Slashdot Mirror
Warner to Sell Music on DVD
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Warner Music is planning an aggressive attempt to replace the CD by pushing consumers to buy their music on specially outfitted DVDs, the Wall Street Journal reports. It's music to the ears of some struggling retailers who seek a new physical product to re-capture some of the online (and file-sharing) market. 'As a retailer I'm going to be holding on desperately for any compelling physical product,' said Eric Levin, who owns two independent stores called Criminal Records in the Atlanta area. 'So the introduction of a new format...is cause for excitement.' More from the article: 'But there are some stumbling blocks that may discourage consumers from embracing DVD albums. The new discs would not play on normal CD players, meaning consumers could not simply pop their new discs into their car stereos or other players. And users would not be able to copy the main audio mix onto their computers. On the proposed DVD album, the main audio mix is to be protected by the same software that already protects the content on normal DVDs.'"
Well now, that doesn't sound like too compelling of a physical product at all, now does it?
For those that didn't RTFA, supposedly the DVD would contain pre-ripped, lower quality versions of the song on the disc, but not actually allow you to rip the high quality versions of the song to your computer. Well, not legally, anyway.... And it doesn't say what the format of those pre-ripped songs are, either, though it could very easily be assumed that they are DRM'd as well. If they are, it probably wouldn't be iPod compatible, either, so honestly now - remind me again what the point is in them wasting money on a product that's doomed from the start?
A community-oriented lyrics site
"the main audio mix is to be protected by the same software that already protects the content on normal DVDs"
...
I was not aware that DVDs where protected... hum
The current DVD encryption algorithms are SO EFFECTIVE! How will ANYONE manage to get around this? All teh warez are dooomed!
How to use coral cache: http://slashdot.org.nyud.net:8090/~oscartheduck
If this were to succeed and CDs were replaced with DVDs, online purchase of music for download would skyrocket because at least those songs can be put on their MP3 player.
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
And thus these discs will not sell. Well, that was easy. Next question?
Here, boys and girls are the two reasons why this system is doomed (and why it's obvious that Warner hasn't figured out how the consumer and the pirate think/work)
1) the main audio mix is to be protected by the same software that already protects the content on normal DVDs
So much for stopping piracy.
2) The new discs would not play on normal CD players, meaning consumers could not simply pop their new discs into their car stereos or other players. And users would not be able to copy the main audio mix onto their computers
And there goes consumer interest as well.
If SACD taught us anything, it's that consumers don't want to re-buy their collection, or replace their favorite stereo just for a minor difference in quality. It's just not gonna happen. There may be a small uptake, but the majority of consumers will say "Doesn't work in my stuff? Well then why bother?"
The real litigious bastards...
Capitalistic Humility is the virtue of selling what the customers want to buy, not what you want to sell. Seems WB forgot that. It is obvious why this format will be better for WB and the music industry in general. The only drawback is that it sucks for the customers, the people whose money the music industry wants.
They seem to be like Ford prior to the attack of the Japanese car manufacturers or Apple before the release of Windows 3.1. Complacent, expensive, and sure there is no other alternative for the customer. It might be a good idea to short their stock.
-- Support a free market in the field of government
When I walk around town, I see people with digital music players everywhere, so I doubt I am the only person who does this. Changing disks every album, and not having a random shuffle mode is simply not a convenient way of listening to music. I didn't listen to nearly as much as I do now when I had to change discs periodically; I would listen to an album and then stop.
This is a step backwards.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Should read:
"Warner to Offer Music on DVD"
that they just don't get it. This will sell exactly as well as DVD-A (which is probably what it is) and SACD. There isn't a big enough improvement to justify having to buy new players and probably have to buy the CD twice so that normal people can listen in thier cars and such. I have 4 devices that can play DVD-A, and 0 that can play SACD. Well, maybe 2 for SACD if it works in computers, I don't remember on that one. I have a dozzen or so that can play CD-A. Even those I don't use much, preffering my iPod.
.50 for 64K MP3, to $1 for 160K MP3/AAC, to maybe $1.50 for FLAC, I know I would be all over that. But the files have to be in the format I need, MP3 or FLAC so I can convert to whatever I want, and they need to be unencrypted. That's the online service I would use, and it's the online service people WANT. You could even set it up so that the user could say "I have an iPod" and it would default to AAC. A legal service like that would get slashdotted in minutes with people wanting to give you thier money.
Not to mention, that most bands seem incapable of putting out a GOOD CD, so I end up only listening to 30% or less of the music I paid for in the first place. So now I can't just rip the songs I like onto my computer for burning to MP3-CD mixes and my iPod. That interests me how? Oh yeah, it doesn't.
I mean really, who wants this? The 1% of music listeners that we call "audiophiles"? MP3 is good enough for most people, so better sound isn't going to sell more shiney plastic things. Think about it, what do people clammor to pay for? Easy, convience. Make it EASY TO DO WHAT THEY WANT IT TO. This is so amazingly simple. Apple is the closest of the legal providers to "getting it". iTMS is fast, easy, and the restrictions aren't bad enough that it bothers most people. I still don't use them for the same reason I don't use DVD-A and SACD, I have a dozzen devices that can play MP3, I have 4 that can play AAC, encrypted or not. The point is, I recognize I may be a minority in that case and see the value for users.
