You're still thinking in terms of the old music distribution economics. Artists will not be selling a CD with 10 songs on it. Record companies will give out CDs with 100,000 songs on it for free.

Okay, I think you're a little too technically minded here.

For one, are you implying that artists, with this new technology, would not be constricted by limited space and that this was the only reason there are no more than 10 to 15 songs on most CD's? That is completely ridiculous. For example, Led Zeppplin's IV only has 8 songs for approximately 43 minutes of music. That leaves about 30 minutes. Do you think I feel ripped off because they "deprived" me of 40% of of the total possible listening time? Of course not! Artists have the right to craft their work and let us hear what they want us to. It's the record companies that rip you off with the price.

For their last album (No. 4), Stone Temple Pilots had about 30 to 40 songs worked out. I don't want all those on an album. Neither did they. Most likely because honestly, they knew some of them sucked! I don't want a song that sucks or doesn't sound right. I truly appreciate a well-crafted album. It shows that they put some thought into it.

Now, if you were saying that with this technology, record companies could distribute numerous artists' songs on one CD, then think about that prospect for a second. Do you know of any band that would want to share a CD with 1000 other groups? I don't think so.


Just remember, it takes a long time for the creative process to work. It took my favorite band, the Screaming Trees, 6 years to make their last album. They did not have 10,000 songs.

DiGNAN