# Buying CDs



## Lisztfreak

Since in the past time I have spent a pretty fair amount of my savings money on music, I was wondering how do you people buy new CDs?

How often do you buy? How many recordings at a time?

Do you plan your purchase or just come to the shop and choose on the spot?


----------



## Frasier

Hi!

I buy CDs for various reasons but usually with some forethought. I like modern repertoire which is never represented well so I just have to hope I find what I'm looking for (having noted latest releases from Gramophone Magazine which they hold in the library). Occasionally I go on a recreational spend and come back with something different. 

Our library is rasonable and if I wanted something mainstream I'll see if they have it. I might then buy it - or copy it specially if it's out of print. I don't steal the music, I copy on "CD for AUDIO" as you pay a royalty on each blank just to permit a copy for personal use.

I also record obscure works off a certain UK radio station when I think they are unlikely to appear on CD.

Sadly the internet offers more in my line than our towns so I buy a few on-line - but only if I know the work or artists or specific recording. If I need more info I ask around, ask the library to get it, visit a shop. Online shops are ok but often omit details you like to know like the date of the recording (rather than the date the CD was released). But I find online browsing a pain. 
Sometimes I have no choice - only one version is available. 

I buy less now than, say, five years ago. Probably two titles/sets per month now, including operatic DVDs.

Edit: My latest was bought online and arrived this morning - CD reissues of the Fine Arts Q playing the Bartok Quartets (which I knew from the LPs). I can't think I'd find these locally and a shop would take ages to get them.


----------



## opus67

I've been averaging somewhere between 1 and 2 CDs a month (starting from May '06). I usually have something in mind before the purchase, and since rarely anyone buys (western) classical, I can assure myself that a CD I saw two months ago would still be there. I do read reviews at a few places online before deciding, but there have been times where I picked up CDs "at random." Also, for now, I stick to just a handful of composers, but then, I do spend a good part of an hour browsing the CDs over and over again.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Basic economics is the reconciliation of our unlimited wants to our limited means. I address the issue via the following: 1) I've learned to take special pains to avoid impulse purchases. I go off the wagon every now and then, but I pretty much stick to the plan. 2) I stay away from duplicate versions of the same work, unless I'm so crazy about the piece that I'm motivated to buy a study score. 3) I'm not afraid to let pricing influence my decisions. I'll buy a "B+/A-" version of a work for half the price of a "Diamonded, Rosetted, Key recording" of the same piece. I look at it this way- buying the latter takes away from your ability to pick up other, yet to be discovered masterpieces.
So summing up, I say "plan-when-you-can." Budget, because (eventually) you'll have to.


----------



## Guest

At the shop, I listen many excerpts and choose among the CDs that have good appreciation.


----------



## Lark Ascending

If I hear something I like when listening to Radio 3 I make a note of the piece and its composer and purchase a CD from the HMV stores at either Oxford Circus or Bond Street whenever I visit London to see concerts. As was stated in another thread, they both have excellent classical music sections. I made sure to visit them last Friday before I attended a concert at Cadogan Hall and bought a couple of Vaughan Williams CDs (various works) and one of Ravel violin sonatas. The classical music section in the Virgin where I live (Peterborough) is poorly stocked, so it's good for me that London is but an hour's train journey away.


----------



## Krummhorn

I subscribe to _Rhapsody_ [streaming online access] and listen to various recordings, and use that as a guide for my purchases. Before y'all get your hopes up, Rhapsody is [presently] only available in the US, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia and in Palau.

At other times, when going to bookstores, I will browse through the collections, and if something interests me, I'll get it there. My collection is gaining in size, so it has become necessary to keep a list of my current library so that I don't wind up with multiple copies of the same thing.

I routinely rip a newly acquired CD and burn a working copy for my own personal use. Eventually, I'll get an iPOD unit to interface with the radio in my car, but until then, the present system works for me.


----------



## cato

Great Question!  

I usually buy 1 to 6 classical and opera cds a month, depending on price and if they are single cds, or box sets.

I buy from one small independant music store (that's about to go out of biz.  ) and the two major book/cd stores in my city: Borders, and Barnes & Noble. Many times, I have to special order what I want, because they do not normaly stock it.

I also shop at used cd/book stores for used cds, many of whom are out of print.

The way I look at it, buying and collecting classical/opera cds is a way to stem the tide of them going out of print. They are dissapearing at an alarming rate, so I buy and collect as many as I can.


----------



## Guest

I just about have enough CDs now, been collecting since buying my first CD Player 1988/89, I always brought from a dedicated Music shop, and being a Hi Fi nut go only for the best available, how ever, having at long last connected to net via Broad Band I am exploring downloads, it is great fun and much better audio than I had expected, but not for serious listening.
I still buy about 4-6/mth and from regular shops.


----------



## Frasier

I have yet to jump on the download bandwagon. I'm also a hi-fi buff and have examined a few downloads to find they contain all manner of distortions from clipping to normalising and components such as transients lost in MP3 encoding even at 256. 

Agreed at 256 the sound is adequate for on-the-move listening marred by ambient noise anyway but for room listening its faults start to notice. 

More of a problem is the meagre repertoire of the sort I like available for download. It hardly qualifies for the charts so I'm forced to get CDs or record from the radio. Radio may be less than perfect but it's a question of whether I'd like to have a recording or not. 

Trouble is, there is SO much perfectly good music about but just the smallest amount is promoted.


