Club CDFreaks - Knowledge is Power - View Single Post - Why do people still continue to DL lossy crap and risk litigation?

TekWiz · 11-01-2004

Very simple answer:

Quality: MP3 Quality can be excellent if it's done with the correct encoder--A few years ago I compressed maybe 80 cds with AUDIOCATALYST, at 128 KB, and I spent hours comparing song segments--I even put the original CD in a Pro quality NEC CD player and did A/B comparisons with excellent quality headphones, and in only one instance I heard a very slight diffference in a segment that lasted about 2 seconds of very wide-range sound (like noise) where I felt there was some slight loss in the 128 MP3. At the time I was also testing an early version of AAC, and in the 128 AAC I didn't hear that loss. However it was so minor and so short and so hard to detect that I stuck with MP3--AAC isn't a standard. Other encoders I tried were much worse--Even the "professional" quality encoder (I forget the name at the moment-but it was acclaimed) didn't sound too good to me--I just found the Audiocatalyst to be perfect.

Sure you can download some bad sounding MP3s--lots of them, but usually if the bitrate is high like 160 and up the quality is pretty good. And most people don't even listen under "IDEAL" conditions--most people know nothing about quality an use crummy tin-ear headphone--how come all those $1 bargain store "COBY" headphones and such sell at all? I mean I could make better sounding headphones from a freakin' TUNA CAN and some speaker wire and a magnet! So obviously many people are not big time audiophiles. People listen outside, in their cars where there's a lot of noise too. Heck many people still listen to tapes and some people think records are the best! So go figure!

RISK OF PROSECUTION?

Be realistic here--you do sound like you work for the record industry. There are maybe 60 million people who use KAZZA, and the record industry can only sue a few hundred or a few thousand--so do the math. Besides now it's much harder for them to sue anybody becuause last month Verizon won their case and a federal judge decided that record companies cannot obtain names and addresses through a court clerk but they must actually file using the accepted procedure which is slow and expensive. So they only got a couple hundred names because of some legal confusion which got corrected now.

So the chance of being sued by the RIAA is like maybe winning the lottery or being hit by lightning. I don't think people are too worried about that--heck how many people smoke and drink and they know well that this is going to kill them and is making them sick and stupid but they keep doing it anyway? Most people don't really like to think too much about consequences--they just do what they feel like at the moment. If something happens later they say "oh shit! why did I do THAT?! What was I thinking". So you ain't gonna change human nature.

Finally I think that $1.00 per song (hehe, ok, 99 cents!) is still a lot to pay for something that you may not really like or only listen to a few times and shows how greedy the RIAA really is. There is no reason in the world why an MP3 should cost that much when it doesn't cost almost anything to make it available compared to the cost of making CDs (not much--but still much more) and stocking them on store shelves (now that's really expensive). They would charge $5 a song if they thought it would sell as well.

Listening to music on the radio is free, and many people used to tape songs--I used to do it as a kid. Why should listening to songs on your computer be any different? Who cares what the audio quality is? These songs get boring soon anyway. I have a whole bunch of CDs sitting somehwere that I only listened to a couple times, maybe even 10 times and never again.

How about if you were charged by the minute to be online? This is the way it is in many parts of the world. That would suck big time wouldn't it. All these things do is let a few assholes stuff their fat wallets with everybody's money. Note that only like .10 ccents goes to the artists of that $1. Maybe the artists should setup paypal accounts so the fans that like their songs can send whatever they like for the songs they listen to directly to them? Now that would be revolutionary. We can't assume the world is composed mostly of thieves!

Some things to think about...

Tek.

11-01-2004	#25 (permalink)
TekWiz CD Freaks Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 151	Very simple answer: Quality: MP3 Quality can be excellent if it's done with the correct encoder--A few years ago I compressed maybe 80 cds with AUDIOCATALYST, at 128 KB, and I spent hours comparing song segments--I even put the original CD in a Pro quality NEC CD player and did A/B comparisons with excellent quality headphones, and in only one instance I heard a very slight diffference in a segment that lasted about 2 seconds of very wide-range sound (like noise) where I felt there was some slight loss in the 128 MP3. At the time I was also testing an early version of AAC, and in the 128 AAC I didn't hear that loss. However it was so minor and so short and so hard to detect that I stuck with MP3--AAC isn't a standard. Other encoders I tried were much worse--Even the "professional" quality encoder (I forget the name at the moment-but it was acclaimed) didn't sound too good to me--I just found the Audiocatalyst to be perfect. Sure you can download some bad sounding MP3s--lots of them, but usually if the bitrate is high like 160 and up the quality is pretty good. And most people don't even listen under "IDEAL" conditions--most people know nothing about quality an use crummy tin-ear headphone--how come all those $1 bargain store "COBY" headphones and such sell at all? I mean I could make better sounding headphones from a freakin' TUNA CAN and some speaker wire and a magnet! So obviously many people are not big time audiophiles. People listen outside, in their cars where there's a lot of noise too. Heck many people still listen to tapes and some people think records are the best! So go figure! RISK OF PROSECUTION? Be realistic here--you do sound like you work for the record industry. There are maybe 60 million people who use KAZZA, and the record industry can only sue a few hundred or a few thousand--so do the math. Besides now it's much harder for them to sue anybody becuause last month Verizon won their case and a federal judge decided that record companies cannot obtain names and addresses through a court clerk but they must actually file using the accepted procedure which is slow and expensive. So they only got a couple hundred names because of some legal confusion which got corrected now. So the chance of being sued by the RIAA is like maybe winning the lottery or being hit by lightning. I don't think people are too worried about that--heck how many people smoke and drink and they know well that this is going to kill them and is making them sick and stupid but they keep doing it anyway? Most people don't really like to think too much about consequences--they just do what they feel like at the moment. If something happens later they say "oh shit! why did I do THAT?! What was I thinking". So you ain't gonna change human nature. Finally I think that $1.00 per song (hehe, ok, 99 cents!) is still a lot to pay for something that you may not really like or only listen to a few times and shows how greedy the RIAA really is. There is no reason in the world why an MP3 should cost that much when it doesn't cost almost anything to make it available compared to the cost of making CDs (not much--but still much more) and stocking them on store shelves (now that's really expensive). They would charge $5 a song if they thought it would sell as well. Listening to music on the radio is free, and many people used to tape songs--I used to do it as a kid. Why should listening to songs on your computer be any different? Who cares what the audio quality is? These songs get boring soon anyway. I have a whole bunch of CDs sitting somehwere that I only listened to a couple times, maybe even 10 times and never again. How about if you were charged by the minute to be online? This is the way it is in many parts of the world. That would suck big time wouldn't it. All these things do is let a few assholes stuff their fat wallets with everybody's money. Note that only like .10 ccents goes to the artists of that $1. Maybe the artists should setup paypal accounts so the fans that like their songs can send whatever they like for the songs they listen to directly to them? Now that would be revolutionary. We can't assume the world is composed mostly of thieves! Some things to think about... Tek.