# ...Buy CDs or Listen on Spotify?



## ethan417 (Jun 10, 2020)

Hi

I love the being able to listen to different performance on Spotify.
For me, the sound quality on Spotify does not compare with the actual CD.

I was wondering, are you happy with the sound quality of streaming services or do you purchase the actual CD?

If you do purchase CDs, how do you decide which to purchase and which to just stream?

Many thanks.
- E


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Idagio and Primephonic, aside from being classical-oriented and thus infinitely more hassle-free for our purposes than Spotify, have $14.99 per month lossless streaming options for CD quality audio, which I spring for. I’m young and have more important things to spend money on, so I don’t have a single CD to my name. But the music collecting craze on TC has me seriously considering seeing if I can procure a CD player and get into this craze.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

ethan417 said:


> I was wondering, are you happy with the sound quality of streaming services or do you purchase the actual CD?
> 
> If you do purchase CDs, how do you decide which to purchase and which to just stream?


The way I use Spotify, I'm reasonably happy with the sound quality. I use Spotify mostly in the office, in the car, and at the gym via Bluetooth earbuds, so the sound is good enough for those occasions. At home, I mostly listen to CD's, because that's where the serious audio equipment resides.

As for what I buy - I listen via Spotify to new releases when they're available. If I listen once and love it, I buy it. If I listen to it more than a few times, I buy it. If I listen once and realize that I don't really need a 27th copy of such-and-such, I don't.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> But the music collecting craze on TC has me seriously considering seeing if I can procure a CD player and get into this craze.


I hate to tell you this, but you're kind of late. The CD-era is nearing an end. The number of new disks each month is a fraction of what it was decades ago. There are however some great bargains in boxed sets and you can build an impressive collection from second hand sources. When CD players first came out they were very expensive. Then prices came down and you could get a good player relatively cheap - with sound quality to match. But nowadays, good players are very pricey - $400 to $500 for an entry level machine that can't even play SACD is not uncommon.



wkasimer said:


> At home, I mostly listen to CD's, because that's where the serious audio equipment resides


That's the truth! So many young people who have only ever had ear buds playing from their phones have no idea how good a great set up can sound. One of the most sorrowful events in recent years has been the demise of HiFI shops run by people who really knew and cared about great sound. Even Bose, which for decades made excellent home stereo gear, no longer provides those products.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> I hate to tell you this, but you're kind of late. The CD-era is nearing an end. The number of new disks each month is a fraction of what it was decades ago. There are however some great bargains in boxed sets and you can build an impressive collection from second hand sources. When CD players first came out they were very expensive. Then prices came down and you could get a good player relatively cheap - with sound quality to match. But nowadays, good players are very pricey - $400 to $500 for an entry level machine that can't even play SACD is not uncommon.


LOL that's what I figured. I have learned to appreciate great sound with the combination of Sennheiser headphones and lossless streaming, though. Hearing the natural richness of bass instruments, sharp trumpets, clear woodwinds, and strings in full bloom is such a pleasure after being confined to cheap earbuds for so long.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

Which streaming service to use is a topic in itself, and conditions change rapidly. I am a CD collector, but on my very good but not true audiophile system, “Ultra HD” (25-bit/96 kHz) stereo streamed recordings are better sounding than standard 16-bit/44.1 kHz stereo CDs. This is a recent development. Only five years ago, I would never have been able to say that any streaming sounded as good as standard CD playback. However, I have a true SACD player that reproduces stereo, 3-track, and multi-channel recordings (in combination with an appropriate amplifier and 5.1 speaker set-up). With three- or multi-channel SACDs, this is clearly better sound than any streaming service I know of can currently provide. But streaming could catch up. It could go multi-channel as it’s gone HD stereo. Of course, it doesn’t matter if you don’t have a very good DAC/amplifier and speakers or headphones.

I find collecting CDs to be fun and I like that I can play CDs and SACDs irrespective of Internet connectivity. I also like the liner notes of most CDs. It’s hard to know the detailed recording engineering info from my streaming service, whereas the audiophile record labels I like to collect give me all of the info and allow me fully to appreciate the sound quality of the recordings. That’s my personal preference which follows from my interest and experience in audio recording techniques and technology.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> I hate to tell you this, but you're kind of late. The CD-era is nearing an end. ...


And so is the era of the professional, i.e. actual money-making, musician.

I still prefer physical media, so as long as they're around and can be played it's CDs for me. Or vinyl if I still had a turntable.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

mbhaub said:


> I hate to tell you this, but you're kind of late. The CD-era is nearing an end.


That's okay. I'm nearing my end as well. Also, I haven't bought a CD in years; I have about 15,000 of them and am happy to stand pat.

I don't do Spotify or any other streaming service. I did have NML but they screwed me over - forget them too.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ethan417 said:


> If you do purchase CDs, how do you decide which to purchase and which to just stream?


if I was starting out and relatively low on funds, I would only purchase the music and recordings that I loved the most - get the most bang for the buck.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

So, I am not a Spotify or any other streaming service user, and thus cannot comment on sound quality. But I can speak to why I don't use those services (I like owning my music and dislike monthly fees) and why CDs still retain a great deal of utility.

1. Range of recordings available. Nearly everything from the past 80 years of recording is on CD. 
2. Value for dollar. CD box sets, with some offering discs at $1-2 per album represent an incredible bargain.
3. Resale value. The used CD market on eBay is thriving.

Personally, my purchasing is a mix between CD box sets (with the occasional used individual album) and downloads, usually hi-res. Presto Classical and HDTracks offer an amazing range of CD-quality and higher recordings, with HDTracks running frequent sales and Presto generally having great deals every day. I listen almost entirely on my Sony ZX300 hi-res Walkman with my Sony Z7 headphones. When I get a CD, I rip it to FLAC immediately.

I think, if you're primarily a headphone listener, the best route is to purchase a USB CD (or Blu-Ray) drive for your laptop, so that you can use CD as a means of acquiring music.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

I use Spotify Premium which enables us to listen to a large array of recordings (even rare ones) from almost all composers. There is even a lot of Medieval and Renaissance artists there. Same goes for other genres, such as jazz, rock, electronic music - but I was pleasantly surprised at how much music from all eras are there.

In a rushed life, it is much better for me to have all the music I love readily available at my Android, my home laptop and my workplace computer. Plus, I am paying the service for all this music it provides, in a much cheaper way than buying physical media (which is coming to an end), avoiding filling space also. It is also very disappointing how much low quality work is done in various physical media, including artwork (some gross errors even in music titles from famous recordings), sometimes a CD can arrive damaged. Imagine buying a box-set and then notices, after a couple years, one of its CD's - or even a couple more- arrived damaged because you still did not have the time to check all of the media?

Of course I would love to have a huge library at home, with a very good sound system, with all my favorite recordings - and would indeed have if i had the *money *and also the *time *to do so, as well as the availability of many recordings that can't be found anymore in physical format. But even if i had it, would i really spend my time in such library? I don't think so, it would probably only be a room full with that amazing media. I still have a lot of stuff to do, so my Android and home/workplace computers are my best friends to music playing while i do my everyday tasks. 
So, the optimal solution for me (which of course will not be the same for other people), in terms of money spent, time spent, physical space usage, accessibility in various environments, providing me the overall listening pleasure is indeed using Spotify, and building my playlists there also when needed.

I am already spending my money legally in Spotify to get all this amazing music. Therefore, i can save my money to go watch some live concerts, be it from a local orchestra or from a band i love, which is very helpful to any artist from any genre.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

ethan417 said:


> Hi
> 
> I love the being able to listen to different performance on Spotify.
> For me, the sound quality on Spotify does not compare with the actual CD.
> ...


I've never been attracted to the idea of using a streaming service unless I'm sampling an album I'm interested in buying on CD. If I can't find the CD I'm looking for because it's out-of-print or just too expensive, then I'll buying a CD quality download of the album. I probably own around 8,000 classical recordings and what I've done with some of my collection is rip the CDs to my iPods using a high bitrate and this is just more convenient for me, especially at night. I listen through headphones and use a headphone amplifier at my desk. I still love playing my CDs through my stereo system, though and I do this whenever I can, but since I'm not the only one in my household, listening through headphones has become really my only option because I don't want to disturb anyone else.


----------



## vincula (Jun 23, 2020)

wkasimer said:


> As for what I buy - I listen via Spotify to new releases when they're available. If I listen once and love it, I buy it. If I listen to it more than a few times, I buy it. If I listen once and realize that I don't really need a 27th copy of such-and-such, I don't.


Exactly what I do, but add YouTube as a great source as well. If you buy a reasonably cheap, convenient and fine quality device -such as a Pro-ject Bluetooth Box S, to name one- then you can stream it to you main rig.

I still buy vinyl -only very specific works, as I've got way too much already- and cd's. The price these days is insanely low for what you get and the used market's thriving, as it's already been pointed out. It helps on my concentration as well, especially with operas and long symphonic works.

Physical formats won't disappear any time soon, despite what's been repeated as a mantra for years now. The new generation don't use cd's, some buy vinyl and very few listen to classical music anyway. Not many listen to "albums", most listen to playlists in shuffle mode in these new world of multiple devices. However, let us die in peace first, thanks.

As for cd players, I'm a vintage kind of guy. Im biased to the sound of Philips-based machines for the first generation, slightly tweaked or updated. Built as tanks and with a fluid and analogue-like sound. Call me old-fashioned, but vinyl's still my reference when it comes to sound quality.

Regards,

Vincula

PS. Got about 3 TB of high quality downloads in HD. Gifts from friends. I don't listen to then very often. Will need another life, I guess.


----------



## Guest (Jun 29, 2020)

I have a CD collection going back to about 1993, and a small vinyl collection going back to 1970ish. I still prefer to buy CDs - I'm not going to fork out for any vinyl unless it's secondhand classical (Gibson's and Beecham's Sibelius recordings for example).

When I want to sit in my living room and listen, it's on my hi-fi (budget). In the car, I use CDs and/or my phone (mostly ripped CDs to MP3s).

I use Spotify Free to help me sample interpretations (yesterday trying several different _Tapiola)_.
I occasionally download FLAC or MP3 direct from Presto Classical.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_The CD-era is nearing an end. The number of new disks each month is a fraction of what it was decades ago._

Only from commercial companies for new releases, not via people that still use and make them. I saw a film recently and enjoyed the score so I went to buy it and found no CD was available. I downloaded the score then made my own CD, cover and track listing. There is no shortage of companies that make the cases.

Your first sentence is what people said about LPs in the 1970s when cassettes arrived. It is true not much is released new on LP anymore but you can still buy most LPs ever made and have them converted or convert them yourself. I do this regularly also.

It should be noted the "promise" of the digital era is that everything ever produced on LP (and soon CD no doubt) will return digitally. This has not happened and there is no reason to believe it will in today's shrinking classical market.