----------



## zlya

Am I the only one who borrows cds from the library? I treat music a bit like books: if I fall absolutely in love with something, I'll buy it, but for casual listening/reading I'm happy to borrow.


----------



## Frasier

Did Mango just delete his/her own post right then? I was about to answer it. Never mind. Let's say you don't get high quality classical downloads as a rule. You need to know where and who and the repertoire is hopelessly narrow!


----------



## Guest

Frasier said:


> Did Mango just delete his/her own post right then? I was about to answer it. Never mind. Let's say you don't get high quality classical downloads as a rule. You need to know where and who and the repertoire is hopelessly narrow!


What is your point in responding to posts that don't exist?

I did make a short - and very temporary - post querying your assertion that there is much classical material available for download at 256 kps. But then I deleted it because I anticipated that it would probably simply draw yet more of your ill-informed comment.

If you think that 256 kbps gives poor sound, perhaps you should debate this with Mr Corkin who is on record as saying that all he needs is 64 kbps (heaven forbid!).

And BTW, I am a "her" so please cut out your continued nonsense with "his/her", or I will immediately start questioning your genetic structure. OK?


----------



## Frasier

Mango said:


> What is your point in responding to posts that don't exist?
> 
> I did make a short - and very temporary - post querying your assertion that there is much classical material available for download at 256 kps.........


Where did I say that? I definitely haven't erased it from a post so please inform me where. Thank you.


> But then I deleted it because I anticipated that it would probably simply draw yet more of your ill-informed comment.


I recall you asked a question, a comment wasn't invited, ill-informed or otherwise.



> If you think that 256 kbps gives poor sound, perhaps you should debate this with Mr Corkin who is on record as saying that all he needs is 64 kbps (heaven forbid!).


.Again, where did I say that? A few posts up, I said "Agreed at 256 the sound is adequate for on-the-move listening marred by ambient noise anyway but for room listening its faults start to notice." Yes? So I said it was adequate, not poor



> And BTW, I am a "her" so please cut out your continued nonsense with "his/her", or I will immediately start questioning your genetic structure. OK?


hehehe! Well, I've questioned yours so you're perfectly welcome.

Mango, it would help if you could read my/others' posts and not infer things that aren't there. Please use the quote /quote tags around the text in question to save unnecessary debate. You frequently misquote me/others, giving rise to debates about the post itself, not the subject. Thanks if you can do that. And I have had a bit to do with audio engineering so I'm probably adequately informed in that area.


----------



## Guest

Frasier said:


> And I have had *a bit *to do with audio engineering so I'm probably adequately informed in that area.


Taking your advice to quote your actual words, thank you for telling me you have *"a bit"* of audio knowledge. It now makes sense.

Anyone with any real knowldege of audio matters, and sound compression technology, will tell you that:

(i) At 128 kbps (the norm for most download) you get borderline hi-fi for home equipment.

(ii) At 160 kbps it needs pretty good equipment to notice any big problems.

(iii) At 192kbps, most people would struggle to distinguish between that and the full bandwith of a CD on budget home hi-fi (pp to about £1000).

(iv) At 256 kbps, it would need some higher-end equipment (costing well over £1000) to notice much of a difference between that and a CD.

(v) The highest rate at which many people rip CDs is 320 kbps, and even that's on the safe side.

(vi) Top class car radio/MP3 manufacturers recommend no more than 256 kbps, with 192 kbps being perfectly satisfactory. Mine's a high-end Bose system in my car and MP3 sounds fine at 192 kbps. On my home system I use 256 kbps and I can't tell the diference between that and a CD.

(vii) The BBC's best digital transmission rate on Radio 3 is 192 kbps.​
Thus I think you are completely wrong.


----------



## Guest

Frasier said:


> Mango said:
> 
> 
> 
> And BTW, I am a "her" so please cut out your continued nonsense with "his/her", or I will immediately start questioning your genetic structure. OK?
> 
> 
> 
> hehehe! Well, I've questioned yours so you're perfectly welcome.
Click to expand...

And you wonder why so many of your posts are deleted, making sexist remarks like this. You are almost as bad as Corkin, suggesting I should go and "get laid". This too was deleted earlier.

You just can't stop the baiting can you?

I won't respond any further for the time being. I will simply leave this here for others to see what unpleasant rubbish you write.


----------



## Rod Corkin

Frasier said:


> Mango, it would help if you could read my/others' posts and not infer things that aren't there. Please use the quote /quote tags around the text in question to save unnecessary debate. You frequently misquote me/others, giving rise to debates about the post itself, not the subject. Thanks if you can do that. And I have had a bit to do with audio engineering so I'm probably adequately informed in that area.


For the record I must interject to qualify a remark of mine quoted, as usual, out of context by Mango. I stated that 64 kbph WMA is more than adequate, for me at least, *when used solely for playback on in-ear headphones*. I tested this myself in comparison with higher resolutions. Also I mentioned my Samsung DAP has some excellent sound enhancement features which I haven't seen on any other brand. I don't record in mp3 format, to my ears WMA has greater transparency, especially at lower resolutions.

PS also for the record Mango is in my ignore list so nobody can blame me if things get out of hand in any topic from now on!!


----------



## Frasier

Mango said:


> Taking your advice to quote your actual words, thank you for telling me you have *"a bit"* of audio knowledge. It now makes sense.


I was being unassuming as this isn't the hi-fi-forum. Perhaps there, not here, you could outline your credentials/experience? I shall watch for your response there [edit]where we can discuss the fine details if you like.



