Dev,

Ever consider selling your albums in lossless (i.e., FLAC) format online? You could charge an amount more than mp3, closer to CD prices. I think a lot of your fans would buy them, if they don't already have the CD's. I just bought Porcupine Tree (Fear of a Blank Planet) as a FLAC download from http://www.burningshed.com/, they don't have many artists, so they must have a personal licensing agreement with each artist on there. You own the rights to all the solo stuff yes? So I think you could put it on a site like that and sell albums for maybe $10-$12 USD.

Anyway, when I listen to FLAC through headphones, I can tell the difference big time. I bought your entire catalog from Amazon as mp3 downloads because I was so impatient after I bought Terria, that I had to have it all RIGHT AWAY. Freakin everything, from Punky Brewster to DT, DTB, DTP, and the entire Strapping catalog. With all the layering and fine details in your music, the listener really needs to have the CD or lossless audio to listen properly.

If you made DT, DTB, and DTP available for purchase in lossless format, I'd buy the whole freakin' catalog again. I already plan on buying the DTP boxset when it is available. But until then, I will impatiently put up with the 256Kb mp3's from amazon. I refuse to download anything from bittorrent unless I own it already or plan on buying it shortly after.

Lossless audio hasn't really taken off yet, but I think it has to eventually. Personal storage space (HDD's) is ridiculously cheap, and will get cheaper. I should know, I work for a major disk storage manufacturer. Another artist who sells a lot of stuff in lossless format is Robert Fripp. He has a site where you can download live releases as FLAC from his own stuff as well as King Crimson. http://www.dgmlive.com/

I don't know if you've thought about it or not, but I think it would be way cool. Like I said, I'd buy the whole damn catalog again.

Can't wait for the rest of the DTP series!

Yes, flac-downloads would be great. I have all of my CDs on my HD in flac-Format now (i took quite a lot of time to rip them all) and almost never use my CD-player anymore. I' m quite a hifi-enthusiast and really don't like MP3 - i can tell the difference, too, especially with Wall of Sound-productions (i can't tell it when listening to singer/songwriter stuff, though). Devs music is the most effective MP3-killer i know.

Of course i'll buy the physical discs from Dev, because i'm a fan, but if i weren't such a big fan i would greatly appreciate the possibility to buy, download and listen immediately in lossless. Considering the shipping-price i think it would be a win-win for everyone.

Good point on the shipping costs.

I'm a huge fan too. Even though I elected to buy the mp3's rather than the CD's. But you have to understand I'm horribly impatient. I first heard Dev when I bought the Judas Priest tribute album in 1995 or 1996 or whatever it was when it came out. But I bought it for one song, Mercyful Fate's cover of "The Ripper". Then I heard SYL's version of "Exciter" and I loved it. However, I stupidly ignored Dev for nearly 15 years! I didn't get into him until I saw Terria on an Amazon listmania for "Must have prog albums". This was only a few months ago, March maybe. I downloaded it and was floored to say the least. I then had to have absolutely everything. I haven't been this "addicted" to an artist since I first heard Metallica probably back in the late 80's/early 90's...before the dreaded Black Album. I'm horribly impulsive and impatient. And modern technology only contributes to these personality traits!

Those who share these particular elements of my personality would literally jump at the chance to download lossless. I'm sure many others would as well! Another good thing about purchasing via download; It hides (to some degree) the fact that you're spending money on a bunch of stuff. This of course only applies if you're hitched or share your finances with someone.


edit: I just went back to that burningshed site and bought the rest of the full-length porcupine tree albums in FLAC!!!

I can't really tell the difference between 320kb/s MP3s and .flac (and neither can you most likely, unless you're not human). Usually mp3's aren't sold that quality though, so on the occassions that I can buy stuff, if for whatever reason I can't find the CD, I generally buy the mp3's then pirate the album in .flac or 320k anyway. Releasing in lossless would, at the very least, cut down on risk (not to mention it seems to be a rule that any high quality torrent of Devins albums are horribly seeded).

Plenty of us humans can definitely hear the diff between a high quality, though still lossy 320kbps mp3, and the actual CD or lossless format encoded from the original CD.

You won't notice it as much on stuff that is already highly compressed and doesn't have much going on. But when I listen to Terria in Flac format, all the little things stand out more. It's almost like cleaning the wax out of your ears. But it is a fact. Even a high quality mp3 is still lossy, and with decent headphones on I can definitely tell the difference.

