MP3 Creators Introduce New Format: MusicDNA
The developers of the ubiquitous MP3 format wish to replace it with a new format called MusicDNA. The new format was recently demoed at the Midem industry conference in Cannes by BACH Technology.
The MP3 format changed the face of the music industry by delivering what was the need of the hour during the 90's: an audio compression technology tailored to slow internet connections and small hard drives of the day.
It is still going strong in an era when Internet connections are much faster and storage abundant. But thanks to the MP3 format (and the internet), the music industry now has rampant digital piracy to contend with. It is becoming increasingly difficult for them to convince people to pay for music.
MP3's successor is aimed at tackling piracy, the one issue relevant to this era. Its developers hope that the MusicDNA format will be able to boost music sales by giving consumers more bang for their buck. Apart from music, each MusicDNA file will contain bonus content that will be updated from time to time. Extras include lyrics, blog posts, videos and artwork besides other updates and information. It will be compatible with any MP3 player.
BACH Technology is not the first company to have taken this approach. Apple's iTunes LP also accomplishes much the same thing by packaging music and related multimedia content in one file.

Image Credit: Cnet (UK)
![]()
gmvolk
January 26, 2010 at 2:17pm
DVD's were new. They promised all these "extra" features. What do we get, director commentary(yawn), movie trailers(yawn), etc etc. Nothing that I ever use or need. Now they want to give us lyrics...I want to listen to music not read it. Blog posts, I don't read blogs as it is so this is useless. Videos, yeah make the file 10-20 times bigger in size so I can only get only get two or three songs on my MP3 player. Plus you'll go over your ISP bandwidth limit downloading an album. I can already add artwork into my MP3's, which is about the only thing else I would want on my music. I know, they can link it to twitter and facebook(add sarcastic symbol here)! And none of this will do anything to tackle piracy, someone always finds a way to circumvent DRM.
![]()
Trooper_One
January 26, 2010 at 12:41pm
MusicDNA? Sounds like bloatware to me. Also, why would I want to use bloatware supported by the RIAA, the most evil oranisation since Mr. Evil's old organisation.
Finally, there's no infrastruture for it (e.g. music players) - just like Hydrogen fuel wanting to get into the market but only gas stations exists. It sounds overly proprietory as well.
In other words, MusicDNA = Epic Fail.
![]()
DOAcepr
January 26, 2010 at 9:38am
Its the same reason I stopped buying Sony CDs, or why I won't use iTunes... DRM (or some variation of it). It is to restrictive, to proprietary (Apple) and too much of a pain in the @$$. I have several computers, cell phones, & mp3 players in my household and getting them all to play music while fighting the DRM isn't worth it. I'll stop buying music first. RIAA has lost any trust they ever had with the public. I don't need or want any of that extra crap, just the music.
- I don't condone piracy, I won't engage in it, or support it. I do however believe in fair use.
![]()
mls067
January 25, 2010 at 7:30pm
I guess I'm old fashion. I just want my music, to listen to. If I wanted all the extra's they are implementing with this, then I'll buy the dvd or an enhanced CD. Why bloat a song?
![]()
Fugazi
January 25, 2010 at 6:32pm
to me it sounds like its simply a bloated codec made for the purpose of corprate greed (stopping piracy, selling extras) and not about actual sound quality. FLAC is the best choice for sound quality IF storage space is not an issue. its not a revolutionary jump like vinyl to CD, CD to mp3. i say it will be a dud.
oh and way to copy the music genome project (musicDNA hello!) which is technology by the good folks at pandora.
-Andy
![]()
hagbard
January 25, 2010 at 5:35pm
I've read that this format allows for up to 32 GB of extra "content" per file, aside from the audio. I read that as up to 32 GB of DRM.
![]()
Jox
January 25, 2010 at 5:29pm
Extras include lyrics, blog posts, videos and artwork
Couldn't... Care... Less.
Need lyrics to a song? Google.
Want to know what people are saying about a song? Google.
Want artwork and photos pertaining to a song/musician? Google.I can't see this making any kind of a dent. All that matters are sound quality and cost.
-Jox
![]()
Cy-Kill
January 25, 2010 at 5:33pm
The MP3 format is to entrenched for this to really make an impact, it'll probably be used for some things, but I don't see it superseding MP3s.
Cy-Kill
![]()
meangenedrlove
January 25, 2010 at 5:46pm
"The MP3 format is to entrenched for this to really make an impact, it'll probably be used for some things, but I don't see it superseding MP3s."
That's what the naysayers said about compact discs, which MP3s pretty much superceded and LPs before that...which CDs superceded.
I welcome something new as long as it is an improvement on the MP3 format and much easier to customize/standardize the tag/track info. I would also love to have my music library free from the wild variances in volume levels from track to track that currently plague my MP3s. I have had some success in overcoming a lot of it with MP3Gain, but it is far from perfect. I hope something like that is a key feature of MusicDNA.
Having backwards compatibility with current MP3 players is a plus (as mentioned in the blurb), so what's the problem?
![]()
nduanetesh
January 25, 2010 at 11:08pm
The problem is that people don't adopt something new unless there is a compelling reason to do so.
Does anybody remember MP3Pro? It actually offered better quality sound in smaller files (AND backward compatibility with current MP3 players), but that wasn't enough reason for most people to actually use it. Unless this new format has a real "must have" feature that people really want (and judging from the responses to this article so far, it doesn't) it will be flop.