Mango said:


> (compressed)(i) At 128 kbps (the norm for most download) you get borderline hi-fi for home equipment.
> (ii) At 160 kbps it needs pretty good equipment to notice any big problems.
> (iii) At 192kbps, most people would struggle to distinguish between that and the full bandwith of a CD on budget home hi-fi (pp to about £1000).
> (iv) At 256 kbps, it would need some higher-end equipment (costing well over £1000) to notice much of a difference between that and a CD*.**
> (v) The highest rate at which many people rip CDs is 320 kbps, and even that's on the safe side.
> (vi) Top class car radio/MP3 manufacturers recommend no more than 256 kbps, with 192 kbps being perfectly satisfactory. Mine's a high-end Bose system in my car and MP3 sounds fine at 192 kbps. On my home system I use 256 kbps and I can't tell the diference between that and a CD.
> (vii) The BBC's best digital transmission rate on Radio 3 is 192 kbps.
> 
> Thus I think you are completely wrong.


I haven't disputed any of your statements so kindly stop prevaricating. As for the definition of "hi-fi" this will always be the subject of debate.

*There's still a difference.

Now, could we get back to buying CDs?


----------



## Guest

> Perhaps there, not here, you could outline your credentials/experience? I shall watch for your response there.
> 
> ....
> 
> I haven't disputed any of your statements so kindly stop prevaricating. As for the definition of "hi-fi" this will always be the subject of debate.


Naughty, *Frasier*, you are being harrassing again in your first quote above.

Thanks for not disputing any of my statements. You know they make sense. In total they make your earlier comments look rather feeble, don't they?


----------



## Guest

Rod Corkin said:


> For the record I must interject to qualify a remark of mine quoted, as usual, out of context by Mango. I stated that *64 kbph *WMA is more than adequate, for me at least, *when used solely for playback on in-ear headphones*. I tested this myself in comparison with higher resolutions. Also I mentioned my Samsung DAP has some excellent sound enhancement features which I haven't seen on any other brand. I don't record in mp3 format, to my ears WMA has greater transparency, especially at lower resolutions.
> 
> PS also for the record Mango is in my ignore list so nobody can blame me if things get out of hand in any topic from now on!!


Good day to you, *Mr Corkin*.

I see that you listen to your Samsung at *64 kbph *(sic). Are you sure? What strange format is this? Does it work especially well on forte pianos, or just tinny old ancient instrument ensembles you keep flogging here.

I hope you won't mind if I stick to 192 kbps, and the likes of Klemperer conducting the Philharmonia, and the Quarteto Italiano. I'm just old-fashioned I guess, but these sound a great deal better to me.

I am so sorry to hear I'm not in your "buddy" list any more. What have I done?


----------



## ChamberNut

I tend to make "binge purchases" of CD's  

I can go 3 or 4 months without buying a CD, but then I go on a little spree and purchase usually 1/2 a dozen or more at the same time. Because of very poor selection of CD's in the "classical" section (some don't even have one:angry: )of the music stores in my city, I tend to make the majority of my purchases through on-line stores like Barnes & Noble and Amazon.

The HMV store is probably the best store for an almost adequate section and selection of classical music. And because classical music isn't that "popular", they do have some good deals at times, where you can get 3 or 1 CD's, etc.


----------



## Frasier

Re; Mango's previous post:
Haha! I like it. No harrassment intended, incidentally. You questioned the quality of my knowledge of audio engineering then had the cheek to spell out something pretty obvious to most people. Your tabulation adds nothing we didn't know already. So I wondered what your background in audio engineering amounted to. 
You've answered my question.

= = = = =
As for buying CDs, I've just ordered a couple of Lyrita reissues - Gordon Jacob's Symphonies 1 & 2 and Holbrook's The Birds of Rhiannon.


----------



## Guest

zlya said:


> Am I the only one who borrows cds from the library? .


You are not the only one who borrows CD. I do the same. I think It is very practical, and a very good way to discover unknown composers. Every week I try at least 2 composers I don't know. I am sometimes disappointed, but as I never buy it, I don't care…


----------



## ChamberNut

Alnitak said:


> You are not the only one who borrows CD. I do the same. I think It is very practical, and a very good way to discover unknown composers. Every week I try at least 2 composers I don't know. I am sometimes disappointed, but as I never buy it, I don't care…


Hmm, this sounds like a wise idea. I may start to do this soon.


----------



## Lisztfreak

Borrowing CDs from the library? An interesting thing. Never seen any CDs in a library here where I live, so I cannot experience it.


----------



## Guest

ChamberNut said:


> I tend to make "binge purchases" of CD's
> 
> The HMV store is probably the best store for an almost adequate section and selection of classical music. And because classical music isn't that "popular", they do have some good deals at times, where you can get 3 or 1 CD's, etc.


The last lot of CDs I bought from an HMV store were all mis-labeled. I can't recall them all but one was supposed to be Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Ehibition; it turned out to be Emma Kirkby singing some old English songs by William Byrd. Maybe if I could get my hands on a 64 kpbh Samsung player I wouldn't have noticed the difference. Who knows?


----------



## Guest

Frasier said:


> Re; Mango's previous post:
> Haha! I like it.


Thank you. Only too pleased to set you straight.

It might be best, though, if you try to be a bit more careful in future. The general tone of your earlier remarks was to be dismissive of the quality of download material for anyone interested in hi-fi. You suggested that it is only satisfactory for on-the-move cheapo MP3 players, of the sort Mr Corkin swears by.

