# The Death of the Audio CD



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

Sales of music CDs are painfully predictable in their steady decline ―for several years now, every year has been worse than the previous in terms of sales, and it seems extremely unlikely that this tendency will reverse any time soon. In the meantime, legally-downloaded music is increasing significantly, but not enough to make up for the lost business from CD sales. Illegal downloads are commonly percieved as the key culprit, but I don't think it's right to blame them completely. They are centainly a bad thing and don't help, but they also don't necessarily reduce the impulse to buy a CD; again, it's hard to know for sure.

Humans (as a species) have always shared music, and let's hope it stays that way. Digital recording has added a whole new dimension to the mix, and physical products need to be attractive to compete. One might argue that Vinyl records have fared better against the digital age, and they might even survive longer than the Audio CD as a niche. Generally, attractive sells, and physical is not as attractive anymore.

Even user experience cripples the CD, but the format has some advantages over digital downloads. I, for one, am a staunch believer in the CD, and will remain one until the last Schnittke disc in my last drawer stops playing. I don't want to worry about having to manage all my CD downloads online, so physical is a lot more convenient for me (it appears that I'm in the minority here).

*In conclusion:* No one can deny the fact that Audio CD sales are severely down, and it can be argued that this is because of the digital age. _Are CD sales ever going to die out completely?_ CD players are no longer being sold, so the future looks pretty damn bleak. _What do we do to fix this problem?_ I say that we make the CD-buying experience more fun. I order most of my CDs from Amazon, but there are still a great deal of music lovers that purchase from brick-and-mortar stores. Add a Starbucks, create a loungy atmosphere that people will want to come back to. I don't know, experiment. _Finally, what will (eventually) replace the CD?_ I want to prolong the time I have with CDs as long as possible, so maybe this won't affect me. But even if I die and CDs are still flourishing in sales, they will have to be replaced _eventually_. Everything has to get replaced with newer technology, newer innovations... "better" in an unending ratrace.

What do you all think? I reckon this will be one passionate debate.


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

Well, there doesn't seem to be anything better to replace the CD so far. Certainly not digital files.
It's kind-of sad that we seem to have reached the first generation for whom quality of sound is no longer a factor.
For the sake of mobility, sound quality is sacrificed, and people listen via pokey little earwigs, or crappy tablet speakers.
In the past, the "shrink factor" - from 78s, to LPs, to CDs - went hand-in-hand with improved sound (potentially, at least).
Not any more, it seems.

It might be less about what replaces the CD, than the fact people aren't listening to music through any kind of 'loudspeaker' worth the name.
And that makes all the difference.
cheers,
Graeme


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Just to note, my aging ears can't tell the difference between a CD and a decent bit-rate MP3. Yes, even in direct A-B comparisons. Period. So what am I giving up by listening to MP3s? Nothing that I can see.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

The CD is user friendly and gives good audio and you actually have it in the flesh so to speak, good CD players are still being manufactured at a reasonable price, see link at bottom of page.
I do not stream any music and would not trust the "cloud" as a sole source for my collection.
The only thing that may be better would be a solid state source something similar to a USB stick but much improved.
KenOC can't tell the difference between mp3 and a CD, fair enough I am now in the same situation but played through a decent system at volume you will find that the CD sounds great but [email protected] will sound distorted even some @320 so I will stick to the CD until something better turns up

http://www.whathifi.com/best-buys/hi-fi/best-cd-players?utm_medium=EMAIL&utm_campaign=Enews%20Bulletins&utm_content=WHIF%20ENews%20Bulletin_noextras%20(10.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

It has to have cover art and notes to be worth buying for me. Plus sound for me is an issue.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Eliminated post. Financial Times has a great article on the resiliency of CD sales, but their persnickety copyright concerns won't even let me post a quote of text without copyright warnings, nor a link to the article, but it degenerates to their main page, so given that, my post is deleted out of frustration. Search it yourself if interested. Title of article is,

"CD sales in the UK more resilient than downloads"


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Just to note, my aging ears can't tell the difference between a CD and a decent bit-rate MP3. Yes, even in direct A-B comparisons. Period. So what am I giving up by listening to MP3s? Nothing that I can see.


Yup, same thing with me. MP3s don't get scratched either. Plus, YouTube doesn't send you free physical CDs as they do with other formats. 

Bottom line: I can't remember when last I bought a CD. But I am just a casual listener, not a professional musician or critic or anything grand like that.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

A sad perspective from two years ago:

http://slippedisc.com/2015/04/classical-record-sales-just-keep-on-falling/


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Many of the lossless file formats (such as Apple's) sound as good to me as CD (agreeing with KenOC). Using iTunes and streaming music content from a server (i.e., home computer) is to me infinitely more convenient than constantly loading individual discs into a mechanical device with a motorized door. It's truly a technology on the way out. Digital information doesn't care if it sits on a shiny silver disc or a hard/solid state drive. What matters these days is the DAC in terms of audio quality, and these are now separate standalone units or incorporated into amps/receivers.

So I myself won't miss the demise of the CD player. But it'll most certainly still be around the same way turntables and tubes are still around for those who perceive superior sound quality from those sources. Not wanting to knock those who still love the CD architecture, but I just don't see it as the future.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

As the format to follow the CD, what would have been ideal would have been something like music albums in lossless format being distributed as 500mb-1g SD memory cards that could slip into digital players of all sizes. No bulky CD player & no moving parts. They could easily be sold in a cardboard sleeve large enough to have some graphics & description on them. 

I don't understand why the lossless CD is being replaced by mostly lossy digital file formats. Of course, I suppose the answer is that it's cheaper & efficient for both companies and consumer. And the fact probably is that most people don't care if to lossless or not.

Btw, it's my understanding that CD players are still being sold, but in much fewer numbers.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

MP3 is certainly a lossy format, although (as I say) I can't really tell any difference. Photos are in a similar situation, with JPG files, a lossy format, replacing lossless formats almost entirely. Even with a decent-size enlargement, you'll never see a difference -- although lossless RAW files still have advantages in post-processing.

The "good enough" rule applies today more than ever, especially when "good enough" is indistinguishable from "perfect" to most people.


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

Maybe I'm too old-fashioned, but I'm just not ready to let go of CDs. I like the sight of them sitting on my shelf, if that makes any sense. It's _real_, unlike a folder on my computer. I like reading the program notes, polishing them, and the sound ―pretty much everything about a CD! Think of it as the difference between a book and an e-book. I prefer books because I get to hold them in my hand and feel them for myself. I can't go the same with an e-book, or for that matter anything digital. I think it's best to see what happens in a few years to make a final decision. 'Will CDs make a comeback or is digital the way to go?'

In the meantime, for those that are proponents of CDs: _What do we do to improve CD sales?_


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Portamento said:


> Maybe I'm too old-fashioned, but I'm just not ready to let go of CDs. I like the sight of them sitting on my shelf, if that makes any sense. It's _real_, unlike a folder on my computer. I like reading the program notes, polishing them, and the sound ―pretty much everything about a CD! Think of it as the difference between a book and an e-book. I prefer books because I get to hold them in my hand and feel them for myself. I can't go the same with an e-book, or for that matter anything digital. I think it's best to see what happens in a few years to make a final decision. 'Will CDs make a comeback or is digital the way to go?'
> 
> In the meantime, for those that are proponents of CDs: _What do we do to improve CD sales?_


Stop free downloading for one.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

According to the study I posted recently - testing 500 people on CD sound, MP3 etc blind double testing etc - experts, sound engineers, general listeners - conclusion - cant tell the diff between CD and MP3 etc. So sound quality cant be the issue even if you think it is.

That said I dont spend money on downloads. I want a library of physical product - something i can lend to my friends, pass on to my son etc. 
When I do download I use freely available out of copyright material. I will not pay for it.


----------



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

Unfortunately most purchasers of music are looking for pop, not classical, and in their case, things like sound quality and physicality matter far less to them. No one these days wants to go to the trouble of taking CD off shelf, removing disc from case, placing disc in stereo, and pressing play. First of all, why do all that when three or four taps on your fancy phone or tablet will bring you any of your music you want? Second, the vast majority of music listeners aren't looking for the immersive experiences we seek as classical listeners. Listening on a high-quality surround-sound stereo isn't going to do anything more for them than plugging their tiny white earbuds into their smartphones would. Third, there is the issue of portability. We like to listen to classical at home, in a comfortable distraction-free environment so we can focus on it and relish it. But people take pop everywhere, and toting a bunch of CDs around just isn't going to cut it. Even in cars, people use AUX jacks to plug their phones in instead of using CD players these days. The bottom line is that the vast majority of music listeners don't put the same premium on music that serious classical listeners do. For most, music is strictly entertainment, and is expected to be as conveniently accessible as possible. 

I agree that there is something peculiarly satisfying about having real, physical CD cases on your shelf. It's near impossible to explain why. I also agree that physical books blow eBooks out of the water; much prettier to look at, and easier to read. The satisfaction of being able to stare at the spines of real books and the sides of CD cases sitting on shelves is something that eBooks and mp3s will never fulfill.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Not sure what "most people" is! I listen exclusively to MP3s. In my office, I play them from the computer through an outboard DAC, a stereo receiver, and decent speakers. In the living room, it's an iPod plugged into my AV receiver. In the car, through the car stereo (using an iPod and an ancient cassette adapter!) I don't feel I'm compromising in sound quality, although honestly I'm more interested in the music than the sound.

No nostalgia here for LPs or even CDs.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

This issue is, at present, very relevant to my home audio situation.

I've got in the neighborhood of 6,000 CD's collected over the past 34 years. I fully agree that lossless files stored in a computer or music server are both more convenient and at least as high in sound quality as CD's but for people like me who've been collecting large numbers of discs ever since they first started producing them, the idea of ripping the entire collection to flac files and having to collate and organize all the metadata in a way that would make browsing enjoyable is daunting in the extreme.

My current CD player is in need of replacement and I've spent the last 3 weeks experiencing first hand how audio companies have greatly diminished their support for the CD format. Finding a player that has the functions I need at a price I can pay is proving to be exasperatingly difficult. There are a couple of machines that appear to fit my requirements out of maybe 45-50 that I've looked at seriously. So I'll end up with a new CD player, but my oh my is finding one a chore.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

"My current CD player is in need of replacement and I've spent the last 3 weeks experiencing first hand how audio companies have greatly diminished the support for the CD format."

Will DVD or Blu-ray machines play CDs? Seems so. That may be a decent solution, since I see those going for under $50. Example:

https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Pl...d=1489388660&sr=8-13&keywords=blu-ray+players


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

KenOC said:


> "My current CD player is in need of replacement and I've spent the last 3 weeks experiencing first hand how audio companies have greatly diminished the support for the CD format."
> 
> Will DVD or Blu-ray machines play CDs? Not quite sure. But that may be a decent solution, since I see those going for maybe $30.


