Copy-protected CDs - philosophical discussion

Well first of all I don't drink beer, nor do I drink any more at all so I am unable to follow instructions(what's new). I never claimed he was an anarchist nor am I attacking his integrity but if he claims to be an audiophile and is yet willing to sacrafice quality for the dollar, it doesn't add up. Keep in mind Onhwy61 my coment was made all in jest and not meant to be taken literally(please don't wonder mindlessly on highway 61), I just feel it is an unusual perspective for an audiophile to hold. All kidding aside I think my earlier reply today makes sense, this isn't English class, you(Kelly) and I usually see eye to eye; though we are allowed our own opinions. Perhaps it is my age that allows me to act prior to the thought process completing its proper cycle, or all the freaking Aristotle I have been reading- translations to English yield less then superior grammer(I think it has been rubbing off). Oh yea and in regards to my statement made on 12-27-01, that was writen/typed in about 30 sec. in a fit of rage! I hope I can not be held accountable for that.
Happy Holidays,
Tim

tim: sometimes i can't slough off my tendancies to act as a parental unit, for which i apologize.. i do, however, most respectfully suggest you reread onhwy61's last 2 posts. his model is, in fact, designed to promote, not denigrate, the interests of those who proudly wear the mantle named "audiophile." -kelly

I stand corrected, I misunderstood his view, I hope Onhwy61 will accept my most humble appologize. I think I will now take your advice and enjoy the pre ;) Thanks for clearing the fog, which for some reason always seems to be clouding my vision. Good night

Tim

My earlier posts were written to express what I believe to be the attitude of the major recording labels. The heart of my hypothetical proposal is to exchange an absolute safeguard against unauthorized copying for a dramatic lowering in consumer prices. Cornfedboy has pointed out several valid problems with my position. It may not be financially viable and it is doubtful that the recording corporations would actually lower their prices.

Another point I was trying to get across is that audiophiles represent a very small percentage of the music buying public. Rightly or not, our fascination with sound quality is not widely shared. I point to the emergence of the MP3 format as evidence of what the general public is willing to accept regarding sound quality. Tireguy points out that there are several audiophile oriented music companies, but I would speculate that the combined sales of the six labels he mentioned in a decade is less than the sales of Sony/Columbia in any given week. The audiophile market is a very minor blip on the screen. It's a niche market that can easily be taken over by the major labels. Mosiac has done a marvelous job with their comphrehensive jazz reissues. How long did it take for Sony/Columbia to recognize the market opportunity and start limiting Mosiac's access to their catalog while they simultaneously released the reissues on their own Legacy label?

I make the assumption that any copy protection encoding will be audible under some set of circumstances. Whether we like it or not, it probably will be an important element of the music distribution future.

I agree with the points that, as a major music label, it's logical that they're trying look at some way to stop the proliferation of CD copying and that, for the vast majority of their buying public, the impact on sound quality is not a major issue. Certainly the impact on sound quality induced by copy protection isn't going to be worse than all the compression and fabrication that is put on a lot of the major releases already, the same stuff that has audiophiles lamenting the recording "quality" of most releases. I think the Telarc's and MFSL's of the world know who's buttering their bread and it will be a long time before they put copy protection on their products.

I also think it's true that the major labels are reacting to this like dinosaurs - they know something needs to be done, but they want to patch the problem instead of getting caught up with the times and reinventing the product, at the risk of destroying their cash cow, the CD with a retail price of $16.99. That's what annoys me to no end - they want to debilitate their current product without offering up any incentive to the customer. I buy a lot of CDs - easily 100+ a year. I make copies of all of them to put in CD changers in my system as well as in my car. I like having the original copy (I could borrow tons of CDs from the library or from friends to reduce my cost if I wanted to and felt right about it, but I don't). I shop for good prices - 20% off at the local outlet, the CD clubs, etc. In other words, I'm a prime example of why the current model is a cash cow for the companies. Now they want to change (in all negative ways) the model for me without offering me anything positive. Even if I don't take this as an inherent accusation that I am part of the problem, this is bad business. Gee, I'm sorry that it's going to cost you to "catch up" and to transform your business model, but you know what - that's what it's going to take if you want me to continue pumping $2000 a year into your market. Every other service I purchase gives me more each year for less, so it's not going to work for the music industry to give me less for the same amount.

So far I haven't encountered a copy protected CD, so I continue with the same model I've used for several years now. If and when it becomes a regular encounter, I will change the model. I would like to change the model by industry incentive - define a service that's worth the price (and there is a huge market for people willing to pay for a service) and meets my needs. If that isn't what's offered, then at a minimum I'll take a break from buying new CDs until some other model is defined.

Maybe the new model will be the new hi-rez formats, brought down to current CD prices - a hi-rez format with copy protection at the same price might be an example of give-and-take. -Kirk