If CD was a digital download?

[wight gunner]

I got into thinking about the way new music by existing artists is released. In the UK there quite often is a free drop in a newspaper, with new tracks mixed with old track (usually well known ones) used to promote a new album by an artist and that would be a better way to release the CD thing rather than down loads.

If Guns n' Roses were to produce live versions of the stuff for CD, along with SCOM, PC, WTTJ, LALD, YCBM not only would it re-engage old fans, but it would give a taste of the new stuff, without giving it away.... Put it in the Sun, the UK's biggest selling daily at 4m copies per day, then the potential for a mega launch is massive. No doubt this could be done on a world wide scale.

On the subject of CD, had a wierd dream last nite, that CD was released in a pop-up sleeve, that when opened, the sleeve turned into a 3D dragon, with hologram scales, I'm only on prescription drugs, so don't assk what I took.

[LeftToDecay]

"If Chinese Democracy was offered as a digital download, how much would you pay for it?"
I think that is a wrong question..
..in a sense that there are people here who "would pay" hundreds of dollars for  digital download of cd.
Right price tag for it would be somewhere on either side of 10 euros, in my opinnion.

Why on earth would any major record label want to do that for a release of any major band?
Specially for a record like cd.

[Giant_Robot]

I think the issue is that the label and gnr dont want the album to leak before the release date and also try to pervent the album ending on torrents sites, so if you release it on itunes and other download sites it will be easier to stop a leak from happening before the release date and because itunes protects it files you wont be able to share it on torrents ! Also there is itunes plus which higher quality of file, And then they can release it on cd in november or somthing like that !

Also i dont buy into the idea that you have been cheated when they will release it later as a physical product

Also if there so many "real fans" wont you buy both version ! 

[The Chad Cometh]

Also if there so many "real fans" wont you buy both version ! 

Nope. I'll get it from my mate for free when it's downloadable and buy it when it's in the cd store, like most people.
Digital downloads are fucked.

[Giant_Robot]

Also if there so many "real fans" wont you buy both version ! 

Nope. I'll get it from my mate for free when it's downloadable and buy it when it's in the cd store, like most people.
Digital downloads are fucked.

How ?
When the album will be tied to one account and file protected ?
Digital downloads are fucked ? ha hahaha yeah sure they are 

[SINSHINE]

I'm convinced there are ways around ANY kind of file 'protection.' Once the songs are out there (in ANY form), they are gauranteed to be on limewire and the like. The only thing they can do is delay that process a bit by making it more difficult to pirate.

If they're going to go the route of digital download, which I think is still a good idea despite my previous comment (a CD is no safer anyway), I think they should use the fans' impatience to their advantage and set up a 'countdown' to the files being available. As a fan, you could purchase a 'download ticket' in advance for $10. Have the website countdown the days, hours, minutes and seconds to a worldwide release of the download. This in and of itself will help promote the album and continue the hype. Put the money you would have used on in-store marketing into a server powerful enough that it won't crash when tens of thousands attempt to download the album all at once.

Now, like I said...of course it will show up on limewire eventually...maybe hours after the initial download release or perhaps a day or two if the security on the files has been stepped up a few notches. Regardless, I think the majority of the die hard fans will not be able to wait that undetermined amount of time (especially when there are thousands of other fans around the world ALREADY enjoying the album for the fifth time over). I mean c'mon...if you knew the album was out there and you could be among the very first to hear it, would you not fork over $10 bucks and plan your weekend around it?

The physical CD can then take a backseat...maybe be released a month or so later with some bonus material, etc.

I'm not too sure how Radiohead handled their digital release (if it was similar to what I've mentioned above)...but I gotta think that the buzz around this album and the never-ending wait will make for quite an eventful release no matter how they plan to do it.

Just do it...already 



EDIT: In fact, go one step further with it. GN'R should play a concert in conjunction with this release...taking the stage at the exact moment the countdown clock strikes zero and play the album live straight through. Fans that purchase the 'dowload ticket' would be treated to a live stream (and eventual download) of the show as well.

[The Chad Cometh]

Also if there so many "real fans" wont you buy both version ! 

Nope. I'll get it from my mate for free when it's downloadable and buy it when it's in the cd store, like most people.
Digital downloads are fucked.

How ?
When the album will be tied to one account and file protected ?
Digital downloads are fucked ? ha hahaha yeah sure they are 

If you seriously don't think there are people out there who can get around file protection, you need a reality check my friend.
Can anyone here explain how a digital download is even close to being the same experience as opening a CD and checking out the booklet art while you listen to it for the first time?
I HATE the idea of a digital download. What incentive is there  to not listen to and download the leaks if they are only going to be released online anyway?

[Oh My Choking Soul]

I think paying a penny for the download is fine if you plan on buying the hardcopy but want to hear it immediately. The internet service charge for radiohead was a couple of bucks, mind you there was an expense on the band to host thier album, collect funds etc but I trust that was recovered in that fee. The 1 cent download I bought contributed to online sales that prompted the record deal/distribution of the album now in every Starbucks in the country. The phisical copy I bought for $80 was a cash cow for the band and now sells on ebay for over $100.