Yes they do as long they are attached to the TV they don't have loudspeakers.
You can also play CDs in your computer.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

You know, there's just that indefinable something about the clay tablet that just gets to me. To take your friendly ol' stylus in hand, and press out some cuneiform at the end of a hard day - I dunno, there's just something so _tactile_ and _authentic_ about it that I, at least, just don't "get" from papyrus. Oh, sure, papyrus is light and portable - I suppose that appeals to some people - but where's the sheer _satisfaction_ you get from seeing row upon row of hardened clay, with your agricultural reports preserved physically for all time? Nope - it's stone for me, always.

Whether we like it or not.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

I am seriously considering buying 2 or 3 good CD players and keeping them in storage, just in case. I can see other formats being useful for flexibility and portability, and would not mind having one for the car, for example, where the sound is less than ideal anyway. But I expect to keep my CDs as long as I am breathing. (It is a pity that no one will probably want them when I am gone, just as my parent are finding that no one has any interest in their old LPs, even for free.)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

JAS said:


> I am seriously considering buying 2 or 3 good CD players and keeping them in storage, just in case. I can see other formats being useful for flexibility and portability, and would not mind having one for the car, for example, where the sound is less than ideal anyway. But I expect to keep my CDs as long as I am breathing. (It is a pity that no one will probably want them when I am gone, just as my parent are finding that no one has any interest in their old LPs, even for free.)


Not even now with the Vinyl revival?


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

JAS said:


> I am seriously considering buying 2 or 3 good CD players and keeping them in storage, just in case. I can see other formats being useful for flexibility and portability, and would not mind having one for the car, for example, where the sound is less than ideal anyway. But I expect to keep my CDs as long as I am breathing. (It is a pity that no one will probably want them when I am gone, just as my parent are finding that no one has any interest in their old LPs, even for free.)


I am seriously considering the same thing.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

Maybe recording companies should stop recording the same repertoire over and over again. Does anyone _really_ expect the 150th recording of the Mendelssohn violin concerto to find an eager audience, apart from the collectors? If the buying audience is presented with a Beethoven symphony cycle - perhaps more than one - each year, it's no wonder that sales are dropping. The industry can only blame itself.

That being said, I _love_ CD's and buy them quite often - but I honestly see no reason for owning 85 different recordings of the same work. As a user of Spotify, I don't mind having multiple interpretations of a given piece available, but I have no interest purchasing them all.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Pugg said:


> Not even now with the Vinyl revival?


The vinyl revival seems to be pretty small and specific. None of my parents' records are particularly special, although I would have thought that my father's old Mills Brothers LPs might have found some interest (even if only for the covers). When two old friends died many years ago, most of their record collection ended up in the dump. The only thing that anyone wanted were their Beatles LPs, and perhaps one or two other things.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

This isn't even an argument. 

Physical media is dead, will be 100% gone besides for hipsters and old people very soon.

You can't tell the difference between 320 kbps lossy and a cd. Trust me, you can't. You definitely can't tell the difference between FLAC and CD, as FLAC is lossless. All streaming platforms will be streaming FLAC before 2020 (very likely)

Cover art, booklet notes, etc will all make their way into the streaming platforms at some point or another. As for now, if you want that stuff, you can find it somewhere. Someone has uploaded hi-def scans somewhere. I was just listening to the Ligeti Project and reading the booklets on a PDF earlier today. It is the internet.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

Pugg said:


> Not even now with the Vinyl revival?


the "Vinyl Revival" is overhyped. It's mostly just hipsters buying them to look cool. Of the people that buy them, a very small amount of people actually play them consistently. They're for show. Why would you ever play a scratchy old vinyl instead of a lossless dig file or 320 lossy?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

jailhouse said:


> the "Vinyl Revival" is overhyped. It's mostly just hipsters buying them to look cool. Of the people that buy them, a very small amount of people actually play them consistently. They're for show. Why would you ever play a scratchy old vinyl instead of a lossless dig file or 320 lossy?


I know for a fact that the U.K alone sold over more then 3 million albums last year, new ones like Bowie.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

Yeah i know. People buy it because it looks awesome and its hip all of a sudden. They either play it one time or dont even put the vinyl on the table ever and listen to the digital version while looking at the sleeve.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

jailhouse said:


> Physical media is dead, will be 100% gone besides for hipsters and old people very soon.


I am not disagreeing, but wait until people find out that we don't really _own_ those digital files. The idea is to, eventually, make everything "ondemand" . . . and for a fee (which, of course, will grow and grow every year)


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

JAS said:


> I am not disagreeing, but wait until people find out that we don't really _own_ those digital files. The idea is to, eventually, make everything "ondemand" . . . and for a fee (which, of course, will grow and grow every year)


They can't raise the fee that much because then they'd lose customers like me to piracy. I'm well versed enough in the internet to not have to use any services and listen to everything for free in flac if i want to. I chose to pay for spotify. I'm sure a lot of people are like me.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

They'll eventually die out, yes.

I normally can't hear the difference between MP3/AAC files and CDs either. The exception is in certain music with high, pure tones (a fair amount of Renaissance music).

But that said...Tidal already offers lossless streaming, and has a huge library. I've tried it and the sound quality is quite good, though I didn't end up signing up because there are some issues with the classical music - some of it seems to have loudness normalization between tracks that you can't turn off, and the library is hard to search. But it's only a matter of time before someone is offering a high-quality lossless streaming service at a reasonable price.

I can actually see the vinyl record renaissance continuing after that, among afficionados. But there will no longer be any compelling reason for CDs to exist.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

isorhythm said:


> But it's only a matter of time before someone is offering a high-quality lossless streaming service at a reasonable price.


FLAC streaming is probably the number 1 most requested thing on the spotify forum. It's almost guaranteed within several years if you ask me.


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

The tough part for me is knowing when to call it quits. Audio CDs are a dying technology, and (as much as we don't want them to) they will die out one day. _Is lossless streaming the future?_ I'm not sure ―I'll have to wait a few years. In the mean time, I will keep buying CDs in the hope of a comeback. I just hope that I won't be left in the dust when I _do_ switch to digital.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Oh I don't think there's a need to stock up on CD players. Many people will stay with this format for a long time, and demand is still quite strong. Amazon has quite a few quality players available at reasonable prices (i.e., Onkyo C-7030 with high quality Wolfson 192/24 DACs) for under $200 US.

But I think there is a case for CD in that not everyone wants or can afford in time and finances to maintain a separate computer, software, and database as a music server. So I think CDs and players will be around for quite a while.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

I made the switch from LPs to CDs years ago, and welcomed the technological advance. ("Hey, here's a great way to reproduce sound: let's take this needle and *scratch* a piece of vinyl!") By the same logic, I suppose I should be OK with the demise of CDs. But there's something satisfying about owning physical artifacts, in a steadily growing collection on a shelf, as opposed to a menu of computer files.

Plus I'm old. So I'll keep buying CDs, with reasonable confidence they'll outlast me.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

amfortas said:


> I made the switch from LPs to CDs years ago, and welcomed the technological advance. ("Hey, here's a great way to reproduce sound: let's take this needle and *scratch* a piece of vinyl!") By the same logic, I suppose I should be OK with the demise of CDs. But there's something satisfying about owning physical artifacts, in a steadily growing collection on a shelf, as opposed to a menu of computer files.
> 
> Plus I'm old. So I'll keep buying CDs, with reasonable confidence they'll outlast me.


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

Audio CDs will never die for me. I refuse to listen to music at lower quality than CD audio. So right now I only listen to classical music from CDs (lossless files that I ripped from them, that is) or LPs.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

jailhouse said:


> This isn't even an argument.
> 
> Physical media is dead, will be 100% gone besides for hipsters and old people very soon.
> 
> ...


Oh good! Tell me where to get the libretto to Prokofiev's Flaming Angel because I have wanted a recording of it for a while now but won't buy it without having the text!


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

JAS said:


> I am not disagreeing, but wait until people find out that we don't really _own_ those digital files. The idea is to, eventually, make everything "ondemand" . . . and for a fee (which, of course, will grow and grow every year)


Not true. If you purchase your digital files you are able to download them to a hard drive. Just be sure to make that transfer so it's available.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

The way things are going, I agree with others that CD is inexorably on the way out. Just look at the production stats year by year. As far as classical music is concerned my guess is that we will see more of what companies like Hyperion are doing: have both MP3 and FLAC available (presently 1.29 MP3, 1.49 Flac). And these files totally belong to you as opposed to streaming.

The vinyl resurgence is very real, but it's a niche. There's only very limited interest in classical vinyl. The stores in the Los Angeles are interested in jazz vinyl, but not in my large classical vinyl collection.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

The difference between a CD and an MP3 file is that the CD is a physical artifact which has a provenance. We know what record company recorded it, when it was mastered, and that it is relatively unaltered.

An MP3? Who knows?

I receive MP3s from my friends, and they've run it all through a bunch of compression and other processing, to "fix" it and make it sound "better," which means louder.

I've only got so much time left to listen to music, and it will not be wasted listening to compressed MP3s.

What is the point of this thread, as far as predicting the future of music? So the CD is dying: what, if anything, will replace it? Does anyone have any pro-active solutions for us, instead of declaring the CD to be dead?

Some here are advocating MP3s, but it is not a technical improvement. I suppose that its convenience is the deciding factor. I want highest sonic quality, not convenience.


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

I've said it before, but the CD-buying experience _needs_ to be more enjoyable. Let's be honest: staring at row after row of near identical discs is pretty drab. The atmosphere needs to be more "loungy" and fun for the average music listener. I, personally, order my CDs from Amazon (and other online sources), but many still purchase CDs from brick-and-mortar stores. User experience has to be better for these people.


----------



## merlinus (Apr 12, 2014)

millionrainbows said:


> The difference between a CD and an MP3 file is that the CD is a physical artifact which has a provenance. We know what record company recorded it, when it was mastered, and that it is relatively unaltered.
> 
> An MP3? Who knows?
> 
> ...


Very well said! One improvement is the increasing availability of 24/96 downloads. There can be lots more detail and inner voices heard, in addition to a wider spectrum of sound, assuming the original recording was done well.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

merlinus said:


> Very well said! One improvement is the increasing availability of 24/96 downloads. There can be lots more detail and inner voices heard, in addition to a wider spectrum of sound, assuming the original recording was done well.


I agree, there is an obvious difference between high and low resolution. That's why professional recording formats like Pro Tools and Logic have 24-bit/96 Khz capability. If you wish to compress these into MP3s, you can.

You can't UN-compress an MP3, though. Once the data is compressed, it cannot be retrieved in its full resolution.

When using Pro Tools, and you have 12 or more tracks of individually recorded instruments, the difference in resolution shows up in the mixing. Most MP3-novices have never experienced this, and have never mixed or recorded audio tracks.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Portamento said:


> I've said it before, but the CD-buying experience _needs_ to be more enjoyable. Let's be honest: staring at row after row of near identical discs is pretty drab. The atmosphere needs to be more "loungy" and fun for the average music listener. I, personally, order my CDs from Amazon (and other online sources), but many still purchase CDs from brick-and-mortar stores. User experience has to be better for these people.


Much more likely, the brick-and-mortar store option will go away for pretty much everybody. It certainly has around where I live, and most of the places where I have visited over the last several years.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I don't mind buying by mail at all. The selection is so much more complete. Brick-and-mortar is OK for immediate gratification. I use it to physically examine the things I end up buying on-line.