As I have pointed out, on this matter you are wrong and now you say you agree.


----------



## Frasier

ChamberNut said:


> I tend to make "binge purchases" of CD's
> 
> I can go 3 or 4 months without buying a CD, but then I go on a little spree and purchase usually 1/2 a dozen or more at the same time. Because of very poor selection of CD's in the "classical" section (some don't even have one:angry: )of the music stores in my city, I tend to make the majority of my purchases through on-line stores like Barnes & Noble and Amazon.
> 
> The HMV store is probably the best store for an almost adequate section and selection of classical music. And because classical music isn't that "popular", they do have some good deals at times, where you can get 3 or 1 CD's, etc.


HMV Oxford Street is probably the most comprehensive in europe. I try to buy something there occasionally to support their efforts. I don't know how long they'll last now they're changing hands. Tower's had a shop at Piccadilly Circus but sold out to virgin. They had a good range. Their jazz section was probably better than HMV as they could get their hands on Japanese reissues of western material, the Japanese TOCCP and TOCCJ issues were always well ahead of the european releases.


----------



## Frasier

Mango said:


> Thank you. Only too pleased to set you straight.
> 
> It might be best, though, if you try to be a bit more careful in future. The general tone of your earlier remarks was to be dismissive of the quality of download material for anyone interested in hi-fi. You suggested that it is only satisfactory for on-the-move cheapo MP3 players, of the sort Mr Corkin swears by.
> 
> As I have pointed out, on this matter you are wrong and now you say you agree.


You really are a prevaricator! How can I be wrong? You're saying that MP3 or any other of the MPEG 1 codecs, or AAC *ARE* _*hi-fi?*_

Hahaha! Ok.

But I certainly didn't agree with that. Please read what I said - I have asked you to quote me with the quote /quote tags but you won't because you can't. If you can't read it accurately, please ask someone to read it out for you. Thanks.

[edit] I've already invited you to take up a discussion of audio in the hi-fi sub-forum of this one - please do so and stop diverting this thread. Once more, thanks.

I'll leave you to have the last word on this diversion.


----------



## Guest

Frasier said:


> You really are a prevaricator!
> 
> ...
> 
> I'll leave you to have the last word on this diversion.


No I'm not. I'm simply querying your bogus assertions about the quality of download music material at 256 kbps.

I have just done a quick Internet search and found several sites where researchers have concluded that MP3 at 192 kbps is very good indeed. It is virtually indistinguishable from HiFi at 256 kpbs. Here are the conclusions of one study selected at random:

_"Conclusions

All in all, I was impressed by the quality of MP3's vs CD. Unlike the preconceived notions I had when I set out to do these tests, the 192Kbps MP3 was indeed "near CD quality." The degradation was indeed subtle, but noticeable. It is my belief, however, that on the HiFi setup the 192Kbps MP3 is more fatiguing to the ears during extended listening. Surprisingly, 256Kbps and 320Kbps MP3 were virtually indistinguishable by my ears from the CD, except for a light boost in the upper midrange and treble.

So what does this all mean? My feeling is that 192Kbps MP3 is more than adequate for listening with a computer or in a car. The distortion and lousy frequency response of the systems themselves (as well as the high ambient noise in a car) make the 192Kbps MP3 sound so similar to the original CD that the advantage of the smaller storage requirements of the MP3 far outweigh the sonic benefits of the CD. It's nice to have 5-6 audio CD's worth of music on a single MP3 CD - almost like having a CD changer in your hands. On the other hand, for critical listening on a HiFi, I feel that 256Kbps is the best bitrate to use, because it sounds significantly better than 192Kbps. Since I couldn't hear any improvement at all when going to up to 320Kbps, I don't recommend going this high for the simple reason that the file sizes are significantly larger.

MP3's ripped with BladeENC sound far better than I expected, and I believe that most listeners (except neurotic audiophiles those with extremely expensive equipment who claim that $800/meter speaker cables sound significantly better than my cheap but high quality 12 gauge stranded copper cables) would find that the difference in audio quality between the original CD's and 256Kbps MP3 is insignificant".​_The source is:

http://www.lincomatic.com/mp3/mp3quality.html


----------



## Guest

*Frasier*

Further to my post immediately above, I have just spotted the following additional information in the same article quoted above:

"*Update 2006-05-19*

_It has been a number of years since I wrote this article. In the interim, the LAME MP3 encoder has undergone many improvements, while BladeEnc has been widely discredited. Currently, I favor VBR (variable bit rate) encoding, which gives you better sound quality vs size, because the encoder dynamically adjusts the bitrate. I'm following the recommendations from HydrogenAudio, using LAME 3.97b2, and am very happy the results. I've found the High Quality settings (-V 2 --vbr-new) - ~190kbps - to provide sufficent quality that I find CD's burned from the output to be sonically indistinguishable from the originals." _​
To the less techically qualified, this is saying that MP3 at 190 kbps (variable rate) using a more recent version of the sound encoder produces CD quality results - "_output ...sonically indistinguishable from the originals_".

I think this demolishes your arguments completely, and I await your apology for creating such a fuss and confusion, and for wrongly accusing me of prevarication.

Thank you so much.