Either way, Radiohead have announced that "name your price" was more profitable than a standard release (per sale) however normal distribution is a bigger market, largely due to Starbucks involvement.

I feel no guilt paying $80.01 for 2 copies. I could have ripped my buddies for free, but I chose not too because it was only a penny for my own and that penny plus service fees profited the band more than me stealing it until I got my hardcopy.

[Sober_times]

I havent really read anybody elses thoughts but I guess I'm old school. Cuz i wouldnt want to buy a digital download. I want the cd in my hands. I dont own a mp3 player. Im young too, well 26, but not too old where Im new to technology. I just dont have a desire for mp3 player and dont have a desire do download a cd.   

[Giant_Robot]

I'm convinced there are ways around ANY kind of file 'protection.' Once the songs are out there (in ANY form), they are gauranteed to be on limewire and the like. The only thing they can do is delay that process a bit by making it more difficult to pirate.

If they're going to go the route of digital download, which I think is still a good idea despite my previous comment (a CD is no safer anyway), I think they should use the fans' impatience to their advantage and set up a 'countdown' to the files being available. As a fan, you could purchase a 'download ticket' in advance for $10. Have the website countdown the days, hours, minutes and seconds to a worldwide release of the download. This in and of itself will help promote the album and continue the hype. Put the money you would have used on in-store marketing into a server powerful enough that it won't crash when tens of thousands attempt to download the album all at once.

Now, like I said...of course it will show up on limewire eventually...maybe hours after the initial download release or perhaps a day or two if the security on the files has been stepped up a few notches. Regardless, I think the majority of the die hard fans will not be able to wait that undetermined amount of time (especially when there are thousands of other fans around the world ALREADY enjoying the album for the fifth time over). I mean c'mon...if you knew the album was out there and you could be among the very first to hear it, would you not fork over $10 bucks and plan your weekend around it?

The physical CD can then take a backseat...maybe be released a month or so later with some bonus material, etc.

I'm not too sure how Radiohead handled their digital release (if it was similar to what I've mentioned above)...but I gotta think that the buzz around this album and the never-ending wait will make for quite an eventful release no matter how they plan to do it.

Just do it...already 



EDIT: In fact, go one step further with it. GN'R should play a concert in conjunction with this release...taking the stage at the exact moment the countdown clock strikes zero and play the album live straight through. Fans that purchase the 'dowload ticket' would be treated to a live stream (and eventual download) of the show as well.

There some good ideas !
you post them in gnr marketing theard !

[SINSHINE]

^^^

thanks, man...maybe I will post it there too 

[Wicked Demon]

with exception of a handful of posts trying to further the idea of a digital release, I'm surprised by the negativity in this thread.

People have started petitions that sometimes get a lot of names, yet ultimately go nowhere.

And here, with the apparent blessing of an admin holding loose connections with the band, comes a poll where you have a good chance of communicating to the band just how much you want this album, and there are fans saying they would rather not pay ANYTHING for it?

Axl, Beta, whoever: I will pay you $1000--maybe more--today for a digital download, CD, vinyl, 8-track, or piece of tinfoil that has to be played on a Thomas Edison museum piece. I will sign a non-disclosure or other agreement that says I will not copy or play it for anyone else. I will accept the possibility of some kind of cryptographic signature in the data.

Of course, the price I am willing to pay may change according to general laws of supply and demand... but even in a mass market release, I would pay $100 for a digital-only download. I promise. And I would pay again for a physical product. I paid more to go see GNR in Vegas a while ago, and I have no problem paying about that much to be able to hear--over and over--more great music.

[Jaakko]

with exception of a handful of posts trying to further the idea of a digital release, I'm surprised by the negativity in this thread.

People have started petitions that sometimes get a lot of names, yet ultimately go nowhere.

And here, with the apparent blessing of an admin holding loose connections with the band, comes a poll where you have a good chance of communicating to the band just how much you want this album, and there are fans saying they would rather not pay ANYTHING for it?

Axl, Beta, whoever: I will pay you $1000--maybe more--today for a digital download, CD, vinyl, 8-track, or piece of tinfoil that has to be played on a Thomas Edison museum piece. I will sign a non-disclosure or other agreement that says I will not copy or play it for anyone else. I will accept the possibility of some kind of cryptographic signature in the data.

Of course, the price I am willing to pay may change according to general laws of supply and demand... but even in a mass market release, I would pay $100 for a digital-only download. I promise. And I would pay again for a physical product. I paid more to go see GNR in Vegas a while ago, and I have no problem paying about that much to be able to hear--over and over--more great music.

"Old school-fans" are not against supporting the band or anything like that. We just don't like mp3's, i-pods and stuff like that. For example to me the biggest internet-thing I'm capable of is to type this kinda message  I just don't have enough patience to mess around with computers.

