Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media The Almighty Buck The Internet

The Perfect Online Music Store? 532

brace asks: "With the proliferation of online music sales, more and more companies are jumping onto the bandwagon and trying to sell you downloadable music. Some of them do a good job, some of them are just bad at it. The question I have for Slashdot readers is essentially 'What would the perfect online music store offer you?' Should it have OGG and FLAC tracks, as well as MP3? Would you rather pay per-song or per-month? Would you want the option to purchase hard-copy as well (like the actual album, or even band merchandise)? Should the song samples be 30 second downloads or full-song streams fed on-demand? Is a radio station important for an online music store?"
"Personally, I'd like to see a store that has a 24/7 internet radio station, on-demand streaming, $0.99 downloads (and $9.99 album downloads), links to purchase actual albums or merchandise, and with MP3, OGG, and FLAC support. I'd also like to see the artists being paid more than 10%..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Perfect Online Music Store?

Comments Filter:
  • by PepsiProgrammer ( 545828 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:01PM (#10368490)
    Personally I think it would be great if a music store kept the files in wav format and encoded them on the fly so you could choose any format you like (caching the popular options). Sure they would probably have to charge more, but I think it would be worth it.

    Oh and no DRM please, I like my music without bullshit.
    • by poptones ( 653660 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:13PM (#10368601) Journal
      and the prices are good, too. Problem is those "wav" files seem to be ripped in analog format or something, cuz their quality is very erratic.

      No fucking way am I gonna pay a buck a song and ten bucks an album for downloads unless I really like the work and can get pristine quality. Thus far I would say Magnatune does it best: you can listen to anything they have (and you can actually hear it because the quality doesn't suck) and, if you want to buy it, you can set the price and download it in high quality formats. I've bought a few albums there and have actually found myself going back to buy a work again because I decided I liked the work more than I thought and I felt bad about being such a cheap bastard.

      if the record companies would trust people to do the right thing and stop calling us all thieves they could make a LOT more money. If I can buy a used CD for five bucks, rip it and get the quality I want, why the fuck would I pay twice that for the download? Magnatune gets it... the others don't.

      • "if the record companies would trust people to do the right thing and stop calling us all thieves they could make a LOT more money. If I can buy a used CD for five bucks, rip it and get the quality I want, why the fuck would I pay twice that for the download? Magnatune gets it... the others don't."

        The empirical evidence runs counter to your opinion. The iTunes Music Store does absolutely gangbuster business, and they have very little trouble signing up artists, compared to Magnatune. They charge a bu

        • by Fnkmaster ( 89084 ) on Tuesday September 28, 2004 @01:43AM (#10370655)
          A) iTMS doesn't sign up artists directly, they sign up the labels and resell their music, paying them 77 cents out of the dollar. B) Magnatune doesn't really try to sign established artists, they appeal to independent artists, or artists in non-mainstream genres, and they apparently have substantially more artists interested in being listed than they want to list - they are being selective, trying to pick good music, focusing on niches where they think they have a chance of getting traction.


          Magnatune is trying to be a niche online record label, not a catch-all retailer selling music as a loss leader for their music player devices, so comparing them directly is pretty meaningless. Does Magnatune have issues with their marketing and PR? Absolutely, but I'm not sure that the fact that they let you listen to high quality streams before you buy has anything to do with their issues (it's not really payment optional, they just let you choose your payment amount between 5 and 20 dollars for an album, I believe, with 8 being the recommended amount).


          If the problem is just exposure of the artists and the Magnatune site, that's a fixable problem and doesn't fundmentally disprove their model (which I see as high quality, DRM-free tracks for a reasonable price per album, with free full song previews). In any case, I think the jury's still out on this one, but there's plenty of room for an iTunes and a Magnatune to coexist out there (in fact, iTunes is going to be doing a deal with Magnatune in the near future to promote some of their artists in exchange for time-limited exclusives to sell their new albums).

    • 10 years out (Score:5, Interesting)

      by simpl3x ( 238301 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:35PM (#10368791)
      Since some of my CDs are nearing twenty years, and I am encoding all of them into Apple lossless, I'd like to think a decade out. Much of my music has never been really used until I have been burning them into iTunes, and while lossless is great, the availability is probably more important. Digging through a couple of thousand CDs prevents one from using the music. I will likely re-encode all of the CDs (3 of 12 boxes to go) into 256 AAC when the variable bitrate version is out with quicktime 7.0. This will give me about 120 gigs of compressed music, which will be usable on whatever Pod is around in 3 or 4 years. 128 AAC or 128 LAME is just not good enough.

      So, before I begin purchasing music online, it has to be at least 256 AAC quality, reasonable (meaning easy to disable) licensing or non-restrictive DRM, and a better selection of music. Until then, I'll buy CDs, burn them and give away or sell the worthless shell to somebody else.