I like the idea of these Amazon stores. That way, you could order on-line, then pick it up at the store.


----------



## merlinus (Apr 12, 2014)

Even my palm-size Sony digital recorder can do 24/96! I run the instruments/vocals through a Mackie mixing board, with wonderful results.


----------



## MissKittysMom (Mar 2, 2017)

So many reasons for the decline. Beyond those mentioned, there's everything you want on YouTube (well, almost everything, depending on how eclectic your tastes). Increasing costs for studio/engineering time, at the same time that revenues, profits, payments to artists are all down. Decreasing education and exposure to classical, for the general population.

I'm another old person who can't hear the difference any more. Besides, I'm really more interested in the music. It's not so different from when I was younger, and I was OK with mono, tape hiss, limited dynamic range, and even a degree of outright distortion, if the performance was worth it.

I prefer to buy good-quality MP3, because everything I listen to is on either computer, tablet, or phone any more. I still have over 1000 CDs, all ripped, and metadata edited to _dies irae _and back; having gone digital, careful cataloging is about being able to find my stuff. But I still hold on the CDs, maybe out of respect for copyright for stuff that I rip for personal use. I can't remember the last time I put a physical CD in my physical stereo system, which is now a 5.1 home theater system.

CD drives for computers are becoming scarce, too. None of my computers have one. I've already worn out one external drive; I hope the new one lasts a while.

Some music is only available on CD, and possibly will be no longer available once the format is truly dead. The same losses happened with vinyl, too. Pity the poor person who wants to find Vissarion Shebalin's complete cycle of string quartets, or the two-piano recording of Shostakovich's 10th symphony, with Shostakovich and Weinberg on piano. The disappearance of recordings like these are the real loss.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Just saying:

For those that say there is very little support for the CD if you go to the link that I posted on page one you can see CD players are still being manufactured at decent prices.

Why is the Red Book standard still set as 1411kbps which gives 80 min of music, when if mp3 is indistinguishable you can get about 5hrs and more onto a CD.
I burn CDs for the car and use this method ([email protected]) and 256 because no difference can be detected over road noise


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

It is unfortunate the the digital age is going to slowly replace one digital media over another. However, as an audiophile, I think CDs still have a unique place and edge over download digital media. One may choose to own remastered historical recordings that comes in a physical CD form. SACD is a good example that offer many historical recordings and could beat digital download. 

I do not know if you read the program notes in the booklet that comes with the CD. There is a lot of musical education in those notes that digital download cannot offer. For those classical lovers in this forum, many will love reading the booklet as much as enjoying listening to the CDs. 

I think a CD package is an art by itself - the cover booklet, the photos and artwork that comes with it could differentiate itself form digital download. Maybe more innovation is needed to design the package to make CD more appealing to collectors. 

CD can also be signed by an artist at a concert, many soloists offer signing sessions after a concert. Recently, Nicola Benedetti signed 2 of her CD after a concert. Signing a CD could be a marketing idea to ensure CD could be sold. 

I do not think CD is total dead yet, innovation of marketing the CDs could save it over digital download.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

For me CD (and mp3!) has been dead for long. I'm not "that" old, but there no difference to hear in the digital formats, if the stream is lossless. They are same bits as in the CD.

But I don't know... Even if I have the ocean of music at my hands, I find myself always coming back to pretty constant set of pieces. And I pay money every month, even if I don't listen to anything new. Maybe the CD era was better, after all.

One problem with Spotify and similar services is that one cannot store the music for offline usage "forever". It will time out at some point. So the real suvivalist needs to have a good selection of CD's anyways.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Listening to a CD and speakers is THE IDEAL WAY to enjoy recorded classical music.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

There are so many inexpensive CD bargain basement bonanzas being released that my CD collection has exploded in the past two years. I also play music from Hard Drives (Bluesound and I tunes, both lossless and high res) but I actually find CDs easier to deal with. Sonically the differences are trivial. Streaming also doesn't work for me, mainly because the interfaces are all pop music oriented. Don't get me started about vinyl.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Note to the OP. You say that CD sales are down "due to the digital age". Please note that CDs are a digital medium; the birth of the CD is generally thought of as the start of the digital era. A CD player is actually a computer, one with a very limited functionality. It spins the disc and loads it; it extracts the digital data from the disc; it then converts the digits into analog sound and sends that sound to an amplifier. Using a personal computer to do the same functions is merely substituting one type of a computer for another. The main difference is that most PCs have dispensed with extracting the data from a spinning disc and extract it from hard drives instead


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Triplets said:


> Note to the OP. You say that CD sales are down "due to the digital age". Please note that CDs are a digital medium; the birth of the CD is generally thought of as the start of the digital era. A CD player is actually a computer, one with a very limited functionality. It spins the disc and loads it; it extracts the digital data from the disc; it then converts the digits into analog sound and sends that sound to an amplifier. Using a personal computer to do the same functions is merely substituting one type of a computer for another. The main difference is that most PCs have dispensed with extracting the data from a spinning disc and extract it from hard drives instead


Thanks for putting that for clear-text . I've also trying to say that. Some services actually stream exactly the same bits on wire as exists on the CD. Then of course there's the question of digital-to-analog conversion quality, in which good CD player of course beats down mediocre laptop DA. But there are obviously much better quality converters for computers available. All the music processing for audio CD's are done on computers anyways.

Edit: DA is needed, because eventually the music comes out analog, as sure as the air bounces back and forth Bruckner's 7th as I'm writing this.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

I think many of us would argue that the exactly digital information is transferred during downloading when comparing to a CD and using a computer to listen is as good as listening the music on a CD player. One many need to consider the DACs that build into higher end CD player or standalone DACs does make a difference to the output. When combining to audio chain of pre amp, power amp and speakers. The final outcome could be night and day.

I know some member could argue that there is not difference is heard - this discussion was on another thread.

Another factor to consider is the download source. If you download from a legal source that you are paying to do it, I am fine with it. But if you are doing it illegally at free download sites, you could be infringe to copyrights. Please consider the cost of doing a recording - not just renting a studio, but the education cost of any soloist, musicians, equipment, instruments etc. If you put everything together, buying a CD is a great investment in music. In combination with various reasons discussed about the value of CDs in this thread, I feel that CDs is still a platform one need to consider before start following the trend of download digital media - legal or otherwise.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Dan Ante said:


> Just saying:
> 
> For those that say there is very little support for the CD if you go to the link that I posted on page one you can see CD players are still being manufactured at decent prices.
> 
> ...


Well, it goes without saying that MP3s were developed to accommodate the listening habits and devices of the modern listener (earbuds, at a computer, in cars), and to SAVE DATA SPACE.

Critical listening? That's becoming a lost art.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Why don't these CD-haters just listen to the radio? That's what "FM" means: Free Music.

I mean, isn't satellite radio the same thing as what they are advocating? Any music you want, without any physical artifact except a player in your car. Then you can drive to Sonic and order a burger and fries. We've come a long way since the 1950s!!!


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> Why don't these CD-haters just listen to the radio? That's what "FM" means: Free Music.
> 
> I mean, isn't satellite radio the same thing as what they are advocating? Any music you want, without any physical artifact except a player in your car. Then you can drive to Sonic and order a burger and fries. We've come a long way since the 1950s!!!


I think there is a very optimistic assumption of a golden age of music in which everything will be available everywhere, all the time, with no limitations in terms of access or (at least virtually) storage, and for free or a mere pittance. Looking back at history, I think I can pretty much guarantee that whatever the future brings, it won't be that.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

My biggest issue with digital is that I literally can't find 1/2 of what I listen too out there in a digital format. I have to buy it on CD or LP and rip it myself.

iTunes, Amazon MP3, Spotify, even the almighty YouTube. None of them have 1/2 of the albums I have on CD or LP. I don't listen to new music that is easily found. I have to actually buy the CD's or LP's so that I can actually listen to the music I want to hear. 

I literally still have a hundred LP's I'd gladly get rid of...I keep them not because I prefer the sound quality but because they were never released on Cassette Tape or CD, let alone digital.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

I like CDs because they are physical media and resilient (provided you take care of them). For example, I have CDs I bought 30 years ago that still play perfectly. Who knows where digital formats will be 30 years from now? It's true that CD players aren't manufactured in the quantities they used to be but I think there will always suppliers of high end equipment to cater to that niche market that likes the physical format, just as there are still small, specialist companies making high end turntables and valve amplifiers.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

pcnog11 said:


> I think many of us would argue that the exactly digital information is transferred during downloading when comparing to a CD and using a computer to listen is as good as listening the music on a CD player. One many need to consider the DACs that build into higher end CD player or standalone DACs does make a difference to the output. When combining to audio chain of pre amp, power amp and speakers. *The final outcome could be night and day.*
> 
> I know some member could argue that there is not difference is heard - this discussion was on another thread.
> 
> Another factor to consider is the download source. If you download from a legal source that you are paying to do it, I am fine with it. But if you are doing it illegally at free download sites, you could be infringe to copyrights. Please consider the cost of doing a recording - not just renting a studio, but the education cost of any soloist, musicians, equipment, instruments etc. If you put everything together, buying a CD is a great investment in music. In combination with various reasons discussed about the value of CDs in this thread, I feel that CDs is still a platform one need to consider before start following the trend of download digital media - legal or otherwise.


Not according to the latest studies I have seen - including one of 500 subjects using top end vs low end eqt etc - researchers concluded listeners could not, on average - distinguish CD vs MP3 whether using high end or low end.


----------



## WildThing (Feb 21, 2017)

As someone who can't usually tell the difference in quality between CD and MP3 either, I'm not exactly mourning the loss if it happens. I too still have all of my CDs, but I very rarely ever even take them out of their cases anymore! I have my entire collection ripped and uploaded to Google Play Music, organized by composer, so I have every album I own available at my fingertips instantly, and I can either listen while on the road, on my home stereo, with headphones...easy as that.

The only reason I still occasionally buy a CD is when it's an opera, oratorio, or song cycle that I don't have and want a hard copy of the text for when I'm following along with the music. And librettos in translation to newer or lesser known operas can be difficult to find online. But if I already have the text and simply want an alternative recording? A quick purhcase on Amazon, download it and upload it to my collection and I'm all set!!!


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

stomanek said:


> Not according to the latest studies I have seen - including one of 500 subjects using top end vs low end eqt etc - researchers concluded listeners could not, on average - distinguish CD vs MP3 whether using high end or low end.


For sure these sound comparisons didn't cover organ music with 16 Hz bass pipes, because in MP3 such low frequencies are cut out. MP3 with 16 Hz information would be of the same size as CDs. Also acoustic information reverberating in a hall is relayed down into the deep: that's cut off too. But most speaker/headphone systems are unable to reproduce something close to 16 Hz. That's why CD & MP3 are said to be indistinguishable.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

stomanek said:


> Not according to the latest studies I have seen - including one of 500 subjects using top end vs low end eqt etc - researchers concluded listeners could not, on average - distinguish CD vs MP3 whether using high end or low end.


