backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 44 comment(s) - last by emboss.. on Sep 23 at 11:02 PM

Music publishers make a play for new physical music format

For most of recorded music's life, delivery was tied to a physical medium of some sort. Physical formats included the vinyl record, cassette tape and the CD many of us still use today. With the advent of the digital age and digital music, the physical medium for music is a dying breed.

The lack of interest in physical media for music has led to sharp declines in profits for music publishers. Most every music publisher sells digital tracks today, but the profit margins on digital music are much slimmer than what music companies see on CDs and other physical mediums.

Today, some of the largest music publishers in the world announced that they are backing a new physical music format that they hope music lovers in the digital age will embrace. The format is called slotMusic and is nothing more than MP3 tracks stored on a microSD card. Many mobile audio devices from MP3 players to mobile phones can use the microSD format.

The format will allow users to purchase digital tracks without needing to have access to a PC or internet connection. To hear the music on the slotMusic cards would require no software or passwords, the tracks are DRM-free as well. Tracks would reportedly be encoded at up to 320 kbps in MP3 format.

"slotMusic offers consumers an immediate, tangible, and high quality alternative to CDs and digital delivery," said Danielle Levitas, vice president, Consumer, Broadband & New Media, IDC. "This year, more than 1.2 billion mobile phones will ship globally, outstripping portable media players by nearly an order of magnitude - and this trend is accelerating."

One significant detail that the backers of the new physical format have yet to announce is the price of slotMusic cards. The card themselves are nothing more than standard 1GB microSD cards. If music publishers try and sell them at a premium simply for the microSD card the format will have a tough road ahead.

Another big potential problem for the new format is that the top music player on the planet -- Apple's iPod -- lacks support for microSD. The iPod alone accounts for nearly 60% of all music players on the market. Another huge potential issue for the slotMusic format backers is that programs like the Nokia Comes with Music plan are starting to gain momentum.

With music fans being able to buy a phone and get all of the music they want free for a full year -- from the same publishers that are backing the slotMusic format -- the future doesn't seem very bright for slotMusic. Sony Ericsson is also going to offer music phones with unlimited music downloads.

On top of portable devices with free music, the fact that the iPod doesn’t support microSD coupled with the fact that the iTunes store is the largest music retailer around, overall slowing sales of music is another factor to contend with.

Music based video games like Guitar Hero and Rock Band are fast becoming one of the preferred music buying formats. A perfect example is Guitar Hero: Aerosmith, the game massively outsold the latest Aerosmith album. Even established bands with significant followings like Metallica are realizing that playable tracks for music-based games are potentially one of the best formats for music distribution available today. Many credit the renewed popularity of Metallica to Guitar Hero and Rock Band. If the slotMusic format isn’t doomed from the start, it certainly has some major hurdles to overcome.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Or....
By quiksilvr on 9/22/2008 12:32:58 PM , Rating: 5
Just accept the fact that physical media for music is dead and make DRM free mp3's the standard at high bit rates and low prices. Otherwise expect piracy to continue.




RE: Or....
By theplaidfad on 9/22/2008 12:39:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Just accept the fact that physical media for music is dead


I guarantee you that if I were to poll the 100+ people I work with, that 80% of them buy CD's. On the other hand, if I worked with a bunch of geeks and nerds, it would probably be 80% the other way.

I do not disagree that physical media should be dead, just thought I would point out that it is indeed not dead.


RE: Or....
By Staples on 9/22/08, Rating: -1
RE: Or....
By hellokeith on 9/22/2008 5:25:20 PM , Rating: 1
Staples,

Wish I could give you a 5. Pirates are pirates regardless of the market. They claim free speech, privacy, and all other kinds of wacky unrelated things in order to support their illegal/immoral/unethical practices (of which they are well aware of their wrongdoing).

Also, you will always see them posting negative comments about progress in the area of legal-and-paid-for digital media distribution, because they know it becomes more and more likely they will be discovered, sued, fined, and possibly jailed under valid laws they know they are breaking.