      I do have to say that most people do not purchase as much music as I do, and that a certain amount of it needs to be freely available at lower bitrates. Streams are great, but smart playlists loaded on demand (RSS-ish) would be great. They could simply be automatically disposed of afterwards.
      • Re:10 years out (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Flamesplash ( 469287 )
        256 just seems a bit much. Do you really hear the difference, or do you just think you do?

        Sometimes I'm glad I have not perfect hearing, I don't have to worry about these issues.
      • Re:10 years out (Score:3, Insightful)

        by nathanh ( 1214 )
        Until then, I'll buy CDs, burn them and give away or sell the worthless shell to somebody else.

        You are not allowed to keep the ripped versions once you've sold or given away the "worthless shell". You might as well be downloading the music off eDonkey because what you propose is just as illegal.

  • allofmp3.com (Score:5, Insightful)

    by n0iz77 ( 793147 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:01PM (#10368492)
    allofmp3.com is already amazing. super low prices and i can get most of the music in ogg q5. :)
    • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bullitB ( 447519 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:10PM (#10368576)
      Unless you're a Russian citizen, living in Russia, listening to the music in Russia, allofmp3.com is also not legal. If you're going to violate local copyright laws, at least use a P2P service where they don't take down your name and credit card number.
      • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Insightful)

        by geniusj ( 140174 )
        Well i've never heard of anyone getting busted for it yet. Nor have I heard a statement from the RIAA saying that the site was illegal.
      • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:4, Insightful)

        by jonathan_95060 ( 69789 ) * on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:24PM (#10368693)

        Unless you're a Russian citizen, living in Russia, listening to the music in Russia, allofmp3.com is also not legal. If you're going to violate local copyright laws, at least use a P2P service where they don't take down your name and credit card number.


        And what do you base this statement on? Forget proof, has RIAA even ever commented on allofMP3? Last time I searched RIAA was mute on the subject of AllofMP3.com which is strange when you consider how much music US customers download from there. It is inconceivable that RIAA is unaware that US citizens are using AllofMP3 in droves.

        Granted, ripping CDs in the US and uploading them to allofMP3 is likely to be illegal but I have seen nothing to suggest that downloading music from allofMP3.com is illegal.

        Presumably if it was illegal to download from allofMP3 then RIAA would get an injunction (or some such legal device) against the credit card companies so that VISA and Mastercard would not let US customers do business with AllofMP3.

        I've used AllofMP3.com for nearly a year and I'm thrilled with them. They give me MP3s in the format I want (192kbps VBR MP3s) and they have old hard to find music (e.g. King Crimson - Discipline) that I can't get from other online services.

        SIDEBAR: it was actually the fact that I couldn't fine old AC/DC and King Crimson albums that I wanted on iTunes that drove me to AllofMP3, not the fact that AllofMP3 is cheaper!
        • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Informative)

          And what do you base this statement on?

          17 USC 106(1), given the definitions of a phonorecord in 17 USC 101, and numerous cases such as Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 75 F. Supp 2d 1290, 1294 (D. Utah 1999).

          I have seen nothing to suggest that downloading music from allofMP3.com is illegal.

          Well, now you have!

          Presumably if it was illegal to download from allofMP3 then RIAA would get an injunction (or some such legal device) against the credit card companies so that VISA and Masterca
          • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:5, Interesting)

            by kayen_telva ( 676872 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:40PM (#10368846)
            I fail to see how that case you cite relates.
            so I guess I guess I can post links to bugs bunny to support mine.
            is buying russian liquor illegal ? is buying a russian fur hat illegal ? no.

            http://www.museekster.com/allofmp3faq.htm#Is%20All ofmp3%20legal?
            http://www.technewsworld.com/story /34512.html
            http://news.com.com/5208-1027-0.html?forumID=1&thr eadID=1110&messageID=4945&start=-181

            2 friggin seconds on google and your little soapbox is destroyed
        • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Senjutsu ( 614542 )
          Question: Why can't I use the iTunes Music Store outside of the US, UK, France, or Germany?

          Answer: Because Apple has not secured the copyrights for the songs they sell outside of those 4 countries.

          If having the distribution rights in one country were enough to allow you to distribute worldwide, you can damn sure bet Apple would do so. They wouldn't deny themselves a revenue stream like that.

          Just because the RIAA hasn't commented on it, it doesn't mean it's it legal.
      • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:5, Informative)

        by NSash ( 711724 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:35PM (#10368796) Journal
        That's actually not true. I am not a lawyer, but until I hear from one, I think I'll go by this. [copyright.gov]

        602 - Infringing importation of copies or phonorecords

        (a) Importation into the United States, without the authority of the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or phonorecords under section 106, actionable under section 501. This subsection does not apply to--

        (1) importation of copies or phonorecords under the authority or for the use of the Government of the United States or of any State or political subdivision of a State, but not including copies or phonorecords for use in schools, or copies of any audiovisual work imported for purposes other than archival use;

        (2) importation, for the private use of the importer and not for distribution, by any person with respect to no more than one copy or phonorecord of any one work at any one time, or by any person arriving from outside the United States with respect to copies or phonorecords forming part of such person's personal baggage
        [...]

