Napster Sociological Observations from the Apocalypse

[Chip McDonald]

As some of you know, I teach guitar for a living.

 

Before Christmas, I would guesstimate maybe 3 in 10 students brought in burned CD's from MP3's off of Napster.

 

Post-Christmas report:

 

That's changed to probably 8 in 10, if not higher. A lot of people got CD burners/computers with Cd burners for Christmas.

 

A *lot*.

 

I predict by the end of the year *everyone* will have them, and *everyone* will be using Napster.

 

As it is, a few school age students have told me that at different schools there's a number of cabals based around kids that will take someone's song "order" for a cd, and produce a custom burned cd for them the next day for $5. That's one pirate-cottage industry that will fall by the wayside by next year...

 

... and I predict second quarter music sales will drastically reflect Napster's impact. I've got a pretty good cross section of people I teach on a regular basis, and I've quizzed them on the subject: it's a pretty ingrained phenomenon.

 

Additionally, *no one* sees anything wrong with it. It falls squarely into the category of swiping towels from a hotel or getting a $10 bill back instead of a $5 from Taco Bell, socially speaking. My sense is that this is a *now* a permanent attitude that isn't going to change.

 

 

THE POSSIBLE UPSIDE:

 

I've blathered about before, half-joking, about the impending Dark Ages of Music. Or - a possible renaissance in awareness of quality.

 

Well, I've noticed something very, VERY interesting in the past two weeks....

 

The song choices overall, that these people are placing on their compilation CD's, are NOT obvious mainstream choices. They either fall into the "classic song" category - which isn't to say merely a "hit" song, but those that have that enduring nature to them; or they're specialized in a genre.

 

A few students have had some VERY curious choices on their cds: kids in their early teens with all sorts of songs from the mid 70's for instance.

 

Another example: a LOT of 80's metal on cd's from kids that, maybe half a year ago, were merely into Korn or Limp Bizkit. Kids that wouldn't be caught dead BUYING a Ratt cd - but have *no social stigma about downloading it off the net*.

 

This is significant. In general, I would say all of my students are much more enthusiastic about music now, AND they're more selective about what they listen to. Most say they don't listen to the radio anymore, nor MTV. This is VERY peculiar in my experience.

 

*They're now listening to the music they WANT to listen to*.

 

Not what MTV is trying to tell them is cool. The act of purchasing a cd these days is a *social* statement for most American consumers: it reflects your "hip" credentials. Downloading music off the net *has not yet been stigmatized by the media*.

 

I'm going to repeat that:

 

DOWNLOADING MUSIC OFF THE NET HAS NOT BEEN STIGMATIZED BY THE MEDIA

 

All of us elitist snobs who have moaned and groaned about the state of pop music and radio, MTV - WE WERE RIGHT. The industry has shot itself in the foot.

 

While the industry has spent the past 20 years turning the act of listening music into an act of popular consumerism, they SHOULD have been spreading propaganda in the direct reverse angle:

 

Dispersing categories.

 

Because as it turns out, people left to their own contrivances have such an oddball non-predictable set of likes and dislikes that if you *really* want them to be excited about music and to REALLY get into *wanting* music - you have to take the governor off marked "cool new music".

 

The way the industry can turn the whole thing around is to foster this angle to the point "everyone" is thinking in terms of being ardent music *lovers*. You make them into considering music as being an *important* thing, enough so that they won't stand for an MP3 if there is a superior replacement available.

 

I know all of the Jaded Industry Types here will dismiss this, but I'm telling you it's not as implausible as it may seem at first nor non-workable.

 

I'm even starting to feel the general bad taste the general public seems to have in terms of music is maybe something of a "Sickness of gimmickry". They're so used to buying something for novel value, or novel promotional value, that their sense of balance regarding what they hear is destroyed. When allowed to pursue what they really, honestly enjoy they turn away from that.