----------



## Guest

True Hi Fi requires something a little better than an all in one box at £1000-£2000. 
If new you would need to spend somewhere in the region of £6000 at least. You do need separates. I have a radio channel via SKY and the drop in quality compared to normal FM is easily noticeable, while some of my down loads are not unpleasant they do not get anyway near even the bottom rung of the Hi Fi ladder.

Further to that I understand that the manufactures are compressing CDs even more to day, some one in the trade may be able to comment on that.


----------



## Guest

Andante said:


> True Hi Fi requires something a little better than an all in one box at £1000-£2000.
> If new you would need to spend somewhere in the region of £6000 at least. You do need separates.


There aren't many all- in boxes costing £1000-2000.

And "£6000 at least" is very clearly a great deal more than £1000-2000.

To get decent hi-fi for a normal domestic situation, you don't need to spend as much as £6000. That's professional level kit for studio work etc.

A very decent amp, cd player, speakers, cable and interconnect would cost about £2000-2500. Obviously you can spend a lot more but the gains are marginal for a typical domestic situation. You can spend a lot less and the sound quality losses are not great.


----------



## Guest

As I can’t afford good speakers, I use headphones. With 100€, I have the quality of speakers costing more than 3 000€...


----------



## Frasier

Andante said:


> True Hi Fi requires something a little better than an all in one box at £1000-£2000.


Possibly all the electronics could be put into one box but it would be bulky and very heavy if you use toroidal transformers! I wouldn't like to see the D/A in the same box, and the CD chassis and turntable if you have one, need to be isolated from amplification and speakers.



> Further to that I understand that the manufactures are compressing CDs even more to day, some one in the trade may be able to comment on that.


The frame or file format of a CD allows no compression. It simply digitises audio - any compression is done in the audio beforehand (and doesn't thus concern the CD data). Compression is always applied to pop music - the level/gain is (usually electronically) set to bang the ceiling the whole time. There is almost no dynamic variation on most modern pop music even if it sounds like there is!

Compression in classical music happens much less now than in the days of the LP. Engineers used it on the dynamics: raising the quieter passages and softening the louder, simply to cope with the limitations of LPs which had a narrow dynamic range compared to CDs/live music. The engineers also had to produce LPs that sounded ok on modest record players... which meant that hi-fi enthusiasts had to put up with some awful noises! Once the audiophile market got under way things improved but at a price.

Cassette tapes used a type of compression called pre-emphasis on the higher frequencies (under the banner Dolby B & C) just to push the higher and more obtrusive noise band down a little during playback whereon the same frequencies were de-emphasised.

So be assured that if compression happens, it's in the audio before CD preparation/mastering. If you were thinking of maximum playing time, that's a different issue. The Standards stipulated 74 minutes but by cheating some engineers have squeezed on almost 90 minutes.


----------



## Lisztfreak

So how many CDs do you have in your collection? I mean the original, purchased ones, and not counting the 2 or more CD packs as multiple CDs.

I've been interested in classical music for a mere year and a half, so I can today count just 88 CDs. But in a year and a half... too much money spent, friends, too much.


----------



## ChamberNut

Lisztfreak said:


> I've been interested in classical music for a mere year and a half, so I can today count just 88 CDs. But in a year and a half... *too much money spent*, friends, too much.


I hear you Lisztfreak.......but it's money very well spent  Over 3 years, I've amassed about the same amount of CD's as you have, I would say......If you count multiple CD's, it's likely over 200.


----------



## Frasier

Just a rough count - 350 in one rack, 120 in the other so...470 including popular, collected over about 20 years, so about 25/year allowing for a few sold off. They're mostly works outside the well-trodden repertoire. 

I also have about 80 private CDs, some made at concert rehearsals, legitimately I should say!


----------



## Guest

I prefer not to count. 200, may be 300…
The CDs was available on the market in late 1982, and I bought my firsts in the 1990’s. 
I have still many vinyl discs, perhaps 70 or 80. But I still believe that the sound was not so bad, and I have a great pleasure to re-listen them. BTW, nobody can contest that these vinyls are all originals!


----------



## opus67

17 (with 3 2CD sets)
I don't think I have spent so much in such a short time before, and I never thought I would be someone interested in purchasing music CDs in the first place.


----------



## Guest

Frasier said:


> Andante said:
> 
> 
> 
> True Hi Fi requires something a little better than an all in one box at £1000-£2000.
> 
> 
> 
> Possibly all the electronics could be put into one box but it would be bulky and very heavy if you use toroidal transformers! I wouldn't like to see the D/A in the same box, and the CD chassis and turntable if you have one, need to be isolated from amplification and speakers.
Click to expand...

I think you may possibly have misundestood the point that Andante was making. I interpreted his reference to an "all in one box at £1000-£2000" as referring to kit like an _Arcam Solo _, which combines amp/tuner/cd player in one unit. But at this price it's an up-market product and clearly offers hi-fi.

On the other hand, he may have been referring to a box costing NZ$ 1000-2000, in which case it's obviously a piece of budget kit, (eg _Teac_ and _Onkyo_ offerings) and I would agree with his comment.