Just about everything ever released on CD is still available somewhere used also. If 78s, LPs, tape and CDs have taught us anything it is that many people still prefer hardcopy documentation. Fifty years from now no one is going to be peddling their collections of vintage downloads.

I understand 21st century people grew up differently and see technology differently. To me just having the music is like having air.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

MatthewWeflen said:


> So, I am not a Spotify or any other streaming service user, and thus cannot comment on sound quality. But I can speak to why I don't use those services (I like owning my music and dislike monthly fees) and why CDs still retain a great deal of utility.
> 
> 1. Range of recordings available. Nearly everything from the past 80 years of recording is on CD.
> 2. Value for dollar. CD box sets, with some offering discs at $1-2 per album represent an incredible bargain.
> 3. Resale value. The used CD market on eBay is thriving.


I agree with the first two, but as for #3 - it depends. As someone who buys and sells on eBay, I have noted a sharp decline in selling prices - in the current market, only a select few recordings fetch more than a minimal price.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I do use Spotify but only to hear something that I am unsure whether to buy or not. Streaming as my main way of listening to music wouldn't work as I am too nomadic and quite often nowhere near access to the WWW. The sound quality would probably get to me, too, but you can get a sense for how well recorded a disc is.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I use Spotify Premium and I still collect secondhand (especially) and new CDs. The one advantage Spotify has is the volume of material on there. There are many recordings that are either out of print or extremely rare and uber expensive. At least by using Spotify I can hear many of those. Some of the stuff on Exton, for example, costs an arm and a leg to buy. I can usually listen to it all on Spotify without having to sell my house or a kidney.


----------



## Iain59 (Nov 15, 2018)

Worth noting that of the CD or higher quality streaming services such as Tidal, Amazon HD, Qobuz, Idagio and Primephonic only the last three provide liner notes for many of the more recent classical releases. Gives me back the main reason I kept buying CDs until 2018 but not since.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

I use Spotify and buy downloads and CDs as well. I use Spotify at the office, in the car, and for making discoveries - and also to listen to albums that are out of print or too expensive.

If I had to, I could use streaming services exclusively. But I prefer to collect the stuff I really like, for several reasons: part of it is a consumerist impulse I guess, wanting to own things and the thrill of buying new things, etc. But also because acquiring music lets me:
- have a curated collection of music that I love or have at least decided I want to live with,
- organize the music as I like,
- rest assured that I will have it handy in 5, 15, 30 or however many years in the future.

I've been buying a bunch of CDs lately, mostly boxes (10+ discs) as these are usually cheaper to get as a physical copy vs. lossless download. And some things I just want to own on CD, it all depends. Everything from ECM, for example.

A recent development is that I've given up on the idea of ripping all my CDs, as it's too much work and also because I like having different things available depending on where I'm listening; makes it easier to choose what to listen to, and in the age of _everything-available-always_ I enjoy the inconvenience of having to sit down in my living room when I want to listen to something I only have on CD.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

I use Idagio for pure listening and Youtube for listening and reading. 

Spotify (max settings desktop premium) to my ears has flat and lifeless sound compared even to the recently developed free Youtube music service.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

I buy CD's. I will use YouTube or Spotify to sample a work to see if it's something I am interested in. If I am, I buy the CD, if not then I don't waste my money.


----------



## Gray Bean (May 13, 2020)

I have about 50,000 CDs. I have been collecting since the late 80’s. I still purchase CDs for home listening. I have a B &W system in my listening area. Like my library of (physical) books I would not want to be without my record collection. My nieces say my house is like a museum. Oh, well. I’m behind the times it seems. 
As for deciding what to purchase, I read tons of online reviews, get Fanfare Magazine, listen on Youtube, talk to my musical friends and colleagues, and read this site carefully. I’ve only been on TC for about 6 weeks but I’ve gotten some great suggestions that have been spot on. Of course, I also take the risk of getting a record I don’t like but that’s collecting!


----------



## Ekim the Insubordinate (May 24, 2015)

It is a mix for me. I really like having a physical CD, but space is an issue. Most of my purchases have been digital. I worry though - I have heard that purchasing streaming movies is not a guarantee of permanent ownership - that basically you are paying for the right to have that movie so long as the service from which you purchased has rights to it. So while I like to have my downloaded music in the cloud, and can regularly stream across any of my devices, and download if needed for offline listening, I still back everything up to an external hard drive, just to be safe.

I purchase my CDs mostly from used media stores (books, movies, music) - rarely brand new. I also collect vinyl when I can find it at those stores. Many times wonderful older vinyl can be had, in good, playable condition, for as much as $0.25 per album. My father-in-law a few years back bought me one of those turntables that allows you to convert vinyl to digital.

After that, I pay for Apple Music subscription - it is not the best for classical, though. For example, while you can buy Hyperion label albums over iTunes, Apple Music apparently does not have rights to streaming Hyperion catalog albums (much to my chagrin - I love that label). But I also listen to a lot of rock, and I like being able to just run all my music off of my Music app on my iPod, iPad, and iPhone, without having to also go to a Spotify app.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

Oh how I wish Hyperion were on streaming services, and Linn!

I think I would probably buy more of their albums if I had access to them on Spotify.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

I have CDs, but I'm increasingly using streaming (Apple Music). I only listen to music through headphones, and if I use a quality DAC converter and quality headphones, there is no significant difference in stream and CD quality.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Helgi said:


> Oh how I wish Hyperion were on streaming services, and Linn!


And Testament!



> I think I would probably buy more of their albums if I had access to them on Spotify.


Just the opposite for me - I buy more Hyperion and Testament CD's than any other label, just because I *can't* stream them.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Helgi said:


> If I had to, I could use streaming services exclusively. But I prefer to collect the stuff I really like, for several reasons: part of it is a consumerist impulse I guess, wanting to own things and the thrill of buying new things, etc. But also because acquiring music lets me:
> - have a curated collection of music that I love or have at least decided I want to live with,
> - organize the music as I like,
> - rest assured that I will have it handy in 5, 15, 30 or however many years in the future.


The third point is the reason why I continue to buy and keep CD's. There's no guarantee that Spotify, or any other streaming service, will exist ad infinitum. And I've already seen certain items disappear from Spotify.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Supraphon is the label I am frustrated most by its absence from streaming. Luckily YouTube has most recordings not on streaming (of course in diminished sound), except for Hyperion who blocks even their records being disseminated on YouTube.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

Testament, now that would be a treat. So there's Hyperion, Linn, Testament and Supraphon. Any more? Exton I've had problems with because of geographical rights issues, and Sony as well.



wkasimer said:


> The third point is the reason why I continue to buy and keep CD's. There's no guarantee that Spotify, or any other streaming service, will exist ad infinitum. And I've already seen certain items disappear from Spotify.


I think the idea of having a long-term collection just doesn't make sense with streaming services, no matter how good the service is. Things move quickly in the tech industry and even if you can hop from one service to another there's still the rights issues and all that.

But I do feel silly sometimes when I'm buying music that I can just as well play on Spotify.


----------



## ethan417 (Jun 10, 2020)

Thank you - I love and learn a lot from liner notes.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Helgi said:


> Testament, now that would be a treat. So there's Hyperion, Linn, Testament and Supraphon. Any more?


Melodiya, Telarc, Chesky, BBC Legends, Nonesuch are some that come to mind


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Helgi said:


> But I do feel silly sometimes when I'm buying music that I can just as well play on Spotify.


I don't, although I pretend to feel silly when my wife notices.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Melodiya, Telarc, Chesky, BBC Legends, Nonesuch are some that come to mind


Supraphon and Melodiya are labels that were on Spotify until fairly recently, and are now gone.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

l love those shiny little discs. 
And the art and notes too. 
And i like something i can hold rather than a download. 
And they sound better imo.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

Those of you with 10k+ CD collections, would you have that many if streaming services had been available when you started?



Allegro Con Brio said:


> Melodiya, Telarc, Chesky, BBC Legends, Nonesuch are some that come to mind


Are the same ones missing on the other streaming services you've tried? BBC Legends is exactly the sort of thing that would be nice to have on Spotify.

There are two great BBC Legends compilation boxes on there (on ICA Classics).


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Helgi said:


> Are the same ones missing on the other streaming services you've tried? BBC Legends is exactly the sort of thing that would be nice to have on Spotify.


Idagio actually has a few scattered Testament and Chesky recordings, not close to the whole catalog though. Spotify has Nonesuch (which Idagio and Primephonic do not) and a little bit of Melodiya and Supraphon. Sometimes you luck out as these recordings on labels not carried have been reissued on various obscure labels For example, Barbirolli's RPO Sibelius 2 on Chesky, perhaps my favorite individual Sibelius symphony recording ever, somehow made its way onto a "Readers' Digest Classical Favorites" album available on Spotify and Primephonic, much to my delight! I agree that BBC Legends is a huge hole in the catalog, as there are some truly immortal performances on some of those out-of-print albums. Most of the out-of-print catalog of Philips also seems, strangely enough, to not be carried on streaming.

BTW Helgi, I love your avatar - I remember seeing that album of Bach motets by Gardiner and thinking how hilariously random but lovable that cover was.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

It's meant to represent the level of difficulty in singing the motets  A wonderful album, btw.

As for Philips, I see a lot of those old albums on Spotify licensed to Universal International Music B.V. Maybe they're not available in the US?

Praga is another one missing from Spotify.


----------



## ThaNotoriousNIC (Jun 29, 2020)

New to the forum and I saw this thread. I grew up in the late 90s and 2000s during a time when pirating music was huge in the 2000s and then streaming came into play in the 2010s till now. I don't own any classical CDs so I cannot say whether or not there is a quality drop between listening via CD or Spotify. What I can say is that I am a very big Spotify listener and I have been listening to classical music for years on the platform. As I delved into the genre more and more, I find that Spotify is an incredible tool for finding pieces you have not heard before and finding multiple recordings of the pieces I repeat heavy. Spotify has helped me to become more well-listened to the genre as a whole and introduced to me to more music than I would have thought possible. 

I don't believe that I would have the same success with CDs due to monetary constraints and storage and piracy was never a good option for classical music listening (you could find thousands of seeds for the latest Jay Z album but maybe 5 or 10 seeds for an opera collection if you were lucky). In the end, if you were like me and you are trying to get into the genre more and hear new things, I can't recommend enough. Now that I know a good amount of music and I know what I like, now I can think about investing into buying particular CDs of recordings that I like.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

ethan417 said:


> Hi
> 
> I love the being able to listen to different performance on Spotify.
> For me, the sound quality on Spotify does not compare with the actual CD.
> ...


A hobby of mine is to browse the thrift stores for classical/rock cds. I have bought quite a few cds for less than $2.00 that were issued from the 80's, 90's, and up to today, and many are out of print. Also I have bought cd players (made years ago) for nothing and some are in storage for later use (also receivers). But I will caution you that I consider collecting cds is more than about listening as it is way too expensive to listen to a cd once or twice and shelved it. I would stay away from it if you are not missing anything now because it can really get into major space issues and the guilt of knowing all the cds are not really getting much use. Don't open the door...........


