# Download Music



## megabyte (20 Feb 2007)

Can I get a few  good sites that are not to expensive for downloading music,to a i-pod for my kid;
M.


----------



## wavejumper (21 Feb 2007)

[broken link removed]
all sorts

https://www.beatport.com/
mostly dance

http://bleep.com/
dance and whereabouts 

the last two do not use DRM as far as I know.


----------



## Ballyman (21 Feb 2007)

www.allofmp3.com as close to free as you can get.

www.limewire.com actually free!! (Need to download limewire software)

EDIT: Both of the above are legal sites but may not be 100% legal, depending on what you are actually doing with the music and your morals!!


----------



## extopia (21 Feb 2007)

Bear in mind that limewire sharing is not legal. Whatever about the legality of downloading the music, you will not have any ownership rights to the music you actually download. The limewire software is also a notorious spyware magnet!

allofmp3 is cheap but not legal.

Most of us can afford a few cents for downloading the music legally so why not do the right thing?


----------



## ClubMan (21 Feb 2007)

I thought that _Limewire _sharing *may or may not *be illegal depending on what's shared? Doesn't the installer pop up a dialog asking you to confirm that you will only use it for legal transfers?


----------



## wavejumper (21 Feb 2007)

As far as I'm aware most of these Russian mp3 sites (like allofmp3.com) do not pay the copyright owners, meaning the artists don't get squat for their music.


----------



## lucylou (21 Feb 2007)

we got a virus in our pc after using limewire


----------



## ClubMan (21 Feb 2007)

megabyte said:


> Can I get a few  good sites that are not to expensive for downloading music,to a i-pod for my kid;
> M.


Is it an _Apple iPod _or another manufacturer's _MP3 _or digital audio player (_DAP_)? Just that I have heard people use the term _iPod _generically for *all *_DAPs_.


----------



## Sn@kebite (21 Feb 2007)

extopia said:


> Most of us can afford a few cents for downloading the music legally so why not do the right thing?



you sound like you work in the music industy



ClubMan said:


> I thought that _Limewire _sharing *may or may not *be illegal depending on what's shared? Doesn't the installer pop up a dialog asking you to confirm that you will only use it for legal transfers?



That's right i used limewire _Once apon a time_ and i got bombarded with ads and warnings saying i had to accept responsibility for my download.

My personal view is: If limewire _was illegal_ it would be shut down.

But this saga is going to go on and on for decades in the future.....everybody has different views on P2P but the main thing is that they still exist, proving that somebody doesn't care about them...so i rest my case until i see this coming up over and over again in this,and many other forums in the future...(i look forward to it  )
It can and has been done you know.
Politicians have better things to do than worry about petty piracy etc..(_which is a minority anyway_)


----------



## BrenG (21 Feb 2007)

I downloaded a number of albums from ITunes but had great difficulty in transferring music from PC to laptop as transfer will not be done without verification code which can sometimes fail. Also number of times you can transfer is limited which I found out to my cost after first Ipod was ruined after being dropped into the toilet.


----------



## PM1234 (21 Feb 2007)

Is it possible to download music to pc and burn onto a cd? 

I'm guessing its not as otherwise ppl wouldn't have a problem with limited no. of transfers?


----------



## ClubMan (21 Feb 2007)

Seems sort of pointless paying for DRM protected tracks (e.g. from _iTunes_) when you can generally just by the non _DRM _protected version (i.e. the _CD_) for about the same price (possibly even less) and then not be prevented from managing your own music collection by such technical constraints...


----------



## MugsGame (21 Feb 2007)

I can heartily recommend  eMusic.com. Why not register for a two week trial and get 25 free downloads?

Similar idea to iTunes, but tracks are in MP3 format so you can play them anywhere, not just on an iPod, and transfer them or burn them to CD as many times as you like (for your own personal use!). You pay a monthly subscription, but it works out much cheaper per track (43c or less depending on the plan you choose.). The selection (over 2m tracks) currently isn't as good as iTunes, but on the Classical side they do have the complete Naxos catalogue, amongst others. If you delete your MP3s accidentally you can redownload them for free (provided you continue to subscribe.).

Declaration: if you register for a trial via the above link I will get some free tracks, but it won't cost you anything.


