Thursday, September 27, 2007
AmazonMP3: That’s Nice
This isn’t a full on review of AmazonMP3, really. Just a series of thoughts about the new service--and why, for now, it’s still not for me.
- The Amazon store interface doesn’t work as well for me as the iTunes Store interface, but, using Amazon’s downloader, the store does integrate nicely with iTunes. That’s not a huge issue, but it is a nice touch.
- I like the eMusic Remote better--not the old downloader, but the new one. Essentially, eMusic has a standalone browser that has all of the functions easily bookmarked, integrates nicely with the site, and now has an integrated downloader.
- On content: eMusic has a great selection of older and obscure stuff, but it occasionally frustrates me with partial albums, limited availability of albums for an artist, and a serious lack of mainstream music. AmazonMP3 will probably get better, but, frankly, didn’t have much music that I wanted. iTunes has a better selection than AmazonMP3 and a wider range of stuff to buy and download (music videos, podcasts, movies, and TV entertainment), but still misses much of what I listen to. All of the services are lacking, really, which is why I can’t imagine myself saying “I use such and such and I won’t use the other.” I have no sense of loyalty in this comparison.
- On pricing: AmazonMP3’s prices are all over the board: I say everything from $.89 to $1.35 for individual songs and albums (with just a few songs) from $1.99 to higher cost albums. On average, the prices are far better than iTunes for either the DRM or DRM-free songs, though. I have a 65 song subscription to eMusic which costs just $14.99 per month--a far better per song price than either iTunes or AmazonMP3. iTunes is the most expensive of the bunch at $.99 for the rights managed AAC files and $1.29 for the DRM-free files.
- On quality: AmazonMP3 sells 256kbps VBR mp3 files, while eMusic serves up 192kbps VBR mp3 files (that’s an average rate for the Variable Bit Rate files, by the way), which is definitely a big deal to the average audiophile. The difference probably won’t matter to most listeners, though. iTunes Music Store sells 128kbps AAC files with DRM protection and 256kbps AAC files without--which Apple claims are better formats for maintaining audio integrity--so the 128kbps AAC file should sound significantly better than a 128kbps mp3 file. I won’t judge since I’m not the audiophile that others are; I can hear the difference between compressed files and original CD quality just as I can hear the difference between CD and vinyl. What I can’t hear is the difference between the iTunes DRM files and the eMusic files (which is probably tantamount to heresy in someone’s book).
- On other features: eMusic has a great feature set that I wish Apple would steal from. The “save for later” feature, the community features, great suggestions every month--all great stuff. iTunes has a wonderful assortment of music and entertainment and a brilliant interface that works so beautifully with iPod products that I’ll always and forever use it for some of my purchases. AmazonMP3 has the Amazon interface, so you have some nice bits thrown in with suggestions to buy Hefty bags and Senseo Coffee Pods (which isn’t bad, just not quite what I’m looking for in my music-buying expeditions).
- Bottom line: I’ll keep my eMusic subscription for all my odd purchases (and, currently, the majority of my music intake); I’ll continue to use iTunes Music Store for downloadable video, some music, and games for the iPhone that I keep promising myself; and I’m sure that as AmazonMP3 matures, I’ll buy some songs and albums there, as well. It’s nice, but not earth shatteringly good.
I think the only reason AmazonMP3 is getting press is that it is the first competitor to iTunes Music Store that makes sense and competes head-to-head. eMusic is a different model (a subscription model that lets you own your music as opposed to the many shots at “renting” libraries of music for a subscription), and I included it simply because it is where so much of my stuff comes from these days. But Amazon goes the iTunes route, has a solid interface, and integrates with iTunes quite well. It’s a second music store done right--far better, as far as I’m concerned, than the attempts by Microsoft, Wal Mart, Real, and the many other pretenders. Add good quality and, generally, better prices, and I can’t imagine that Amazon won’t be successful with their downloadable music store.
