# The death of the CD?



## KenOC

Best Buy will no longer stock CDs after mid-year. Target may follow suit. According to this article, CD sales are down about 80% since 2001.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...ing-out/ar-BBIK9Ej?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp


----------



## mbhaub

I heard this and am not surprised. Best Buy has long been a non-entity for me anyway. When the nearest in my area opened some 20-25 years ago they actually had a large, separate room just for classical cds. Imagine that. Then after several years DVDs began taking over and the classical was becoming non-existent. Now if Amazon were to stop selling cds I'd be alarmed, but that's not going to happen. At least in the classical arena record producers are showing no signs of the end of the cd era. Every month there are several hundred new releases on cd. And they're re-releasing old, great recordings in those superb budget boxes. So if Best Buy stops selling cds, who cares?

On the other hand...buying a reasonably priced cd-only player is getting more difficult. There aren't that many out there. Even on Crutchfield, there's hardly anything that the average consumer can afford, but they have several players in the $3000 and up range. Buying a player that can handle SACD is really hard. Yes, you can get a Blu Ray player that does it, but the sound quality is distinctly lower than a genuine, dedicated sacd/cd player. That is a real concert for me. So I'm stocking up on players and my enormous cd collection and a slew of players will take me to my end, I hope!


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> Best Buy will no longer stock CDs after mid-year. Target may follow suit. According to this article, CD sales are down about 80% since 2001.
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...ing-out/ar-BBIK9Ej?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp


Neither store sells CDs I want anyway. There will be CDs a plenty online for a long time to come, especially if people start selling them off to replace them with vinyl. My local record store said that a large part of their current prosperity is due to vinyl sales.

But why only go back to vinyl. We could go all the way back to wax cylinders.


----------



## MarkW

Fritz Kobus said:


> We could go all the way back to wax cylinders.


Megaphones and ear trumpets do pretty well also.


----------



## Phil loves classical

The Classical selection in regular stores selling mass copies of new releases sucked for a while now, plus I already collected what I really want. Only Amazon has those rarities I want. The CD format won’t die. It is much more compact than vinyl and better durability, and the sound quality is still right up there, unlike DVD’s, compared to Blu Ray and 4K. SACD’s make little or no improvement to me overall anyway, not for my system.


----------



## Pugg

Everybody shops on-line, great choices, so no problem, the real problem is the free streaming.


----------



## starthrower

Pugg said:


> Everybody shops on-line, great choices, so no problem, the real problem is the free streaming.


The real problem is paid streaming. They don't pay the artists anything.


----------



## Casebearer

The real problem is dumb consumers that don't realize they are buying from a very small selection of platforms that aim to have global dominance. Once they have you can wet your chest. I never stream (except YouTube). I want to own it myself and be independant of these monopolists/oligarchists.


----------



## Star

The advent of streaming has meant the death of the CD in the main. I went into a charity shop yesterday where they were advertising 10 CDs (and DVDs) for a pound. Admittedly these were not classical CDs but it does show that CDs are on the way out. Fortunately we are well stocked


----------



## KenOC

I am sifting my rather large CD collection now and expect well over half of it to be donated to the local library or thrift stores. I have most of my music on hard drives, well backed up, and only play a CD once in a blue moon.


----------



## Jacck

the CD has been dead for over a decade, since the invention of mp3. Digitalisation is the way. The CDs degrade over time, digital music does not lose any quality. The real problem is how to pay the artists.


----------



## Merl

KenOC said:


> I am sifting my rather large CD collection now and expect well over half of it to be donated to the local library or thrift stores. I have most of my music on hard drives, well backed up, and only play a CD once in a blue moon.


If you wanna donate anything to me (especially Beethoven) I'd be more than happy, Ken! :lol:


----------



## Guest

I bought a high quality Densen CD player last year and it took ages to get from Denmark because the supplier said there was a resurgence in interest in CDs in Europe and they couldn't keep up the demand for CD players!


----------



## DavidA

KenOC said:


> I am sifting my rather large CD collection now and expect well over half of it to be donated to the local library or thrift stores. I have most of my music on hard drives, well backed up, and only play a CD once in a blue moon.


Just confess I do like to physically load a CD and play it rather than listen on line. Just outa date maybe!


----------



## Andolink

I just bought a new CD player last week (PS Audio DirectStream Memory Player) and a companion DAC to go with it (PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC). This is my only source; no computer connection to my stereo; no turntable. I have over 7,000 CD's collected since 1983 and that's too many to attempt to convert to digital files so I'm pretty much tied to the format for forever. I'm fine with that, however, finding a CD player with the features I need at a reasonable price is definitely getting increasingly, in fact maddeningly, difficult.


----------



## DavidA

Christabel said:


> I bought a high quality Densen CD player last year and it took ages to get from Denmark because the supplier said there was a resurgence in interest in CDs in Europe and they couldn't keep up the demand for CD players!


Maybe just an excuse. I know when I enquired about a video recorder with hard drive for the TV a guy told me they'd soon be obsolete with new streaming technology.


----------



## Guest

Here in Blighty, hifi shops still sell lots of makes of CD players. My small, local one currently has 26, ranging in price from £129 to £2550.


----------



## Strange Magic

To the extent that more and more daily functions are becoming absorbed by the Internet, the more dependent we become upon the proper functioning of the 'net, and the more fragile are the futures of those functions. I try to resist becoming totally dependent on the 'net by retaining possession of the ability to function completely off-line, at least when it comes to music. With a strong CD (or tape, or vinyl) collection, and a generator, one could continue on through a takedown of the 'net by Big Brother or the Great Leader or the Ayatollah, or whatever big catastrophe. A couple times a year, my local power company wants me to hook up my thermostat to the 'net, so they can regulate my power consumption. E.M. Forster's 1920's tale, _The Machine Stops_, told the story very well back then about what happens......


----------



## PlaySalieri

I dont get people wanting to have paid files on their hard drive - I just dont get it - a library of music has to be recordings on a physical format whether it be LP, CD or whatever.
People said LP would die - and yet sales are increasing year on year while CD sales are sliding. I think there will always be enough people not prepared to play ball with the big money interests and insist on having their music in a hard copy.


----------



## Guest

Strange Magic said:


> To the extent that more and more daily functions are becoming absorbed by the Internet, the more dependent we become upon the proper functioning of the 'net, and the more fragile are the futures of those functions. I try to resist becoming totally dependent on the 'net by retaining possession of the ability to function completely off-line, at least when it comes to music. With a strong CD (or tape, or vinyl) collection, and a generator, one could continue on through a takedown of the 'net by Big Brother or the Great Leader or the Ayatollah, or whatever big catastrophe. A couple times a year, my local power company wants me to hook up my thermostat to the 'net, so they can regulate my power consumption. E.M. Forster's 1920's tale, _The Machine Stops_, told the story very well back then about what happens......


I've lost various tracks and albums that I had on tinterweb. A chastening experience. My CDs may not last forever but I'm pretty confident they won't suddenly disappear.


----------



## Zeus

Well, I listen to all the music I know on youtube... Why do you all buy CDs?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Star said:


> The advent of streaming has meant the death of the CD in the main. I went into a charity shop yesterday where they were advertising *10 CDs (and DVDs) for a pound. Admittedly these were not classical CDs* but it does show that CDs are on the way out. Fortunately we are well stocked


They probably have a lot of rubbish that would not sell unless you paid people to take it and use the CDs for coasters. So I think it is more a statement on modern pop music.


----------



## Pugg

Zeus said:


> Well, I listen to all the music I know on youtube... Why do you all buy CDs?


Why not?


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> I am sifting my rather large CD collection now and expect well over half of it to be donated to the local library or thrift stores. I have most of my music on hard drives, well backed up, and only play a CD once in a blue moon.


I just sold my 6-CD Maria Callas arias set and deleted the files from my computer since I no longer own the disks. I assume you are offloading stuff you have no desire to listen to. As I understand it, to have it on your hard drive you either had to have downloaded from a legitimate site or have the CDs on the shelf.


----------



## KRoad

Physical sales for CDs are still relatively healthy here in Germany, about 45% of recorded music sales I believe (I may be wrong). The choice of dedicated CD players is now limited though . I recently bought back-up players in advance for CDs, DVDs and Blu Rays on the assumption that they will very soon be very hard to find indeed. After all, how many new cassette decks does one see these days? Unfortunately, I still have hundreds of cassettes that I very, very seldom play. 

The tyranny of technology! Maybe there is something to be said for Ludditism after all.


----------



## Merl

Zeus said:


> Well, I listen to all the music I know on youtube... Why do you all buy CDs?


*Better quality than Youtube, plus I've got lots of music you can't get on Youtube
*It's nice to have a physical copy of something
*The internet is not always available wherever you go (I live in Scotland and large parts of the East Neuk are total wi-fi blackspots)
*They look good in my CD racks and impress people.:lol:

Seriously though, the majority of my music collection is digital, on hard drives (backed up, btw - been there with the big HD crashes so I've learned my lesson) but if I'm in my music room (spare room) I only have to press two buttons, insert a CD and I'm playing my music. Otherwise I'd have to load the computer up, wait for the HD to load in there and then go through the hassle of finding the right files. For this, the CD is very handy. And yes, I do watch and listen to stuff on youtube but the quality is variable to say the least (dependent on uploader, bitrate, etc) and often incomplete. CD sales are dropping and that's good news for me cos prices are slowly coming down and there's still some music I want physical copies of.


----------



## starthrower

Zeus said:


> Well, I listen to all the music I know on youtube... Why do you all buy CDs?


Ugh! Why do you need a paycheck at the end of the week?


----------



## amfortas

starthrower said:


> Ugh! Why do you need a paycheck at the end of the week?


Exactly. At my point in life, I've got nothing else to spend my money on. Don't take *that* from me, too!


----------



## starthrower

I have to plead ignorance concerning the legalities of these streaming companies. Why do they have the right to stream copyrighted material and only pay the artists pennies for thousands of clicks from listeners?


----------



## Guest

starthrower said:


> I have to plead ignorance concerning the legalities of these streaming companies. Why do they have the right to stream copyrighted material and only pay the artists pennies for thousands of clicks from listeners?


As long as the rich get richer, what's the problem?


----------



## starthrower

dogen said:


> As long as the rich get richer, what's the problem?


They tell poor folks to get rich by working harder, while they do it by stealing!


----------



## The Deacon

Ceedees rule!

You don't want your ceedees and jewel cases..._give them to the Deacon!_


----------



## starthrower

Casebearer is right. We have to stop giving all our business to the conglomerates. I know I can buy classical CDs from Presto, but I don't know where I can buy jazz CDs other than checking to see if physical stores have web retail. In the states there's Dusty Groove in Chicago. https://www.dustygroove.com/ They specialize in jazz, R&B, and Brazilian music. If I lived in a big city I'd go to a brick & mortar store.

Actually, prog rock, classical, and jazz listeners are probably the most loyal supporters of physical media, but they only account for a total of less that 10 percent combined of all consumers.


----------



## Rach Man

stomanek said:


> I dont get people wanting to have paid files on their hard drive - I just dont get it - a library of music has to be recordings on a physical format whether it be LP, CD or whatever.
> People said LP would die - and yet sales are increasing year on year while CD sales are sliding. I think there will always be enough people not prepared to play ball with the big money interests and insist on having their music in a hard copy.


I believe that the problem with your argument is that classical music is such a small percentage of recorded music. So if the popular music crowd decides that CDs are not necessary, then the recording companies will go along with them and not the classical music crowd.

To confirm that this is true, note that the Grammy's had a several hour long show with a lot of pomp and circumstance. They gave out the classical awards before the show began and the mainstream public didn't care.

BTW, Manfred Honeck and the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra won the orchestral performance with the Shostakovich 5th symphony recording. And to your point, stomaneck, I own the CD and wouldn't just download it. I truly hope that I am wrong and you are right, because I do like buying CDs, new and used ones. But I fear that CDs may be on the decline
.


----------



## amfortas

My town has a second-hand book store with a sizeable section of used, low-priced classical CDs. Only problem is, they're not getting much additional stock coming in these days, and I've already sifted their shelves many times over for the most desirable items. 

Fortunately, I can still get comparable deals on used CDs from the Amazon--just without the instant gratification, or the boost to the local economy.


----------



## starthrower

Rach Man said:


> I believe that the problem with your argument is that classical music is such a small percentage of recorded music. So if the popular music crowd decides that CDs are not necessary, then the recording companies will go along with them and not the classical music crowd.


Those are the facts. Streaming is the current model for music consumption. But how artists are going to get a fair cut of the profits is another story.


----------



## eugeneonagain

Jacck said:


> the CD has been dead for over a decade, since the invention of mp3. Digitalisation is the way. The CDs degrade over time, *digital music does not lose any quality.* The real problem is how to pay the artists.


This is untrue. Degradation of digital files due to faults in the hardware holding the information is well-known. All those digital files are largely held on hard-drives - either traditional or solid state - and companies have multiple backups. A CD is just another piece of hardware holding the same sorts of digital file and I'd rather just one of those malfunctions than a 3TB drive containing hundreds of thousands of files.

In Switzerland there are companies backing up on magnetic tape because it has been shown to have high stability. It degrades more quickly with use, but they simply store it and make data copies when necessary.

The business of archiving and preservation has not been 'solved' by digital information files. The preservation of recordings that were originally analogue is a problem digitally because there is a dispute about whether it preserves the actual analogue sound. When the original recordings have degraded enough (or been stupidly destroyed) so that the digital files are all that is left, there is an issue.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Zeus said:


> Well, I listen to all the music I know on youtube... Why do you all buy CDs?


Limited data allowance means I can't use youtube too often even if I wanted to - and CDs don't have buffering issues.


----------



## Guest

DavidA said:


> Maybe just an excuse. I know when I enquired about a video recorder with hard drive for the TV a guy told me they'd soon be obsolete with new streaming technology.


No, my dealer told me all about it BEFORE we ordered the player from Denmark. There's a resurgence of interest in CDs and also in vinyl. Many music-lovers are fed up with having everything stored digitally rather than in a space where they can lay their hands on a music carrier, together with artwork, pictures and liner notes.


----------



## millionrainbows

The real problem is that the "recorded music industry" is dead. Now, the music industry must survive on live performance, like music _used_ to be before the advent of recording (and Daniel Barienboim t-shirt and signature bong sales).

This is good, in a way; it empowers actual people (musicians, too) playing real music, live.

But, ironically, it comes too late in the millennia of industrialization, jet travel, and electronic connectivity.

Our society and social fabric is no longer suited, and no longer wants, the problems presented by "real" people except as it fits the identikit of the brave new age of celebrity and booty (both kinds); it only needs data.

So musicians are no longer exclusively trained classically, or consistently to agreed standards. Mandolin players have branched off into their enclaves, electric guitarists are studying the bio-mechanics of speed-picking using guitar-mounted i-cameras, and the violin has become the fiddle.

The classical paradigm has been replaced by specialized programs and courses which further the survival of the plethora of post-modern populist sub-industries and genres, just like community colleges which cater to large, local semiconductor industries.

The music files are just advertisements for all this other activity, and keep people in the 'virtual' realm at minimal cost. The data is merely propagation of the social mechanisms which generate sales in other areas of human activity: fashion, clothing, life style, exercise, snacks, food, social agendas, etc.


----------



## Guest

Music has always existed in a continual state of flux, particularly recorded music. Same with composers. I love having CDs at my fingertips but I would say nothing can substitute for live performance; nothing at all. That is the ultimate ideal.

Frankly, I don't trust computer technology enough to have my music stored digitally. Back-ups notwithstanding, it can all disappear in a heartbeat and I don't want to have to 'excavate' or 'mine' cyberspace looking for that lost opus!!!


----------



## Triplets

mbhaub said:


> I heard this and am not surprised. Best Buy has long been a non-entity for me anyway. When the nearest in my area opened some 20-25 years ago they actually had a large, separate room just for classical cds. Imagine that. Then after several years DVDs began taking over and the classical was becoming non-existent. Now if Amazon were to stop selling cds I'd be alarmed, but that's not going to happen. At least in the classical arena record producers are showing no signs of the end of the cd era. Every month there are several hundred new releases on cd. And they're re-releasing old, great recordings in those superb budget boxes. So if Best Buy stops selling cds, who cares?
> 
> On the other hand...buying a reasonably priced cd-only player is getting more difficult. There aren't that many out there. Even on Crutchfield, there's hardly anything that the average consumer can afford, but they have several players in the $3000 and up range. Buying a player that can handle SACD is really hard. Yes, you can get a Blu Ray player that does it, but the sound quality is distinctly lower than a genuine, dedicated sacd/cd player. That is a real concert for me. So I'm stocking up on players and my enormous cd collection and a slew of players will take me to my end, I hope!


Depends on your price range. Oppo players can be had for $500 that do a good job with SACD


----------



## millionrainbows

This post should take me to page 3, since it does not otherwise respond.


----------



## millionrainbows

Any thrifty music collector worth their salt knew that Best Buy and Target (and still, Wal mart) served as useful outlets for certain major releases, which prices were better than the localized merchants: The new Beatles stuff, the Led Zepp 2-fers, the new Stones album, etc. I'm sorry to see it go.


----------



## starthrower

The irony of buying physical CDs is that they come with that pretty artwork and the micro text that nobody over 45 can read without a magnifying glass. And everybody that buys CDs is over 45.


----------



## Triplets

I unexpectedly had to buy a new car last week. I was driving a Honda Civic Hybrid, 2007, that my mother had stopped driving. The Hybrid battery died—it’s guaranteed for 10 years—and I rather quickly bought a Honda Accord, Motor Trend Car of The Year, blah, blah. I didn’t think to enquire until after the sale, but no CD slot! Not surprised since laptop computers—another endangered species—stopped containing them years ago.
CDs are not going to disappear, and neither will CD playback machines. There are just to many of them out there. Eventually they will make some sort of resurgence, as lps have. It’s also ironic that the standard of CD (actually digital) replay has gotten so good just as the medium itself is threatened with obsolescence


----------



## SixFootScowl

Why is it that I cannot go to page 3 of this thread? Every time I click on page 3, it takes me to page 1. But I can get to pages 1,2, and 4.


----------



## KenOC

Some decades in the future there will be a nostalgic resurgence of CDs. They will be made in small and expensive batches by specialist craftspeople and sold, along with their ultra-costly playback machines, in small high-end shoppes. Aficionados will buy them eagerly, claiming to hear in their characteristic and welcome “CD clarity” something far more desirable than the bland and uninteresting perfection of the then-current mainstream sound technologies.

In other words, something like we see today with a different medium.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

starthrower said:


> I have to plead ignorance concerning the legalities of these streaming companies. Why do they have the right to stream copyrighted material and only pay the artists pennies for thousands of clicks from listeners?


Maybe if they paid the artists more money then they would have to raise the price they charge their customer each month. If they did this maybe people would not subscribe to use the streaming service. Maybe the artist should talk to their manager and ask why did they not ask for more money before letting the service use their music?


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Fritz Kobus said:


> Why is it that I cannot go to page 3 of this thread? Every time I click on page 3, it takes me to page 1. But I can get to pages 1,2, and 4.


I used to have that problem, but since going to 40 posts per page that has stopped. This is only on page 2 for me.


----------



## larold

CDs are still in demand, just like LPs were once they quit producing them. Guess what? Companies make new LPs again. It will happen again with the CD. If you have CDs you want to be rid of contact Princeton Record Exchange in New Jersey USA. I tried to sell them some LPs a while back but they weren't interested. However, they said they'd take all the CDs I had.


----------



## starthrower

Johnnie Burgess said:


> Maybe if they paid the artists more money then they would have to raise the price they charge their customer each month. If they did this maybe people would not subscribe to use the streaming service. Maybe the artist should talk to their manager and ask why did they not ask for more money before letting the service use their music?


A catch 22 scenario. Withhold permission and languish in obscurity, or grant permission and starve.


----------



## Taplow

The day that CDs are no longer produced shall be the day I stop buying new music.

I recall that I resisted the CD for a while when they were first introduced back in 1983. But it was also a new technology that interested me, so it didn't take long to convert. I can see no redeeming features in digital files. They are fragile and ephemeral. They lack tactility, and they come with no printed artwork, no liner notes, no substance.

I am working very hard to build the best possible collection of classical music that I can with past, current and any new releases. But once the CD is truly dead I shall shut up shop and be content with what I have for the remainder of my pitiful life.


----------



## bharbeke

Blank CDs are pretty cheap. You can back up your download purchases onto them if you like. I feel your pain about the lack of liner notes/picture content with digital downloads, but the availability and price make it worth the trade-off for me.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

I've never got past Vinyl, so don't tell me this............ good god next you'll tell me they don't make 78's or cassettes anymore.


----------



## Bluecrab

bharbeke said:


> Blank CDs are pretty cheap. You can back up your download purchases onto them if you like.


I think an even better option is to back up your digital files to an external hard drive. I've been doing that for a while now with the hard drive on my desktop PC. My external hard drive holds 1 terabyte. That's a vast amount of storage. It doesn't factor into my music, because I still use CDs.

Speaking of CDs... does anybody else make CDs from youtube videos using one of the online youtube-to-mp3 converters? (of course, you could also just keep the mp3 files in their digital form and play them with your mp3 player. But I burn them onto blank CDs.)


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

I make cassettes from Youtube videos using my Nak tape deck contented to my laptop- don't need any sort of converter..... 

I call it steam powered ripping :lol:


----------



## Oakey

Cassettes are making a nostalgia comeback too. I would never have guessed this ten years ago. The new Kylie album is being released on cassette, as was the latest Erasure album. I guess this is the new hipster thing (albeit that neither of these two artists are hipster artists).

I never stopped buying vinyl after buying my first CD in 1989, even bought new titles (pop) during the 1990s when vinyl was not hip at all. And I never stopped buying CDs. Bought a new SACD (2018 release) last week, showing that even this redundant format (to some) is not dead.

I think CDs will last as THE physical format. It's convenient and although I appreciate HD audio, it is basically marketing. Double blind listening tests have shown that even music experts and audiophiles cannot hear the difference between 16 bit CD quality and hi-res SACD audio when the same master is used. 

I don't stream music, but I do stream movies and TV series (Netflix). I do listen to mp3 on my iPhone when travelling.


----------



## mbhaub

Triplets said:


> I rather quickly bought a Honda Accord, Motor Trend Car of The Year, blah, blah. I didn't think to enquire until after the sale, but no CD slot! Not surprised since laptop computers-another endangered species-stopped containing them years ago.


That's right! The Bose system that was built in to my Miata died a while back and Mazda no longer carries replacements and no one fixes these things. So down to the auto stereo shop and they only carried one stereo with a cd slot! But it also had provisions for attaching an mp3 player, phone via Blue Tooth, and a USB port. I have to say, I love the USB. I took a 32 GB stick and transferred an astonishing amount of music. It's great - no cds to worry about in the heat or getting scratched. No skipping on really rough roads. The only draw back is that if a movement of a symphony is divided into two or more tracks there's an annoying pause between the tracks - can't find how to do continuous play.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> Some decades in the future there will be a nostalgic resurgence of CDs. They will be made in small and expensive batches by specialist craftspeople and sold, along with their ultra-costly playback machines, in small high-end shoppes. Aficionados will buy them eagerly, claiming to hear in their characteristic and welcome "CD clarity" something far more desirable than the *bland and uninteresting perfection of the then-current mainstream sound technologies*.
> 
> In other words, something like we see today with a different medium.


Yes, your own clone orchestra would be as bland and uninteresting as a player piano.


----------



## Casebearer

mbhaub said:


> That's right! The Bose system that was built in to my Miata died a while back and Mazda no longer carries replacements and no one fixes these things. So down to the auto stereo shop and they only carried one stereo with a cd slot! But it also had provisions for attaching an mp3 player, phone via Blue Tooth, and a USB port. I have to say, I love the USB. I took a 32 GB stick and transferred an astonishing amount of music. It's great - no cds to worry about in the heat or getting scratched. No skipping on really rough roads. The only draw back is that if a movement of a symphony is divided into two or more tracks there's an annoying pause between the tracks - can't find how to do continuous play.


I remember being very sad the next old Toyota I bought 5 years ago (now 17 years old) didn't go with the possibility of playing my cassettes. So I've not been playing my cassettes for five years now, although I still have two quality decks that I could have repaired so I can play them in my home. I'm thinking of that!


----------



## Casebearer

starthrower said:


> Casebearer is right. We have to stop giving all our business to the conglomerates. I know I can buy classical CDs from Presto, but I don't know where I can buy jazz CDs other than checking to see if physical stores have web retail. In the states there's Dusty Groove in Chicago. https://www.dustygroove.com/ They specialize in jazz, R&B, and Brazilian music. If I lived in a big city I'd go to a brick & mortar store.
> 
> Actually, prog rock, classical, and jazz listeners are probably the most loyal supporters of physical media, but they only account for a total of less that 10 percent combined of all consumers.


For this reason more than half the cd's I buy, I buy directly from the performers at the concerts I visit. That way I'm sure my money ends up with the people I love for what they're doing: giving me pleasure. I don't begrudge them to have some money to be able to keep doing what they're doing. Many performing artists also have their own websites where you can buy their cd's directly. It's much more personal and nicer to do.

There is a more general economic principle involved here called 'short chains' (not sure if that is the right translation). It applies to agriculture as well for instance. Many farmers have great difficulty to survive for much of the same reasons: too many middle men that pick up the profit. Wherever you can: buy directly from the person that produced the goods! Never buy from a 'platform' whenever you can avoid it. Buying through these platforms 'for your convenience' is your biggest enemy in the end. Everytime you do you give them more power over the producers (who could even be your children or relatives) and in the end they will control access and prices almost totally.


----------



## KenOC

My current car is new enough to have a CD player but old enough not to have a stereo minijack for an iPod or other music player. Fortunately I had one of these left over from an ancient Sony Discman. Pops into the cassette well and plays the iPod just fine. You can still get them for six bucks or so.


----------



## SixFootScowl

For those who don't have cassette decks, but do have a power outlet (or cigarette lighter), I have something like this, which broadcasts your mp3 player (or similar device) into your car radio. You find a dead area on your radio and then adjust the adapter to that frequency. Works great.


----------



## zelenka

YouTube and Spotify happened. Noone buys CDs anyomre.


----------



## Guest

zelenka said:


> YouTube and Spotify happened. Noone buys CDs anyomre.


I do. There goes that argument.


----------



## Triplets

zelenka said:


> YouTube and Spotify happened. Noone buys CDs anyomre.


Hi Zelenka. I love your name, and the Composer. I do suspect that CD purchasers tend to be a certain demographic with respect to age. No one that I know under 30 buys CDs and wants to hassle with Physical Media.


----------



## larold

<<Cassettes are making a nostalgia comeback too. I would never have guessed this ten years ago.>>

According to my local used media store and a couple online places I used to buy LPs, so is the reel-to-reel tape. I have been contacted by two places I formerly used to buy out of print LPs telling me they would buy any classical reel-to-reel tape I have. My local used store owner called these people "fetishists."


----------



## SixFootScowl

larold said:


> <<Cassettes are making a nostalgia comeback too. I would never have guessed this ten years ago.>>
> 
> According to my local used media store and a couple online places I used to buy LPs, so is the reel-to-reel tape. I have been contacted by two places I formerly used to buy out of print LPs telling me they would buy any classical reel-to-reel tape I have. My local used store owner called these people "fetishists."


I played with a reel-to-reel tape machine as a child. And I recall when everyone was spinning vinyl, the audiophiles were into reel-to-reel. So perhaps reel-to-reel is the way to go and all these vinyl enthusiasts are just chasing a red herring--well, we know they are chasing a red herring, regardless of reel-to-reel.


----------



## eugeneonagain

I laugh at the millennials (and the older people who think they are running with the millennials) when they put blind faith in 'cloud services' and paying over-and-over to stream the same music. All predicated upon some idea of a 'minimalist' lifestyle.

Youtube is a great resource, but it is undercutting a lot of artists. Further up this thread Millionrainbows talked about recordings being mere advertising for live performance and this is partially true in the way they are used, but not entirely. Live performances and recordings are different beasts; the latter are not merely records of a live performance. Plus some music is rarely or never going to make it to live performance (the costs can be astronomical for a start) whereas it _can_ appear on recordings.

Others have already said they don't want to be permanently connected to the internet and I too feel liberated by reaching for a CD or LP from my own collection and just playing it directly.


----------



## 13hm13

> Quote Originally Posted by Zeus:
> 
> Well, I listen to all the music I know on youtube... Why do you all buy CDs?


I'm with you bro ... bought my *last* CD about 10 yrs ago. All CDs on various HDDs now.

YouTube is much more fun, and much more variety. Often, super RARE stuff is posted on YT that'd never make it to disc (or other physical format). E.g., the rare Annie Fischer Mozart PC I just threaded on. And all those BBC Proms concerts are never makin' it to disc.



starthrower said:


> Ugh! Why do you need a paycheck at the end of the week?


I don't thx to mucho inheritance ... besides, shoppin' is a timesink and timewaste!!

Feel free to DISLIKE this post!!!


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

I brought 5 vinyl records yesterday - nothing beats them, the list is

the nice









the nice again









Beetheart









King Crimson









and soft machine


----------



## eugeneonagain

13hm13 said:


> I'm with you bro ... bought my *last* CD about 10 yrs ago. All CDs on various HDDs now.
> 
> YouTube is much more fun, and much more variety. Often, super RARE stuff is posted on YT that'd never make it to disc (or other physical format). E.g., the rare Annie Fischer Mozart PC I just threaded on. And all those BBC Proms concerts are never makin' it to disc.


I also listen via YouTube and I'm sure a lot of others do. I just like to decide how I want to listen. When I'm doing stuff and listening to music I like to use a CD player because I don't want to be online 24 hours a day. It leads to distractions.

Plus I like the recordings that I've carefully chosen over years. They bring back memories and I like the tactile act of removing records and playing cassettes and reading the CD booklets as I listen.
I don't doubt that CDs will eventually succumb in the way previous media have, but I'm not going to engaging in the mindless cheer-leading for google's control of information and culture. So much that appears on YouTube also disappears. I'm happy to have more than one source and means for listening thanks.



