Being the intrepid blogger that I am, I thought I would go ahead and give Amazon's new MP3 store a whirl, since it works with iTunes and offers up high quality DRM-free MP3 files. What better way to compare and contrast the Amazon experience to the iTunes Store experience than purchasing the same song? The song in question is Rehab by Amy Winehouse (mostly because it was the first song that caught my eye on Amazon's page, and I enjoy it whenever I hear it).Finding the track
You can't buy something if you can't find it, right? That's why searching is so important for any online music seller. I bought Rehab because it was featured on Amazon's front page, but to be fair I searched for it using the Amazon MP3 search. The term I entered was 'rehab,' and here are the results:
The results are presented in typical Amazon style: barebones but fairly easy to use. The song I was looking for came in at #17 on the 57 songs found (sorted by relevance).
The same search run on the iTunes Store returns:
As you can see, the first result is the song I was looking for.
Advantage: iTunes.
Previewing the track
Amazon MP3 has a very straight forward way of previewing tracks, and if you're familiar with the way Amazon handles previews of physical CDs you're familiar with what they are doing with the digital tracks. You can click a play button next to a particular track to hear a sample, or hit the Preview All button and hear all the previews in the order they appear on the album.
You're all familiar with how iTunes does this, I'm sure. Double click the track, or hit the Play button on iTunes and you'll be treated to a 30 second preview of the song.
Advantage: Amazon MP3. Sure, it isn't integrated with iTunes, but that 'Preview All' button is a very good idea. If you want a quick sample of all the songs on an album you can't beat it (and the iTunes Store doesn't beat it).
Buying the track
Here is where it is all decided. If Amazon can't compete with the ease of use that is iTunes (one click and you've bought a song that is immediately downloading into your music library) then it is game over, man.
Buying a track from Amazon MP3 is fairly painless. You click on the 'Buy MP3' button, Amazon asks to make sure you meant to buy that track (you can turn this warning off), and then you are taken to a Thank You page which explains what is happening. Unless, of course, this is your first time downloading something from Amazon MP3, in which case you are prompted to download and install the Amazon MP3 Downloader (a Universal app), pictured here:
The Amazon MP3 Downloader serves as a bridge between your machine and Amazon's download service. You'll notice that whenever you buy a song from Amazon you will be downloading .amz files, not MP3 files. These are the files that the Amazon MP3 Downloader looks for. Once you have the Downloader installed it dutifully goes out and fetches the MP3 that you bought (if you're wondering why Amazon just doesn't let you download the songs straight from the browser, I would imagine they don't want people figuring out the URLs of the MP3s and then downloading them like mad. Just a guess on my part.).
The Amazon MP3 Downloader has a few preferences you can fiddle with. You can set it to look for updates of itself, tell it where to save your downloaded MP3s (the default is in the current user's Music folder in a folder called 'Amazon MP3'), and set whether or not you want it to add your newly downloaded MP3s to iTunes (it is set to do this by default, and it worked flawlessly).
Advantage: iTunes. iTunes has the huge advantage of being its own application, so it can handle everything in one shot. This also makes the buying experience seamless, you don't have to use one app to buy your song, one app to download, and yet another to play it. I will say that one you install the Amazon MP3 Downloader the process is generally painless. A very 'set it and forget it' kind of procedure that doesn't require much interaction, but it still involves an extra step that iTunes doesn't require.
Playing the track
Both the iTunes Store track and the Amazon track played back in iTunes flawlessly. Amazon, you'll be happy to note, includes high resolution album art with their MP3s (though the Amazon album art and the iTunes Store are were different). I am not an audiophile, so both files sounded the same to me, but in my heart of hearts the Amazon track sounded better only because it has no DRM and it cost me 10 cents less.
Advantage: Amazon. Amazon files will play on more devices, and are usable in more ways, than DRM protected iTunes files and generally cost less than iTunes Plus files (though the pricing on Amazon is variable, so it is possible that you could find a track on Amazon that costs more than the same track via iTunes Plus). The files, without a doubt, are prepared with a higher bit rate than anything in the iTunes Store, so audiophiles might want to check that out (my merely mortal ears couldn't tell the difference).
Conclusion
I would liken buying tracks at Amazon MP3 to buying something at WalMart. The decor isn't great, but the prices make up for it (no matter what you think of WalMart, you can't beat their prices). The iTunes experience is much nicer, but I am willing to deal with a slightly less polished store to save a few bucks on some downloads. I'll be checking both iTunes and Amazon when I have the urge to buy some music, and I imagine I won't be alone on that.
I am sure Amazon will be refining the experience, and I hope this forces Apple to take a look at the iTunes Store and make that experience even better. Luckily, this is a case of the consumer winning since the more options you have, the better off you are.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
9-25-2007 @ 2:08PM
Billy K said...
Apple may have a problem.
The store is uglier, but the downlaoding was faster, the previews were faster, the selection was (shockingly) better for what I looked for, and the recommendations it made were a lot more relevant.
Steve and the boys better get to work.
P.S. I *do* wish, however, that Amazon had at least *asked* me which credit card I wanted to use, rather than assuming it was the one I purchase hard goods with.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:10PM
petey said...
You said nothing of the price for the new Amazon tracks.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:25PM
Quix said...
"Steve and the boys better get to work."
I think Steve and Co. would be *thrilled* to give us DRM-free tracks at 256 kbps for $.89 *if the labels would allow it*.