 

So - Napster is going to be an even worse problem in a few months. But I think what's *really* going to throw the industry for a loop is that a lot of people are going to be *honestly* enjoying music for the first time in their lives in the coming months. People, whether they know it or not, are educating their tastes by selfishly pursuing whatever their fancy invokes them to tdecide to download off of Napster.

 

A kid that has engorged himself on Led Zeppelin, vintage Van Halen, Black Sabbath, even Iron Maiden (which seems to have had a sudden underground popular upswing, based on what I've seen?) for a few months is NOT as easily going to be sold a cd consisting of a band that merely plays a massively detuned chord and grunts now and then.

 

BUT - if the major labels use their resources to go back to THE ORIGINAL FREAKING CONCEPT OF THE BUSINESS - which is to FIND UNIQUE AND TALENTED *new*, not GIMMICKY, music - they can pull out of this with some adjustments. People, once they've found what they truly like, feel a connection and a *responsibility* to the artist. They'll automatically buy the new release by that favorite artist when it's released (just as I do); but they're going to be much more finicky about just slapping down $16 for something MTV is trying to push on them.

 

A simple moral concept on the part of the consumer and the distributor of music, but one the industry has to foister itself.

 

I think what will be very telling is when the next Dave Mattews cd is released. Based on my observations of his popularity if there is any ubiquitous artist around today it's him, and one who is downloaded VERY heavily. I think when his next CD comes out it will sell extremely well, due to the nature of how his organization has a somewhat "homegrown" vibe to it: his fans feel somewhat responsible for him. They want him to keep putting *music* out. That will have to be the prototype in order for artists to endure in the future I think, which means hopefully an end to generic manufactured music.

 

Unless I'm missing something.... Otherwise I don't think 2001 is going to be a good year for the corporate music distribution industry.

http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald

[the stranger]

Chip,

That was a nice little article. I will definitely absorb these insights into my views on the subject. You were very smart to have taken advantage of your situation to get this info that would have been difficult to extract in any other setting.

A+

[fet]

Excellent post! As Napster and other programs like it make it difficult to earn a buck off recorded music, the balance will shift in favor of the artists/musicians who are highly dynamic live performers. A higher overall level of performance and sound reproduction might not totally be a bad thing.

 

The live performance experience won't be duplicated and distributed until full-size full-color hologram movies come into being - probably not in our lifetimes.

 

"When one door closes, another opens..." - we just don't know where that door is yet.

[Curve Dominant]

>>Unless I'm missing something.... <<

 

Well. for starters, your control group (guitar students, suburban, middle class) represents a demographic most likely to have the means, motive, time and tech-saavy to aquire free downloads. Napster and MP3 generally help CD sales. It's a great way to sample stuff you may want to buy. The simple fact is that as these kids grow and get bigger school workloads, or get jobs, they will simply not have the TIME to sit in front of the computer all day and night compiling CD's. If you assume that time is money, it is cheaper and more efficient to buy CD's in a store than to do the work of downloading, CD burning, and cataloging. And the quality of free downloads will never catch up to CD's, because the financial incentive isn't there to develop the quality, UNLESS...

 

Yes, the "Industry" has been a big knucklehead on this issue so far, but we live in a capitalist society, where innovation moves in directions that encourage the generation of capital. Hummer Winblad Venture Partners didn't pump $20 million into Napster for charitable purposes, those folks are gonna get paid. We've recently gone through an unprecedented technological earthquake, and free music is pouring through the crack in the ground and coming out of the modems of your guitar students' computers. You don't think that there are armies of high-tech entrepenuers out there, figuring out ways to rig the system so that those kids will eventually have to pay for that stuff? Why do you think BMG jumped in with Napster, out of the goodness of their hearts? What hearts? They see $$$, mah brutha!

[Tom Aragon]

Is Napster going to be charging a subscription in the near future?

I think it will remain popular ( even though not quite as widely used ) when they do decide to charge for the service.

 

 

There are several things the recording Industry should observe from some of this.