----------



## ClubMan (21 Feb 2007)

Note that even making digital or other copies for your own personal use of _CDs _that you have bought is of quesionable legality and quite likely illegal in _Ireland _(where there is no automatic "fair use" policy allowing such actions) even if lots of people do it, the chances of prosecution are minimal and the technology required (e.g. a _PC, CD _ripping s/w and an _MP3 _player) are obviously easily obtained.


----------



## aircobra19 (21 Feb 2007)

You can burn your iTunes tracks to CD then reimport them into iTunes, but you'll then have to retag them and lifes to short. The quality of iTunes tracks is quite low at 128kps. You'll get better quality for much the same price by buying 2nd hand CD's from somewhere like amazon and theres no DRM and the CD's can be kept as a backup for when you drop the iPod (or better DAP) into the toliet. (the toliet seriously?)

DAP - Digital Audio Player.


----------



## BrenG (21 Feb 2007)

Well these things happen. I now have a 20G ipod that refuses to work with a full music collection somewhere inside. Seriously it seems that if these things get wet you may as well just throw them out. Apple cost of repair was just prohibitive.


----------



## MugsGame (21 Feb 2007)

> Note that even making digital or other copies for your own personal use of CDs that you have bought is of quesionable legality and quite likely illegal in Ireland (where there is no automatic "fair use" policy allowing such actions) even if lots of people do it



While [broken link removed] confirm that you correct in relation to CDs, I would be very surprised if anyone has or ever will be prosecuted for digitisation for personal use.

I mentioned it in connection with eMusic only because someone asked about technical impedients to burning downloaded files to CD. As for the legalities of burning eMusic files for personal use, see their terms of use which say


> Content received through the Service may be used and played for your personal, non-commercial use only. You agree not to reproduce, retransmit, distribute, disseminate, sell, broadcast, perform, make available to third parties or circulate the content received through the Service to anyone or to exploit any such content for commercial or noncommercial purposes without the express prior written consent of eMusic.



Now to my mind this gives you additional rights that include burning for personal use.

Additionally, their [broken link removed] page says


> eMusic sells music in the universally compatible MP3 format ...  The MP3 format allows consumers to play tracks on any device, burn CDs and make as many copies as they like for personal use.


----------



## ClubMan (21 Feb 2007)

MugsGame said:


> While [broken link removed] confirm that you correct in relation to CDs, I would be very surprised if anyone has or ever will be prosecuted for digitisation for personal use.


I agree but just pointing it out since people seem to have odd ideas about what is and is not legal in this context (and in this specific jurisdiction).


----------



## Sn@kebite (21 Feb 2007)

aircobra said:
			
		

> You can burn your iTunes tracks to CD then reimport them into iTunes, but you'll then have to retag them and lifes to short.



You can also open the ipod itself as a USB-HDD and drag and drop your mp3s to the pc.(problem is: some ipods rename the filenames but you should still have tags and stuff. I think filename is only thing thats changed)

And also as far as retagging them, Tag&Rename does an excellent job. In a fraction of time.


----------



## aircobra19 (21 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> You can also open the ipod itself as a USB-HDD and drag and drop your mp3s to the pc.(problem is: some ipods rename the filenames but you should still have tags and stuff. I think filename is only thing thats changed)
> 
> And also as far as retagging them, Tag&Rename does an excellent job. In a fraction of time.



In a fraction of the time of what exactly?

Didn't know you could see the music files when you mounted it as a HD I thought it was on a different parition or something.


----------



## Sn@kebite (21 Feb 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> In a fraction of the time of what exactly?


Of doing it manually, like i assumed you were talking about? (other wise you wouldnt've said "_but life's to short_")



			
				aircobra said:
			
		

> Didn't know you could see the music files when you mounted it as a HD I thought it was on a different parition or something.


It shows up with the CD/DVD drives. Provided you have it enabled in the iTunes Preferences area.


----------



## aircobra19 (21 Feb 2007)

If you mean it shows up a USB drive I know that. I didn't know you had access to the music directories I thought it was only the data. 

How does  Tag&Rename tag files with no tags or emaningful filenames any quicker than any other tagging application. Does it analyse them like MusicBrainz or MusicMatch?


----------



## extopia (26 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> you sound like you work in the music industy



Not the music industry, no - but I do work in an industry where copyright and intellectual property is an issue (as it is in many industries, I suppose).

Most of us here on AAM frown upon tax evasion, which is a form of theft. Downloading music illegally is also a form of theft, and like tax evasion, it has the effect of increasing the burden carried by those who comply with the law. I think the music industry was the architect of its own misfortune in this area as it was far too slow to embrace downloading as a distribution channel and allowed the P2P market to flourish as a result.


