Forums » Off-Topic
(posted in General because more people read it than O/T)
Long Story Short, the RIAA lobbied the Copyright Review Board to make a ruling last month that would increase the royalty burden paid by internet radio stations by as much as 1,200%, and force a minimum payment of $500 a month to play music on the internet regardless of profit. This ruling is unfair to internet radio providers, and will outright destroy any nonprofit or independant radio providers such as Live365, Pandora and NPR. Without action, the internet will fall silent, and May 15 will mark the day the music dies for thousands of Internet Radio stations and more than 50 Million listeners.
However, all hope is not lost. A new bill has been introduced that is being called the Internet Radio Equality Act, which would overturn the CRB's ruling and force the Recording Industry to charge the same royalties for Internet Radio as they do for XM and Satellite Radio. This would be a good thing, as Internet Radio royalties are already double those of Satellite Radio.
In order for this bill to pass and Internet Radio to be saved, it needs support in Congress. By calling, e-mailing, snail-mailing and/or petitioning your congress representatives and urging them to support the Internet Radio Equality Act, you can make a difference. Please visit SaveNetRadio.org for access to forms, petitions, and contact information for your local representatives, and other information about what You can do.
This is Your chance to save the music. Don't let it go to waste - Act Now.
Please share this with your friends and pass it on. Spread the Word.
Long Story Short, the RIAA lobbied the Copyright Review Board to make a ruling last month that would increase the royalty burden paid by internet radio stations by as much as 1,200%, and force a minimum payment of $500 a month to play music on the internet regardless of profit. This ruling is unfair to internet radio providers, and will outright destroy any nonprofit or independant radio providers such as Live365, Pandora and NPR. Without action, the internet will fall silent, and May 15 will mark the day the music dies for thousands of Internet Radio stations and more than 50 Million listeners.
However, all hope is not lost. A new bill has been introduced that is being called the Internet Radio Equality Act, which would overturn the CRB's ruling and force the Recording Industry to charge the same royalties for Internet Radio as they do for XM and Satellite Radio. This would be a good thing, as Internet Radio royalties are already double those of Satellite Radio.
In order for this bill to pass and Internet Radio to be saved, it needs support in Congress. By calling, e-mailing, snail-mailing and/or petitioning your congress representatives and urging them to support the Internet Radio Equality Act, you can make a difference. Please visit SaveNetRadio.org for access to forms, petitions, and contact information for your local representatives, and other information about what You can do.
This is Your chance to save the music. Don't let it go to waste - Act Now.
Please share this with your friends and pass it on. Spread the Word.
I could care less whether NPR goes under, but Internet Radio is too fun to lose. Noes!
AUGH OFF TOPIC!!!!
What? SaveNetRadio.org is off topic?
I love my radioAmbient.
That's SaveNetRadio.org
(I'll move it later.)
I love my radioAmbient.
That's SaveNetRadio.org
(I'll move it later.)
I don't give a rats ass about internet radio. Pathetically inferior sound is not worth the effort to save. The overall quality of sound recordings has been continuously degraded since the "dawn" of digital audio. Early CDs were strident and unpleasant to the ear. Their only claim to "audiophile" fame was their excellent dynamic range.
Since then, different compression schemes have somewhat improved the overall quality of CDs, but not enough to make them truely audiophile quality. This is because of the compression itself. It can totally fuck up sound quality. (As a side note, this is also true of analog recording, broadcasting and playback. Just try to recall the last time you REALLY heard a high quality FM radio broadcast. The goal of broadcasters is to have the [realatively ] " loudest" signal.)
Many years ago, I asked some of my friends to provide me with high quality audio
tape (analog) recordings for some listening demonstrations. I'm nobody, but i knew
people that had access to master recordings of major performers of the time. My
home system was a hodge-podge of mid-level consumer electronics, some equipment I had built myself and an analog (half-inch, 3-track) tape deck that required four people to carry up the stairs to my apartment. The result was several
people leaving because everything was too loud, quite a few people standing and
cheering and my neighbors almost getting me evicted.
I mention all of this because there is a real answer to bad digital sound: Sony SuperAudio CDs. Somebody came up with "DVD-Audio" which is much better than
CDs, but at about half the sampling rate of SA CDs. SuperAudio CDs are as close to
analog as I have EVER heard and in some cases somewhat better. If you want an example, i suggest listening to Cyndy Lauper's first album on SA CD (one of the best
tracks is "All Through the Night") or some of the Rolling Stones albums that are also
available on SA CDs. But PLEASE listen on a good system, not some plastic "boom box" or portable music player! Real sound requires a REAL system.
