Apparently it’s illegal in Canada to copy music from a CD you bought to an iPod (or whatever). It’s simply not allowed, even if you’re not breaking any DRM in the process. (In the U.S., it’s illegal to copy a DVD to your computer’s hard drive because you have to circumvent the copy protection in the process.) Solution? Some sort of levy, which would ensure that “artists” make money even though you’re not re-buying their music.

The deal now is that an MP up there wants to introduce a CAN$75 “iPod levy” that would effectively legalize copying music from a CD you bought to your iPod. The levy has just been proposed, but if the Canadian legislature is anything like its American counterpart it’s going to be a little while before anyone even raises the issue again.

The idea of a levy isn’t new, per se—there’s already a levy on blank media (CD-Rs and the like) that supposedly help to make sure that “artists” get paid. (My hunch is that it goes right back to the record label’s coffers, but whatever.) Granted, you could be buying blank media to backup your PowerPoint presentation, so it’s not a 100 percent fool-proof thing, but it neatly solves the problem in a way that prevents people from having to re-think the entire concept of copyright in the 21st century.

This so-called iPod levy could also negatively affect people who buy iPod but don’t put any music on them—people like me, for example. I have an iPod touch and I dare you to find one song on there. (I pretty much just use it for like 10 minutes a day to check WoW.com before going to bed.) Why should I have to pay CAN$75, which is like US$4,000 these days, to subsidize other people’s habits?

Yes, I understand that the number of people who buy iPods and then don’t put any music on there is quite small, but I needed to fulfill my daily complaint quota.

Let’s turn it around, make it local to our fair American readers. Let’s say Congress, for whatever reason, creates and passes a law that says you’re 100 percent allowed to copy DVDs (legally bypassing the DRM) that you own to your hard drive, but that from now own all commercial DVDs come with a $10 tax on them to cover the “losses,” so to speak. Would you go for that?

Flickr

By Chris Scott Barr

These days buying music and putting it on your MP3 player of choice is a pretty simple task. Unfortunately for some of the older generation, even that can seem like a daunting task. Instead they’d perhaps just prefer to listen to the radio. Well if you’re looking to bring them into the age of MP3 players without scaring them too much, here is an interesting device that I saw while roaming the floor of CES.

Myine has created a rather curious radio called the Abbee, which is essentially used to record music. At its very basics, it  is your average FM radio that your parents and grandparents have used for years. The interesting thing is the small MP3 player docked on top of the unit. When you turn on the radio and hit the record button, that MP3 player will begin recording the music played (while automatically editing out the commercials and DJ talk).

Once you’ve let the device record for a while, you can take it off and use it as an MP3 player. There is no screen on it, so unfortunately you won’t have any way to see the song that is currently playing or anything. If there is a song that you like, just hit the star button and it will be saved. Otherwise once the 500 song (approximate) limit is reached, it will begin recording over the earliest songs (first in, first out) the next time you dock it an hit record.

It really seems rather simple to use, and could be good for those that really don’t mess with computers too much. The $249 price does seem a bit steep, though I suppose you are technically going to get a lot of free music (not of the highest quality of course) so you can factor that into the price. Most tech-savvy users won’t take much of an interest, but if you have an older relative they may very well love one.

[ Myine ]

In the interest of bringing Ron and Fez’s fantastic radio show topics to a more tech-minded audience, I propose the following: games like Guitar Hero and Rock Band, while fun and, generally speaking, “good,” will not save rock music. Rock and roll, for all intents and purposes, is dead. Bear with me for a minute, I’ll make this relevant to CrunchGear.

So the topic on today’s show was: U2—you may have heard of them—recently released a new album, but it didn’t sell too well. This created the discussion: is rock dead? Someone brought up the idea that kids today just aren’t buying music anymore, that they’re playing video games instead; you have but so many entertainment dollars to spend, right? But even if kids (and by kids I mean the 30 and under crowd, a completely arbitrary cutoff point) are going out and buying these games left and right, does that mean they’re experiencing music in a new way, as proponents of the idea that Guitar Hero will save the music business would have you believe, or are they just killing time?

To paraphrase Ron Bennington, if the only thing these kids are doing is playing Simon with Pearl Jam in the background, Pearl Jam might as well be the Pac-Man theme song. The kids aren’t paying attention to the music, aren’t getting “into it,” per se, but are merely following along with whatever random melody is playing in the background.

(Incidentally, a caller tried to blame the decline of rock music on Pearl Jam’s anti-everything antics back in the 1990s and 2000s, driving kids into hip hop’s flashy embrace. Kids want to look up to Rock Stars, and the lifestyle they live, and not necessarily people who, while armed with guitars, are generally against the whole rock “scene.” That’s partially why rapping about money, women, and cars caught fire in the 1990s: it filled a void that rock had left behind. I sure as hell would rather listen to Jay-Z than, say, The Strokes, who, if I recall correctly, were once promoted as the saviors of rock and roll.)

The future?

What new (and I do mean brand new, and not merely new to you) rock music have you heard in one of these games that made you think, “Hey, this band is pretty good. I’m gonna buy their album from iTunes and buy a t-shirt from their Web site.”? You may well be able to play along just fine with a Weezer or Peter Frampton song, and you’ll have a good time doing so, but in doing so you’re not exactly discovering Bruce Springsteen back when he was just a local Jersey act. You’re not discovering new music, but rather pressing a fisher price fret along with the melody to a classic rock song. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but that’s not going to save rock music, now is it?

And by save I just mean to make it popular again. I’d love to see a sales comparison between rock music and hip hop over the past 10 years. I bet it’s pretty one-sided.

Now these games are great for bands like The Beatles that are trying to introduce their catalog to millions of new eyeballs, but you’re not necessarily creating any new talent. It’s sorta like WWE in that sense: I stopped watching regularly back in high school (2004ish), but I turn on Raw or Smackdown today and the very same guys are who were main-eventing then (Triple H, Undertaker, John Cena, etc) are main-eventing now; no new stars have been created in the past five years. That’s not good!

So yeah, sorta rambling, but you get my point: Rock Band & Co. may be great for the record labels looking to make a extra few dollars on licensing deals, and may be great for old bands looking to introduce new fans to their music, but you’re crazy if you think these games will make rock music the music of this generation’s young people; hip has already won that battle. No new rock talent is being cultivated with these games, and the relationship between the actual music and the player isn’t genuine: you’re playing a video game with your friends as part of an event or fun social gathering, and aren’t carefully digesting the melodies and lyrics of “Gouge Away” for the sake of the music itself.

That is all.

Flickr and Flickr

A music-oriented home theater speaker system from Dynaudio.

(Credit: Dynaudio)

First thing, determine your system’s priorities. Will you watch movies or listen to music? Most folks do one or the other.

Since more home theater speaker buyers watch movies than listen to music, I’ll start there.

It’s hardly an overstatement to claim movie-oriented home theater systems succeed or fail based on their center channel’s performance and sound quality. The center speaker delivers virtually all the dialog and it can, depending on the mix, convey upward of 80 percent of a movie’s soundtrack. The center speaker has a big job.

So invest 30 percent of your 5.1, 6.1, or 7.1 system budget on the center speaker, the Center Centric HT approach. As always, when it comes to sound quality, size matters. Bigger centers tend to sound better than small ones.

The subwoofer is the next most important player in a home theater sound system. Invest the next 30 percent of your dollars on the sub. The sub is largely responsible for home theater impact and power.

…

Originally posted at The Audiophiliac