----------



## aircobra19 (26 Feb 2007)

extopia said:


> ... I think the music industry was the architect of its own misfortune in this area as it was far too slow to embrace downloading as a distribution channel and allowed the P2P market to flourish as a result.



You mean people got tired of being ripped of the music industry cartels, and their mass production of mediocre music, because they could make more profit then developing artists. [SIZE=-1]"Hoist on their own petard[/SIZE]" more like. 

If you could buy a CD for a 3rd of the price, they'd double their sales overnight. They could push the quality angle of an original CD, master them properly and develop/promote better artists.


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> You mean people got tired of being ripped of the music industry cartels, and their mass production of mediocre music, because they could make more profit then developing artists. [SIZE=-1]"Hoist on their own petard[/SIZE]" more like.
> 
> If you could buy a CD for a 3rd of the price, they'd double their sales overnight. They could push the quality angle of an original CD, master them properly and develop/promote better artists.



This is the most sensible thig i've heard on AAM.

The music industry of today has no talent and no skill, but they know how to charge high prices for CDs etc...
I just don't think the music industry deserves to be handed money for their half-assed attempts, they're just there for the money not like 2-3 decades ago when ppl actually cared about being employed in the music industry.



			
				extopia said:
			
		

> Most of us here on AAM frown upon tax evasion, which is a form of theft. Downloading music illegally is also a form of theft, and like tax evasion, it has the effect of increasing the burden carried by those who comply with the law.



And also: not everyone is loaded enought TO comply with the law.
(could you please explain this statement above^^ extopia?) Especially the last part.
Thanks


----------



## CCOVICH (26 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> Most of AAM users have some "bitterness issues" they have carried though their lives.


 



			
				Sn@kebite said:
			
		

> And also: not everyone is loaded enought TO comply with the law.


 
Utter nonsense on both counts.


----------



## ClubMan (26 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> Most of AAM users have some "bitterness issues" they have carried though their lives.


What on earth are you on about!?  



Sn@kebite said:


> And also: not everyone is loaded enought TO comply with the law.


Music is a discretionary purchase so there's no need to resort to illegality if you cannot afford it. Just do without.


----------



## CCOVICH (26 Feb 2007)

And if you are downloading 'free' music, presumably you can afford to pay for an internet connection.


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

CCOVICH said:


> Utter nonsense on both counts.





ClubMan said:


> What on earth are you on about!?
> 
> 
> OK on reading my own post it sounds dumb, sorry lads.
> ...



OK that's right but, do you not think the priorities need to be organised first?
Like catch rapists, murderers, drug gangs etc..first then lets focus on ppl who download music? (it seems to me that this generates revenue for the government and that's why there's so many warning etc on tv and radio)


----------



## ClubMan (26 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> OK on reading my own post it sounds dumb, sorry lads.


Are you still in dumb mode or should we take this seriously...


> OK that's right but, do you not think the priorities need to be organised first?
> Like catch rapists, murderers, drug gangs etc..first then lets focus on ppl who download music? (it seems to me that this generates revenue for the government and that's why there's so many warning etc on tv and radio)


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

CCOVICH said:


> And if you are downloading 'free' music, presumably you can afford to pay for an internet connection.



Or you could be doing it in school, college, work, librarys etc..? Doesnt have to be at home. And even if it was...how much is an internet connection? And how much is a CD, usually two-three times what you'd spend in a monthfor the internet.


----------



## MugsGame (26 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> aircobra19 said:
> 
> 
> > If you could buy a CD for a 3rd of the price, they'd double their sales overnight.
> ...



Double the number of widgets shifted and reduce your income by a third. What business wouldn't jump at an opportunity like that!


----------



## extopia (26 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> (could you please explain this statement above^^ extopia?) Especially the last part.
> Thanks



I mean simply that those who choose to pay for their music no doubt pay more than they would if copyright theft was not a problem.

I don't think you have to be loaded to pay 99c for a track. Especially if you're wealthy enough to have a computer and/or a broadband internet connection.

The only "possibly" legitimate use I can think of to use P2P to download tracks is if you have bought the music already in another form, on record or cassette back in the old days, for example, and you either don't have the means or couldn't be bothered to convert it to digital format yourself. But I wouldn't be surprised if the music industry disagreed. I'm no fan of music industry executives, by the way, in case you're getting the wrong impression.