        (b) In a case where the making of the copies or phonorecords would have constituted an infringement of copyright if this title had been applicable, their importation is prohibited. In a case where the copies or phonorecords were lawfully made, the United States Customs Service has no authority to prevent their importation unless the provisions of section 601 are applicable.
        • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:5, Informative)

          by cpt kangarooski ( 3773 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:43PM (#10368865) Homepage
          What, can't you read?

          (b) In a case where the making of the copies or phonorecords would have constituted an infringement of copyright if this title had been applicable, their importation is prohibited.

          That means that unless the copies made would have been legal had US law applied at the place where they were made -- and therefore, since only the US copyright holder has power under US law, he would have had to consent; Russian organizations have no blanket power under US law -- they are NOT importable.

          And since the exception in (a)(2) only applies to (a), and not (b), you're fucked.

          Also 602 doesn't apply. Downloading is reproduction, not importation. Check it out: Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 75 F. Supp 2d 1290, 1294 (D. Utah 1999).
          • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Interesting)

            by NSash ( 711724 )
            That means that unless the copies made would have been legal had US law applied at the place where they were made -- and therefore, since only the US copyright holder has power under US law, he would have had to consent

            Russian copyright law [outsourcing-russia.com] grants the holder the exclusive right to distribute and reproduce the work. Russia is a signatory of the Berne Convention [wipo.int], so if allofmp3.com is operating legally within Russia, they already have the copyright holders' consents.
            • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Interesting)

              Russian copyright law is as worthless as Moon-Man law within the borders of the US. Copyright law is national. Which is why they can have whatever they have within their borders.

              Since I'm talking about US-located downloaders breaking the law, Russian copyright law is not a part of this discussion.

              so if allofmp3.com is operating legally within Russia, they already have the copyright holders' consents.

              No, they have either a) compulsory licenses so that they can reproduce legally without consent, or b) c
              • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Informative)

                by NSash ( 711724 )
                I dunno why you point out the Berne Convention. It doesn't play into this.

                The Berne Convention is the reason that Russians couldn't ignore their own copyright laws with regard to works created by non-Russians.

                No, they have either a) compulsory licenses so that they can reproduce legally without consent, or b) consent of the RUSSIAN copyright holder. Who very well might not be the same person as the US copyright holder.
                And from what I hear, it's the former.


                If you have any specific sources on the exact
              • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Informative)

                by NSash ( 711724 )
                Russian copyright law is as worthless as Moon-Man law within the borders of the US. Copyright law is national... Since I'm talking about US-located downloaders breaking the law, Russian copyright law is not a part of this discussion.

                If they are in compliance with Russian copyright law, they have the copyright holders' permissions, which means they are in compliance with U.S. copyright law.

                (Edit - If they really are distributing under a compulsory license [slashdot.org], that's something else.)
          • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:4, Insightful)

            by caudron ( 466327 ) on Tuesday September 28, 2004 @08:10AM (#10372214) Homepage
            That means that unless the copies made would have been legal had US law applied at the place where they were made

            (standard IANAL stuff applies)

            Even under US Copyright law, these copies are legal. They are licensed under contract in a legitimately recognized sovreign nation that is an active and signifigant participant in the world community. Russian-born contracts are perfectly valid and enforecable across borders.

            Facts:

            1) The music was legally licensed in the nation where the sale is taking place.

            2) There exosts no prohibition against sale in the legal license.

            3) There exists no prohibition against sale accross borders once the music is legally licensed.

            4) When the RIAA had legal grounds to injunct a music distribution method, they do so.

            5) The RIAA has never made a single public mention of AllOfMP3, and there exists no evidence to suggest that AllOfMP3 is on their hitlist.

            6) Copyright law allows me to purchase music in another country and bring it here, so long as the purchase was legal.

            7) The sale of music by AllOfMP3 is legal.

            Downloading is reproduction, not importation. Check it out: Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry,

            I trust that you, also, are not a lawyer since you have taken IR v ULM way out of context.

            1) In IRvULM, the hosting site did not have license to distribute. AllOfMP3 does.

            2) In IRvULM, there is no mention whatsoever of the distinction between reproduction versus importation as an issue. Judge Campbell was ruling on the distinction between viewing and copying. The judge ruled that viewing a page constituted the illegal making of a copy, rather than a legal viewing (i.e., same as photocopying a book rather than same are reading it in the library) which has zero bearing on a case where the licensee has every legal right to sell copies of the material and is doing so under the auspices of a legally recognized government that engages and accepts the rules of the WTC, of which Russia is a member in good standing.

