mp3, and how to burn it to a CD; I'm sure they will be able to figure out how to do this too.

    2. Re:IOP by nkh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even though I'm a nerd, I refuse to buy "binary data sent over the internet". I demand a physical CD I can carry home and play in my car, computer or any electronic device I have. When my hard disk can crash or refuse to work, I'll never have problems with my CDs for the next 20 years (I just have not to walk on them...)

      OTOH, buying CDs is simple while they are not crippled with DRM. When 100% of the new CDs are sold with spyware-hidden-macrovision-drivers, people will understand what the word DRM means and maybe switch to another media.

  3. No..format? by NorthWoodsman · · Score: 5, Funny

    So in other words, the format is WAV.

    --
    1p}{ 1 sp34k |33+ +|-|e|\| p30p13 \/\/il| 8e i/\/\pr3553|)
  4. I doubt it by magefile · · Score: 3, Informative

    I mean, at first glance, I thought: "hey, this is a great use for FLAC". Then I realized that because FLAC takes so much CPU time to decompress, CD players that could play it don't exist (if they did, they'd be more expensive). Just give me a standard CD and I'll rip it myself, thanks.

    1. Re:I doubt it by tuffy · · Score: 5, Informative
      I mean, at first glance, I thought: "hey, this is a great use for FLAC". Then I realized that because FLAC takes so much CPU time to decompress, CD players that could play it don't exist (if they did, they'd be more expensive).

      FLAC actually takes very little CPU power to decompress; less than MP3, certainly. But they only compress to about 50% so a CD full of them could only hold two albums instead of one, which isn't gaining a whole lot. So I tend to leave my FLACs at home and convert them to something lossy to take with me.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    2. Re:I doubt it by toddestan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It takes a high end 486 to a Pentium to decode MP3 files in the x86 world, yet there are MP3 players that last a long time on a single AA battery. All that someone would have to do is create a dedicated FLAC decoding chip.

    3. Re:I doubt it by tuffy · · Score: 3, Interesting
      All that someone would have to do is create a dedicated FLAC decoding chip.

      That's probably overkill. FLAC decoding is all integer ops so you could do it on some cheap ARM chip without any problem. The ease of it is likely why FLAC is already supported on various bits of hardware.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    4. Re:I doubt it by BossMC · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But they only compress to about 50% so a CD full of them could only hold two albums instead of one

      I used FLAC for a while, and I found that it compressed rock to about .75 of original size, and G'd up thuggin' west coast gangsta rap to .60 of original size. I assume that rap compresses better because it has much more redundancy, that is, "wut wut wut" and some bassline will compress better than your everyday rock song.

      In terms of cpu draw, I found that ripping a CD was not CPU bound when using FLAC, but limited to the speed of the cdrom drive. Even still, PC cdrom drives can process the audio off of a CD on their own (See grey cable) which is a testament to how little processing raw PCM data must take.

  5. read between the lines by ErichTheWebGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sounds good on the surface. But this is only another way for them to force DRM down our throats to the point that we have no other choice but to either accept it or not buy music. My choice? Not buy music...

    I'm also willing to bet Microsoft conveniently has patents on whatever technology would be proposed to "secure" the digital file.

    --
    bash: rtfm: command not found
  6. ".no" format? by FlunkedFlank · · Score: 3, Funny

    poor usage of an ellipsis in the submission ... I read it as ".no" format, thinking ".no" was some kind of new file extension.

    1. Re:".no" format? by Zycom · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's what they really want to give us. .no copying, .no sharing, .no moving, .no ripping, .no burning...

  7. Shoot... by Avyakata · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now indecisive people like me will be completely immobilized...

  8. m ... i don't know ... by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A file format will _allways_ have to be involved, even what this people call "no format", will be a format, raw audio is also a file format, The point is that raw, uncompressed formats are not really very usefull to transfer over the net, compression is fundamental, unleast you want to remix it, or do some quality job over the audio, in which case, you need the full, uncompressed, high quality original, people will want a compressed, small format.

    ALMAFUERTE

    --
    WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    1. Re:m ... i don't know ... by OverlordQ · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nah, they'll just throw out random bits and call it music, atleast that's what they do nowadays

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  9. I read this, and it occurs to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The music industry would *LOVE* to get rid of the music CD, so I see this as a trial balloon.

