Hi all,

I am about to start an essay on Intellictual Property with respect to Peer-to-Peer File Sharing and was thinking that I might start a poll here and maybe a few other places regarding peoples use of MP3s. I have heard that the majority of MP3 downloaders sample what they think they may like and buy the cds depending on how they feel after hearing some of the tracks. I would like to add this kind of information to my essay, however, like all good facts, it's nigh on impossible to prove.

So if you could, please vote above, and leave feedback if you fell it's neccessary. Maybe you could tell other ppl here to vote aswell so I can get a broader sample.

Thanks...

[mjn]

i don't rate MP3's at all, but i will ONLY download rare tracks or live tracks NOT available on CD.

If the music is available on CD, then i'll buy it, rather than download some compressed, low bit rate MP3.

[Lex]

I download new songs (where I have no plans to buy the album)... £3.99 for a CD-Single - they have to joking!

I mostly download old songs that I liked but never bought... I don't really see the harm in that as they are no longer available to buy as singles anyway

I dowload only a few MP3's then burn them to disc for my in car cd player

My mate has literally thousands and he sells albums at a massive profit........personally, id rather buy the real thing though

I download tunes that I can't get hold of in other ways (deleted old stuff, or rarities). I don't normally burn them to disc, though: I just listen while I'm working.

I also download some tracks to see what an album is like before I buy it. That's particularly handy if you're buying an album over the 'net.

And sometimes, I just download random stuff to see if I like it.

If anything, the ability to download music has caused me to spend more on CDs, rather than less.

I download before buying. So may times have I heard a couple of good tracks from an artist, only to go out and buy their album and it's rubbish. Try before you buy. That's my motto.

[tomson]

I usually download a few songs from an album (or the whole album) then decide if if its worth buying - if its good then i'll buy it on CD no matter how high a bitrate the mp3s are. If its crap I just delete it from my hard drive.

My MP3 collection is mostly a portable copy of my own CD collection back home. Since I have to move a fair bit, I don't like dragging all my CDs with me, so I just download them when I get to the new location.

I also download rare or out of print songs as well. I've got no qualms about "trying before buying", but I'm not too keen on current music, so I don't find myself doing this much at all.

On a related note, I don't think the music industry is afraid of piracy. They are afraid that people will actually listen to an album before buying it, and realize that most of these mass-produced one-hit-wonder albums aren't worth the money. Sampling is good for bands with talent, but tragic for bands who coast on massive radioplay of 1 or 2 songs.

I never download MP3's, I think the quality is awful and I don't like to listen to any music that I would listen to at that sample rate. I occasionally rip tracks to my hard drive and send them to friends via MSN, and visa versa, but only as a sampler for something which I intend to buy. Even if I don't like a whole album, I still think it's worth buying CD's as if you look in the right places, you can get them a lot cheaper than the £16.99 highstreet store price.

[TheDufster]

I agree with most of the posts above, but I'm no snob when it comes to the quality. As long as there's no hiss/distortion or obvious quality flaws I am more than happy to listen to MP3s (usually at 128kpbs or above) - it's all about the music for me.

If I can listen to it and enjoy it, that ranks above any bickering about the quality not being the same as CDs etc. etc. etc. :o :o

Originally posted by TheDufster
I agree with most of the posts above, but I'm no snob when it comes to the quality. As long as there's no hiss/distortion or obvious quality flaws I am more than happy to listen to MP3s (usually at 128kpbs or above) - it's all about the music for me.

If I can listen to it and enjoy it, that ranks above any bickering about the quality not being the same as CDs etc. etc. etc. :o :o

I think it's personal to me, I'm really really anal about the quality. Whislt I don't have the best set up, it is pretty good and I like to get the best out of it. I hate when things are ripped at 128kbps and the trasients sound digitised and you get a cher-like vocal sound. I can wait 2 weeks for the CD to come out, or pay the £9 or less.

1 and 3 for me so it's a shame you didn't make the poll so we can vote for more than one option (can't change it as a Mod either ).

As an example, Gambit sent me some American Hi-Fi tracks over MSN the other day so I could hear what they were like. I immediately ordered both their CDs as they were fab

[Shirker]

I download tracks to replace my old Cassette Tapes

[karkus30]

to listen to before buying, I love to have all the original packaging and want the best sound quality available.......I deserve it

I would be happy to send copies of tracks over MSN, if only I could get the damn thing to work

Router has IT gremlins, way too complex for me to resolve

I never download MP3s. It is US who suffer in the long run as CD prices will go up!

[karkus30]

Originally posted by Alice
I never download MP3s. It is US who suffer in the long run as CD prices will go up!

The music industry is changing, but downloading is not so far removed from home taping of other peoples albums, radio broadcasts etc.

It wont kill music, just the fat cats that get rich exploiting other peoples work. Infact it exposes people to a wider variety of music, music thats is usually unobtainable in music shops that only stock mainstream artists. It also allows artists to broadcast their work without having to go through the pain of a recording contract.

Make cds cheaper or give added value to the product, things like free tickets, books, memorabillia would make them much more attractive.

The price of some older cds is daylight robbery, some are 16 quid .

I own hundreds of bought cds and albums, but these days I rarely buy at full price, sooner or later you find an album in the bargain section, the once £13.00 album reduced to a few quid, if shops can afford to do this there must be big margins involved.

No, Im afraid the music industry is the tree and P2P downloading is the pruning shears, ultimately it will re structure and be stronger for it.

Music is here to stay as long as people exist, so will music, it may become less lucrative for the few, but it might reduce the amount of commercialised dross which passes for music, letting more real tallent through.

Well said. There are dozens of articles (many written by musicians) that look at the breakdown of the cost of a CD, and most of the price goes into feeding the machine. Advertising, radio kickbacks, lawsuits, limos, and all the other crap that goes into the business. Oh, and if there's anything left, the artist might actually make some money.

