On 26/01/08, carlstephen koto wrote:
> I agree with Roger on this subject. I think that the record companies
> are in a transition phase. Maybe they finally decided that suing their
> customers wasn't such a wise business move. In regards to the poor
> quality that downloaded music offers, I think that this distribution
> model is still in it's infancy and is slowly improving as technology
> has allowed it. Off the top of my head, iTunes only been around as a
> download source for a few years now? When it first started to sell
> music, it was only available as Mp3 or AACs. Then some of the
> downloads were available in Apple lossless. The fact that most folks
> migrated from dial up to DSL in the last couple of years would have
> made large files impractical before that. Apple's recent announcement
> that iTunes would begin offering HD movies with DTS 5.1 sound in March
> should be evidence that there is no lack of bandwidth to stream any
> audio format currently in use. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but I
> think that it won't be that long before iTunes makes it's next
> improvement in sound quality options. I just hope that they start with
> the "live" orchestral concerts. Steve

People should look at Tasmin Little's site:

This successful violinist is offering free downloads, an educational
project, news, and links to Amazon for all her commercial CDs. I think
this is the future.  No doubt she will soon be selling downloads and CDs
too, but she particularly wants to encourage people to go to her live

My only concern is that if each musician or group has their own site and
distribution, their archives may not be well preserved. What happens to
the 24/96 files when a band breaks up?

Don Cox
[log in to unmask]