Also you haven't picked up on Andante's opinion that a budget of £6000-7000 is required to get hi-fi. I presume you would not agree,

As for his reference to a trend towards increasing "compression" of CDs, I think he means the squeezing-in of more lines, as the following extract from Wikipedia, with reference to CD technology, makes clear:

_The program area is 86.05 cm² and the length of the recordable spiral is 86.05 cm² / 1.6 μm = 5.38 km. With a scanning speed of 1.2 m/s, the playing time is 74 minutes, or around 650 MB of data on a CD-ROM. If the disc diameter were only 115 mm, the maximum playing time would have been 68 minutes, i.e. six minutes less. A disc with data packed slightly more densely is tolerated by most players (though some old ones fail). Using a linear velocity of 1.2 m/s and a track pitch of 1.5 μm leads to a playing time of 80 minutes, or a capacity of 700 MB. Even higher capacities on non-standard discs (*up to 99 minutes*) are available at least as recordables, but generally the tighter the tracks are squeezed the worse the compatibility_​.


----------



## Guest

My original amounts for entry level Hi Fi were converted from NZ$ to English£. approx 3 to 1.
It really boils down to what standard you want [not afford] We had a local Hi Fi group some years ago and my set up was the the most basic, it was and is good, but when you hear a quality system then the difference is very noticeable, of course it works on the tried and proven system of diminishing returns


----------



## JohnM

Lisztfreak said:


> Since in the past time I have spent a pretty fair amount of my savings money on music, I was wondering how do you people buy new CDs?
> 
> How often do you buy? How many recordings at a time?
> 
> Do you plan your purchase or just come to the shop and choose on the spot?


I've averaged 1.2 every week for the last 20 years

It's almost always planned - because one work always invites comparison with another!


----------



## opus67

JohnM said:


> I've averaged 1.2 every week for the last 20 years


I'm guessing you have at least 3 different versions of every Beethoven symphony.


----------



## Guest

opus67 said:


> I'm guessing you have at least 3 different versions of every Beethoven symphony.


And even then it would only constitute 2% of the total.

It would be interesting to learn how much duplication exists in such large collections, and how much material never ever gets played.


----------



## opus67

Mango said:


> And even then it would only constitute 2% of the total.
> 
> It would be interesting to learn how much duplication exists in such large collections, and how much material never ever gets played.


There is a short article sort of thing on the "seven stages in the life of a CD collector." It's from classicstoday.com and was posted here a few months ago. It's fun to read. I'll try to hunt it down.

EDIT: Finding it wasn't tough. Here it is: http://www.talkclassical.com/1268-collectors-life.html 

I'd like to know which phase the members of TC are in.  I'm still in phase 1.


----------



## Guest

opus67 said:


> There is a short article sort of thing on the "seven stages in the life of a CD collector." It's from classicstoday.com and was posted here a few months ago. It's fun to read. I'll try to hunt it down.
> 
> EDIT: Finding it wasn't tough. Here it is: http://www.talkclassical.com/1268-collectors-life.html
> 
> I'd like to know which phase the members of TC are in.  I'm still in phase 1.


This one's been doing the rounds for ages.


----------



## JohnM

Mango said:


> And even then it would only constitute 2% of the total.
> 
> It would be interesting to learn how much duplication exists in such large collections, and how much material never ever gets played.


I have an answer for both Ous67 and Mango.

Opus67 - you're right, I have 5 versions of each Beethoven symphony. Some are very different from each other; most aren't, however. 

Mango - you're also right, this is a major problem. Not least because before I was buying CDs I was buying LPs too! A long time ago I discovered that there were indeed records and CDs that I never got round to hearing, so I decided that drastic action was necessary - either a) I had to stop buying music eek: ) b) operate a one-in-one-out policy when buying music ( ) or c) implement a system of listening by rota so that everything gets a listen.

I chose c. 

I play all my music in a strict rotational basis. It took a while to get used to the idea but once I did it works well (for me, anyway). I get to listen to my whole collection just under once a year - so I get the added advantage of nothing becoming over-familiar or boring.

If I find that I'm not enjoying a disc when it comes round then I ditch it from my collection!


----------



## Guest

JohnM said:


> I play all my music in a strict rotational basis. It took a while to get used to the idea but once I did it works well (for me, anyway). I get to listen to my whole collection just under once a year - so I get the added advantage of nothing becoming over-familiar or boring.
> 
> If I find that I'm not enjoying a disc when it comes round then I ditch it from my collection!


And who are your favourite composers? Has the order changed much over the past 20 years? I bet it has.


----------



## JohnM

Yes it definitely has, but the order of my rota system hasn't varied much at all. That's how everything gets a listen - because everything gets its' own turn. The particular order doesn't matter so long as it is adhered to. The idea works better in practice than it sounds.

If that sounds predictable it isn't - I find that when you're talking about working through 1600ish albums you'd be amazed just how much sounds fresh and new when you only get to hear it once every 14 months.


----------



## Stravinsky

I used to buy my CDs from the local CD shop. They were very friendly and had a large section of classical music. But now they have shut down, like so many of those small independent shops. It's really depressing but how can they compete against the giants, right? Well, fact is that as a serious collector, service and a personal link are important to me. And I don't really want MP3s to subsitute a CD with a cover and a booklet to read!!

I turned to the internet and purchased CDs from all the big ones such as Amazon. But it's impersonal and hard to get a complete overview - there's so much around! Over the years I've become friends with the guys who run an online CD shop which I can recommend. I bought a wonderful set of Bruckner symphonies there once. Check them out, they specialize in classical music CDs with many rare (even autographed) collector's items:
http://stores.ebay.com/opus8music

If you hear of any other sources please let me know!