    CD's are great because they have really good quality music in non-DRM format.

    Keeping the CD's lets you rip to whatever new format or device that comes along.

    Think it through...CD's are the consumer's best *and only* friend in the music business right now.

  10. what will it be next week? by DuctTape · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I'm starting to get a little weary of these, "The Death of ..." articles. It'll happen when it happens. Or is it that the authors are hoping that the thing whose turn it is to be dying will die of this quasi-self-fulfilling prophesy?

    Is there a place in my preferences where I can turn off viewing "Death of ..." articles?

    DT

    --
    Is this thing on? Hello?
  11. RIAA by MagicDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The death of the CD will come from RIAA tactics. Leave aside their random lawsuits of 80 year old grandmas, the reason people will stop buying CD's is because they are made to pay $20 for 15 tracks from an artist when only 1-2 of them are good. Back in the day when LPs were popular, you could buy a disc with just the one song you wanted. Now you're force fed tripe from the industry pushing their flavor of the month, big breasted, tiny brained, diva wannabes. Why would I want to pay $20 for a Jessica Simpson CD when there's maybe one track on there that I might like. Much better to be able to pay a buck and get the one song I want and put it on my Rio. That's actually another point, media size. When's the last time you've seen anyone walk around with a discman?

    1. Re:RIAA by kasek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      if you pay $20 a cd, you are buying them at the wrong places. If there are only 1-2 tracks you consider 'good', you must not care for the artist too much, so why buy the CD in the first place? I can't think of any CD i have bought recently where I didn't enjoy the entire CD.

      if you are buying the flavor of the month pop garbage, it's your own fault for contributing to the studios coffers, so they can have someone new on the lineup next month.

    2. Re:RIAA by LocoSpitz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Back in the day when LPs were popular, you could buy a disc with just the one song you wanted."

      Well, as long as it was the single.

      "Now you're force fed tripe from the industry pushing their flavor of the month, big breasted, tiny brained, diva wannabes."

      No you're not. The industry has always promoted the artists it thought would sell big, regardless of quality. If you're too damn lazy to look for music that you like, that's your own problem. There are hundreds of CDs released each week, and any good music store has hundreds or thousands of CDs available for purchase. If you go online, you can purchase just about any CD you want. Quality music publications are available both online and off and are filled with reviews of a variety of albums. Take advantage of these resources and find music for yourself instead of complaining that the music industry is still promoting easy to sell artists after all these years.

  12. Proof of ownership by MiKM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The nice thing about owning the CD is it gives you proof of ownership (unless you physically stole it).

  13. If that means better sound quality, great.... by slithytove · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but, so far, all the major only music distribution has been in formats inferior to cd (probably all of it started out as the same bits as the cd release).
    I buy loads of music, and have a reasonably high-end computer-as-transport, headphone rig to listen to it. But I've yet to buy a single track online because of the quality issue (and drm). I buy and rip around 10 cds a month. Its a pain in the a$$ for me to find the music that suits my eclectic taste in CD form and then rip it to .flac. I'd pay a little more than the cost of a cd to download the .flac out of a vast library including all the stuff I want and have yet to find. And it would cost the distributor far less as well.
    If we could buy stuff in whatever format the artist wanted to output it in (pre-mixing/rendering even (opensource music)), the last remaining desire to have hard copy would be nullified for me:)

  14. A New Type of Store... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    That'd be pretty cool...

    To prevent the industry (CD Retailers) from going entirely bankrupt though, perhaps the CD stores (current ones) could instead become "customizing stations", in which customers could request certain songs and have a professional (label, case, everything)CD made for them. Sure you could do it at home, but couldn't you always order a CD from Amazon? And since all the shop would really need is a burner, access to a database of songs, and a computer, it could be as small as a stall!

    From the way I see it, the CD Retailers will:

    A) Go out of business...

    B) Take their shop online!

    C) Merge with an existing online retailer (most likely)

    D) Do the CD creation for customers by downsizing their shop to a music stall (in the mall).

  15. Fine as long as lossless by PrayingWolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Fine, as long as they still sell the lossless version for the same price as the lossy compressed one...
    and to me even a high quality mp3 is lossy.