I remember when compressed formats were becoming popular, but memory was still very expensive and capacity of MP3 players limited. A study was put out by Stereo or High Fidelity magazine that showed that a majority of listeners couldn't distinguish between a 48kbps WMA file and a CD. I was always a little skeptical, but I still proceeded to convert a lot a lot of music to 48kbps, something I regretted later.

I think the environment, one's age and degree of one's hearing acuity have a lot to do with how well one can distinguish between a given lossy vs lossless file. I don't think a lot of people realize how much of the upper frequencies they lose with aging and living in our noisy world. (I'm sure that the sound level during previews in movie theaters is often above 110db.)


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

DaveM said:


> I remember when compressed formats were becoming popular, but memory was still very expensive and capacity of MP3 players limited. A study was put out by Stereo or High Fidelity magazine that showed that a majority of listeners couldn't distinguish between a 48kbps WMA file and a CD. I was always a little skeptical, *but I still proceeded to convert a lot a lot of music to 48kbps, something I regretted later.
> *


____________________

I was able to stomach piano sonatas at 68 kbps, but anything orchestral sounded very bad at that bit rate.


----------



## WildThing (Feb 21, 2017)

Florestan said:


> ____________________
> 
> I was able to stomach piano sonatas at 68 kbps, but anything orchestral sounded very bad at that bit rate.


:lol:

To be clear I never go below 320kpbs.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

realdealblues said:


> My biggest issue with digital is that I literally can't find 1/2 of what I listen too out there in a digital format. I have to buy it on CD or LP and rip it myself.
> 
> iTunes, Amazon MP3, Spotify, even the almighty YouTube. None of them have 1/2 of the albums I have on CD or LP. I don't listen to new music that is easily found. I have to actually buy the CD's or LP's so that I can actually listen to the music I want to hear.
> 
> I literally still have a hundred LP's I'd gladly get rid of...I keep them not because I prefer the sound quality but because they were never released on Cassette Tape or CD, let alone digital.


At the risk of being pedantic...if you can buy the recording that you want on a CD, then you are buying it in a digital format. What you are attempting to say is that you can't buy it as a download. All I can say, realdeal, is that you must be specializing in rare,arcane stuff. My experience is that any recording that ever existed in a digital format--be it CD, DVD-A, or Blu Ray--is available from some Site somewhere, as a download--at least in MP3 form, and usually lossless as well


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

millionrainbows said:


> Critical listening? That's becoming a lost art.


I couldn't agree more, I am not an extreme audiophile by any means but I want to hear music as close to the original as possible so I have a reasonable set up, all separates and good but old speakers in all it has cost about NZ$20.000 now I know there are turn tables that cost that much and more, and some people spend hundreds of thousands on a set up, but to day people are satisfied to listen to below par audio, be it on the PC or mp3 device etc.


----------



## Francis Poulenc (Nov 6, 2016)

The only way of making money through pop music is concerts, advertising. Put the videos on Youtube and you get paid by the amount of views it gets.

Classical is largely screwed. There is no advertising revenue online, as most of the good recordings are old and have been uploaded privately to different sites. The only revenue will be from concerts, which I think will always have a steady audience. There will always be the few aficcionados, and old people who don't care much for the music but want to get out of the house. Orchestras will survive from this revenue, and from patronage.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

realdealblues said:


> My biggest issue with digital is that I literally can't find 1/2 of what I listen too out there in a digital format. I have to buy it on CD or LP and rip it myself.
> .


You're either bad with computers or are exaggerating. Give me a list, I guarantee I can find them all very quickly either legally/pirated.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

chill782002 said:


> I like CDs because they are physical media and resilient (provided you take care of them). For example, I have CDs I bought 30 years ago that still play perfectly. Who knows where digital formats will be 30 years from now?
> 
> It's true that CD players aren't manufactured in the quantities they used to be but I think there will always suppliers of high end equipment to cater to that niche market that likes the physical format, just as there are still small, specialist companies making high end turntables and valve amplifiers.


working exactly the same way, Or in some super-duper 3d virtual reality format and surviving for an unlimited amount of years after because theyre digital...?

the concept doesn't apply. CD is not "higher quality" and anyone pretending to buy them because "i like to get the highest quality possible" is either wrong or fooling themselves. You buy them because you enjoy spending your money on something and getting the booklets and all that stuff. That's the only reason left to purchase cds.
FLAC is literally the same quality CDs are printed at.

same goes for vinyl. Actually it applies more to vinyl because the packaging is larger/cooler. Brand new vinyl sounds worse than FLAC. 10 year old vinyl sounds immeasurably worse than FLAC. There is literally no argument.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

realdealblues said:


> My biggest issue with digital is that I literally can't find 1/2 of what I listen too out there in a digital format. I have to buy it on CD or LP and rip it myself.
> 
> iTunes, Amazon MP3, Spotify, even the almighty YouTube. None of them have 1/2 of the albums I have on CD or LP. I don't listen to new music that is easily found. I have to actually buy the CD's or LP's so that I can actually listen to the music I want to hear.


I find that very, _very_ hard to believe. Care to share what are these incredibly obscure recordings that you are unable to find?


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

I can be very long-winded so I'll use bullet points to try to keep things moving along:


CDs are dying, but aren't we all? But, yes, CDs have been seeing decreasing sales since 2000 or 2001 I believe.
Digital download sales are actually decreasing faster than CD sales according to the latest RIAA report (the recording industry trade group in the US for those who don't know). What has been growing rapidly are the streaming services. According to the same report, vinyl record shipments are actually falling at rates not too far off of CD's decline. SACD shipments are actually increasing, but the total volume is still practically nothing.
Here's the important point - Will the declining CD shipment rate even mean anything any time soon? The record companies like selling physical products and the CD is cheap to produce and consumers still buy far more CDs than any other physical medium. This isn't like the situation in the 1980s and 1990s where the record companies were eager to repurpose record and cassette manufacturing to make CDs to fulfill the demand for more profitable CDs. As far as I can tell, all new albums created by classical labels big and small are sold on CD (perhaps some that are exclusively sold on CD).
CD players are still common. Teac, Pioneer, Onkyo, Yamaha, Marantz, NAD, and others still make component CD players. In fact, Pioneer just came out with a new one in 2016. That's not to mention the number of DVD, Blu-Ray, and game console players on the market that can play CDs. Most new cars still have CD players for now (US domestic cars seem to be the fastest to eliminate them as they just can't help themselves but to please the bean counters, but I'm guessing others will drop them over the next couple of redesign cycles). Computer CD drives are becoming more rare, but external drives are still plentiful on the market. People have tons of stuff on CDs, DVDs, and Blu-Rays so CD reading devices should be available for many years to come.
I can't speak for the infrastructure in other countries, but there are still a decent number of people in the US who cannot get access to reliable broadband Internet (plus there are some who can, but have to deal with very restrictive data caps). Physical media is still important to these customers.
Ripping a CD is easy to do in most cases so even those who only want to listen to music through a music server can do so. I've noticed that it is often cheaper to just buy the CD and rip it than buy each track on a CD from a known music download store. Something like Amazon's Auto-Rip can get CD buyers access to their music right away too.
What can a CD lover do to try to help their sales? Well, don't expect CDs to ever go back to 2000 levels again. Still, buying CDs is the best way to show the record companies that you want them. Buying CDs from normal dealers will help the most. Buying overstock CDs out of some guy's garage on Amazon Marketplace probably doesn't say much to the industry, but you can buy those too to go along with purchases from normal dealers.
As a final point, we may be currently living in the best time to build a classical CD library. The record companies continue to release new box sets at very fair prices. Some of these are newly remastered and have excellent audio fidelity. The used CD stores/thrifts are full of CDs at dirt cheap prices. 

The TLDR summary: There continues to be less demand for CDs and physical media in general, but I'm not sure if it's something that CD lovers need to worry about right now. They, and CD reading devices, will still be around for a while.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

qwerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

stomanek said:


> Not according to the latest studies I have seen - including one of 500 subjects using top end vs low end eqt etc - researchers concluded listeners could not, on average - distinguish CD vs MP3 whether using high end or low end.


In a research environment, the set up of the comparisons are based on the different sources (mp3 or CD) and subsequently the audio chain is identical then the outcome could be the same. However, in real life, would this audio chain be the same for those listen to CD and mp3?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

jailhouse said:


> qwerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr


Is this a special code we all can use?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

pcnog11 said:


> In a research environment, the set up of the comparisons are based on the different sources (mp3 or CD) and subsequently the audio chain is identical then the outcome could be the same. However, in real life, would this audio chain be the same for those listen to CD and mp3?


Then you are saying the critical factor is the equipment and not the format.

I think they tested several formats (ie lossless files vs mp3) on full set up and even on little mp3 type headphones.

I will look through my old posts where the link is if you want to study the results.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

Francis Poulenc said:


> ...as most of the good recordings are old...


I actually think the opposite and am curious about what, other than nostalgia, leads you think so.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

> qwerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr





Pugg said:


> Is this a special code we all can use?


Its right above asdffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff. Think he was typing out the keyboard and fell asleep on the r.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Florestan said:


> Its right above asdffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff. Think he was typing out the keyboard and fell asleep on the r.


Post of the day, we do know now what keyboard poster is using.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Damn - that's my bank account password!!!


----------



## haydnfan (Apr 13, 2011)

I haven't posted in a long time.

But I wanted to jump in and say that describing cd sales as being in free fall is greatly overstating things. The problem is that the data out now is 2 years old. The picture is very different today.

Streaming plans are quickly cannibalizing digital downloads and the rate of decline in cd sales has greatly slowed down. I think that physical media will survive, but digital downloads will not. There are already rumors that Apple will shut their store in two years leaving only streaming. I think that cds will be a go to item for collectors and will remain around.

We've already seen something similar in the realm of ebooks. People were prophesying that by now physical books would be dead. Hah! Instead they've cannibalized mass market paperback sells but trade paperbacks and hardcovers have been fine. Actually trade paperbacks actually increased in sales.

In general, I perceive push back. Physical media sales will continue to decline but will eventually plateau and co-exist with digital media. 

And in classical music, it doesn't matter. Look how long a dead format (SACD) persisted in the realm of classical music! What about the cd then? It's going nowhere.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

With this newfangled talking picture thing they've come up with, in the next ten years there will be no more live theatre or concert events. Mark my words.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

realdealblues said:


> My biggest issue with digital is that I literally can't find 1/2 of what I listen too out there in a digital format. I have to buy it on CD or LP and rip it myself.
> 
> iTunes, Amazon MP3, Spotify, even the almighty YouTube. None of them have 1/2 of the albums I have on CD or LP. I don't listen to new music that is easily found. I have to actually buy the CD's or LP's so that I can actually listen to the music I want to hear.
> 
> I literally still have a hundred LP's I'd gladly get rid of...I keep them not because I prefer the sound quality but because they were never released on Cassette Tape or CD, let alone digital.


This. I have a huge collection of DVDs and Blu-rays too, and my wife says, why do you have all this? You can watch whatever on Netflix. So I pull a title at random off the shelf and say, "See if this is available on Netflix." And it almost never is. I want to see my content when I want to see it, not when Netflix decides it wants to pay a licensing fee to make it available to watch.