And by the way, if someone likes the music enough to go to the trouble of downloading it, the argument about the majority of music being crap is beside the point. Good music always survives, sometimes despite the machinations of the industry.

The bottom line is that piracy hurts the industry execs, sure, but it hurts the artists - especially young bands - more. I'm a music fan myself, and I've spent a good sum of money every year for the past 30 years buying music and going to gigs. I tend to gravitate towards the less commercial end of the scale (although I buy a fair amount of "fat cat" music too). I value good music, and I'm prepared to pay for it, because I want more of  these acts to make enough to keep doing what the do best. 

Legal download sites like iTunes etc. are the way forward. CD prices are still a little high in Ireland, but they're already dropping towards download price points, especially for back catalogue, and that's a positive thing.


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

extopia said:


> I mean simply that those who choose to pay for their music no doubt pay more than they would if copyright theft was not a problem.



Well i am reluctant to agree with that. But it makes sense.

But some other ppl in this site had a rant at me because they said if everybody in Ireland worked tax would be lowered. And i disagreed.

Sort of how i feel, about your point, why would they do that? when they can make more money. There's no doubt in my mind that if they suddenly lowered prices for CDs more ppl would buy them and they would slowly abolish piracy.

But could it not be that in Ireland there's not alot of competition against companies forcing _each other's_ prices down like the airline industry?
As for now they're able to charge what they like and there's no proof that the prices are so high because of piracy.


----------



## ClubMan (26 Feb 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> As for now they're able to charge what they like and there's no proof that the prices are so high because of piracy.


Shop around. For example ... new _Kaiser Chiefs _album in town at the weekend €20, in our local _Xtravision _€15 and on _CD WOW _€12. 13 tracks so that's presumably cheaper than _iTunes_? The €20 outlet can charge what it likes if people (like my sister in law) are prepared to pay it without shopping around.


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Shop around. For example ... new _Kaiser Chiefs _album in town at the weekend €20, in our local _Xtravision _€15 and on _CD WOW _€12. 13 tracks so that's presumably cheaper than _iTunes_? The €20 outlet can charge what it likes if people (like my sister in law) are prepared to pay it without shopping around.



Yes i do and i know. I'm just saying that i guess that CD would be alot cheaper in England and probably even cheaper in USA, but how is this so. ppl say that "oh Ireland is just a rip off republic" all i want to kniow is, how is this?
Is it because of a monopoly in this country for almost everything?


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

MugsGame said:


> Double the number of widgets shifted and reduce your income by a third. What business wouldn't jump at an opportunity like that!



i'm afraid i disagree, greedy entrepreneurs don't go very far. I always thought in business you find a gap in the market and fill it at a generous price so ppl notice your business.
But it's like the music industry of today is leaning towards the greedy side of business and it's pushing ppl towards piracy. I'm not justifying piracy as i don't take part in alot of it, personally i prefer to buy music on CD cause its better quality. But at the samr time the music industry is partially to blame as well a ppl who take part in illegal activity.


----------



## extopia (26 Feb 2007)

CD prices are coming down - just like DVD prices did. There is no dispute about that. Eventually there will be no difference between prices here and in other markets, of that I have no doubt.

There is no monopoly in the music industry in Ireland, what makes you think there is? Prices are higher here - but not a huge amount higher if, as Clubman suggests, you shop around. (The Kaiser Chiefs album is 12.99 in the iTunes store, by the way, and includes 5 bonus tracks for a total of 18 tracks).

The one thing that bugs me about the industry here is that a lot of "big-name" releases (especially by Irish artists) are not allowed into the iTunes store for quite a while, in an attempt to get people to buy the CD.


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

extopia said:


> There is no monopoly in the music industry in Ireland, what makes you think there is


I don't remember saying there is? I remember asking if there is one.

Are you sure there not being _allowed_ into iTunes? Or could it just take time to make them available?


----------



## aircobra19 (26 Feb 2007)

extopia said:


> CD prices are coming down - just like DVD prices did. There is no dispute about that. Eventually there will be no difference between prices here and in other markets, of that I have no doubt.
> 
> There is no monopoly in the music industry in Ireland, what makes you think there is? Prices are higher here - but not a huge amount higher if, as Clubman suggests, you shop around. (The Kaiser Chiefs album is 12.99 in the iTunes store, by the way, and includes 5 bonus tracks for a total of 18 tracks).
> 
> The one thing that bugs me about the industry here is that a lot of "big-name" releases (especially by Irish artists) are not allowed into the iTunes store for quite a while, in an attempt to get people to buy the CD.