It depends much on the complexity of the music. The psycho-acoustic algorithm of MP3 is just not made for metal. You can hear the difference mostly in very complex, layered, dynamic music with big frequency-spectrum - and there its mostly the cymbals that sound always a bit fizzy/fuzzy/flirry in MP3. Also sometimes the bass sounds less deep or powerful.

I think there maybe be differences in encoders. Maybe today there are encoders out there which create MP3s which don't have those issues, but i doubt it. Most MP3s i've listened to just weren't as good as FLAC. So i would always prefer lossless files - in addition it's a psychological thing: you know that you have the best possible quality and you don't have to worry to miss something even better.

I agree. I'm listening to Yes - Close to the Edge in lossless right now. It sounds fantastic. You can hear all the little things and subtle details very well, and back then, things were very open and dynamic. Modern day recordings have everything mixed at the same level, and as loud as possible without clipping. This older prog that I like has a lot of dynamics, like a classical music piece with lots of crescendos and variance in levels all over the place. Everything todaybis very tight and locked down, that's why Ki is so refreshing. It was created with modern day technology, but with less constraints. There are a lot of little details and dynamics going on. So rare to find in most modern recordings...now I have to re-rip all my CDs!!!

i would really love if Dev offered all his records (every one of them! even the official bootleg!) in FLAC through the site. i'm still a record collector, but to be able to have a perfect copy direct from the source without having to worry about accurately ripping discs etc. would be fantastic. the Porcupine Tree example is perfect, as they also have a gigantic discography like Dev, and offer pretty much everything digitally, in addition to working up the collectors' market all the time. profitable!

i maintain there's no discernible difference between 320kb/s and FLAC on my big expensive surround system and sound card but to each his own

Try it out with decent headphones. Pick something with a lot of detail and/or layers. Without headphones, it would be hard to tell the diff. I listen with headphones 90% of the time.

Right I'm getting a bit sick of this discussion so here's the deal.

• Some people have good ears
• Some people have good music equipment
• Some people know what to pay attention to
• Some people are just full of shit and try to impress other people
• Some people suffer from a sort of placebo-effect

Any combination of the above, may be able to hear the difference between FLAC and 320MP3 and I'm sure it extends to 128MP3 and maybe even beyond.

Other people cannot hear the difference. Simple as that.

Point taken.

All that aside, the real question is: Would it be a wise business decision to offer the catalog in FLAC?

I would think that it is. I can't imagine that the initial investment would be very much. But I don't know anything about the business. That's why I asked in the first place. If it is a low risk investment that could result in a worthy return, and if Dev decided to do it, then I would love having the opportunity to buy FLAC releases from HDR.

Maybe it would be a good idea to poll some artists who have done it to see if it has been successful for them. Don't know if I could do that. "Hey man, it's the_s_rabbit. How's it going?! How are your FLAC sales doing man?".

[*]Some people are just full of shit and try to impress other people[/*]
[*]Some people suffer from a sort of placebo-effect[/*][/list]

In the past I've generally been of the opinion that people who claim to be able to tell the difference between lossless audio and a very high quality mp3 fall into one or both of these camps, without exception. More recently though, I've decided to reserve judgement since I really don't know enough about what mp3 is throwing away, and what the human brain can perceive, or about audio in general to be honest.

I still think the vast majority of people that claim to be able to tell the difference are full of shit though.

I have looked at what the human brain can percieve, and there should be no discernable difference between FLAC and 320k for most things. Even more amusing is people that claim analog sounds better than high quality mp3's, ignoring the poor fidelity.

Fine then. Offer 320Kbps mp3's. The point of this thread isn't to quibble over the goddamn difference. It's to see whether or not it would be a good business decision to offer higher quality digital downloads. Amazon and iTunes aren't quite up to 320Kbps. They are variable bit rate, but I don't know what the max is. But for sure, I can tell the difference between those and FLAC or the CD. Who cares. That's not the point. Would people fucking buy it if it were for sale? Hey, I don't have a blu-ray player, nor do I plan on buying one because I don't give a shit about the difference between 480p and 720p. I'm not a movie buff. But I guess I am a music "buff" if you want to call it that, and there are plenty of others out there who are as well. Would it not be a wise decision to appeal to this audience?

As for the debate over whether a "human" can tell the difference, it's all subjective. Nobody can prove shit and yeah there is the whole psychological placebo effect thing that also happens. But who gives a fuck? If it fucking sells then why not do it?


That is the point of this goddamn thread.

Peace