PayPlay offers DRM-free tracks for $0.88

Again, like emusic, who's ever heard of these artists. The Top country list has no one I've ever heard of.

Good luck with that.

While I applaud PayPlay for their competitive spirit, I do think a couple of points should be made:

1. 192Kbps MP3 is not, in any sense, superior to 128kbps AAC. Furthermore, Apple's DRM-free tracks (when available) will be 192Kbps AAC, which is significantly higher quality than 192kbps MP3.

2. Don't go hoping you'll see any artists that you've ever heard of (unless you're an indie-rock college radio junkie like me). Nobody even remotely famous, no EMI tracks that I could find. Which is not to say there's nothing good there, just that it's "c" list material.

A nice COMPLEMENT to the iTunes music store, but "beats it" is a REAL stretch.

PS. Terrible navigation too.

Actually, Apple's DRM-free tracks will be 256k AAC, not 192k. So that's even better news.

So, we criticize radio for pushing the big names down our throats while ignoring a lot of the indie and smaller artists, now we criticize music services that promote them because there's no big names on the list.

Beyond that, supposedly Apple's DRM-free tracks will be 256kpbs, not 192, AAC files. However, they will also cost 42 cents more per track (and should we think that this is one of Apple's ways to prod people into getting bigger iPods?). However, in the real "huh?" part of the deal, supposedly albums will cost the same. Apparently getting individual songs from an album leads to those songs being shared more then someone getting an entire album.

This is a great move toward continuing to eliminate DRM from even more online music stores, and I applaud it.

The PayPlay site admits that they offer "1,300,000+ indie music tracks", but the more folks recognize that DRM is problematic, the more momentum this movement will have with the Big Four (EMI is onboard; next stop... Warner?), and the better off the buying public will (eventually) be.

Also, regarding the statement in the article: "...higher quality than iTunes' 128Kbps tracks which cost $0.10 cents more" First off, note that the iTunes DRM-free tracks will actually be $1.29, but will be 256 kbps. So, the PayPlay 192 kbps tracks are actually a VERY good bargain. However, um, shouldn't that either be "...which cost $0.10 more" or "...which cost 10 cents more"?

This message brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Dept.

Whoops: I had forgotten that iTunes will be 256 kbps AAC, which is considerably better than even MP3 at the same bitrate (as the above posters have indicated). Therefore, while the PayPay pricing isn't quite as good as it might be, it's still a good move in the right direction.

I will definitely check it out. This sounds like good way to locate new bands and find some favorites.

For once, I agree with Testudo, who usually writes things to rile apple fans. I doubt PayPlay is going for Apple directly; they are filling a niche, and that is always good.

I am just curious as to what the formula is for payments to artists (i.e., how many pennies from each sale goes to artist, label, payplay...).

It's actually not valid to say AAC is better than MP3 at all bit rates. But at the same time, it's not even necessarily correct to say AAC at 128 is better or worse than MP3 at 192. Apple makes their AACs from sources at a considerably higher bitrate than CD. Does PayPlay use CD or higher quality sources?

None of you get it. It's not about if this is better than Apple or not. This is about a new music model that will kill the record companies and distributers. Putting more money and power into the hands of artists.

I'm pretty sure everyone who works on music at Apple is happy to see this happening.

First off, I'll say that I'm all for this. It might not have the big bands, but there are plenty of smaller bands that you might never have heard of if it weren't for places like this.

That said, the site itself needs some improvement. I browsed it for about 15 minutes and found two things that I would like to see changed (and that I will submit to them as feedback):

1) When you browse by genre you can't choose to sort by artist (I might have overlooked something, but I didn't find a setting for that anyway).

2) The album price is still 8.88 even for albums with less than 11 tracks (which is the point at which it makes sense to buy an album instead of the individual songs).

Little things that can easily be fixed. Now I'm off to listen to some samples from these unknown bands :)