This isn't "competition," this is extortion by the labels against Apple. All retailers should be offered the same pricing and DRM arrangements - working dirty strategic ploys like this only hurts us as consumers.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:30PM
required said...
"Steve and the boys better get to work."
I agree. This new amazon store looks pretty good (they have radiohead) and will most likely stop me from shopping at itunes.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:31PM
Mystic said...
I just checked it out, and I have to say that it is pretty nice. MUCH better then their movie store.
I can get an entire Lily Allen album, 256 kbps MP3, for $8. Not bad.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:33PM
Justin said...
Wow:
Ben Lee's new album on iTunes:
9.99
DRMed, 128kbps AAC
Same album on Amazon
6.99
DRM FREE, 256kbps MP3
WINNER = AMAZON
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:36PM
James said...
"The files, without a doubt, are prepared with a higher bit rate than anything in the iTunes Store, so audiophiles might want to check that out"
When it comes to iTunes+ this isn't really true. iTunes+ is 256kbps *AAC*. AAC is a superior codec to MP3.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:37PM
Angela said...
The only way Apple is going to compete is to either A) lower the price of their DRM songs or B) make all of their songs non-DRM for the DRM price.
Personally, I thought the navigation was easier to use than the iTMS.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:37PM
Sparks said...
FYI: You can click 'skip the downloader' and just set that you would like to download the MP3s directly, which is what I did.
The Amazon Downloader allows pausing/resuming of downloads, and will import directly into iTunes to make things more friendly, but is not required.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:39PM
Oz said...
"I think Steve and Co. would be *thrilled* to give us DRM-free tracks at 256 kbps for $.89 *if the labels would allow it*."
Why do you think that? Not having a go, just wondering why so many people assume that Apple wants to lower prices, only for the record labels to stop them each time(yet they let Amazon!)
To me it doesn't look like a simple case of Good Apple VS evil Record labels. No reason to assume so, any way.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:41PM
Kwahnoom said...
The labels have an interest in offering better prices to Amazon...for now... If and once Amazon MP3 becomes a success and more established, record labels can demand higher prices from Amazon MP3 and also use the successful existence of Amazon MP3 as a leverage against Apple to get a better deal in iTunes. If Amazon MP3 doesn't make it, then not much lost.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:52PM
Rene Ritchie said...
I bought several songs to show my support for DRM music. Overall, it was a good experience. Not as slick as iTunes, but functional. The price (especially $0.89) was great. I don't particularly care which service I use as long as it serves me, but Universals shenanigans have turned me off of both their music and their TV (looking at you NBC).
The one problem I had with Amazon was that, when I searched, I very often got Karaoke or Tribute results instead of "real" songs. Sometimes it was such a mess of them that it turned me off of the search entirely. Hopefully they'll fix that.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:54PM
aj_robins said...
Placing my tinfoil hat on: my guess as to the real reason for the special downloader is to add a user-specific watermark to the purchased MP3. It's better to use the user's CPU cycles for this, than to suck up amazon's resources.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 2:58PM
Scott said...
The advantage of iTunes that you cite -- one complete application -- is also a minus, in that the store is inaccessible to people at work without iTunes access. The Amazon store is browsable anytime, with any browser.
Overall, though, I'm hoping the Amazon store can help Apple to change its deals with the publishers and be able to offer non-DRM, and possibly cheaper, songs. The complete iTunes package is a tough one to beat.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 3:00PM
GadgetGav said...
You have to wonder what percentage Amazon are giving the record labels when they think 70% is far too little...
I wonder if this will prompt Apple into variable pricing..? It's odd to see an album of 12 songs for $8.99 and then see that some tracks are $.89 and some are $.99 when you're used to seeing everything as one price. I wonder who decides which tracks are 'worth' more...?
Apple still has the advantage in digital booklets, bonus tracks and videos...
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 3:00PM
Dana Stocking said...
I just think it goes to show that you can offer high quality music at a low price. As much as I love Apple, it looks like they need to push the record industry a little harder now.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 3:05PM
Anton said...
"I bought several songs to show my support for DRM music."
Rene meant DRM-free music, so I don't want to see 10 posts about her slip-up.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 3:05PM
jus10 said...
As mentioned by someone with the same name as me, you failed to factor in the DRM-free nature of the Amazon store. If Amazon's MP3s are cheaper than Apple's itunes plus files or I can actually get the files on Amazon, they win. I don't buy restricted music.
I do agree browsing for music in the Amazon store is a nightmare though. So, I browse through itunes and then buy the music at Amazon.
In either case, I re-encode the file into a VBR mp3 with lame so to me it doesn't matter what the file started as. 256-kbit is high enough to start the shave down process.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 3:06PM
GadgetGav said...
Rene Ritchie; I assume you mean NON-DRM music..!
aj_robbins; That's exactly what iTunes is. The DRM is added at the application level. I doubt they're doing the same at Amazon if they let you bypass the loader. Maybe the loader does add something, but if it does and it gets found out, everyone will just bypass it.
The terms of use on Amazon are much better, presumably because there's no DRM and so they can't enforce restrictions, but you can do pretty much what you like as long as you don't break the copyright and it's for non-commercial use. Much more like a physical CD, so how did the RIAA let that go through..??
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 3:07PM
Anton said...
oops....his?
Reply