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

realdealblues said:


> I buy CD's. I will use YouTube or Spotify to sample a work to see if it's something I am interested in. If I am, I buy the CD, if not then I don't waste my money.


Pretty much my approach as well.


----------



## ethan417 (Jun 10, 2020)

ethan417 said:


> Hi
> 
> I love the being able to listen to different performance on Spotify.
> For me, the sound quality on Spotify does not compare with the actual CD.
> ...


First I want to thank all of you who have responded to my original post.
I have learned so much.

As I continue to learn, I see that a number of sites sell: CDs, MP3, CD quality FLAC files, HiRes lossless FLAC files.

Many of the sites include a digital copy of the liner notes.

Do any of you purchase the download files?
Which format do you like and why?

thanks


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

I purchase downloads if the price is reasonable, however there are a lot of bargain box set CDs where the download of the tracks is 3 4 or 5 times higher than the physical copies. I buy ALAC (or FLAC if ALAC isn't available). I've bought a few hi res files but the difference is either minimal or nonexistent to my ears. However, I do enjoy the process of putting a CD or record into the player and just sitting down and listening. Using iTunes and listening to files can be 'too easy'.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

ethan417 said:


> Thank you - I love and learn a lot from liner notes.


Indeed, nothing beats a good reading.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Helgi said:


> Those of you with 10k+ CD collections, would you have that many if streaming services had been available when you started?


Definitely...........................................


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Helgi said:


> Those of you with 10k+ CD collections, would you have that many if streaming services had been available when you started?


Yes. I love my collection.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

I have a very large collection of music in physical media (vinyl, CDs, storage,...), and I still made purchases, mostly of content that can't be found in streaming.

But today, I mostly use streaming for new content. I'm subscribed to three services: Tidal, Qobuz and Idagio. Quality is between high and very high. It's very convenient. Of course, physical media is rapidly becoming just a niche market.


----------



## mark6144 (Apr 6, 2019)

Music is just digital data. In today's world, the idea of acquiring and storing data physically etched onto plastic seems quaint, inefficient and frankly wasteful.


----------



## Iain59 (Nov 15, 2018)

mark6144 said:


> Music is just digital data. In today's world, the idea of acquiring and storing data physically etched onto plastic seems quaint, inefficient and frankly wasteful.


Much better to store all that data in giant air-conditioned server farms, oh wait a minute...


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

I've moved around a lot in the past 10-15 years. I used to have a lot of books and a lot of CDs and whatnot, but I've kind of tried to declutter my life. I also have quite a few hobbies that take up space in my world: Guitar, woodworking, pipes & tobacco and then my wife is an artsy lady so there's all of her paints and cameras and whatnot. 

I say all that to say that I'm primarily a digital kind of person now. I know myself well enough to know that if I went down the audiophile path I would love it and spend way too much on it and I just don't have room or time in my life for that. So I have lately been using the Amazon Music service to stream stuff, and then if I like it I've been buying the digital albums. 

I prefer download to CD unless the price is significantly higher. I just purchased a few box sets from Presto that are in the process of shipping and they are the first CDs I've bought in years. I'll rip them and put the boxes away in a closet somewhere. I mostly listen to music on my phone with headphones or maybe in the car. If I had to sit in a specific place to listen to audiophile quality sound to enjoy music, I'd never have time to, so this is what I do to make it work and thus far I've been happy with the arrangement.


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

I hate collecting things. I already hoard books since I can't read them on my computer and the Kindle is kind of annoying (either you have to read the text in a minuscule font, or you have to click to change the page every 15-20 seconds) and I absolutely loathe myself for owning them and feel suffocated. I can't imagine what hundreds or a thousand CDs lying around would be like.

In any case, books seem like a much more excusable thing to hoard. Music cannot be anything more than pure entertainment, regardless of how sophisticated or high-minded it is or how strongly it moves you. It's just there for the sake of provoking emotions, you develop nothing listening to it, you learn nothing new, it doesn't help you with anything, it's just a fun way to waste time. I would never forgive myself if I spent hundreds each month on buying music.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

Boychev said:


> ...you develop nothing listening to it, you learn nothing new, it doesn't help you with anything, it's just a fun way to waste time...


Such materialistic Marxist-Leninist demagoguery has been fed us in my country by the Communists for 40 years. Everything useful was converted into tons of coal mined, processed iron and wheat harvested. If you sing, then only at work or during warfare! Thanks, never again...
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy...


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

^If anything, music is more "materialistic" than literature. Music is ultimately about sensations (whatever ideas may have gone into it), a text is ultimately about ideas (whatever emotions it might evoke). You can't dance to a book.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Helgi said:


> Those of you with 10k+ CD collections, would you have that many if streaming services had been available when you started?


Probably not, although I'd still have plenty...


----------



## caracalla (Feb 19, 2020)

Boychev said:


> I hate collecting things.


In contrast, I just can't help collecting things. Including music. Except that music doesn't have to be a 'thing'. These days, I mainly buy downloads - lossless if possible, mainly to avoid problems if they need to be converted in future. If it's not possible, 330kps MP3s are perfectly adequate for ears of my vintage. On the now-rare occasions I buy (or am given) CDs, I rip what I want and then get rid of them. In general, I'm only too relieved to be shot of physical media and don't mourn the impending demise of the CD any more than I did the passing of vinyl.

What I particularly value about downloads is that they give me the ability to collect exactly what I want, free of undesired accretions. In fact, for all collectors who prefer to go a-hunting for their music with a sniper's rifle rather than a blunderbuss or machine gun (people who dislike 'complete cycles' and feel slightly nauseous at the thought of 100-CD boxed sets), they're just ideal. Now we don't even have to put up with unwanted tracks from the same album!

Meanwhile, the streaming services have taken on the reference library function. At any rate, that's where I now do all my exploring, auditioning and 'learning to like'. I'm now old enough to see tech as more of a nuisance than a boon, but I'd have to say that in the music-collecting field all these developments have been highly positive from my pov.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

I started with LPs as a tennager in the early 1980s, upgraded to CDs by the late 1980s, and sometime in the 2000s started buying digital music from I-tunes and Amazon, but then I went back to CDs. I guess I just like having the music contained on an item that is physically present. I have a collection of maybe 4,000-5,000 CDs and LPs, and with limited space I try to keep buying new CDs to a minimum. How many box sets of Beethoven's nine symphonies do I really need? I do listen to music on YouTube from time to time, but not much. I stopped using headphones a few years ago, and the only cell phone I've ever owned is a flip phone. I guess I just don't like the way that everyone seems to be mentally checked out whenever I go somewhere and everyone's eyes either glued to their phone and their ears are sealed off with headphones. People talk about the hardships of social distancing with COVID-19 but I see that people, at least in the USA, had already been social distancing in the sense that their electronic devices worked to place them into a world all their own, as opposed to one where they were engaging with their environment. I saw an interview with John Cage where he said he liked to listen to the sound of traffic, so when I'm walking in the city or along on a hiking trail, I like to listen to the sounds in my environment. I mean, how can hear the birds singing in the the first movment of Beethoven's _Symphony #6 "Pastorale"_, if you don't ever experience bird's singing in the first place?

As for Spotify, what's that?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Coach G said:


> As for Spotify, what's that?


It's a frustrating streaming service where classical music is just one of many categories. I signed up earlier today and was bombarded with non-classical songs; they treat everything as a song. It is a pain to navigate and find what you want. The first thing I wanted to do was listen to Bantock's Celtic Symphony - not there. My 2nd pick was absent as well. I've already deleted my account.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> It's a frustrating streaming service where classical music is just one of many categories. I signed up earlier today and was bombarded with non-classical songs; they treat everything as a song. It is a pain to navigate and find what you want. The first thing I wanted to do was listen to Bantock's Celtic Symphony - not there. My 2nd pick was absent as well. I've already deleted my account.


I agree, searching is really annoying, difficult (and sometimes impossible). Unfortunately, a similar search "system" (based on the title of a track and the name of one randomly selected artist) is often used by CD stores. It often happens that the search engine displays only the tempo designations as track names and the conductor/pianist/singer as author. So you can order for example: _1 Allegro, 2 Moderato, 3 Scherzo, ... by Jiří Bělohlávek_ (without further specification, e.g. the name of the composer). Some years ago, I tried to explain which data was important, and I offered free help in processing the offer of classical music to our largest CD store in my Country. They didn't consider it necessary, so you can order _Allegro ma non tanto_ by Yuja Wang there.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

DaddyGeorge said:


> I agree, searching is really annoying, difficult (and sometimes impossible). Unfortunately, a similar search "system" (based on the title of a track and the name of one randomly selected artist) is often used by CD stores. It often happens that the search engine displays only the tempo designations as track names and the conductor/pianist/singer as author. So you can order for example: _1 Allegro, 2 Moderato, 3 Scherzo, ... by Jiří Bělohlávek_ (without further specification, e.g. the name of the composer). Some years ago, I tried to explain which data was important, and I offered free help in processing the offer of classical music to our largest CD store in my Country. They didn't consider it necessary, so you can order _Allegro ma non tanto_ by Yuja Wang there.


I feel I must chime in here to recommend Presto Classical for anyone's download needs. They have CD-quality FLAC and higher downloads for most back catalog and almost all new releases, and they are categorized by people who obviously understand and appreciate classical. Searching is a breeze, whether you search by conductor, orchestra, or composer. And the prices are generally great.

Presto is where I check first, for anything I want to acquire. It's that good.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

mark6144 said:


> Music is just digital data. In today's world, the idea of acquiring and storing data physically etched onto plastic seems quaint, inefficient and frankly wasteful.


But if the data is already stored on disc and has been for 20 (if not 40) years, what is being wasted by using that as your means of delivery?


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

I collect books, and a lot of them. I feel like those are physical repositories of knowledge, and it comforts me to know that my shelves are packed with wisdom that I could use at any time of life. I can’t imagine having the same sensation with CDs. To all you collectors, is the difference in listening to physical media vs. streaming equivalent to reading paper books vs. ebooks? I can’t possibly imagine the difference would be as drastic because you’re still hearing the same sound (in lossless at least). Is it just the “having something to own” aspect of it that is appealing? For me, the idea of having a large CD collection is kind of cool, but also somewhat frustrating with the thought of having to change CDs for larger works, etc. not to mention the hefty impact on one’s wallet.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I collect books, and a lot of them. I feel like those are physical repositories of knowledge, and it comforts me to know that my shelves are packed with wisdom that I could use at any time of life. I can't imagine having the same sensation with CDs. To all you collectors, is the difference in listening to physical media vs. streaming equivalent to reading paper books vs. ebooks? I can't possibly imagine the difference would be as drastic because you're still hearing the same sound (in lossless at least). Is it just the "having something to own" aspect of it that is appealing? For me, the idea of having a large CD collection is kind of cool, but also somewhat frustrating with the thought of having to change CDs for larger works, etc. not to mention the hefty impact on one's wallet.