            What, can't you read?

            Though it's clear by this statement that you were being offensive in your reply, you'll note that I stuck to the facts and didn't engage in meaningless insult. Try doing that from now on and people will respond better to your arguments. and especially avoid being so cocky when you are wrong. It doesn't make you look so good.
    • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:5, Insightful)

      by blackmonday ( 607916 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:13PM (#10368603) Homepage
      Those of us in the USA who buy music from allofmp3 need to remind ourselves thats it's not legal here. But dammit its the closest thing to perfect. There media app downloads the songs for you in the background, the tunes are dirt cheap and they have a good (but not excellent, at least in punk) selection. Their search engine sucks though. Search for "corazon oro" without the quotes, then search for "corazon de oro". that song should be there in the first search! I would also like it if it embedded the album cover into the tune, so iTunes could display it.

      • How exactly is it illegal for us? Wouldn't that be something along the lines of "importing" your music?
      • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday September 28, 2004 @12:29AM (#10370219)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Interesting)

      Yeah, but it's illegal* to use (at least for Americans). So it's not noticably better than free, illegal alternatives.

      *Yes, it's illegal to download from them. This is because downloading is reproduction, not importation (which is also generally illegal anyway)

      Before disputing this, please read 17 USC 106; pertinent definitions in 17 USC 101 (in particular 'phonorecord'); Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 75 F. Supp 2d 1290, 1294 (D. Utah 1999); A&M Records v. Napster, 239 F.3d 1004,
    • Re:allofmp3.com (Score:3, Insightful)

      by damiam ( 409504 )
      Whether or not it's legal, allofmp3.com is ethically no better than p2p because the artist doesn't get payed a single penny.
  • iTunes rock (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:02PM (#10368497)
    After 3 years of boycotting music and not buying any, I finally started using iTunes 4 months back. Since then I've purchased 10 albums. I tried MusicMatch and looked at Real, but honestly iTunes is the most user friendly.
    • Re:iTunes rock (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dbn3 ( 239079 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:20PM (#10368667)
      [Listening to the new U2 single just bought on iTunes :) ]

      Now that I am more than 10 years out of college, it is definately worth $0.99 to just get the song I want without trolling the p2p networks looking for music.

      Besides, in recent years, if it ain't hip with the teen/college crowd, it ain't on the p2p networks. Those tracks that are there are of very variable quality -- you have to get several copies because some moron can't rip or encode correctly. It's just not worth the hassle.

      Things I really like about iTunes:
      - cost;
      - quality;
      - ease of purchase;
      - the "others also bought" links let me explore things I haven't heard before; and, of course
      - buying the single for a buck instead of a 10 track crappy cd for $14 for that one single.

      Things I still am waiting for:
      - broader catalogue (Madonna and The Beatles for two are still not available)
  • MP3? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Treacle Treatment ( 681828 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:02PM (#10368498)

    I wouldn't pay for any downloadable music that wasn't CD quality and storable to as many CDs or MP3 players as I wanted.

    • Agreed, especially with the need for CD quality. On reason I'm happy to shop (occassionally) at livephish.com [livephish.com] is that they give me the option of buying flac and doing whatever I want with the files.
  • iTunes (Score:2, Insightful)

    by loid_void ( 740416 ) *
    No one has done /. better, and no one has done iTunes better, and didn't someone say, "Bring 'em on." Nah...
  • FREE MUSIC (Score:3, Insightful)

    by michalas ( 763695 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:03PM (#10368511) Homepage
    >'What would the perfect online music store offer you?'

    FREE MUSIC!
  • Allofmp3.com (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RzUpAnmsCwrds ( 262647 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:04PM (#10368521)
    Allofmp3.com already has FLAC, Vorbis, and VBR MP3 files for the taking. They're DRM-free and play on anything.

    I would happily pay $.99 a track for what Allofmp3.com offers. Of course, they only charge $0.01 per megabyte.

    Of course, Allofmp3.com is probably illegal, at least in the US. But the RIAA should learn the lesson that the MPAA has learned:

    Give people the content they want (movies, some of them costing $100s of millions to produce), at a fair price ($15 DVDs), in a format that's convenient (DVDs have good quality and nonrestrictive DRM) and there will be no incentive to pirate your content.
    • Re:Allofmp3.com (Score:2, Insightful)

      by MrRage ( 677798 )
      It's a lot easier to download a song vs. downloading a whole movie. That's probably why the movie industry hasn't been hit as hard.
    • Re:Allofmp3.com (Score:4, Insightful)

      by OS24Ever ( 245667 ) * <trekkie@nomorestars.com> on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:11PM (#10368588) Homepage Journal
      But the RIAA should learn the lesson that the MPAA has learned:


      That, and produce a quality product. I'm hard up to find any new music that isn't over sampled over produced stripping teeny bopper. I mean with the iPod and you listen to the music without her shaking her ass your face on the screen you see the crap for what it is.
      • Re:Allofmp3.com (Score:3, Insightful)

        by valmont ( 3573 )

        well the RIAA may own and produce a lot of crappy music of "today". The only problem is that they own really, REALLY *REALLY* good music from "back in the day". I'm sorry but show me one independent artist who's nearly as good as Ella Fitzgerald.

