Could CD Quality Downloads Be An Answer To The Sales Slump?
Is it possible that super-high quality lossless music downloads could play a role in bringing consumers back to the habit of paying for music? Some evidence may point in that direction; particularly among the tech savvy crowd that were among the first adopt file-sharing and can be the hardest to please.
Ian Rogers reports that two of his Topspin Media’s most famous clients found surprising success with FLAC and Apple Lossless formats. "12% of all David Byrne and Brian Eno fans took the FLAC option, and 21% of those purchasing (Paul McCartney’) The Fireman record direct from TheFiremanMusic.com took one of the lossless options ."
Not earth shattering, but signifigant and worth watching. Ian tells the rest of the story on the Topsin Media blog.
The majors already dipped their toes in this water with the Music Giants site, where they offered lossless files (granted, they were DRM encumbered WMA lossless) and charged a premium. IIRC, you could buy the CD cheaper than get the files. Given that and the fact that the labels are still bleeding money, I can’t see them offering more content for the same or less money than what they’re charging currently.
While I think in the examples you give for some people the lossless files were a deciding factor, I wonder how many got them simply because they were no extra charge? I also think the guy from Topspin kind of sums it up. Most people are happy with mp3 and the listening environments they play music in wouldn’t benefit from lossless files anyway. As much as I’m a fan of this happening, especially if they don’t charge extra for the lossless, I just don’t think it matters to 95%+ of the music buying public.
This topic is a big deal. “Lossless” is a nonsense word in this context. CD’s are 44.1, 16 bit. There is a great deal of loss happening at the Redbook CD level already. That’s one of the reasons people don’t like them. The BS marketing about them being indestructible and having higher fidelity worked for a while…but the public is hip to the fact that they are fragile and sound like shit. Oh and they usually have only one good song on them.
If Hollywood and TV can figure out high res movie and TV show downloads then music should be available in DSD….then we’ll be back on an analog standard and people will be able to hear, buy and appreciate the full res music….and then this digital dark age will finally come to a close.
But labels would have to provide iTunes with DSD masters and iTunes would have to build DSD into their hardware.
DSD iPod…the stuff dreams are made of.
brendan b brown
wheatus
if most people were to hear the lossless files versus the MP3’s, they would be astonished at the difference in sound quality — i don’t think the average music buyer understands this difference — and music giants’ prices aren’t significantly higher…
The lack of overhead production costs should be reflected in MP3…it’s not…That’s a problem. Why is the industry so fascist anti-retail. Pass on your savings on to the customer.
When did customers become the enemy?
Lostcause, if CD quality downloads are that superior does it not obviously follow that DSD (SACD) file downloads and playback would simply eviscerate all other formats at the same time that it gives the customer the highest quality recorded sound that has ever been available?
Why not just jump ahead? All these other formats are stalling.
brendan b brown
wheatus
Yes, the difference of 44.100k and 128k is indeed audible. That’s why I tend to call iTunes the modern day jukebox: you throw in 99 cents and out comes a blaring sound.
The lossless download is unavailable in those regions of the world that don’t have access to high bandwidth internet connection. CDs can be shipped there, too, though.