Oh, and a bit of info for all you PUNKS that think you know about digital audio: the
original theories dealing with digital sound transmission were developed by the Bell
Telephone Laboratories (USA) and Ericcson (Sweden) in the 1930s. The goal was to
increase the carrying capacity of the Trans-Atlantic Cable. Unfortunately for them,
the transistor had not yet been invented. The transistor came about a little more
than twenty years later. Thus the T-1 was born...........
Since then, different compression schemes have somewhat improved the overall quality of CDs, but not enough to make them truely audiophile quality. This is because of the compression itself. It can totally fuck up sound quality. (As a side note, this is also true of analog recording, broadcasting and playback. Just try to recall the last time you REALLY heard a high quality FM radio broadcast. The goal of broadcasters is to have the [realatively ] " loudest" signal.)
Many years ago, I asked some of my friends to provide me with high quality audio
tape (analog) recordings for some listening demonstrations. I'm nobody, but i knew
people that had access to master recordings of major performers of the time. My
home system was a hodge-podge of mid-level consumer electronics, some equipment I had built myself and an analog (half-inch, 3-track) tape deck that required four people to carry up the stairs to my apartment. The result was several
people leaving because everything was too loud, quite a few people standing and
cheering and my neighbors almost getting me evicted.
I mention all of this because there is a real answer to bad digital sound: Sony SuperAudio CDs. Somebody came up with "DVD-Audio" which is much better than
CDs, but at about half the sampling rate of SA CDs. SuperAudio CDs are as close to
analog as I have EVER heard and in some cases somewhat better. If you want an example, i suggest listening to Cyndy Lauper's first album on SA CD (one of the best
tracks is "All Through the Night") or some of the Rolling Stones albums that are also
available on SA CDs. But PLEASE listen on a good system, not some plastic "boom box" or portable music player! Real sound requires a REAL system.
Oh, and a bit of info for all you PUNKS that think you know about digital audio: the
original theories dealing with digital sound transmission were developed by the Bell
Telephone Laboratories (USA) and Ericcson (Sweden) in the 1930s. The goal was to
increase the carrying capacity of the Trans-Atlantic Cable. Unfortunately for them,
the transistor had not yet been invented. The transistor came about a little more
than twenty years later. Thus the T-1 was born...........
Spoken like a true audiophile...
I want streaming broadcasts of music I haven't heard yet so that I can be exposed to a broader range. I don't mind paying a small reasonable fee for this. I then purchase my favorite tracks for my mp3 player, or buy the CD if I think it's worth it.
I will now move this thread about SaveNetRadio.org
I want streaming broadcasts of music I haven't heard yet so that I can be exposed to a broader range. I don't mind paying a small reasonable fee for this. I then purchase my favorite tracks for my mp3 player, or buy the CD if I think it's worth it.
I will now move this thread about SaveNetRadio.org
Interesting rant RattMann. Although I'm slightly confused (not an unusual experience for me). Cunjo's post is speaking of internet radio, not analog tape versus CD (or DVD, Super CD, etc). You're not really gonna sit there and tell us that FM is better than Digital radio (or internet radio). Sure, if you had a massive transmitter that could distribute pure sound to the entire world then you might have an argument, but you can't argue against the fact that where distribution and accessibility/vs quality is concerned, internet radio has analogue radio done.
Anyway, I'm hoping this won't leak into Canada. I'm on a pure Canadian music kick (been on it for two years now, and trust me, there's no reason to look south, in fact, the indy stations down there are shiiiiiiiiite compared to what's goin on up here). And I'm getting it all through internet radio/casts...
Good luck with that y'all yankee swanks.
PS cbcradio3.ca if you're looking for the best and the brightest coming out of north america....
PPS Drunken post, context is a funny bunny...
Anyway, I'm hoping this won't leak into Canada. I'm on a pure Canadian music kick (been on it for two years now, and trust me, there's no reason to look south, in fact, the indy stations down there are shiiiiiiiiite compared to what's goin on up here). And I'm getting it all through internet radio/casts...
Good luck with that y'all yankee swanks.
PS cbcradio3.ca if you're looking for the best and the brightest coming out of north america....