        Hey that's how it's been for decades. If you're really good, people like your shit, the big guys go after you, and you succumb to the big buck, or at least prospects of it.

        The thing is, if you want to become really famous, and make the big bucks, you have to

  • (near) unlimited servers spread across the world, making bandwidth a moot point
    a flexible distributed search engine
    wide variety, from studio releases to live recordings to fan-inspired mashups.

    Hmm, sounds like an average p2p network. :)
  • I talk about the Global Library in books 6/7:

    www.geocities.com/James_Sager_PA

    I think its vitally important to keep record of what users buy. This way, you can give other users tips... ALA:

    80% of users that had 50% of your favorite music also downloaded groups: A,B,C

    Read reviews, and mod them up/down, and your favorite critics suddenly occur... Read what they say about music and trust them because they were right all the other times.

    ETC ETC, you can go deep... Right now its getting the rights to downlo
  • by vivek7006 ( 585218 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:05PM (#10368529) Homepage
    Everytime you buy a song, your size will increase by 20%
  • For me (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Judg3 ( 88435 ) <jeremy@pa[ ]ck.com ['vle' in gap]> on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:05PM (#10368531) Homepage Journal
    The author's idea of a music store is pretty much aligned with my own, except for one thing - I'd like to have the ability to (for an additional fee even) download the .wav file.

    Then I can do whatever the hell I want to with it. Yes MP3 and OGG are nice, and yes FLAC is lossless, but the ability to download a .wav just gives me that warm fuzzy "I can do whatever I please with it" feeling.

    Ah, yes, and I'd like the ability to download the track I purchased 3 times, just in case. Making sure I could grab my music again if my hdd fails would be an extra warm selling point too.

  • AudioGalaxy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by frankmu ( 68782 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:05PM (#10368532) Homepage
    that was a great site, with informative reviews, and vast selection of music. still miss it.
  • by The Only Druid ( 587299 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:05PM (#10368533)
    Look at it this way, there are two groups of replies to this:

    The Slashdot Crowd...

    They're going to demand support for all of the Ogg contained codecs.
    They're going to demand no drm, even optionally, so while you'll probably see AAC as a general format, you wont see fair-play.
    You'll see the classic mp3, of course.
    The price is going to have to be far less than 99c, since so many people here resent all things associated with the Apple store. I'm thinking what, 30 pence will please you guys?

    The Normal Crowd...
    For everyone else, you know what the perfect music store would be? The iTunes music store with basically a few additions:
    There should be some ability to purchase at least some songs (i.e. certain classical pieces) at a higher bitrate.
    There should be the ability to purchase files for more than one player, so that may mean something like WMA.

    There's probably more, but I think these are the key points...
  • by Anita Coney ( 648748 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:06PM (#10368534) Homepage
    Personally, I like buying CDs from Amazon. The prices are good, I have yet to find any DRM, I pay no shipping, no taxes, and usually get my CDs in about a week. I can then rip them to any format I choose.

    • I like buying CD's from Amazon too, but not when the CD contains one song out of thirteen that I want to hear and I'm expected to pay for all of them. This is where Apple's store excels; you buy exactly what you want. Sound quality is good enough; if you're listening through those lousy iPod earbuds or average desktop speakers, 128 bit AAC files are fine. If you're an audiophile, only 30ips reel-to-reel analog tapes are good enough for you, so what are you doing here anyway? :)
  • by luugi ( 150586 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:06PM (#10368538)
    How Napster used to be.
  • already exists... (Score:5, Informative)

    by MrBlic ( 27241 ) * on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:06PM (#10368539) Homepage
    Magnatune fits your description and it already exists. All we need is to have Magnatune license it's storefront for many other publishers to open and make some money in a similar grass-roots way.

    http://www.magnatune.com [magnatune.com]

    I'm not affiliated in any way other than to love what they do. I've listened to lots of stuff, including their streaming mp3s of entire genres. I have bought a couple of albums from magnatune, and still listen to it today. It's been a long time since I've been into music this much.

    -Jim

    • I'll agree to that! (Score:5, Informative)

      by ValourX ( 677178 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:19PM (#10368661) Homepage
      Magnatune is incredible -- if only they also had Opera, I'd never have cause to listen to anything else.

      I listen to the New Age and Electronica shoutcast stations from Magnatune on Rhythmbox petty much all day and night.

      For people who like new music -- and it's *good* music, too -- Magnatune is probably the best Internet resource.