Plus as an old person who grew up with very little available for classical music or movies (there were three channels--well, three if the wind was blowing right), I find it comforting to have the physical stuff right there.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

My lps were destroyed in a flood in 1985, at the dawn of the CD era. As lps were dissapearing from store shelves I made the switch to CDs. I missed browsing at lps in racks and reading the notes. When second hand lp stores started springing up about 2000 There were still many cherished lps that had never been digitized so I fell for the vinyl propaganda and bought a turntable, phono preamp, record cleaners, etc. Now every lp that I ever owned is available digitally and after tiring of the hassles of vinyl I sold my lp playing rig at a good price and used the cash to help finance a superb DAC and I am a happy camper.
LPs deserved to die. Surveys indicate that half the current vinyl purchases are by people that don't have turntables. They are buying for nostalgia sake. The hassles of actually playing the damn things mitigate against their ever being more than a niche product, and any purported sonic advantage is belied by the fact that all new lps released are using digital files.
CDs are so easy. Load them in the machine hit a button on the remote and off you go. Streaming Classical Music losslessly or high res just isn't happening; apparently IT programmers can't figure out artist, performer, etc. The only limitation on CDs is having adequate storage space, and as many of us are heading into the golden years and moving into smaller living spaces that is a real factor. Downloads are being killed off by streaming, although they may persist in Classical Music the same way that we have kept SACD alive.
Downloads and ripping CDs to a HD requires a content management system so you can your stuff. They also require dealing with IT and internet access issues that can start to rival vinyl in hassles. 
CDs will always be my preferred media


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Triplets said:


> My lps were destroyed in a flood in 1985, at the dawn of the CD era. As lps were dissapearing from store shelves I made the switch to CDs. I missed browsing at lps in racks and reading the notes. When second hand lp stores started springing up about 2000 There were still many cherished lps that had never been digitized so I fell for the vinyl propaganda and bought a turntable, phono preamp, record cleaners, etc. Now every lp that I ever owned is available digitally and after tiring of the hassles of vinyl I sold my lp playing rig at a good price and used the cash *to help finance a superb DAC* and I am a happy camper.


I had to google DAC. Digital to analog converter. What is the purpose? Don't most computers or CD drives do that? Or am I listening to choppy sound on my MP3 player? I blithely thought I could simply listen to mp3 files ripped off the computer.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Florestan said:


> I had to google DAC. Digital to analog converter. What is the purpose? Don't most computers or CD drives do that? Or am I listening to choppy sound on my MP3 player? I blithely thought I could simply listen to mp3 files ripped off the computer.


Music files that sit on a CD or computer hard drive are in digital format. Your speakers or earphones are analog devices. Those digital music files have to be converted to analog signals (via DAC) in order for speakers/earphones to understand and reproduce sound. (This, as opposed to vinyl records where the recorded sound is already in analog format, so no DAC needed.)

So as an example, if you look at the back of most quality CD players, there are both analog and digital outputs. If you use the analog outputs, the CD player's internal DAC translates the signal to analog. If you use the digital outputs, the signial is being passed in digital format to the next component, which must then translate the signal to analog using its own DAC.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Richard8655 said:


> Music files that sit on a CD or computer hard drive are in digital format.


Conversion isn't an issue as long as we don't presume a loss of meaningful data in the storage format. (And also presuming that the conversion is a good one and doesn't throw anything meaningful away. This latter consideration can at least be improved.)


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

jegreenwood said:


> Damn - that's my bank account password!!!


No that is Trump's pw.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Richard8655 said:


> Music files that sit on a CD or computer hard drive are in digital format. Your speakers or earphones are analog devices. Those digital music files have to be converted to analog signals (via DAC) in order for speakers/earphones to understand and reproduce sound. (This, as opposed to vinyl records where the recorded sound is already in analog format, so no DAC needed.)
> 
> So as an example, if you look at the back of most quality CD players, there are both analog and digital outputs. If you use the analog outputs, the CD player's internal DAC translates the signal to analog. If you use the digital outputs, the signial is being passed in digital format to the next component, which must then translate the signal to analog using its own DAC.


So essentially the speakers or earbuds are forcing a digital to analog conversion, but it could perhaps be done better with a converter device/software that would smooth things out?

But the other thought here is that with DAC or forced conversion one actually listens in analog, so we have as much advantage as the vinyl proponents who listen to digitally mastered vinyl, and we don't have the warmth (artifact of the groove to needle relationship) of the vinyl, but probably have some artifact of the forced digital to analog conversion of the speaker unless we use a high quality DAC.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Florestan said:


> So essentially the speakers or earbuds are forcing a digital to analog conversion, but it could perhaps be done better with a converter device/software that would smooth things out?
> 
> But the other thought here is that with DAC or forced conversion one actually listens in analog, so we have as much advantage as the vinyl proponents who listen to digitally mastered vinyl, and we don't have the warmth (artifact of the groove to needle relationship) of the vinyl, but probably have some artifact of the forced digital to analog conversion of the speaker unless we use a high quality DAC.


To the first point, I think that's essentially why people have high quality standalone DACs. Otherwise it's the unit's (CD player's) internal DAC converting.

To the second, exactly right and well put. Audiophile proponents like the warmth of analog sound that never existed in digital format and never went through the conversion. I don't know that I subscribe to that view, but I can see how it might be perceived that way by exacting ears.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Florestan said:


> So essentially the speakers or earbuds are forcing a digital to analog conversion, but it could perhaps be done better with a converter device/software that would smooth things out?
> 
> But the other thought here is that with DAC or forced conversion one actually listens in analog, so we have as much advantage as the vinyl proponents who listen to digitally mastered vinyl, and we don't have the warmth (artifact of the groove to needle relationship) of the vinyl, but probably have some artifact of the forced digital to analog conversion of the speaker unless we use a high quality DAC.


There's a lot of things in between the disc (whether a CD or vinyl record) and the speakers which influences the sound. In the case of CDs (or any digital audio), it has to be converted to analog before it is amplified and played through the speakers. CD players have built-in DACs (Digital-to-analog converters) that can output analog audio using RCA cables to the amplifier. Some CD players (or dedicated CD transports) can also output digital audio. If digital outputs are used, an outboard/external DAC or a DAC built into the amplifier has to do the conversion. Some people like the sound of a good external DAC, but the reality is that most, if not all, component CD players built since the late 1980s have pretty decent built-in DACs at the very least. These should be sufficient for good audio quality for most users. The CD players on the market today, including fairly inexpensive ones from Teac and Onkyo, have DACs from companies like Burr-Brown and Wolfson that have excellent fidelity. I hear that many of the DVD/Blu-Ray players on the market today have excellent quality DACs as well.

One potential issue with using an outboard DAC (or an amplifier's DAC) is that not all will apply the de-emphasis that some classical CDs made mostly in the 1980s were mastered with. CD pre-emphasis is a tricky matter and probably worthy of a discussion by itself if nobody has posted that before on this forum.

In the case of turntables, the sound is influenced from an equipment perspective by the table itself, the cartridge, alignment and proper setup, the and the pre-amplifier. The cartridge/stylus has a significant impact on the sound. I find that many carts play back with too much treble, but again, a lot can be said about that. Magnetic cartridges (the predominant kind of component turntable cart) do not output audio at line level so it needs to be pre-amplified. Newer turntables have built-in preamps (some of which cannot be turned off for better or worse), but older ones will need some sort of outboard solution. Most older receivers and integrated amplifiers have a phono preamp that is of decent quality at the very least, but other types of preamps vary in quality and can have quite an impact on sound quality. Most LP records have an RIAA pre-emphasis as well and the preamp will provide de-emphasis. In the case of turntables with ceramic cartridges, the de-emphasis is often not done and so the resulting sound is very tinny.

There's really nothing wrong with analog sound. The problems that records have are due to the record media itself and not due to analog. That said, analog formats can have distortions that make sounds more pleasing to some people. Even that gets wrongly attributed at times though. I think a lot of the people who say that are 1970s rock album fans who are used to records from that era having a lot of treble compared to newer remasters. This isn't an analog vs. digital thing for the most part, the reality is that engineers put a lot of treble in rock albums at that time since that was the fad at the time. On the classical front, RCA Dynagroove records are an example of LPs with unnatural EQing.

Anyway, some CD players/outboard DACs produce warm sound for those who want it. This is just my opinion, but I want a format that produces the sound in a way that is as natural as possible especially with classical music. I can use tone controls or an EQ to adjust things from there if I want to. The good news is that most classical CD masterings are done this way. Other genres have issues with this (sometimes major issues), but we're lucky in that regard.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Flores tan, your pc has a DAC. The DACs in PCs are usually inexpensive and not the highest quality, because that isn't a real important consideration for the pc manufacturers. Worse, the DACs in a pc are particularly liable to be contaminated by other electronic noise in the pc. In CD players or standalone DACs the DAC chip is isolated and electrically shielded from other sources of electrical contamination. Also, in these components the DAC usually gets a dedicated power supply, but in a pc it has to share power with other parts of the pc


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Triplets said:


> Flores tan, your pc has a DAC. The DACs in PCs are usually inexpensive and not the highest quality, because that isn't a real important consideration for the pc manufacturers. Worse, the DACs in a pc are particularly liable to be contaminated by other electronic noise in the pc. In CD players or standalone DACs the DAC chip is isolated and electrically shielded from other sources of electrical contamination. Also, in these components the DAC usually gets a dedicated power supply, but in a pc it has to share power with other parts of the pc


Interesting. I don't listen that much off the computer though, but I suppose one could wire up a DAC for the computer speakers, but would have to turn off the internal one. That, or perhaps there are high quality sound cards (there are sound cards, or no?) that would do the job.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Some computer speakers come with built in DACs usually to be accessed via the USB outlet of the pc


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Triplets said:


> Flores tan, your pc has a DAC. The DACs in PCs are usually inexpensive and not the highest quality, because that isn't a real important consideration for the pc manufacturers. Worse, the DACs in a pc are particularly liable to be contaminated by other electronic noise in the pc. In CD players or standalone DACs the DAC chip is isolated and electrically shielded from other sources of electrical contamination. Also, in these components the DAC usually gets a dedicated power supply, but in a pc it has to share power with other parts of the pc


Quite true in my experience. I bypassed my computer's sound card by connecting an outboard DAC (and not an expensive one) to a USB port. From there, into my amp. The difference in sound quality was obvious, not subtle at all.

I'm told that Macs don't need this treatment, but can't testify to that.

https://www.amazon.com/Behringer-UC...2YEI/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1489713191&sr=8-2


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Triplets said:


> Some computer speakers come with built in DACs usually to be accessed via the USB outlet of the pc


A little searching suggests my Logitech Z313 Speaker System does not have it's own DAC.

EDIT: above statement based on not seeing it mentioned on Logitech's webpage for this set.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Nothing's changed for me, CDs still rule. Apparently they also do for classical music producers, which release/reissue 300+ monthly.

Players are still prevalent at any price point--single, changer, DVD, Blu-ray, Universal.