 

Most of the younger audience of Napster has no problem in spending 4 to 6 hours of their time in searching out, downloading with high speed access, converting to a Wav or Aiff file, placing the songs in the order of their choice and waiting for a CD to be burned.

 

People are downloading whatever they want to and even if they grab a whole album they are cherry picking the tunes that they want to burn to CD's.

 

They like creating their own compilations of songs and putting them in the order as well as theme of their choice.

 

I think people are really tired of spending top dollar for a CD for only one or two songs they like.

 

These are simply observations I've made and am not stating any for or against type of postition on Napster which is a discussion that's never ending and one I've already participated in a long time ago so it doesn't need repeating on my part anyway.

 

Thanks to Chip for a great insight!

Tom Aragon

[alphajerk]

i give chip an A+ as well. its a cheap business to get into, $99 for a cd burnder now, cd's @ $0.20 a piece, high speed connections making DL times nothing... wow, back in the day when i wanted to make a girl a tape, i had to track down all the tracks i wanted to put on it from friends, now they just search for it in a couple seconds.

 

BTW: its not just suburban middle class kids, walk down the streets of NYC and you can find the uncompressed bootlegs available for a LOT cheaper, sometimes before the album even hits the stores.

[josephandrews.edu]

Napster is definitely a utility to find new bands to buy CD's from, unless you're strapped for cash or in college. Buying CD's is a wonderful experience. Buying a groups' CD is like saying, " i love you. Give me more." You can polish the nice jewel case and meticulously examine the liner notes and caress the beautiful... ok this is getting kinda weird.

 

Burned cd's have no band loyalty

[ST.Morigeaugte.net]

The little I've messed with it, I too find it cheaper just to buy the disc.

 

Ya gotta spend the time to down load and review the selection to ensure you've got a good copy, or even the one that the titles sez it is. Then you have to burn the damn thing. I sit in front of a monitor all day long, it's the last thing I want to do at night.

 

Then there is the issue of storing the data till you do burn it... again not something I wanna load up my harddrive with.

 

The few disc' I've burn are a collection of tunes I really like, but I've gotten burned out do'in the Napster.

 

just my 2cents

 

Mo

[Chip McDonald]

Originally posted by Curve Dominant:

[bWell. for starters, your control group (guitar students, suburban, middle class) represents a demographic most likely to have the means, motive, time and tech-saavy to aquire free downloads. [/b]

 

Hmm. Well, I don't really have a control group, just a sample. Having said that, while you've mis-categorized my entire student body, for the most part they are middle class. Which means they are also probably the largest group of kids that shops for music. As I said, those that don't have the technology directly available to them can get the benefits of it easily enough - certainly more easily now.

 

The cost of the technology is part of the cost of purchasing a computer these days - something that is considered a necessity for a student today. As such, some kids don't have cable modems. One kid said, when I asked him what he did, I got exactly what I expected: "I just grab a couple of songs before I go to bed and let them download during the night". Actually, I would say the mystique of this combined with the game of happening upon exactly what you're looking for heightens the appeal of Napster as well.

 

I stick by what I inferred: effectively most every kid has access to Napster/cd burning right now.

 

generally help CD sales. It's a great way

 

I just got home from - guess what - buying a brand new, official real-deal corporate label globally distributed legal compact disc (the new Enya cd, _A Day Without Rain_)(have to give _Bold as Love_ a rest). I asked the guy at the counter (of a small independently owned franchise) "how's sales"?

 

"Non-existent" was his reply.

 

get bigger school workloads, or get jobs, they will simply not have the TIME to sit in front of the computer all day and night

 

Hmm.. Either you haven't used Napster *or* you *really* use Napster....

 

It takes no time for a kid to pick some songs; they're downloaded unattended. Dragged into the cd writer program - boom.

Probably a total of 15 minutes of conscious thought. Where's the big time investment?

 

Hummer Winblad Venture Partners didn't pump $20 million into Napster for charitable purposes, those folks are gonna get paid.