      You choose what you want to pay for an album ($4 minimum, $8 suggested, the sky is the limit) and 50% goes to the artist. You can download full-quality WAVs, MP3, OGG, FLAC, AAC, and I think there's one more. You can also download all of the album art in PDF format, so you can write your own CDs as they would be from the store, minus the DRM.

      I usually get the WAV zip file, then compress it to OGG/Vorbis for my computer and write the WAVs to CD for my car.

      -Jem
  • Easy... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kelnos ( 564113 ) <[bjt23] [at] [cornell.edu]> on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:06PM (#10368540) Homepage
    Give me a choice of Ogg Vorbis or FLAC, give me the choice to pay an "all you can eat"-type periodic subscription, or a per-song price (with a discount for an "album's" worth of songs). I'd like to see this store backed by artists who actually get a large chunk of my change, not by huge music conglomerates. The obvious one: I don't want any DRM on the files themselves. A supported Linux client is a must, of course (or a web interface). 30 second preview clips are good enough for me to decide if I like a song enough to buy it.

    So, as you might guess, I'm not buying any online music anytime soon...
    • Everything in parent, plus:

      • Decent selection of classical music
      • Decent search capabilities that can take into account the requirements of classical music (same piece recorded by several different orchestras/conductors/soloists, sometimes more than once by a particular artist, movements, organization by composer's work rather than by which things someone crammed onto a CD, etc)

      FLAC is good enough. Since it is a lossless codec, I can transcode it without the inherent loss between, say, going from OGG to

  • sound quality (Score:4, Insightful)

    by evil crash ( 739354 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:06PM (#10368546) Journal
    Guaranteed sound quality, and the ability to re-download any track I've ever purchased. (Ya just never know when ya might lose it.)
  • by mcwop ( 31034 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:07PM (#10368547) Homepage
    To be up front I like Apple's music store, but it needs vast improvement:

    • Create magazines by genre. Example, a punk page with weekly news album reviews highlights etc. Tour dates. Could have one for Classical etc...
    • More indy music, most stores do not have the more esoteric independant stuff that I want.
    • Allow bands to set up their own bootleg store page, where they can upload and sell live albums or singles - all to be billed thorugh the main store
    • Set up store preferences, like the landing page by music genre etc...

    That is it off the top of my head.

  • Offer a single repoistory for FLAC/SHN downloads via torrents for live music that's distributible for free.

    It will draw people in that are interested in both the live stuff and paying to support the bands that support the free distribution of their music.

    Give me that and I'd frequent your store. Hell, I've even been peeking more and more at iTMS because of their large studio collection of the Grateful Dead. They even have a good size collection of other jambands (WSP, SCI).
  • Last time I used it (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bigberk ( 547360 ) <bigberk@users.pc9.org> on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:07PM (#10368552)
    bleep [warprecords.com] was just about perfect. Because it's direct to the record label, about 50% of the sale goes to the artists (which is fantastic in my books). You simply pay for the sale, maybe an entire album, and get a ZIP file containing the high quality MP3s that have been lame encoded with VBR. Very proper. Looks proper, sounds proper. So yeah, that's about as perfect as I have seen!
  • * Per Song Pricing

    * Lossless compression scheme and a cheap program to encode it to any other format.

    * 50 cents or less pricing per song

    * GOOD MUSIC SELECTION (ie Beatles, Beach Boys, U2, Led Zeppelin)

    * EVEN MORE GOOD MUSIC SELECTION (Rarities, B-Sides, Live Shows, exclusives)

    * Indy artists

    * Less 50 cent, nelly and timberlake on the front page

    * Reasonable DRM (none)

    * Audiobooks

  • by EvilCabbage ( 589836 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:09PM (#10368566) Homepage
    When I find music worth buying, I seek it out in my local, privately owned music store. These little stores are often owned by people that love music and they really need help to keep the money in the local economy.

    After I purchase my real, shiny CD I rip it to MP3 and stick the CD on my shelf. If my hard drive crashes and burns, I've got my hard copy right there, waiting to be re-ripped.

    I just don't see the appeal in buying music online in the way proposed. My idea of buying something involves actually having a physical end product, otherwise it's just called 'renting'.
    • by clarkie.mg ( 216696 ) <mgofwd+Slashdot&gmail,com> on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:39PM (#10368839) Homepage Journal
      I don't think your local store has hundreds of thousands CDs. Usually, they stock only novelties and popular artists.

      Of course, you can back order through them but then you will have to go twice to the store. Why not buy online then.
      • Of course, you can back order through them but then you will have to go twice to the store. Why not buy online then.

        My local outlet is quite comprehensive (even more impressive considering this is a town of less than 30,000 people), but is it such a bad thing having to go and browse twice?

        Music should be something social. It's great being in a store and bumping into someone with similar tastes and interests. This may come as a shock but it's a great way to work on those people interaction skills, just g
  • I've said it before and I'll say it again!