The mail-order retailers I deal with do it better than any brick 'n mortar I visited back in the day. And it's cheaper, and right to my doorstep!


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Florestan said:


> Interesting. I don't listen that much off the computer though, but I suppose one could wire up a DAC for the computer speakers, but would have to turn off the internal one. That, or perhaps there are high quality sound cards (there are sound cards, or no?) that would do the job.


What Triplets said above is quite true. I've heard some on-board sound cards which sound quite good, but I've heard others (some using the same chip no less) which sounds flat and/or noisy due to the factors listed by Triplets.

Before spending money on a DAC, you may want to test your sound card before you go buying anything. Is your PC near your stereo system (assuming it's not a laptop)? If so, you may want to hook up your computer to your stereo system, play a CD, and see how it sounds compared to using your CD player (you may need a <$10 cable to do this). A lot of times the most limiting factor a computer has is not it's sound card, but instead the speakers. A lot of computer speakers are quite poor. They are like a lot of those "fashion headphones." The sizzle the highs and have boomy, farty bass with a lot of mud in between. I'm not familiar with the Logitech speakers you mention. Good computer speakers are getting a bit hard to find as some people use a standalone amp and speakers/monitors instead. I use a nearly 20 year old set of Boston Acoustics BA635 computer speakers and they sound great IMO. They weren't that expensive when new either and can probably be had for peanuts on the used market.

Some computers come with audio EQ software that purposely EQs the sound into what is called a "smiley face." This might make poor laptop speakers sound better with some types of music, but I would disable any kind of rubbish like this. You may see it being advertised as "Beats Audio" or something like that. I'm sure another user more familiar with this type of software can tell you how to disable it.



KenOC said:


> I'm told that Macs don't need this treatment, but can't testify to that.


I'm not sure, but I don't think the audio hardware that comes with Macs are any better than what comes with most PCs. The problems with noise that Triplets mentions is just the nature of computer audio regardless of the manufacturer (though some design their motherboards better to isolate noise).


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Florestan said:


> A little searching suggests my Logitech Z313 Speaker System does not have it's own DAC.


If your speakers have a digital input (likely a USB port), then they have a DAC. If they have only analog inputs (likely a 3/16" stereo mini-jack or a pair of RCA jacks) then they do not.


----------



## Guest (Mar 17, 2017)

I've resisted buying downloads, but since I'm running out of storage space (or so my wife claims...), I've recently been buying hi-res FLAC files, mostly 24bit/96 or 192khz, and I must say that by playing them through the DAC of my very expensive Esoteric SACD/CD player, the files sound just as good if not better than most RBCDs. (It depends on the original recording resolution. Some companies record in 24/96 now, so the files should theoretically be clones of the master recording. Some companies use even higher DSD resolution.) The main downside is that my laptop is too far away to see what track number is playing or how much time is left, and I can't remotely pause a piece, but I'm certainly happy with the sound. Most, but not all, include a booklet, which is a small pain to print. 

I do think that the predictions of the death of CDs are a bit premature, at least among classical and jazz fans.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> If your speakers have a digital input (likely a USB port), then they have a DAC. If they have only analog inputs (likely a 3/16" stereo mini-jack or a pair of RCA jacks) then they do not.


They are USB connected. Odd Logitech does not advertize the DAC, but maybe it is a given on so many speakers that it is not something people are searching for.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Florestan said:


> They are USB connected. Odd Logitech does not advertize the DAC, but maybe it is a given on so many speakers that it is not something people are searching for.


I looked up the Logitech Z313 specs and they appear to only accept 3.5mm (1/8") analog input.



Kontrapunctus said:


> I've resisted buying downloads, but since I'm running out of storage space (or so my wife claims...), I've recently been buying hi-res FLAC files, mostly 24bit/96 or 192khz, and I must say that by playing them through the DAC of my very expensive Esoteric SACD/CD player, the files sound just as good if not better than most RBCDs. (It depends on the original recording resolution. Some companies record in 24/96 now, so the files should theoretically be clones of the master recording. Some companies use even higher DSD resolution.) The main downside is that my laptop is too far away to see what track number is playing or how much time is left, and I can't remotely pause a piece, but I'm certainly happy with the sound. Most, but not all, include a booklet, which is a small pain to print.
> 
> I do think that the predictions of the death of CDs are a bit premature, at least among classical and jazz fans.


Agreed about the death predictions being premature.

On another note, I purchased a Sony Classical CD a few months back that is re-mastered from analog. The liner notes actually said that Sony re-masters at 24/88.2 instead of 24/96 due to it being a cleaner downsample to CD's 16/44.1 format. I've read elsewhere that this is true due to the nature of dither and the resulting noise. Whether the noise is noticeable or not, I don't know and I kind of doubt it, but it's very highly unlikely that anyone can tell a difference between 88.2 and 96 without the downsampling so it makes sense to use 88.2 for the cleanest possible results. Having said that, people have the mentality that the higher number must always be better so I'm pleasantly surprised that Sony is choosing the better option and admits to it even though they may get criticism from people who don't know about downsampling works. Does anyone know if other labels are re-mastering analog or recording digital at 88.2 kHz for cleaner downsampling to CD?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Florestan said:


> They are USB connected. Odd Logitech does not advertize the DAC, but maybe it is a given on so many speakers that it is not something people are searching for.


Ditto Klassic. the Z313 speakers seem to use a stereo miniplug (analog) not USB and thus have no DAC nor any use for one. An outboard DAC may still be handy to deliver a better sound to the speakers from your computer via one of its USB ports.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Klassik said:


> I looked up the Logitech Z313 specs and they appear to only accept 3.5mm (1/8") analog input.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## NorthernHarrier (Mar 1, 2017)

I still buy CDs. The readily available downloads of the music I want are not in 320k format, and lossless files take up too much space on my audio player's memory and card. I also like playing discs in my home system. I'll keep buying them, but I do feel like I should learn more about digital file options and DACs.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Klassik said:


> I looked up the Logitech Z313 specs and they appear to only accept 3.5mm (1/8") analog input.
> 
> Agreed about the death predictions being premature.
> 
> On another note, I purchased a Sony Classical CD a few months back that is re-mastered from analog. The liner notes actually said that Sony re-masters at 24/88.2 instead of 24/96 due to it being a cleaner downsample to CD's 16/44.1 format. I've read elsewhere that this is true due to the nature of dither and the resulting noise. Whether the noise is noticeable or not, I don't know and I kind of doubt it, but it's very highly unlikely that anyone can tell a difference between 88.2 and 96 without the downsampling so it makes sense to use 88.2 for the cleanest possible results. Having said that, people have the mentality that the higher number must always be better so I'm pleasantly surprised that Sony is choosing the better option and admits to it even though they may get criticism from people who don't know about downsampling works. Does anyone know if other labels are re-mastering analog or recording digital at 88.2 kHz for cleaner downsampling to CD?


Mercury downloads at 88.2. I have Byron Janis and Antal Dorati in the Rachmaninov 2 and 3 PCs and they sound superb and a significant improvement over red book
I don't have any experience with computer speakers beyond Audioengine. The Audioquest company makes some DACs that look USB drives and fit in the USB port of the pc. They have a mini jack at the other end that can be connected to headphones or the analog input of Florestan's computer speakers (remember to change the audio output in the pc settings) and for around $100 might be a significant upgrade


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Klassik said:


> On another note, I purchased a Sony Classical CD a few months back that is re-mastered from analog. The liner notes actually said that Sony re-masters at 24/88.2 instead of 24/96 due to it being a cleaner downsample to CD's 16/44.1 format. I've read elsewhere that this is true due to the nature of dither and the resulting noise. Whether the noise is noticeable or not, I don't know and I kind of doubt it, but it's very highly unlikely that anyone can tell a difference between 88.2 and 96 without the downsampling so it makes sense to use 88.2 for the cleanest possible results. Having said that, people have the mentality that the higher number must always be better so I'm pleasantly surprised that Sony is choosing the better option and admits to it even though they may get criticism from people who don't know about downsampling works. Does anyone know if other labels are re-mastering analog or recording digital at 88.2 kHz for cleaner downsampling to CD?


I have several of the Mercury downloads as well and can confirm Triplets. While not a guaranty, if the CD you're interested in is also available as a hi-rez download, you can take a look at HDTracks and see whether it's offered as 24/88.2, 24/48 or 24/96.

Note - I don't want to introduce a debate about HDTracks here. I'm just suggesting it's probably a good way to tell which multiple is used.



Kontrapunctus said:


> I've resisted buying downloads, but since I'm running out of storage space (or so my wife claims...), I've recently been buying hi-res FLAC files, mostly 24bit/96 or 192khz, and I must say that by playing them through the DAC of my very expensive Esoteric SACD/CD player, the files sound just as good if not better than most RBCDs. (It depends on the original recording resolution. Some companies record in 24/96 now, so the files should theoretically be clones of the master recording. Some companies use even higher DSD resolution.) The main downside is that my laptop is too far away to see what track number is playing or how much time is left, and I can't remotely pause a piece, but I'm certainly happy with the sound. Most, but not all, include a booklet, which is a small pain to print.
> 
> I do think that the predictions of the death of CDs are a bit premature, at least among classical and jazz fans.


What software are you using to play music. For some programs you can find a remote control app. I'm still hanging on to my Squeezeboxes with iPeng as my remote. JRiver has JRemote.



NorthernHarrier said:


> I still buy CDs. The readily available downloads of the music I want are not in 320k format, and lossless files take up too much space on my audio player's memory and card. I also like playing discs in my home system. I'll keep buying them, but I do feel like I should learn more about digital file options and DACs.


Many programs will allow you to keep a lossless file on your computer while (in one way or another) transfering a lossy version to an audio player. You can do that with iTunes and JRiver.


----------



## Guest (Mar 17, 2017)

^^ I use JRiver. SInce I play files from my laptop and not wirelessly through my wi-fi, I don't see how remote control would be possible.


----------



## RRod (Sep 17, 2012)

Klassik said:


> I looked up the Logitech Z313 specs and they appear to only accept 3.5mm (1/8") analog input.
> 
> Agreed about the death predictions being premature.
> 
> On another note, I purchased a Sony Classical CD a few months back that is re-mastered from analog. The liner notes actually said that Sony re-masters at 24/88.2 instead of 24/96 due to it being a cleaner downsample to CD's 16/44.1 format. I've read elsewhere that this is true due to the nature of dither and the resulting noise. Whether the noise is noticeable or not, I don't know and I kind of doubt it, but it's very highly unlikely that anyone can tell a difference between 88.2 and 96 without the downsampling so it makes sense to use 88.2 for the cleanest possible results. Having said that, people have the mentality that the higher number must always be better so I'm pleasantly surprised that Sony is choosing the better option and admits to it even though they may get criticism from people who don't know about downsampling works. Does anyone know if other labels are re-mastering analog or recording digital at 88.2 kHz for cleaner downsampling to CD?