 

I dunno, that's a pretty "hip/fast" crowd, there's no telling.

 

Curiously, I've noted a number of obliquely connected references in _Wired_ magazine lately related to Napster's financial concern, Hummer Winblad most recently. _Wired_ seems bent on promoting Napterism (there, I proclaim invention of that tense) in general, while curiously running articles on tangential but related things/financial concerns. Interesting.

 

there are armies of high-tech entrepreneurs out there, figuring out ways to rig the system so that those kids will eventually have to pay for that stuff? Why

 

HAHAHAHA! I *know* there are - and I *know* there's a lot of money being dumped down the toilet on that premise. MP3 compression tech is here *now*, it's not going away. There is *always* going to be a way to shoot it across a TCP connection, you can't prevent that without preventing the Net at the same time.

 

Which means the only way it can be annulled is through either a change in sociological philosophy, or by changing the nature of what is being demanded: which is why I think the industry should be making a major push to make DVD 5.1 happen for everyone in cars and homes as the defacto standard and proceed to phase out binaural CD's. Consumers won't care for a higher bit depth/sample rate, but they'll miss not having discrete surround if (and this is the part the industry should listen to) *they're convinced they want it*.

 

They did it with compact discs back in the 80's, they can do it again.

 

do you think BMG jumped in with Napster, out of the goodness of their hearts? What hearts? They see $$$, mah brutha!

 

Nah, they're flagellating in a what they perceive is a morass of possible formats, delivery systems, payment schemes, merchandising options...

 

I predict there will be a day, maybe not for another 15 or so years, when "digital information gurus" will be looked upon with suspicion, somewhat like attorneys. The whole dotcom bubble happened because of unscrupulous technically savvy people convincing many a capital investor to get into the field - even though it was completely oversold.

 

I'm sure BMG has hired all sorts of specialists to advise them. I'm also sure the CEO's of BMG probably aren't computer literate beyond using a spreadsheet. If anyone thinks MP3 *distribution* can be stopped - short of regulating the Net and requiring ISP's to analyze every packet that goes through their hubs/switches - they're misguided.

 

(listening) Ahhh... Nothing like some massively layered and airy authentic cadences and voice leading - sans MP3 artifacts and weirdness....

http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald

[Chip McDonald]

I know I'm apparently shouting into a vacuum, and being a nobody-music composer I'm shooting myself in the foot for proffering these arguments in public (that ultimately would destroy a revolutionary pathway of distribution for my own music in favor of the old corporate distribution model), but...

 

My position has been the industry should relentlessly push discrete 5.1 on consumers: make the standard of music consumption so unwieldy to convey across the Net the Real Thing would be too enticing to ignore.

 

Something I just noticed provides (I think) a good argument for such a position.

 

Right now, I know 3 different ways I can obtain a compressed video copy of the new

Tom Hank's movie, _Cast Away_. Like the kid that is stuck with a phone modem downloading Limp Bizkit songs while he sleeps at night, I could download the whole thing on my cable modem (an admitted luxury) and watch it tomorrow after work if I wanted to.

 

BUT I DON'T WANT TO.

 

Why? Because I know the compressed form will have to be watched on my computer monitor. It will have lossy artifacts galore no doubt. I've never tried downloading a whole film, so I'm not sure of the nature of the capability the Divx format delivers sound wise.

 

*I* want to see it in a theatre on a (relatively) big screen in 5.1, with good old fashion non-ramping continuous tone 35mm film providing the picture, with fully saturated blacks and non-quantized swaths of continuous color.

 

The point being, *I have the option to enjoy the product in a form that is far superior to the bootlegged version*, and I want to take that option (if I can afford it while it's still in a theatre).

 

16/44.1 cd's, while being audibly superior to MP3's, are not *clearly* more enticing. Joe Average consumer needs something obvious like 5.1 as a standard to knock them over the intellect, in order to make the distance from free MP3 as a choice audio medium to "pay for play" as a preference.