13hm13 said:


> *I don't thx to mucho inheritance* ... besides, shoppin' is a timesink and timewaste!!
> 
> Feel free to DISLIKE this post!!!


I don't even know what the part in bold means.


----------



## Nate Miller

dogen said:


> I do. There goes that argument.


#MeToo

talk about your cultural appropriation :lol:


----------



## Art Rock

Yes indeed.............
#I♥CD


----------



## Dr Johnson

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> I brought 5 vinyl records yesterday - nothing beats them, the list is
> 
> the nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the nice again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beetheart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Crimson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and soft machine


I applaud the music but not the format.

Scratches, dust, static anyone? A dust bug for your turntable, sir?

No thanks.

I'm planning an extension to house many more CDs.


----------



## eugeneonagain

When I started using vinyl again I was dismayed to re-experience how annoying it is when the inner sleeve catches in the tabs of cardboard inside the outer sleeve. Most irritating.


----------



## Guest

Nate Miller said:


> #MeToo
> 
> talk about your cultural appropriation :lol:


You need to draw me a picture on that one.


----------



## Casebearer

Triplets said:


> No one that I know under 30 buys CDs and wants to hassle with Physical Media.


I'm glad my daughter is. She's got a nice collection of metal.


----------



## Becca

Jacck said:


> the CD has been dead for over a decade, since the invention of mp3. Digitalisation is the way. The CDs degrade over time, digital music does not lose any quality. The real problem is how to pay the artists.


CDs may degrade over time but MP3 is pre-degraded media.


----------



## 1AlexR

*Had to add more*

Does anyone know how to post? The instructions for me to reply to posts are for me to first create 10 posts, so I can't reply to posts till I've posted 10 and I can't post 10 because I can't find any buttons on this site to click on in order to start creating my posts and now that I've typed all of this out I get the feeling that the site will block it again since I don't have my 10 posts yet, what a dilemma.

+_+_+_

addendum to the above: well, it worked, I was finally able to say something. But the above still stands, does anyone know how I can post my required 10 posts? Thank you.


----------



## Pugg

1AlexR said:


> Does anyone know how to post? The instructions for me to reply to posts are for me to first create 10 posts, so I can't reply to posts till I've posted 10 and I can't post 10 because I can't find any buttons on this site to click on in order to start creating my posts and now that I've typed all of this out I get the feeling that the site will block it again since I don't have my 10 posts yet, what a dilemma.
> 
> +_+_+_
> 
> addendum to the above: well, it worked, I was finally able to say something. But the above still stands, does anyone know how I can post my required 10 posts? Thank you.


This will guide you trough the site, read and if not find the answer just make a topic.
Welcome to Talk Classical.

http://www.talkclassical.com/site-feedback-technical-support/


----------



## 13hm13

I listen to music more than ever before -- and that's largely due to ditching HASSLE formats (CD, vinyl).

Outside (on my iPod or phone) -- walking, biking, yardwork. 
Inside: on my PC system or thru headphones. While working on the computer or doing household errands.

Some of my playlists are WEEKS long. I don't think many CD changers -- at least those with good sound -- were more than 10 discs per magazine.

I *think* listening to more music is a good thing -- even though much of it dwells in a multi-tasked background.

BTW, as I keyed in this post, I had the following YT "video" running in a different browser tab:






Thx to that vlogger for ripping that LP and uploading it.

Ahh...YouTube. _The_ game changer. Many of my Playlists seem a bit antiquated as YouTube's automated playlists improve. Alphabet's got billions and billions of $'s to improve their technology. It's makin' my classical life easier


----------



## SixFootScowl

13hm13 said:


> I *think* listening to more music is a good thing -- even though much of it dwells in a multi-tasked background.


I spin CDs in the car, but those are burned because I don't like to play the originals. But like you, most of my listening is in a multi-tasked background using mp3 files on a player.


----------



## eugeneonagain

13hm13 said:


> I listen to music more than ever before -- and that's largely due to ditching HASSLE formats (CD, vinyl).
> 
> Outside (on my iPod or phone) -- walking, biking, yardwork.
> Inside: on my PC system or thru headphones. While working on the computer or doing household errands.
> 
> Some of my playlists are WEEKS long. I don't think many CD changers -- at least those with good sound -- were more than 10 discs per magazine.
> 
> I *think* listening to more music is a good thing -- even though much of it dwells in a multi-tasked background.
> 
> Ahh...YouTube. _The_ game changer. Many of my Playlists seem a bit antiquated as YouTube's automated playlists improve. Alphabet's got billions and billions of $'s to improve their technology. It's makin' my classical life easier


I don't think having long playlists like that is listening more than it is just consumption. The two are not synonymous. Since you persist in ignoring the critiques and just reposting the same answer with slightly altered wording I'm concluding that you don't really have an answer.


----------



## wkasimer

13hm13 said:


> YouTube is much more fun, and much more variety.


And much worse sonics.


----------



## eljr

1AlexR said:


> Does anyone know how to post? The instructions for me to reply to posts are for me to first create 10 posts, so I can't reply to posts till I've posted 10 and I can't post 10 because I can't find any buttons on this site to click on in order to start creating my posts and now that I've typed all of this out I get the feeling that the site will block it again since I don't have my 10 posts yet, what a dilemma.
> 
> +_+_+_
> 
> addendum to the above: well, it worked, I was finally able to say something. But the above still stands, does anyone know how I can post my required 10 posts? Thank you.


sounds like a technical issue

welcome though!


----------



## eljr

13hm13 said:


> I listen to music more than ever before -- and that's largely due to ditching HASSLE formats


No format ever dissuaded me from listening. Reel to Reel, Vinyl, 8 track, cassette, CD....

I do have to agree that streaming is much more convenient.

I am not much of a YouTube guy as I feel compelled to listen to the best formats available but as long as people are listening, all is well.


----------



## eljr

KenOC said:


> Some decades in the future there will be a nostalgic resurgence of CDs. .


I doubt it.

I believe CD's will be more like Reel to Reel, 8 track and Cassette.

The CD is digital and digital will continue so what would be the point? Plus, better digital is available, so what would be the point?

Records are different, they are analog and sensory more engaging. Plus you have the whole ritual to listening to a record that is absent in CD.

Yes, I doubt a niche market for CD in the future.


----------



## eljr

KenOC said:


> Best Buy will no longer stock CDs after mid-year. Target may follow suit. According to this article, CD sales are down about 80% since 2001.
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...ing-out/ar-BBIK9Ej?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp


I am surprised sales are doing that well, down 80%.

I don't think anyone here buys at Best Buy so it's only important in understanding the changing delivery of music.

I will miss the CD but time is change and you can't stand up to father time.

------------------------

Footnote, I am about to order 10 new albums and only 6 come in a downloadable medium. The other 4 are only available on CD. 
I doubt popular music fans have this.... problem.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eugeneonagain said:


> I laugh at the millennials (and the older people who think they are running with the millennials) when they put blind faith in 'cloud services' and paying over-and-over to stream the same music. All predicated upon some idea of a 'minimalist' lifestyle.
> 
> Youtube is a great resource, but it is undercutting a lot of artists. Further up this thread Millionrainbows talked about recordings being mere advertising for live performance and this is partially true in the way they are used, but not entirely. Live performances and recordings are different beasts; the latter are not merely records of a live performance. Plus some music is rarely or never going to make it to live performance (the costs can be astronomical for a start) whereas it _can_ appear on recordings.
> 
> *Others have already said they don't want to be permanently connected to the internet* and I too feel liberated by reaching for a CD or LP from my own collection and just playing it directly.


This is what I am resistant to.
Think that the boom in mobile phone technology only exists because smartphones can now plug you into the internet virtually wherever you are. Remember how before the internet - 99% of people used their PCs as word processors and nothing more? or games machines. The internet is becoming or has become life for many people - and they must be connected. I suspect in 50 years or so we will never leave our houses - everything will be web centered. ten people at a bus stop - all tapping away, heads bowed, on their mobiles. You've seen it and so have I. Where are we going as a species?
So yes I try to avoid streaming, you tube and other net based music services. Doing it the old fashioned way while I can.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Dr Johnson said:


> I applaud the music but not the format.
> 
> Scratches, dust, static anyone? A dust bug for your turntable, sir?
> 
> No thanks.
> 
> I'm planning an extension to house many more CDs.


Never had much trouble with dust and I get full liner notes, artwork, collectability, originality and beautiful analog sound  ...........


----------



## jegreenwood

All those technologies are far too complicated. Glad I have a Google Home. I just say "Hey Google, play me some Glenn Gould."



(Although I do have one for the kitchen.)


----------



## KenOC

stomanek said:


> ...ten people at a bus stop - all tapping away, heads bowed, on their mobiles. You've seen it and so have I. Where are we going as a species?


Here's a thoroughly dystopian answer to that question.


----------



## 13hm13

eljr said:


> Records are different, they are analog and sensory more engaging. Plus you have the whole ritual to listening to a record that is absent in CD.
> .


There is *some* ritual in CD playback, though the routine is not quite so labor-intensive. I think that's big part of the reason why physical formats get the love they do -- hence this overlong thread!!
Humans like physical, three-dimensional objects. It's not surprising that -- after a boom in ebook sales, several years back -- tradit. printed books and brick+mortar bookstores are back in biz.


----------



## Larkenfield

“Hi. I am a CD. The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated... But my reproductive organs seem to be shrinking in size over the past few years. Still, as recently as two years ago, 125 million CDs were sold and that’s not chopped liver. I am King of having the consistently best sound quality and highest bitrate despite the streaming services beginning to catch up. Mark Twain was right... at least for now.“ 

PS. The Winter Olympics! (with the usual obnoxious & interminable commercials in the US). Those without cable can watch them live on Hulu for an extra monthly charge. Goodie!


----------



## 13hm13

The title of this thread is pretty morbid and final: "The death of the CD?".

Some may prefer a more positive beat: 'The rise of streaming".

Or: "High-rez downloads ... at last!!"


----------



## KRoad

Apropos streaming... What about the very interesting (and for me at least, indispensable) information in essay form pertaining to the historical circumstances of the composition itself and the specifics of the particular recording I am listening to?

Re: Opera. If streamed, in what form (if any) is a libretto available? Can one seriously appreciate an opera without one? I think not.

Serious questions to which devotees of streaming are invited to respond, please.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> Where are we going as a species?.


seems we are doing pretty darned well

I see no downside to living with an encyclopedia in hand that also allows for communication with friends and family.Not to mention, an entertainment hub always at the ready.

What a wonderful world!


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> seems we are doing pretty darned well
> 
> I see no downside to living with an encyclopedia in hand that also allows for communication with friends and family.Not to mention, an entertainment hub always at the ready.
> 
> What a wonderful world!


While we emotionally secure and fully mature adults can benefit from such devices as the modern smartphone, there is growing awareness of downsides for the young, with addiction to the device becoming more evident. Without long periods of quiet reflection, one wonders how an authentic sense of self and self-worth is to evolve, especially when the groupthink, being-in-the-loop, being accepted and not ignored or not isolated aspects of constant peer involvement are considered as a big part of the equation for the vulnerable young. My own situation involves eschewing the smartphone entirely while enjoying all the benefits of the iPad.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> Without long periods of quiet reflection, one wonders how an authentic sense of self and self-worth is to evolve, especially when the groupthink, being-in-the-loop, being accepted and not ignored or not isolated aspects of constant peer involvement are considered as a big part of the equation for the vulnerable young. .


adaptations are normal and healthy AND youth is best at it


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> adaptations are normal and healthy AND youth is best at it


Are we sure that all adaptations are normal and healthy, in all cases? Perhaps adapting to life in milieu A seriously degrades our performance or even survival in milieu B. And youth have fewer choices about adapting than do emotionally stable, mature adults; they are often unaware that choices even exist.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> seems we are doing pretty darned well
> 
> I see no downside to living with an encyclopedia in hand that also allows for communication with friends and family.Not to mention, an entertainment hub always at the ready.
> 
> What a wonderful world!


I wouldnt call it much of an entertainment hub.
My wife bought me a LG smartphone recently - groan - with generous package. All I use it for when I am out and around is for my business email - it also has a decent camera. I honestly have no other use for it. The only great thing is the battery lasts a week.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> *seems we are doing pretty darned well*
> 
> I see no downside to living with an encyclopedia in hand that also allows for communication with friends and family.Not to mention, an entertainment hub always at the ready.
> 
> What a wonderful world!


That's b/s and you know it. We are screwing up the planet and heading towards utter distopia in which one family will own 99.9% of the world's wealth. Laugh and enjoy while you can - your grandchildren and their kids will not be so fortunate.

Open your eyes - the smartphone is the ultimate gadget of control and brainwashing.


----------



## 13hm13

> We are screwing up the planet and heading towards...


The big, huge, *gyregantic* reason why *plastic* media formats have gotta go ...

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-40654915


----------



## KRoad

eljr said:


> seems we are doing pretty darned well
> 
> I see no downside to living with an encyclopedia in hand that also allows for communication with friends and family.Not to mention, an entertainment hub always at the ready.
> 
> What a wonderful world!


Well sir, I see a BIG downside. Every single day in fact. In my capacity as a Principal of an International School in a major global capital, I have banned the use of Smart Phones by my students during the course of the school day - much to the relief of many parents - and many of the students themselves, I may add.

_We're doing pretty darn well as a species_, you say. Is the brave new world really such a wonderful world? I wonder...


----------



## Kevin Pearson

Responsible use of technology has always been an issue. I like owning CDs and knowing that my collection is available anytime because it's not going to disappear in the cloud somewhere never to be recovered. If I need portability I can rip my CDs and make mp3s in short order. 

I use Spotify as well for music and do enjoy using the service. It has saved me from buying CDs I would have been disappointed in and turned me on to CDs I have added to my collection. I think streaming services like Spotify are worth the money and if the price was to double so they could pay more to the artists I would still retain the service because of the benefits it provides me.

Obviously we all have limited recources and cannot afford to purchase all the music we would like to own and services fill that desire in some measure. The convenience factor of streaming anywhere is also another benefit that CDs can only supply by bringing a portable player with you. Why carry two devices?

As to whether the CD is dead I highly doubt it. Especially in classical music because for many classical collectors it's the preferred format. It was classical music collectors that got CDs off the ground and will sustain it in its decline.


----------



## eljr

KRoad said:


> _We're doing pretty darn well as a species_, you say. Is the brave new world really such a wonderful world? I wonder...


Wonder no more, yes, it truly is.

I get it. Most people are set in there ways and change is never needed is the mantra. This mindset never advances the species. It does however have it's place and there is a reason most people default to it, security. Fear.

I won't get into the whole thing but I fully expected most would disagree with me as I understand why.

As to refusing the use of cell phones in school, hello. That is only common sense.

Parents were relieved? What kind of parents need a teacher to regulate their kid? I'd submit a parent not in charge.


----------



## Triplets

Kevin Pearson said:


> Responsible use of technology has always been an issue. I like owning CDs and knowing that my collection is available anytime because it's not going to disappear in the cloud somewhere never to be recovered. If I need portability I can rip my CDs and make mp3s in short order.
> 
> I use Spotify as well for music and do enjoy using the service. It has saved me from buying CDs I would have been disappointed in and turned me on to CDs I have added to my collection. I think streaming services like Spotify are worth the money and if the price was to double so they could pay more to the artists I would still retain the service because of the benefits it provides me.
> 
> Obviously we all have limited recources and cannot afford to purchase all the music we would like to own and services fill that desire in some measure. The convenience factor of streaming anywhere is also another benefit that CDs can only supply by bringing a portable player with you. Why carry two devices?
> 
> As to whether the CD is dead I highly doubt it. Especially in classical music because for many classical collectors it's the preferred format. It was classical music collectors that got CDs off the ground and will sustain it in its decline.


Nice to see you posting again, Kevin


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Kevin Pearson said:


> Responsible use of technology has always been an issue. I like owning CDs and knowing that my collection is available anytime because it's not going to disappear in the cloud somewhere never to be recovered. If I need portability I can rip my CDs and make mp3s in short order.
> 
> I use Spotify as well for music and do enjoy using the service. It has saved me from buying CDs I would have been disappointed in and turned me on to CDs I have added to my collection. I think streaming services like Spotify are worth the money and if the price was to double so they could pay more to the artists I would still retain the service because of the benefits it provides me.
> 
> Obviously we all have limited recources and cannot afford to purchase all the music we would like to own and services fill that desire in some measure. The convenience factor of streaming anywhere is also another benefit that CDs can only supply by bringing a portable player with you. Why carry two devices?
> 
> As to whether the CD is dead I highly doubt it. Especially in classical music because for many classical collectors it's the preferred format. It was classical music collectors that got CDs off the ground and will sustain it in its decline.


Yes spotify helps to decide if you want to buy the music. It can also help you from buying stuff you would hate. Spotify also has somethings that would be too costly to buy the cd's.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> *Wonder no more, yes, it truly is.*
> 
> I get it. Most people are set in there ways and change is never needed is the mantra. This mindset never advances the species. It does however have it's place and there is a reason most people default to it, security. Fear.
> 
> I won't get into the whole thing but I fully expected most would disagree with me as I understand why.
> 
> As to refusing the use of cell phones in school, hello. That is only common sense.
> 
> Parents were relieved? What kind of parents need a teacher to regulate their kid? I'd submit a parent not in charge.


Well - it is for you then - and those who o/d on their phones and pcs, shunning person to person contact for a virtual life - would probably say the same as you - this is progress, they would say - get up to date.

In the meantime - think about the billions of tons of plastic waste we are generating with all this often unnecessary technology. Everybody has to have a new phone every year - that's 1 billion phones per year the environment is going to have to accommodate. where do they all go - and the batteries?

Is this the wonderful world?


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> Everybody has to have a new phone every year


completely different argument.

Here we agree.

The need for everyone to have a new toy to amuse and assert socioeconomic standing I find most unpleasant.

Still, it's hard coded, an extension of the same human need.


> shunning person to person contact


actually, it helps to strength bonds that exist


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> Wonder no more, yes, it truly is.
> 
> I get it. Most people are set in there ways and change is never needed is the mantra. This mindset never advances the species. It does however have it's place and there is a reason most people default to it, security. Fear.
> 
> I won't get into the whole thing but I fully expected most would disagree with me as I understand why.


Just curious whether your enthusiasm is specifically confined here for the modern smartphone or is it a much more encompassing endorsement of things getting better every day in every way?


----------



## eugeneonagain

'The species' hasn't advanced for a very long time indeed, we are more-or-less the same people we were before the industrial revolution. Technological culture's advancement has been rapid and over a short period. 

Aside from purely scientific changes, it has been a story of advancement largely confined to a rather narrow concept of human culture. So this ideology and mantra of 'all technological change equals cultural advancement and any questioning of it is Luddism' is really a product of the narrow vision engendered by a technological mindset. It is a sort of neo-Futurism thought to be rendered authoritative by neutral 'science', when in fact it is a mere cultural opinion with a science gloss.

Fear is indeed a real reaction to change, but more than just change. It's also fear of loss of what is valuable. Too many 'progress' ideologues and foot soldiers of the past have laid waste to things we now regret having lost.

I'm in favour of progressive change, but not blindly sleepwalking into it thinking the world is always on a guaranteed course to improvement. That's incredibly naive.


----------



## Casebearer

eugeneonagain said:


> 'The species' hasn't advanced for a very long time indeed, we are more-or-less the same people we were before the industrial revolution.


I agree. I've been reading Samuel Pepys' Diaries from the 17th century a few years back and was astonished how little people change.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Apart from communications technology - there has been very little technological change in the last 60-70 years for consumer products. In the 50s we had all mod cons, we had cars, jet airliners and we also had computers albeit not in the home.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

and this is all about a bit of flat plastic with dots in it


----------



## eljr

eugeneonagain said:


> 'The species' hasn't advanced for a very long time indeed, we are more-or-less the same people we were before the industrial revolution. Technological culture's advancement has been rapid and over a short period.
> 
> Aside from purely scientific changes, it has been a story of advancement largely confined to a rather narrow concept of human culture. So this ideology and mantra of 'all technological change equals cultural advancement and any questioning of it is Luddism' is really a product of the narrow vision engendered by a technological mindset. It is a sort of neo-Futurism thought to be rendered authoritative by neutral 'science', when in fact it is a mere cultural opinion with a science gloss.
> 
> Fear is indeed a real reaction to change, but more than just change. It's also fear of loss of what is valuable. Too many 'progress' ideologues and foot soldiers of the past have laid waste to things we now regret having lost.
> 
> I'm in favour of progressive change, but not blindly sleepwalking into it thinking the world is always on a guaranteed course to improvement. That's incredibly naive.


Not sure I read any posts here that suggested blind sleep walking or proclaiming that all technological change equals cultural advancement but often one raises such fallacies to promote their perspective so, I "get" why it was done here.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> Just curious whether your enthusiasm is specifically confined here for the modern smartphone or is it a much more encompassing endorsement of things getting better every day in every way?


my thoughts are derived by the overall quality improvements of life that have blessed us

There is good and bad to everything, balance is always key.

So yes, the cell phone is but one of many bits.


----------



## eljr

Casebearer said:


> I agree. I've been reading Samuel Pepys' Diaries from the 17th century a few years back and was astonished how little people change.


I always laugh when folks suggest that the generation that follows them is so radically different than theirs.

I hear it all the time, "when I was a kid" or "kid's today."

What we really have are the same peoples with different stimuli.


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> my thoughts are derived by the overall quality improvements of life that have blessed us
> 
> There is good and bad to everything, balance is always key.
> 
> So yes, the cell phone is but one of many bits.


I take this to mean you're good with the good stuff and dislike the bad--I'm OK on that also.


----------



## Melvin

I'd heard on bbc radio or npr not too long ago someone commenting that the sale and production of the CD has diminished dramatically, with the one exception being in classical music CDs (and jazz as well maybe).

There is still a devoted portion of classical music listners who swear allegiance to CDs for a few reasons, I believe.

As for smart phones, they are clearly incredibly distracting to people, (to have a computer and social media device attached to you at all times), and maybe even they are revolutionary to human behavior.


----------



## eljr

Melvin said:


> smart phones, they are clearly incredibly distracting to people


Great point.

That is the challenge. Not accepting that distraction is essential.

@kroad posted above that in his position as a principle of Principal of an International School in a major global capital he banned cell phones from the classroom. These are the kind of astute rules that are needed to govern cell phone use.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> That's b/s and you know it. We are screwing up the planet and heading towards utter distopia in which one family will own 99.9% of the world's wealth. Laugh and enjoy while you can - your grandchildren and their kids will not be so fortunate.


I enjoy the passion in this post.

Still, I need ask:

How is the cell phone responsible for this predicted apocalypse?



> Open your eyes - the smartphone is the ultimate gadget of control and brainwashing.


I would further ask, just how this "mind control" works.

Thanks in advance


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> I enjoy the passion in this post.
> 
> Still, I need ask:
> 
> How is the cell phone responsible for this predicted apocalypse?
> 
> I would further ask, just how this "mind control" works.
> 
> Thanks in advance


If you consider that millions of people are so addicted to a small screen that they cant go more than a minute without looking at it - a device which decides what you can and cant delete from it's apps and memory - I am surprised that you ask this question. The potential is there to direct the thoughts and behavior of the bulk of the world's population.

The built in obsolescence of modern technology is no conspiracy theory but a fact. Where are all the mountains of obsolete non biodegradable PCs and smartfones + other technology sent? There are mountains of these things in the third world. Do you not think there will be an environmental price to pay?


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> I enjoy the passion in this post.
> 
> Still, I need ask:
> 
> How is the cell phone responsible for this predicted apocalypse?
> 
> I would further ask, just how this "mind control" works.
> 
> Thanks in advance


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-13281200

You're welcome.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Wow, from cell phones to apocalypse. We better destroy all our cell phones and computers before the world is destroyed by them. At least I am not a party to it. I only have a TracPhone that is not smart and requires minutes to be front loaded to it.


----------



## Strange Magic

Fritz Kobus said:


> Wow, from cell phones to apocalypse. We better destroy all our cell phones and computers before the world is destroyed by them. At least I am not a party to it. I only have a TracPhone that is not smart and requires minutes to be front loaded to it.


No need, Fritz. Just need to remember who is controlling whom (or what). Your phone is way more advanced than mine--I have a completely obsolete "candy-bar" cellphone that can only send and receive phone calls. Crazy. It's off 99.999% of the time.


----------



## eugeneonagain

eljr said:


> *Not sure I read any posts here that suggested blind sleep walking or proclaiming that all technological change equals cultural advancement* but often one raises such fallacies to promote their perspective so, I "get" why it was done here.


Maybe you didn't read them, but you wrote them.

Fair do's, I don't always read my own posts either.


----------



## Guest

Hey, I didn't know we'd moved on to the end of civilsation.

Q. 
Who said "The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops that we have created are destroying how society works" ?

A.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/11/facebook-former-executive-ripping-society-apart


----------



## Merl

This thread is hilarious. I've actually laughed out loud at some of the harbinger of doom prophecies. Right, I'm off to play Candy Crush....... Must...... Defeat...... The candies........


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> If you consider that millions of people are so addicted to a small screen that they cant go more than a minute without looking at it - a device which decides what you can and cant delete from it's apps and memory - I am surprised that you ask this question. The potential is there to direct the thoughts and behavior of the bulk of the world's population.


OK, so we have gone from a gadget of mind control to a potential gadget of mind control. Better.

I would suggest it's potential to control the mind is no more effective than was the TV when I was a youth. Heck, before that newspapers had a similar potential.



> The built in obsolescence of modern technology is no conspiracy theory but a fact. Where are all the mountains of obsolete non biodegradable PCs and smartfones + other technology sent? There are mountains of these things in the third world. Do you not think there will be an environmental price to pay?


again, this is a completely different conversation.

I, like you, feel planned obsolescence (I never seem to get agreeance on the exact definition of this) is indeed destructive.
Part of an impending Armageddon? No.

Thank you for your comments, it's good to understand others perspectives.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> Hey, I didn't know we'd moved on to the end of civilsation.
> 
> Q.
> Who said "The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops that we have created are destroying how society works" ?
> 
> A.
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/11/facebook-former-executive-ripping-society-apart


Mr Palihapitiya has a rather extreme perspective. We do need hear all sides to born a reasoned opinion. I found the built in feed back loops interesting but thought to myself, why bother? Confirmation bias was around long before Facebook and will be with us long after.

Thank you for the link.


----------



## eljr

eugeneonagain said:


> Maybe you didn't read them, but you wrote them.
> 
> Fair do's, I don't always read my own posts either.


No, I did not write them. that was your interpretation.

How you were able to make such an extreme interpretation is actually very telling.

if you believe the cell phone the antithesis of positive human development you are free to

I think it emblematic of an emotional response rather than a considered opinion.


----------



## Bluecrab

dogen said:


> Hey, I didn't know we'd moved on to the end of civilsation.


Yeah, really.

That's what happens when the philosophers around here come forth. :lol:


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

or Jerry Springer (usually goes that way)


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> OK, so we have gone from a gadget of mind control to a potential gadget of mind control. Better.
> 
> I would suggest it's potential to control the mind *is no more effective than was the TV when I was a youth.* Heck, before that newspapers had a similar potential.
> 
> again, this is a completely different conversation.
> 
> I, like you, feel planned obsolescence (I never seem to get agreeance on the exact definition of this) is indeed destructive.
> Part of an impending Armageddon? No.
> 
> Thank you for your comments, it's good to understand others perspectives.


I think that is incorrect. When you leave your house the TV stays behind. Mobiles stay with you virtually 24/7. I know people who sit in bed playing with their mobiles for 1 our before shut eye and eventually, exhausted - go to sleep. The mobile also probably offers the authorities (for political reasons) - and big business (for money) - a chance to monitor what you are doing - where you go - what you say - what you think. Now you can protect your phone with a fingerprint - how might that be of use and to whom?


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> I think that is incorrect. When you leave your house the TV stays behind. Mobiles stay with you virtually 24/7. I know people who sit in bed playing with their mobiles for 1 our before shut eye and eventually, exhausted - go to sleep. The mobile also probably offers the authorities (for political reasons) - and big business (for money) - a chance to monitor what you are doing - where you go - what you say - what you think. Now you can protect your phone with a fingerprint - how might that be of use and to whom?


it is certainly a debatable point but a cell phone is not stared at for hours on end as the TV was in my youth

I know folks who STILL lay in bed late at night watching TV past their bedtime

surveillance is surveillance as I see it

it can be done in many ways.... a cell phone is only one of many ways....

thanks again for your perspective

I do think your view well worth discussing


----------



## Bulldog

eljr said:


> it is certainly a debatable point but a cell phone is not stared at for hours on end as the TV was in my youth


I think you're wrong about that - teenagers and young adults are at their phones for hours at a time.


----------



## PlaySalieri

I think in some way this discussion about control etc is related to the death of CD. Are we not being herded in a particular direction - with merely the illusion of free choice?


----------



## DavidA

Bulldog said:


> I think you're wrong about that - teenagers and young adults are at their phones for hours at a time.


Absolutely!You see them on their phones for hours. Also parents when they should be communicating with their kids. I want to say, "Put your phone away and talk to them." Even in the cinema you notice some people can't go above 10 minutes without checking their phone. Some form of addiction it appears.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> I think in some way this discussion about control etc is related to the death of CD. Are we not being herded in a particular direction - with merely the illusion of free choice?


Free choice has always been an illusion. Being headed our lineage.


----------



## eljr

DavidA said:


> Absolutely!You see them on their phones for hours. Also parents when they should be communicating with their kids. I want to say, "Put your phone away and talk to them." Even in the cinema you notice some people can't go above 10 minutes without checking their phone. Some form of addiction it appears.


I see cell phones as having enhanced the relationship between child and parent.

My perspective comes from having two children pre cell phone and one post.

As to being on the phone hours at a time, what exactly is this harm?

Something as insidious as the cell phone you can surly list all it's evils.

I look forward to evolving this discussion into particulars.


----------



## eljr

Bulldog said:


> I think you're wrong about that - teenagers and young adults are at their phones for hours at a time.


i think it would be interesting to do a study as to which gets more attention. The all day glances at a cell phone or the hour upon hour of uninterpreted gaze spent in front of the tv in 1970.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-13281200
> 
> You're welcome.