It's all a bit irrelevant (or should be these days) because you only have a few use-cases to really worry about (48*{1,2,4} <-> 44.1*{1,2,4}) for the resampler, and any reasonably-shaped dither is inaudible except in cases where you deliberately amp-up the 16-bit noise floor above normal listening levels.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I like CDs as a "fetish object." I like the physical object, with its printed CD label and booklet. The record company logo is on there, and the booklet usually has some good, informative notes. It has a provenance; we know it was manufactured from the source recording, usually, and is 16-bit/44.1. This gives me a feeling of great security and confidence.

Naked files seem like a mystery. Where did they come from? What are their specs?


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> I like CDs as a "*fetish object*." I like the physical object, with its printed CD label and booklet. The record company logo is on there, and the booklet usually has some good, informative notes. It has a provenance; we know it was manufactured from the source recording, usually, and is 16-bit/44.1. This gives me a feeling of great security and confidence.
> 
> *Naked files *seem like a mystery. Where did they come from? What are their specs?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)




----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Kontrapunctus said:


> ^^ I use JRiver. SInce I play files from my laptop and not wirelessly through my wi-fi, I don't see how remote control would be possible.


True - you need wifi.

Edit - or are you saying that you play directly from the laptop although you do have wifi. In that case I think you can JRemote to work. Take a look at media network in options.

Note - I too have JRiver but I use it primarily for managing my library. I do use it to play music on my desktop system. I continue to use Squeezebox over my network to provide music to my main systems.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

millionrainbows said:


> I like CDs as a "fetish object." I like the physical object, with its printed CD label and booklet. The record company logo is on there, and the booklet usually has some good, informative notes. It has a provenance; we know it was manufactured from the source recording, usually, and is 16-bit/44.1. This gives me a feeling of great security and confidence.
> 
> Naked files seem like a mystery. Where did they come from? What are their specs?


This is quite true. There's a lot to analyze on physical media that's not always present on downloads/streaming media. For example, I like to look up the IFPI codes on CDs to see who made the CDs and where they were made. It's not like it matters, I've never had a CD that didn't work or sounded bad due to the physical manufacturing of the disc, but it's neat to look at. Sometimes I've come across CDs that are labeled as being made in one country, but they are actually made somewhere else. Off of the top of my head, I think I recently opened a Haenssler disc (probably one of those discs from the Fey Haydn series) that said it was made in Germany, but it seems that it was made in Norway according to the IFPI code. Oh well, no biggie I guess.

Hopefully I'm not the only weirdo who looks at their CDs that closely!



jegreenwood said:


> I have several of the Mercury downloads as well and can confirm Triplets. While not a guaranty, if the CD you're interested in is also available as a hi-rez download, you can take a look at HDTracks and see whether it's offered as 24/88.2, 24/48 or 24/96.


Thanks for the info. If a file is available in 48, 88.2, and 96, do you think they actually do the re-mastering at all three rates or do you think they just record at 96 and downsample the others? I know it's a mostly pointless thing for the reason that RRod lists, but it is interesting to me at least.


----------



## mtmailey (Oct 21, 2011)

I think music today is not as good as it used to be this why cds do not sell like they used it.Most pop music to me is lame most artist have no talent they rehash stuff.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

mtmailey said:


> I think music today is not as good as it used to be this why cds do not sell like they used it.Most pop music to me is lame most artist have no talent they rehash stuff.


I think you are on to something. Today's pop is so transient that nobody would want to keep it around long enough that they would buy and store a CD. Songs go by the wayside quickly as the next hit comes along and I could see people wiping old stuff off their players to make room for the latest music. Gotta keep up with what everyone else is listening to.


----------



## Centropolis (Jul 8, 2013)

mtmailey said:


> I think music today is not as good as it used to be this why cds do not sell like they used it.Most pop music to me is lame most artist have no talent they rehash stuff.


See, this is why not many young people get into classical music, we "trash talk" the music of their generation and in turn, they just do the same to CM. Every type of music has its place and whether they have talent or not according to us, it doesn't matter. If we expect others to respect "our music", we better do the same to other types as well.

Back to the topic, I still buy CDs because buying a used CM CD is usually cheaper than buying the album off iTunes (or any other provider you decide). I can rip CDs to MP3s but going from MP3s back to CDs, you're losing data.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Centropolis said:


> Back to the topic, I still buy CDs because buying a used CM CD is usually cheaper than buying the album off iTunes (or any other provider you decide). I can rip CDs to MP3s but going from MP3s back to CDs, you're losing data.


Heck, it's often cheaper in my experience to buy the CD new than to buy each track from a download store. I suppose the case might be different if you only want to buy selected tracks. That seems legit with pop music where one might only want one or two songs on the CD, but I'd imagine that most people buying classical music would want everything that's on the CD. Maybe there's people who only buy selected movements from a symphony, but I would imagine that is rare.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I had a hard drive crash and not work permanently. I also had my computer crash so bad, had to reinstall my OS. I would hate to lose hard earned music if I had it on the computer. flash drives can be slow, and even with only several, they are hard to get organized. Paying for digital copies feels, like renting movies only. I like listening from my sound system than headphones on a MP3 player. I don't even feel like I'm owning a recording unless there is cover art, liner notes, and a reliable medium that you can't erase. There are way too many cons to digital music for me.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Phil loves classical said:


> I had a hard drive crash and not work permanently. I also had my computer crash so bad, had to reinstall my OS. I would hate to lose hard earned music if I had it on the computer. flash drives can be slow, and even with only several, they are hard to get organized. Paying for digital copies feels, like renting movies only. I like listening from my sound system than headphones on a MP3 player. I don't even feel like I'm owning a recording unless there is cover art, liner notes, and a reliable medium that you can't erase. There are way too many cons to digital music for me.


Suggest to back up your computer. My digital classical music mostly resides in iTunes, and with an external hard drive (like from Western Digital), the computer's drive (with iTunes) can be backed up automatically and regularly. External drives usually come with free backup software as well.

There are also quite a few cloud storage services, like Dropbox and Apple's iCloud. But they have fees.

But I agree, physical CDs can be a lot more satisfying and more easily managable.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Perhaps we need to back up the back up of the back up.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Dan Ante said:


> Perhaps we need to back up the back up of the back up.


Only if you don't trust your first backup.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Richard8655 said:


> Only if you don't trust your first backup.


I keep all my music on an external drive connected to my computer. But a copy of all of it is on a second external drive not connected to my computer. The connected hard drive is more likely to fail since it spins much (if not all) the time. One more back up would not be a bad idea.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Dan Ante said:


> Perhaps we need to back up the back up of the back up.


Or just sticking to CD.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Florestan said:


> I keep all my music on an external drive connected to my computer. But a copy of all of it is on a second external drive not connected to my computer. The connected hard drive is more likely to fail since it spins much (if not all) the time. One more back up would not be a bad idea.


Sounds like a good approach. Keeping the music database on an external drive makes sense, especially if the computer's internal drive is becoming limited in space. The 2nd external drive that's offline is a great idea. Just need to manually back up to it regularly.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Pugg said:


> Or just sticking to CD.


That is another form of backup--unless it gets CD rot!

But my thought is that while I can always re rip a CD, it would be a royal pain to re rip 2000 CDs or whatever my collection consists of. Probably would not. Would only rip so many as i want to listen to. Some I might never re rip in that situation such as most of my 40 some Beethoven Ninths.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Richard8655 said:


> Sounds like a good approach. Keeping the music database on an external drive makes sense, especially if the computer's internal drive is becoming limited in space. The 2nd external drive that's offline is a great idea. Just need to manually back up to it regularly.


Yes, maintaining updated backup drive is the key. I am good with that for music, but not for letters, and other misc stuff.

Ideally, keep a backup drive in a separate location in case fire takes everything, but then cloud storage maybe is a better answer.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I'm not a fan of cloud storage for music files. Unless they're highly compressed, any sizable collection will require a lot of space. Also I'm becoming wary of external hard drives which seem to fail more often than they used to if one believes the reviews. My new favorite format is 'jump'/USB flash drives available now for $30-40 for a 256g drive. No moving parts, easy to store and if USB 3.0, they transfer data really fast.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

DaveM said:


> I'm not a fan of cloud storage for music files. Unless they're highly compressed, any sizable collection will require a lot of space. Also I'm becoming wary of external hard drives which seem to fail more often than they used to if one believes the reviews. My new favorite format is 'jump'/USB flash drives available now for $30-40 for a 256g drive. No moving parts, easy to store and if USB 3.0, they transfer data really fast.


Flash media can fail too though so the idea of multiple backup methods is pretty good advice. I don't know if flash media still has this problem, but I believe that flash drives, SD cards, and SSDs need to be used every now and then or else the data could get erased. Of course, having used magnetic hard drives for some 30 years now, I can also say that keeping hard drives unused for long periods of time can cause problems as well. Tape backup drives were popular in the early 1990s and were pretty reliable if I remember correctly, but those only seem to be used in enterprise settings now.

I don't know if anyone here has BD-R drives on their computers, but I have one and it's a pretty easy way to store 25gb of data for only $1-2. I don't know how long BD-R discs will last once they are burned, but hopefully they're at least good for five years or so until they can be re-burned or moved to another storage medium. 50gb discs are also available, but they cost more.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Klassik said:


> Heck, it's often cheaper in my experience to buy the CD new than to buy each track from a download store. I suppose the case might be different if you only want to buy selected tracks. That seems legit with pop music where one might only want one or two songs on the CD, but I'd imagine that most people buying classical music would want everything that's on the CD. Maybe there's people who only buy selected movements from a symphony, but I would imagine that is rare.


I was alluding to that when I said that due to the major labels offering their back catalogue at steep discounts my collection has exploded. I've often bought multi disc sets to get one work, and then gone on to enjoy the other discs in the set as well.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Klassik said:


> . . .
> 
> Thanks for the info. If a file is available in 48, 88.2, and 96, do you think they actually do the re-mastering at all three rates or do you think they just record at 96 and downsample the others? I know it's a mostly pointless thing for the reason that RRod lists, but it is interesting to me at least.


I'll risk going off-topic again just to answer the question. I think if you look at HDTracks you will find extremely few recordings available in both 88.2 and 96 or their respective mutiples. The most common instance of multiple hi-rez frequencies I've seen are 96 and 192.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

I keep two back-ups of everything. For my ripped SACDs I keep two copies of the iso and two back-ups of extracted files. What I don't do, but should is keep one off-site. I did that when I worked at an office, but I am retired now.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Triplets said:


> I was alluding to that when I said that due to the major labels offering their back catalogue at steep discounts my collection has exploded. I've often bought multi disc sets to get one work, and then gone on to enjoy the other discs in the set as well.


The main reason I've stopped buying CDs is that I have a hundreds of discs from mega-boxes which I have listened to either once or not at all. Add to that my exploration of Tidal, and it takes a lot for me to motivate a new purchase. In fact the majority of my most recent purchases have been audiophile jazz. (I do have a pair of orders in for classical CDs at MDT.)


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

DaveM said:


> I'm not a fan of cloud storage for music files. Unless they're highly compressed, any sizable collection will require a lot of space. Also I'm becoming wary of external hard drives which seem to fail more often than they used to if one believes the reviews. My new favorite format is 'jump'/USB flash drives available now for $30-40 for a 256g drive. No moving parts, easy to store and if USB 3.0, they transfer data really fast.


