2. music
  3. 1092009701

The music companies do something wrong

I still refuse to buy copy protected CD's. One of the companies seem to having everything they put out protected.
So I do not own the new Norah Jones, the remixed Beatles album and a whole bunch of other music that I just put back on the shelf. Why should I be restricted from having the tunes on my computer...in the car....ipod etc? Especially considering the high prices for new material.
Plus why is that I can buy movies on DVD for ten bucks and yet back catalogue of music stuff is still expensive? Movies cost real money to make compared to "records" so it goes to show you how much dough there is in it for the majors. Plus the fact that on movies people are much more likely to collect residuals where as most of the musicians get zip.
ntscdan
Post removed 
aroc
760 posts
 
No such thing is 'copy protected' CDs. nearly all of those should be referred to as 'playback restricted' since that is what they really are. Also you can't really call them 'CDs' or 'compact discs' or redbook anymore since they are a different beast. more like pieces of 5 inch polycarbonoate media that resemble compact discs. or 'the disc formerly known as a CD'. ;-)

Like Elizabeth, I buy all of my stuff on usedor new vinyl when I can. Although I cannot match the prices or selection Elizabeth enjoys. Sigh.
marakanetz's avatar
marakanetz
5,473 posts
 
The more you ignore, the cheaper it becomes. There are always ways arround.
How'bout copy protected Norah Jones signle singing "Star Spangled Banner?"
robm321
932 posts
 
I agree with Elizabeth.

I mostly buy used vinyl. Along with redbook, SACD is basically a way to sell all the CDs again, just an angle to get more profit from old titles. Anyone can get LPs for CHEAP and they sound better (assuming well recorded) than all other formats.

Rob
More to discover