Censorship is enjoyed the world round.

Differing cultures have different types depending on mores and governing systems.

Mass physiology, which is what you are fearful of, was achieved by many over the millennia.

Can a cell phone be used in such an undertaking? Absolutely. But so can ANY communication tool.

Realize their was no cell phone under Hitler, for example.

Trump would be effective with or without the cell phone. In fact, it is but a negligible tool in his manipulative kit.


----------



## Triplets

eljr said:


> i think it would be interesting to do a study as to which gets more attention. The all day glances at a cell phone or the hour upon hour of uninterpreted gaze spent in front of the tv in 1970.


You may not realize that today's "Smart TV"s are also monitoring and reporting on viewing habits, sharing that with Google, Apple et. al to help them tailor the ads that are sent to you. So the TV vs Cell phone dichotomy that is on debate here (that plunking a kid in front of a TV for hours is less intrusive than having them use a cell phone) is a non sequitir.
The truth is we are constantly being monitored. George Orwell would find our lifestyle very plausible. The best that we can hope for is that the information is only used to try and sell more stuff to us, and not to otherwise control and coerce us


----------



## DavidA

eljr said:


> I see cell phones as having enhanced the relationship between child and parent.
> 
> My perspective comes from having two children pre cell phone and one post.
> 
> As to being on the phone hours at a time, what exactly is this harm?
> 
> Something as insidious as the cell phone you can surly list all it's evils.
> 
> I look forward to evolving this discussion into particulars.


When I see parents chatting or playing games on their phones instead of talking to their kids it can only be described as undesirable. But perhaps you talk to your kids on the phone instead of face to face round the meal table?


----------



## eljr

Triplets said:


> You may not realize that today's "Smart TV"s are also monitoring and reporting on viewing habits, sharing that with Google, Apple et. al to help them tailor the ads that are sent to you. So the TV vs Cell phone dichotomy that is on debate here (that plunking a kid in front of a TV for hours is less intrusive than having them use a cell phone) is a non sequitir.
> The truth is we are constantly being monitored. George Orwell would find our lifestyle very plausible. The best that we can hope for is that the information is only used to try and sell more stuff to us, and not to otherwise control and coerce us


You need to follow the thread.

This is about the 2018 cell phone vs 1970 television.

-------------------

As a sidebar, less than 50% of millennials and gen xers watch ANY traditional tv at all.

-------------------

I am not much for sitting home and hoping but I can assure you, you are being manipulated daily and always have been. For more than just buying stuff.


----------



## eljr

DavidA said:


> When I see parents chatting or playing games on their phones instead of talking to their kids it can only be described as undesirable. But perhaps you talk to your kids on the phone instead of face to face round the meal table?


I'd suggest you are set in your ways and have a closed mind.

I promise you, your way is not better, it is not worse.

I also promise you, the cell phone and other such technologies have principally served to enhance quality of life.


----------



## Guest

DavidA said:


> Absolutely!You see them on their phones for hours. Also parents when they should be communicating with their kids. I want to say, "Put your phone away and talk to them." Even in the cinema you notice some people can't go above 10 minutes without checking their phone. Some form of addiction it appears.


You see it all the time. In a restaurant the other evening, on the next table (and in my sight line throughout) was a teenage daughter and her parents. The daughter attended constantly to her phone, never once engaging with the other humans sat next to her. Thus is society denuded.

And although a criminal offence in the UK, smartphone use whilst driving continues, and continues to cause death.

Perhaps the threat of losing income will cause a response : Unilever, the world's second largest marketing spender, is threatening to withdraw its advertising from Facebook "if they fail to protect children, promote hate or create division in society." -

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/feb/12/marmite-unilever-ads-facebook-google


----------



## Pat Fairlea

I sincerely hope we're not seeing the death of the CD. My CM listening has passed through 78s to 33rpm vinyl (vulnerable) to tape cassettes (tangly, vulnerable spawn of Satan) to CDs (robust-ish, easy to select key tracks etc) to MP3 (compressed and poor quality). CDs win for me, every time. 

As for young people becoming fixated on their mobile/cell/smart phones, when have teenagers ever communicated with their parents and siblings? And as a not-young person, I have been really grateful for my smart phone and social media since retiring. I live some distance from ex-colleagues and friends, but can easily keep in contact with them and feel I am still part of that nice community. Any new technology has its downside and its challenges. Maybe we haven't been smart enough in how we accommodate these communication devices to use them for our benefit rather than largely for the benefit of e-businesses and perverts.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> You see it all the time. In a restaurant the other evening, on the next table (and in my sight line throughout) was a teenage daughter and her parents. The daughter attended constantly to her phone, never once engaging with the other humans sat next to her. *Thus is society denuded.*


I am lost as to how to politely respond as this is so wildly over the top.



> And although a criminal offence in the UK, smartphone use whilst driving continues, and continues to cause death.


The cell phone causes death?

PLEASE tell me how the cell phone causes death.

Obviously you are speaking about distracted driving (I pray)which I agree needs to have MUCH tougher penalties.



> Perhaps the threat of losing income will cause a response : Unilever, the world's second largest marketing spender, is threatening to withdraw its advertising from Facebook "if they fail to protect children, promote hate or create division in society." -
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/feb/12/marmite-unilever-ads-facebook-google


Again the conversation shifts.

Not that this is not worth discussing but it is separate from the intrinsic value of a cell phone.

---------------------------

Honest, I get people don't like change. I understand why this is and how it's hard coded in us.

I do not understand the hysteria over a devise that can deliver all the worlds accumulated wisdom, enhance the bonds with one another and keep us almost instantly aware of any malady or celebration we have an interest in.


----------



## eljr

Pat Fairlea said:


> As for young people becoming fixated on their mobile/cell/smart phones, when have teenagers ever communicated with their parents and siblings? And as a not-young person, I have been really grateful for my smart phone and social media since retiring. I live some distance from ex-colleagues and friends, but can easily keep in contact with them and feel I am still part of that nice community. Any new technology has its downside and its challenges. Maybe we haven't been smart enough in how we accommodate these communication devices to use them for our benefit rather than largely for the benefit of e-businesses and perverts.


I love this post!

When I think back to all the lost relationships before this wonderful time we now live in I have a great appreciation for today.

When I was 18, long distance telephone calls were so expensive that many a relationship waned.

It kills me that most the people I knew as a youth never adapted to the evolving technologies. They remain lost to me.

That does not happen today. My American daughter speaks nearly daily to her Swedish resident best friend. When life's demands are so rigorous as to cut back on the daily texts, social media fills in to assure they share each other's lives.

When my daughter traveled I was with her, not encumbered by the thousands and thousands of miles between us.

Frankly, the cell phone and all it's treasures have sown a much closer and larger social network for all who want it. Yet, I come here and hear accusations of it's responsibility in social isolationism? Folly of thought I think would be fair to say.


----------



## SixFootScowl

It seems to me that music is transient to the younger people, that is, a song only has a short lifespan and then it is tossed for the next hit. Unlike we classical listeners (and classic pop/rock) who have music of much greater value, they see no reason to have a CD because they are just going to toss the music. The CD would simply get in the way.

Unfortunately, the market is driven by the desires of the masses and over time these people who listen to throwaway music will be a greater and greater share of the market. Let's hope that many of them mature enough to turn to music of greater value and actually start buying CD sets.


----------



## Strange Magic

The intrinsic value of the cell phone: There are only upsides; no downsides. Now I get the picture .


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> The intrinsic value of the cell phone: There are only upsides; no downsides. Now I get the picture .


A terrible take away from a fair minded discussion. IMHO


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> The cell phone causes death?
> PLEASE tell me how the cell phone causes death.
> Obviously you are speaking about distracted driving (I pray)which I agree needs to have MUCH tougher penalties.


Obviously. And like other "addictions", penalties do not diminish the attraction.



eljr said:


> Honest, I get people don't like change.


If that includes my contribution I would have to say that is a straw man.


----------



## eljr

Fritz Kobus said:


> It seems to me that music is transient to the younger people, that is, a song only has a short lifespan and then it is tossed for the next hit. Unlike we classical listeners (and classic pop/rock) who have music of much greater value,
> .


We do?

Maybe "get over ourselves" might be a suggestion from a younger music enthusiast? ( a very valid suggestion)

-------------------------------

There is no need of a CD because a CD is a pain the a$$ compared to streaming.



> they are just going to toss the music


Honest, this is getting ridiculous. Such disdain for the present, the future. For our children.


----------



## eugeneonagain

eljr said:


> I am lost as to how to politely respond as this is so wildly over the top.
> 
> The cell phone causes death?
> 
> PLEASE tell me how the cell phone causes death.
> 
> Obviously you are speaking about distracted driving (I pray)which I agree needs to have MUCH tougher penalties.
> 
> Again the conversation shifts.
> 
> Not that this is not worth discussing but it is separate from the intrinsic value of a cell phone.
> 
> ---------------------------
> 
> Honest, I get people don't like change. I understand why this is and how it's hard coded in us.
> 
> I do not understand the hysteria over a devise that can deliver all the worlds accumulated wisdom, enhance the bonds with one another and keep us almost instantly aware of any malady or celebration we have an interest in.


Your argument is continually constructed as if everyone else is struggling to accept change. You are wrong. When Dogen addressed the issue of people sacrificing normal human contact for smartphone activities, you simply brush it aside; not answer it but brush it aside because you have no answer.

The dismissal of dangerous driving through lack of attention CAUSED by attending to a smartphone is not what you are painting it as. I see that you are taking the 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' mantra approach to this issue. Also a tired assumption that it is merely a personal responsibility issue, rather than that mobile technology has infiltrated social space in nefarious ways. The smartphone has now been, rather forcibly, intertwined into the way the majority of people work and organise their lives. It is a major factor in the latest automation of the workplace achieved by it being deeply embedded into social life.

It might run more smoothly if you would properly engage with the problems and issues being raised rather than playing the (unconvincing) role of enlightened ambassador for progress and only balanced commentator in the village with regard to the effects of current technology upon modern life.

In a book from the 1960s, Jacques Ellul's _The Technological Society_, he looks forward to the year 2000 and remarks:



> Knowledge will be accumulated in "electronic banks" and trans*mitted directly to the human nervous system by means of coded electronic messages. There will no longer be any need of reading or learning mountains of useless information; everything will be received and registered according to the needs of the moment.
> There will be no need of attention or effort. What is needed will pass directly from the machine to the brain without going through consciousness.


In the '60s with all the fear and conscious concerns of dictatorship and the abuse of emerging technology, particularly bio-technology, it always seemed less histrionic to say such things. Now there is again a naive view that the age of the free individual has finally dawned which has been facilitated by personal technology. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? Do they even balance? Are all the advantages really as advantageous as you are saying or are you just plucking out a few that benefit you personally?

At the very least the artificial 'social network' is not synonymous with traditional social networks. It isn't merely the same thing carried on through useful technological means. That is an oversimplified approach.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> Obviously. And like other "addictions", penalties do not diminish the attraction.


There is no need to diminish any attraction. There is a need to control behavior.

We know that tougher laws do just that.


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> A terrible take away from a fair minded discussion. IMHO


Opioids: only upsides; no downsides. Nuclear power: only upsides; no downsides. I could go on (but I won't).


----------



## PlaySalieri

DavidA said:


> When I see parents chatting or playing games on their phones instead of talking to their kids it can only be described as undesirable. But perhaps you talk to your kids on the phone instead of face to face round the meal table?


Isnt that one of the worst sights. I used to frequent a cafe where I would often see a dad (mainly sometimes a mum) sat across from a child, dad tapping away on his phone and the child talking to daddy - becoming more desperate for a reply to his/her questions and receiving no response. As a parent that sort of thing makes me feel very sad.


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> We know that tougher laws do just that.


It's not that simple. In the UK, drivers can be fined, lose their licence and face imprisonment; but it still goes on because:

"It is alarming to see that some drivers have clearly relaxed their attitudes to the risks associated with this behaviour but more worrying is the increase in the percentage of motorists who actually admit to using a handheld device when driving.

The fact that drivers have little or no confidence that they will be caught when breaking these laws is a likely contributor to the problem and it is sadly the case that every day most road users see other drivers brazenly using their handheld phones when in control of a vehicle - a sight which should be a thing of the past."

- RAC road safety spokesperson.


----------



## eljr

eugeneonagain said:


> It might run more smoothly if you would properly engage with the problems and issues being raised rather than playing the (unconvincing) role of enlightened ambassador for progress and only balanced commentator in the village with regard to the effects of current technology upon modern life.


well I see I pi$$ed somebody off. (I am sure several)

What might run more smoothly? You selling your doomsday scenario?

You know, it may be that my balanced commentary is unconvincing to you because your stance is so radical.



> the artificial 'social network' is not synonymous with traditional social networks. It isn't merely the same thing carried on through useful technological means. That is an oversimplified approach.


Then why would you or anyone approach it like that?

You do understand the adaptive nature of life?



> Your argument is continually constructed as if everyone else is struggling to accept change. You are wrong. When Dogen addressed the issue of people sacrificing normal human contact for smartphone activities, you simply brush it aside; not answer it but brush it aside because you have no answer.


Here is what we will do.

We will explore.

First though, you must support your assertion that people are sacrificing normal human contact for smartphone activities because I wholly reject this assertion. I have found that smartphones have done very much the opposite.

Would you like me to expound on this?

Do not claim the already posted ludicrous scenarios of a people who gaze down or offer comment over the net while in company of others because that is too easy to rip apart.

-------------------------------

In summation,

I assure you, the sky is not falling.


----------



## eugeneonagain

There is long-term research being done about the effects of lack of bonding between infants and young mothers who now look at their smartphones during breastfeeding/feeding; rather than at the child and the way they would talk to and interact with the child were they doing so. I suppose the final results of that are not yet in.

However, swinging this discussion back to music and the CD, it is probably inevitable that the CD as a delivery system for the sale of music will be superseded, except for archival purposes. Most people I know aged between 15-30 don't even use a dedicated mp3 player; they listen from their phone sometimes linked to a bluetooth speaker. I haven't asked everyone, but some people I have directly asked say they just stream music or have the radio on and it doesn't seem to be either informed listening or even listening at all in the actively engaged sense, rather than merely hearing. 

In some sense it matches the sort of wall-to-wall TV of commercial channels where the credits and theme music disappears and the output just runs almost seamlessly between advertisements. More like an intravenous drip you forget about than a pill you might swallow or not swallow. Streamed music can easily become mere Muzak, musical wallpaper.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> It's not that simple. In the UK, drivers can be fined, lose their licence and face imprisonment; but it still goes on because:
> 
> "It is alarming to see that some drivers have clearly relaxed their attitudes to the risks associated with this behaviour but more worrying is the increase in the percentage of motorists who actually admit to using a handheld device when driving.
> 
> The fact that drivers have little or no confidence that they will be caught when breaking these laws is a likely contributor to the problem and it is sadly the case that every day most road users see other drivers brazenly using their handheld phones when in control of a vehicle - a sight which should be a thing of the past."
> 
> - RAC road safety spokesperson.


Thanks for the reasoned reply.

Good point.

We can never offer full protection from smart phone distractions, people driving when drinking or drugging, people putting on makeup as they whirl down the road.

But what then do we do?

frankly, I support cars be required to be equipped with technology to ensure drivers are not distracted.

Is there something more than this that you would suggest?

Do you think that one distraction be, smartphone be treated differently than other distractions?

If so how?


----------



## eljr

If 100 years ago I offered you a devise that could deliver all the worlds accumulated wisdom, enhance social bonds and keep us almost instantly aware of any malady or celebration we have an interest in, who here would have ran from such a devise?


----------



## Tallisman

Still love me some CDs. Especially those delicious CD box sets. Yum. I'm a sucker for the ephemeral thrill of opening stuff.


----------



## Tallisman

I buy CD's and upload them onto iTunes and then onto an iPod for headphone listening. That way I can have both formats, but only spend on one. Hehe.


----------



## eugeneonagain

eljr said:


> well I see I pi$$ed somebody off. (I am sure several)
> 
> What might run more smoothly? You selling your doomsday scenario?
> 
> You know, it may be that my balanced commentary is unconvincing to you because your stance is so radical.


There's nothing radical about balancing the critique from blind optimism. Isn't it just a little bit more 'radical' to go about calling things "a doomsday scenario". You haven't pi$$ed me off, just disappointed me with your naivety.



eljr said:


> Then why would you or anyone approach it like that?
> 
> You do understand the adaptive nature of life?


Give me a break.



eljr said:


> Here is what we will do.
> We will explore.
> 
> First though, you must support your assertion that people are sacrificing normal human contact for smartphone activities because I wholly reject this assertion. I have found that smartphones have done very much the opposite.
> 
> Would you like me to expound on this?
> 
> Do not claim the already posted ludicrous scenarios of a people who gaze down or offer comment over the net while in company of others because that is too easy to rip apart.
> 
> -------------------------------
> 
> In summation,
> 
> I assure you, the sky is not falling.


You can reject it, but that's not really a rebuttal is it? You fail badly in this assessment because you are equating how people behave online with how they behave in situations of physical presence of another. If you stop and think for a moment you'll realise that people behave differently; in much the same way that I am now admonishing you via a forum, but would very likely approach it differently if we were discussing this on a park bench. The difference creates an entirely different social experience than traditional social interaction and the discussion is about both its pros and cons, not just a mindless appraisal or a sweeping indictment against it.

That a bunch of retired classical music listeners with gall stones feel they can communicate with the wider world from their well-used chairs, isn't a thoroughgoing vindication of the other wider disadvantages of living life through technological communications. You or I and others on this forum have the benefit of having acquired a world-view and socialisation pre-dating the smartphone and the internet; we get to see both sides. My neighbour's daughter is acquiring hers differently and I at least find it a bizarre sight when her friends come over and I see them standing at the back, silent and all looking at individual smartphone screens for half an hour.

Please do expound, but only if it is something more than: 'I reject', 'you are all naysayers' because that's neither very enlightening nor substantial.


----------



## eugeneonagain

eljr said:


> If 100 years ago I offered you a devise that could deliver all the worlds accumulated wisdom, enhance social bonds and keep us almost instantly aware of any malady or celebration we have an interest in, here here would have ran from such a devise?


Such a devi*c*e would have been jumped on by almost everyone. However there is a leading assumption in there: "enhance social bonds". It only increases them, or even changes their nature. It also assumes that we need to know about every "malady or celebration".
It's like demand is created to fulfil supply...now where have I seen that before?

Whenever I hear it put forward I am always reminded of this Thoreau quote:


> "And I am sure that I never read any memorable news in a newspaper. If we read of one man robbed, or murdered, or killed by accident, or one house burned, or one vessel wrecked, or one steamboat blown up, or one cow run over on the Western Railroad, or one mad dog killed, or one lot of grasshoppers in the winter, - we need never read of another. One is enough. If you are acquainted with the principle, what do you care for a myriad instances and applications?"


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> Thanks for the reasoned reply.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> We can never offer full protection from smart phone distractions, people driving when drinking or drugging, people putting on makeup as they whirl down the road.
> 
> But what then do we do?
> 
> frankly, I support cars be required to be equipped with technology to ensure drivers are not distracted.
> 
> Is there something more than this that you would suggest?
> 
> Do you think that one distraction be, smartphone be treated differently than other distractions?
> 
> If so how?


OK. I could respond but even by my lax standards I think I've helped derail this enough from the OP.

I'm out of here.


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> If 100 years ago I offered you a devise that could deliver all the worlds accumulated wisdom, enhance social bonds and keep us almost instantly aware of any malady or celebration we have an interest in, here here would have ran from such a devise?


The library and the letter have been uniquely combined in the tablet (iPad). The addition of instantaneous, ubiquitous, seemingly constant contact offered by the reduction in size and the addition of the telephonic component in the modern smartphone has, through perhaps not yet fully-understood psychological/behavioral mechanisms, transformed the relatively benign tablet concept into an addictive agent of amazing potency--today's cellphone. I walk among cellphone zombies, shop among them, sometimes visit them in their homes. I see them in the rear view mirror of my car, in the car behind me, often gesticulating vigorously in animated conversation....


----------



## millionrainbows

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> I brought 5 vinyl records yesterday - nothing beats them, the list is
> 
> the nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the nice again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beetheart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Crimson


I bought all of those when they came out, so I still have them. Unless record cutting lathes have vastly improved, I see no need to pay 20-30 dollars each for them again. This, right now, is the "golden age" of CDs. I bought this 14-Cd set of guitar music for 7.99.


----------



## millionrainbows

How can a medium like CD become obsolete? All it does is store files on a portable plastic hard disc, and all computers play them. What are the naysayers waiting for, a higher-rez format? I thought none of them could tell the difference.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> We do?
> 
> Maybe "get over ourselves" might be a suggestion from a younger music enthusiast? ( a very valid suggestion)
> 
> -------------------------------
> 
> There is no need of a CD because a CD is a pain the a$$ compared to streaming.
> 
> Honest, this is getting ridiculous. *Such disdain for the present, the future. For our children*[/B].


Rhetoric of this level is unworthy of you.
If you want to maintain your, until now, impeccably "balanced" face - you should read back your posts carefully before posting - you might yet be able to delete that last part.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> If 100 years ago I offered you a devise *that could deliver all the worlds accumulated wisdom*, enhance social bonds and keep us almost instantly aware of any malady or celebration we have an interest in, here here would have ran from such a devise?


It delivers not such nice things too. I hate to think how much time I would have spent looking at certain types of material when i was growing up in the 70s had I that access and technology. Thankfully my exposure to that kind of thing was limited to the lingerie section in my mum's mail order shopping catalogue.

But you live in the land where makers do not have to state whether or not food is GM - I am surprised that you, with your ability to balance out issues, take such an optimistic position on technology and personal liberty.


----------



## eljr

eugeneonagain said:


> There's nothing radical about balancing the critique from blind optimism. Isn't it just a little bit more 'radical' to go about calling things "a doomsday scenario". You haven't pi$$ed me off, just disappointed me with your naivety.
> 
> l.


Now I know I was supposed to become angered at yet another sarcastic, hate dripping post from you but instead I broke out in laughter, realizing your frustration at not being able to justify your emotional response to smartphone use as demonic.

-----------------

Here is what we are gonna do.

You are going to choose between taking a time out like an adult or continuing to exhibit your frustrations at my posts.

If you choose the latter, I will not be responding.

I am going to continue to share ideas and thoughts without malice with those with a differing perspective.

----------------

I do however, sincerely wish you all the best


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> OK. I could respond but even by my lax standards I think I've helped derail this enough from the OP.
> 
> I'm out of here.


indeed, it is time to move on

have a great day!


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> The library and the letter have been uniquely combined in the tablet (iPad). The addition of instantaneous, ubiquitous, seemingly constant contact offered by the reduction in size and the addition of the telephonic component in the modern smartphone has, through perhaps not yet fully-understood psychological/behavioral mechanisms, transformed the relatively benign tablet concept into an addictive agent of amazing potency--today's cellphone. I walk among cellphone zombies, shop among them, sometimes visit them in their homes. I see them in the rear view mirror of my car, in the car behind me, often gesticulating vigorously in animated conversation....


All this is true in my observations as well.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> It delivers not such nice things too. I hate to think how much time I would have spent looking at certain types of material when i was growing up in the 70s had I that access and technology. Thankfully my exposure to that kind of thing was limited to the lingerie section in my mum's mail order shopping catalogue.
> 
> But you live in the land where makers do not have to state whether or not food is GM - I am surprised that you, with your ability to balance out issues, take such an optimistic position on technology and personal liberty.


Interesting you found and noted my uncharacteristic optimism as it is juxtaposed to my core pessimism as to the human condition.

and point taken, indeed, all of man's wisdom is not positive, much is dark and is best left buried


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> Rhetoric of this level is unworthy of you.
> .


Oh no it is not.... but, thanks for giving me the benefit of thinking it is. 

lol

-------------------------

a general comment to all, it's OK for folks to disagree

peace all


----------



## PlaySalieri

cant view page 12!

nav between pages all over the place


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr, I'm going to conclude from your most recent posts that you are staging a strategic withdrawal from your hitherto almost unbridled enthusiasm for the modern smartphone, and now affirm that you see real problems of addiction, loss of concentration, lack of situational awareness and other negatives associated with near-universal smartphone use.


----------



## eugeneonagain

eljr said:


> Now I know I was supposed to become angered at yet another sarcastic, hate dripping post from you but instead I broke out in laughter, realizing your frustration at not being able to justify your emotional response to smartphone use as demonic.


See this is where you are falling down. With the lack of a meaningful argument at your disposal you are relying upon accusing me of being 'frustrated' and 'emotional'. The fact, however, is that I am neither. I also don't think smartphone use is 'demonic', as you would would quickly realise if you were to actually read what I have written. So much silly hyperbole from you.



eljr said:


> Here is what we are gonna do.
> 
> You are going to choose between taking a time out like an adult or continuing to exhibit your frustrations at my posts.
> 
> If you choose the latter, I will not be responding.
> 
> I am going to continue to share ideas and thoughts without malice with those with a differing perspective.


Here's what I'm _gonna_ do: I'll set my own terms for how I deal with this discussion, thanks. In between dealing with your contributions, I've already been away and baked a strudel, washed the dishes and vacuumed the bedroom. It's really not a top priority. If anyone is frustrated it is yourself, perhaps at having a pet certainty uprooted.

Whether you respond or not is your own affair; it has no bearing on the cavalier lack of depth with which you've approached the question of technology in society up to now. It's not merely 'differing perspectives' it's a matter of convincing perspectives.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> eljr, I'm going to conclude from your most recent posts that you are staging a strategic withdrawal from your hitherto almost unbridled enthusiasm for the modern smartphone, and now affirm that you see real problems of addiction, loss of concentration, lack of situational awareness and other negatives associated with near-universal smartphone use.


how on earth can you conclude that?

I am winding it down as my point was made and some folks are becoming unsettled in my resolve.

I said earlier in the thread, there is good and bad to everything in life. I am not blind to the challenges presented by our smartphones.

When you have something so powerful, accessible and beneficial you need to embrace it and find ways to limit it's negatives. Not cast it to the wind as untenable.

Their is MUCH downside to winning the lottery, would you not claim the prize to avoid the challenges which tag along?


----------



## amfortas

As this thread makes clear, new modes of communication do not change the fundamental imperative of human discourse: "I win."


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

the answer is on page 12


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

millionrainbows said:


> I bought all of those when they came out, so I still have them. Unless record cutting lathes have vastly improved, I see no need to pay 20-30 dollars each for them again. This, right now, is the "golden age" of CDs. I bought this 14-Cd set of guitar music for 7.99.


You had good taste back then...................................


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> how on earth can you conclude that?
> 
> *I am winding it down as my point was made and some folks are becoming unsettled in my resolve. *
> 
> I said earlier in the thread, there is good and bad to everything in life. I am not blind to the challenges presented by our smartphones.
> 
> When you have something so powerful, accessible and beneficial you need to embrace it and find ways to limit it's negatives. Not cast it to the wind as untenable.
> 
> Their is MUCH downside to winning the lottery, would you not claim the prize to avoid the challenges which tag along?


You are indeed compassion itself and your gradual winding down is much appreciated.

Many music fans suffering from delusional paranoia over new tech, with your comments no longer contradicting quite rationally their ill skewed world view, can now breathe easy and continue to prance along the path of their folly.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> Now I know I was supposed to become angered at yet another sarcastic, hate dripping post from you but instead I broke out in laughter, realizing your frustration at not being able to justify your emotional response to smartphone use as demonic.
> 
> -----------------
> 
> Here is what we are gonna do.
> 
> You are going to choose between *taking a time out like an adult* or continuing to exhibit your frustrations at my posts.
> 
> If you choose the latter, I will not be responding.
> 
> I am going to continue to share ideas and thoughts without malice with those with a differing perspective.
> 
> ----------------
> 
> I do however, sincerely wish you all the best


why do you do that? I mean why do you goad people? Why not stick to your goal ie establishing the validity of your position.


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> If 100 years ago I offered you a devise that could deliver all the worlds accumulated wisdom, enhance social bonds and keep us almost instantly aware of any malady or celebration we have an interest in, who here would have ran from such a devise?


If 30 years ago you offered us a portable phone which would track our location in real time, be able to listen to all of our calls, access what we are typing etc and that the government had access to all of this, I think most of us would have run from it.


----------



## eugeneonagain

I expect the police will arrive soon anyway to cut holes into the thread so that no-one will know what was being discussed. It's all transient and malleable on the internet.


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> I said earlier in the thread, there is good and bad to everything in life. I am not blind to the challenges presented by our smartphones.
> 
> When you have something so powerful, accessible *and beneficial* you need to embrace it and find ways to limit it's negatives. Not cast it to the wind as untenable.
> 
> Their is MUCH downside to winning the lottery, would you not claim the prize to avoid the challenges which tag along?


Whether near-universal smartphone use is ultimately beneficial has yet to be seen, though its use will doubtless not be curbed in any way, beyond imposing bans on use when one is operating a moving vehicle. Society as a whole will have to find ways (or not) to cope with the dysfunctions that arise from uncontrolled smartphone use. We have seen that the blessings of opioids and of nuclear fission have their limits and/but their use is far easier to limit by societal/governmental control, and such controls are being worked into the fabric of our lives. Your lottery analogy is interesting; it is another social/economic experiment, substituting what some call a tax on the naïve for more general and progressive forms of taxation, in order to finance public expenditures. The downside may be the daily consumption of the seedcorn of the poor in their pursuit of faint gain, rather than their using it to build financial security. It would be comforting to see evidence that you have considered these things in more depth.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

This discussion has been interesting to follow. Not sure how we got from the "death of the CD" to technology taking control of everyone, but whatever. There are studies that are showing there can be potential problems with cellphone use. Primarily mental health issues with depression and anxiety and the increase in brain cancers is concerning as well. However, a balance is necessary in everything we take up. If someone spends an inordinate amount of time listening to music and disconnecting from society would that be a concern? I think so, and so even something as innocent as listening to music can become a problem. 