I agree that the sound is the same. I rip all my CDs and listen to the FLAC file. There may be something to be said for liner notes, but they don't outweigh the hassles of storage for me (I don't keep a large number of CDs on hand and try to sell them when possible). If download stores were better about always including a PDF, that would be negated entirely.

The reason I buy CDs is cost and available catalog. They are both better than download. I download when I can but it isn't always an option, or can be price prohibitive (which is asinine).

My current project, for instance, is ripping the entire Karajan 1970s box set. I paid $200 on Discogs to have it shipped, new, to me from Greece.









Now, it is available on Amazon as four downloads of $56.49 apiece. This comes to 225.96, and that's if you can even find the downloads themselves on Amazon (they're horribly organized), and then still they're in lossy VBR MP3. And this is the only place I see the set for download. Purchasing individual albums would run in the $500 range, and only perhaps half are available for download.

If I buy the box, I can rip the disc in lossless FLAC, copy the book into a PDF, scan the cover art, and make sure all the metadata look the way I want on my DAP, and then sell the box along for likely 100% of my purchase price. Now, to be sure, this represents an investment of time. I imagine I'll put 20 hours of labor into ripping, scanning, and organizing everything (generally while I do my real job, or watch TV in the evening). Some people enjoy meticulous projects like this, some don't.

If it had been offered as a FLAC download for $200 with a PDF book, I would have done that. It's certainly easier. But the market is not providing that yet, certainly not on Amazon (Presto Classical is getting there).

It does appear that the set is available on Spotify, but I'm not a member, and at 10 bucks per month, I would relatively quickly be paying more, and it would not be on my preferred device, which has a wired headphone connection. I'd rather just own the music outright and be able to port it to any device I like without needing an internet connection.


----------



## Rach Man (Aug 2, 2016)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I collect books, and a lot of them. I feel like those are physical repositories of knowledge, and it comforts me to know that my shelves are packed with wisdom that I could use at any time of life. I can't imagine having the same sensation with CDs. To all you collectors, is the difference in listening to physical media vs. streaming equivalent to reading paper books vs. ebooks? I can't possibly imagine the difference would be as drastic because you're still hearing the same sound (in lossless at least). Is it just the "having something to own" aspect of it that is appealing? For me, the idea of having a large CD collection is kind of cool, but also somewhat frustrating with the thought of having to change CDs for larger works, etc. not to mention the hefty impact on one's wallet.


I think it depends on what you want. You say that you collect books because you like having all of the wisdom on your shelves. I have a 512gb ipad. I bet I could have a boatload of books, from kindle, stored on that iPad. We would get the same knowledge. We would get the same words. But some people enjoy having the physical book in their hands. Some don't mind lots of e-books on a device.

I think that this is similar for music. Some people like having the physical disk and some are content with being able to listen to the sounds in any form. I like having the disks, but I don't mind reading a kindle. (I like physical books, too.) So I guess I can go to both directions. But the choice is up to the individual.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I collect books, and a lot of them. I feel like those are physical repositories of knowledge, and it comforts me to know that my shelves are packed with wisdom that I could use at any time of life. I can't imagine having the same sensation with CDs. To all you collectors, is the difference in listening to physical media vs. streaming equivalent to reading paper books vs. ebooks? I can't possibly imagine the difference would be as drastic because you're still hearing the same sound (in lossless at least). Is it just the "having something to own" aspect of it that is appealing? For me, the idea of having a large CD collection is kind of cool, but also somewhat frustrating with the thought of having to change CDs for larger works, etc. not to mention the hefty impact on one's wallet.


Yes, to me it's similar to books (which I also collect) versus e-books (which I never use), but there's more. Until about five years ago, the audio quality of streamed music and much downloadable music was not as good as CDs. As you say, it is now-sort of. Streamed stereo Ultra HD seems to me by listening and by technical specs to be as good as stereo SACD, but the audio quality of my three- and multi-channel SACDs cannot be obtained by streaming that I know of. Same for multi-channel Blu-ray, but I use SACD. Another thing is that the CDs (usually SACDs) that I like to collect include interesting album art and liner notes that have somewhat the quality of books in my mind, so there isn't such a bright line between my CD and book collections.

I've always been very choosy and stingy about collecting, and after 30 years I only have about 1000 CDs. The ones I buy these days are either SACDs of music that's very important to me, or box sets that are inexpensive with music I like. Overall, it's not very expensive at this scale. I do increasingly listen to HD and Ultra HD stereo streamed music as an alternative to buying CDs. It's extremely useful for activities like the TC SQ, early music, and so on listening groups.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Rach Man said:


> I think it depends on what you want. You say that you collect books because you like having all of the wisdom on your shelves.* I have a 512gb ipad. I bet I could have a boatload of books, from kindle, stored on that iPad. We would get the same knowledge. We would get the same words. But some people enjoy having the physical book in their hands. Some don't mind lots of e-books on a device. *
> 
> I think that this is similar for music. Some people like having the physical disk and some are content with being able to listen to the sounds in any form. I like having the disks, but I don't mind reading a kindle. (I like physical books, too.) So I guess I can go to both directions. But the choice is up to the individual.


The experience with real books can for some people be very different from reading ebooks. I've got rather weak eyes and I strongly prefer reading physical books. I also love their smell and feel which no device could provide ...


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

For books, I still prefer paper, for some of the reasons mentioned above. I feel I retain much more information reading on paper, and I like the feel/smell. My wife and I both have somewhat large libraries from our grad school and teaching days. I would say between us we purchase 10-20 books annually. And we have a lot of kids' books, too.

As far as comics, I've moved entirely to Kindle for purchasing. I feel bad about it, and still go to the local shop with my kids on occasion. But my purchases are relatively fewer and further between, and mostly collected editions, and not storing them is great. I simply don't have the space living in the city.

For movies, I still strongly prefer physical media, for reasons of a/v quality and availability. Seeing various movies and episodes of TV get dropped from streaming providers recently has been disquieting. They are a pain to store, and I've cut down to, say, 4-5 movies purchased annually. I do stream TV shows, though, and strongly prefer streaming to broadcast or cable.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> _When CD players first came out they were very expensive. Then prices came down and you could get a good player relatively cheap - with sound quality to match. But nowadays, good players are very pricey - $400 to $500 for an entry level machine_


I've never understood why this is so. I admit I am an ignoramus when it comes to hi-fi so I'm willing to be enlightened but I was always under the impression that it was the quality of the amp and speaker/headphones which counted rather than that of the disc player.


----------



## mark6144 (Apr 6, 2019)

MatthewWeflen said:


> But if the data is already stored on disc and has been for 20 (if not 40) years, what is being wasted by using that as your means of delivery?


Well I was thinking plastic and space, but of course the whole manufacturing, distribution and retailing setup is wasteful compared to digital distribution.

Personally that's not my main reason for preferring streaming though. I simply like the convenience of being able to listen to whatever I want, whenever I want, without having to leave my chair to go find physical media or spending more money to "own" it. It's not just physical media that is becoming anachronistic, it's the whole concept of "owning" music in order to listen to it. Paying for on-demand access makes so much more sense.

(I do own CDs and vinyl but it has long since been boxed and stored away. I still listen to them, but via streaming because it's more convenient ).


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

elgars ghost said:


> I've never understood why this is so. I admit I am an ignoramus when it comes to hi-fi so I'm willing to be enlightened but I was always under the impression that it was the quality of the amp and speaker/headphones which counted rather than that of the disc player.


Apparently, the differentiators are in the sound hardware itself and in build quality as it relates to error correction. A cheap CD player will do more interpolation to account for errors introduced by vibration and the like. A high-end CD player will be damped from all vibration and play precisely what is encoded on the disc.

Keep in mind, when I play a physical disc (approximately once in a blue moon lately), I use one of my Blu-Ray players. I was just curious about what "audiophile" CD players were like and did my research at links like the following:

https://www.whathifi.com/us/best-buys/hi-fi/best-cd-players

https://www.cambridgeaudio.com/usa/en/blog/what-cd-transport


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Rach Man said:


> I think it depends on what you want. You say that you collect books because you like having all of the wisdom on your shelves. I have a 512gb ipad. I bet I could have a boatload of books, from kindle, stored on that iPad. We would get the same knowledge. We would get the same words. But some people enjoy having the physical book in their hands. Some don't mind lots of e-books on a device.


In fact, I would say that I vastly prefer reading pdfs to physical books, because books force me into uncomfortable positions and constantly keeping hands in a position optimal for reading, if not for them. Pdfs mean a healthy seating in front of a laptop, and moving the text with just wireless mouse in hand, with an adjusted page/text size to one that is most comfortable. Finally, quoting and taking notes are very easy with a digital text as compared to a physical one...


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

mark6144 said:


> Well I was thinking plastic and space, but of course the whole manufacturing, distribution and retailing setup is wasteful compared to digital distribution.
> 
> Personally that's not my main reason for preferring streaming though. I simply like the convenience of being able to listen to whatever I want, whenever I want, without having to leave my chair to go find physical media or spending more money to "own" it. It's not just physical media that is becoming anachronistic, it's the whole concept of "owning" music in order to listen to it. Paying for on-demand access makes so much more sense.
> 
> (I do own CDs and vinyl but it has long since been boxed and stored away. I still listen to them, but via streaming because it's more convenient ).


My point earlier was that manufacturing was already a sunk cost. The discs, for the most part, already exist, especially when we're talking used. Retail space for the most part no longer exists for CD distribution, most of it is online.

Now, shipping is another matter, and one I've given a great deal of thought. I will pay a premium (say 10-20%) if I can download a CD-quality FLAC file instead of having it shipped. All of my new (i.e. non classical) music is purchased this way, and frequently for more than a CD (say, $15 vs. $10). But it still does create a carbon cost to host and distribute a file. It's a much more invisible cost, but it's there nonetheless. With that said, CD-quality or better FLAC files are not available for all classical repertoire, and sometimes download costs are prohibitive.

As far as owning vs. on-demand, I am very leery of rights issues and collections disappearing. I am willing to do it for things like television programs that I will only watch once. But for music, that I want to listen to dozens (if not more) times, and movies (ditto), I vastly prefer to own a copy of my own that cannot be taken away from me at whim by a corporation somewhere with no means of redress.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

MatthewWeflen said:


> As far as owning vs. on-demand, I am very leery of rights issues and collections disappearing. I am willing to do it for things like television programs that I will only watch once. But for music, that I want to listen to dozens (if not more) times, and movies (ditto), I vastly prefer to own a copy of my own that cannot be taken away from me at whim by a corporation somewhere with no means of redress.