RE: Or....
By Ryanman on 9/23/2008 12:33:08 AM , Rating: 2
ah, too bad you're wrong. I pirate certain amounts of music for a couple reasons
1. One hit wonders (or any rap song) - why pay 15 bucks for a single track? not me. Sorry dude, that's a total rip.
2. DRM - had a blast this weekend spending six hours trying to dig up working torrents for myfairplay after one of my clients lost his ipod and had 12,000 ACC files on his backup hard drive. Thanks apple, you guys are a bunch of asshats. I hate your hardware, I hate your software, I hate your arrogance, and I can't stand your music service.
3. Artists - I'm tired of everyone sitting in multimillion dollar houses whining about piracy. "but wait ryan, what about the poor workers are record studios?!?". Get a grip. We all know they still get full salary.

Does this mean I pirate everything? Absolutely not. I got a couple great Anberlin songs recently - around 9 to be exact. Realized that supporting a decent band wouldn't hurt me and I'd get higher quality music. To date I've bought 10+ albums after being a pirate. Maybe I just want to give my money to people who deserve it.


RE: Or....
By wvh on 9/22/2008 6:13:15 PM , Rating: 2
I would buy more CDs if they were cheaper. Especially if they'd be directly from the artist. I just can't stomach paying more for 3 CDs than for a CD player. I have to listen to a lot of music just to find something I like.

It's not uncommon for a CD here to be priced around 20 euros (about 29.5 dollars). To me, that's just too expensive for the few times I listen to it – I would never have found all the great underground bands I enjoy if I would have had to buy all the crappy music I've listened to on the way. And the radio is no help, thanks to those very same record labels pushing bland non-music. The music industry itself is failing in delivering the music the listener wants or might want.

This whole industry needs to reinvent itself pretty urgently (add my voice to the choir)... and this is not it.


RE: Or....
By Spivonious on 9/22/2008 12:50:59 PM , Rating: 4
Why would I trade uncompressed digital audio in a convenient package for compressed mp3s? Plus, I like having something physical. Heck, I'd prefer vinyl but it's impossible to find these days. Once you've heard vinyl on a good tube stereo system, everything else just sounds plastic.

And did you just say that $1 per song is expensive? You need to get a better job.

If record companies really want customers back in the stores, then they need to make CDs $10 or less. Every time I go into the record store I see a few albums that I'm interested in but know nothing about. I'm not shelling out $15-$20 for something that might be total crap. I have, however, impulse-bought $10 CDs many times.


RE: Or....
By amanojaku on 9/22/2008 2:03:02 PM , Rating: 2
I like the idea of getting individual tracks since most CDs aren't worth the polycarbonate and aluminum they're printed on. $1 per song is a fair price, too, although some songs (e.g. like Beethoven's 6th Symphony) can be an album all by themselves.

There's nothing wrong with compressed audio; the problem is lossy audio vs. lossless. You can get a lossless compressed track. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless#Audio But, yeah, vinyl is nice. I want to try out one of the laser turntables. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable


RE: Or....
By Hare on 9/23/2008 12:37:27 PM , Rating: 2
There's nothing wrong with lossy compression. People always complain about MP3 saunding bad but in an ABX-test people can't differentiate a CD from a well encoded MP3 (decent encoder and bitrate >256 vbr). I'm an audiophile and have a few grand stereo set but at least I'm able to admit that MP3 and AAC tracks sounds great. It's just that most people listen to 128kbps radio rips or use their motherboards analog output.


RE: Or....
By quiksilvr on 9/22/2008 6:24:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, $1 a song is too expensive for a 128 kbps mp3. $1 for a 320 kbps mp3 (a quality that is near indistinguishable to CD except maybe at high midranges) that comes with CD front/back cover art and official lyrics is a much better idea. Frankly I think 128 kbps is disgusting and it should at least be 192 to make it remotely good.

Besides, the world isn't made up of Amazon and iTunes. There are many sites that let's you download mp3s for a $0.25 (granted its 128 kbps and at rare occasions higher bit rates but you get what you pay for; can't say the same for Amazon and iTunes).