 

Hopefully I can rest assured the CD format isn't going away soon so I can continue to make my meager pittance at selling my self-produced product at gigs and so forth...

http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald

[earfatigue]

<

fact is that as these kids grow and get bigger school workloads, or get jobs, they will simply not have the TIME to sit in front of the computer all day and

night compiling CD's.>>

 

WAIT! i'm 27 and time is very valuable. but i'm up for a couple of hours when i get back from the studio with a six pack deprogramming myself from my day. i also have a dsl line and a 12x burner. i could download a whole record in 10 minutes and burn it in another ten, all the while chatting with you fine people.

 

maybe one thing is when a record comes out that i'm digging i buy it so it's not just another maxell blank with some cryptic sharpie scrawling on it. or maybe i like the pretty pictures. or maybe i actually want the artist to get their $0.03 (after label recoup).

 

the thing is, with the exception of well-to-do suburbanites and college students, broadband internet access is not a reality. when it is, well, crap, sony/phillips/etc better come up with something more enticing than dvd-audio quality. notice how there's no portable dvd-audio players (complete with an innertube to wear around your head and a 10" sub driver to tape to your chest), but mp3 portables are doing quite well....

 

i have no answers. but i continue to put up all my new stuff online for free knowing that they'll just have to shell out $8 for the 12" later. (or pay $40 for a dubplate made from an mp3... most would rather wait)

 

judson snell www.slangmusicgroup.com

[Curve Dominant]

>>Buying CD's is a wonderful experience. Buying a groups' CD is like saying, " i love you. Give me more."<<

 

>>when a record comes out that i'm digging i buy it so it's not just another maxell blank with some cryptic sharpie scrawling on it. or maybe i like the pretty pictures. or maybe i actually want the artist to get their $0.03 (after label recoup).<<

 

MP3's will help artists of a higher quality. As a composer and publisher (ASCAP), I would rather see a free Napster. More $$$ in the long run. But I'm not naive about the economic realities. What's hip is that MP3.com has become a "Neutral Country," where its citizens can publish at will, as opposed to Napster, where the composer of the music has no say: that's called "compulsory labor" or SLAVERY, and that's illegal in this country.

[John Sayers]

The only limitations you are refering to chip will not be around in 2 years. Cable is creeping around the world as is satelite transfer.

 

My friend runs the computer dept at our local high school. 1200 kids. Each student gets 20meg free storage space and the school has permanent ISDN internet access 24 hrs.

 

Noones mentioned the CD Copy Programmes, one kid buys it and the rest copy.

 

cheers

John

[Curve Dominant]

>>No ones mentioned the CD Copy Programmes, one kid buys it and the rest copy.<<

 

I hope one of my tracks ends up on some of those mix CDs.

[Tom Aragon]

Originally posted by earfatigue:

i also have a dsl line and a 12x burner. i could download a whole record in 10 minutes and burn it in another ten, all the while chatting with you fine people.

 

judson snell www.slangmusicgroup.com

 

Are you burning CD's of MP3 files?

 

If so then yes I can see you doing it this quickly but if you're backing out each and every track from MP3 to a Wav or Aiff File then it surely must take longer than that.

 

Just curious

 

Tom

[Alndln]

I think in the near future(very near)File formats will change furiously making the "Mp3 to Wav." thing that even idiots have had a good 5 years to master a lot more of an inconvenience for the average joe.I don't totally blame the Industry for Napster,aside from free music they offer have you been to a local Tower or whatever to see what's new?Maybe if the 10 zillion people who think that their artists excused themselves and gave up the rack space for people who are it wouldn't take forever to wade through unbeleivable tremedous excess.Whenever I go to one of these outlets I alway's walk away emty handed with a major headache.My rambling 2 c.

[Chip McDonald]

Re. to cable/DSL requirement:

 

That's not the case. As I cited in my post, many kids have made a habit of picking some songs before they go to bed, which will have finished being downloaded by the time they get up.