    The perfect online music store is already here, at magnatune. [magnatune.com]

    Stream the entire catalog for free! If you decide you want to download something, you chose the format and the price. The artist gets 50%.

    The quality of the entire catalog is extremely high. This is a feature, not a bug :-) (what, no Britney Spears?).

    Check it out and enjoy :-)

    -- a satisfied Magnatune customer
  • The ultimate music store would let each individual artist choose the format of the songs, the cost of the songs (per song, per album, or a subscription), how the songs are to be previewed, hard copy, merch, etc.
  • by Jason1729 ( 561790 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:10PM (#10368574)
    It has to have CD quality or better, no DRM, and substantially cheaper than buying on CD.
  • Backups (Score:2, Interesting)

    by DAldredge ( 2353 )
    It should have the ability to give you back what you bought in the event of a computer crash.
  • 1. Everything is free.
    2. Everything encoded in a new revolutionary format which features greater than CD quality, and all files magically don't take any space to store or time to download.
    3. Everything is without DRM.
    4. Despite it being a new format, it automatically plays on every device in existance anyway.
    5. Every piece of music ever composed is available and audiobooks of every book written.
    6. Revolutionary new searching technology brings you right to what you're looking for the first time every time wh
  • Huge selection and $0.10 a track, and they'd get a lot of money from me, as opposed to no money right now.
  • Profit! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Vaystrem ( 761 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:18PM (#10368646)
    1) Submit story to /.
    2) Have /. community critque existing Music stores
    3) Implement Recommendations
    4) Submit story to /. about new music store
    5) Profit!
  • My 2 bottom lines (Score:2, Interesting)

    by saur2004 ( 801688 )
    1) No DRM
    2) Cash anonymity. [1]

    I could not care less about any other details, ogg, mp3, ect, ect.

    [1] If I walk into a music store, get a CD off a shelf and pay with cash (tinfoil hat arguments about face recognition systems or ATM bill number records aside) I can expect a certain level of anonymity. Ill buy online when I can expect that level of anonymity. (aka never) No one has my permission to record what music I listen too, what books I read, or what video I watch piriod, and that includes credit ca

  • I would like for previews to be the full length of the song, because I frequently want music that I've not heard before. It's one thing to say "I definately want the latest song by Eminem" and just buy it because you know you'll like the artist, but I have more offbeat tastes, and I'd like to know that I like all of a song I want to buy. So if I'm crusing through the store and I see something like "The Boston Pops plays a medley from The Simpsons", I'd be interested in hearing that, but the first thirty s
  • Most online record sales still think in terms of individual tracks, and when you get a DJ mix album there aren't any gaps between the tracks. Problem is both MP3 and AAC encodings of these albums leave glitches between the tracks, either when you play it or try to burn a CD from it.

    Vorbis or FLAC would fix this issue, at least from a CD burning point of view, but a lot of players will still add an auduble glitch into otherwise perfect DJ glue.
  • by sPaKr ( 116314 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:21PM (#10368675)
    When you look at pricing selling bits is a losing game. First lets just get past the whole DRM, no I repeat NO DRM has ever worked. Just look at the warez groups and software, every game comes out with DRM and within hours its down like panties. The next fact we need to look at is just the econmics of the music buisness. Albums will never avarge over $20, the current sweet spot is $9 - $15. The per track sweet spot is $.99 (pick your currancy its all .99). Now lets look at concert tickets and expendatures. A decent show will start at about $30 per person, (figure you need to shelp a girl that makes less then you along so your paying her way). Add in tshirt (gotta get the sweet brittny t) and maybe a few beers, and you can esisly kick that outing up to $100s. So we have a situation where the concerts are brining 10x what the album sells for, and we are talking about albums? Jebus, why not just take 10% of the gate and give the bits away for free? So this is how it should work. First encode all the albums in just about every decent format that someone might want, and give them away for free. Allow people to download them directly from your website, share them p2p, it doesnt matter its just bits. Now Sell albums with something that they dont get by downloading. Keep the CD at about $15, but include a head of line copuon for the next concert. Most people if they like the ablum and buy it, and get it gets them into the concert. Now whamo this is where you start to cash in as we have seen the concerts is where people spend real money. The mp3s, flacs, aac's are just marketing to sell more concert tickets, shirts, and beers. Hard Copy CD's stay at $15 so they break even, but again just push people into the concert. The scary thing is the same model works for movies. How many Starwars fanboys would preorder the DVD's if they got into the premier of the next episode a day early with the movie critics? This also fixes the DRM arms race as by not playing that game. I mean how can kazaa compete when I can get the album, for $15 but a $20 rebate for the concert? If I show up for the concert the 'album pays for its self' in my eyes, but since they jack up the price of the concert, add in the price of the tshirt and the 'CD of the concert' vendor the music industry, artist, and promoter makes back the cash hand over fist.
  • Free (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Apreche ( 239272 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:26PM (#10368718) Homepage Journal
    Recorded music isn't worth anything to me anymore. I'll pay to see a concert or buy merchandise if I am compelled to do so. But unless it is for a ridiculously low price, say a dollar a month for infinite music, then its just not worth it.

