A loss you can see...
Let’s start with science. CD’s are compressed audio from higher resolution files outputted at the mastering stage (technically pre-mastering before it goes to the manufacturer who creates the post-production master for creating the CD). The only time the consumer is getting the high resolution master audio is if they are listening to an Audio DVD or SACD (5.1 Surround or Stereo), have downloaded high definition source files (some artists have actually started making these available as well, usually to be burned as an Audio DVD) or if the project was recorded and mastered at CD resolution.
These master files are between 48khz 24bits (2,304,000 bit rate) and 96khz 24bits (4,608,000 bit rate). Compare that with a CD which is 44.1khz 16bits (1,411,200 bit rate). Not only is the difference mathematically evident, you notice it when you listen as well. So when you buy a CD you’re not getting the highest quality, but what has been deemed an acceptable consumer quality (for now). This is on par with buying a DVD of a movie shot HD. The DVD isn’t the highest quality, it is an acceptable consumer quality (at least until BlueRay becomes a standard which isn’t too far away now).
The best MP3’s are 320kbs (320,000 bit rate). That’s less than 25% of the CD quality and less than 8% of the high resolution source audio. More often than not however, you’re getting MP3’s at 256kbs or less. To restate it, that is less than 25% of the accepted consumer quality. It is like getting a DVD on the street from someone who took a video camera into the theater and recorded the movie. At 320kbs they used an consumer grade HD camera, anything less though just a handheld DV.
OK that’s a bit harsh. Let’s say MP3’s are like VCD’s; obviously of lesser value than the original format. Yet you go to your favorite online music store and they tell you the MP3 is at near CD quality and convince you to spend almost the exact same price you’d pay for the CD. To add insult to injury, the main costs that go into the price of the CD is the packaging not the actual CD itself. Packaging costs for the physical materials and printing, a cost not even incurred on the manufacturing side of a download. Then there are the distribution costs to get the physical CD in a store near you. None of these however, translate into the digital realm (technically bandwidth could be equated with distribution costs, but its 2009 bandwidth, particularly at volume, is a non cost). Yet you’re still paying a price relative to the CD.
To make matters even worse, you spent the last decade listening to the labels complain about how they are losing money because so many people are stealing these quarter quality files and not buying the CD’s or the downloads. Perhaps if instead of wasting their time trying to litigate against their customers, they decided to educate them on the difference between lossy audio and CD quality…. See this is my thing. I’m an audio guy. I can hear the difference. The average consumer may not be able to, or more succinctly, if the average consumer is told over and over there is no difference, they’ll take it at face value. And why were they being told this? Well to sell the MP3’s of course, or alternately so the claim can stand in a court of law when they sued you for not buying what they were selling.
Let’s try another comparison. Imagine if the motion picture association started saying VCD’s are high quality versions of the movies. That doesn’t even make sense does it? Neither does high quality MP3. It’s an oxymoron, for the simple fact that MP3 compression is lossy. Data is lost. What goes in is not the same as what comes out, no matter how you cut it. Which is interesting in and of itself; has the binary data from audiofiles ever been compared in the court of law? Spectral analysis will tell you there’s quite a bit missing with lossy compression. A song ripped from a CD looks nothing like the original.
Which brings me to my next point. One of the reasons lossy compression has become such a standard is its been sold as the next best thing to the CD, which quite simply it isn’t. In the compression world, the next best thing to the CD is a lossless file. The primary reason for this is quite simple: you can decode the lossless compression and end up with the original file. In other words the lossless file actually is at the consumer quality standard of the CD.
So why haven’t lossless files become a standard over the MP3? A few years ago one could have said the file size is too large, but considering people are now downloading full movies to their hard drives, lossless audio files aren’t that big of a deal. But there’s an industry and culture which has been sold around the MP3 file which the lossless model works against. The logic of that culture says MP3 player with the biggest harddrive is really only as good as the number of songs you can cram on it, even if you’ll never listen to them all and they are at 128kbps. This is the uneducated culture of music listening which has run rampantly out of control. When you’re trying to cram that MP3 player full, spending money is the least important thing.
2008 was the first year a major label (Atlantic Records) had downloads top their physical product. Yet in the same breath 95% of all music downloads in 2008 were ‘illegal’. There’s a message in there, and it boils down to persepective. Since the advent of the MP3 the labels have had the wrong perspective and with that perspective have spent the past decade run their industry into the ground. Their perspective says fast cheap distribution equals fast cheap revenue. Its knee jerk and not well thought out, as what is fast and cheap for them is just as fast and cheap for everyone else. Their only recourse in that is litigation which is of course long and expensive. They used to have the upper hand over the consumer in that regard, but I’m betting their recent decision to stop prosecuting customers has more to do with their ability to continue affording it with such dismal results, then their actually seeing the light.
Where they failed is in not seeing the full potential an MP3 has as an advertisement. Everyone else gets it. Music blogs use MP3’s everyday to advertise their site. Someone goes online, searches for a song by their favorite artist, and ends up on somebody’s blog. For new music they go to the blog before the label site, the artists official site, and often times the MySpace, because the blog has it first. On legit blogs it will be posted up with information about how to even purchase the song or album legally, doing the labels advertising for them. If they saw the MP3 like a product sample for building brand recognition, instead of their being billions of illegal files out there, there would be billions of new leads acquired for free. Again it’s all about perspective.
If all MP3’s were ripped at 192kbps standard for online use and official digital releases sold in lossless formats a lot of problems would be solved. It would take doing what should have been done years ago – educating the customer on the difference between lossy and lossless compression – but the benefits would be phenomenal. First and foremost there would be a digital standard which actually was on par with the physical CD (and could theoretically surpass the quality as lossless files can be at higher bit rates). People could share MP3’s all that they like, knowing that it is the same as sharing cassette tapes of old. When the customer has lossless files to compare with their MP3’s the value of that MP3 will subjectively decrease, encouraging the purchase of lossless files for the music they care about. Furthermore online ‘pirates’ could be identified by bit rate. With the choice ofposting a 256kbps file and risking legal action and posting a 192kbps file and being in the clear, I think the majority of bloggers would be more than happy to go with 192kbps.
Now of course this doesn’t solve all of the industry’s problems. One of the biggest ones they’ve had over the years has been customer retention, and file formats really won’t do anything to help them with that. If they’re going to fix that problem they’ll have to go back to their bread and butter which is finding and releasing good music. Unfortunately in the age of 360 deals, that hasn’t been a focus of the industry for a long time.
You May Want To Read:
Published under: GeneralTags: advertising • digital • downloads • formats • lossless • mp3 • piracy
You must be logged in to write a comment.