Audio and Marketing Fun Redux

[filkertom]

Helpful and important this has all been -- I thank you all a lot. Keep it coming, but I think we can narrow it down to divergences from this stricter template:

1. Pretty much everyone here, at least, has broadband. So keying things for that is okay.
2. Many of you have purchased, or intend to purchase, the downloads.
3. MP3 is the preference of most of you, for a number of reasons, particularly burning to CDs and using in iPods, which means no DRM (not that there was going to be anyway). Other than that, preferred format is the original CD itself, when a song is on a CD.
4. You don't want to pay more for higher-bit-rate MP3s, although a few leave the possibility open if they're of considerably higher quality -- which means it's probably not in either of our interests for me to do them above 128 Kbps, unless I figure out something different in the quality/file size/bandwidth equation... which I might, so don't rule it out. But I wouldn't do it as a separate option -- I'd just upgrade the downloadables.
5. Most of you would not mind the option to download in other formats...
6. ... but MP3 is the clear winner, with OGG having a number of supporters, but not without MP3 also being available. AAC got some attention as well. All that considered, I'll probably just stick with MP3s for downloadables.
7. One or two of you think a surround file would be cool, if it wasn't just band-in-front, audience-in-back (it wouldn't be, trust me), but it's not on anyone's list of priorities, and therefore it's off mine.

Has anyone got a problem with that?

Comments

[jss]

Nope, not me.

[popefelix.livejournal.com]

I object!

[shockwave77598.livejournal.com]

Hot Dog! Sound like a weiner!

[poltr1]

Well, since I still use dialup, I'd vote for audio CDs for purchase, followed by MP3s for when I finally bite the bullet, dig deep into the wallet, and join the 21st century. If I had broadband, then yes, near-CD quality MP3s (128Kbps w/44 kHz sampling rate) would be my preference.

[jalapenoman.livejournal.com]

Nope, just keep on having fun.

[selenesue.livejournal.com]

Sounds like a winning program to me!

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

Well, there are still some of us who don't have broadband, but we (at least I) don't do much with on line music in any form. I've hardly visited your web site at all, but I sure snapped up And They Say I've Got Talent as soon as it was physically there to snap up. So to keep us (or at least me) happy, keep on making real pressed CDs.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Well, I was certainly going to do that. :) But it does bring up something else I've been curious about (and you and poltr1 are the first ones who mentioned not having broadband): I've been burning CD-Rs of the downloadable albums to take to cons expressly for people who [a] don't have broadband and [b] want the better audio quality of the original .wav files. Would you be interested in buying a "downloadable" album on CD-R for, say, $10 or $11?

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

Depending on what was on the album, and whether it was going to come out as a pressed CD, I might be. You mentioned this weekend that you were thinking of doing studio versions of some of the songs from your first two tapes. I want. If it's not going to be a pressed CD, I'd definitely buy a CD-R.

[hms42]

I have downloaded on my broadband for another fan on dialup and put the mp3s onto CD-R. (I have asked them to pay you for the music before I do the conversion. They have paid every time so far.)

Harold

[poltr1]

That depends on several things, including the available cash on hand, what's on the CD-R, and how much of that $10-11 goes into your pocket.

I've also been kicking around the idea of getting a wireless card for my laptop, and going to a local hotspot, for the sole purpose of downloading large files.

Hmmm...no one out there has mentioned that they had DSL. Of course, TW's propaganda is that DSL isn't as good as broadband, and I hear the opposite from the DSL companies.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Hm. I'll go back and look, but I thought a couple of people on the previous thread had mentioned DSL. I have DSL, through SBC, and am pretty happy with it. Given the choice between megacorporations, they beat the hell out of ComCrap.

To answer the other points: The CD-Rs that I've been burning have exactly the same content as the downloadable albums (in this case, Live At GAFilk and The 24-Hour Project), but use the raw audio at the highest fidelity instead of being compressed down to 128-Kbps MP3s. I use Memorex CD-Rs, which have done very well for both reliability and audio quality, and burn 'em with my Plextor DVD-RW drive, and I print up a disk label and put it in a slim jewel case. Except for a couple of bucks for shipping and the aforementioned CD-R materials, that money would go to me.

[arensb.livejournal.com]

I still don't have broadband at home (though I'm working on it: there's something funky with the phone lines in my area, so I can't get DSL at a reasonable price), so when I want to download a CD image, I do it on campus.

What are you talking about here, though? Data CD-Rs with MP3s that can otherwise be downloaded the same way as And They Say I've Got Talent? If I saw you at a con, yeah, I'd buy one of those for ten bucks, especially if I could talk you into autographing it. The reason is simple convenience.

Nonetheless, I'd still prefer good old audio CDs (which I can rip to whichever audio format I prefer), with cover art, lyrics, liner notes, etc. Yes, it's an emotional attitude. I tried being completely rational once, and it didn't work out.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

I prefer those, too, when appropriate. But the downloadables are intended to get you a good hunk o' music, cheap and fast. I'm going to continue using both. :)

And the CD-Rs, very specifically, will not be MP3s. They will be the raw .wav file audio, exactly the same as if I was going to send it to the duplicators, except I can one-off burn 'em myself, rather than order 300 or 500 or 1,000 (which I can't do right now). The only difference between that and a pressed CD would be that it's burned and hand-labeled. (See my answer just above this one for more.)

[arensb.livejournal.com]

And the CD-Rs, very specifically, will not be MP3s. They will be the raw .wav file audio, exactly the same as if I was going to send it to the duplicators

Ah. Even better than I thought, then. (Except that it's a gold CD rather than a pretty silver one, and the cover artwork might not look as good, which are also considerations.)

[mikewdotorg.livejournal.com]

Sounds good to me (finally subscribed to LiveJournal today, so working up from the bottom...)