 

Re. MP3>.wav conversion:

 

I haven't seen it, but I've been told (via discussions with various people) that there are a number of disk burner programs that automatically make the conversion when you drag the files into the program; and supposedly it does it on the fly. So again - that's not a time constraint issue.

 

 

Curve Dominant makes an interesting point, although I'm going to re-word it: MP3's probably hurt the more "primitive" sounding artists more than others. A person who likes Sting who has a decent stereo is probably going to be less enthused about listening to a bootlegged copy of "Brand New Day" than some punk kid with a shelf-top $150 "stereo" who is into NoFx.

 

http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald

 

 

This message has been edited by Chip McDonald on 01-09-2001 at 01:15 PM

[wormhole]

MP3 isn't going to go away but i think it will get better in terms of quality. and as soon as Napster charges $.01 for anything they will disappear. The next wave of file sharing is going to be something along the lines of Gnutella where you don't have a server just peer to peer file sharing. The Wired article alluded to this and I agree. 5.1 probably won't be enough to lure people away from MP3 since that can be ripped too. This is an issue that will continue to evolve. As the industry trots out new reasons to not pirate the pirates will copy those features. What we really will need is a sense of loyalty to the artist as someone pointed about Dave Matthews. This is a great promotional opportunity. If your song gets a shit load of downloads then it's be easier to market your music to other avenue. And having MP3s on an artists web site will be compulsory soon.

[Alndln]

Mp3's not going away? That's what my uncle said about L.P.'s. Dream on......

[Curve Dominant]

True peer-to-peer systems tend to bog down when large numbers of people start using them. Napster was successful because it was not P2P - anyone could use it. There's a lot of hype about Gnutella, but I personally do not know one person who has successfully used it. Here's some recent posts concerning Gnutella:

 

>>Gnutella is currently in gnots. It seemed like the end of copyrights as we knew it at first, because unlike Napster, it is a decentralized peer-2-peer network. But a funny thing happened when all the Nappyheads ran to Gnutella: it slowed to a crawl. The more people get on it, the slower it gets. Brilliant, eh? First of all, it is not limited to MP3s the way Napster was, so when you send a search for an MP3 it has to look through every other kind of file for it, and most likely it will time-out before your search is complete. Searches that produce no results, which are increasingly common, are due to bottlenecks on the Gnutella network. These bottlenecks are being caused by a couple of reasons in addition to bad code writing in the client software. If user A makes a request for a file from user B, who is offline, the software sends a "push" packet broadcast to all the other computers connected to user A instead of routing it back to where it came from. This lack of routing and pushing when the host is offline contributes to more than 50 percent of the total traffic on bad days. So much for the Gnutella revolution.<<

 

>>Another factor in the failure of Gnutella is the fact that a disproportionately larger number of users "take" from the network than "give." One study I saw in the NYTimes On The Web found that something like 90% of the files on the network are posted by only 45% of the network users, which bogs down searches because so few files may be found among an artificailly larger database, which results in effectively 45% wasted, or "futile," searches.<<

 

Gnutella also lacks other traits that made Napster a hit: a sleek graphic user interface, clever marketing, a catchy name and logo, and a $20 million cash infusion by Bill Gates, Ann Winblad and John Hummer.

[Chip McDonald]

Originally posted by wormhole:

MP3 isn't going to go away but i think it will get better in terms of quality.

 

I think we have already met diminishing returns in terms of the math involved with the compression. A lossy algorithm is never going to produce/reproduce the exact same input file.

 

and as soon as Napster charges $.01 for anything they will disappear.

 

*Napster* may disappear, but not MP3's.

http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Chip McDonald:

I think we have already met diminishing returns in terms of the math involved with the compression. A lossy algorithm is never going to produce/reproduce the exact same input file.

 

No, but we will undoubtedly get faster Net connections and more bandwidth with time. And I don't doubt that entirely new types of compression algorithms will be developed too, which compensate in some fashion for data loss. Also MP3 PLAYERS will probably improve, introducing the equivalent of oversampling to make up for lossy compression, etc.