PPS Drunken post, context is a funny bunny...
I agree with Bryce, A v D is not the issue here. The issue is that internet radio is perhaps the only way how 'radio' (the use of the term is not even necessarily correct if broadcast via the internet, btw) may survive.
So, SaveNetRadio.
So, SaveNetRadio.
RM, You are way off-base.
Yes, I am aware that internet radio streaming quality is inferior to DVDA and High-Quality Analog. Everybody with two brain cells to rub together knows that. However, music that you do not already own is not available to you in DVDA or High-Quality Analog sound formats! So unless you can afford to spend thousands of dollars anually on sampling music, these are not a substitute for internet radio.
And for the record, given typical reception even in close proximity to broadcasting towers, Broadband Internet Radio quality >> FM Radio quality. In fact, Pandora is damn near indistinguashable from high-bitrate .MP3, and it's a hell of a lot better than nothing.
Yes, I am aware that internet radio streaming quality is inferior to DVDA and High-Quality Analog. Everybody with two brain cells to rub together knows that. However, music that you do not already own is not available to you in DVDA or High-Quality Analog sound formats! So unless you can afford to spend thousands of dollars anually on sampling music, these are not a substitute for internet radio.
And for the record, given typical reception even in close proximity to broadcasting towers, Broadband Internet Radio quality >> FM Radio quality. In fact, Pandora is damn near indistinguashable from high-bitrate .MP3, and it's a hell of a lot better than nothing.
Give me a good rock internet radio station as opposed to the ones I've seen on iTunes. If you can, I'm definitely all for saving it.
check out pandora! your needs will be answered.
My Rock stations:
Classic Rock: Classic Rock Radio
Industrial Rock: Ultima Radio
Hard Rock & Metalcore: SkyCommand Radio
Classic Rock: Classic Rock Radio
Industrial Rock: Ultima Radio
Hard Rock & Metalcore: SkyCommand Radio
I signed that petition weeks ago heh. Cool that others are aware.
Sorry that what I said earlier came out like digital vs. analog. That really was not my intent. What was meant was: we should be using digital technology to IMPROVE sound quality, and not just pumping more cheap (or free) very low quality crap into the world. Death to MP3 or AAC or even AIFF. We need, we want HIGHER QUALITY
sound.
Wow. It comes out better (and a lot shorter) if it's not the middle of the night and I'm
not full of beer. Something to think about !!
sound.
Wow. It comes out better (and a lot shorter) if it's not the middle of the night and I'm
not full of beer. Something to think about !!
I don't care if it's high quality or not....
RattMann: can you honestly tell the difference between a 320kbps mp3 and one of your super sound recordings? is it really that much better, and finally, do you think that the average person can tell the difference, or would pay extra for the improved quality?
imo if the answer to any of those questions is no, then super high quality sound is going to be something that most people will never care about because cheaper options that work just as well are available.
imo if the answer to any of those questions is no, then super high quality sound is going to be something that most people will never care about because cheaper options that work just as well are available.
RattMann said: What was meant was: we should be using digital technology to IMPROVE sound quality, and not just pumping more cheap (or free) very low quality crap into the world. Death to MP3 or AAC or even AIFF. We need, we want HIGHER QUALITY sound.
Yes, we definitely want that. But we also want, like Whistler said, to broaden our horizons. And for that, we do not want, or are, at least in most cases, quite unable to fund a steady flow of Hi-Fi-worthy recordings into our collections. Therefore, we rely on radio and internet broadcasting to show us new things to discover, so that we can buy the Hi-Fi-worthy recordngs afterwards.
And I think it is poor sport to deprive those who have not enough money to buy such high quality recordings of music that can be easily made available to them via computer/internet, just because we think it is not good enough.
Yes, we definitely want that. But we also want, like Whistler said, to broaden our horizons. And for that, we do not want, or are, at least in most cases, quite unable to fund a steady flow of Hi-Fi-worthy recordings into our collections. Therefore, we rely on radio and internet broadcasting to show us new things to discover, so that we can buy the Hi-Fi-worthy recordngs afterwards.
And I think it is poor sport to deprive those who have not enough money to buy such high quality recordings of music that can be easily made available to them via computer/internet, just because we think it is not good enough.
so looks like according to that article that slime pointed out, 320 kbps should be fine for anyone, even the sticklers who wont take anything but the best. so tell me again why its so important to have 5mbps sound?