My observations of people in general shows me that technology is changing the way people interact. Whether that's good or bad for humans is too soon to tell. My instinct tells me that overuse of these devices is causing, or will cause some harm to society. The disconnection of people actually relating to people cannot be a healthy thing. 

I also think there is widespead addiction to technology and phones in particular. Even for myself I have found that I do not have the concentration I once had before smartphone and computer use. So, I have to make a concerted effort to put the phone away and stay with reading my book or working on another project. Even so, I have to admit to my mind wandering and wanting to pick up my phone. This behavior, in my opinion, is not normal, or healthy. I would dare say most on here if they were honest would have to admit the same thing. 

As a result there have been times I have felt like unplugging but there are so many advantages to having technology that I would miss and probably just wind up reconnecting. 

Time will ultimately reveal what damage is being done on society. Perhaps it's greater than we care to admit, but hopefully not. In the meantime let's be thankful for the opportunities we have today to explore music we would never have hoped to have without this technology. Of course if we didn't have the tech we would never have known what we were missing anyway.


----------



## SixFootScowl

From technology to the demise of human civilization!
We are all doomed!


----------



## Guest

Fritz Kobus said:


> From technology to the demise of human civilization!
> We are all doomed!


Apparently (ie I can't remember which biologist said it) there is an inverse relationship between the intelligence of a species and it's longevity. More intelligent fauna such as mammals don't seem to last for as long as insects for example before they become extinct. Until very recently, humans were quite unsuccessful, with a very sparse population. In fact _homo sapiens_ have now come to about the end of their time on Earth according to this theory.

With the exponential increase in AI at the moment, it looks like we may indeed be doomed, not to mention the, uh, CD.


----------



## amfortas

Tulse said:


> With the exponential increase in AI at the moment, it looks like we may indeed be doomed, not to mention the, uh, CD.


It would be the final irony if the CD ends up outlasting us.


----------



## SixFootScowl

amfortas said:


> It would be the final irony if *the CD* ends up outlasting us.


Hopefully it is opera!


----------



## eugeneonagain

Well at least no one would be there to suffer.


----------



## Strange Magic

amfortas said:


> It would be the final irony if the CD ends up outlasting us.


There is no question that the CD will outlast us. Our understanding of geology, particularly of erosion, deposition, and sedimentation tells us that a stratum of anthropogenic materials is being laid down in any and all basins of deposition, that are destined to be compacted into a well-defined stratum that future (alien) geologists will quickly identify as marking the Anthropocene Era. The Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary and its associated Great Extinction is similarly well-marked by the associated debris of the fatal asteroid that took T. Rex away.


----------



## amfortas

Strange Magic said:


> The Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary and its associated Great Extinction is similarly well-marked by the associated debris of the fatal asteroid that took T. Rex away.


Not to mention the archaeological clues that tell us what music the T. Rex got down to.


----------



## KenOC

Tulse said:


> Apparently (ie I can't remember which biologist said it) there is an inverse relationship between the intelligence of a species and it's longevity. More intelligent fauna such as mammals don't seem to last for as long as insects for example before they become extinct.


Well, cockroaches date back to the Carboniferous, about 320 million years ago. Humans, even of the earliest kind, have been around only one or two percent of that time. I'm not sure who will win this race but I know how Darwin is placing his bets! 

Not to mention that cockroaches are remarkably resistant to the effects of ionizing radiation, which should give further pause for reflection.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Kevin Pearson said:


> This discussion has been interesting to follow. Not sure how we got from the "death of the CD" to technology taking control of everyone, but whatever. There are studies that are showing there can be potential problems with cellphone use. Primarily mental health issues with depression and anxiety and the increase in brain cancers is concerning as well. However, a balance is necessary in everything we take up. If someone spends an inordinate amount of time listening to music and disconnecting from society would that be a concern? I think so, and so even something as innocent as listening to music can become a problem.
> 
> My observations of people in general shows me that technology is changing the way people interact. Whether that's good or bad for humans is too soon to tell. My instinct tells me that overuse of these devices is causing, or will cause some harm to society. The disconnection of people actually relating to people cannot be a healthy thing.
> 
> I also think there is widespead addiction to technology and phones in particular. Even for myself I have found that I do not have the concentration I once had before smartphone and computer use. So, I have to make a concerted effort to put the phone away and stay with reading my book or working on another project. Even so, I have to admit to my mind wandering and wanting to pick up my phone. This behavior, in my opinion, is not normal, or healthy. I would dare say most on here if they were honest would have to admit the same thing.
> 
> As a result there have been times I have felt like unplugging but there are so many advantages to having technology that I would miss and probably just wind up reconnecting.
> 
> Time will ultimately reveal what damage is being done on society. Perhaps it's greater than we care to admit, but hopefully not. In the meantime let's be thankful for the opportunities we have today to explore music we would never have hoped to have without this technology. Of course if we didn't have the tech we would never have known what we were missing anyway.


some good comments. I think I was probably happier before the phones became like mini computers when they were just phones. in those days I was singing their praises - particularly as one great benefit - if you break down in your car - you can simply call up the recovery services. but but but - my wife is a nervous woman and if she doesnt get texts from me now and again she starts to think something is wrong. if mobiles did not exist, this problem would not present. It occurs to her that I may have simply forgotten to text her - but what if I have crashed in my car? So she worries and in the past has even called the police when I have been silent for some time. Yes I do have reasons to hate this technology but enough said about that.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> why do you do that? I mean why do you goad people? Why not stick to your goal ie establishing the validity of your position.


i tactically responded in kind


----------



## eljr

Tulse said:


> If 30 years ago you offered us a portable phone which would track our location in real time, be able to listen to all of our calls, access what we are typing etc and that the government had access to all of this, I think most of us would have run from it.


Well, we have it for 20 years, in mass.

How far have you run?


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> I have found that I do not have the concentration I once had before smartphone and computer


I know what you mean, we have all seen a difference associated with the distraction a smartphone compels.

But is it really concentration we have lost?

In the early 70's I would listen to music and inevitable stare at the album cover. I studied the pictures, read and reread liner notes.

That was about all I did when listening.

Today, I have the world to find interest as I listen.

I am processing more today as I listen. I am processing more all day than 20 years ago,.

I have no problem concentrating on what I wish, I am simply able to find things of more interest.

---------------------

I see you are from Denton TX. Some good high school football played in Denton.


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> I know what you mean, we have all seen a difference associated with the distraction a smartphone compels.......
> 
> Today, I have the world to find interest as I listen.
> 
> I am processing more today as I listen. I am processing more all day than 20 years ago,.
> 
> I have no problem concentrating on what I wish, I am simply able to find things of more interest.


I wonder, then, if you're really hearing the music.....

Do you watch television as you listen? Read a book? I sometimes wonder (not while I'm listening to music, of course) about the concentration of future surgeons as they make their incision; my future lawyer as he argues my case... "I'm great at multi-tasking!", says the engineer of the locomotive...


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> Well, we have it for 20 years, in mass.
> 
> How far have you run?


No.

It has slowly crept up on us. We weren't offered it 30 years ago. It has gained more power and surveillance abilities over us on a piecemeal basis. As we have become adjusted to using it, it does a bit more.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> I wonder, then, if you're really hearing the music.....


I assure you, I have all the amplification one needs to hear the music I play.



> Do you watch television as you listen?


In the 70's, at college, it was common to see me with my headphones on and a basketball game on the TV. Not so much anymore as I have wonderful fellow music enthusiasts, from around the world to share thoughts and perspectives with.



> Read a book?


No. I know this is a common practice which i have never been able to accomplish.



> I sometimes wonder (not while I'm listening to music, of course)


Why would you say of course. You do not wonder things when music is on? Frankly, I don't think that is even possible.

Maybe a trance like state may accomplish this? Now this is something for me to wonder about.



> about the concentration of future surgeons as they make their incision; my future lawyer as he argues my case... "I'm great at multi-tasking!", says the engineer of the locomotive...


I never wonder about surgeons taking there cell phone into the operating room.

---------------------

It's all so plain. Some folks just believe that their habits, practices are superior to others.

It's just not the case.

----------------------

I now have a question for you. What are your thoughts on minimalism in music? Riley, Reich, Glass...


----------



## eljr

Tulse said:


> No.
> 
> It has slowly crept up on us. We weren't offered it 30 years ago. It has gained more power and surveillance abilities over us on a piecemeal basis. As we have become adjusted to using it, it does a bit more.


now that you are aware that your phone is surveilling you, how far from it have you run?


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> In the 70's, at college, it was common to see me with my headphones on and a basketball game on the TV. Not so much anymore as I have wonderful fellow music enthusiasts, from around the world to share thoughts and perspectives with.
> I never wonder about surgeons taking there cell phone into the operating room.
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> It's all so plain. Some folks just believe that their habits, practices are superior to others.
> 
> It's just not the case.


Actually it is just the case. I will submit as an assertion that watching television while listening to music (other than just having "white noise" in the background, is to not hear the music. it has been shown that multitasking is actually to do several things poorly, or one thing so-so and the rest very badly.

As we both know, my remark about surgeons and lawyers had to do with their concentration when learning their craft. We hope they were neither listening to music nor watching basketball while they studied.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> Actually it is just the case. I will submit as an assertion that watching television while listening to music (other than just having "white noise" in the background, is to not hear the music. it has been shown that multitasking is actually to do several things poorly, or one thing so-so and the rest very badly.
> 
> As we both know, my remark about surgeons and lawyers had to do with their concentration when learning their craft. .


How did we both know that?

and, would not any lessening of needed knowledge have been evidenced in their grades or as a failure to become a doctor or lawyer?

Frankly, I don't know why one would take a class and have a smartphone active to begin with.

I answered your questions, answer mine. Minimalism. Your thoughts?


----------



## Strange Magic

I gather that you believe there are no incompetent surgeons or lawyers. The competent malpractice lawyers will have you quickly out of the jury box. As far as us both knowing that my remark dealt with lack of focus while studying, I'll withdraw my inference that you would understand that. I also can't understand why anyone would take a class and have a smartphone active, just as I cannot understand listening to music--with any claim to concentration--while watching television.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

eljr said:


> I know what you mean, we have all seen a difference associated with the distraction a smartphone compels.
> 
> But is it really concentration we have lost?
> 
> In the early 70's I would listen to music and inevitable stare at the album cover. I studied the pictures, read and reread liner notes.
> 
> That was about all I did when listening.
> 
> Today, I have the world to find interest as I listen.
> 
> I am processing more today as I listen. I am processing more all day than 20 years ago,.
> 
> I have no problem concentrating on what I wish, I am simply able to find things of more interest.
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> I see you are from Denton TX. Some good high school football played in Denton.


If undistracted means giving undivided attention to something then the answer is obviously YES! I rather hate not being able to listen to an entire album or read a book without thinking about checking my phone for the latest text, Facebook post or email. I didn't used to have this problem until phones.

And yes Denton does have a good football team but my wife and I retired to Knoxville, TN about 5 months ago. Loving it here!


----------



## wkasimer

Strange Magic said:


> I cannot understand listening to music--with any claim to concentration--while watching television.


You've obviously never attempted to watch a major league baseball game on television.


----------



## Triplets

wkasimer said:


> You've obviously never attempted to watch a major league baseball game on television.


I always have headphones and music on during a football game. Who wants to listen to 4 hours of regurgitated sports clichés and commercials?


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> now that you are aware that your phone is surveilling you, how far from it have you run?


See my previous post.


----------



## Woodduck

eljr said:


> Well, we have it for 20 years, in mass.
> 
> How far have you run?


That question would be more meaningful if there were a place to run to.


----------



## Woodduck

As one who still prefers that things be embodied and present to the senses - visual and tactile - I only regret owning thousands of CDs when I move house (which I've done too many times). It has saved space at home, as well as work when moving, to have discarded the jewel cases.

In view of the certainty of moving again, I'm doing a long-overdue cleanout of my collection and expect to discard at least 400. It's all good stuff, and I'll try, hopefully, to find someone old enough to want physical CDs who doesn't already have much of the music. In the good old days it would have been a pleasure to think that some music-mad youngster, such as my erstwhile self, would inherit a fine classical collection from me. I, receiving such a bounty, would have felt I was inheriting the world!

Sic transit gloria mundi corporalis.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Woodduck said:


> That question would be more meaningful if there were a place to run to.


You mean like Canada


----------



## 13hm13

Kevin Pearson said:


> If undistracted means giving undivided attention to something then the answer is obviously YES! I rather hate not being able to listen to an entire album or read a book without thinking about checking my phone for the latest text, Facebook post or email. I didn't used to have this problem until phones.


Books have been written about the topic of loss of ability to concentrate ... this phenomenon** has its roots in the age of Internet, and esp. smartphones.

Getting back to the main topic...perhaps locking yourself in a listening room with a single CD (or LP) is not a bad idea. Turn your ringer off or put your phone outside the listening room.

**Nicholas Carr 's 2010 book,_ The Shallows_, is perhaps the first serious attempt to "research" the phenomenon. Carr won a Pulitzer Prize . Lotsa YouTube videos, podcasts and blogs about this book if you're curious.


----------



## WildThing

stomanek said:


> I dont get people wanting to have paid files on their hard drive - I just dont get it - a library of music has to be recordings on a physical format whether it be LP, CD or whatever.


What can I say, I guess I'm just an odd duck! :tiphat:

For me, I simply don't have any sort of attachment to physical media. That doesn't mean I've gotten rid of all my cds -- I still have my modest sized cabinet full of them -- but having a digital library has helped me keep my collection far more organized and given me the ability to listen to much more music than I ever had before. I guess it's just not an all or nothing proposition for me like it is for some. I love the portability factor of having my collection on hard drive, I love I can access any one of my albums anytime I want to from anywhere through my cloud player, and I love that it keeps my collection from taking up the entire house! :lol: At the same time physical albums come with text and translations for operas and vocal works, and those are absolutely critical for me so I could never completely go digital. And hey, youtube and streaming media services are great ways at sampling potential purchases and hearing out of print/rare recordings. So as far as I'm concerned it's a win win win!


----------



## Woodduck

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> You mean like Canada


I mean like someplace that doesn't cause chilblains and hypothermia.


----------



## Joe B

sorry...posted on wrong thread (was reading this and thinking I was posting on the "Currently Listening" thread without changing pages)

OK. After reading this post for the last several days I will post my opinion on the OP. I'm not surprised Target is going to stop selling CD's. They barely carry any now and the selection is totally lame (I had a gift card and went in to see what they had for CD's and Blu-ray's....pathetically small selection).

CD's: I don't believe they'll stop producing classical CD's any time soon. If/when they do I'll be disappointed. I only have physical media and want to keep it that way. After millions of years of evolution, I'm still bogged down with three dimensional objects.

Smart Phones: I'm not qualified to say anything. I've never owned a cell phone, and I don't want to. But I do understand the debate:
1. portable encyclopedia, phone, portable entertainment center, device which circumvents physical separation and distance and keeps friends/family close
2. addictive technology, dehumanizing our society, making people no more than Borg drones
3. Big Brother's surveillance/tracking tool
4. largest experiment in mankind's history, subjecting everyone to microwave radiation without their permission, all for the almighty dollar (don't think this has been addressed)

If you can view the smart phone from the #1 slot you've got yourself a pretty cool tool.
If you view the smart phone from #'s 2,3 & 4 get rid of it. Why have something in your possession with that much negative energy attached to it.


----------



## Gallus

As a 'millennial' who has never bought a compact disc in his life, this thread is highly amusing to me. 

But perhaps I have missed out on a transcendental experience in paying money for a piece of plastic.


----------



## Star

Gallus said:


> As a 'millennial' who has never bought a compact disc in his life, this thread is highly amusing to me.
> 
> But perhaps I have missed out on a transcendental experience in paying money for a piece of plastic.


 It may have missed your attention but it is actually the program which is on the piece of plastic that one pays for. I don't know whether you pay for your downloads but if you don't then please remember that you are helping to drive the music industry into liquidation


----------



## PlaySalieri

Gallus said:


> As a 'millennial' who has never bought a compact disc in his life, this thread is highly amusing to me.
> 
> But perhaps I have missed out on a transcendental experience in paying money for a piece of plastic.


or a few hundred pieces of paper bound together - I assume you find it equally amusing that people buy books


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> And yes Denton does have a good football team but my wife and I retired to Knoxville, TN about 5 months ago. Loving it here!


I have never been to Knoxville but I love Nashville. After Boston, New York and Jersey City, it would be my choice to live.

Enjoy!


----------



## eljr

Tulse said:


> See my previous post.





> Quote Originally Posted by eljr View Post
> Well, we have it for 20 years, in mass.
> 
> How far have you run?





Tulse said:


> No.
> 
> It has slowly crept up on us. We weren't offered it 30 years ago. It has gained more power and surveillance abilities over us on a piecemeal basis. As we have become adjusted to using it, it does a bit more.


Does this mean you do have a smartphone? You did not run from it as you had suggested you would have?


----------



## Genoveva

WildThing said:


> For me, I simply don't have any sort of attachment to physical media.


Nor me.

Even if the sale of music CDs was still a thriving activity I would still much prefer to rip the CDs and keep of all my music on a hard drive linked to my PC or laptop. On my hard drive, I have it all listed by: folder structure, composer, title, artist, album, composer, conductor, genre, sub-genre, year, comment (the latter identifying any special features, e.g, a live performance, or if noticed any problems with the recording).

I find this to be far better than storing and handling what would otherwise be a large amount of CDs. I'm sure that many would agree. It's so much easier to seek out what I'm looking for, and to do some quick and simple comparisons between alternative versions of a work, if it's all on a hard drive.

Very quickly, I can for example click on _foobar2000_ (my favoured media player) and search out how many recordings I have by, say, Sir Neville Marriner, or how any versions of Handel's Water Music , or Mozart's Jupiter Symphony, etc, that I have. In each case, I can read off their timings, bit rates, when they recorded etc, and several other things.

The possible sound quality loss in playing music from a computer rather than a CD player is not something that bothers me at all. I'm perfectly happy with what can be achieved by computer playback, provided the ripping from CD was done well, which in my case I know to be the case in the majority of situations. If I happen to spot anything that sounds a bit naff, I'll just re-do it, usually using EAC.


----------



## eljr

Woodduck said:


> That question would be more meaningful if there were a place to run to.


So let me get this straight...

You feel victimized by the mass embrace of the cell phone BUT unable to stand alone without one?

---------------------

If not, please explain.

thanks


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> Does this mean you do have a smartphone? You did not run from it as you had suggested you would have?


Does this mean you do not understand my original point? Whether or not I have a smartphone today is irrelevant in the context of the post I made.

What's up about Minimalism?


----------



## eljr

13hm13 said:


> Books have been written about the topic of loss of ability to concentrate ... this phenomenon** has its roots in the age of Internet, and esp. smartphones.


Really?

You don't recall the TV remote and how people incessantly clicked?

There is no loss of concentration. Man is a curious animal. TV, PC's,cell phones simple provide a continued stimuli absent in the past.

Good grief.

------------------------

My apologies, sincerely.

I am becoming frustrated with people posting of "victimization by technology" that has blessed our lives in so many ways.

Here is an idea. Change perspective.

Instead of finding problems and victimization, find challenges and solutions.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> So let me get this straight...
> 
> You feel victimized by the mass embrace of the cell phone BUT unable to stand alone without one?
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> If not, please explain.
> 
> thanks


err, dont challenge Woodduck to a duel of wits - you cant win that one.


----------



## eljr

Tulse said:


> Does this mean you do not understand my original point? Whether or not I have a smartphone today is irrelevant in the context of the post I made.
> 
> What's up about Minimalism?


You said you would run, I asked if you have (implied, now that you are aware of all the horror)

It is a totally applicable a question.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Genoveva said:


> Nor me.
> 
> Even if the sale of music CDs was still a thriving activity I would still much prefer to rip the CDs and keep of all my music on a hard drive linked to my PC or laptop. On my hard drive, I have it all listed by: folder structure, composer, title, artist, album, composer, conductor, genre, sub-genre, year, comment (the latter identifying any special features, e.g, a live performance, or if noticed any problems with the recording).
> 
> I find this to be far better than storing and handling what would otherwise be a large amount of CDs. I'm sure that many would agree. It's so much easier to seek out what I'm looking for, and to do some quick and simple comparisons between alternative versions of a work, if it's all on a hard drive.
> 
> Very quickly, I can for example click on _foobar2000_ (my favoured media player) and search out how many recordings I have by, say, Sir Neville Marriner, or how any versions of Handel's Water Music , or Mozart's Jupiter Symphony, etc, that I have. In each case, I can read off their timings, bit rates, when they recorded etc, and several other things.
> 
> The possible sound quality loss in playing music from a computer rather than a CD player is not something that bothers me at all. I'm perfectly happy with what can be achieved by computer playback, provided the ripping from CD was done well, which in my case I know to be the case in the majority of situations. If I happen to spot anything that sounds a bit naff, I'll just re-do it, usually using EAC.


There are strong arguments for doing what you do - personally I would not have the patience to archive my hard copy recordings onto my hard drive.
I hope you have them backed up on a stick - hard drives can break down and there is data loss.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> err, dont challenge Woodduck to a duel of wits - you cant win that one.


An exchange of ideas is a duel of wits?

Good grief.

I asked for classification of his position as I read it in a way I find it hard to believe he meant.

But it was good of you to try to set up a duel.


----------



## eljr

Woodduck said:


> In view of the certainty of moving again, I'm doing a long-overdue cleanout of my collection and expect to discard at least 400. It's all good stuff, and I'll try, hopefully, to find someone old enough to want physical CDs who doesn't already have much of the music.


Are you willing to ship them at the recipients expense? To someone not a youngster?


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> There are strong arguments for doing what you do - personally I would not have the patience to archive my hard copy recordings onto my hard drive.
> I hope you have them backed up on a stick - hard drives can break down and there is data loss.


Same here.

The idea of transferring thousands of CD's to a hard drive is not gonna happen here either.

What I did, 3 years ago, was to just rip new purchases.

I have a dedicated PC for audio and a external hard drive to back everything up.

On top of that, I have the CD.

I, like Woodduck, enjoy the visual and tactile of owning a CD.

Having an inventory of LP's and CD's that spans 50 years makes it very hard to move away from the individual album storage format to the mass storage format of a hard drive.

And the thought of just streaming without ownership leaves me far to insecure to succumb.

I do have 3 streaming services for music but use them principally for discovery.


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> You said you would run, I asked if you have (implied, now that you are aware of all the horror)
> 
> It is a totally applicable a question.


I said that many of us would have been against it 30 years ago:



> Quote Originally Posted by Tulse View Post
> If 30 years ago you offered us a portable phone which would track our location in real time, be able to listen to all of our calls, access what we are typing etc and that the government had access to all of this, I think most of us would have run from it.


I then said this:



> It has slowly crept up on us. We weren't offered it 30 years ago. It has gained more power and surveillance abilities over us on a piecemeal basis. As we have become adjusted to using it, it does a bit more.


To spell it out, if we had have been told of the full implications of smartphone technology 30 years ago then we would probably have rejected it. As the phone / internet has improved incrementally (and the surveillance) so has our usage of it in day to day life. This makes it very hard to do without it.

For example, work computers have a little device which tracks your geographical movements and track your internet use. Are you seriously suggesting that if we are against this technology then we should avoid paid employment?

Even if you are, then how about going self employed, where you can set your own rules? I've recently set up a business but a smartphone is necessary because I need to be contactable by my clients at all times. So I have been forced to buy a smartphone for the first time in order to be able to run my business.

So if we reject employment and self employment, how are we supposed to live?

How about signing on the dole? But wait, the government have been introducing a new scheme where you have to account for your movements and activities during the whole of the working week on the internet.

If you reject modern technology, you are all but dead.

So to answer your question, yes I have a smartphone, and no I haven't run from it. Does this mean that you have won? :lol:


----------



## eljr

Joe B said:


> I do understand the debate:
> 1. portable encyclopedia, phone, portable entertainment center, device which circumvents physical separation and distance and keeps friends/family close
> 2. addictive technology, dehumanizing our society, making people no more than Borg drones
> 3. Big Brother's surveillance/tracking tool
> 4. largest experiment in mankind's history, subjecting everyone to microwave radiation without their permission, all for the almighty dollar (don't think this has been addressed)
> 
> If you can view the smart phone from the #1 slot you've got yourself a pretty cool tool.
> If you view the smart phone from #'s 2,3 & 4 get rid of it. Why have something in your possession with that much negative energy attached to it.


WOW!

This is the only post needed in the developed sub topic of "the smartphone."

Brilliant in the simple breakdown and simple solutions.

This is definitely the definitive last word on the subject.

Well done!


----------



## eljr

Tulse said:


> So to answer your question, yes I have a smartphone, and no I haven't run from it. Does this mean that you have won? :


Thank you for your reply.

There is no right nor wrong, no winning and losing. It's about understanding.

Understanding means there are many perspective and each persons perspective is their reality.


----------



## eljr

Gallus said:


> As a 'millennial' who has never bought a compact disc in his life, this thread is highly amusing to me.
> 
> But perhaps I have missed out on a transcendental experience in paying money for a piece of plastic.


I love this post BUT I must ask that you, please explain the transcendental experience in paying money to be left with nothing.


----------



## eljr

Star said:


> It may have missed your attention but it is actually the program which is on the piece of plastic that one pays for. I don't know whether you pay for your downloads but if you don't then please remember that you are helping to drive the music industry into liquidation


I took his post to mean he streams. I know of no one young who even buys downloads.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> WOW!
> 
> This is the only post needed in the developed sub topic of "the smartphone."
> 
> Brilliant in the simple breakdown and simple solutions.
> 
> This is definitely the definitive last word on the subject.
> 
> Well done!


agreed - I thought it a brilliant summary of the positions etc too


----------



## eljr

Genoveva said:


> Nor me.
> 
> Even if the sale of music CDs was still a thriving activity I would still much prefer to rip the CDs and keep of all my music on a hard drive linked to my PC or laptop. On my hard drive, I have it all listed by: folder structure, composer, title, artist, album, composer, conductor, genre, sub-genre, year, comment (the latter identifying any special features, e.g, a live performance, or if noticed any problems with the recording).
> 
> I find this to be far better than storing and handling what would otherwise be a large amount of CDs. I'm sure that many would agree. It's so much easier to seek out what I'm looking for, and to do some quick and simple comparisons between alternative versions of a work, if it's all on a hard drive.
> 
> Very quickly, I can for example click on _foobar2000_ (my favoured media player) and search out how many recordings I have by, say, Sir Neville Marriner, or how any versions of Handel's Water Music , or Mozart's Jupiter Symphony, etc, that I have. In each case, I can read off their timings, bit rates, when they recorded etc, and several other things.
> 
> The possible sound quality loss in playing music from a computer rather than a CD player is not something that bothers me at all. I'm perfectly happy with what can be achieved by computer playback, provided the ripping from CD was done well, which in my case I know to be the case in the majority of situations. If I happen to spot anything that sounds a bit naff, I'll just re-do it, usually using EAC.


First, I love your user name, Genoveva.

Sensual and compassionate is the name to my ear.

I am envious that you were able to rip your collection in such a through manner. I have roughly a thousand ripped but am dissatisfied that I did not understand the ability of tags and their importance upon execution.

So now I just live with fundamentals in searches.

I do need comment on suggesting that playback is somehow less preferable from a PC than from a disc.

This is simply not true. How could it be? It's digital.

You are not ripping to MP3, I assume. So no info is lost.

I just put on Schumann's Genoveva, inspired by your user name.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> I took his post to mean he streams. *I know of no one young who even buys downloads*.


then who is making Taylor Swift immensely rich?


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> First, I love your user name, Genoveva.
> 
> Sensual and compassionate is the name to my ear.
> 
> I am envious that you were able to rip your collection in such a through manner. I have roughly a thousand ripped but am dissatisfied that I did not understand the ability of tags and their importance upon execution.
> 
> So now I just live with fundamentals in searches.
> 
> *I do need comment on suggesting that playback is somehow less preferable from a PC than from a disc.
> 
> This is simply not true. How could it be? It's digital. *
> 
> You are not ripping to MP3, I assume. So no info is lost.
> 
> I just put on Schumann's Genoveva, inspired by your user name.


It depends - if you are using a CD player with a superior DAC - then it would make a difference. and how many people route their pc sound through a high quality amplifier and speakers? I dont - I have a 10 buck pair of speakers linked to my pc - still enjoy listening to music on youtube though. And my quality gear is gathering dust. But I work at my pc all day and youtube is a handy way of listening. Is it better? No.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> then who is making Taylor Swift immensely rich?


The question is not who, it is what.

The answer is touring and endorsements.

I did not say young peopled do not consume recording product, I said they do not download it or buy hard copies of it.

as with all recording artists, their moneys come from touring.

"Swift's payday comes courtesy of her massive 1989 World Tour. She smashed the Rolling Stones' North American touring record, grossing $200 million on the continent en route to quarter of a billion dollars in total. She also pads her pocketbook by shilling for brands including Diet Coke, Keds and Apple"

her earning on CD sales I cannot find listed as its' not of consequence in her total earnings


----------



## eugeneonagain

I've had every CD I own ripped to mp3 or FLAC for computer playback going back to 2005, some even earlier, but I've re-ripped as my hardware has improved. I even have the content of some of my best vinyls stored similarly. Also a few cassettes that haven't been reissued on CD.

I'm noticing that the kiddywinks seem to think they invented this idea and the old codgers new to it think they are especially hip with 'the future'. In both cases: no. 

In terms of data degradation I have more files that I have ripped go corrupt than any CD I have ever bought. Only two CDs I have currently have faults on them and after ripping them I find one is due to the physical media because the ripped file is okay and the other is corrupted data. Sometimes when you re-export this from Audacity it works again (though there will be degradation).
Most people ripping their CDs are not using professional software; I use standard free software that comes with Linux distributions and they seem 99% effective. There might be the odd fault now and again with large batch conversions.

I'm glad I still have the actual CDs because whenever a file goes wrong (or I accidentally delete it or lose it because of drive corruptions) I can just rip it and not have to pay for the files again. Plus, as stated above, some things I bought on vinyl, cassette and early CD are not even available to buy.