I don't see new CD's coming down. They are as expensive as they've ever been on the high street. While internet prices are cheaper, they are still too expensive. 

iTunes is not on a parity with buying a CD. You are buying low quality tracks at 128kps nothing clost to the quality of a CD, and then you have DRM on the files which is a pain in the butt! Again no DRM issues with a CD.  If you don't like it you can resell it. Wheres the resale on iTunes songs?

Downloading MP3's is much like home taping on cassette. There was a lot of rubbish about that aswell. It has been argued that people are downloading and exact copy, and its easier to download. Also that it robs sales from real CD's. But thats seem at odds that CD's and traditional media were in decline before MP3 and that most of the MP3's online are low bitrate. Also a lot of people aren't that IT literate and prefer not to get their tracks though a computer. Didn't some surveys show that a lot of people who download MP3's also buy a lot of music? Fans are going to want to collect the albums, the cover are, read the liners etc. 

A lot of music doesn't get into iTunes because they don't have an agreement with the publisher for that label/artist. 

The music industry seems to be doing everything they can except dropping prices. They are strangling their own market. Theres been cases where they've refused to release an album because it while it will make a profit it won't make enough profit. Theres lots of artists in the past who needed a few albums to find their feet before they became popular. Let consider them lossleaders, and an investment in their development and future profits. Yet if you cut off a budding artist or overprice their CD's they are effectively stopping that development. How often would you chance your arm on a new album? How about if it was €5?

That my 2 cents anyway.


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Feb 2007)

hey _aircobra19_ It seems you & me share views.

Maybe we're two of a kind. Ans maybe we just are ore atuned to the music world. I don't know but i love music and i rarely download any, only if i can't buy. like if it's not for sale. I also buy sheet music for guitar, costs me a fortune but the downloadable ones are rubbish.


----------



## aircobra19 (26 Feb 2007)

I have only ever used iTunes when someone has given me free tokens for it. Other that I've never used a downoad store because I want to encode my music myself at decent bitrates and without DRM. I also don't want to support the shadier download sites, with their dubious connections. Aswell as that most of the mainstream sites don't carry alot of the music I want. When you can buy 2nd hand CD's in town, or even from amazon theres no financial sense in spending on lowbitrate crud.

I'm a tab man myself. But as I'm a dire guitarist it doesn't really matter. Tone is more important. Not that I have any.


----------



## MonsieurBond (27 Feb 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> I don't see new CD's coming down. They are as expensive as they've ever been on the high street. While internet prices are cheaper, they are still too expensive.



CDs are definintely still very expensive in Ireland compared to UK, rest of Europe and especially Asia. 

However, I do see a lot of new releases being sold at reasonable prices for an initial period over here in HMV and Tower. Reasonable being €15 or so.



aircobra19 said:


> iTunes is not on a parity with buying a CD. You are buying low quality tracks at 128kps nothing clost to the quality of a CD, and then you have DRM on the files which is a pain in the butt! Again no DRM issues with a CD.  If you don't like it you can resell it. Wheres the resale on iTunes songs?



I completely agree. However, for many people, 128kbps AAC (which btw is about equivalent to 160kbps MP3) is good enough. I myself, while I would never consider buying an album on iTunes (preferring to buy the CD and rip it at 190kbps) have in fact downloaded chart remixes from iTunes that I might not listen to enough times to justify buying a CD Single, as CD Singles are still expensive and becoming increasingly hard to find.

The DRM is a pain but Apple claim it is not their fault.

You can always burn to CD and re-rip without the DRM anyway.



aircobra19 said:


> Downloading MP3's is much like home taping on cassette. There was a lot of rubbish about that aswell. It has been argued that people are downloading and exact copy, and its easier to download. Also that it robs sales from real CD's. But thats seem at odds that CD's and traditional media were in decline before MP3 and that most of the MP3's online are low bitrate. Also a lot of people aren't that IT literate and prefer not to get their tracks though a computer. Didn't some surveys show that a lot of people who download MP3's also buy a lot of music? Fans are going to want to collect the albums, the cover are, read the liners etc.