All the best,
Igor


----------



## Vaneyes

Stravinsky said:


> *I used to buy my CDs from the local CD shop. They were very friendly and had a large section of classical music. But now they have shut down, like so many of those small independent shops. *It's really depressing but how can they compete against the giants, right? Well, fact is that as a serious collector, service and a personal link are important to me. And I don't really want MP3s to subsitute a CD with a cover and a booklet to read!!
> 
> I turned to the internet and purchased CDs from all the big ones such as Amazon. But it's impersonal and hard to get a complete overview - there's so much around! Over the years I've become friends with the guys who run an online CD shop which I can recommend. I bought a wonderful set of Bruckner symphonies there once. Check them out, they specialize in classical music CDs with many rare (even autographed) collector's items:
> http://stores.ebay.com/opus8music
> 
> If you hear of any other sources please let me know!
> 
> All the best,
> Igor


And you wrote that 5 years ago, Igor. Lots of twists and turns since then. Another indy that tried to hang on, bit the dust recently in Bath, England.

Even big boy chains went. Tower, Virgin, Ricordi, all gone. Some smaller regional efforts remain, such as Amoeba in California, and Groupe Archambault in Quebec.

Related:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/apr/03/amoeba-music-record-store-marc-weinstein

http://www.archambault.ca/classical-ACH400005000000-en-ct


----------



## Granate

*OP:*



Lisztfreak said:


> Since in the past time I have spent a pretty fair amount of my savings money on music, I was wondering how do you people buy new CDs?
> 
> How often do you buy? How many recordings at a time?
> 
> Do you plan your purchase or just come to the shop and choose on the spot?


I managed to find a Thread in the RM&P section that talked about my issue.

I don't know if I have healthy purchase methods, and my parents don't ever complain, but recently I've had serious dilemmas about what to buy and whether I was doing right for my future as a collector.

Of my CD collection, only the 2014 Warner Karajan 101cds set, my two Wagner _rings_ (Keilberth 53 & Böhm 66/67 from Bayreuth) and the 1951 Knappertsbusch _Parsifal_ have been *blind purchases,* I mean, I got them without trying them first. The rest of my growing collection is made of works and recordings I have already listened to and compared before purchasing.

My purchase strategy since January has been to get my favourite Verdi opera recordings on CD. I've gotten individually an _Aida_, _Don Carlo_, 2 _Otellos_ and then a _Nabucco_, and a _Macbeth_ and _Simon Boccanegra_ are coming. If I add that to all the Verdi studio recordings that Callas made, included on the 2014 box I got as a bargain, makes my Verdi collection almost complete.

My Wagner collection has the two _rings_ I'm very satisfied with, a Kna Parsifal I would like to give away in exchange for a better one (BFO 52 imo) and a Barenboim _Tristan und Isolde_ I love (although I'd love to get almost 4 more recordings). Although I'd like to have the rest of the Wagner works except _Die Meistersinger_, those ones are my favourites and I would often go to them for a listen.

And then the problem comes in my favourite composer: Anton Bruckner. I've tested his discography quite enough to make a list of Symphony cycles I love but are very different one from the other, not to mention the versions used.

I've now managed to get a partial collection of Bruckner with the Wiener Philharmoniker (6-9), a set of first versions (Young Hamburg) and a set of pre-Nowak editions (Jochum DG). I'll do a small Bruckner challenge with my favourites too but I've recently been tempted with purchases that I wasn't sure about.

Two weeks ago, I was lurking the two Konwitschny Wagner recordings he made for Electrola. The _Tannhäuser_ was one of my favourites in stereo (favourite Dresden), but I would also like to have a stereo _Parsifal_, the Cluytens _Lohengrin_, the Dohnányi _Holländer,_ etc. I had so many doubts I didn't press buy at anything, because my current challenges ignores the CD collection that I talk about and which I barely give a listen because of being curious.

And yesterday, I had a bigger dilemma. I found that the Barenboim Chicago Bruckner cycle (which I had liked quite much in a second listen) and the Celibidache Munich EMI Bruckner cycle were on sale (27€ for Bareboim and 25€ for Celibidache). I would have loved to get them if it had been months ago, but I thought that with the collection I had, I was very satisfied with my Vienna and Hamburg sets and would mainly use Celibidache for Symphonies 4 & 5. I could have purchased the distinct Barenboim cycle but I had a lot of remorse since I have only played three recordings of the Jochum CD set and I was a bit disappointed with the experience (unlike my first listen). I became afraid of buying more Bruckner sets that I wouldn't use enough.

Then I made two purchases of works I didn't own yet: the Abbado _Simon Boccanegra_ and a used Haydn Creation by Doráti. Altogether they could cost as much as the Celibidache Bruckner cycle, with only 4 cds instead of 12.

I still have that remorse because I'm letting two excellent offers of Bruckner cycles I'd love to own go. But I have two new works too...

How did you plan your CD purchases? Do you think you have wasted money or let go some offers?


----------



## ClassicalListener

My frustration with collecting CDs today is that it seems every Deutsche Grammophon, Decca, EMI and Philips release is going out of print. All Fricsay individual releases are virtually gone, the entire Philips Duo series, the Liszt Masur set, the Strauss Böhm set, anything I happen to look at is disappearing.

Slowly and carefully building a disc collection is such a rewarding life-long pursuit, of course it could not survive the age of fleeting digital mass consumption.


----------



## Granate

ClassicalListener said:


> My frustration with collecting CDs today is that it seems every Deutsche Grammophon, Decca, EMI and Philips release is going out of print.