    Even if I did join some service, almost none of the music I listen to would be available. I listen mostly to groups like machinae supremacy, who give their music away for free anyway, classic rock which I already have on vinyl and thus am legally allowed to have mp3s of, ocremixes, and foreign music. It might be possible to pay for some of the foreign music on some of the services, but either I wont be able to read it or it wont work with Linux or it will costly ungodly amounts of money.

    In conclusion I would actually pay for music if.
    1) Every song ever recorded was available.
    2) I could choose my format and bitrate freely.
    3) Absolutely no DRM encumberance.
    4) Works with Linux.
    5) Super cheap, we're talking pennies or half pennies per song.

    It's a good thing not too many people feel like me. The record companies would be screwed.
  • by Hortensia Patel ( 101296 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:26PM (#10368719)

    Magnatune [magnatune.com].

    MP3, Ogg, FLAC, you name it. Listen to entire albums before buying, if you like. Most artists allow some discretion in how much you pay, depending on how much you like it and/or how much you can afford. Artist gets 50% and, IIRC, they retain full copyright.

    I'm not affiliated with them in any way, but these guys really do Get It. Give 'em a whirl, they deserve it.

  • by Malor ( 3658 ) * on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:27PM (#10368722) Journal
    What I want is what I get on a CD: lossless music without DRM. (stupid attempts at copy protection notwithstanding.) At that point, your pricing is going to determine how much I'll buy. If you're at 99c per song/$10 per album, I'll buy some... if you're at $5/album, I'll buy a heck of a lot more.

    For me, at least, $5 is about the sweet spot.... it's low enough that I'd buy four or five albums at a time, and I don't think I'd buy any more if they were cheaper, since you can only listen to so much stuff. At $10, I'd guess that my total dollar value of purchases would be much lower, because I'd have to think about each one a little. At $5, it's an impulse purchase... at $10, it's less so.

    Even www.allofmp3.com isn't THAT cheap; lossless files from them usually run about a buck apiece. If they were cheaper, and their selection was broader, I'd buy a lot more, but I'm still pretty happy with them as it is.

    www.allofmp3.com shows that the infrastructure can work. But it would be hard to duplicate here, because the record labels here want to charge a lot more for stuff. Somehow, I suspect they'd want to price it so that original CDs were actually cheaper; their perspective will probably be that lossless DRM-free files are 'more' than what they give you on the CD (since it's easy to copy). Unfortunately, almost any customer would think of electronic-only delivery as 'less', and wouldn't be willing to pay as much. I certainly wouldn't.

    Overall, allofmp3.com is running about $10-11 for a lossless album, and I've bought a few of them. So I am a real potential customer. Get that price down to $5 or so, and I'd buy a boatload of music that I wouldn't otherwise.
  • by dynayellow ( 106690 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:31PM (#10368760)
    Asking Slashdot what the perfect store to buy music should be like. It's like asking the American Cancer Institute which cigarette has the best flavor.
  • magntune.com (Score:4, Informative)

    by phr1 ( 211689 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:39PM (#10368838)
    The perfect online music store is already up and running [magnatune.com]. It has mp3 downloads and streams of entire albums under Creative Commons licenses. If you want WAV, Ogg, FLAC, or other formats, you can pay for those. They are still under the CC license permitting non-commercial redistribution so you don't have to click on agreements allowing RIAA thugs to inspect your underwear drawer. If you want to use the music commercially (say as a movie score), the licenses for that are right there on the site: select the one you want, print it, sign it, and send it in with a check for the specified amount.

    Admittedly, there's nowhere near as wide a choice of CC-licensed music right now as there is of RIAA-style proprietary music, but that doesn't bother me. There's been so much music recorded through history that there's no way to ever listen to it all, and everything I've downloaded from Magnatune has been excellent. There's enough selection there to keep me happy for quite a while. I've completely lost interest in RIAA music and haven't bought a CD from a record store in years. (I've bought a few directly from performers at live shows, but that's about it).

  • by the-build-chicken ( 644253 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @09:51PM (#10368922)
    ...allofmp3.com

    it's got it nailed. Great service, great price.
  • Liner Notes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by corian ( 34925 ) on Tuesday September 28, 2004 @12:43AM (#10370311)
    If I purchase an album digitally, I'd still like to download a PDF/Flash/something of the album art and liner notes. It's important content that the artist (or perhaps the label) feels complements the music, and that's why they are sold together. Although I'm puchasing music in a different format than a jewel case, I still want the same experience.

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Working...