Yes, this exactly. But also:


Allegro Con Brio said:


> Is it just the "having something to own" aspect of it that is appealing? For me, the idea of having a large CD collection is kind of cool, but also somewhat frustrating with the thought of having to change CDs for larger works, etc. not to mention the hefty impact on one's wallet.


I think ultimately I just prefer physical media for the same reason you prefer paper books, and for the same reason that I prefer my old worn out copies of sheet music -- and my brand spanking new copies of sheet music -- to using an iPad with a page-turner thingamajig. There's just something about digitized data in those areas that seems sterile and disposable to me. Maybe it's psychological. But pulling out copies of music that I've had since I was about 10 or 11 is preferable to reading off a tablet screen, regardless of convenience.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

for books, pdf files win. Physical books are just there to fill space. Reading science articles in a tablet, while listening to Nightwish using Spotify, is the best!


----------



## Bkeske (Feb 27, 2019)

I use Tidal (high res subscription) to check out albums I’m unfamiliar with of musicians, conductors, composers, orchestras, etc.

But no, I could never be without my physical medium. If I hear something I like, it may go on my ‘want list’ for purchase. I’m of that age that I cannot feel a sense of ownership with just streaming music or downloaded files, as growing up, having the album, CD, or cassette provided that ‘pride of ownership’. I want it in my hands, tangible, not invisible in ‘thin air’.

In addition, in most case with a good system, physical medium sounds best, to me. I’m purchasing vinyl again, and my first choice is vinyl, as It sounds best to me. Thus, vinyl is my preferred medium. After that, CD’s tempered by my DAC, pre, amp, etc. Unfortunately, new vinyl can be very expensive, but good older vinyl is very reasonable and available, and many of great older performances. So, that’s what I primarily seek to purchase. Used CD’s are actually cheaper than used vinyl, and they are plentiful to purchase as well, you just have to be a bit more careful as the sound quality can be dreadful with some. And some, especially some of the newer realeases, are very very good. 

Can streaming be audiophile quality? Yes, if you have a good set-up, but I still find vinyl the most ‘organic’ presentation than all the others. Bottom line; not having the physical medium just does not work for me for a variety of reasons. That won’t change.


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

Fabulin said:


> In fact, I would say that I vastly prefer reading pdfs to physical books, because books force me into uncomfortable positions and constantly keeping hands in a position optimal for reading, if not for them. Pdfs mean a healthy seating in front of a laptop, and moving the text with just wireless mouse in hand, with an adjusted page/text size to one that is most comfortable. Finally, quoting and taking notes are very easy with a digital text as compared to a physical one...


Blue light is horrible for you though - messes with your cortisol levels and sleep schedule (no wonder everyone is so angry and confrontational all the time on Facebook and Internet forums). I already work 8 hours on a computer, night shifts included, reading on the computer in my spare time sounds soul-crushing.


----------



## Iain59 (Nov 15, 2018)

MatthewWeflen said:


> If I buy the box, I can rip the disc in lossless FLAC, copy the book into a PDF, scan the cover art, and make sure all the metadata look the way I want on my DAP, and then sell the box along for likely 100% of my purchase price. Now, to be sure, this represents an investment of time. I imagine I'll put 20 hours of labor into ripping, scanning, and organizing everything (generally while I do my real job, or watch TV in the evening). Some people enjoy meticulous projects like this, some don't.


If you no longer own the music, I think what you're doing is called theft - it's certainly not benefitting the artists.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Iain59 said:


> If you no longer own the music, I think what you're doing is called theft - it's certainly not benefitting the artists.


Does every single used CD or Vinyl sale meet with similar righteous scorn? What about buying a used book? A used car? A used home? A used set of headphones?

Karajan and his BPO are dead and gone, and I have purchased a significant chunk of their music firsthand. These box sets are also out of print, and no one is offering the music as CD-qualilty FLAC, so there is no way to purchase what I want in such a way that filters royalties to whatever remaining living members there are.

I think the benefit of spreading their music to more people outweighs the harm of Universal Music Group not getting another bite at the apple.

And you can go pound sand.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Iain59 said:


> If you no longer own the music, I think what you're doing is called theft - it's certainly not benefitting the artists.


If he bought the box set that he ripped, the vendor and record company got paid. Keeping it or selling it changes nothing.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

starthrower said:


> If he bought the box set that he ripped, the vendor and record company got paid. Keeping it or selling it changes nothing.


The problem is not in the selling, but in keeping the MP3/FLAC/APE whatever files. I think copyright law dictates that the moment you sell the physical CD's, you're no longer allowed to have the electronic files.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> The problem is not in the selling, but in keeping the MP3/FLAC/APE whatever files. I think copyright law dictates that the moment you sell the physical CD's, you're no longer allowed to have the electronic files.


Probably true. Not a practice I do because I'd rather listen to the music on the CDs over my audio system. I don't bother with ripping to digital files.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I don't have a dedicated stereo, I have neighbors above and below me, I don't have space to store thousands of CDs, and no one sells this music as digital files of sufficient quality. 

If DG were to sell the music directly at the same quality and for the same price as the box set, the question would be moot.

I have purchased thousands of dollars worth of first-hand music from Amazon, HDTracks and Presto classical. I'm sleeping fine at night.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I'm not passing judgement on you. I realize CDs present a storage problem. That's why I recently downloaded Spotify, although I don't use it much.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Art Rock said:


> The problem is not in the selling, but in keeping the MP3/FLAC/APE whatever files. I think copyright law dictates that the moment you sell the physical CD's, you're no longer allowed to have the electronic files.


I believe that's correct. I occasionally rip a CD before getting rid of it, but only if it's an OOP item that I think is unlikely to be reissued.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

By my count, of the 82 CDs in this particular box set, I already owned via other means (prior CD/Blu-Ray purchases, downloads) 45 of them - most of which directly filled the coffers of UMG. I bought the box set to get the other 37 albums. A significant chunk of those 37 albums are not in print by UMG, and are only offered as a lossy MP3 download at Amazon. And I'm not going to buy my music as lossy MP3 files. I'm just not. 

I'm having a difficult time spotting the harm when someone re-sells something that can't be purchased except on the used market anyway.

I do, by the way, understand the distinction, that I am continuing to use the product after selling it on. But again, I think Karajan and the BPO lived pretty well on the royalties they earned during their lifetimes. I don't think I'm depriving them of any benefits.

Am I supposed to throw the CDs in the trash? Would that be more ethical? I fail to see how.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

deleted ......................


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Those of you with 10k+ CD collections, would you have that many if streaming services had been available when you started?_

I don't have that large a collection but have owned more recordings than that in 50 years. The 20th century was a collector's century, especially the postwar era. People collected everything and antique stores became de rigeuer. There was an entire postwar industry in classical music related to collecting.

The Internet changed all that and people don't do this in the 21st century. If I started listening to classical music today I wouldn't own any CDs.

It's not reasonable to think anyone that started listening to classical music in this century would collect anything tangible. That's why there are no longer CD players in new cars and the reason most record and book stores closed,

The Englishman that writes books about CM including "Who Killed Classical Music?" identified this long ago saying the Inernet and YouTube meant no one had to any longer retain a reference collection of recordings at home. Those of us that do choose to, most likely because it's how we learned it.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

MatthewWeflen said:


> By my count, of the 82 CDs in this particular box set, I already owned via other means (prior CD/Blu-Ray purchases, downloads) 45 of them - most of which directly filled the coffers of UMG. I bought the box set to get the other 37 albums. A significant chunk of those 37 albums are not in print by UMG, and are only offered as a lossy MP3 download at Amazon. And I'm not going to buy my music as lossy MP3 files. I'm just not.
> 
> I'm having a difficult time spotting the harm when someone re-sells something that can't be purchased except on the used market anyway.
> 
> ...


I was just pointing out what i consider an error in starthrower's post. By the way, throwing the CD's in the trash is not allowed for the same reason. Ethically strange maybe, but that's how I understand the copyright law works (and at least in the past, people have been fined heavily in the USA for illegal possession of copyrighted materials).


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

MatthewWeflen said:


> By my count, of the 82 CDs in this particular box set, I already owned via other means (prior CD/Blu-Ray purchases, downloads) 45 of them - most of which directly filled the coffers of UMG. I bought the box set to get the other 37 albums. A significant chunk of those 37 albums are not in print by UMG, and are only offered as a lossy MP3 download at Amazon. And I'm not going to buy my music as lossy MP3 files. I'm just not.
> 
> I'm having a difficult time spotting the harm when someone re-sells something that can't be purchased except on the used market anyway.
> 
> ...


It's not a question of what makes sense. Or what seems ethical to you and I. It's a matter of what the law says.

In theory, someone could buy a CD, rip it, and then pass it along to 100 other people who do the same, thus depriving the copyright holder of proceeds. That's obviously true for something that's in print. It's less clear ethically for something that's no longer available, but I believe that the law doesn't make that distinction.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

It looks as though there is a fair amount of ambiguity in the law, such as it exists. As such, I would argue that it is a question of what makes ethical sense, until and unless the law is made clear.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripping


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2020)

I use Qobuz, not Spotify, and while LPs/CDs/SACDs/hi-res downloads generally sound a little better, Qobuz is great for that middle area where recordings are enjoyable but not enough to own. Unless I love it, I'm content with Qobuz since I'm low on physical storage space. If I love it enough, I'll first try to find a hi-res file, and if that isn't available, then I'll buy the CD/SACD/LP.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

MatthewWeflen said:


> It looks as though there is a fair amount of ambiguity in the law, such as it exists. As such, I would argue that it is a question of what makes ethical sense, until and unless the law is made clear.


There is really no ambiguity in the law, in the US, at least not in the most important point. To the degree that making a copy is permitted, it is tied directly to the ownership of the original. If you sell the original, your copy is no longer valid or lawful.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

My understanding is that a person is free to record anything they like as long as they are not selling it. I could go all the way back to cassette tapes and how people would record music for themselves to listen in the car, or record music so as to wear down their record albums, or record music in order to have their own "mix" of favorite tracks (even if the term wasn't applied at the time), or to _record music to give to a friend or relative _when certain recordings were hard to come by. The stereo systems and cassette tapes were manufactured and sold for that purpose.


----------



## Iain59 (Nov 15, 2018)

MatthewWeflen said:


> Does every single used CD or Vinyl sale meet with similar righteous scorn? What about buying a used book? A used car? A used home? A used set of headphones?
> 
> Karajan and his BPO are dead and gone, and I have purchased a significant chunk of their music firsthand. These box sets are also out of print, and no one is offering the music as CD-qualilty FLAC, so there is no way to purchase what I want in such a way that filters royalties to whatever remaining living members there are.
> 
> ...


