Online distribution of music and dance

Bryan McAlister

Message 16202 · 1 Mar 1999 22:56:28 · Fixed-width font · Whole thread

In article <003701be63fc$8e073ce0$xx1x0xx8@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx>, Greg
Reznick <xxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx> writes
>I feel compelled to join this discussion because I think several threads
>have become entangled. First, let's clear some things up:
>
>1. Yes, Ian, libraries pay fees to copyright agencies, and no, audio files
>don't compress like AutoCAD files.
>2. Speaking of compression, the words "loss-less" and "audio recording"
>don't really go together. The original is an analog medium and the very act
>of recording introduces loss of some sort. In particular, you start by
>limiting your recording equipment to the range of human hearing. So all we
>have left to measure is how much loss is incurred and whether it impinges on
>the listening experience. A front page story in my morning newspaper today
>discussed the potential effect of MP3 on the music industry; MP3 is good
>enough to make people nervous, and is much better than the quality produced
>on your cassette recorder. So it's probably good enough for music
>distribution.
MP3 certainly sounds reasonable to me, though most of the tracks I've
heard are rock music.
Iomega also have a zip format out but the version I have is pretty crap
--
Bryan McAlister