  16. Re:No format by Ingolfke · · Score: 5, Informative

    MP3s lose information due to their compressions scheme. So if you converted from and MP3 to OGG to WMA you'd end up with file missing all of the information from each round of compression. Using a lossless encoding format, like FLAC or WMA Lossles, would allow you to copy to whichever media format you prefer.

  17. Wrong, wrong, wrong.. by adeyadey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most ordinary people like the idea of buying something "real" - they will even collect the CDs/LPs of a band (sometimes buying the same recording again) just to have a complete collection. The most famous cover artwork is also a factor, an item people like to own, and have on their bookshelves. The old 33 LPs were superior in that regard- have a look at the prices people are paying for certain old vinyl LPs on ebay..

    MP3/downloads-type purchases will saturate out at a certain level - the general public will always go for the "real thing", which will probably still be CDs for the forseeable future..

    --
    "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
  18. Times change by __aadkms7016 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The habits of "most ordinary people" change with the generations. Many people still alive in the US remember when horse racing, boxing, and baseball were the three major sports that "most ordinary people" cared about. Today, only baseball hangs on to that claim ...

  19. Wrong by Donny+Smith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    >The music industry wants to give us LESS and charge us MORE.

    A tipical /. comment appropriately modded insightful. At the same time it's completely wrong.

    Because all the music industry has rights to their content, there is nothing to "give you*", so it's stupid to claim they want to give you LESS.
    * For example, they can simply allow you (i.e. make it legal) that you can keep downloading shit via P2P networks. They even don't need to provide download service as the content is mostly out there on the Network.
    Do they want to charge more?
    As profit-making enterprises, they should be trying to charge more, which is no problem if they offer disproportionately more in return. If you're currently a net-thief (i.e. you steal more than you buy), you'll pay "more" if you buy everything. Folks who pay for all their content will probably pay (relatively) less than they do now.

    >They're not going to give us more.

    They don't care - they can give you use-rights to everything they own as long as you pay more. For example, if you approach a studio and offer them $10K in cash for "all you can see" I believe they'd accept it as they know they now squeeze (say) $3K per lifetime per customer of your traits. The fact that the average $3K customer sees 1,935 movies for those $3K and you'd see 24,292 titles for your $10K is of no importance whatsoever.

    The article is correct in saying that the format of the future is no format at all but not because you buy data (and convert it any way you want) but because you buy use-rights to a song and you don't even need to own the data.
    Music can be played someplace else and delivered to your earphone's via GPRS phone or DSL.

    1. Re:Wrong by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Folks who pay for all their content will probably pay (relatively) less than they do now.

      You mean like what happened with the switch from the (relatively) mechanically complex and expensive to manufacture cassettes, to the mind-numbingly simple and cheap CDs?

      Hmm, does $4-$9 in 1980-dollars equate to $12-$25 in 2005 dollars? At 2.5% inflation per year, it doesn't even come close. Bummer.


      A tipical /. comment appropriately modded insightful. At the same time it's completely wrong.

      A tYpical **AA apologist comment modded insightful. At the same time it directly contradicts historical evidence.

      Tell me, do you guys really believe this crap, or do you just post it as a form of trolling? Or do you all work for the **AA and they actually pay you to betray the rights of your own species to your soulless corporate masters?

  20. Magnatune already does this by JawaSpot · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The online music store Magnatune already does this.
    From the FAQ:
    When you buy music on Magnatune, you can download the music
    in a variety of formats -- and you can download all the different
    versions you want.

    There are 5 major formats availabe to buyers:

    44k/16bit WAV: zip file of perfect quality WAV files.
    FLAC: zip file of perfect quality FLAC files.
    OGG: zip file of high quality OGG files.
    128kb MP3: zip file of 128kb MP3 files.
    MP3 VBR: zip of high quality MP3 VBR files.

    In addition, you can download individual songs as either 128k
    MP3s or WAV files.
    Other nice things about Magnatune are:
    • You can listen to every song all the way through (in streaming 128kbps mp3) as much as you want before buying
    • You decide how much you want to pay for an album, and exactly half of your money goes straight to the artist

  21. Re:Random thoughts by otis+wildflower · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With electronic distribution, there's a tempation to distribute cut-down copies to save bandwidth (even allowing for more modern codecs). If I've got a pressed CD from a company, I can tell there's a certain minumum.