[Wicked Demon]

We just don't like mp3's, i-pods and stuff like that. For example to me the biggest internet-thing I'm capable of is to type this kinda message  I just don't have enough patience to mess around with computers.

Ah, then put us down for *2* copies of Chinese Democracy on a piece of tinfoil for Thomas Edison's phonograph machine

[GNRfan2008]

Best way to go about this is to have a lossless pre-order where the album is not released until say 2 million copies are sold. Sell them for $5 each. There are die hards that would buy 100 copies if they knew it was helping to speed up the release of the album. Take advantage of the die hard demand and you have an automatic $10 million before ever releasing the album on CD or iTunes, Amazon mp3, etc.

[jarmo]

A lot of people are against digital downloads.

But in some cases, they're a very good thing. Without iTunes, Izzy wouldn't have released two albums in 2007....


The ironic thing is that in an age of HD big screen TVs, many people listen to their compressed music files using iPods with $20 headphones....




/jarmo

[GNRfan2008]

A lot of people are against digital downloads.

But in some cases, they're a very good thing. Without iTunes, Izzy wouldn't have released two albums in 2007....


The ironic thing is that in an age of HD big screen TVs, many people listen to their compressed music files using iPods with $20 headphones....




/jarmo

Precisely. Music is considered more portable than home entertainment like DVD's, Blu-ray, or HD DVD. However, even digital music stores are starting to increase their quality. All of Amazon's mp3 downloads are 256 kbps, and iTunes has some 256 kbps DRM-free AAC files even though the labels are currently favoring Amazon in an effort to defeat Apple's monopoly by forcing some of their downloads on iTunes to still have DRM with only 128 kbps bitrate. Led Zeppelin is the best example of this. Buy from Amazon mp3 and it's high quality mp3's vs. DRM, low quality AAC files from iTunes.

[gav]

with exception of a handful of posts trying to further the idea of a digital release, I'm surprised by the negativity in this thread.

People have started petitions that sometimes get a lot of names, yet ultimately go nowhere.

And here, with the apparent blessing of an admin holding loose connections with the band, comes a poll where you have a good chance of communicating to the band just how much you want this album, and there are fans saying they would rather not pay ANYTHING for it?

Axl, Beta, whoever: I will pay you $1000--maybe more--today for a digital download, CD, vinyl, 8-track, or piece of tinfoil that has to be played on a Thomas Edison museum piece. I will sign a non-disclosure or other agreement that says I will not copy or play it for anyone else. I will accept the possibility of some kind of cryptographic signature in the data.


Of course, the price I am willing to pay may change according to general laws of supply and demand... but even in a mass market release, I would pay $100 for a digital-only download. I promise. And I would pay again for a physical product. I paid more to go see GNR in Vegas a while ago, and I have no problem paying about that much to be able to hear--over and over--more great music.

100% agreed. best post in this topic

[Limulus]

A lot of people are against digital downloads.

But in some cases, they're a very good thing. Without iTunes, Izzy wouldn't have released two albums in 2007....


The ironic thing is that in an age of HD big screen TVs, many people listen to their compressed music files using iPods with $20 headphones....




/jarmo

Precisely. Music is considered more portable than home entertainment like DVD's, Blu-ray, or HD DVD. However, even digital music stores are starting to increase their quality. All of Amazon's mp3 downloads are 256 kbps, and iTunes has some 256 kbps DRM-free AAC files even though the labels are currently favoring Amazon in an effort to defeat Apple's monopoly by forcing some of their downloads on iTunes to still have DRM with only 128 kbps bitrate. Led Zeppelin is the best example of this. Buy from Amazon mp3 and it's high quality mp3's vs. DRM, low quality AAC files from iTunes.

even if they offer higher mp3 or AAC bitrates.... they still are all compressed files touching/cutting "hearable" frequencies for human ears. the main and weird point is: everything increased in quality over the years but with audio and internet in 2008(!) - quality is down and still much lower quality than a CD....and CD standard is more than 25(!!!!) years old allready (ask yourself if you tape video tv stuff on Betamax in 2008??). add the fact that a "real-25-year-old-standard-CD-format" from chinese democracy is produced anyway (you dont think Axl is listening through 128-256kbps MP3s through headphones/PC speakers, huh?)....i'll never get the point why going down qualitywise from there.

as for me i absolutley wouldnt like to be able to only get the compressed mp3 stuff at first, then waiting weeks/months for a possible physical (25-years-old-standard) cd!

[don_vercetti]

Yeah, itunes is not the greatest of sound quality (it's good, but not befitting of a title like this imho) even at 256kbps.  Also, it's so easy to rip itunes stuff, i couldn't use AAC Protected files on my phone so it took me about half an hour to rip izzy's albums to MP3, and have them on my phone.  Using itunes as a means of protection is a joke. 

I will pay good money for a nice, cd, release, but I won't be at all thrilled with a digital release, unless it is in Flac, which seems quite unlikely.