From a legal standpoint in most jurisdictions it's still theft, and whether you personally think Universal Music are entitled to the royalties is irrelevant, by law they are. Whether you choose to respect the law is your decision and will reflect your personal values and integrity.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

"Whoever is without sin, cast the first stone." I don't want to contradict legal norms in any way, but I think that "theft" sounds very harsh in this context. I assume that most of us have occasionally made some "illegal" copies of (for example, unavailable) recordings during our lives. I don't think we should feel ashamed of that. From what I read here, the vast majority of the members of this forum steadily buy CDs, music publications, go to concerts, teach music and generally seek to contribute to artistic education and the promotion of the art of music. I suppose that no one is in the slightest interested in robbing the artists (rather the opposite).


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

JAS said:


> There is really no ambiguity in the law, in the US, at least not in the most important point. To the degree that making a copy is permitted, it is tied directly to the ownership of the original. If you sell the original, your copy is no longer valid or lawful.


Can you supply the relevant statute? I've been looking for hours and cannot find it. I would be much obliged.

The statute that the RIAA cites (but does not link to, conspicuously) seems to apply only to import and rebroadcast.

https://www.riaa.com/resources-learning/about-piracy/

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/[email protected]/chapter5&edition=prelim

From what I can see here, the RIAA is blowing smoke up people's butts in order to scare them off of copying music. But the law doesn't support their extreme position. They are intentionally misreading narrow statutes and claiming broad application.

You'll recall that the RIAA also sued MP3 player manufacturers and lost, just as the MPAA sued VCR manufacturers.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Iain59 said:


> From a legal standpoint in most jurisdictions it's still theft, and whether you personally think Universal Music are entitled to the royalties is irrelevant, by law they are. Whether you choose to respect the law is your decision and will reflect your personal values and integrity.


Supply the relevant statute or go pound sand.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

DaddyGeorge said:


> "Whoever is without sin, cast the first stone." I don't want to contradict legal norms in any way, but I think that "theft" sounds very harsh in this context. I assume that most of us have occasionally made some "illegal" copies of (for example, unavailable) recordings during our lives. I don't think we should feel ashamed of that. From what I read here, the vast majority of the members of this forum steadily buy CDs, music publications, go to concerts, teach music and generally seek to contribute to artistic education and the promotion of the art of music. I suppose that no one is in the slightest interested in robbing the artists (rather the opposite).


But what fun is it if you can't accuse someone of a monstrous theft and impugn their integrity?

Reasonable people like you are draining the fun from the Internet.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

DaddyGeorge said:


> "Whoever is without sin, cast the first stone." I don't want to contradict legal norms in any way, but I think that "theft" sounds very harsh in this context. I assume that most of us have occasionally made some "illegal" copies of (for example, unavailable) recordings during our lives. I don't think we should feel ashamed of that. *From what I read here, the vast majority of the members of this forum steadily buy CDs, music publications, go to concerts, teach music and generally seek to contribute to artistic education and the promotion of the art of music.* I suppose that no one is in the slightest interested in robbing the artists (rather the opposite).


My wife can attest to the fact that I've spent lots of $$$ on CDs, but since I don't drink alcohol or smoke, she tolerates my "habit".


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

Coach G said:


> My wife can attest to the fact that I've spent lots of $$$ on CDs, but since I don't drink alcohol or smoke, she tolerates my "habit".


Exactly the same in my case...


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

MatthewWeflen said:


> But what fun is it if you can't accuse someone of a monstrous theft and impugn their integrity?
> 
> Reasonable people like you are draining the fun from the Internet.


I don't really take the self-righteous approach. My concern is that the technology has gone way ahead of a structural basis for sustainability as far as performers are concerned. Too much too fast.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

MatthewWeflen said:


> Can you supply the relevant statute? I've been looking for hours and cannot find it. I would be much obliged. . .


I am not sure what you are looking for precisely, but I believe that the principle is covered by "first sale" doctrine: https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm...54-copyright-infringement-first-sale-doctrine

That is what allows you to sell or trade away your original printing of a book, etc. I recall a case some years ago that questioned whether or not you were allowed to make backup copies for your own use of something you owned. In an age of digital technology, and widely held means of making copies that are, for all intents and purposes, of quality comparable to the original, some concepts of common use have been pushed to their limits.

https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html

Fair use is sometimes also abused. A holder of copyright might not object to you making a photocopy of a few pages from a book held in a library. But copying the whole book would surely be frowned upon.

This isn't directly related, but it will be interesting to see how the case proceeds: https://www.rarebookhub.com/articles/2822

Does that help?

Edit: Disclaimer that I am not a lawyer, although I am responsible for several copyrights of printed matter. I have also contributed to publications that are covered by copyrights, and in making my contributions, I agree to various limitations, even when I am not technically "paid" for the contribution. I have also negotiated usage rights to a number of works that are still covered by active copyrights. (In the end, copyright holders really only have the rights in practice that they can enforce, even if the law actually grants them greater rights in principle.)


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

JAS said:


> I am not sure what you are looking for precisely, but I believe that the principle is covered by "first sale" doctrine: https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm...54-copyright-infringement-first-sale-doctrine
> 
> That is what allows you to sell or trade away your original printing of a book, etc. I recall a case some years ago that questioned whether or not you were allowed to make backup copies for your own use of something you owned. In an age of digital technology, and widely held means of making copies that are, for all intents and purposes, of quality comparable to the original, some concepts of common use have been pushed to their limits.
> 
> ...


Thank you. Something to think about. I agree that technology is beginning to outstrip the way laws were framed in the past. I don't think the statutes directly apply to my situation. All I can say is that I try to be judicious, according to my own inner lights, with respect to when it's "right" and when it's "wrong." I would never copy and sell a CD from a currently active artist, for instance. I have also been trying to move most of my purchasing to download, mainly for carbon cost reasons, but with the knock-on effect of obviating these sorts of concerns.

As someone who taught college courses, I would frequently use PDF versions of articles and books that were no longer in print, or excerpts of books that were, in order to defray costs for my students. I was teaching ethics, btw


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

larold said:


> It's not reasonable to think anyone that started listening to classical music in this century would collect anything tangible. That's why there are no longer CD players in new cars and the reason most record and book stores closed,
> 
> The Englishman that writes books about CM including "Who Killed Classical Music?" identified this long ago saying the Inernet and YouTube meant no one had to any longer retain a reference collection of recordings at home. Those of us that do choose to, most likely because it's how we learned it.


Well, I'm a relative newcomer to classical music (in any serious sense) and even though I would consider myself a tech-savvy person, I'm still drawn to CDs. I am getting close to 40 years old, though, so maybe it's different for people who didn't grow up with physical media to begin with.

I have Spotify in my car and listen to music on a smartphone with fancy wireless earbuds (the stuff of sci-fi, really) but in the evening I like to sit down with some CDs and a cup of tea in my living room


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Helgi said:


> Well, I'm a relative newcomer to classical music (in any serious sense) and even though I would consider myself a tech-savvy person, I'm still drawn to CDs. I am getting close to 40 years old, though, so maybe it's different for people who didn't grow up with physical media to begin with.
> 
> I have Spotify in my car and listen to music on a smartphone with fancy wireless earbuds (the stuff of sci-fi, really) but in the evening I like to sit down with some CDs and a cup of tea in my living room


I'm approx two times younger than you and I'm also drawn towards CDs, if I only had the money for them... I have a decent audio system and I do a lot of listening through Primephonic FLAC streaming, thus I think the audio quality doesn't suffer too much. I also buy downloads and occasionally order CDs if there are some rarities I really want to listen to but which are not available through streaming. I'd like the security to be able to touch the CD and know for sure that some developer is not going to take it away from me though.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

What the music world should be figuring out now is how to help musicians, orchestras, venues, management, etc to survive the plague. The world of streaming and CDs is mainly benefiting the big companies. I never hear anything about this in the news. The arts are obviously not a major priority. At least not here in the states.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

I still buy quite a few CDs. They are dirt cheap.

I also buy vinyl.

But the fastest growing part of my music collection, is hi res files. 24/96 and 24/192 PCM, and especially, double rate and quad rate DSD. 

DSD is ridiculously good. Especially when it comes to soundstage and imaging.

I am considering getting a streaming music service, but it certainly won't be Spotify (MP3, seriously?). I am considering Tidal or maybe Qobuz. They both have hi res formats.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

MatthewWeflen said:


> It looks as though there is a fair amount of ambiguity in the law, such as it exists. As such, I would argue that it is a question of what makes ethical sense, until and unless the law is made clear.


The law is pretty clear, or at least as clear at the law ever is - it's the ethics that are murky. I certainly rip and share music, but only items that are long out of print, or not commercially available (e.g. broadcasts) at all. No doubt some of that may be technically illegal.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Well, I'd just like to announce that I've gone and purchased download versions of the box set in question. So I now own a "license" for the digital files.

THANKS FOR THE GUILT TRIP, EVERYONE


----------



## RobertKC (Dec 9, 2013)

I almost exclusively buy Blu-ray audio/video recordings of classical concerts, opera, and ballet. IMO, there's no comparison between the experience of seeing a concert in high-definition video and hearing via hi-res surround-sound, compared with the experience that is delivered via streaming or a CD. During pandemic sequestration, Blu-ray (or Ultra HD Blu-ray) is the next best thing to being in the concert hall.

Here's my thread about Blu-ray: Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts

If Blu-ray isn't available, I'll buy a Pure Audio Blu-ray (i.e., no video) or SACD. Both of these formats feature hi-res surround-sound.

The Redbook CD was introduced to the marketplace almost 40 years ago, and is vintage technology. IMO, CD does NOT deliver state-of-the-art audio sound quality. Modern performances (i.e., last dozen years or so) of classical music are routinely captured, and mastered in hi-res (e.g., 24bit/192kHZ PCM, or hi-res DSD), and delivered to the consumer as a hi-res download, or Ultra HD Blu-ray, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, or SACD.

I hasten to add that older recordings (including LPs) can deliver significant enjoyment, and are of course the only choice for historically significant performances. With that said, if you listen solely to decades old recordings, you're limited to what was state-of-the-art technology decades ago. (In which case CD may be as good as it gets.) Provenance of the recording is extremely important. For decades-old recordings, the quality of the original recording is the ultimate limiting factor for audio quality.

Bottom line - in 2020 - "Cd vs. streaming" is an incomplete list of formats that are available for classical recordings.


----------



## vincula (Jun 23, 2020)

RobertKC said:


> I almost exclusively buy Blu-ray audio/video recordings of classical concerts, opera, and ballet. IMO, there's no comparison between the experience of seeing a concert in high-definition video and hearing via hi-res surround-sound, compared with the experience that is delivered via streaming or a CD. During pandemic sequestration, Blu-ray (or Ultra HD Blu-ray) is the next best thing to being in the concert hall.
> 
> Here's my thread about Blu-ray: Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts
> 
> ...


Very informative post, which adds a few things into the equation.