    Fair nuff, though any decent content download system would provide different bitrate versions of the same content. Audible does this, for example, giving you the choice of bitrate/format when you download audiobooks.

    The point being don't spend forever telling me how much you love your music if you're listening to it on crappy mp3s, ripped god knows how, at 192, on ear phones that use cone drivers.

    To a point, you can definitely cheat with good speakers though. Personally, I prefer Klipsch, best value for money IMHO. OTOH IANAA, and in fact I have a mild case of tinnitus which drowns out the cost-asymptotic 10-20% of difference between a good CD hooked to a clean amp and Klipsches and serious high-end componentry.

    Not to mention the portable and automotive experiences really lend themselves to good economical performance. For multi-thousand-dollar aphile componentry to be worth it you really need to own and control the soundstage (even with headphones you need a good quiet (preferably soundproof) room). In a car, that kind of spending is just silly: there's plenty of good-enough stuff at reasonable prices.

    Then again, I tend to be a price/performance freak. I'm not the type to typically buy the most expensive/fastest CPU, vidcard, etc.. I buy the best balance at the time which offers the longest service life possible.

  22. Re:Random thoughts by danila · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1. MP3 is a standard too. It plays on all computers, all digital players (except the few old Sony players that noone bought), many cellphones and portable game consoles. And I bet that CD didn't become the standard it is today overnight.

    2. I won't trust you, because it was proven time and time again, that audiophiles lose their ability to distinguish 128 from 192 and CD from MP3 as long as the testing is blind. 128Kbit MP3s are good enough for more than 90% of the people. And the latest OGG/AAC/WMA/MP3Pro are good enough for 99%.

    3. That doesn't work. You are not an authority figure, so there is no reason to repeat after you anything. We can all think for ourselves and it is obvious that you can buy an album digitally just as you can buy a single track. In fact, right now I am playing an album (5 albums, to be more exact) and it is in MP3 format. BTW, I am quite happy that I don't have to change CDs...

    4. You can't piss people off with that. We will just pity your stupidity. You can eat your placebos as much as you want, of course, but everyone else knows that there is no way to tell iPod playing MP3s from your super-dooper $3k device playing 48bit DVD-audio or whatever else, as long as the testing is done blind.

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  23. They sure have a difficult time understanding by Simonetta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They sure have a difficult time understanding that the old 20th century way of buying music is pretty much over.

    The old way being you pay them 30-50% of the hourly minimum wage for a three to five minute recording on a stable physical medium.

    They keep squeezing their heads to come up with new ways to keep this old form of business going, but it's fading every day.

    The new music transaction format is much different. There is a completely different amount of music that the consumer gets for the same amount of money.

    Now you buy an old hard disk that has 10 to 100 Gigabytes of MP3 or OGG compressed format audio of hundreds of albums in a certain genre or era of music. Some of it you keep, some of it you discard, some of it you will never listen to, some of it you pass on to others, some of it you alter, sample, or mix, and some of it you never know who the artist is.

    Of course, you don't buy or trade these old hard disks full of unknown music from the music industry companies. It's not their business model. They couldn't even conceive of selling music in this way. They are doing everything that they can think of to actually put people in prison for selling or tranactioning music in this format.

    But it doesn't matter. There has been a fundamental change in the nature of the distribution and storage format for audio in the past ten years. The music industry, which is a contradiction of terms in this new era, will have to come to terms with it.

    Our terms.

    One last thing, guys, don't put anyone in prison for listening to music. It will have long term nasty consequences, even including bloodshed when the penality for copying and listening to illegal music begins to approach the penality for kidnapping and killing music industry executives. And it won't stop or change the transformation that is happening in the entertainment industry. the new technology is a marketing challenge, not a criminal act that requires inprisonment.
    We'd like to think that you won't let all this tough talk and macho posturing about putting people in jail and conficating their life savings for listening to music get out of control. But, frankly, we're losing our confidence in your ability to think rationally.

    After all, it's only rock'n'roll.