Comments on: A Requiem For iTunes DRM

By: Marci

Marci — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:28:11 +0000

oh ok thanks

By: MegaZone

MegaZone — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:39:49 +0000

Requiem works fine on PCs, that’s where I use it.

By: Marci

Marci — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:43:17 +0000

nice but this only works for MAC…..any idea what i can use for PC ??

By: MegaZone

MegaZone — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:49:15 +0000

I did already catch the release of Requiem 1.8.1.

By: TomKessler

TomKessler — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 22:37:26 +0000

Got my new Google G1 phone with Android on it. Was oh so nice to copy my DRM free music over to the phone and not have to have any concern about if it would work or not.

Amazon Mp3 has been great too at .89 cents a song over .99 cents

By: jhegg

jhegg — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:55:31 +0000

Requiem 1.8.1 is out and works with iTunes 8.

Can anyone tell me how the instructions above for updating iTunes differ with a Mac. I can’t seem to find that info.

By: MegaZone

MegaZone — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:54:40 +0000

They won’t – can’t – add DRM back into to tracks where the DRM has been removed. But they have change iTunes 8 so that Requiem no longer strips the DRM from new tracks. The author is working on it to try to get Requiem working on iTunes 8.

For now don’t upgrade to 8 if you want to keep stripping DRM.

By: TomKessler

TomKessler — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 08:16:11 +0000

Very simple process used Requiem 1.7.4 to strip all DRM

I am using iTunes 7.7.1.11 and as the article mentions Apple will try and lay the DRM back in?

Now that iTunes 8 is out had anyone run into this?

Does it make sense to convert these to m4a to mp3 next prior to going to version 8?

By: MegaZone

MegaZone — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:26:12 +0000

That’s faulty logic. If you accept that a lossless version is three times the size of the 256Kbps AAC file (I’ll accept that, but it varies), that doesn’t mean the AAC is worth 1/3 the lossless file. Is the lossless file *three times better*? No, I don’t think it is. In fact, for *most* users they’d be hard pressed to tell the difference between professionally encoded 256Kbps AAC and lossless audio.

It is highly subjective, for most users there is no additional value in having the CD and ripping it to lossless. I own ~750 or so CDs, and I ripped them all to 128Kbps AAC. That’s fine for me, I still rip the rare CD I purchase that way. Lossless holds no additional value for me – except the *potential* future value of some new codec even better than AAC in the future. Having lossless to be able to export to a new format for could be useful. But that’s a low level of value to me.

There’s also the hassle of dealing with the CDs and the waste they produce. I feel obligated (and I am legally, but that’s different) to keep all the CDs I ripped music from. I have several boxes full of CDs in my basement, uselessly taking up space. Alternatively I could destroy them, but that’s wasteful. Some people rip and resell the CDs but I’m not comfortable with that morally, and legally that’s a no-no.

So for me the digital copies have value CDs do not – the value of NOT having physical media to deal with. There is also the value of convenience and instant gratification. With CDs I have to either go out and buy them at retail, and pay more to get it now, or order them online and wait for them. Then I have to deal with the packaging, and do the ripping, hope it is in CDDB for the metadata (granted, it usually is), and then deal with the media long term. With digital music I buy it, it downloads in seconds or minutes, and I’m done.

For someone else lossless may be of high value. But for me, and I’d say probably most users, the convenience and lower hassle of digital music holds value, and any qualitative difference in the music is imperceptible to most. Especially in the kinds of environments most people listen to music in – the car, on earbuds, etc.

By: David Russell

David Russell — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 18:22:12 +0000

An AAC file from iTunes plus is 256kbps. A lossless audio file (ie the same amount of sound as the CD) is about three times that. So $10 for an iTunes album when the CD is also $10, you are effectively paying three times what the product is worth.

By: OompahLoompah108

OompahLoompah108 — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:45:28 +0000

This is a great explanation on the DRM scheme. I like the Google instructions on how to get Requiem -> it points to the site where I’ve hosted it!

Thanks to Brahms, and all his hard work, we can strip our music + videos. I am anticipating the wait for the updated version so it can work with iTunes 8!

By: Gryphon

Gryphon — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:19:39 +0000

Seriously, Leo? A buck is too much for a song?

And I thought I was cheap.

By: Leonardo DiCrapio

Leonardo DiCrapio — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 14:40:29 +0000

I’ve purchased my share of music from iTunes, but all MP3/AAC are a rip-off at 99 cents per track. The tracks should be priced at $0.25 to $0.50 per track. That price point would be reasonable given the lower audio quality than from a CD. That’s why I think that Amazon’s $5 should become more the norm rather than the weekly sale. But at least Amazon charges $5 for some album, instead of Apple’s $10 rip-off point.

By: xdreamwalker

xdreamwalker — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:37:35 +0000

This is sweet! A long time ago I used myFairTunes to strip all of my music. It really had bugged me that it would not strip the videos, but I have lived with that. I was real bummed out when it stopped working, and I stopped buying music.
I guess I forgot about the whole thing until today. I was very please with the results. I didn’t have any music to strip, but it took care of some TV episodes for me.