Good for them, but it doesn’t really make much difference to me. eMusic is still my favorite music store (although I wish that the selection of contemporary popular stuff) and iTunes is still my favorite downloadable entertainment store (although I wish there were more obscure, older, odd stuff) and lower prices to get in step with Amazon wouldn’t hurt my feelings either. The DRM issue simply isn’t an issue to me--I can’t play the songs on my work computer, the two laptops we have at home, and the two desktops that we have at home, burn CDs, and play the songs on our iPods; I understand why iTunes DRM is an issue for others but it’s not to me.
Maybe when AmazonMP3’s library of music bulks up, I’ll be changing my tune (har har har--sorry about that) and that will become my music store of choice. For now, for me, it’s just another option--but that’s no bad thing.
Comments & Trackbacks
For the nonce, my music comes from ripping my own CDs and vinyl. CDs are much easier to rip, but the USB turntable I bought a couple of months ago simplified the use of vinyl enough that I’m gradually working my way through the collection.
It’s pretty striking how so much of my music comes from such a short period (roughly ‘77 to ‘82), but that seems to be the case with most people*.
When I do get around to buying by the song, I suspect that I’ll consider DRM a deal breaker. File mobility is important when you continue to listen to the same music for decades. (See the comments about vinyl above.) 8-)
* “Short period”, not “roughly ‘77 to ‘82”, though if it were the latter I’d be much happier with incidental music in public spaces.
I do think that a lot of our musical taste solidifies during a period usually marked by the last year of high school and somewhere near the last year of college, punctuated with a scattering of the things that you discover in the few years surrounding. But the weird thing for me is that I keep adding musical styles to my taste--so my like for blues started a little late, then came bluegrass and roots country, then came classical, then came opera. Lately I’ve been getting into music that was popular around WWII. But that means that my collection of music spans pretty much every decade from the 30’s to now, although there is still a big pool of 90’s stuff in the center.
This and with my ridiculous reading habit conspire to keep me poor.
Blogger Bashes don’t help the problem.
Anyway, I do see what you’re saying about DRM--and it’s a good point. I’m just generally not that forward thinking…
I have stuff from a broad period, too. I have quite a bit of classical and traditional folk, some big band hot jazz, some sixties folk, some taiko drumming, some electronic music (of various sorts), and so on. But nearly all of the music that I chose to rip first is from a very short period.
Part of this, I suspect, is because it’s music I like that I have only on vinyl, so it’s music I haven’t listened to much recently. (My more-recent purchases have been rather more eclectic.) So it has a sort of renewed novelty that later purchases lack.
As an aside, shuffling directly from the 2nd movement of the Eroica to AC/DC is a bit jarring. Classical music, and symphonies in particular, are not well served by random play.
(And as a complete hijack, can anyone tell me why Audacity won’t let you use the letter Z in naming tracks? That’s just weird.)
Thanks for this. I think I’ll take a pass, too.
What I have found most jarring in random play (so far) is the short spoken introductions to songs that were put on separate tracks. I always expect them to be followed by the song they lead into, but that doesn’t always happen. Depends on the CD.
As for musical tastes, my baseline started from a slightly longer period of time than Doug. I was a kid in England in 1963, and rode a chartered bus to school. Thus, we had *radio*. The drivers normally tuned into the pirate radio stations, so we got to hear all the popular music that the BBC wouldn’t play, which later became the first wave of the British Invasion. That and what I’ve heard referred to as “the great 60’s folk scare” defined my musical tastes for years.
The “primary materials” collection lasted until the mid-70s, then I started branching out - with what’s now called “light jazz” starting in the mid-70s, bluegrass starting in the late 70s, then big-band swing and latin jazz later.
Most if my iTunes collection comes from my CDs (and my father’s, which is where the Jackie Gleason comes from), but some comes from band websites and the like. I’ve still got my LPs and a bunch of tapes, too, but have only ripped one tape so far.
Cheryl thinks my musical tastes are too limited, but I refuse to listen to anything that’s a) really loud (I’m trying to preserve what’s left of my hearing), or b) has unintelligibly-screamed lyrics (life’s too short to deliberately inflict annoyances upon yourself).