1) _Listening only vs Listening & seeing/watching_. These are totally different experiences, so imho the 2nd does not "surpass" the 1st. We live in a world populated -I'd say tyrannically dominated- by images, so much that many seem to be almost unable to recreate their own images in their brains. I teach literature for a living and play saxophone too -so that I can cope with teaching , so believe me when I say many of many students simply cannot "see" a character after reading a page. They seem to sport a coat against written words.

2) Audio/Sound: the higher the resolution the better it sounds. This is simply not true, hearing is not subjective, but listening is. Then we must add that recording's not a simple technical affair. Fx. Placing a microphone's almost an art. Many of the new recordings sound incredibly artificial to me. Some say the devil's in the detail -well, to me too much detail's can be hell too.

Yes, I'm biased. Perhaps I enjoy coloration and imperfection. I try to emulate Sahib Shihab when a play the bari. He sounds dirty realistic in those old records I've got. When I listen to many of the new cats coming out of Berklee and straight into the studio, I feel like listening to music while waiting for my turn at the doctor. So clean, so polished, so polished, so perfect: so lifeless.

No pun intended to anyone. Sorry for the rant.

Regards,

Vincula


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

wkasimer said:


> Probably not, although I'd still have plenty...





Simon Moon said:


> I still buy quite a few CDs. They are dirt cheap.
> 
> I also buy vinyl.
> 
> ...


Well, since a long time Spotify is not using MP3, but rather 320kbps Ogg Vorbis.

I have both Tidal and Qobuz, if your primary interest is classical, I would recommend to go for Qobuz. In any case, both services feature a month suscription free of cost, to test.


----------



## Tinker2Evers2Chance (Jul 3, 2020)

Mix of disk and download.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

My understanding was that Spotify's sound was slightly tailored to sound good on phone/earbud combos with a bias towards popular music. I have read a number of people saying they can't hear the difference between the sound from 320 MPS and CD or higher resolution files, if thats how their hearing works fair enough, but if Spotify 'modifys' the sound then surely that can be distinguished.

One other little point, regarding Hi Res files - each system will be limited by the type of file the DAC within the system can handle, don't assume what you use can handle the higher spec' files.


----------



## Guest (Jul 3, 2020)

Malx said:


> My understanding was that Spotify's sound was slightly tailored to sound good on phone/earbud combos with a bias towards popular music. I have read a number of people saying they can't hear the difference between the sound from 320 MPS and CD or higher resolution files, if thats how their hearing works fair enough, but if Spotify 'modifys' the sound then surely that can be distinguished.
> 
> One other little point, regarding Hi Res files - each system will be limited by the type of file the DAC within the system can handle, don't assume what you use can handle the higher spec' files.


Even if one can 'hear the difference', one still has to decide if that difference is a qualitative deterioration. Most of my rips are mp3 at 320. I asked elsewhere about whether I am likely to hear a signficant qualitative improvement if I rip FLACs at 24/192 when listening over decent ear buds...only one TCer responded and he suggested that any difference might be marginal.

True Wireless Bluetooth Earbuds for Classical Music -an Update


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

wkasimer said:


> I believe that's correct. I occasionally rip a CD before getting rid of it, but only if it's an OOP item that I think is unlikely to be reissued.


The law is the law but ethics are more nuanced.

What about when the record company is ripping us off? I'm thinking of the 30 minute CD of Currentzis doing Beethoven 5. It seems to me that marketing policies like that almost invite ripping the disc and then selling it.

Also, when you see a historical recording that was once for sale cheaply but then comes back without remastering at a higher price? The performers are gone. The record company has made good money from the recordings over decades and now they want the next generation to pay extra.


----------



## RobertKC (Dec 9, 2013)

vincula said:


> Very informative post, which adds a few things into the equation.
> 
> 1) _Listening only vs Listening & seeing/watching_. These are totally different experiences, so imho the 2nd does not "surpass" the 1st. We live in a world populated -I'd say tyrannically dominated- by images, so much that many seem to be almost unable to recreate their own images in their brains. I teach literature for a living and play saxophone too -so that I can cope with teaching , so believe me when I say many of many students simply cannot "see" a character after reading a page. They seem to sport a coat against written words.
> 
> ...


Of course, Blu-ray is particularly relevant for visual art forms such as opera and ballet. Blu-ray delivers an additional benefit for opera by displaying the libretto on the HDTV screen. I also enjoy Blu-ray for orchestral concerts, because I can see the conductor, musicians, and concert hall. (IMO, some of the historic European concert halls are beautiful - and if it weren't for Blu-ray I would never have seen them.) I understand this is personal preference - i.e., some people prefer to have the lights off and just listen - even for opera and ballet.

I believe that modern top-quality hi-res recordings have more value for large-scale orchestral music than for relatively small-scale music such as a string quartet (or jazz trio). IME recordings of small-scale music place far less demand on a music reproduction system (including the recording and home playback equipment) compared with large-scale orchestral music and large-scale opera.

If you want to fully experience what hi-res can offer, I suggest comparing your favorite CD (or LP or streaming) of Mahler Symphony 2 with this Blu-ray, when played on a high-quality surround-sound system with subwoofer:


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

MacLeod said:


> Even if one can 'hear the difference', one still has to decide if that difference is a qualitative deterioration. Most of my rips are mp3 at 320. I asked elsewhere about whether I am likely to hear a signficant qualitative improvement if I rip FLACs at 24/192 when listening over decent ear buds...only one TCer responded and he suggested that any difference might be marginal.
> 
> True Wireless Bluetooth Earbuds for Classical Music -an Update


I am that member 

Just to be clear, you can't "rip at 192/24," an audio file must be encoded at that bitrate initially. So, if you took a CD and used Audacity (or something) to encode it at 192/24, it would still only ever be 44/16, you'd just be putting it in a bigger container.

Having listened to the same recording in a variety of (natively encoded) formats, I can say that the difference is real but marginal, and highly dependent on the listener's circumstances, biology and equipment. It is true that, all else being equal (by which I mean recorded in the same hall, with microphones placed expertly, listening over the same equipment, with the same level of attention), a 192/24 recording of a concert is going to sound slightly better than a 44/16. It is also true that a FLAC or WAV rendition of that 44/16 recording, done at, say, 750kbps, is going to sound better than an MP3 of the same recording done at 128kbps. The areas in which I can discern the difference, when I am paying attention and listening over good equipment, are high frequency sounds like cymbals, and in small nuances like room reverberation and sound decay.

But over wireless earbuds via SBC Bluetooth? Nah. You're almost certainly not going to be able to distinguish 320kbps MP3 from CD quality in double blind testing, and anything above that can't be passed over that connection.

The argument, to my mind, for ripping at native resolutions (via FLAC, which stores the data losslessly but in a smaller container than WAV), is flexibility for future use. If you rip it as an MP3, you're never going to get that data back if and when you upgrade your equipment.

This is a fun test you can do online to see if you can tell the difference between various bitrates. But again, you have to have equipment (a decent pair of wired headphones, or LDAC capable wireless headphones) to be sure you can pass the data in its entirety.

https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality

Here's another one I haven't personally tried yet:

https://thenextweb.com/plugged/2018...kills-with-this-blind-test-on-lossless-music/


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

The one question that needs to be asked is how using headphones/buds affect hearing ability. If using downloads and playing over systems, that is one thing and using headphones is another. Caution needs to be used in how loud the music is played because if your hearing is impaired it will not come back. Hearing will naturally decline as one ages but I think using headphones is more of a problem in this regard. My point is that there are a lot of young listeners who have no playback systems so they are exposing their ears to the sounds/pressure of listening daily where if one has a stereo at home, in the car, the music is not presented directly into the ear. Just a thought.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Bigbang said:


> The one question that needs to be asked is how using headphones/buds affect hearing ability. If using downloads and playing over systems, that is one thing and using headphones is another. Caution needs to be used in how loud the music is played because if your hearing is impaired it will not come back. Hearing will naturally decline as one ages but I think using headphones is more of a problem in this regard. My point is that there are a lot of young listeners who have no playback systems so they are exposing their ears to the sounds/pressure of listening daily where if one has a stereo at home, in the car, the music is not presented directly into the ear. Just a thought.


This is a real concern and all listeners should safeguard their hearing.

With that said, in all the reading I've done, the claim that headphones are more damaging at the same volume is never supported, it's always made by some internet rando.

As far as I can see, it's all about dB levels and duration. 80dB measured at the ear is the same whether it comes from 1 inch away or 10 feet.









https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/98-126/pdfs/98-126.pdf

I always listen between 40-50% of the volume my DAP puts out. I've measured it with a smartphone dB app (admittedly not as accurate as a professional meter) at about 50-60 dB. Even if the phone app is off by a significant margin, I don't think it presents a dangerous volume. I also tend to listen to about 2 hours max consecutively, usually more like 1 hour (or album). And classical in particular is marked by extended quiet passages.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

schigolch said:


> Well, since a long time Spotify is not using MP3, but rather 320kbps Ogg Vorbis.


I stand corrected.

Not a big improvement, and definitely inferior to CD.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

Simon Moon said:


> I still buy quite a few CDs. They are dirt cheap.
> 
> I also buy vinyl.
> 
> ...


What's kind of surprising is that I recently bought a CD (redbook) on Amazon and got the "Autorip" version on my Amazon HD streaming service, and the streaming version is 24/192. There are other cases where I have a redbook (16/44.1 stereo) CD but can get the same album on Amazon HD in Ultra HD (usually 24/96 FLAC).


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

I would say subscribe a premium Spotify account and forget any physical media


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

MatthewWeflen said:


> This is a real concern and all listeners should safeguard their hearing.
> 
> With that said, in all the reading I've done, the claim that headphones are more damaging at the same volume is never supported, it's always made by some internet rando.
> 
> ...


One problem is that damaging hearing on purpose would not exactly be ethical so they use guidelines to help. However, to me, it is cumulative based on general exposure over time. By the time you are middle age (and before) the hearing has worsen. I have a hunch that headphones will do more damage than sounds from speakers taking into account the "loudness" level for all activity. Also, consideration has to be given for other exposure as well. One way to self test is awareness of how well you can hear speech following a session. Do you feel that you need a little time for the hearing(that is, the speech discrimination in various situations) to come back?

To be sure it is in everyone best interest to protect their hearing as it will not come back.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

MatthewWeflen said:


> This is a real concern and all listeners should safeguard their hearing.
> 
> With that said, in all the reading I've done, the claim that headphones are more damaging at the same volume is never supported, it's always made by some internet rando.
> 
> ...


.......................................................


----------



## GrosseFugue (Nov 30, 2011)

I confess a nostalgia for CDs. I was probably the last person on earth to make the jump to CDs, sticking with cassettes to the bitter end. I couldn't imagine replacing all my music and at what cost! There then followed several years where I didn't listen to music at all (long story).

