As we all know by now, DRM (digital rights management) is that disagreeable bit of code that restricts downloaded music from being played with the same flexibility offered by music purchased on CDs. Competing interests and historical incentives have created a world of music burdened by DRM, but with nothing approaching an industry standard. Technical barriers and functional incompatibility between MP3 players and music sites have confused and discouraged the listening public. Somehow, the prevailing music industry wisdom is that by attaching DRM to downloaded music, they will prevent piracy and illegal transfers while fostering a thriving market. Like many others (and like most statistics would show), we think the music industry has gotten this wrong.

The Internet has changed so many of the rules of how content is accessed and used. Consumers demand freedom of choice and, in most cases, they will pay for this flexibility. However, the music industry clings to an increasingly outdated notion that they can control the environment and that DRM is the silver bullet.

We think the equation should be very simple – let consumers buy the music in a format that is easy to use and easy to play. It should work on their iPod, their Zune, in their car or wherever else they are listening to music. The music has to be easy to download, the price must be reasonable, and the quality should be great. None of this seems like rocket science to us but it’s easy to get confused when you scan the digital music landscape.

We believe that it's a matter of when, not if, the unrestricted MP3 format becomes the standard. Consumers will favor reputable and reliable download stores over the e-mail-attached song-from-a-friend-of-a-friend approach. Consumers have learned painfully frustrating lessons by adding corrupted and virus-ridden music to their digital collections. We don't suspect that people want to steal the music, especially if the price is right and the download purchase and transfer process is easy and foolproof. Liberating digital music – so that it can be played on any device at any time, at any location - should lead to a dramatic increase in the legitimate download market.

The Concert Vault, as we have previously announced, will begin offering downloads in April. Expect us to follow our own advice.

Cheers!

Wolfgang

So this will be DDR rather than DRM? ;-)

 

Any idea yet what kind of pricing structure you'll have?

Another question that just occurred to me, will only shows available in the Concert Vault be available for download?  There are plenty of shows/tunes that you used to play on the original Vault Radio that I'd love to download, such as John Mayall from 7/12/1969, Joe Cocker from 3/27/1970 both at the Fillmore East and The Nice from 12/12/1969 at the Fillmore West.  That's just a few that I kept notes on that I'd be interested in.

I know who people who only illegally download music because of the restrictions. If the music industry wants to stop piricy they should make the DRM more liberal, not more strict

This is fantastic thank you very much! Any idea on when the video concert vault will debut?

  Wow- right on!
        THAT'S encouraging!!
      Tell it like it is and keep on keeping on!

BRAVO!!
Somebody gets it. You are for the most part right on the mark. I believe the "industry" is causing it's own demise, and you guys are like a friggin beacon. PLEASE CONSIDER checking out Livephish dot com.
Choice of mp3 or FLAC (CD quality for a couple more bucks), very reasonable prices, very well designed, and officially released material instantly disappears from the filesharing sites out of respect for what they and you and I believe in. Maybe you are considering a low priced monthly subscription ala rhapsody?  With constant new releases of fantastic vaulted material (like you promise), that's what I'd sign up for.

The revolution will not be televised.

Let me second the request for lossless FLAC-encoded files, not just MP3. Your content does tend to appeal to an older market of music lovers, who appreciate artists, not just hit songs. A large number of us prefer to listen to music on high-quality hifi systems, not just on pocket MP3 players with the 5-cent headphones that come with them.

Besides Phish, there are officially sanctioned sites for many artists, including The Who and King Crimson, who also offer (for a price) both MP3 and FLAC versions of their concert recordings.

I would certainly welcome and gladly pay for FLAC-encoded downloads (with no lossy compression in their lineage) of many of these concerts. I would not pay for MP3 encoded versions.

I would like to add my voice to the chorus asking for a loss-less option (and yes, I am willing to pay more for this!). FLAC is great, but WMA-L should be considered too as it will play directly on most PCs.

Please consider PayPal for the payment system; it is universal and safe.

Cheers

The Bear

That's all well and good, and I applaud your efforts and values.

"The music has to be easy to download, the price must be reasonable, and the quality should be great."

