legal music downloads

mcfisco

Hopefully without breaking forum rules

Here is a BBC link - if you look at the bottom of the report it lists the top 3 legal download sites

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4875142.stm

superscaper

I've downloaded a couple of albums (from the likes of tesco and MSN) but there's not much of a saving, so I think in future I'll just buy cds and maybe wait until they end up in the bargain section. Also I personally prefer having the physical package as well.

superscaper

Of course if you are only after individual tracks then I'd say it would depend on how much you buy. If you only buy the odd couple every so often you may as well search for the cheapest site for each track. If you buy loads then a subscription service such as wippit may be better but be careful that you may still have to pay extra for some tracks on top of your subscription.

woo

there are some smaller markets where iTunes can be nearly half the price though.
subscription services tie you in for life though don't they, if you stop paying you lose the music? can't be that good

superscaper

woo wrote:

there are some smaller markets where iTunes can be nearly half the price though.
subscription services tie you in for life though don't they, if you stop paying you lose the music? can't be that good

That is true for most but wippit is a rare example where you still keep the music after you cancel your subscription. But you've brought up a good point that you should always read the smallprint of these sites and what you are actually agreeing to and what you are actually getting.

ollyshaw

To be honest as moneysavers you have to weigh up the pros and cons. There was an EP recently that I wanted, £4 on CD £2.70 on itunes, so I went with Itunes and lived with the DRM restrictions. Normally getting an album on play or cdwow is about the same as on Itunes (or the windows based stores), so for an album I will be getting the DRM free CD and ripping to high quality LAME mp3's.

As for quality, the old school argument for LP's was based on the "richness" or "smoothness" of sounds. CD's ARE a lossless format.

Olly

superscaper

ollyshaw wrote:

CD's ARE a lossless format.

Olly

Tis true but with CDs it really depends on how good the digital processing is on the decoder. You can get some forms of decompression that even ADD more detail than was there originally!! Doesn't make sense to me but just look up fractal decompression. Anyway getting off topic a bit, I've heard arguments either way on the quality of CDs versus LPs and audiophilia is rampant with pseudoscience so you have to take most things with pinch of salt.

woo

ollyshaw wrote:

As for quality, the old school argument for LP's was based on the "richness" or "smoothness" of sounds. CD's ARE a lossless format.

Olly

When you have got tinnitus like me doesn't really matter that much

superscaper

woo wrote:

When you have got tinnitus like me doesn't really matter that much

And the older you get the less of the high frequencies you can hear anyway. If it sounds good to you then that's all that should matter. Woo, hope the tinnitus isn't too bad. :beer:

wolfman

ollyshaw wrote:

As for quality, the old school argument for LP's was based on the "richness" or "smoothness" of sounds. CD's ARE a lossless format.

CD's are a digitised form of sounds whereas LP's are analog. Effectively it won't include "all" the information during the conversion from ananlog to digital, and sound is after all analog itself. Hence you usually find true audiophiles sometimes prefer LP's to CD's.

I'm personally going to stick with buying the CD's, rather than buying online until the prices drop, and more choice is offered in the form of file formats and bitrates. Also no DRM!

The industry seems to defining how we are supposed to listen to our music and what on, rather than the other way around. That's the main reason why I won't buy from iTunes.