If you are a collector and/or like something physical I'm not going to bog you down for it. All I'm saying is that the music industry needs to start making the transition to high quality mp3s at reasonable prices otherwise piracy will continue. And who knows? Maybe they will eventually have 640 kbps mp3s that will outclass CDs and even compete with vinyl LP (I know that Vinyl LPs are amazing when ideal but are much harder to keep in mint condition than digital data).


RE: Or....
By Spivonious on 9/23/2008 10:02:47 AM , Rating: 2
If you had a decent stereo system you would easily be able to tell the difference between any bitrate mp3 and the CD.


RE: Or....
By Hare on 9/23/2008 12:40:48 PM , Rating: 2
Complete and utter BS. Plug your computer to an external DAC and do the same thing with your CD player. If you can tell an MP3 (320kbps vbr) from a CD original in an ABX test you have better ears than 99.99% of people.

Btw. I have a decent stereo system and have been a hi-fi enthusiast for quite some time.


RE: Or....
By Xerstead on 9/23/2008 3:00:13 PM , Rating: 2
I disagree with the 'easily' in your statement. But as most people do not have a high-end music system it's not such a big issue.
Most people downloading will be listening to the tracks from their PC, walkman or car. None of these compete in sound quality with a good home stereo. Functionality and ease of use is more important. Providing the sound quality is 'good enough' the majority will not complain and will pay for it.
I do see the need for higher bit-rate files for those, including myself, who have a higher expectation of what constitutes 'good enough'.
Playing mp3s from my PC sounds the same as playing the CD from my PC. This is not quite as good as playing the original CD through my stereo but it still sounds much better than any of the any of small-mid sized, and most full sized, stereos I've listened to. (Auzentech X-fi Prelude via digital coax to my home cinema kit.)
I do also like having somthing physical for my money, but the stack of plastic discs in the corner of my room is too big already. The flexability of playlists without having to change disc every time wins the argument for me. Back-up is easy as 1 DVD takes up less space than 100 CDs.


RE: Or....
By comc49 on 9/23/2008 1:41:46 AM , Rating: 1
cd have better quality then vinyl and for me i dl 10-15 new songs a day so $1 per song is too much for me


RE: Or....
By Spivonious on 9/23/2008 10:01:24 AM , Rating: 2
Your opinion doesn't count because you steal the songs anyway.


RE: Or....
By DASQ on 9/22/2008 2:47:36 PM , Rating: 2
While I agree, I do like having the box with the pictures and whatnot. Just to line my shelves.

Of course I'd rip the CD the first time I used it, and it would then be back in the box for the rest of eternity.


yet another MP3 market
By crleap on 9/22/2008 2:45:33 PM , Rating: 4
I. Refuse. To. Ever. Pay. For. Compressed. Audio.

EVER.




RE: yet another MP3 market
By AnnihilatorX on 9/22/2008 3:01:55 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. The only benefit CD has over online distribution is the loseless quality benefit, and album bundles.

You invent a physical format without those, you are doomed.


RE: yet another MP3 market
By emboss on 9/23/2008 11:02:43 PM , Rating: 2
I don't get the hate for lossy compression. It lets you use the space that is otherwise basically wasted for something useful.

For example, CDs are 44100 samples/sec, 16-bit, stereo. That's 1411 kbps. I'd much rather be using that huge bitrate for higher-quality audio that's been compressed. You could easily do 96 Ks/sec 24-bit audio, or 5.1 surround (~235 kbps/sec per channel is heaps; for a reference point the 5.1 audio on DVDs is usually ~75 kbps/channel) in that. Either one would sound better than straight CD audio. The only thing going for PCM is that it's easy to build a physical player.


RE: yet another MP3 market
By achintya on 9/23/2008 3:58:53 PM , Rating: 2
Hmmm.. What if the same compressed audio comes in a lossless format? Maybe even a higher quality than offered by a CD? 5.1 surround perhaps?