Along these lines, I think you may be alluding to SSD (solid state drives). They're much more reliable than hard (spinning disk) drives and are becoming more affordable as replacements for both internal and external drives.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Nothing is absolutely permanent, especially not us. I only need my recordings to outlast me, both in terms of storage and a means by which to retrieve and play them.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Richard8655 said:


> Along these lines, I think you may be alluding to SSD (solid state drives). They're much more reliable than hard (spinning disk) drives and are becoming more affordable as replacements for both internal and external drives.


Couple that with USB 3.0. USB 3.0 is about 4 times faster in data transfer than USB 2.0.

Also, if you have a SSD for the operating system on your computer, programs will load at lighting speed and will appear to come up instantly.


----------



## Guest (Mar 18, 2017)

jegreenwood said:


> True - you need wifi.
> 
> Edit - or are you saying that you play directly from the laptop although you do have wifi. In that case I think you can JRemote to work. Take a look at media network in options.
> 
> Note - I too have JRiver but I use it primarily for managing my library. I do use it to play music on my desktop system. I continue to use Squeezebox over my network to provide music to my main systems.


Yes, I have wi-fi, but based on my Tivo's performance with it, streaming would be spotty and slow!


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Pugg said:


> Or just sticking to CD.


Yes that is what I do, I have had 4 or 5 CDs that developed the dreaded "Tarnishing kiss of death" but managed to copy before it affected the audio.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Triplets said:


> I was alluding to that when I said that due to the major labels offering their back catalogue at steep discounts my collection has exploded. I've often bought multi disc sets to get one work, and then gone on to enjoy the other discs in the set as well.


This is definitely true. I was talking to a co-worker a couple weeks who kind of likes classical music, but does not buy it except at garage sales and such. We were talking about Beethoven's 6th and he liked it so much that he wanted to know if he could buy a CD of it for ~$15. I laughed at him and told him he could go down the street to B&N and buy a Sony Bernstein boxset of all of Beethoven's symphonies in excellent re-mastered sound for $15. He thought I was surely joking, but of course I was not.

Of course, those Sony Masters white box sets are lacking in terms of liner notes, but Warner Classics has been re-releasing a lot of the EMI & Virgin back catalog they purchased a few years back and they're almost as cheap as the Sony stuff and have more in terms of notes and prettier packaging. The Universal labels have their offerings too.

In terms of the death of the CD, I wonder how the smaller labels are adjusting to the current market where the big labels are almost giving away performances by legendary conductors. I guess they just have to record current orchestras and record more obscure works and hope that there is profitable demand for that. If so, it think it's a real win-win for us consumers in terms of choices.


----------



## haydnfan (Apr 13, 2011)

Centropolis said:


> See, this is why not many young people get into classical music, we "trash talk" the music of their generation and in turn, they just do the same to CM.


This is absolutely wrong. I teach teenagers, and I'm telling you that they do not listen to their own music. This is not a generational issue. There are only a handful of writers producing the songs for all of the pop artists. The autotuned synth in combination with the lack of writing diversity creates homogeneity that people of all ages find unappealing.

What do they listen to? All sorts from j-pop to swedish metal. Streaming services have made it possible for them to cultivate very eclectic tastes. The reason that so few millennials listen to CM is not condescension or snobbery on our part. It's the decline of music programs in school.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

haydnfan said:


> There are only a handful of writers producing the songs for all of the pop artists.


Its another Tin Pan Alley!

Bob Dylan, Bob Dylan's Blues:

"Unlike most of the songs nowadays that are being written uptown in Tin Pan Alley
That's where most of the folk songs come from nowadays
This, this is a song, this wasn't written up there
This was written somewhere down in the United States"


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Portamento said:


> Sales of music CDs are painfully predictable in their steady decline ―for several years now, every year has been worse than the previous in terms of sales, and it seems extremely unlikely that this tendency will reverse any time soon. In the meantime, legally-downloaded music is increasing significantly, but not enough to make up for the lost business from CD sales. Illegal downloads are commonly percieved as the key culprit, but I don't think it's right to blame them completely. They are centainly a bad thing and don't help, but they also don't necessarily reduce the impulse to buy a CD; again, it's hard to know for sure.
> 
> Humans (as a species) have always shared music, and let's hope it stays that way. Digital recording has added a whole new dimension to the mix, and physical products need to be attractive to compete. One might argue that Vinyl records have fared better against the digital age, and they might even survive longer than the Audio CD as a niche. Generally, attractive sells, and physical is not as attractive anymore.
> 
> ...


You guys and gals should have stuck with Vinyl....................


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Richard8655 said:


> Along these lines, I think you may be alluding to SSD (solid state drives). They're much more reliable than hard (spinning disk) drives and are becoming more affordable as replacements for both internal and external drives.


Actually no, I'm referring to simple USB flash drives which are now available in memory capacities that were formerly only possible with regular HDs and SSDs. They have the benefit of being very portable and easy to store off-site.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> You guys and gals should have stuck with Vinyl....................


Thats OK for those with cloth ears :tiphat:


----------



## Norma Skock (Mar 18, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> Thats OK for those with cloth ears :tiphat:


There's nothing like witnessing the piece performed live. I hate modern auditoriums though, so much light. Anything performed in a classic opera theatre, where the audience is dimmed out, is perfect.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Norma Skock said:


> There's nothing like witnessing the piece performed live. I hate modern auditoriums though, so much light. Anything performed in a classic opera theatre, where the audience is dimmed out, is perfect.


All of the concerts that I have attended over the years have the lights dimmed during the performance.


----------



## Norma Skock (Mar 18, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> All of the concerts that I have attended over the years have the lights dimmed during the performance.


Perhaps in New Zealand, all the concerts I have attended in Western Europe have extremely bright lights the whole way through the auditorium.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Norma Skock said:


> Perhaps in New Zealand, all the concerts I have attended in Western Europe have extremely bright lights the whole way through the auditorium.


Yes that would spoil it for me, doesn't anyone complain?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Dan Ante said:


> Yes that would spoil it for me, doesn't anyone complain?


Do we have to?...................


----------



## poodlebites (Apr 5, 2016)

Norma Skock said:


> Perhaps in New Zealand, all the concerts I have attended in Western Europe have extremely bright lights the whole way through the auditorium.


I have a different experience. I've gone to a few concerts in the Netherlands and Spain and every time the light was dimmed during the performance.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

poodlebites said:


> I have a different experience. I've gone to a few concerts in the Netherlands and Spain and every time the light was dimmed during the performance.


You are absolutely right, only the lights above the orchestra stays on.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

For me, the best dimming effect is at our summer evening outdoor CSO concerts. Night sky and stars. I agree, definitely adds to atmosphere and enjoyment (along with a little wine).


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I often consult the program, which has the words for what is being sung. Last concert, Beethoven's Missa Solemnis, they turned the lights so low it was very difficult to see the words.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

CD represents the pinnacle medium for classical music, may not be the best, but for cost and longevity and quality of sound, it's hard to beat.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

ArtMusic said:


> CD represents the pinnacle medium for classical music, may not be the best, but for *cost and longevity and quality of sound*, it's hard to beat.


And ease of use (no antistatic mat, no dust remover, no queuing up needle), good size for storage, ease of copying/ripping/reburning.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Florestan said:


> And ease of use (no antistatic mat, no dust remover, no queuing up needle), good size for storage, ease of copying/ripping/reburning.


A media kind of skipped over -- a 1 GB USB flash drive costs about $3 without content and will hold an uncompressed CD. Completely RW, no moving parts, and doesn't require a player so long as your stereo has a USB port and a DAC. Larger drives actually cost about the same if you want that 3-CD set!

But the day of physical media is fading, even as we watch...


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> A media kind of skipped over -- a 1 GB USB flash drive costs about $3 without content and will hold an uncompressed CD. Completely RW, no moving parts, and doesn't require a player so long as your stereo has a USB port and a DAC. Larger drives actually cost about the same if you want that 3-CD set!
> 
> But the day of physical media is fading, even as we watch...


The CD is also great for the booklet. I might appreciate booklets on the USB stick as it would be easy to find them vs digging through boxes of CDs but I am not fond of reading on the computer, beyond the necessity of reading posts on TC and other such stuff as one nowadays turns to Google for, but if it is too long, I either skip it or print it out to read.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Just a thought...your stereo includes a remote with an ample screen. When you plug in the USB stick, the booklet is automatically sent to your remote, where you can browse it at leisure while listening in addition to controlling the playback.

But it's too late for all that, never gonna happen.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

KenOC said:


> A media kind of skipped over -- a 1 GB USB flash drive costs about $3 without content and will hold an uncompressed CD. Completely RW, no moving parts, and doesn't require a player so long as your stereo has a USB port and a DAC. Larger drives actually cost about the same if you want that 3-CD set!
> 
> But the day of physical media is fading, even as we watch...


The music still has to come from somewhere in order to put it on a flash drive. Digital downloads are one option, but as many have stated earlier, it's often cheaper/easier to just buy the CDs. You can then rip them and put them on the flash drive.

Another problem with flash drives is that it's hard to tell what's on them just by looking at them. You might want to grab your flash drive with Beethoven's 5th on it, but you may accidentally grab your flash drive with _A Fifth of Beethoven_ on it! What a disaster that would be! (As an aside, I actually kind of like Walter Murphy's music. Please don't laugh at me!)

My car has a USB port that I can plug a flash drive into and play music off of it. It's very convenient. Unfortunately, I think it only plays MP3s and WMAs. Granted, you probably wouldn't be able to tell a difference in the car. It does have a CD player too though and I prefer to listen to classical music that way in the rare times that I do listen to classical in the car. It's difficult to listen to classical music in the car due to the dynamic range. Plus, I'm used to listening to it with a certain amount of focus which is hard to do in the car while driving.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Members are reminded that TC cannot approve of any method that violates copyright.You Tube terms of service are quite clear:



> you agree not to access Content or any reason other than your personal, non-commercial use solely as intended through and permitted by the normal functionality of the Service, and solely for Streaming. "Streaming" means a contemporaneous digital transmission of the material by YouTube via the Internet to a user operated Internet enabled device in such a manner that the data is intended for real-time viewing and *not intended to be downloaded* (either permanently or temporarily), copied, stored, or redistributed by the user.


Any post referring to downloading from You Tube or seeking information on methods of doing so will be deleted.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Does this mean that any posted clips from YT will be deleted?


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Dan Ante said:


> Does this mean that any posted clips from YT will be deleted?


Nope. All clips are links to YT which is within the terms of service. Nothing is copied to the TC server. Same applies to all the supported video formats - they are URL links so the content stays where it should be - on the home server.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Taggart said:


> Any post referring to downloading from You Tube or seeking information on methods of doing so will be deleted.


Oops sorry, didn't realize. We probably needed this clarification about YT.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Florestan said:


> And ease of use (no antistatic mat, no dust remover, no queuing up needle), good size for storage, ease of copying/ripping/reburning.


Amen to that, sir!


----------