A lot of people have ripped their CDs to their computers and then dump the CDs in charity shops. How I laugh when I hear tales of how their computer "died" or they upgraded to a new machine and the transfer of files went wrong. Or how they forgot to properly tag and title them and now have a load of numbered files or files called: 'track_1, Track_2' etc.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> It depends - if you are using a CD player with a superior DAC - then it would make a difference. and how many people route their pc sound through a high quality amplifier and speakers? I dont - I have a 10 buck pair of speakers linked to my pc - still enjoy listening to music on youtube though. And my quality gear is gathering dust. But I work at my pc all day and youtube is a handy way of listening. Is it better? No.


Why would one use a lesser DAC for one source?

OK, I get what you are saying, that people just use PC headphone jack to their analog amplifier. But that is a choice. There is no need to sacrifice sound when streaming.

In fact, you have better digital available via download and steaming than on Red Book.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> Why would one use a lesser DAC for one source?
> 
> OK, I get what you are saying, *that people just use PC headphone jack to their analog amplifier*. But that is a choice. There is no need to sacrifice sound when streaming.
> 
> In fact, you have better digital available via download and steaming than on Red Book.


well at best - or they just run cheap speakers direct from that jack. also the output on those jacks is generated by a 1 buc circuit.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> The question is not who, it is what.
> 
> The answer is touring and endorsements.
> 
> I did not say young peopled do not consume recording product, I said they do not download it or buy hard copies of it.
> 
> as with all recording artists, their moneys come from touring.
> 
> "Swift's payday comes courtesy of her massive 1989 World Tour. She smashed the Rolling Stones' North American touring record, grossing $200 million on the continent en route to quarter of a billion dollars in total. She also pads her pocketbook by shilling for brands including Diet Coke, Keds and Apple"
> 
> her earning on CD sales I cannot find listed as its' not of consequence in her total earnings


thanks for that info. then what's the big deal about people streaming for free if artists are earning just a small % of their earnings from recordings


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> well at best - or they just run cheap speakers direct from that jack. also the output on those jacks is generated by a 1 buc circuit.


Well if they do of course the sound is inferior. In this case I would recommend they dump the PC.

I believe the post was apples to apples though.


----------



## PlaySalieri

eugeneonagain said:


> I've had every CD I own ripped to mp3 or FLAC for computer playback going back to 2005, some even earlier, but I've re-ripped as my hardware has improved. I even have the content of some of my best vinyls stored similarly. Also a few cassettes that haven't been reissued on CD.
> 
> I'm noticing that the kiddywinks seem to think they invented this idea and the old codgers new to it think they are especially hip with 'the future'. In both cases: no.
> 
> In terms of data degradation I have more files that I have ripped go corrupt than any CD I have ever bought. Only two CDs I have currently have faults on them and after ripping them I find one is due to the physical media because the ripped file is okay and the other is corrupted data. Sometimes when you re-export this from Audacity it works again (though there will be degradation).
> Most people ripping their CDs are not using professional software; I use standard free software that comes with Linux distributions and they seem 99% effective. There might be the odd fault now and again with large batch conversions.
> 
> I'm glad I still have the actual CDs because whenever a file goes wrong (or I accidentally delete it or lose it because of drive corruptions) I can just rip it and not have to pay for the files again. Plus, as stated above, some things I bought on vinyl, cassette and early CD are not even available to buy.
> 
> A lot of people have ripped their CDs to their computers and then dump the CDs in charity shops. *How I laugh when I hear tales of how their computer "died" or they upgraded to a new machine and the transfer of files went wrong. Or how they forgot to properly tag and title them and now have a load of numbered files or files called: 'track_1, Track_2' etc.*


Yep - laughter is great therapy for sure - particularly in cases like these.

The other point is - I'm mainly getting at people who pay for dowloaded music, almost as much or the same as if they had bought a CD. what are you going to say in your will "I bequeath my lifetimes collection of music to my son etc. You can find it in the folder on my C drive marked "music""

I understand that the terms of sale of downloaded music would make this illegal?

Pushing this issue out wider - how many people collect photos in a hard copy photo album? People have their entire lives images from when they were young etc stored on their hard drives.

Gone will be the days when you could sit on a sofa with your children and leaf through some old photo albums. Some of those photos have messages and little poems on the back. Quite touching to have the kids read them out.

Those days are coming to and end. You will instead be sat with a laptop frying your thighs and skimming through zillions of photos, most irrelevant and many poorly taken.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> thanks for that info. then what's the big deal about people streaming for free if artists are earning just a small % of their earnings from recordings


Well they do make some money when a song is streamed and they did make more when the music is bought, either download or CD or...

Humans are humans, they want as much as they can get and then more.

You know who had the right idea?

The Grateful Dead.

They let folks record their shows all they wanted. Even set up a "tapers" section at their concerts.

Every show they played for 50 years is available legally for free.

Guess what this strategy led to? The highest grossing touring band of all time.

We all tend to be penny wise and dollar foolish. I would submit that following a template of just getting your music out there may be of greater benefit than worrying about a penny or 2 pennies from a stream.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> Yep - laughter is great therapy for sure - particularly in cases like these.
> 
> The other point is - I'm mainly getting at people who pay for dowloaded music, almost as much or the same as if they had bought a CD. what are you going to say in your will "I bequeath my lifetimes collection of music to my son etc. You can find it in the folder on my C drive marked "music""
> 
> I understand that the terms of sale of downloaded music would make this illegal?
> 
> Pushing this issue out wider - how many people collect photos in a hard copy photo album? People have their entire lives images from when they were young etc stored on their hard drives.
> 
> Gone will be the days when you could sit on a sofa with your children and leaf through some old photo albums. Some of those photos have messages and little poems on the back. Quite touching to have the kids read them out.
> 
> Those days are coming to and end. You will instead be sat with a laptop frying your thighs and skimming through zillions of photos, most irrelevant and many poorly taken.


 set up a trust and using it to purchase digital assets. Name yourself and your children as trust beneficiaries, now you can hand down downloads without breaking any ban on third-party transfers.

But this is just not important as day of the music download is rapidly coming to an end too.


----------



## eugeneonagain

eljr said:


> Well they do make some money when a song is streamed and they did make more when the music is bought, either download or CD or...
> 
> Humans are humans, they want as much as they can get and then more.
> 
> You know who had the right idea?
> 
> The Grateful Dead.
> 
> They let folks record their shows all they wanted. Even set up a "tapers" section at their concerts.
> 
> Every show they played for 50 years is available legally for free.
> 
> Guess what this strategy led to? The highest grossing touring band of all time.
> 
> We all tend to be penny wise and dollar foolish. I would submit that following a template of just getting your music out there may be of greater benefit than worrying about a penny or 2 pennies from a stream.


This is not the same as their studio recordings which are protected by the usual intellectual property laws and which are policed in exactly the same way. It's easy to release ratty live recordings for free when you've already made (and continue to make) millions from copyright-protected studio work.
Not so easy for other artists in the classical world who don't have hordes of 'deadheads' following their concerts. Also if an artist is playing live a lot and only releases a few recordings, having their live recordings plastered all over the internet for free as well as their recordings is not going to be beneficial.

I say if folk are going to so avidly insist upon having a 'capitalist market' as the basis of the economy (as so many do), they could at least stand by it, and their words, and purchase these things rather than wanting a free lunch or everything for a few cents/pence.
Every artist working is not Taylor Swift or has had the 50-year career of a Grateful Dead (who have also benefited from the golden era of the music business).


----------



## eljr

eugeneonagain said:


> This is not the same as their studio recordings which are protected by the usual intellectual property laws and which are policed in exactly the same way. It's easy to release ratty live recordings for free when you've already made (and continue to make) millions from copyright-protected studio work.
> Not so easy for other artists in the classical world who don't have hordes of 'deadheads' following their concerts. Also if an artist is playing live a lot and only releases a few recordings, having their live recordings plastered all over the internet for free as well as their recordings is not going to be beneficial.
> 
> I say if folk are going to so avidly insist upon having a 'capitalist market' as the basis of the economy (as so many do), they could at least stand by it, and their words, and purchase these things rather than wanting a free lunch or everything for a few cents/pence.
> Every artist working is not Taylor Swift or has had the 50-year career of a Grateful Dead (who have also benefited from the golden era of the music business).


all fair points


----------



## PlaySalieri

We need to remind ourselves that for all the slaving classical musicians do to reach a top standard - they get paid very little compared with pop stars. I knew one top violinist (now deceased) who recorded 50 CDs with chandos - said she didnt even bother to cash her yearly royalties cheque, it was such a pitiful sum.
I know that flashy names like Lang Lang and Benedetti make a good amount - but 99% make a standard salary, even those who ave recorded.


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> We need to remind ourselves that for all the slaving classical musicians do to reach a top standard - they get paid very little compared with pop stars. I knew one top violinist (now deceased) who recorded 50 CDs with chandos - said she didnt even bother to cash her yearly royalties cheque, it was such a pitiful sum.
> I know that flashy names like Lang Lang and Benedetti make a good amount - but 99% make a standard salary, even those who ave recorded.


which is why I support greatly expanded public funding of the arts

I do have a question, if the royalties were so meager, which is what I would expect, how did this top violinist pay their bills?


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> which is why I support greatly expanded public funding of the arts
> 
> I do have a question, if the royalties were so meager, which is what I would expect, how did this top violinist pay their bills?


she had a post at a conservatoire and had quite a few private pupils


----------



## Kevin Pearson

stomanek said:


> It depends - if you are using a CD player with a superior DAC - then it would make a difference. and how many people route their pc sound through a high quality amplifier and speakers? I dont - I have a 10 buck pair of speakers linked to my pc - still enjoy listening to music on youtube though. And my quality gear is gathering dust. But I work at my pc all day and youtube is a handy way of listening. Is it better? No.


I do and I can tell you that the sound quality run through the PC in no way compares to the sound quality I get from my Oppo Blu-Ray/CD player. Not even close. Is is listenable? Yes and so I continue to use do it and stream music through Spotify but to say it's "digital" so it must be the same would be false. It's certainly better than running it through some cheap desktop speakers by a gazillion times over.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Kevin Pearson said:


> I do and I can tell you that the sound quality run through the PC in way compares to the sound quality I get from my Oppo Blu-Ray/CD player. Not even close. Is is listenable? Yes and so I continue to use do it and stream music through Spotify but to say it's "digital" so it must be the same would be false. It's certainly better than running it through some cheap desktop speakers by a gazillion times over.


That's what I would expect.

I was standing outside a take away shop years ago - at the height of my mania with hifi audiophile sound - and there was a beautiful seductive classical sound coming from inside the shop - it sent shivers of delight up my spine - a piano piece - I was drawn inside and saw the source of the sound - a beaten up paint splattered old transistor radio cassette.

so much for my £10k system with special high end cables etc.


----------



## Guest

Top quality recorded CDs played on excellent equipment are better than anything which can be streamed from the internet. The problem, as I see it, is that the vast majority of CDs from 1983, when that format was available, are NOT of a high recording standard. About one quarter, if that, of my collection falls into that high end category. As my hi-fi retailer said to me, "rubbish in/rubbish out". Even using a DAC for digital streaming can only do so much. On a 'good day' my pretty good hi-fi outfit playing well engineered CDs sound absolutely terrific and I always feel the speakers and amplifier can still deliver more. Not so with lesser engineered CDs when the sound quickly flattens and over-modulates (I think that's the correct term). First world problem.


----------



## Woodduck

eljr said:


> So let me get this straight...
> 
> You feel victimized by the mass embrace of the cell phone BUT unable to stand alone without one?


How do you arrive at that conclusion from one brief remark? Cellphones have their uses - and abuses. Still, I was perfectly happy in a world without them.

If I were permanently paralyzed or mutilated from being in a car crash caused by some irresponsible fool who thought he could drive and talk on the phone at the same time, I would feel victimized by the fact that what is an outrageously unnecessary risk is now considered normal and necessary. But usually I just feel annoyed when people buying produce, waiting for the cashier, riding the train, or sitting near me when I'm feeding the squirrels insist on adding to the general noise pollution by bringing their private business into the public space. As for those whose bizarre idea of togetherness is to bury themselves in their separate electronic worlds, I can easily avoid them, and wouldn't have them as friends even if they'd have me, which they wouldn't because I'm old and bloody-minded.

I have a cell phone (and no land line), but I don't carry it around with me unless there's a specific need for it. I'm not flattered by the thought that someone can't wait until I get home to talk to me, and I'd rather be watching the clouds and listening to the birds (if they're audible over the traffic noise and that guy behind me who's on his phone talking about the Dow or the Seahawks).


----------



## DaveM

Woodduck said:


> How do you arrive at that conclusion from one brief remark? Cellphones have their uses - and abuses. Still, I was perfectly happy in a world without them.
> 
> If I were permanently paralyzed or mutilated from being in a car crash caused by some irresponsible fool who thought he could drive and talk on the phone at the same time, I would feel victimized by the fact that what is an outrageously unnecessary risk is now considered normal and necessary. But usually I just feel annoyed when people buying produce, waiting for the cashier, riding the train, or sitting near me when I'm feeding the squirrels insist on adding to the general noise pollution by bringing their private business into the public space...


There are some side benefits. Yesterday while at a Target store a young woman was walking up and down the aisle talking into her cellphone loudly while I was trying to decide on some new bedsheets. During the next 5 minutes I heard what sounded like a TV soap drama having to do with a funeral and problems concerning the urn. Of course, as with the soaps someone was disrespecting her and not appreciating their relationship. Her voice rose and fell appropriately as the story proceeded. I was sorry that I couldn't stay long enough for the next episode.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Christabel said:


> Top quality recorded CDs played on excellent equipment are better than anything which can be streamed from the internet. The problem, as I see it, is that the vast majority of CDs from 1983, when that format was available, are NOT of a high recording standard. About one quarter, if that, of my collection falls into that high end category. As my hi-fi retailer said to me, "rubbish in/rubbish out". Even using a DAC for digital streaming can only do so much. On a 'good day' my pretty good hi-fi outfit playing well engineered CDs sound absolutely terrific and I always feel the speakers and amplifier can still deliver more. Not so with lesser engineered CDs when the sound quickly flattens and over-modulates (I think that's the correct term). First world problem.


I began listening to classical music via CD at the start of 1990. I had no idea then about ADD and DDD. I was going into the CD shop praising the amazing sound on this DG rec of Gilels playing mozart, and ansermet on this Decca rec and previn on this emi. The owner of the shop said - you realise those are all old remastered analogue. I was astounded. The remastered CDs seemed to be better than the DDDs. I wasn't some analogue nut proving my own conclusion as I was well and truly sold on the concept of digital sound and CD. And I am afraid - that is why I traced the source of those recordings and found they sounded even better on LP playback systems. Oddly enough - digital recordings LPs sounded better than the CD equivalents - but I think that was more to do with the infancy of CD playback technology.
I still think this way - but the circumstances of my life means that I have to listen in a way that is the most convenient.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Woodduck said:


> *How do you arrive at that conclusion from one brief remark?* Cellphones have their uses - and abuses. Still, I was perfectly happy in a world without them.
> 
> If I were permanently paralyzed or mutilated from being in a car crash caused by some irresponsible fool who thought he could drive and talk on the phone at the same time, I would feel victimized by the fact that what is an outrageously unnecessary risk is now considered normal and necessary. But usually I just feel annoyed when people buying produce, waiting for the cashier, riding the train, or sitting near me when I'm feeding the squirrels insist on adding to the general noise pollution by bringing their private business into the public space. As for those whose bizarre idea of togetherness is to bury themselves in their separate electronic worlds, I can easily avoid them, and wouldn't have them as friends even if they'd have me, which they wouldn't because I'm old and bloody-minded.
> 
> I have a cell phone (and no land line), but I don't carry it around with me unless there's a specific need for it. I'm not flattered by the thought that someone can't wait until I get home to talk to me, and I'd rather be watching the clouds and listening to the birds (if they're audible over the traffic noise and that guy behind me who's on his phone talking about the Dow or the Seahawks).


I wondered that too - which is why I made my tongue in cheek comment.


----------



## Sonata

stomanek said:


> Yep - laughter is great therapy for sure - particularly in cases like these.
> 
> The other point is - I'm mainly getting at people who pay for dowloaded music, almost as much or the same as if they had bought a CD. what are you going to say in your will "I bequeath my lifetimes collection of music to my son etc. You can find it in the folder on my C drive marked "music""
> 
> I understand that the terms of sale of downloaded music would make this illegal?
> 
> Pushing this issue out wider - how many people collect photos in a hard copy photo album? People have their entire lives images from when they were young etc stored on their hard drives.
> 
> Gone will be the days when you could sit on a sofa with your children and leaf through some old photo albums. Some of those photos have messages and little poems on the back. Quite touching to have the kids read them out.
> 
> Those days are coming to and end. You will instead be sat with a laptop frying your thighs and skimming through zillions of photos, most irrelevant and many poorly taken.


You do realize that people can and do print important photos and often store them in photo albums just as they did with film don't you?


----------



## Kevin Pearson

Sonata said:


> You do realize that people can and do print important photos and often store them in photo albums just as they did with film don't you?


But speaking as someone who ran a photo lab the last ten years I would have to say far fewer people print photos then used to. Having the ability to look at photos on the phone or home PC has greatly hurt the photo industry. To the effect that my lab was closed and I was given severance pay. I wish the photo industry was stil strong but the truth of the matter it is a dying industry.


----------



## DaveM

A sound/recording engineer explained some time ago that over the many years of the LP, the microphones and electronics emphasized the high end to compensate for the high frequency limitations of vinyl records. The endpoint sounded rather good. But when those same microphones and electronics were used in the first few years of the CD, the result was a shrill, hard sound since the CD transmitted the accentuated high end.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Sonata said:


> You do realize that people can and do print important photos and often store them in photo albums just as they did with film don't you?


Yes some may well do.
But given that you can take zillions of photos for nothing - how many people print out? I think most just keep them stored on their phones or PCs, as we now do. We have a ton of albums up to about 2009 - when we were using throw away cameras. But since that time it is all stored on the PC.


----------



## eugeneonagain

stomanek said:


> Yes some may well do.
> But given that you can take zillions of photos for nothing - how many people print out? I think most just keep them stored on their phones or PCs, as we now do. We have a ton of albums up to about 2009 - when we were using throw away cameras. But since that time it is all stored on the PC.


Probably better for the environment (never did like the idea of disposable cameras), but worse for the idea of photos as mementos. I was always careful about taking photos with a limited film, but today you can just snap away...and people do.

Honestly, about 75% of digital photos must sit there being looked at by no-one.


----------



## Strange Magic

eugeneonagain said:


> Probably better for the environment (never did like the idea of disposable cameras), but worse for the idea of photos as mementos. I was always careful about taking photos with a limited film, but today you can just snap away...and people do.
> 
> Honestly, about 75% of digital photos must sit there being looked at by no-one.


75% is probably wildly low a figure. Extraordinary ease of acquiring and retaining things almost invariably results in the rapid diminution of their value. This is certainly true of photos. I'd suggest the figure is closer to Murphy's, or Sturgeon's, 90 or 95%.


----------



## eugeneonagain

Strange Magic said:


> 75% is probably wildly low a figure. Extraordinary ease of acquiring and retaining things almost invariably results in the rapid diminution of their value. This is certainly true of photos. I'd suggest the figure is closer to Murphy's, or Sturgeon's, 90 or 95%.


I'm ambivalent as to their future value though. Perhaps unlike the past there will be a more documented visual record for social historians? Or perhaps it will be an endless supply of duck-mouth selfies?


----------



## Strange Magic

eugeneonagain said:


> I'm ambivalent as to their future value though. Perhaps unlike the past there will be a more documented visual record for social historians? Or perhaps it will be an endless supply of duck-mouth selfies?


I think it depends....(doesn't everything?). I've found that often a few very carefully chosen words are worth a thousand pictures. Probably the most informative and memorable histories, social or otherwise, are well-balanced blends of text and illustration, and we can all come up with examples that have particularly resonated with us.


----------



## rspader

stomanek said:


> then who is making Taylor Swift immensely rich?


Concert goers. My daughter was hoping to see Taylor Swift's upcoming concert in Seattle until she found out that the cheap seats were $180.00. And that is in a football stadium so you can imagine where the cheap seats wiil be.


----------



## eugeneonagain

rspader said:


> Concert goers. My daughter was hoping to see Taylor Swift's upcoming concert in Seattle until she found out that the cheap seats were $180.00. *And that is in a football stadium so you can imagine where the cheap seats wiil be*.


The toilets probably.


----------



## PlaySalieri

rspader said:


> Concert goers. My daughter was hoping to see Taylor Swift's upcoming concert in Seattle until she found out that the cheap seats were $180.00. And that is in a football stadium so you can imagine where the cheap seats wiil be.


It costs £250 for a good seat at covent garden


----------



## Joe B

Christabel said:


> ...The problem, as I see it, is that the vast majority of CDs from 1983, when that format was available, are NOT of a high recording standard....


This is why many of us became enamored with some of the smaller, independent labels of that time: Delos, Newport Classic, Dorian, Telarc, etc. These labels were what they were because of the audio engineers they had "behind the wheel" of the recordings. John Eargle at Delos, Lawrence Kraman at Newport Classic, etc. Buying from these labels virtually guaranteed a purchase of sonic perfection. That's actually what got me started out listening to more than just symphonies. I trusted the quality of the label and knew I would never find fault with the recording itself, which resulted in me being exposed to different genres of classical music which I now find almost as necessary as oxygen.


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> I do and I can tell you that the sound quality run through the PC in no way compares to the sound quality I get from my Oppo Blu-Ray/CD player. Not even close..


Is the PC used as a source and then run through the Oppo Dac?

Are you speaking about CD rips on your PC hard drive, downloads from re-sellers (if so what format) or strictly Spotify stream service?


----------



## eljr

Christabel said:


> Top quality recorded CDs played on excellent equipment are better than anything which can be streamed from the internet. The problem, as I see it, is that the vast majority of CDs from 1983, when that format was available, are NOT of a high recording standard. About one quarter, if that, of my collection falls into that high end category. As my hi-fi retailer said to me, "rubbish in/rubbish out". Even using a DAC for digital streaming can only do so much. On a 'good day' my pretty good hi-fi outfit playing well engineered CDs sound absolutely terrific and I always feel the speakers and amplifier can still deliver more. Not so with lesser engineered CDs when the sound quickly flattens and over-modulates (I think that's the correct term). First world problem.


By top quality CD I take it you mean the mastering you prefer.

Spotify and Tidal are available in CD quality so you would be able to receive the same sound if you use the same dac, amp and speakers.(if you are using the premium service) Tidal offers differing issues of a CD so you could choose any mastering you like. Tidal also offers Master Quality which contains a higher bit rate than a CD so you would in theory receive a better result than from a CD.


----------



## eljr

Woodduck said:


> If I were permanently paralyzed or mutilated from being in a car crash caused by some irresponsible fool who thought he could drive and talk on the phone at the same time, I would feel victimized by the fact that what is an outrageously unnecessary risk is now considered normal and necessary..


I agree. We need, here in the states, a federal regulation prohibiting smart phone use of any kind while driving.



> I'm old and bloody-minded


LOL, yes, this is the impression you give.:lol:


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> I think it depends....(doesn't everything?). I've found that often a few very carefully chosen words are worth a thousand pictures. Probably the most informative and memorable histories, social or otherwise, are well-balanced blends of text and illustration, and we can all come up with examples that have particularly resonated with us.


A photo can be an indispensable archive to historic accuracy.... for example, comparing crowd sizes where word and picture are at odds.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

eljr said:


> I agree. We need, here in the states, a federal regulation prohibiting smart phone use of any kind while driving.
> 
> LOL, yes, this is the impression you give.:lol:


So you want another law enforced by the federal government. So if someone drives and is using a cell phone you want the person to be tried locally and the federal government at the same time?


----------



## eljr

Johnnie Burgess said:


> So you want another law enforced by the federal government. So if someone drives and is using a cell phone you want the person to be tried locally and the federal government at the same time?


Here is the problem.

We have 50 different laws for 50 different states and what is legal is beyond scary.

If you can get 50 different states to enact the same legislation, I am on board and would rescind my proposal.

But I am a practical man and you can't get even a handful of stats to enact responsible legislation.


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> Here is the problem.
> 
> We have 50 different laws for 50 different states and what is legal is beyond scary.
> 
> If you can get 50 different states to enact the same legislation, I am on board and would rescind my proposal.
> 
> But I am a practical man and you can't get even a handful of stats to enact responsible legislation.


Not to mention consistency and clarity between the states on sex with animals...


----------



## PlaySalieri

Joe B said:


> This is why many of us became enamored with some of the smaller, independent labels of that time: Delos, Newport Classic, Dorian, Telarc, etc. These labels were what they were because of the audio engineers they had "behind the wheel" of the recordings. John Eargle at Delos, Lawrence Kraman at Newport Classic, etc. Buying from these labels virtually guaranteed a purchase of sonic perfection. That's actually what got me started out listening to more than just symphonies. I trusted the quality of the label and knew I would never find fault with the recording itself, which resulted in me being exposed to different genres of classical music which I now find almost as necessary as oxygen.


and Hyperion was a good label


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

eljr said:


> Here is the problem.
> 
> We have 50 different laws for 50 different states and what is legal is beyond scary.
> 
> If you can get 50 different states to enact the same legislation, I am on board and would rescind my proposal.
> 
> But I am a practical man and you can't get even a handful of stats to enact responsible legislation.


So are you calling for the end of the states and just have a federal system. Because what you would propose would be the federal government trying someone in some town for driving while using a cell phone.


----------



## eljr

Johnnie Burgess said:


> So are you calling for the end of the states and just have a federal system. .


I have been calling for that since I reached the age of reason.


----------



## Genoveva

stomanek said:


> There are strong arguments for doing what you do - personally I would not have the patience to archive my hard copy recordings onto my hard drive.
> I hope you have them backed up on a stick - hard drives can break down and there is data loss.


The reason I have followed this way of doing things is that several years ago a relative gave me a hard drive containing the ripped contents of some 2000 CDs they owned. The files are all MP3 at 320 kbps.

Since that time, as I have purchased my own CDs (about 200), the procedure I have used is:

_· _Ripped the CDs and saved the files as both WAV and MP3. The programme I have used for ripping to WAV is _Exact Audio Copy. _

· I use _Audacity to _make adjustments to things like run-in time and peak volume. Each file is then "exported" as MP3 using 320 kpbs cbr ("lame 3.99").

· I use _MP3TAG_ to re-jig the various tag categories in the way I like them.

· The files are arranged in Windows 10 "folders". The top-level folder is by composer (currently 615 in total). For each composer there is a fairly standard hierarchy of genres and sub-genres, each varying according to the time periods they belonged to. Generally, I follow the same genre listings as in Wikipedia for each of the composers.

· I use _foobar200_ both to configure the entire MP3 collection, and for playback. I can view by folder, composer, title, conductor, genre, sub-genre, year, comment. It's very easy to pick exactly what I want and to make comparisons. The "filter" facility is very useful too, as selections can be finely "tuned".​ 
The hard disk is copied to another hard disk regularly.

My sound system comprises a decent internal sound card, amplifier and stand mount speakers. I can't tell the difference between MP3 32O and WAV. It suits me to have MP3 because this format is compatible with my car sound system.


----------



## DaveM

Johnnie Burgess said:


> So are you calling for the end of the states and just have a federal system. Because what you would propose would be the federal government trying someone in some town for driving while using a cell phone.


Actually, the 'perp' would have to go, or be transported, to the nearest Federal District Court.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

eljr said:


> Is the PC used as a source and then run through the Oppo Dac?
> 
> Are you speaking about CD rips on your PC hard drive, downloads from re-sellers (if so what format) or strictly Spotify stream service?


My comparison would be playing a stream, Flac or even a CD on my PC using the optical digital output from the PC to my Onkyo receiver vs. the sound quality of playing directly from my Oppo Blu-ray player. The sound quality of anything from the PC cannot even compare.


----------



## Guest

stomanek said:


> It costs £250 for a good seat at covent garden


It's cheaper than that at the Musikverein and Wiener Staatsoper. Much cheaper.


----------



## eugeneonagain

Christabel said:


> It's cheaper than that at the Musikverein and Wiener Staatsoper. Much cheaper.


You're all being ripped off then. I've never paid over €35 for a concert ticket in the last 5 years. On Sunday I'm watching a performance of Prokofiev's 3rd piano concerto with Ruslan and Ludmilla and Petruschka. All for €25.


----------



## Guest

stomanek said:


> I began listening to classical music via CD at the start of 1990. I had no idea then about ADD and DDD. I was going into the CD shop praising the amazing sound on this DG rec of Gilels playing mozart, and ansermet on this Decca rec and previn on this emi. The owner of the shop said - you realise those are all old remastered analogue. I was astounded. The remastered CDs seemed to be better than the DDDs. I wasn't some analogue nut proving my own conclusion as I was well and truly sold on the concept of digital sound and CD. And I am afraid - that is why I traced the source of those recordings and found they sounded even better on LP playback systems. Oddly enough - digital recordings LPs sounded better than the CD equivalents - but I think that was more to do with the infancy of CD playback technology.
> I still think this way - but the circumstances of my life means that I have to listen in a way that is the most convenient.


You're absolutely right in your comments. The convenience of CD technology meant for me - a parent of 4 children - that my LPs would no longer be damaged by kids running into the turntable and wrecking the recording; a huge source of angst for me during their childhood. The hype about CDs, when they first came out, talked about "indestructibility" and that was a huge attraction. Even my beloved Kleiber Brahms #4 (the same recording found in his car CD player in Slovenia after he'd died) was poorly recorded and remains hugely disappointing at higher volumes. It's a fabulous performance on what I regard as a bog-standard recording technology. But the early days of CDs were like that but, having said that, many you would expect not to be much good are actually very good - reissues, that is, and ADD.


----------



## Triplets

Christabel said:


> You're absolutely right in your comments. The convenience of CD technology meant for me - a parent of 4 children - that my LPs would no longer be damaged by kids running into the turntable and wrecking the recording; a huge source of angst for me during their childhood. The hype about CDs, when they first came out, talked about "indestructibility" and that was a huge attraction. Even my beloved Kleiber Brahms #4 (the same recording found in his car CD player in Slovenia after he'd died) was poorly recorded and remains hugely disappointing at higher volumes. It's a fabulous performance on what I regard as a bog-standard recording technology.  But the early days of CDs were like that but, having said that, many you would expect not to be much good are actually very good - reissues, that is, and ADD.