 

--Lee

[Alndln]

WMA is already a little better and Sonic Foundry's new format(forget the name)is supposedly even better than that.I'm just surprized Mp3 as a format lasted even this long.I suppose it will serve the Industry as a way to boost thier sales of back catalouge through Napster though.

[Chip McDonald]

Originally posted by Lee Flier:

No, but we will undoubtedly get faster Net connections and more bandwidth with time.

 

I don't know... The costs to bring a bigger pipe up someone's front yard is significantly more expensive than just getting it to the street. I can see cable modem bandwidth becoming ubiquitous in a year or so, but I don't think anything faster (fiber optic) will make it to a home-by-home basis. There's not enough demand for it. Maybe 25 years on the other side of the complete saturation of the market with HDTV and maybe they'll need to upgrade their cable... I know there's breakthroughs being made in light switching technology, but I'm not sure if the current system(s) cable companies use are geared to accept such a thing without going through an existing light>electron hub?

 

Of course, if that happens, it's all over.

It wasn't until last year that we got cable modems here in Augusta Georgia; I'd be very surprised to find the mass availability of a residential optical connection prior to 2020, even with the cost breakthroughs just last year in optical switch engineering. There is a local cable company that has already laid fiber throughout the whole town, but it is already stressed to capacity in some places; given what they had to go through (and how they've totally disrupted things in some parts of town), and the costs for an independent company to try do the same thing I don't see that happening again anytime soon.

http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald

[Curve Dominant]

The cool thing about MP3's is that they sound like AM radio. I'll never forget the thrill of hearing one of my tracks over the net for the first time. All that came across with any clarity was the groove and the vocal tracks, and it was bumpin'. MP3's will always be classic delivery vehicles for songs, just like vinyl.

[Anderton]

For the first time since I went to Europe a couple months ago, I missed a day of checking into the forums because I was getting a semianr ready for MacWorld.

 

So I'm sitting in a hotel room in San Francisco, sign on, and find this thread.

 

WOW. Very, very, very thought-provoking. I'll join the chorus of folks giving Chip an A+.

 

I'll add one more thing. I think that Marshall McLuhan was really a prophet -- it's important to remember that the medium is also the message. There's an element of, well, craftsmanship and/or ritual (take your pick) in finding songs on the net and burning a CD...it's the mix tape phenomenon. I think people miss that with CDs.

 

With vinyl, you had to lift the needle to play cuts, flip the record over, clean it... there was an element of ritual there too. I think something people don't like about CDs is that the element of ritual is missing.

 

Napster has restored that.

 

You all are the best, I love reading what you have to say...I go through withdrawal if I miss it for a day!!!

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Chip McDonald:

I don't know... The costs to bring a bigger pipe up someone's front yard is significantly more expensive than just getting it to the street. I can see cable modem bandwidth becoming ubiquitous in a year or so, but I don't think anything faster (fiber optic) will make it to a home-by-home basis.

 

Heehee... guess you haven't heard about the wireless networks that are under development. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif They're not ready for prime time yet, but I predict within 3 years they will be.

 

Didn't know you were in Augusta Chip; I'm in Atlanta and have a good friend who's from Augusta, an engineer now living in Nashville.

 

We oughta hook up sometime!

 

--Lee

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Anderton:

WOW. Very, very, very thought-provoking. I'll join the chorus of folks giving Chip an A+.

 

Wow, I just realized that although I've raved about Chip's post in OTHER threads and even on other forums, I haven't done so here. I give it the Post of the Year award so far. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

I'll add one more thing. I think that Marshall McLuhan was really a prophet -- it's important to remember that the medium is also the message. There's an element of, well, craftsmanship and/or ritual (take your pick) in finding songs on the net and burning a CD...it's the mix tape phenomenon. I think people miss that with CDs.

 

With vinyl, you had to lift the needle to play cuts, flip the record over, clean it... there was an element of ritual there too. I think something people don't like about CDs is that the element of ritual is missing.

