I'm trying to offer the best spread between size and quality on my netlabels (www.rohformat.de, www.primative.net/schleudertrauma/ < shameless self promotion - GOTCHA! ;). That's actually vbr mp3's compressed with lame 3.90.3 codec using the --alt-preset standard setting. Right now i'm almost alone with vbr in the netlabel scene. Many others still use lame compressed 192kb HQ mp3's. I would also love to offer .ogg which i consider to be way better, qualitywise - it's not yet spread broadly enough. Since a lot of people in our "audience" are using Traktor/FS i won't move to .ogg before N.I. will support it.
On a sidenote, the difference between lame --alt-preset standard or .ogg and lossless formats isn't significant enough to approach our users with lossless compressed files that are up to 7 times bigger. Many people who download music from netlabels aren't flatrate or highspeed internet users. Maybe in some years the public request for lossless files will be strong enough to make the step. I don't see that for now as it's also a storageproblem, and hd's aren't up for this task yet ;) I personally think that discussion about file compression techniques should be hold under seperate cover (bet that'd be a nice flamewar, heh...) The thing that worries me most about apple etc, they all try to punish the user to use their own software to play their native formats. It's the same as with cd copy protection, the customers don't want to have limited access to products they buy. Back to aac (e.g.), converting between compressed formats doesn't make sense and are NO option as some industry people might tell us. About the bandwidth, storage space vs quality problem: Of course, bigger files have higher fixed costs. But why is there no option for the customers to choose buying better quality for a higher price? I bet the industry assumes that the usual customer is a dumbo and satisfied with the crap they sell there (pity, that's even true :/ ). Well, where is this heading to? I bet it needs some group effort in the "underground", i.e. a foundation of independant labels offering music in reasonable quality. Instead, i have to learn that Tresor joins apple :( The only thing that makes me a little bit happy about the situation: the amount of hits on netlabel websites is steadily growing. So should i cry or laugh?.. My 2,5 €cent. Ronny > two threads coming together at the same time... > > so as there are a lot of independent label runners on this > list who might be considering digital distribution what > format do you think digital releases should be released in? > > high bit rate lossy compressed format (mp3/ogg/aac) or full > width wavs/aiffs? > > i favour the latter. i have the bandwidth tho. > > robin... > > > -> Too bad the quality offered by Apple is still way below > enjoyable or > -> even playable :( Until the point they start selling music encoded > -> with reasonable codecs in a file format that can be used by any > -> application i > -> can only say: > -> > -> IT SUCKS. > -> > -> Even if the entire 313 music history would be available there. > -> > -> Thx for listening, > -> > -> Ronny