There was definitely a learning curve for recording engineers with digital technology, and many early digital recordings can be a tough listen, but I've found that as playback equipment continuously improves, even many of the bad sounding digital recordings are rendered highly enjoyably. I prefer CDs to Hard Drives, but I'm out of storage space and contemplating downsizing soon, so the drive to convert the collection to HD is on. I'm still searching for the best organizing software


----------



## Fletcher

But vinyl is back!! 



KenOC said:


> Best Buy will no longer stock CDs after mid-year. Target may follow suit. According to this article, CD sales are down about 80% since 2001.
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...ing-out/ar-BBIK9Ej?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp


----------



## Woodduck

eljr said:


> A photo can be an indispensable archive to historic accuracy.... for example, comparing crowd sizes where word and picture are at odds.


In that particular case - as in all cases from the same source - no photographic evidence was necessary.


----------



## Woodduck

Strange Magic said:


> a few very carefully chosen words are worth a thousand pictures.


Wish I'd thought of that. :clap:


----------



## Marinera

eugeneonagain said:


> You're all being ripped off then. I've never paid over €35 for a concert ticket in the last 5 years. On Sunday I'm watching a performance of Prokofiev's 3rd piano concerto with Ruslan and Ludmilla and Petruschka. All for €25.


Opera's always more expensive. In covent garden you can get tickets for such price perhaps in the balcony level. Scary place balcony. You sit there like a pigeon on the rooftop of a multistored building with the vertigo inducing view and not even the armrests to hold on to but you don't even really need them because the seats are so narrow you're literally stuck between your neighbours. I don't usually mind heights but I sat in cold sweat there. Getting to and from these seats was the greatest challenge I've ever faced in any venue since when standing up the view gets sooo much better that you think if you'll black out right now nothing will stop you from rolling off the perimeter and onto the stage...only perhaps the levels below. What a happy thought. Cleaners that work there must be spidermen or the adrenaline junkies.


----------



## Guest

I understand that it is cheaper to fly from the UK to Europe to see an opera than go to Covent Garden.


----------



## Guest

Marinera said:


> Opera's always more expensive. In covent garden you can get tickets for such price perhaps in the balcony level. Scary place balcony. You sit there like a pigeon on the rooftop of a multistored building with the vertigo inducing view and not even the armrests to hold on to but you don't even really need them because the seats are so narrow you're literally stuck between your neighbours. I don't usually mind heights but I sat in cold sweat there. Getting to and from these seats was the greatest challenge I've ever faced in any venue since when standing up the view gets sooo much better that you think if you'll black out right now nothing will stop you from rolling off the perimeter and onto the stage...only perhaps the levels below. What a happy thought. Cleaners that work there must be spidermen or the adrenaline junkies.


This space in a theatre is also reserved in Vienna for the 'cheap seats'. It consists of a standing area right up the very top, with a railing and people put their scarves there to 'mind' their spot. I used to get a sore neck looking up at them, so I stopped that practice. In the Musikverein you can stand up at the back for 10 Euro or right up the top near the organ, completely unable to see anything of what is going on with the music. Along the balkon loge (upstairs left and right) only the first row can see anything. If you watch any broadcasts from the Musikverein you'll see the people in the 2nd and 3rd rows actually standing up. I've sat in the Parterre Loge (downstairs) in the back half of the Goldensaal only to have a woman two down from me lean on her elbows on the little bench, thereby destroying the view for everybody in that first row for the rest of the performance. I wanted to hit people but think it wouldn't have been a good idea!!!


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

The existential death of the CD


----------



## PlaySalieri

Genoveva said:


> The reason I have followed this way of doing things is that several years ago a relative gave me a hard drive containing the ripped contents of some 2000 CDs they owned. The files are all MP3 at 320 kbps.
> 
> Since that time, as I have purchased my own CDs (about 200), the procedure I have used is:
> 
> _· _Ripped the CDs and saved the files as both WAV and MP3. The programme I have used for ripping to WAV is _Exact Audio Copy. _
> 
> · I use _Audacity to _make adjustments to things like run-in time and peak volume. Each file is then "exported" as MP3 using 320 kpbs cbr ("lame 3.99").
> 
> · I use _MP3TAG_ to re-jig the various tag categories in the way I like them.
> 
> · The files are arranged in Windows 10 "folders". The top-level folder is by composer (currently 615 in total). For each composer there is a fairly standard hierarchy of genres and sub-genres, each varying according to the time periods they belonged to. Generally, I follow the same genre listings as in Wikipedia for each of the composers.
> 
> · I use _foobar200_ both to configure the entire MP3 collection, and for playback. I can view by folder, composer, title, conductor, genre, sub-genre, year, comment. It's very easy to pick exactly what I want and to make comparisons. The "filter" facility is very useful too, as selections can be finely "tuned".​
> The hard disk is copied to another hard disk regularly.
> 
> My sound system comprises a decent internal sound card, amplifier and stand mount speakers. I can't tell the difference between MP3 32O and WAV. It suits me to have MP3 because this format is compatible with my car sound system.


That sounds time consuming - esp working with audacity. How long does it take on average to do 1 CD?

MP3 - I know there are blind studies on hi fi experts who could not distinguish - but then hi fi experts are regularly embarrassed by studies comparing budget equipment with top end stuff.


----------



## DaveM

stomanek said:


> That sounds time consuming - esp working with audacity. How long does it take on average to do 1 CD?
> 
> MP3 - I know there are blind studies on hi fi experts who could not distinguish - but then hi fi experts are regularly embarrassed by studies comparing budget equipment with top end stuff.


Yes, a good ole double-blind study can bring the owners of very expensive high-end equipment down to earth pretty quickly. The equivalent of the placebo effect can make one think that the quality of sound is proportional to the amount of money spent. Not to mention that a hearing test on those much over 40 can be a bit of a shock when they see the sharp drop off much above 10-12 kHz.


----------



## Genoveva

stomanek said:


> That sounds time consuming - esp working with audacity. How long does it take on average to do 1 CD?
> 
> MP3 - I know there are blind studies on hi fi experts who could not distinguish - but then hi fi experts are regularly embarrassed by studies comparing budget equipment with top end stuff.


Yes it can be a rather time-consuming process, but I have only acquired some 200 CDs over the past 3 years, an average of a little more than one a week. As I said previously, the great bulk was given to me already ripped onto a hard disc.

The most recent was a CD of Zimerman/Schubert/Piano Sonatas D 959 & D 960. The ripping took about 5 minutes. Checking the result in _Audacity_ and exporting each of the two sonatas as MP3 took another 5 minutes. The only adjustment I needed to make in _Audacity_, which I do routinely, was to limit the peak amplitude to -3db. That's to allow for the possibility of any artefacts (i.e. odd sounds caused by the compression) that can sometimes be induced by saving as a lossy file. If they occur, they show up as spikes, and in order to prevent any such spikes from causing clipping, I usually find that -3db is a suitable adjustment to the peak amplitude. The problem is potentially more likely when 128 kbps was the norm for MP3, but at 320 kbps (the maximum rate) it's much less likely to occur.

I have tried really hard to listen for any differences between WAV 16 bit and MP3 320, and can't say that I've ever detected anything significant. Other people have been along and on the whole can't tell the difference either. Some said they could tell slight differences but I'm not sure about that. I have looked at the frequency analysis of the spectrum of a WAV file and its MP3 320 kbps counterpart, and there's not much difference. The frequencies of the MP3 file go all the way to 22 khx, which is all you get on a CD (red book). I doubt that many people can hear frequencies at that level, even if they think they can. I reckon that an MP3 file at 192 kbps would satisfy most people. It's a well-known feature of ageing that one loses sensitivity at higher frequencies. I think that a lot of people in their 40's and beyond would be very surprised to find out just how badly their hearing has deteriorated in terms of sensitivity at higher frequencies. I guess they'be be very lucky to hear much above about 15 khz at best, and among the more elderly (60+) it could be as low as 10 khz.

I know full well that "audiofiles" (which I'm not) sneer in your face at the mere mention of MP3. This has happened to me on several occasions. The last occasion was a few months when I was shopping for a new amplifier at a well-known chain of hi-fi retailers. The assistant could hardly contain his disgust when I mentioned MP3 as one of my main type of files. I felt so awful that I quickly said that I also have lots of WAV files. He wiped his brow and muttered something like _"Thank G.d for that"_. I didn't however tell the whole truth, that I can't tell the difference, and mainly use MP3 for the sheer convenience of this format. I only go there because they have a very good stock of hi-fi, and I just love looking at it. On that occasion, I bought a new set of speaker stands, as I decided that my present amplifier was OK and not worth spending a lot more money on a new one.


----------



## Merl

Most of my mp3s are ripped at 320k but i like vbr best, especially with classical music. Generally my music files are lossless and then I convert a copy to mp3 for the car / phone. Mp3 is so convenient. I tag and rename many files with .... yes youve guessed it.....'Tag and Rename'.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Genoveva said:


> Yes it can be a rather time-consuming process, but I have only acquired some 200 CDs over the past 3 years, an average of a little more than one a week. As I said previously, the great bulk was given to me already ripped onto a hard disc.
> 
> The most recent was a CD of Zimerman/Schubert/Piano Sonatas D 959 & D 960. The ripping took about 5 minutes. Checking the result in _Audacity_ and exporting each of the two sonatas as MP3 took another 5 minutes. The only adjustment I needed to make in _Audacity_, which I do routinely, was to limit the peak amplitude to -3db. That's to allow for the possibility of any artefacts (i.e. odd sounds caused by the compression) that can sometimes be induced by saving as a lossy file. If they occur, they show up as spikes, and in order to prevent any such spikes from causing clipping, I usually find that -3db is a suitable adjustment to the peak amplitude. The problem is potentially more likely when 128 kbps was the norm for MP3, but at 320 kbps (the maximum rate) it's much less likely to occur.
> 
> I have tried really hard to listen for any differences between WAV 16 bit and MP3 320, and can't say that I've ever detected anything significant. Other people have been along and on the whole can't tell the difference either. Some said they could tell slight differences but I'm not sure about that. I have looked at the frequency analysis of the spectrum of a WAV file and its MP3 320 kbps counterpart, and there's not much difference. The frequencies of the MP3 file go all the way to 22 khx, which is all you get on a CD (red book). I doubt that many people can hear frequencies at that level, even if they think they can. I reckon that an MP3 file at 192 kbps would satisfy most people. It's a well-known feature of ageing that one loses sensitivity at higher frequencies. I think that a lot of people in their 40's and beyond would be very surprised to find out just how badly their hearing has deteriorated in terms of sensitivity at higher frequencies. I guess they'be be very lucky to hear much above about 15 khz at best, and among the more elderly (60+) it could be as low as 10 khz.
> 
> I know full well that "audiofiles" (which I'm not) sneer in your face at the mere mention of MP3. This has happened to me on several occasions. The last occasion was a few months when I was shopping for a new amplifier at a well-known chain of hi-fi retailers. The assistant could hardly contain his disgust when I mentioned MP3 as one of my main type of files. I felt so awful that I quickly said that I also have lots of WAV files. He wiped his brow and muttered something like _"Thank G.d for that"_. I didn't however tell the whole truth, that I can't tell the difference, and mainly use MP3 for the sheer convenience of this format. I only go there because they have a very good stock of hi-fi, and I just love looking at it. *On that occasion, I bought a new set of speaker stands, as I decided that my present amplifier was OK and not worth spending a lot more money on a new one.*


dont let the staff make you feel obliged to make unnecessary purchases.

You are dedicated if you are going to all that trouble. I have used audacity with some LP transfers - a good program but you need patience and time.


----------



## PlaySalieri

DaveM said:


> Yes, a good ole double-blind study can bring the owners of very expensive high-end equipment down to earth pretty quickly. The equivalent of the placebo effect can make one think that the quality of sound is proportional to the amount of money spent. Not to mention that a hearing test on those much over 40 can be a bit of a shock when they see the sharp drop off much above 10-12 kHz.


I am afraid that all the blind testing I have seen on audophiles and indeed musicians leaves the high end business struggling to justify itself. Violinists and coinnoseurs that cant distinguish a top end strad from a good modern instrument costing a fraction of the sum - hifi dealers that cant tell the diff between a $100 amp and $30K monoblocks. It is indeed very very embarrassing. I know a guy that used to work for Quad - he said most of the research went into case design.


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> My comparison would be playing a stream, Flac or even a CD on my PC using the optical digital output from the PC to my Onkyo receiver vs. the sound quality of playing directly from my Oppo Blu-ray player. The sound quality of anything from the PC cannot even compare.


Thanks for the reply

Why would you not use the PC digital out to the Oppo??????

Which Oppo do you have? The Audiophile (95, 105, 205) grade or the standard (93, 103, 203)

I also enjoy Oppo, I have several, 103, 105 and HA-1. I am thinking of getting the Sonica and or the Sonica Dac. I waited a year for the 203/205 to be released only to find that it did not contain the streaming feature I enjoy with the 103 and 105.


----------



## PlaySalieri

anybody else having trouble with page numbers here - I mean I click on page 19 and it takes me back to 8


----------



## PlaySalieri

eljr said:


> Thanks for the reply
> 
> Why would you not use the PC digital out to the Oppo??????
> 
> Which Oppo do you have? The Audiophile (95, 105, 205) grade or the standard (93, 103, 203)
> 
> I also enjoy Oppo, I have several, 103, 105 and HA-1. I am thinking of getting the Sonica and or the Sonica Dac. I waited a year for the 203/205 to be released only to find that it did not contain the streaming feature I enjoy with the 103 and 105.


Just as an aside - who is that composer in your avatar?


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> Just as an aside - who is that composer in your avatar?


John Adams

---------------


----------



## Kevin Pearson

eljr said:


> Thanks for the reply
> 
> Why would you not use the PC digital out to the Oppo??????
> 
> Which Oppo do you have? The Audiophile (95, 105, 205) grade or the standard (93, 103, 203)
> 
> I also enjoy Oppo, I have several, 103, 105 and HA-1. I am thinking of getting the Sonica and or the Sonica Dac. I waited a year for the 203/205 to be released only to find that it did not contain the streaming feature I enjoy with the 103 and 105.


I use the DMP-103 and I suppose I don't use the streaming apsect because I have everything tied into my Onkyo. I also find I like separate inputs for my various devices. I love the Oppo btw. Best player I have ever owned. The upconversion for DVDs is fabulous!


----------



## Genoveva

stomanek said:


> anybody else having trouble with page numbers here - I mean I click on page 19 and it takes me back to 8


Yes, I reported the same or similar problem, if you care to look at my recent post in the "Technical problems" area.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

The answer is on page 8


----------



## PlaySalieri

Genoveva said:


> Yes, I reported the same or similar problem, if you care to look at my recent post in the "Technical problems" area.


glad its not just me

there is also an issue if you go direct to the home page


----------



## Genoveva

stomanek said:


> I am afraid that all the blind testing I have seen on audophiles and indeed musicians leaves the high end business struggling to justify itself. Violinists and coinnoseurs that cant distinguish a top end strad from a good modern instrument costing a fraction of the sum - hifi dealers that cant tell the diff between a $100 amp and $30K monoblocks. It is indeed very very embarrassing. I know a guy that used to work for Quad - he said most of the research went into case design.


It all depends on what is meant by "high end". I've heard a good number of amplifiers and speakers and reckon there's a definite improvement in sound quality up to certain price points, which are way higher than the $100 amp you refer to. I do agree, however, that spending as much as $30k for an amplifier is a ridiculous amount, and the improvement in sound quality over something costing much less must be very small if at all.

I won't bore anyone with details of my current set up, but both the amp and speakers cost considerably more than a few $100. I don't reckon that the quality for either has peaked out yet, but my budget has, so I'm holding out for while longer yet before doing any more upgrades. Incidentally, the speaker stands that I acquired recently are much better than what used to serve as stands (I'm too embarrassed to say). They have made a big improvement in sound quality, and am quite amazed at the difference. They have proper spikes and the verticals are filled with a very heavy bead-type substance. Well worth the money.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Genoveva said:


> It all depends on what is meant by "high end". I've heard a good number of amplifiers and speakers and reckon there's a definite improvement in sound quality up to certain price points, which are way higher than the $100 amp you refer to. I do agree, however, that spending as much as $30k for an amplifier is a ridiculous amount, and the improvement in sound quality over something costing much less must be very small if at all.
> 
> I won't bore anyone with details of my current set up, but both the amp and speakers cost considerably more than a few $100. I don't reckon that the quality for either has peaked out yet, but my budget has, so I'm holding out for while longer yet before doing any more upgrades. Incidentally, the speaker stands that I acquired recently are much better than what used to serve as stands (I'm too embarrassed to say). They have made a big improvement in sound quality, and am quite amazed at the difference. They have proper spikes and the verticals are filled with a very heavy bead-type substance. Well worth the money.


I would say for the money I spent - my best system was a systemdeck II, £300 amp and rogers speakers - the whole lot cost about £1000 back in 1990. Why I started going beyond that I dont know as the improvements were minimal - maybe the valve amp and preamp was a worthwhile improvement - but big money turntables and cartridges less so beyond a certain point. Record players can be items of great beauty - I think that was the attraction in addition to the search for perfect sound.


----------



## eljr

Genoveva said:


> I won't bore anyone with details of my current set up, but both the amp and speakers cost considerably more than a few $100. .


I'd not be bored. I be rather interested.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Go old skool 2nd hand - that's the best way to get Hi Fi bang for your buck- there is some great old 1980/90's gear out there


----------



## SixFootScowl

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Go old skool 2nd hand - that's the best way to get Hi Fi bang for your buck- there is some great old 1980/90's gear out there


As an aside, I have a ~1979 Yahama component stereo set that is rated 65 watts per channel. I would sell it but too lazy to list it.


----------



## eljr

Long Overdo death of the CD

From the most immature, combative audio site on the net.


----------



## Joe B

eljr said:


> Long Overdo death of the CD
> 
> From the most immature, combative audio site on the net.


----------



## Sloe

CD:s are incredibly fragile. When I buy a CD I rip it off so I can listen to it on the computer or mobile phone. Much more handy.


----------



## wkasimer

Sloe said:


> CD:s are incredibly fragile.


Compared to what? LP? Cassette? Computer hard drive?


----------



## eljr

Joe B said:


>


LOL, I know, right.

That little guy, Gene (site owner), with his complex, negates much of the good honest engineering he does and the benefits the site would provide.

He is the guy that sets the tone and rules of the board.


----------



## eugeneonagain

wkasimer said:


> Compared to what? LP? Cassette? Computer hard drive?


Indeed. Fragile compared to a hammer I'd say. I've dropped loads of CDs, multiple times, and they still play. It takes some effort to bend and warp a CD. They're not all that fragile.


----------



## KenOC

Sloe said:


> CD:s are incredibly fragile.


Fragile? In over thirty years I have never had a CD become unplayable. Never developed flutter, rumble, or wow. Nor snap, crackle, and pop for that matter. Never fell ill to inner groove distortion, nor gotten stuck in a groove, or skipped grooves. Threw away my dust bug, stylus pressure gauge, and tone arm protractor.

So yeah, I don't get "fragile".


----------



## Sloe

KenOC said:


> Fragile? In over thirty years I have never had a CD become unplayable. Never developed flutter, rumble, or wow. Nor snap, crackle, and pop for that matter. Never fell ill to inner groove distortion, nor gotten stuck in a groove, or skipped grooves. Threw away my dust bug, stylus pressure gauge, and tone arm protractor.
> 
> So yeah, I don't get "fragile".


If a cd get a scratch it is unplayable.


----------



## 13hm13

There are CD-R's sold that are (putatively) more durable than conventional CDs and CD-Rs.
See:
http://www.cd-info.com/archiving/longevity/index.html
(i.e, Kodak Gold, TDK, Verbatim, etc)
Google "UltraLife Archival Grade Gold Recordable Disk"

Of course, this mean you'll have to burn your pre-recorded CD to CD-R. All that fuss -- but, hey ... if you _literally_ want to delay "The death of the CD", that's how to do it 

Beyond "CD", -- i.e., for optical disks in general -- there is the newer "M-Disc" format -- up to 1000 years, perhaps:


----------



## Triplets

Sloe said:


> If a cd get a scratch it is unplayable.


it takes something to scratch a CD...when they were a new medium I inadvertently drove my car over one that had fallen out of a stack intended for car play and landed unbeknownst to me on the driveway....a simple wipe off with soap and water and it played. I can't imagine a vinyl lp or a computer HD withstanding that.


----------



## wkasimer

Sloe said:


> If a cd get a scratch it is unplayable.


And if an LP scratches, it's also unplayable. And when a hard drive crashes, everything on it is unplayable.

Solution - don't scratch your CD's. I've managed to avoid doing so for 32 years. And I'm a klutz.


----------



## KenOC

I hadn't realized how hard the CD has been hit. Looking at the RIAA industry numbers, unit sales fell just over 89% between 2000 and 2016 (the last year they show). And total CD revenues fell even further as the revenue per CD sold dropped from $14.02 to $11.80 over the same period. A double-whammy disaster.

https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/

BTW I've bought plenty of used CDs, some with obvious scratches, and they all played fine. YMMV of course!​


----------



## Sloe

wkasimer said:


> And if an LP scratches, it's also unplayable. And when a hard drive crashes, everything on it is unplayable.
> 
> Solution - don't scratch your CD's. I've managed to avoid doing so for 32 years. And I'm a klutz.


If an LP scratches it either hung up or just sound scratchy.


----------



## Blancrocher

Today's youth don't listen to cds--the idea wouldn't occur to them. They stream stuff for free on their phones. 

Why they don't spend thousands of dollars on freely available media like I do is beyond me.


----------



## PlaySalieri

wkasimer said:


> And if an LP scratches, it's also unplayable. And when a hard drive crashes, everything on it is unplayable.
> 
> Solution - don't scratch your CD's. I've managed to avoid doing so for 32 years. And I'm a klutz.


when a CD scratches or hits a glitch I would submit that the garbled jumpy results are worse than anything that ever happens with an LP.


----------



## KenOC

stomanek said:


> when a CD scratches or hits a glitch I would submit that the garbled jumpy results are worse than anything that ever happens with an LP.


Certainly not in my experience. I used to repair the occasional LP that got groove-stuck using a small microscope and a sewing needle. It worked to some extent, sometimes. But nothing to be done for the other ills that LPs were prey to.

In the 35 years since, I've never had a problem with a CD.


----------



## Gottfried

CDs are visually beautiful. They come in satisfyingly compact cases and look good on shelves. I have invested a disproportionate amount of my income in establishing my (almost exclusively classical) collection, but have thoroughly enjoyed doing so. 

However, much as the CD is my favorite musical medium, I fear that players will become increasingly difficult to find and to use. For example, older computers had disc drives that worked much better than any of the current plug in players I have used, each of which is noisy and sporadically struggles to function correctly.


----------



## Taplow

stomanek said:


> when a CD scratches or hits a glitch I would submit that the garbled jumpy results are worse than anything that ever happens with an LP.


Scratches on the surface of a CD can be polished out. It is, after all, just a piece of plastic. I've had several CDs like this (second hand, I don't mishandle my own CDs) and managed to successfully restore them to perfectly playable condition.


----------



## SixFootScowl

stomanek said:


> when a CD scratches or hits a glitch I would submit that the garbled jumpy results are worse than anything that ever happens with an LP.


I found some scratches are workable on certain CD drives and not others, so if a CD won't play, try a different player or computer CD drive.


----------



## eugeneonagain

Sloe said:


> If a cd get a scratch it is unplayable.


Complete nonsense. It would have to be a scratch deep enough to cause a major disruption to the surface so that the laser couldn't read past it. Many scratched CDs play normally. As Taplow said, they can be polished out and kits are sold for that very purpose.

You are making some fairly foolish claims about CDs in this thread.


----------



## eljr

eugeneonagain said:


> It would have to be a scratch deep enough to cause a major disruption to the surface so that the laser couldn't read past it. Many scratched CDs play normally. As Taplow said, they can be polished out and kits are sold for that very purpose.
> 
> .


Interesting, I never heard of this.


----------



## PlaySalieri

KenOC said:


> Certainly not in my experience. I used to repair the occasional LP that got groove-stuck using a small microscope and a sewing needle. It worked to some extent, sometimes. But nothing to be done for the other ills that LPs were prey to.
> 
> In the 35 years since, I've never had a problem with a CD.


you've never had that awful clicking sound when a CD gets stuck?


----------



## Art Rock

The local library will eliminate the CD section, because demand has decreased dramatically.


----------



## wkasimer

eugeneonagain said:


> You are making some fairly foolish claims about CDs in this thread.


I believe that it's called "received wisdom".


----------



## Taplow

Art Rock said:


> The local library will eliminate the CD section, because demand has decreased dramatically.


An opportunity, perhaps, to collect some cheap cast-aways?


----------



## Art Rock

They will be selling off the inventory at 1 euro each - at thrift stores I get the same deal or better and usually the physical quality of the discs is better. But yes, I'll have a look.


----------



## KenOC

stomanek said:


> you've never had that awful clicking sound when a CD gets stuck?


Actually, no. But I've heard it occasionally on the local classical station!


----------



## PlaySalieri

KenOC said:


> Actually, no. But I've heard it occasionally on the local classical station!


you are incredibly lucky then if you have never had a CD glitch out on you.


----------



## KenOC

stomanek said:


> you are incredibly lucky then if you have never had a CD glitch out on you.


Lucky? I laid it more to the durability of the CD!

For anybody who cares to answer: How many years have you owned CDs? In that time, how many have developed playback problems?


----------



## Art Rock

Since 1986. Apart from one that developed bronzing (a recognized manufacturing error of the early 90s), I had something like 5 develop reading problems over time (much less than 1 0/00).


----------



## PlaySalieri

I wonder if CDs will make a comeback in maybe 20 years - in the same way that LPs have stubbornly refused to die to the extent that publishers are now returning to a format that most people in the 80s thought would be dead and buried by 1990.

I think not - where as LPs offer those who care the chance to enjoy analogue audio technology - Cds offer - digital sound playback - which can be had from the internet, streaming MP3 players etc.

I know some analogue freaks who, in the 90s, predicted that CD would die in the wake of an analogue revival in our lifetime.

That is kind of coming to pass.


----------



## PlaySalieri

KenOC said:


> Lucky? I laid it more to the durability of the CD!
> 
> For anybody who cares to answer: How many years have you owned CDs? In that time, how many have developed playback problems?


I owned CDs going back to the mid 80s and periodically had playback problems many times even from new CDs


----------



## eljr

stomanek said:


> I wonder if CDs will make a comeback in maybe 20 years - in the same way that LPs have stubbornly refused to die to the extent that publishers are now returning to a format that most people in the 80s thought would be dead and buried by 1990.
> 
> I think not - where as LPs offer those who care the chance to enjoy analogue audio technology - Cds offer - digital sound playback - which can be had from the internet, streaming MP3 players etc.
> 
> I know some analogue freaks who, in the 90s, predicted that CD would die in the wake of an analogue revival in our lifetime.
> 
> That is kind of coming to pass.


No way the CD makes a comeback as did vinyl as vinyl holds more romance. Bigger cover art and liner notes, the entire pageantry of caring for records and flipping them every 20 minutes. This all creates an involvement CD's don't have as strongly. Then you add in the fact, as you stated, that records are analog.

Yes, sadly, the CD will go the way of the cassette not the LP.


----------



## Genoveva

stomanek said:


> I owned CDs going back to the mid 80s and periodically had playback problems many times even from new CDs


I don't bother with CDs except to rip new ones as I acquire them. But I have certainly heard of people having problems with CDs that have become badly scratched. Minor scratches shouldn't be a problem as they can be treated, but there must come a point when scratch damage is so bad that it will either click or play the same few bars over and over. I've come across occasional problems of this nature when listening to CDs played over the radio by the BBC. Whether or not they've been able to resolve problems by cleaning, I don't know.


----------



## KenOC

stomanek said:


> I know some analogue freaks who, in the 90s, predicted that CD would die in the wake of an analogue revival in our lifetime.
> 
> That is kind of coming to pass.


Annual CD sales have declined by 843 million units. Annual LP sales are certainly up, but total only 17 million units. It looks like the problems CDs face are caused by other things.


----------



## Joe B

eljr said:


> Yes, sadly, the CD will go the way of the cassette not the LP.


ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff


----------



## Taplow

KenOC said:


> For anybody who cares to answer: How many years have you owned CDs? In that time, how many have developed playback problems?


Bought my first CD in 1985, I think. It's still going strong, and I've never had an issue with any of them.


----------



## Joe B

I have one disc that has an intermittent problem at one spot on some players. However, I bought a box set of DVD's, factory fresh, which all "bronzed" in a few years. I re-bought the whole set 2 years ago. Evidently a manufacturing problem.


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> Lucky? I laid it more to the durability of the CD!
> 
> For anybody who cares to answer: How many years have you owned CDs? In that time, how many have developed playback problems?


1989. I've had none develop problems. I've had a couple of faulty ones at purchase, but that'll all.


----------



## Genoveva

I know that LP sales have been on the "up" for some time now, but I can't ever imagine that I'd want to go with that trend. 

For a start there would be the huge cost of acquiring 100's (or rather 2000+ in my case) LPs. Then there's the problem of storage. 

Another big problem as far as i'm concerned is that most often I don't find the layout of the music on CDs/LPs suits the way I like to store music. For example, I want symphonies by each composer in one place and overtures (or whatever else the record companies include to fill up the space) in some other place. That's a major benefit of ripping the content as it enables me to file the output in a much more convenient manner for playback, and keeping tabs on what I have. 