I can relate! This edition was the first Bruckner cycle from Barenboim in Chicago to be commercially released for a reasonable price. The Karajan Bruckner cycle is out of print but it's likely to be reissued soon, but my greatest fear is with the Originals series by Universal, which is also going out of print slowly.

It's like the future is made only of huge box sets at 100€ or yearly subscriptions in Spotify.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Granate said:


> I can relate! This edition was the first Bruckner cycle from Barenboim in Chicago to be commercially released for a reasonable price. The Karajan Bruckner cycle is out of print but it's likely to be reissued soon, but my greatest fear is with the Originals series by Universal, which is also going out of print slowly.
> 
> It's like the future is made only of huge box sets at 100€ or yearly subscriptions in Spotify.


The Orignals series too! It seems *everything* by the major labels is going out of print, with the exception of these obnoxious megasets. It is a tragedy because I really loved building a collection.

However I will not of course pay for a joyless digital download, an utilitarian remedy and imaginary good I can neither hold in my hands nor collect or display, so instead of $150 a month on CDs they'll get from me a $20 subscription to Tidal. Genius business plan!


----------



## Blancrocher

Hell with it--I'm just going to keep buying cds until there are none left to buy.


----------



## Pugg

> How did you plan your CD purchases? Do you think you have wasted money or let go some offers?


Granate, did you see the OP date?
2007


----------



## KenOC

ClassicalListener said:


> The Orignals series too! It seems *everything* by the major labels is going out of print, with the exception of these obnoxious megasets. It is a tragedy because I really loved building a collection.


CD sales are down over 80% from their peak. Nobody wants to open a production run of CDs unless it will make a profit after the labor, etc. involved, the payments to rightsholders, the printing of the booklets, the payments to the printed material copyright holders, the costs of product assembly, quality control, and packaging, costs of distribution, likely credits for unsold inventory, and so on and on and on including covering overhead and contributing (hopefully) to profit. Currently, sales of newly-fashionable LPs rival CDs! So my best wishes to CD collectors.

BTW, as small as CD sales are now, classical is just one percent of that. Numbers can be cruel.


----------



## Granate

Pugg said:


> Granate, did you see the OP date?
> 2007


It took me 10 pages in the section to find a thread that suited my topic. I didn't want to open a new one.

It happens that I made the choice to buy also the Barenboim Chicago Bruckner cycle (my third one on CD) and requested to cancel the used Haydn Creation. They may answer on Monday, but it's a high amount of money for me (like 44€). I told my parents but they were ok with it, even if I panicked.


----------



## ClassicalListener

KenOC said:


> CD sales are down over 80% from their peak. Nobody wants to open a production run of CDs unless it will make a profit after the labor, etc. involved, the payments to rightsholders, the printing of the booklets, the payments to the printed material copyright holders, the costs of product assembly, quality control, and packaging, costs of distribution, likely credits for unsold inventory, and so on and on and on including covering overhead and contributing (hopefully) to profit. Currently, sales of newly-fashionable LPs rival CDs! So my best wishes to CD collectors.
> 
> BTW, as small as CD sales are now, classical is just one percent of that. Numbers can be cruel.


While classical and jazz have always represented a small portion compared with popular music, as casual consumers move to degraded media like streaming and downloads, it is serious, dedicated listeners who are more likely to keep on purchasing CDs. I would wager the proportion of classical and jazz out of total CD sales has actually increased in recent years.

Secondly, download sales have in reality decreased more rapidly than physical media in the last couple of years. The rate of increase of streaming revenue in 2017 was also moderated compared with 2016: http://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/RIAA-Year-End-2017-News-and-Notes.pdf

Regarding the rest, why is it that releases of independent labels are plentiful while those of the major ones are disappearing? Why can Naxos keep its entire catalogue in print but not Warner? In addition to Naxos, labels like MDG, Toccata Classics, CPO, Brilliant Classics, BIS, Hyperion Records, Orfeo, Harmonia Mundi, put out countless new releases each year, and are very good at keeping in print previous ones. Clearly, if the economics of classical music CD sales are able to support countless small labels, they surely can the couple of big ones.

What's preventing the labels under the Warner Classics umbrella from making CDs available and plentiful is their business plan. They wish for people to stop buying CDs in an effort to force them into formats where labels control every part of the chain. They want you to depend on them every time you listen to a recording. And they'll come up with creative ways to exploit that dependency and blackmail listeners.

Like Blancrocher expressed, I love CDs and will continue to buy them. And if the majors don't wish to sell to me, the remaining labels, which put out amazing records, will get my money. No streaming or downloads will disgrace my listening.


----------



## Merl

I've just bought Tennstedt's Mahler cycle from the US for £2.72. I'm loving that CDs are getting cheaper. The box is still new and shrink-wrapped.


----------



## Granate

^^

O_O

Which edition is it? Brown 1995, Black 2011 or Fuchsia 2013?


----------



## Merl

Granate said:


> ^^
> 
> O_O
> 
> Which edition is it? Brown 1995, Black 2011 or Fuchsia 2013?


Let me check, Granate.


----------



## Merl

This one....... Did I do well or have I committed a faux pas?


----------



## DavidA

Merl said:


> This one....... Did I do well or have I committed a faux pas?
> 
> View attachment 103272


I'd say if you like Mahler that is a steal, whatever the edition. Let's face it, most of us don't notice the edition much anyway!


----------



## Granate

You miss the excellent Live No.7 included in the Black box, but what you got is a bargain (mind that they have the 1994 remasters instead of the ART 2000s ones)


----------