Anyway, once I finally made the leap I marveled at what the disc could do. I still marvel. And, look, more than 40 years after its advent they're still making millions of them each year! There is still clearly a desire for the hard copy. And in recent years some companies have been making them more attractive with unique booklets and containers and such. I don't think they are going away. And I like the ritual of pulling one out, making sure it's clean and sticking it in the tray, etc. Similar to what record lovers do.

I have Primephonic streaming at 320 kpbs, and use it all the time, and yet the sheer convenience -- everything at your fingertips! -- changes the _way_ I listen. Use it primarily when I'm out and about through bluetooth headphones. It's like how looking at the news on your phone vs. reading a hard copy New York Times changes how you fix your attention. I doubt I'll ever upgrade to the Hi Res option for that reason. Though I do have a decent DAC and set of cans at home.


----------



## erki (Feb 17, 2020)

Streaming and any other non "physical" media does not have the same pleasing effect on my listening experience. These feel cold and impersonal and I seem to get bored more easy. And I like to look at the artwork - real physical printed artwork. There are albums where I like the artwork so much that I buy the vinyl as well.
The only thing I do not like about CDs is the "jewel cases". I much prefer paper sleeves or books.
And I too have discovered that now is the perfect time to buy and explore music put out on CDs. On my local auction site I get most of these well under 1EUR(usually 10-20cents). So I can buy the stuff I never knew about and throw these out I don't like. In last year or two I have kept at least 200 new CD purchases.
So I navigate towards CDs more than ever before.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Idagio and Primephonic, aside from being classical-oriented and thus infinitely more hassle-free for our purposes than Spotify, have $14.99 per month lossless streaming options for CD quality audio, which I spring for. I'm young and have more important things to spend money on, so I don't have a single CD to my name. But the music collecting craze on TC has me seriously considering seeing if I can procure a CD player and get into this craze.


If you somehow end up on a desert island with no communications infrastructure your streaming will be nixed. You have to get some CDs of your favorite works and store them in a special briefcase that you can grab say if the house is on fire or something. Physical music in hand is worth a hundred works on a streaming service.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

I exclusively use Spotify and YouTube. I feel sorta spoiled living in a day and age where I can just listen to any music, and by that I mean _ANY _ music I want and receive instant gratification. I'm completely removed from the generation where one found out about music through word of mouth or randomly stumbling upon something in a record store. There's certainly gotta be something about that experience you can't replicate.

I definitely would like to find ways to support classical artists more directly. I don't wanna say I "feel bad" for using Spotify (trust me, I don't) but I wish I could contribute financially in a small way when I enjoy this music and the fruits of their labors so much. The thing is, buying used CDs off of Amazon doesn't help either.


----------



## learner (Apr 29, 2021)

wkasimer said:


> The way I use Spotify, I'm reasonably happy with the sound quality. I use Spotify mostly in the office, in the car, and at the gym via Bluetooth earbuds, so the sound is good enough for those occasions. At home, I mostly listen to CD's, because that's where the serious audio equipment resides.
> 
> As for what I buy - I listen via Spotify to new releases when they're available. If I listen once and love it, I buy it. If I listen to it more than a few times, I buy it. If I listen once and realize that I don't really need a 27th copy of such-and-such, I don't.


I do like the way that you approach the selecting of your music. "Spotify", does it have a steaming option for .wav quality listening or Like Deezer's FLAC steaming which is their best offer. ? after your decision to buy the music in CD format, are you wanting to buy the CD that Spotify played or do you search for a better quality recording of that music. If you do; how do you go about finding that better sounding CD or Vinyl.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Since I as well as always listen to music via my stereo in my living room, I prefer CDs, even if I have gradually acquired so many that it is impractical to catalog them. I have to trust my memory. During the last ca. five years I have acquired a number of downloads from Presto Classical - mostly things that are OOP on CD, but I burn them to CDRs. As a rule, I know in advance which CDs I am interested in acquiring, but it happens that I orientate myself by listening to clips before the purchase. I rarely read professional reviews before buying, but it is not uncommon for music forum posters to mention and recommend interesting CDs, which I had not yet spotted. In some cases YT via headphones may be serviceable for things which can't be heard in other ways or which I all the same don't intend to purchase on CD. Other than that I do not use streaming services.


----------



## cybernaut (Feb 6, 2021)

Spotify. I haven't bought a CD in several years.

Well, I did buy an opera cd for my father recently...but I don't buy them for myself.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

learner said:


> I do like the way that you approach the selecting of your music. "Spotify", does it have a steaming option for .wav quality listening or Like Deezer's FLAC steaming which is their best offer. ? after your decision to buy the music in CD format, are you wanting to buy the CD that Spotify played or do you search for a better quality recording of that music. If you do; how do you go about finding that better sounding CD or Vinyl.


I don't believe that Spotify offers lossless streaming.

If I buy a recording that I heard on Spotify, I'm buying the exact same recording.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Rumor has it that Spotify is testing a FLAC option (for extra cost, of course): https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/22/22295273/spotify-hifi-announced-lossless-streaming-hd-quality


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

premont said:


> During the last ca. five years I have acquired a number of downloads from Presto Classical - mostly things that are OOP on CD, but I burn them to CDRs.


I thought I was the only one who did that.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> I exclusively use Spotify and YouTube.


That's me, increasingly YT (the Spotify iMac app sucks, I keep having to clean out the cache). But I have bought some CDs and even LPs - some special box sets which are not available any other way. But my purchasing budget has dropped to a tiny fraction of what it used to be.

Regarding audio quality - not an issue for me. I got into music during the vinyl age - then cassettes; imperfect audio does not faze me.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

No streaming or digital downloading for me, I'm old school. 
Only CDs and, these days to a much lesser extent, LPs.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

SanAntone said:


> Regarding audio quality - not an issue for me. I got into music during the vinyl age - then cassettes; imperfect audio does not faze me.


As to me, I would say that I tolerate a lot of 78 RPM shellac sound and still draw a moderately rewarding experience from it, but I much prefer better sound. Most - if not all - music "plays" with sound effects and the contrast between different sounds. And it should be optimally audible.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

I like CD or (much more frequently these days) downloads for 2 reasons. The first is that I like to own because I don't trust the steaming services not to drop things. The second is to limit choice! I have limited time in this life, so I want to limit my choices and simplify. It's easier to pick from what I own than from everything available on Spotify: less choice.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

You should look into either Qobuz (more oriented to classical) and Tidal (Classical is an afterthought but they do have a very extensive classical library nevertheless) if either service is available in your country.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

premont said:


> As to me, I would say that I tolerate a lot of 78 RPM shellac sound and still draw a moderately rewarding experience from it, but I much prefer better sound. Most - if not all - music "plays" with sound effects and the contrast between different sounds. And it should be optimally audible.


Yeah, but I find streaming audio perfectly adequate.


----------



## cybernaut (Feb 6, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> That's me, increasingly YT (the Spotify iMac app sucks, I keep having to clean out the cache). But I have bought some CDs and even LPs - some special box sets which are not available any other way. But my purchasing budget has dropped to a tiny fraction of what it used to be.
> 
> *Regarding audio quality - not an issue for me. I got into music during the vinyl age - then cassettes; imperfect audio does not faze me.*


Same. I grew up on vinyl and cassettes, so I have zero problem listening to well-encoded aac, mp3 or ogg files. In fact, after hundreds of ABX tests, I have yet to be able to distinguish them from Flacs, even high-res Flacs. Part of that is a testament to how great lossy compression is...part of it is that my ears are 55 years old and my high frequency hearing tapers off at about 11.5kHz.


----------



## cybernaut (Feb 6, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> Yeah, but I find streaming audio perfectly adequate.


Yep. Perfectly adequate for me too.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

I listen to my own music collection as well as Spotify. I have purchased enough CDs in my life; time to put my cashflow into hiking gear; a kayak upgrade, and MAAYYYYYBE start the kids' college funds


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I have a preference for physical media. It's just a nice feeling to hold something and put it in a player for me.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Sonata said:


> I listen to my own music collection as well as Spotify. I have purchased enough CDs in my life; time to put my cashflow into hiking gear; a kayak upgrade, and MAAYYYYYBE start the kids' college funds


Your children will appreciate that, :lol:


----------



## Dulova Harps On (Nov 2, 2018)

I hate Spotify with a passion. I use Primephonic on occasion because I signed up for a promotion four months for only eight dollars. Really enjoying it. I had used Idagio briefly before Primephonic. Other than that its mostly CDs and Youtube my vinyl is in another country currently.


----------



## skroderider (Jun 21, 2020)

I use Spotify for non-classical (read background music while doing chores). I like Primephonic for classical, but again for exploring. I prefer the experience of putting physical media into the system and lying back and listening.


----------



## ando (Apr 18, 2021)

I subscribe to Spotify and YouTubeMusic (for uploads of vinyl unavailable on cd) and still play cds. Nothing like popping in a random disc from one of my classical box sets or a favorite old chestnut on my various equipment while cooking or cleaning.


----------



## perempe (Feb 27, 2014)

A 4TB hard drive is about $100, but You should have a backup or friends.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro (Dec 10, 2017)

I use itunes instead of spotify. Itunes has better quality audio IMO. I can listen to whatever I want when I want. It's easier to discover new composers and quicker. I don't have to order CDs and buy extra equipment.


----------



## Sondersdorf (Aug 5, 2020)

I use Spotify and often it is a miserable experience. Try to look up a specific Haydn string quartet, for example. Often, I have to search four different ways. Then, I may have to put the movements in the right order myself. Then, I get in some weird mode where it will not show me the track I am playing, and, yes, I know the trick of clicking on the track name in the lower-left corner. I run Spotify in a native app for Mac OS X. Often, on a 13-inch Macbook I have to zoom way out to see what is going on.

I know there are services like idagio that are oriented toward classical music, but I am not ready to pitch over access to popular music and I want to pay for only one service. I also want to avoid Youtube whenever and however I can. These days, even if you are still buying music, you need a streaming service for previews. Does anyone have a service they like better than Spotify?


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

Sondersdorf said:


> I use Spotify and often it is a miserable experience. Try to look up a specific Haydn string quartet, for example. Often, I have to search four different ways. Then, I may have to put the movements in the right order myself. Then, I get in some weird mode where it will not show me the track I am playing, and, yes, I know the trick of clicking on the track name in the lower-left corner. I run Spotify in a native app for Mac OS X. Often, on a 13-inch Macbook I have to zoom way out to see what is going on.
> 
> I know there are services like idagio that are oriented toward classical music, but I am not ready to pitch over access to popular music and I want to pay for only one service. I also want to avoid Youtube whenever and however I can. These days, even if you are still buying music, you need a streaming service for previews. Does anyone have a service they like better than Spotify?


Qobuz handles classical music more elegantly than Spotify, although it has been a few years since I have used Spotify, so things may have changed in the meantime. I believe the parent company is French; I am not sure if that would matter to you. They do also offer "high resolution" and non-lossy streaming (i.e. FLAC vs MP3), if that matters.


----------