Also, I'm not convinced that vinyl necessarily sounds any better than digital. I would perhaps accept that if one has super sharp hearing, ideal listening conditions, and very high end hi-fi, there may be a potential sound advantage in vinyl over CD, but any such gain is likely to be far too marginal to be of concern to me, given the cost to change and other disadvantages mentioned.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Genoveva said:


> I know that LP sales have been on the "up" for some time now, but I can't ever imagine that I'd want to go with that trend.
> 
> For a start there would be the huge cost of acquiring 100's (or rather 2000+ in my case) LPs. Then there's the problem of storage.
> 
> Another big problem as far as i'm concerned is that most often I don't find the layout of the music on CDs/LPs suits the way I like to store music. For example, I want symphonies by each composer in one place and overtures (or whatever else the record companies include to fill up the space) in some other place. That's a major benefit of ripping the content as it enables me to file the output in a much more convenient manner for playback, and keeping tabs on what I have.
> 
> Also, I'm not convinced that vinyl necessarily sounds any better than digital. I would perhaps accept that if one has super sharp hearing, ideal listening conditions, and very high end hi-fi, there may be a potential sound advantage in vinyl over CD, but any such gain is likely to be far too marginal to be of concern to me, given the cost to change and other disadvantages mentioned.


For most I think it is a question of convenience - the sound from digital sources for me, as a listener who is convinced about the superiority of analogue over digital - is damned well good enough for my listening 99% of the time. As I work at my pc all day it is just too easy to go to your tube and listen - I can do that or leave my office desk and start flipping through my LPs wondering what to listen to - then drop it on the turntable etc - get up when the side needs turning.
Having said that - if I want something a bit special - for example I have been listening to K593 in car on the CD, orlando qt, and decided I wanted to hear this work at its best - then I pulled out my 50 year old set of the barchet qt playing this fine work and dedicated my time solely to listening. So LP does have its place in my busy life.


----------



## eugeneonagain

The CD, holding digital information, was a way to offer the same digital files we can now store on a computer. The commercial model of: purchase player and then keep on purchasing discs, has been hit hard by the availability of web-based digital files for as little as 5 cents each. 

As a user-friendly medium for music I like the CD very much. It is relatively small and light and quite robust. It is simple in its operation. As much as I like vinyl for its nostalgia and the huge amount of R&D that went into improving it to a high level, I don't like its annoying fragility and the constant battle with dust and other problems. It's high maintenance.


----------



## Triplets

stomanek said:


> when a CD scratches or hits a glitch I would submit that the garbled jumpy results are worse than anything that ever happens with an LP.


That's because lps are already so noisy that you hardly notice when the needle hits a pothole


----------



## Triplets

Genoveva said:


> I know that LP sales have been on the "up" for some time now, but I can't ever imagine that I'd want to go with that trend.
> 
> For a start there would be the huge cost of acquiring 100's (or rather 2000+ in my case) LPs. Then there's the problem of storage.
> 
> Another big problem as far as i'm concerned is that most often I don't find the layout of the music on CDs/LPs suits the way I like to store music. For example, I want symphonies by each composer in one place and overtures (or whatever else the record companies include to fill up the space) in some other place. That's a major benefit of ripping the content as it enables me to file the output in a much more convenient manner for playback, and keeping tabs on what I have.
> 
> Also, I'm not convinced that vinyl necessarily sounds any better than digital. I would perhaps accept that if one has super sharp hearing, ideal listening conditions, and very high end hi-fi, there may be a potential sound advantage in vinyl over CD, but any such gain is likely to be far too marginal to be of concern to me, given the cost to change and other disadvantages mentioned.


Several studies show that more than half of lps sold are to people who have no means to play them with. They hang them on the walls for decoration or leave them out on coffee tables


----------



## Richard8655

My impression is that older CDs (80’s through 90’s) don’t have as good audio quality as the last decade. My imagination, or has engineering improved since then? Maybe it’s also better CD players (higher resolution DACs, upsampling, etc.) that they’re being played on.


----------



## KenOC

Richard8655 said:


> My impression is that older CDs (80's through 90's) don't have as good audio quality as the last decade. My imagination, or has engineering improved since then? Maybe it's also better CD players (higher resolution DACs, upsampling, etc.) that they're being played on.


I think there were plenty of early CDs that had an unpleasant harsh "digital glare," but there were plenty that didn't. No idea why some recording teams couldn't get the sound right while others did.

Today that sort of bad sound seems rare.


----------



## Richard8655

KenOC said:


> I think there were plenty of early CDs that had an unpleasant harsh "digital glare," but there were plenty that didn't. No idea why some recording teams couldn't get the sound right while others did.
> 
> Today that sort of bad sound seems rare.


Yeah, I think that's true. Back then in the beginning, it was still somewhat emerging technology that's since been perfected (relatively). And now that they've got it right, it's disappearing!


----------



## KenOC

Full uncompressed CDs go away in favor of streaming.
WAV and FLAC files go away in favor of lossy MP3s.
In photography, RAW and TIF files yield to lossy JPGs.
And highly capable DSLRs yield to tiny-sensor smartphone cameras.


Much wailing, rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth among aficionados. But in every case, it’s the “good enough” law in action. Most people, the vast majority, have absolutely no use for the marginal benefits of the “best” solution and will happily settle for the approach that is good enough for what they need and want, especially if there are advantages in cost and convenience. And there often are.

For instance: January shipments of digital cameras worldwide are down almost 30% from a year ago, as that market is hollowed out by those "inferior" smartphone cameras. In fact, any halfway decent smartphone camera takes a far better picture than any mass-market film camera in the pre-digital days. And no film, no processing!


----------



## KenOC

Deleted, dupe post. .................................

​


----------



## SixFootScowl

eljr said:


> Yes, sadly, the CD will go the way of the cassette not the LP.


That might not be so bad in the long run.

Cassette tapes make a comeback

Cassette tapes making a comeback thanks to young, independent artists


----------



## KenOC

The RIAA database shows cassette sales peaking at about $3.5 billion in 1990 and declining to zero by 2009, and nothing after that through 2016, the latest year they have.


----------



## DaveM

I took to cassettes the moment they came out. I could never understand how 8-track tapes continued to exist for a time after. My first deck was one of the first Harman-Kardons with Dolby B. There were a few hiccups during the first few years of cassettes: The tape suffered from some print-through (sound information would bleed to adjacent tape on the roll). Early tape could break, seize or snag and the high-end frequency drop-off was early and steep. Tape hiss was also a problem even with Dolby B.

But in just a few years Dolby C was added and excellent new tapes developed. Hi bias, metal etc. (Cobalt was a mistake.). My favorite tape was Maxell XL II-S. My final and favorite tape deck was the iconic Nakamichi RX505. Contrary to what was predicted, the better cassette tape formulations actually have survived well over time. My 25-30 year old recordings sound as good as the day they were made.

Cassettes were the first format to allow what were comparable to custom playlists (yes, you could do that with open-reel, but it wasn't portable). You could play them on a high-end system, in the car and on pocket portables -Sony and Panasonic were the best. The slow death of the cassette coincided with the rise of MP3 players. The Apple Ipods put the final nails in the coffin.


----------



## KenOC

I never had a Nakamichi, sad to speak. That brand was spoken of in hushed tones. And I could afford only cheap cassettes, which wore my playback heads out by friction. That was a problem for all types of tape players of course, including reel-to-reel.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I was recording my vinyl to Denon blank cassettes through a Yahama cassette deck and playing them on an Alpine stereo in my car with TruSonic 6x9 door speakers that had huge magnets on the backs of them. I think my high frequency hearing loss in the left ear is from that left door speaker, or perhaps the highway wind noise (I started driving in 1975 but didn't have a vehicle with AC until 1999).


----------



## PlaySalieri

Triplets said:


> Several studies show that more than half of lps sold are to people who have no means to play them with. They hang them on the walls for decoration or leave them out on coffee tables


from the Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/aug/12/vinyl-destination-who-is-actually-buying-records

"An ICM poll in April revealed that almost 50% of people who bought a vinyl album the previous month had yet to listen to it. The poll also found that 41% have a turntable they never use, *while 7% of those who purchase vinyl don't own a record player*. (At this stage of the news report, I would probably be looking gravely concerned while flicking through a stack of bossa nova compilations.)"

7% in this ICM study

I think people are inspired to buy vinyl, partly on their physical appeal. CDs were always disappointing in that sense.


----------



## eugeneonagain

There have been a few posts talking about early CDs being worse, but I've not experienced this. I have CDs from the early and mid 80s and they are fine. They are better made for a start. The majority of early CDs all had analogue transfer recordings from quality tape, so as far as I'm concerned they were magnificent. That same rich analogue tape source is what vinyl aficionados always rave about (the disc is a mere reproduction method), but on a CD it doesn't deteriorate or develop pops and crackle.


----------



## Larkenfield

Many of the early CDs were ADD—analog recording, digital mixing, and digital transfer. The digital mixing changed everything, such as Arthur Rubinstein‘s analog recording of the Chopin Scherzi and Ballades. I could scarcely recognize it when the CD came out—the sound was flat, sterile and unsatisfying compared to the original warmth of the LP. Digital mixing had changed the sound of the articulation of the piano—more brittle, metallic, and surface. It did not sound like the original analog recording and I knew that something was rotten in Denmark with regard to certain CD mixes and transfers—the music did not sound natural and I never trusted it as being what it fully and richly sounded like in analog.


----------



## Triplets

Larkenfield said:


> Many of the early CDs were ADD-analog recording, digital mixing, and digital transfer. The digital mixing changed everything, such as Arthur Rubinstein's analog recording of the Chopin Scherzi and Ballades. I could scarcely recognize it when the CD came out-the sound was flat, sterile and unsatisfying compared to the original warmth of the LP. Digital mixing had changed the sound of the articulation of the piano-more brittle, metallic, and surface. It did not sound like the original analog recording and I knew that something was rotten in Denmark with regard to certain CD mixes and transfers-the music did not sound natural and I never trusted it as being what it fully and richly sounded like in analog.


I bought the latest remasterings of Rubinstein Chopin. It cost something like $12. Sounds great, a big improvement over a "Greatest Hits" compilation that I still have from the dawn of the CD era. And no pops, clicks, or feeling that Rubinstein is frying an egg on the Piano


----------



## Kevin Pearson

KenOC said:


> Lucky? I laid it more to the durability of the CD!
> 
> For anybody who cares to answer: How many years have you owned CDs? In that time, how many have developed playback problems?


I've owned a player and discs since 1981 when the Sony DMP-101 was released. I've only had one bad disc in all these years. It was a disc that developed disc rot fro some unknown reason.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I bought a few vinyl albums at garage sales for the purpose of having them on a shelf as my turntable needs a new cartridge and my conventional stereo is packed away in storage under the basement stairs. 

As for CDs, I expose them to the computer drive one time for a rip and then play the music on the MP3 player or burn a disk to play in the car. I did have a lot of those burned disks go bad until I stopped using Memorex. Staples house brand disks have worked fine. So for me the "x" in Memorex reminds me that anything put on that disk may get xed out.


----------



## CDs

I guess the user with the name CDs should chime in. LONG LIVE THE CD!
Nuff said.


----------



## scarecroe

I hope this means sales will increase for ArkivMusic, and others like them, helping secure their business so they stay around.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

I read this article today and was reminded of this discussion about the dangers of technology.

http://www.somedaily.org/ipad-far-bigger-threat-children-anyone-realizes/#.WqKrrWx4WSZ.facebook


----------



## Melvin

They are said to last for 100 to 200 years, under recommended storage conditions.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Melvin said:


> They are said to last for 100 to 200 years, under recommended storage conditions.


So NOT rolling around in the plastic bin in the car door and NOT used as a coaster for a coffee cup. It's no wonder some people can't seem to make CDs last.


----------



## KedarKelkar

Andolink said:


> I just bought a new CD player last week (PS Audio DirectStream Memory Player) and a companion DAC to go with it (PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC). This is my only source; no computer connection to my stereo; no turntable. I have over 7,000 CD's collected since 1983 and that's too many to attempt to convert to digital files so I'm pretty much tied to the format for forever. I'm fine with that, however, finding a CD player with the features I need at a reasonable price is definitely getting increasingly, in fact maddeningly, difficult.


7000 CDs. Admire you!!


----------



## eljr




----------



## SixFootScowl

eljr said:


>


We should like to see the graph for classical, not all music combined.


----------



## Pugg

Fritz Kobus said:


> We should like to see the graph for classical, not all music combined.


Nor sure you then get the answer you are hoping for.


----------



## eljr

KedarKelkar said:


> 7000 CDs. Admire you!!


welcome!

........


----------



## eljr

Fritz Kobus said:


> We should like to see the graph for classical, not all music combined.


try here 

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


----------



## Oakey

Note that these are revenues, not numbers of sales. Although it's obvious CD sales are declining fast, it's still the most popular physical format (compare the 2016 vinyl bar to CDs and keep in mind that the average LP costs twice the price of a CD). Note that vinyl has seen a comeback and even cassettes (who would have thought!). I'm pretty sure CDs will become fashionable again for future generations. It's an easier format to keep in the air than vinyl and cassettes (the few vinyl factories around run on 70s equipment and knowledge and have great difficulty to keep up with demand for instance).

Even though CD is not the premium high-end product anymore it used to be, I love my CDs, and enjoy buying them (used for a bargain these days, like vinyl 15 years ago) and listening to them. I never stopped buying vinyl too (only non-classical though).


----------



## walkingonair

Wow. I still have a pile of CDs, but I have put many of them on iTunes and that is how I prefer to listen to them now. I do buy more through Amazon and iTunes than I used to, so I guess I can understand that. The only thing that bugs me is that at one point, iTunes completely renamed and rearranged my music for me. Really made me mad. Now it is actually easier to just play my CDs than to try and sort through my iTunes mess.


----------



## SixFootScowl

walkingonair said:


> Wow. I still have a pile of CDs, but I have put many of them on iTunes and that is how I prefer to listen to them now. I do buy more through Amazon and iTunes than I used to, so I guess I can understand that. The only thing that bugs me is that at one point, iTunes completely renamed and rearranged my music for me. Really made me mad. Now it is actually easier to just play my CDs than to try and sort through my iTunes mess.


It is better having control than accepting supposed convenience on someone else's terms.


----------



## Blancrocher

As an aside, I met a couple of my best friends at used cd stores. Even though I remain exhilarated by the possibility of immediately wasting money on whatever cd catches my fancy, I miss having physical stores near to home.

One thing I'll regret along with the death of the cd is the decline of the collecting culture that surrounds it.


----------



## KenOC

Fritz Kobus said:


> It is better having control than accepting supposed convenience on someone else's terms.


If you truly believed that, and lived by it, you would slaughter an animal every time you wanted a steak rather than buy one, nicely plastic-wrapped, at the supermarket.


----------



## Joe B

Fritz Kobus said:


> It is better having control than accepting supposed convenience on someone else's terms.





KenOC said:


> If you truly believed that, and lived by it, you would slaughter an animal every time you wanted a steak rather than buy one, nicely plastic-wrapped, at the supermarket.


I agree with Fritz Kobus that it's nicer to have direct control of my music by having and sticking with CD's despite the inconveniences that come with physical media.

KenOC, your comment to Fritz is unfair. You've taken the argument from the lack of control of online music sources to an entirely different arena. This isn't having an argument; it's how you start a fight. And by the way, I stopped eating all flesh foods (meat, fish, eggs) in 1979 for the very reason you state, and it had nothing whatsoever to do with music.


----------



## eljr

walkingonair said:


> I have put many of them on iTunes and that is how I prefer to listen to them now. .


I considered this, or putting them in Amazon, but decided to store my digital music independent of 2nd party and keep them on my own hard drive.

No doubt the way to go is to utilize Roon with Tidal integrated but I take things slowly so I am still working with JRiver here. JRiver affords total control like no other. Problem is, it's a steep learning curb.


----------



## eljr

KenOC said:


> If you truly believed that, and lived by it, you would slaughter an animal every time you wanted a steak rather than buy one, nicely plastic-wrapped, at the supermarket.


Not sure what slaughtered animals has to do with music convenience but this was an "interesting" post.


----------



## eljr

Blancrocher said:


> One thing I'll regret along with the death of the cd is the decline of the collecting culture that surrounds it.


Two thoughts.

1) I agree with you. I love my collection and having, touching storing it.

2) It's just as rewarding, though tactically different, to own a digital collection. (I speak for myself)

I would be upset parting with either.

Problem is, the future is in music rental, not ownership at all.


----------



## eljr

Oakey said:


> I'm pretty sure CDs will become fashionable again for future generations.


You may be right but I just don't see it.

LP's offer a greater point of differentiation sonically and is a much more "involving" format.

The negligible resurgence of tape is simply a cost reduction adaptation spurred by some struggling artists.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> If you truly believed that, and lived by it, you would slaughter an animal every time you wanted a steak rather than buy one, nicely plastic-wrapped, at the supermarket.


Apples and kumquats comparison. Besides, I have much control over the meat I buy as there are many sellers, and it is totally consumable, so if one stops serving my purpose I simply switch or go buy a gun. But if you buy into a music streaming service and set up all your listening, you are stuck with their terms and their changes. How about when Photobucket (abeit probably nobody read the terms) pooped all over the internet and shut everyone out of their pictures.


----------



## Taplow

eljr said:


> Problem is, the future is in music rental, not ownership at all.


The future is whatever the consumer decides it should be. Unfortunately, many seem to be accepting the rental model so I don't see it disappearing too soon. If non-physical media were the only option, I would still rather pay for downloads than opt for a business model where my collection could disappear overnight at the whim of a corporation.


----------



## eljr

Fritz Kobus said:


> Apples and kumquats comparison. .


Love this comparison!

:lol:

kumquats always make me laugh


----------



## eljr

Taplow said:


> The future is whatever the consumer decides it should be. Unfortunately, many seem to be accepting the rental model so I don't see it disappearing too soon. If non-physical media were the only option, I would still rather pay for downloads than opt for a business model where my collection could disappear overnight at the whim of a corporation.


I agree.

I do believe however, if I were born in 1995, I would not agree.

My response would likely be,"so what, I would just use a different streaming service."


----------



## SONNET CLV

If CDs were dead my house would reek with the odor of decay. Big time!
But no, it doesn't.


----------



## Pugg

eljr said:


> I agree.
> 
> I do believe however, if I were born in 1995, I would not agree.
> 
> My response would likely be,"so what, I would just use a different streaming service."


Born only 10 year earlier but I am with Taplow, I know, old fashion, even at my age.


----------



## Granate

KenOC said:


> Full uncompressed CDs go away in favor of streaming.
> WAV and FLAC files go away in favor of lossy MP3s.
> In photography, RAW and TIF files yield to lossy JPGs.
> And highly capable DSLRs yield to tiny-sensor smartphone cameras.
> 
> Much wailing, rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth among aficionados. But in every case, it's the "good enough" law in action. Most people, the vast majority, have absolutely no use for the marginal benefits of the "best" solution and will happily settle for the approach that is good enough for what they need and want, especially if there are advantages in cost and convenience. And there often are.


That should be a considerable fear for our generation. I own a DSLR (my lens is not that good) and it's not really handy to use (because of particular issues with the lens). Most of our pictures and our memories are in our WhatsApp and after a year the phone erases the files.

You know that from time to time I'm buying CDs to build my library as I discover my favourite recordings of particular works. For me, streaming is like that turntable that the shop offers customers to try their records, but instead of minutes, I would spend hours and hours playing all the records available, figuring out my favourite, and taking it home. A professor warned us one time that if we wanted to build a book library, we should use ebooks, because phisical books are a burden when you are moving out. Then comes the question about hard-drives and our investment in them so we don't lose our files (like buying bookshelves every 4 years).

And my particular fear is the time I have to rip my "small" CD collection and putting it in a HD. Honestly, what I care about the most when I'm buying CDs is the opportunity to touch them, open and close them and reading their liner notes. I may not even rip my collection ever, except those CDs I cannot find in streaming sites.



eljr said:


> I agree.
> 
> I do believe however, if I were *born in 1995*, I would not agree.
> 
> My response would likely be,*"so what, I would just use a different streaming service."*


I trust streaming sites because I don't need to wait or fear for the product to wear out. *If a streaming sites closes down, I will find another.* I'm quite satisfied with Spotify Free and Premium, and I don't complain for the sound quality. Their library is impressing. I'm now on trial mode for *Qobuz* (which recently arrived to Spain) and while the library shows less titles, I find the main ones plus others not available in Spotify. I like the sound quality in 320kbps but they should do away with the gaps between tracks. The also offer yearly plans and FLAC sound, with focus on the classical repertoire.

My main priority is to have clear which recordings please me the most, and then I'll find out the best way to listen to them in full enjoyment. I'm now in the discovery stage and I will for a long time. I enjoy things as they are now and keep collecting my favourite operas and symphonies on CD.


----------



## CDs

One of the big issues (among many) with streaming services is that you are are the mercy of the labels, artists and streaming provider. 
With a CD you pay a one time fee and more than likely can listen to it as many times as you want, when ever you want, and where ever you want without paying another dime. I can go pull out a CD I bought 25 years ago and know that it'll play just fine and I don't have to worry if the label or artist had a royalty dispute with my CD player and pulled their music from my CD. I also don't have to worry that my computer will have a bad day and fry all my CDs.
Plus not being tracked about how many times I've listened to certain songs over and over again is a great feeling. Privacy is becoming a lost art. There is a saying "silence is golden" but I would say "privacy is golden".


----------



## RobertKC

For those who like "owning" discs (vs. "renting" music), and who like the convenience of dropping a disc into the tray and hitting the "Play" button (vs. countless hours ripping and tagging), there are several disc-based technologies that are newer than CD: SACD, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, and Ultra HD Blu-ray. These newer technologies are all capable of higher resolution audio (compared with CD's 16bit/44.1kHz), and multi-channel (i.e., 5.0 or 5.1).

Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray additionally provide video, which is perhaps most important for ballet and opera, buy also enjoyable for classical concerts IMO. Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts

New performances of classical music are routinely captured and offered in hi-res formats. Classical recordings delivered via these more advanced disc-based technologies are readily available from on-line retailers.

"Universal players" (e.g., Oppo UDP-205) are available for these more advanced recording technologies (SACD, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, Ultra HD Blu-ray, plus downloaded hi-res (24bit/192kHz) FLAC, and DSD), including units that include "audiophile-grade" DACs, bass management, remote volume control, headphone jacks, etc. And my Oppo players have a TOSLINK connection (fiber optic input that uses the Oppo's internal DAC) that I use to connect a Chromecast Audio gizmo for streaming services such as Spotify Premium, TuneIn internet radio, etc. With an Oppo-UDP-205 plus Chromecast Audio, the only additional equipment you need is a stereo amp and speakers, and you're equipped to enjoy any digital music - whether disc-based, or streaming. (I use vintage tube amps, which illustrates the fact that you do NOT need an AVR.) Subwoofer optional. Or, 5.1 surround-sound. Or, just a pair of headphones plugged into the Oppo's headphone jack.

Unless someone is only willing (or able) to spend bargain-basement prices for reproduced music (e.g., used CDs), I suggest getting a universal player, and start investing in more advanced recordings, and experience new ways to enjoy classical music.

Many people, including me, disagree with any assertion that 30+ year-old CD technology has never been improved upon.

In the unlikely event that in our lifetime CDs are no longer manufactured - _c'est la vie_ - there are plenty of newer technologies that are well established. And, of course, billions of CDs will be available via the used market - and the new "universal players" will play them.

P.S. _You don't need no stinkin' smart-phone to operate an Oppo player_. It has its own remote control. (Though you can use your smartphone as a remote control if you wish.)

P.P.S. I have no affiliation with Oppo. I'm just an audiophile who is a happy user of the last 4 generations of Oppo players (UDP-205, BDP-105, BDP-95, DV-980H). And, more importantly, I enjoy the benefits that newer recording technologies provide for classical music.


----------



## eljr

RobertKC said:


> For those who like "owning" discs (vs. "renting" music), and who like the convenience of dropping a disc into the tray and hitting the "Play" button (vs. countless hours ripping and tagging), there are several disc-based technologies that are newer than CD: SACD, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, and Ultra HD Blu-ray. These newer technologies are all capable of higher resolution audio (compared with CD's 16bit/44.1kHz), and multi-channel (i.e., 5.0 or 5.1).
> 
> Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray additionally provide video, which is perhaps most important for ballet and opera, buy also enjoyable for classical concerts IMO. Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts
> 
> New performances of classical music are routinely captured and offered in hi-res formats. Classical recordings delivered via these more advanced disc-based technologies are readily available from on-line retailers.
> 
> "Universal players" (e.g., Oppo UDP-205) are available for these more advanced recording technologies (SACD, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, Ultra HD Blu-ray, plus downloaded hi-res (24bit/192kHz) FLAC, and DSD), including units that include "audiophile-grade" DACs, bass management, remote volume control, headphone jacks, etc. And my Oppo players have a TOSLINK connection (fiber optic input that uses the Oppo's internal DAC) that I use to connect a Chromecast Audio gizmo for streaming services such as Spotify Premium, TuneIn internet radio, etc. With an Oppo-UDP-205 plus Chromecast Audio, the only additional equipment you need is a stereo amp and speakers, and you're equipped to enjoy any digital music - whether disc-based, or streaming. (I use vintage tube amps, which illustrates the fact that you do NOT need an AVR.) Subwoofer optional. Or, 5.1 surround-sound. Or, just a pair of headphones plugged into the Oppo's headphone jack.
> 
> Unless someone is only willing (or able) to spend bargain-basement prices for reproduced music (e.g., used CDs), I suggest getting a universal player, and start investing in more advanced recordings, and experience new ways to enjoy classical music.
> 
> Many people, including me, disagree with any assertion that 30+ year-old CD technology has never been improved upon.
> 
> In the unlikely event that in our lifetime CDs are no longer manufactured - _c'est la vie_ - there are plenty of newer technologies that are well established. And, of course, billions of CDs will be available via the used market - and the new "universal players" will play them.
> 
> P.S. _You don't need no stinkin' smart-phone to operate an Oppo player_. It has its own remote control. (Though you can use your smartphone as a remote control if you wish.)
> 
> P.P.S. I have no affiliation with Oppo. I'm just an audiophile who is a happy user of the last 4 generations of Oppo players (UDP-205, BDP-105, BDP-95, DV-980H). And, more importantly, I enjoy the benefits that newer recording technologies provide for classical music.


 I enjoyed your passion for your preference in this post. Made me LOL a couple times.

a few questions and thoughts though

1) I take serious issue with your suggestion that a CD is more convenient than streaming. Isn't that the principle draw away from CD's, the convenience of streaming?

2) How has CD been improved on?

3) Personally, I often control my Oppo player from a smartphone and find it much preferable.

4) I too enjoy OPPO but it is "challenged" in DLNA support. It's not very good at the handshake. Damned 105 gives me fits. Always freezing. HA1 I had to send back for repair. 103 no issues, a pleasure. I'd buy another OPPO because what it can do is pretty awesome.


----------



## RobertKC

eljr said:


> 1) I take serious issue with your suggestion that a CD is more convenient than streaming. Isn't that the principle draw away from CD's, the convenience of streaming?


This is 100% personal preference.

The opening sentence in my post above was: "_For those who like "owning" discs (vs. "renting" music), and who like the convenience of dropping a disc into the tray and hitting the "Play" button ..._" There are people who fall in this category.

FWIW, I find streaming audio from Spotify Premium via Chromecast Audio to be easy, and _marginally _reliable - when using my Android table. (And, of course, Spotify provides access to millions of recordings.) OTOH, when using my Google Home (speech recognition) to interface to Spotify Premium, it is essentially impossible to play classical music, due to lack of standards for tagging. (My work-around is to create playlists on Spotify.)

OTOH, streaming Netflix movies via Chromecast, using my Andorid tablet for remote control, fails 100% of the time. (After a few minutes the Pause control doesn't work, and I have to reboot my tablet ... repeatedly ....) A Blu-ray disc is much more convenient IMO. (And there are many more titles available on Blu-ray disc vs Netflix, such as opera and ballet.)

Some people prefer to drop a disc into the tray and press "Play". Some people prefer to stream from Spotify, Tidal, etc. Some people choose to spend many hours copying and tagging CDs.



eljr said:


> 2) How has CD been improved on?



Video, as discussed here: Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts 

Multichannel. IME if you have a large room, and your main stereo speakers must be relatively far apart (e.g., due to room layout), then multichannel has benefit. In a small room, not so much.

Hi-res audio (i.e., higher bit rate than Redbook CD). This debate has been beat to death on hi-fi forums, including here on TC, and I won't beat a dead horse. Either you perceive a benefit - on your hi-fi system - using your ears - or not.



eljr said:


> 3) Personally, I often control my Oppo player from a smartphone and find it much preferable.


OK - cool.



eljr said:


> 4) I too enjoy OPPO but it is "challenged" in DLNA support. It's not very good at the handshake. Damned 105 gives me fits. Always freezing. HA1 I had to send back for repair. 103 no issues, a pleasure. I'd buy another OPPO because what it can do is pretty awesome.


I like to keep things simple. As we discussed on another forum, I use "sneaker-ware" - i.e., copying FLAC downloads (e.g., from HDTracks) to a USB drive, and then plugging the USB drive into the front panel of the Oppo. Not the most elegant solution, but it's reliable. And I seldom buy HDTracks downloads anymore; I mostly buy multi-channel SACD and Blu-ray discs.


----------



## Oakey

eljr said:


> You may be right but I just don't see it.
> 
> LP's offer a greater point of differentiation sonically and is a much more "involving" format.
> 
> The negligible resurgence of tape is simply a cost reduction adaptation spurred by some struggling artists.


Well it's not more cost effective than mp3.

20 years ago nobody would have thought vinyl would ever make a comeback. The kids buying vinyl now were not around when LPs were big and sonically, they sound worse than a good mp3. Yes, I love vinyl but the "warmer" sound is actually unintended distortion, and there's speed fluctuation that gets worse the more the groove is near the centre of the record. Add to that the cracks and pops plus the surface noise that EVERY record (even new 180gr pressings) has.

I have a decent Pro-Ject II record player as well as a decent Teac TN-200. I love to play records and obviously the more expensive the record player the better the sound, but the above issues one never can get completely rid of. I don't fool myself thay they sound better than 16-bit CDs. That's why I never listen to classical LPs. The sound quality in combination with the large dynamic range of classical music plus the short duration of a vinyl record makes it annoying and inconvenient.