Music sampling has always been around, and isn't a cause, it's a symptom of the overall problem.

[Lex]

If the results of this are to be of any use (although I am not sure how they could be ) then surely you need to know why people do not download mp3s, as well as why they do download them.

I love MP3s

[encaser]

An interesting parallel and yet juxtaposition (possibly paradox) is how more people see copied dvds which are shared peer-to-peer as piracy but mp3s as acceptable for a myriad of excuses/reasons.
The argument that mp3s will force music costs up is bogus and time has in fact shown that music companies are being forced to reduce prices to combat such and hope that the quality reasoning pulls potential buyers back. If I've re-said something above, tough, cause someone has to plagiarise this thread as a student's involved
And as far as I see it, most people cross the line of any one reason for mp3 dl at sometime in true human relative stylee.

Originally posted by encaser
An interesting parallel and yet juxtaposition (possibly paradox) is how more people see copied dvds which are shared peer-to-peer as piracy but mp3s as acceptable for a myriad of excuses/reasons.
The argument that mp3s will force music costs up is bogus and time has in fact shown that music companies are being forced to reduce prices to combat such and hope that the quality reasoning pulls potential buyers back. If I've re-said something above, tough, cause someone has to plagiarise this thread as a student's involved
And as far as I see it, most people cross the line of any one reason for mp3 dl at sometime in true human relative stylee.

Deep. I think if you go on a pure hifi board, then MP3's will be renounced as much as DIVX or VCD's are on this board- it come down to the fact that a MP3 is a bad copy of a CD, the same way a DIVX can be a bad copy of a DVD. If the quality is important to you, then you'll go get the real thing. But filesharing is useful for sampling purposes, and I view films in the same ligth I view music with regards to sharing and copies.

[darth_sidious]

I download mp3's to play on my mp3 player..... its as simple as that... i find it usefull to be able to download mp3's..... picture the scene your at home watching tv or listening to the radio, a song comes on that you like... on goes the computer and with the aid of a 600k broadband connection you have the song in 5 mins so you can listen to it whenever you want...

[encaser]

re. Gambit -
True that mp3s and DIVX are weaker copies but when they are done well it's quite realistic to assume that many people wouldn't care as they are 'free' and close to the original. And when you consider the source they are to be played back on...
However, people as you say on this and like forums are more likely to sway toward the real package but even several of the above are going pirate with regard mp3s and using the usual excuses/justifications. In any case, this forum can be argued to be only an unrepresentative case study group which would require several other groups/cohorts to be of any real use, albeit but for ideas.
Now faster connections are available the problem for music, at least, is when people image stuff and share that, especially if they have a pukka music burner.
The whole piracy debate is most interesting when looking at how people see certain types of piracy as ok over others depending on what it is and who makes it.

Thanks for the help guys.

Originally posted by Lex
If the results of this are to be of any use (although I am not sure how they could be ) then surely you need to know why people do not download mp3s, as well as why they do download them.

Duely noted, I will include a mention. From the opinions given, it seems most ppl use them as 'try before you buy' and are reluctant due to quality, but looking at the actual poll data, it looks far tighter.

Anyway, don't stop now, I've just started my essay and have another 2 weeks left.

THANKS AGAIN...

Originally posted by Lex
If the results of this are to be of any use (although I am not sure how they could be ) then surely you need to know why people do not download mp3s, as well as why they do download them.

Cause they've got BT Broadband?

[Stuart Wright]

I hate badly thought out polls.
1 and 3 for me. I've downloaded MP3s of albums which have not been officially released (e.g. Heavy Pettin's 3rd). And stuff you can't get any more (Streets). I've also downloaded MP3s and as a direct result, bought 2 albums and been to see the band live (Harem Scarem).
I personally can't tell the difference between a 192 MP3 and a CD. Lucky I rode motorbikes and played drums for years, then.

[Bonesy]

Delorian,

Haven't read this thread because I buy,

However, perhaps consider the way the mobile industry is pushing digital rights mgmt and super distribution technologies before the true availability of mobile digital content...

and the differences between an open internet world, and a 'controlled' mobile world...

I'd like to hear your views on the above posted on this forum

[March Hare]

A mix of 1 & 2 i'm affraid .

[Daneel]

Originally posted by Gambit
Deep. I think if you go on a pure hifi board, then MP3's will be renounced as much as DIVX or VCD's are on this board- it come down to the fact that a MP3 is a bad copy of a CD, the same way a DIVX can be a bad copy of a DVD. If the quality is important to you, then you'll go get the real thing....

If talking strictly about MP3 you are pretty much right, although a good VBR encode of a properly extracted wav is going to be very close to the original. I don't think many here could tell the difference in a double blind test.

If you look at the wider area of copied music you will find Musepack (mpc files) which is similar to mp3 but a step up in quality despite being the same file size. VERY few people can tell a mpc file from the CD. Finally there is Monkey Audio (ape files) and other lossless compression formats. These are perfect copies of the original CD, although much larger than mp3 files.

[Setenza]

I have 5.5 Gigs of MP3's sitting on my laptop. When I get home I often connect my laptop to my sound system and listen to an easily created playlist.

Over 60% of my MP3's I've ripped from CD's I already own. I often feel nostalgic and want specific tracks and P2P software allows me to obtain it quickly.

I often try to obtain MP3's that have been ripped at higher bitrates. Like Spectre, I'll admit that I often cannot tell the difference btween CD original and copy.

I find this medium convenient. I'd happily pay a sensible subscription to have access to properly managed archives and libraries. I to like to find "live" versions or rare tracks etc.

The music industry has got to quit carping and embrace the technology and use it to their advantage.