Personally, the best I have seen is AllOfMP3. Yes, they may not be legal, however, thier system that allows you to choose the encoding format and bitrate is "the way it ought to be" (tm). Those who are happy with MP3 can have it, those who want FLAC have to pay a little more, but they have have it. You OGG lovers can have yours as well. I think the music industry should buy AOMP3, charge a little more, and call it a day. If I could have a legal download in any format I want starting at, say,
Yes, some people would share some music. Reality check, people do that now and they aren't going to stop. If you make it fast, easy, and reasonably cheap, it's eaiser for me to just get on the site and download from you directly. Perhaps the files could be wattermarked? I don't know. I do know that if I were using AOMP3 a lot, I wouldn't bother to ask friends and family if they had a song, I would just go get it myself.
As for physical retailers, have a setup where people can come in and download songs to thier devices. People don't want to have to go to the store all the time to get things like music. Deal with it. But if you have something like this, people can drop in and grab a song they just heard on the radio or something. Or perhaps retail music is dead, will anyone really miss it?
Ah, right. So it's absolutely nothing to do with the fact that (here in the UK) HMV and Virgin can charge anything up to £17.99 (approximately $30) for some of their single CDs then? Likewise, the fact that record companies/stores price-fix CDs of 30+ year old recordings (say those by The Beatles) at the same (or higher) prices than new releases is irrelevant, is it?
The CD is getting old and tired
No, what you really mean is that the likes of Sony keep making a total "pigs ear" of trying to apply DRM to the open CD format so now you want we consumers to buy all of our music again on a new format that also takes away our "fair use" of the music we buy.
As a retailer I'm going to be holding on desperately for any compelling physical product.
As a consumer, a "compelling physical product" is one which offers good value for money. Perhaps you should consider some price reductions as part of your business strategy?
offer content through a breadth of products to meet consumer needs.
Ah, so consumers *NEED* more restrictive products, do they? Correct me if I'm worng but I don't see too many consumers hammering at the doors of Sony demanding more DRM...
But the capacity of both the CD and DVD sides of DualDiscs is limited compared to normal CDs and DVDs.
Fantastic! So on the *new* format, I can have twice as many Jessica Simpson videos, twice as many out-takes from a bunch of self-indulgent musicians or albums which are twice as long filled with double the amount of boring filler tracks! Brilliant!
Warner is not proposing any generic name for the new format, beyond simply "DVD album".
Can I suggest "Get Our New Audio Disc, Suckers!"? Or GONADS for short?
But there are some stumbling blocks that may discourage consumers from embracing DVD albums.
No shit, Sherlock! And those stumbling blocks are the price, the price and the price.
The DVD album would include "preripped" digital tracks of the entire album
Ah, now I see. So instead of my dowloading free software to rip my CDs myself at an encoding level to what I deem appropriate for my playing device and my listening pleasure, you're going to do it for me, are you? And presumably you'll reflect the fact that you've done this for me in the price of the product also. Wow, life gets better...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
The music industry doesn't seem to have realized that the Compact Disc is just too good a (physical) format. Consumers are happy with the quality of the sound reproduction (even though the dynamic range being used is fractional thanks to today's editing style), and there's a MASSIVE infrastructre built around the medium.
There is no future in physical media. The movie business might be realizing this with the whole Blu Ray/HD-DVD debacle, and the music industry should be watching those download vs. physical purchase statistics, because they're tilting further and further towards digital distrubution.
I expect my next car stereo to have a Type A USB socket on it, so I can plug in a flash drive, or an iPod, or whatever else the TECH industry (not the music industry) comes up with.
You can make unprotected AACs right now. And if they make protected AACs (Apple's exclusive), they're going to have to use a single set of keys, which will be pointless anyhow, because they'll have to give the keys out to anyone who buys the DVD. And if you have the key to one, you'll probably have the key to all of them. So why bother? Just use MP3s, which most consumers understand, now.
Someone else said it very well: CDs are just too good.
There has always been a trade-off between convenience, reliability, and quality. For many decades, records (in one form or another) were the consumer cusp of this triad, although not as convenient as some (cassette and 8-track) nor as good as others (reel-to-reel). CDs came along, and provided truly superior quality, a high degree of reliability, and were very convenient. The CD was and still is a very nearly perfect physical format for consumers.[1] Really, there's no need to replace it with anything, and that's what really worries the recording industry. The only format that will successfully supplant CDs is a non-physical format, and they still haven't figured out how to sustain an entire industry on that. Thus, they keep coming out with new physical formats to delay the inevitable.
The sad thing is that they're looking for sales hooks, and know that they're not getting them. The sound quality is already flawless, the convenience is as good as it practically gets, and so they're adding 'features.' Two-channel classic recordings remastered to 5.1, video clips, and now bloody RING TONES? I don't think they're really that stupid, just desperate.
Ah well. Good riddance to yet another crappy format.
[1] Yes, I know, the CD format has a ton of little flaws: Flawless sound is difficult to achieve in 44kHz/16bit, the plastic scratches too easily, some CDs rot, the cover art isn't big enough, the CDs aren't small enough, etc. etc. But it's close.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban