PDA

View Full Version : Online Music Formats: Death to WMA


daved
30 Jul 2003, 03:53 PM
I've only been involved in a couple crusades, but with the emergence of Buymusic and labels rush to wma format I've decided it's time to speak out:

Just say no to Windows Media files. Especially the free ones (yeah, I know that includes almost every major label band's freebies).

There's no reason to caution people against buying the drek being sold by buymusic.com, but I'll take just a second to skewer it with authority: the files don't sound especially good (compared to AAC), and come with so many restrictions and so little flexibility that they are truly worthless. Speaking as someone with a library of 3000 or so files (all legit, thank you) on my computer and iPod, I can say with reasonable certainty that no human being can or will ever keep straight the scope and range of deals that apply to these files. Which ones burn, copy or play is a total crapshoot, making rational use of your legitimate purchases difficult to impossible. Most sensible users will figure this out when they click into buymusic.com the first time and see the row of confusing rights-management icons and simply pass. But, if you actually USE digital files in your daily life, you don't need to waste a single second at buymusic.com. Move on. This place is empty.

The real danger is the WMA freebies. You know, the files all the labels are suddenly offering you for free. Be afraid. Be very afraid. They're a trojan horse to a dark, silent future.

If you download these files you send a message: I'm willing to take it deep and hard, allow me to hold my cheeks for you. You're signing onto a deal between devils: major labels and microsoft, in collusion to ultimately control how and where you listen to music you buy. If they find no resistance to this format, and see downloads increasing, they'll use that as evidence to support their bad ideas and unamerican plans (the RIAA and MPAA have perverted the legal concept of "fair use" and "copy rights", twisting them far away from the original intentions).

Windows Media was designed by lawyers, who built restrictions on every concievable use for your into the files themselves. While this isn't a bad thing in and of itself, it is a radical shift from the compulsory and blanket rights structures of conventional media. There is no precedent or rationale, other than fear, for this change.

Every time you download a WMA file, you're voting for a bad format, and against your own rights. When you install the Win Media Player 9 on your computer you're not just saying NO to your present and future rights. You also write off open standards and rationality in the music industry. Your continued downloading of these files sets a bad precedent, assuring your children will never be able to enjoy or use music as you do today. The world will be a grayer, duller place if Win Media files become the standard.

When you see the Win Media logo on music, just say no. No matter how good the song or how great the artist, resist.

Don't stop there. Spread the word. Let people know that it doesn't have to be this way. AAC/MP4 is a rights managed open standard that protects artist and fan equally. It's implementation is being fought tooth and nail by the record industry and Microsoft... indeed this is a Cage Match for the ages!

Say no to Win Media. Screw them before they screw you and generations of fans to come. We are writing the book for the new century... lets turn the page on the ignorance and fear that have defined every major label foray into online delivery so far. Don't even look at those files, and for god sake, don't buy the junk being sold on buymusic.com (it's a really offensively lousy deal compared to the alternative offered at iTunes Music Store... if I were a wintel user I'd be furious that they took me for such a fool).

-d-

PS: If you're waiting on iTunes for Wintel, don't hold your breath. The majors are sticking it to Apple since it's been successful, holding out for a model more like Buymusic where THEY control price, and set it 20-30% higher and deliver music with rights-grenades minus the pins. When buymusic flops (either going belly up or selling less than iTunes to a market that's 30X bigger), they'll come around and others will replace them with good files at a fair price, provided the market forcefully rejects the entire winmedia initiative.

karmapoint
31 Jul 2003, 07:45 AM
Here Here....

The other thing that scares me about music formats is that everyone buying at that apple store is telling big business that consumers will buy "crippled" files that cannot be used as the consumer sees fit.

Basically, if i'm going to pay for a digital music file.... I want to be able to burn it to cd and play it on any of the 5 or 6 machines I use throughout the course of my personal and professional life.

I'm going to try to stick to MP3 or Ogg Vorbis... to my knowledge no one is hiding anything in the compression scheme and I can do with it what I want.

RichmondVA
01 Aug 2003, 02:00 PM
So basically when Apple refuses to play ball with Windows and tries to funnel you towards Macs, that's okay but when Windows does it it's wrong?

Screw iTunes. They don't have any technology no one else has. All they have is a service whereby I can download songs. It's a nice service, but I don't appreciate their attempt to leverage that service into forcing me to choose an operating system. In essence, they're hijacking an open standard for their own use.

Screw iPod too. I'm not spending an extra $150 on an mp3 player because it looks cool.

The Sheck
03 Aug 2003, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by RichmondVA
So basically when Apple refuses to play ball with Windows and tries to funnel you towards Macs, that's okay but when Windows does it it's wrong?

Screw iTunes. They don't have any technology no one else has. All they have is a service whereby I can download songs. It's a nice service, but I don't appreciate their attempt to leverage that service into forcing me to choose an operating system. In essence, they're hijacking an open standard for their own use.

Screw iPod too. I'm not spending an extra $150 on an mp3 player because it looks cool.

Well, itunes is coming for Windows by the end of the year, so you can stay on there w/o being forced to choose...

The ipod right now is the best Hard-Drive based mp3 player on the market, if you're worried about cost you can always go to a refurbished dealer and buy a previous generation for cheaper. This way, you can still look cool and still have cash in your wallet. ;)

daved
03 Aug 2003, 10:00 AM
Originally posted by RichmondVA
So basically when Apple refuses to play ball with Windows and tries to funnel you towards Macs, that's okay but when Windows does it it's wrong?

No. You missed my point: Its implementation of products and rights management that concerns me, not platform. I'd not care a whit if Winmedia were being sold with a single rights package. One price, one deal. Or, if buymusic.com offered AAC files and ate Apple's lunch, I'd be ecstatic (I make music to be sold and enjoyed, not locked into crippled files and ignored).

Do you honestly believe you could manage the rights of a 2000-3000 song library where every song has a different combination of capabilities? Microsoft and the major labels do. They're both nuts.

Line up a mix CD, press burn... DOH! 3 songs lack CD rights. Start over. Line up a playlist for your mp3 player (iPod or otherwise)... DOH! Can't move 2 of the songs in the middle to the player. Start over. Try to back up your library or move to a new hard drive. DOH! Half the library won't move, ever. Much of the remaining half can't be restored. This is fubar, no matter which platform.

Secondarily, while Winmedia is ok for streaming off a 56K modem, it sounds like squealing monkeys at cable/DSL speeds. Compared with MP3 it stinks. It's not even on the same page with AAC (which is more musical than MP3 in terms of artifacts... no monkeys at any rate).

Screw iTunes. They don't have any technology no one else has. All they have is a service whereby I can download songs. It's a nice service, but I don't appreciate their attempt to leverage that service into forcing me to choose an operating system. In essence, they're hijacking an open standard for their own use.

You're wrong that they don't offer anythign different. If you want to buy legitimate music that protects your PERSONAL fair use, they offer something radically different. There simply is nothing else like it. Buymusic.com fails to deliver on many levels (mentioned in the original post and above). Another key difference is streaming technologies: preview quality of AAC is better than Winmedia, so from the artists perspective, the "showroom" is more aesthetically pleasing. This actually matters when trying to decide which of 3-4 versions of a track you want to buy.

You're wrong that they are forcing you to go to an OS. Apple's had iTunes for Wintel ready, but the major labels are refusing to sign onto the deal. Apple would like nothing more than to open the Music Store to the other 97% of the market that doesn't have macs (they're a corporation and they like making money as much as Bill Gates). Apple's been trying to launch the windows store, but the majors simply won't accept a $0.99 price (they love buymusic and $1.29 they get for major product there, and want to restrict your use of files more than Apple is willing to accept).

And you're completely off base thinking this is a platform issue in the first place. AAC/MPEG4 is NOT an Apple format, but a standard from the Motion Picture Expert Group encompassing the work of many companies. Unlike SACD or WinMedia, AAC royalties don't flow to a single company, or even largely to a single company (ie Apple isn't getting rich when you use a codec that sounds and works better than Winmedia).

AAC will play on any computer on any platform. Winmedia only plays on windows machines. AAC is an international standard that is technologically and economically superior model to winmedia. This is unarguable.

The only reason we have to argue about this is that MS has chosen to make Winmedia a major label wet dream. In the process they've made a frankenstein that is actively user hostile.

I'm all for rights management. I want the online music business to grow, and form a new market. This won't happen as long as legitimate product is inferior to easily stolen warez in every manner. MP3's beat Winmedia in quality, price, delivery mechanisms, ease of use. MP3s beat AAC in price only.

The adoption of Winmedia by labels for free files is setting the industry back 3-5 years. They're trying to hook labels on more of the same crack they've been smoking for the past 10 years. From a business standpoint, this is brilliance on MS's part.

Its disaster for the music industry. It's very existence allows them to set up a half-assed service (buymusic) offering crippled files to rationalize wholesale legal actions, scaring millions of users, and further alienating legitimate fans.

Getting MS out of this game is key to developing rational systems that more directly connect artists to fans. More middlemen, offensive and confusing rights deals take us farther from the real solutions. MS is counting on fear, uncertainty and doubt to drive labels to their self destruction...

...a more cynical observer might wonder if MS has an eye towards replacing the labels they kill. Or rather, the labels enticed to commit suicide through their own greed and desire to unethically control customer's fair use rights.

Screw iPod too. I'm not spending an extra $150 on an mp3 player because it looks cool.

Sure... I can appreciate your values here. Choice is always good. We're at a wierd place in that market right now, with iPod simply defining a feature set that others are already following. Some players offer recording capability for less money than an iPod. Get what works for you and don't sweat it.

I'd argue that the extra money is for looks (hard disk size, battery life/form, big ram buffer are the obvious differences), but I think there are many better options for some users.

Anyway, RichmondVA, I think you're confusing the issue. The only "leverage" being applied here is by the major labels and MS. You're confusing the message with the messenger. Lets clarify:

Winmedia 9 (the one the majors love) is a technology developed entirely by one company, available only on one platform. All royalties go to MS who exercised total control of implementation and development. There can be no 3rd party Winmedia players without the MS winmedia engine.

AAC/MPEG4 is a technology that's evolved from a successful line of open standards, developed by many companies, available on every platform. Royalties flow in many directions, invisibly relative to the consumer. Apple has no control over it's implementation and development whatsoever (Dolby and Sony get a much bigger chunk of this pie). Anyone can make a player or even a codec!

OGG is IMO equally good in many respects, but never intended to deliver music for sale, and thus not really relevant to the question at hand (format to safely deliver legitimate content with consideration to user and creators rights).

Of the current realistic options, AAC does the best job of balancing the interests of creators with the legitimate needs and applications of fans. You are confusing Apple's adoption of this format (and it's superior delivery system) with the file format itself. They are two completely different things.

Forget Apple, iTunes and iPod. Even without Apple, AAC is far superior to Winmedia in every objective way. From a consumer/user or musician's perspective it's absolutely no contest. Winmedia is a DMCA-powered cancer on music at large (not just the industry), designed mostly to extend MS domination to the music space, not improve user experience or sell music.

This isn't hard to understand... just visit buymusic and browse for 5 minutes (paying attention to the "rights strip" and price tags). Listen to the files: MP3 from Winamp sounds better than Winmedia from WiMP at the same data rate, and OGG and AAC sound even better (packing down a file with protection affects the space available for carrying music). In terms of sound, price, ease of use, WMA is a turd, and a particularly bad smelling one.

I won't argue platforms with you, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on the qualities of the products themselves, since that's the real issue here.

-d-

RichmondVA
03 Aug 2003, 11:20 PM
If it's a question of pure codecs, then yeah I agree with you totally. WMA sucks. mp3 is great and in fact I think a well sampled mp3 track is close enough to cd that most people don't care. Ogg/Vorbis and AAC just up that even further. And the fact that they are platform free and OGG/Vorbis is open standard is even better.

daved
04 Aug 2003, 06:43 AM
Well, then we're on the same page after all, Richmond.

AAC, unlike OGG, is not a political hot potato: it affords digital rights management labels crave, but it's a sane, nearly invisible approach. But like OGG it sounds good and smashes down real good...

AAC isn't a struggling upstart either. It's well funded and enthusiastically backed by the consumer electronics industry. MP3 is supported by demand, but AAC is there by design. It's not a dark horse candidate for the title, but one of the two main contenders.

That's why it's so crucial to reject WMA at every opportunity. If a band with WMA's gets 50% fewer downloads for the same number of page hits, it sends the right message. If you just take whatever they put out there, you're feeding the music industry's delusional myopia. They truly believe in WMA. Not because it sounds better, or downloads faster or previews better or generates more sales (it fails on all these counts)... because it screws the consumer harder, and makes shiny plastic more attractive!

Think about it a minute: the formats chief benefit is that it makes you like CDs more. How is this good for online delivery? Well, it's not. That's the whole point.

Just say no.

-d-