It's hard to generalise. I have downloaded things to see if I like them - and then bought the CD later. I have also "borrowed" MP3s from others - but again, if I like the album and keep it on my iPod, then I will buy the CD as I prefer to own my music on my own terms and in better quality.



aircobra19 said:


> A lot of music doesn't get into iTunes because they don't have an agreement with the publisher for that label/artist.



I suppose it's only a matter of time before more publishers sign up.



aircobra19 said:


> The music industry seems to be doing everything they can except dropping prices. They are strangling their own market. Theres been cases where they've refused to release an album because it while it will make a profit it won't make enough profit. Theres lots of artists in the past who needed a few albums to find their feet before they became popular. Let consider them lossleaders, and an investment in their development and future profits. Yet if you cut off a budding artist or overprice their CD's they are effectively stopping that development. How often would you chance your arm on a new album? How about if it was €5?
> 
> That my 2 cents anyway.




I agree - if CDs cost less, more people would buy them.

However, I can't see the music industry reducing prices when sales are already in decline.

As a final thought, I have sort of gone off buying CDs on the Net as they have been taking so long - well over a week - to arrive that I prefer to spend a few Euros more and get the instant gratification of _see-it, like-it, buy-it_.  Also, I have been burned a few times with the multiple versions problem - it isn't always easy to see which version you are getting especially on sites like play.com who don't give accurate information.


----------



## aircobra19 (27 Feb 2007)

Its not uncommon for a business to downsize in order to become more profitable for less turnover.


----------



## extopia (28 Feb 2007)

DRM is indeed the brainchild of the record companies, not the online music stores. The problem is not really DRM itself, but rather the fact that there exist several incompatible DRM software/hardware combinations. For what it's worth, you can read about Apple's thoughts about DRM here.


----------



## soy (28 Feb 2007)

Most new releases can be bought in the US for $10-12 in the likes of Walmart, Target, Bestbuy, Circuit City etc. At this price I would buy the CD everytime.
There is no justification for us paying twice as much in Ireland.


----------



## extopia (28 Feb 2007)

A lot of that price difference is due to the 21% VAT payable on recorded music in Ireland. That goes to the government, not the record company or the retailer.


----------



## tiger (28 Feb 2007)

I've stopped buying on iTunes as well, same reasons quality & lack of flexibility.  Started frequenting the second hand CD shops, can get newish releases for €10-12 and older ones for abou €8, depending on the shop.


----------



## aircobra19 (28 Feb 2007)

extopia said:


> A lot of that price difference is due to the 21% VAT payable on recorded music in Ireland. That goes to the government, not the record company or the retailer.



So they can squander it on our 3rd rate health service, and other  mismanaged projects. 2nd hand CD's are the way to go. Go into town on a sat or after work and have a browse around. Or get them via amazon.


----------



## MugsGame (28 Feb 2007)

eMusic use VBR MP3s (average bit-rate 192kbps), which to my ears are much better quality than iTunes, especially for classical music. And as I previously mentioned, eMusic don't use DRM. Their selection of mainstream pop artists is limited, but the classical and jazz (and seemingly indie and punk) selections are excellent. I miss having the the sleeve notes from CDs (though some labels now offer these as PDFs on their websites), but I don't miss the CD taking up space on my shelf!


----------



## aircobra19 (28 Feb 2007)

MugsGame said:


> eMusic use VBR MP3s (average bit-rate 192kbps), which to my ears are much better quality than iTunes, especially for classical music. And as I previously mentioned, eMusic don't use DRM. Their selection of mainstream pop artists is limited, but the classical and jazz (and seemingly indie and punk) selections are excellent. I miss having the the sleeve notes from CDs (though some labels now offer these as PDFs on their websites), but I don't miss the CD taking up space on my shelf!



Looks like a nice idea. The major labels won't work with eMusic because of the lack of DRM. Also the EU and UK eMusic stores are dear than the US one apparently for tax reasons. Looks like a good model though.


----------



## MonsieurBond (1 Mar 2007)

MugsGame said:


> eMusic use VBR MP3s (average bit-rate 192kbps), which to my ears are much better quality than iTunes, especially for classical music. And as I previously mentioned, eMusic don't use DRM. Their selection of mainstream pop artists is limited, but the classical and jazz (and seemingly indie and punk) selections are excellent. I miss having the the sleeve notes from CDs (though some labels now offer these as PDFs on their websites), but I don't miss the CD taking up space on my shelf!


----------