Implicit in these qualities should be a few things:

1. As mentioned, loss-less quality should be the preferred, or 'premium,' option for those that this matters to. The unrestricted MP3 format may indeed become the standard, but it's a lousy sounding format for such important and sought after archival material. The music industry -- or anything else that deals with substantially mainstream product -- will most-likely settle for MP3 sound quality because the _average_ listener will (and already is) settle for it because of the convenience etc. However, many of us prefer to have superior sound while taking the extra time or financial effort to obtain it for the experience of hearing these 'lost' performances how they were meant to be.

2. FLAC files, as mentioned work very well, not for all of us, but for many. One of the key factors is that live shows need not be spliced BACK together with spaces, clicks or noticable indication that there is a break in the file between songs. Again, this takes away from optimal listen experience. And I am assuming that a large percentage of your 'audience'' is above the casual listener status.

3. While I am not looking a gift (crazy?) horse in the mouth, the Vault, as amazing as it is, is, I am assuming, dealing with some limitations on what will be -- or CAN be -- making available. Case in point: as interesting as it may be to hear the 'other' artists from The Rolling Thunder Review Tour, there are no Dylan performances included and that would most likely be because the artist has not allowed you too? Similar I would think with The Rolling Stones. The Detroit 1978 recording, available in collector's circles in pieces and incomplete for years, is a wonderful and intriguing addition which must have _somehow_ received clearance from the band. Nicely done, and no easy task. But these types of hurdles need to be worked on even more for the Vault to really blossom to its full potential.

3. On that same subject, while this is an extraordinary opportunity to hear previously unavailable recordings/performances, one has to ask what of the missing two songs? (Respectable/Far Away Eyes). Again, not looking a gift horse, but if you want to provide downloads/purchases for fans and you are concerned about what they are interested in I'm sure most would say "Give me whatever" since we have all been dying for something like this for years. But most would really say "I'd kinda like the whole show, thanks." Often times there are technicasl reasons for songs being ommitted - lost, damaged, incomplete etc. If this is the case this should be included somewhere in the write up of the show. Additionally, if certain performances are available but incomplete for some reason, the partial performance is much preferred over total ommission. The fade out was invented for many reasons....

4. Finally, you are right to be thinking in the opposite pattern that the industry generally does, i.e. they focus on what people are doing with the music AFTER they obtain it, while YOU are focusing on the consumer BEFORE they obtain it. Make the product what they want and sales will go up. Restrict what they can have, charge them an arm and a leg and watch the proliferation of folks trying to record your streamed broadcasts without paying anything. And, no, I don't think any of us are naive enough to believe that isn't happening already.

We want the whole show, in as clean and dynamic quality as possible, and we want them from our favorite artists.

Thank you for what you have done so far, keep up the good work, and keep asking us about what we think.

Hey Now,

I would be interested in lossless formats only. This seems to work for MunckMusic, Digital Soundboards.net, MusicToday.net and others.

I am wiling to pay for quality downloads of lossless digital files of concerts.

If all you offer is MP3, then I will not participate. Some folks still listed to music on higher quality systems than compressed waveforms can support. I hope some of the money makes it to the musicians.

Thanks for you efforts,

Willy

Hitting the nail on the head. you give someone what they want for a nice price and make it easy, they will flock to it!! I am so excited about the offer of downloads, I've been telling everyone I know about this site and the ability to download will, as hard as it is to believe, make this site even better!

It is great that you are not going to encumber the downloads with any DRM.  Consumers want to be able to have control over where and how they can use the music that they have legally purchased and not be dictated to by some recording companies.  This is certainly going in the right direction, if  music sites do not offer DRM-encumberd downloads and more and more consumers demand this, DRM will ultimately end up in the trash bin as a failed attempt by some business people to control and regulate online content.  And yes, as many have said here, I believe you should offer the downloads in MP3 as well as in other better quality formats so as to cater to a wider cross-section of your listeners.

Keep up the good work!!

I would only download if shows were offered in flac or something similar, not mp3. 

I'm a long time downloader of Widespread Panic from the WSP website, and a big purchaser of concert recordings (ABB, Dead, Rat Dog, Phish. There is no question that the FLAC format is light years beyond mp3 particularly for discerning fans of jam bands and those solos only a concert gives. I have spent hundreds of dollars in FLAC downloads from WSP, and Munkmusic. There is no doubt in my mind that if you offer these concert recording downloads in a FLAC format, I will likely end up hundreds of dollars poorer. Please! Make me poorer!