 

Napster has restored that.

 

Great point. It sure has. This is something that maybe all the market researchers overlooked. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif And I disagree with everyone who says it takes a lot of time. It doesn't. I use Napster all the time and it takes no time at all to find what I need, and once I've downloaded it, burning a CD takes maybe 15 minutes. I don't have to be here once I set the CD burn going, nor do I have to be sitting in front of the computer during downloads.

 

Granted I have a cable connection, but I know lots of people with extremely slow connections who don't mind leaving downloads going overnight. We're not all just kids either - I'm 37 and I love Napster, and lots of the people I "meet" through Napster are my age or older. There are even people in their 60's and 70's placing historical records that are out of print on Napster, which otherwise you would never be able to find. That kids are randomly stumbling over some of this stuff and getting turned onto it is wonderful. You can't see whether a fellow Napster user is 16 or 60, what kind of clothes they are wearing, how much money they have or what color they are. All you know is they love music just like you, and you want to hear it.

 

I agree with Chip too that the stuff most people download is out of the ordinary. I have both mainstream stuff and more "underground" stuff on my drive, and what people download from me is nearly always the more off-the-wall, or hard to find stuff. That is all very encouraging to me, especially when I see what the mainstream industry has turned itself into of late. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

 

--Lee

[alphajerk]

i must say with mp3, the power is missing in the cd's burned. which is why i try to buy the real thing if possible.

 

btw: i know in NC they are pushing in the legislature for complete state high bandwidth connection by 2003. i have fiber optic right down the road from me and im in bumfuck [of course i dont have my DSL YET DAMMIT!]. i also know that the railroad lines have signed major deals for use of their right of ways with big fiber optic companies that WILL allow fiber to be laid in its natural mass network connection. it funny how the past is now colliding with the future.

[tonemonkeyyahoo.com]

Some observations from the lunatic fringe...

 

First, from your lips to God's ears Chip. Anything that would drive a stake into the heart of the music business as we know it would be a good thing.

 

Ethics and Napster. I used Napster a lot for a few months primarily to get some out of print back catalog material that I couldn't buy anywhere at any price. Shame on the labels for not making their entire back catalog available in MP3 format and selling it at a modest price (25 cents per song). I guess it's easier to whine about people ripping you off.

 

MP3 sound quality. One of the reasons I've stopped using Napster is the proliferation of badly converted MP3s (usually with Real Jukebox). I've done lots of critical listening comparing MP3s to .wav files created from a source CD. Honestly, if you use a quality converter (e.g., AudioCatalyst, CoolEdite) and your sample freq and resolution is high enough (at least 44.1K and 128 bit, respectively), I don't hear much difference. I do hear some difference in the midrange (MP3s sound more transparent to me) and (very) rarely some aliasing in the highs. The latter is unacceptable - I usually resample to get around it.

 

As a purist, I will concede that *any* difference is bad (i.e., loss of fidelity). However, I have never personally created an MP3 file that in any way equates to "AM radio" fidelity. Honestly, I've found much more pronounced differences between vinyl and CD examples of the same music. Many, many of the early AAD CDs did an abysmal job of converting the source material - fast and dirty were the marching orders of the day. Some are so bad I can't listen to them (e.g., Jeff Beck "Rough and Ready").

 

So long Napster... these days, I'm getting my source material in the form of used CDs. Even if a disc only has one or two decent songs on it, if I can get cheaply enough, I'll rip those songs to MP3, then resell the disc.

 

Message to record labels: Wake up, people will pay *something* for quality MP3 files. You should figure out a way to make it worth my while to buy these from you folks rather than the underground used CD market. I estimate that I pay between 50 cents and $1 per song to copy it from a used CD. Price your content accordingly and I'd be delighted to see you and the artist get paid.

 

Speaking of artists... wouldn't hosting of back catalog material actually benefit a lot of artists who aren't deemed important enough to reprint their CDs?