----------



## RobertKC

I'll add to my comments above about how CD technology has been improved on: storage capacity. The same size shiny disc can hold much more music in Blu-ray format, vs. Redbook CD. For example, IIRC the Solti Ring cycle takes 16 CDs vs. one Pure Audio Blu-ray disc (which features higher bit rate). 

Instead of issuing box sets with 100 CDs, record companies could issue the same collection on relatively few Blu-ray discs, without compressing the audio.


----------



## Vahe Sahakian

Oakey said:


> I have a decent Pro-Ject II record player as well as a decent Teac TN-200. I love to play records and obviously the more expensive the record player the better the sound, but the above issues one never can get completely rid of. I don't fool myself thay they sound better than 16-bit CDs. That's why I never listen to classical LPs. The sound quality in combination with the large dynamic range of classical music plus the short duration of a vinyl record makes it annoying and inconvenient.


I abandoned vinyl the day CD's were introduced, I have a massive collection of vinyl records that are just sitting there and have not been touched since 1983. My main reason for abandoning vinyl is classical music which is what I primary listen, the problem with classical is that is can have much larger dynamics that vinyl simply can't handle, then there is distortion that increases towards the enter of LP but the worst offender is clicks and pops along with surface noise, with classical it is not at all uncommon to have an orchestral recording with the entire orchestra raising hell with a massive sound but there are also very quiet moments where only one instrument is playing at a low volume, in these super quiet passages the surface noise starts to overtake the music making it totally unlistenable.


----------



## Triplets

eljr said:


> I enjoyed your passion for your preference in this post. Made me LOL a couple times.
> 
> a few questions and thoughts though
> 
> 1) I take serious issue with your suggestion that a CD is more convenient than streaming. Isn't that the principle draw away from CD's, the convenience of streaming?
> 
> 2) How has CD been improved on?
> 
> 3) Personally, I often control my Oppo player from a smartphone and find it much preferable.
> 
> 4) I too enjoy OPPO but it is "challenged" in DLNA support. It's not very good at the handshake. Damned 105 gives me fits. Always freezing. HA1 I had to send back for repair. 103 no issues, a pleasure. I'd buy another OPPO because what it can do is pretty awesome.


My 105 has worked flawlessly for 3 years. I now use it as a transport. I have 2 DACs. First is a Mytek Manhatten, and I added a Bryston BD-3 which accepts DSD from SACDs outputted by over HDMI
The irony of the drop in sales is that using quality DACs, CD replay has never sounded better. Even plain vanilla Red Book is great. It all comes down to processing power and reducing jitter.
I'm agnostic about digital sources-HD, CD, streamers-if the DAC is good they all sound very good. And without the egg frying, pops, clicks, and speed warp issues with vinyl.
It's all about convenience. The younger generations are more used to reaching for a computer or smart phone than for a CD tray. And retiring Baby Boomers frequently need to downsize and conserve space. Streaming will dominate the market but CDs, LPs, and even God awful cassettes will always be available. 
The Sky is not falling


----------



## Mal

I pulled back from streaming. CDs & CD players have antifragility. My quickly unsupported streaming device stopped supporting Spotify. I sold it. Spotify doesn't stock Hyperion, and other CD companies, and others may pull out. MY CD collection and 20 year old CD player just keep on going. CDs are the ultimate source, the "masters" for streaming services, so quality is as high as possible. I had a nasty cut off at the end of a favourite Mahler symphony on Spotify - probably DG engineers teaching me a lesson: "Buy the CD!" I did, and the CD was fine. And, of course, spending more money helps the starving artists!


----------



## Genoveva

As I said earlier in this thread, I prefer to listen to my music from a PC hard drive. Most of my music is in MP3 format at 320 kbps cbr. I cannot distinguish any sound difference between this and the WAV or flac lossless backup files that I have, as ripped from the CDs. This is regardless of the type of music played.

My PC is equipped with a decent internal sound card (Asus Xonar Essence) that has never caused me the slightest bit trouble, and it has been in there for over 2 years now and had a lot of use. On the quite rare occasions I might wish to play a DVD, or a blu-ray disc of which I don't have many, I have a blu-ray player in the PC. The video card in the PC is a decent one, and plenty good enough for my purposes. The rest of the system comprises a 27" curved screen monitor, and a pair of Spendor floorstanding speakers (a decent British brand). I also have a TV usb device that has worked reliably via an external TV aerial.

My music collection is quite large. It's this feature that makes a computerised play system so much more convenient than CDs. I can very quickly locate exactly the piece of music I may want to hear. Not only that but importantly I can see it listed against other possible versions of the same work that may be suitable alternatives.

The media software I use is "foobar". I have tried most other media software but I find foobar to be the best, once I got the hang of it that is, which was quite daunting to start with. Now that I have sufficiently mastered it, I find it to be an excellent media player/organiser.

I remember only too well the days of handling CDs several years ago now. I no longer have the CD player (a decent Marantz model but I can't recall the model number) but I do not recall it sounding any better than the MP3 files. I would not wish to go back to that type of system, having experienced the far greater degree of control I have with the present computerised set-up.

With the equipment I have, if I so choose I can simultaneously watch a small TV picture (from the usb device) in the corner of the monitor screen, listen to music, "google" something or other about Haydn, check my bank balance, email my friends, write an essay, skype home, or post something on T-C, and hardly have to blink in switching switch between them all. You can't do that with a CD player, let alone a record deck where one is fumbling around removing dust, worrying about wow and flutter, rumble and (a new one on me) the higher speed as the stylus moves closer to the centre of the record. That last feature sounds hilarious to me, and can't understand why the manufacturers of such kit haven't worked out a remedy for that.


----------



## Markblues

I'm still in love with Vinyl, and apparently they are more popular than downloads these days


----------



## Biffo

Markblues said:


> I'm still in love with Vinyl, and apparently they are more popular than downloads these days


I am not sure this is true but sales of downloads are falling fast. This isn't due to an upsurge in vinyl sales but consumers switching to streaming services.


----------



## eljr

Genoveva said:


> As I said earlier in this thread, I prefer to listen to my music from a PC hard drive. Most of my music is in MP3 format at 320 kbps cbr. I cannot distinguish any sound difference between this and the WAV or flac lossless backup files that I have, as ripped from the CDs. This is regardless of the type of music played.
> 
> My PC is equipped with a decent internal sound card (Asus Xonar Essence) that has never caused me the slightest bit trouble, and it has been in there for over 2 years now and had a lot of use. On the quite rare occasions I might wish to play a DVD, or a blu-ray disc of which I don't have many, I have a blu-ray player in the PC. The video card in the PC is a decent one, and plenty good enough for my purposes. The rest of the system comprises a 27" curved screen monitor, and a pair of Spendor floorstanding speakers (a decent British brand). I also have a TV usb device that has worked reliably via an external TV aerial.
> 
> My music collection is quite large. It's this feature that makes a computerised play system so much more convenient than CDs. I can very quickly locate exactly the piece of music I may want to hear. Not only that but importantly I can see it listed against other possible versions of the same work that may be suitable alternatives.
> 
> The media software I use is "foobar". I have tried most other media software but I find foobar to be the best, once I got the hang of it that is, which was quite daunting to start with. Now that I have sufficiently mastered it, I find it to be an excellent media player/organiser.
> 
> I remember only too well the days of handling CDs several years ago now. I no longer have the CD player (a decent Marantz model but I can't recall the model number) but I do not recall it sounding any better than the MP3 files. I would not wish to go back to that type of system, having experienced the far greater degree of control I have with the present computerised set-up.
> 
> With the equipment I have, if I so choose I can simultaneously watch a small TV picture (from the usb device) in the corner of the monitor screen, listen to music, "google" something or other about Haydn, check my bank balance, email my friends, write an essay, skype home, or post something on T-C, and hardly have to blink in switching switch between them all. You can't do that with a CD player, let alone a record deck where one is fumbling around removing dust, worrying about wow and flutter, rumble and (a new one on me) the higher speed as the stylus moves closer to the centre of the record. That last feature sounds hilarious to me, and can't understand why the manufacturers of such kit haven't worked out a remedy for that.


Interesting.

So you use the headphone jack on the PC to listen to music...
Headphones or to active or to passive speakers?

Do you have more than one listening place in your home?


----------



## wkasimer

Genoveva said:


> With the equipment I have, if I so choose I can simultaneously watch a small TV picture (from the usb device) in the corner of the monitor screen, listen to music, "google" something or other about Haydn, check my bank balance, email my friends, write an essay, skype home, or post something on T-C, and hardly have to blink in switching switch between them all.


That's fine if that's how you always want to listen to music. And sometimes I'm doing the same sort of multitasking - listening while watching a baseball game with the sound off, and/or reading a book, checking email, etc.

But there are many times when I'd rather give a particular piece of music my undivided attention, and be able to exert complete control over it. And that's when I prefer physical media, particularly CD's.


----------



## WildThing

wkasimer said:


> That's fine if that's how you always want to listen to music. And sometimes I'm doing the same sort of multitasking - listening while watching a baseball game with the sound off, and/or reading a book, checking email, etc.
> 
> But there are many times when I'd rather give a particular piece of music my undivided attention, and be able to exert complete control over it. And that's when I prefer physical media, particularly CD's.


Now that I have my entire collection ripped to digital format, I'll still simply plug my mp3 player into my home stereo when I want to engage in a serious listening session, rather than popping cds in and out. Nothing more annoying than having to get up and switch CDs between movements of a symphony, or in the middle of an act of an opera. Now I can simply make a playlist of the music I want to listen to in one sitting and avoid that inconvenience.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

I'm not at all opposed to people storing music on their PCs if they are satisfied with listening that way. I have just been burned too many times losing everything I had stored on PCs and external drives to trust them anymore. Having owned and sold PCs since the early 80s I can testify that the average life before failure is 5 to 7 years. So, Genoveva, you may be ok for now but your day is likely coming that you will regret having put your faith in such fragile devices to store your valuable music. Just saying.


----------



## Genoveva

eljr said:


> Interesting.
> 
> So you use the headphone jack on the PC to listen to music...
> Headphones or to active or to passive speakers?
> 
> Do you have more than one listening place in your home?


I forgot to mention the amplifier. It's fairly new, and quite a decent one. I could use the headphone socket on the sound card but prefer speakers. Until recently I've been using a pair of speakers that a relative loaned me. I've had to give them back because I moved address two weeks ago. Recently I purchased a pair of floorstanders in the same brand. So far so good with both.


----------



## WildThing

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm not at all opposed to people storing music on their PCs if they are satisfied with listening that way. I have just been burned too many times losing everything I had stored on PCs and external drives to trust them anymore. Having owned and sold PCs since the early 80s I can testify that the average life before failure is 5 to 7 years. So, Genoveva, you may be ok for now but your day is likely coming that you will regret having put your faith in such fragile devices to store your valuable music. Just saying.


Hard drives are cheap. Personally I already have my collection backed up on two separate drives, and buying another every 5 years if necessary is no big deal. Plus I have my entire collection backed up on my Google play cloud player, and can redownload anything I wish.

Anyways, like I said before, I haven't gotten rid of my cds. But going digital saves me space and has preventented my large collection from taking over my house. :lol:


----------



## Genoveva

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm not at all opposed to people storing music on their PCs if they are satisfied with listening that way. I have just been burned too many times losing everything I had stored on PCs and external drives to trust them anymore. Having owned and sold PCs since the early 80s I can testify that the average life before failure is 5 to 7 years. So, Genoveva, you may be ok for now but your day is likely coming that you will regret having put your faith in such fragile devices to store your valuable music. Just saying.


Thanks for the warning which is duly noted.

I have three fully up to date sets of the same music data on separate external disk drives. The risk of all three going at the same time is not very high. In fact, I'm probably more likely to be picked up by an alien space ship and taken off to some place else in the galaxy.

If the PC itself goes up in smoke, the contents of the C drive are fully backed up in the same external drives, every 2 weeks. I have tested the recovery system for this and it works fine. It's not the recovery facility in Win 10, as I don't much care for that. It's a disk image of the C Drive based on "Aomei" software. I don't keep any personal data on the C drive, just Win 10 and all the other software needed to run with it (email, photo, sound, etc).


----------



## SixFootScowl

I mostly listen on a mp3 player with a single earbud that combines the two channels, so essentially all my listening is mono. I keep my entire collection ripped on the computer 2TB drive with two external drives for backup. The externals are not connected except to transfer files, so by not spinning all the time, should last a long time. Then I have all the original CDs. The times I listen on the computer speakers is for opera DVDs which also are ripped to the hard drive and backed up. I do listen in the car and that is the mp3 player in my wife's car (she does not like music, so...), but by myself i will run CDs in the car, which I burn from the computer files so the original disks remain pristine.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

Genoveva said:


> Thanks for the warning which is duly noted.
> 
> I have three fully up to date sets of the same music data on separate external disk drives. The risk of all three going at the same time is not very high. In fact, I'm probably more likely to be picked up by an alien space ship and taken off to some place else in the galaxy.
> 
> If the PC itself goes up in smoke, the contents of the C drive are fully backed up in the same external drives, every 2 weeks. I have tested the recovery system for this and it works fine. It's not the recovery facility in Win 10, as I don't much care for that. It's a disk image of the C Drive based on "Aomei" software. I don't keep any personal data on the C drive, just Win 10 and all the other software needed to run with it (email, photo, sound, etc).


I agree that the likelihood of all three going out would be slim unless you have all three always connected. I lost two drive and my PC during a lightning storm once. Nothing recoverabe.


----------



## Granate

Kevin Pearson said:


> I agree that the likelihood of all three going out would be slim unless you have all three always connected. I lost two drive and my PC during a lightning storm once. Nothing recoverabe.


We should do a "How I lost Music recordings on CD, LP or Hard Drive" thread. Is there one already?

I'm more afraid to lose my recording reviews on text files... I have one backup still and all OperaDepot downloads in my Hard Drive.


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm not at all opposed to people storing music on their PCs if they are satisfied with listening that way. I have just been burned too many times losing everything I had stored on PCs and external drives to trust them anymore. Having owned and sold PCs since the early 80s I can testify that the average life before failure is 5 to 7 years. So, Genoveva, you may be ok for now but your day is likely coming that you will regret having put your faith in such fragile devices to store your valuable music. Just saying.


a simple automatic backup protects you from any losses

I am backed up at the stoke of midnight, every-night.

I recently bought a new PC and simple took the external back up and downloaded it to the new PC. Bam, done, that easy. Same as I would do if a PC crashed.


----------



## eljr

Genoveva said:


> I forgot to mention the amplifier. It's fairly new, and quite a decent one. I could use the headphone socket on the sound card but prefer speakers. Until recently I've been using a pair of speakers that a relative loaned me. I've had to give them back because I moved address two weeks ago. Recently I purchased a pair of floorstanders in the same brand. So far so good with both.


Ok, got it, (I think)

PC is storage unit, player and Dac. Then you go analog from headphone output to RCA in on pre-amp. Pre-amp to power amp. 
Correct?

In any event, you are similar to myself. I enjoy being on my PC as I listen to music and the convenience of having all your music in your hand at once is unparalleled.

I do have one system that is strictly for SACD/CD listening. I use it the least but it is my best system.


----------



## eljr

kevin pearson said:


> i agree that the likelihood of all three going out would be slim unless you have all three always connected. I lost two drive and my pc during a lightning storm once. Nothing recoverabe.


ouch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Oakey

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm not at all opposed to people storing music on their PCs if they are satisfied with listening that way. I have just been burned too many times losing everything I had stored on PCs and external drives to trust them anymore. Having owned and sold PCs since the early 80s I can testify that the average life before failure is 5 to 7 years. So, Genoveva, you may be ok for now but your day is likely coming that you will regret having put your faith in such fragile devices to store your valuable music. Just saying.


There is a saying about HDDs: the question is not if they will break down, but when they will break down.

You can solve this with a RAID1 NAS setup but that is something for techies (not that complicated but most 'average' people I know just have all their photos on 1 HDD and occasionally -if at all- back this up). My mp3 collection is stored like that, but I always have the CDs to go back to (and mostly listen fom CD anyway)

Still, my IT friends tell me that is not even a good backup, as the NAS can be infected by viruses or fail due to electrical storms or what have you)


----------



## Genoveva

eljr said:


> Ok, got it, (I think)
> 
> PC is storage unit, player and Dac. Then you go analog from headphone output to RCA in on pre-amp. Pre-amp to power amp.
> Correct?
> 
> In any event, you are similar to myself. I enjoy being on my PC as I listen to music and the convenience of having all your music in your hand at once is unparalleled.
> 
> I do have one system that is strictly for SACD/CD listening. I use it the least but it is my best system.


Not quite.

The internal sound (_Xonar Essence STX II_) has a pair of RCA phono out, and a headphone out. The RCA phono outs connect to the amplifier's RCA phono in, via a "chord commpany" (name of brand) I metre length interconnect of good quality.

This sound card is well known and is the best offering from Asus. It contains very high quality components giving 124 db snr, which is about as high as you can get. I have never noticed any problems at all.

The amp is an integrated amp (_Rega Elicit-R_), of good quality (circa £1600 = $2000 aprox).
It's quite new, but no better than what I was used to previously, since I was spoiled with good quality hi-fi when I lived with my parents.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Well, if my house burns down, the computer, two backup drives, and all the CDs are in the same general area, so I could lose all. I need a good quality cloud storage. I have some music up on Google Drive, but that if only 15GB and I need a lot more than that. So, where can I get good cloud storage for a reasonable price, something that will have my data in at least two geographical locations? But in a major disaster, nuclear war and total breakdown of society, I think even that will be lost. Oh well, there is only so much one can reasonably do.


----------



## WildThing

Fritz Kobus said:


> Well, if my house burns down, the computer, two backup drives, and all the CDs are in the same general area, so I could lose all. I need a good quality cloud storage. I have some music up on Google Drive, but that if only 15GB and I need a lot more than that. So, where can I get good cloud storage for a reasonable price, something that will have my data in at least two geographical locations? But in a major disaster, nuclear war and total breakdown of society, I think even that will be lost. Oh well, there is only so much one can reasonably do.


Google Play Music holds up to 50,000 "songs", or tracks for free I believe. Given that a single movement of a classical counts as one "song", my entire collection fits on the cloud player with plenty of room to spare. Right now I believe I'm up to 31,000 tracks or so.


----------



## eljr

Genoveva said:


> Not quite.
> 
> The internal sound (_Xonar Essence STX II_) has a pair of RCA phono out, and a headphone out. The RCA phono outs connect to the amplifier's RCA phono in, via a "chord commpany" (name of brand) I metre length interconnect of good quality.
> 
> This sound card is well known and is the best offering from Asus. It contains very high quality components giving 124 db snr, which is about as high as you can get. I have never noticed any problems at all.
> 
> The amp is an integrated amp (_Rega Elicit-R_), of good quality (circa £1600 = $2000 aprox).
> It's quite new, but no better than what I was used to previously, since I was spoiled with good quality hi-fi when I lived with my parents.


got it!

My setup, in my office:

I have a dedicated laptop for audio that has mostly Flac files. (some .WAV and a few MP3) 
I send the signal via USB to a Dac/Pre-amp. Pre-amp to power amp. 
I can control it from my desktop PC on my desk or from my phone or from any of my tablets. 
Or , of course, I can walk across the room and control it. 
------------------

I can send the signal to my living room system. It is hard wired via LAN. (DLNA)
My universal player has an excellent DAC which send the signal to a integrated amp.

I can control this from any lap top, desktop, smart phone or tablet in the house as well.

and i can send it to either the front or back porch or my bedroom when i have smaller systems to listen on. In these places I simply use the dac in a tablet or smartphone

I used to carry disc's around with me to all these locations. No more!


----------



## Joe B

Fritz Kobus said:


> Well, if my house burns down, the computer, two backup drives, and all the CDs are in the same general area, so I could lose all. I need a good quality cloud storage. I have some music up on Google Drive, but that if only 15GB and I need a lot more than that. So, where can I get good cloud storage for a reasonable price, something that will have my data in at least two geographical locations? But in a major disaster, nuclear war and total breakdown of society, I think even that will be lost. Oh well, there is only so much one can reasonably do.


I don't listen to downloaded music, but I do need to protect and backup important data and files for my job. I run a NAS configured in RAID 1 for all storage. I then backup to the hard drive on each computer as well as another external hard drive. Then, once a month or so, I backup to another high capacity SSD drive that lives in a safe deposit box at my local bank. So files are redundant on 5 drives in the house and one drive at the bank. USB drive docks are very inexpensive and give an incredibly easy way to back up files for removal to another location. These docks also accept SATA as well as SSD drives. I do this because my internet connection is only DSL which makes backing everything up to the cloud unreasonable. (My files for school are also backed up at school on my computer there as well as redundant drives on the school server. In the event of an event, getting back up and running is not an issue).


----------



## SixFootScowl

WildThing said:


> Google Play Music holds up to 50,000 "songs", or tracks for free I believe. Given that a single movement of a classical counts as one "song", my entire collection fits on the cloud player with plenty of room to spare. Right now I believe I'm up to 31,000 tracks or so.


But are they songs you purchased from Google Play Music or are they whatever you want to upload?


----------



## WildThing

Fritz Kobus said:


> But are they songs you purchased from Google Play Music or are they whatever you want to upload?


Whatever you wish to upload! The service offers other features of course, like radio stations and podcasts, but you can upload any music file youwant wish into your own library. Like I said, a good portion of what I've uploaded is simply what I've ripped from my own cds. Up to 50,000 tracks for free, and after that I believe you have to pay for a subscription. And then you can use the application to access your library on any computer, phone, or tablet wherever you have wi-fi access or data usage.


----------



## WildThing

To give you an idea Fritz, here's what my collection looks like on Google Play:


----------



## DBLee

Fritz Kobus said:


> Well, if my house burns down, the computer, two backup drives, and all the CDs are in the same general area, so I could lose all. I need a good quality cloud storage. I have some music up on Google Drive, but that if only 15GB and I need a lot more than that. So, where can I get good cloud storage for a reasonable price, something that will have my data in at least two geographical locations? But in a major disaster, nuclear war and total breakdown of society, I think even that will be lost. Oh well, there is only so much one can reasonably do.


Mega.nz offers 50 gig free (I assume they only call themselves "Mega" out of modesty). That can be substantially upgraded for a reasonable monthly charge. I've used it for a few years, and have nothing negative to say about it.

However, it is data storage only--it doesn't come with the music player interface with which Google Play, Amazon Music, etc. come.


----------



## SixFootScowl

DBLee said:


> Mega.nz offers 50 gig free (I assume they only call themselves "Mega" out of modesty). That can be substantially upgraded for a reasonable monthly charge. I've used it for a few years, and have nothing negative to say about it.
> 
> However, it is data storage only--it doesn't come with the music player interface with which Google Play, Amazon Music, etc. come.


That sounds good. I am only looking for data storage. But I better read the fine print so one day they don't cut me off like Photobucket did with my linked images.


----------



## vmartell

I hate coming in late to long threads - to much stuff comes up and is hard to address them all - since I do not want to write many replies as I read...

Well - I always hated posts that go "this is what I do" - but given the nature of the convo, seems appropriate... First a disclaimer - I am not an audiophile, because audiophiles tend to believe a lot of stupid anti or pseudo science-y stuff - however, I call myself an audio enthusiast and hang around in audiophile forums. But, I know that because of the limitations of human hearing it is stupid to spend more than a certain quantity of money...

So, proud Schiit Head - Full Schiit stack: Bitfrost Multibit, Asgard 2 and Saga. 

The sources are:

- An Oppo UDP-205 for CD, SACD, Bluray Audio, Optical out to the Bitfrost for non SACD playing, Analog out straight to the Saga for SACD.

- A Schiit Mani phono pream in front of a Pioneer PLX-1000 with a Nagaoka MP-500 cart.

- For Hires files, a Dell Precision 7510, 16 core, 32 GB RAM running JRiver, feeding a Schiit Eitr thru USB then the SPDIF out of the Eitr goes to the Bitfrost

- Active KRK RP-8 and KRK 12s subwoofer for when I want to move air, and Beyerdynamic DT-1990 Pro and DT-1770 Pro cans for most of the time, as between the family and neighbours, moving air is not very often an option...

As you can see is good but reasonably priced system - no audiophile stupidity, only great performance for a reasonable price.

Now to my point - as you can see from above, I am capable of doing them all ( I have stopped myself from getting a tape deck - not only I am out of space, it is actually very silly) 

I came up of age in the 90s - therefore my collection of CDs is big - I haven't counted, but just counting jewel cases I estimate 6000, not including boxsets so it is incredible that I kind of abandoned it - By around 2008 I was ripping CDs as much as I could, listening on iPod, etc. The vinyl revival changed that. 

Because of my age, I caught the tail end of the first vinyl era - so while like many, I did not think twice to get rid of LPs and switch to CD, the memories were there. So the vinyl revival made me curious enough to put together a system and go back to records - That was amazingly fun. 

Yet the CD collection was there. It made me realize that I was never gonna digitize everything. So after many years, I bought a CD player. 

Well - that made me extremely happy - it not only allowed me to play my collection - it was like getting 6000 CDs at the same time! Also I am actually falling in love with the format again. It is the perfect compromise between size and convenience. 

That said, since I regained access to the CD collection, I never play the ripped CDs. The 'puter is used to play the HighRes files I BUY, whenever available. 

The one thing I share with audiophiles is a disdain for lossy formats. While I admit that I may not be able to hear the difference, it is the PRINCIPLE I care about. If a higher quality file that is closer to the master is available, we as consumers should be able to get it. So when I buy a release, my buying preference is:

First a decision of vinyl vs. digital. If vinyl is not available or decide for digital, then the preference is Bluray Audio/SACD -> HiRes File -> CD but many releases are CD and crapTunes - sorry iTunes only, so I still get a good amount of CDs. If not available in those formats I wont get the release (iTunes only, or only lossy in 7Digital, etc). In fact I will prefer CD over the redbook (44.1/16) file - I reserve computer listening for HirRes only. I don't care how big are the files - storage is cheap now. I will get a DSD DAC in the future so lately I have been getting HiRes files on 256FS - 2.8 GB for the first movement of Mahler's 3rd by Ivan Fischer!  

No streaming for me. No lossy files. No listening on iTunes, straight out of the phone out of a laptop. No phone listening - hard to do that when I have a proper setup at home.

So given everything that I have written, what about the death of the CD? Well - definitely I expect that the CD as the mainstream way of obtaining music is dying/dead. We music (classical, jazz, some other niches) lovers or people that still appreciate the packaging of a physical format will keep the CD alive. And I liked it. First sale principle allows us to save some money by buying used. And that CD will play today or 10 years from now.

Noticed that I said "liked" - now for the sad part. The acceleration of the death of the CD has to do with that racketeering organization known as Major Labels.

They hated that we could buy used CDs. They hated we could sell them so other people can benefit. They hate that they cannot have total control. Remember the Sony CD rootkit? Or CDs that only played on actual players and not computers? That is those freaking criminals trying to assert control. But guess what? those a**holes are lucky!

Downloads never really took off! Streaming came in. And that they love. Total control, no copies (well, but is not as a big problem for them as CD copying). No second market , they know when and how you listen. And if they don't want you to listen they will take it away. No distribution costs. And since they are not selling the music the artists compensation is a pittance - $10 for 300,000 listens on Spotify. And of top of that those a**holes criminals want to cover their bases. Now they are pushing a DRM-ed lossy format known as MQA as the all encompassing audio format for those that do not stream. 

F that and F them. Music is not a utility. We cannot allowed ourselves to be at the whim of the majors. We need to resist. Do no stream. Buy your releases. Vinyl if possible, straight from the artists if possibly. Let them know - write to them. Go to Computer Audiophile forum and get on the fray of the MQA threads. Write to Stereophile and The Absolute Sound and tell them to stop being Major Label shills. Cancel Spotify, Google Play, others - they exploit the artists. $20 for being the number one spotify listen is not fair. Get the L.P. instead. Get the CD - some are very beautifully packaged, rivaling LPs. Tell apple that is BS that they offer only 320 kbps crap. Tell amazon is ever more stupid and crappier that they only offer 256 kbps files.

This is not about the death of the CD. This is about the beginning of the process on which the a**holes are asserting control. Let's stop them.

(apologies for the long reply - I am trying to respond to a 30 page thread!)

v


----------



## fjf

It seems the CD is still here: https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/22/17152120/digital-downloads-cd-vinyl-riaa-2017-report


----------



## eljr

fjf said:


> It seems the CD is still here: https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/22/17152120/digital-downloads-cd-vinyl-riaa-2017-report


Well yeah, I buy one about once a day.

But sales are continuing to shrink which is all anyone has effectively said.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

eljr said:


> Well yeah, I buy one about once a day.
> 
> But sales are continuing to shrink which is all anyone has effectively said.


It's possible, and very likely, that sales are falling because much of the music produced by the industry, in general, is crap.


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> It's possible, and very likely, that sales are falling because much of the music produced by the industry, in general, is crap.


Oh no! not another one... lol

before I start, let me ask, what do you mean by this, please expound.
Thanks


----------



## Kevin Pearson

eljr said:


> Oh no! not another one... lol
> 
> before I start, let me ask, what do you mean by this, please expound.
> Thanks


Just turn on any modern radio. I think that speaks for itself without me having to name names. Most of the music that is worth listening to is independently produced and gets no airplay and thus low sales. People just follow the masses for the most part and eat whatever diet is put before them without ever thinking there may be more and something better.


----------



## Guest

Kevin Pearson said:


> It's possible, and very likely, that sales are falling because much of the music produced by the industry, in general, is crap.


I think CD sales are falling as listening via tinterweb increases (downloads, streaming).

"The remarkable life of Norwich's Prelude Records, one of the country's few remaining specialist classical music shops, is drawing to a close.

Andrew Cane, proprietor, plans to shut the doors of the St Giles Street shop for the final time on March 30, after more than 30 years.

Mr Cane said the decision followed a slow, but steady decline in business as download purchases and streaming music services have boomed."

- http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/classical-music-shop-prelude-records-is-to-close-after-more-than-30-years-in-norwich-1-4847370


----------



## Triplets

eljr said:


> Well yeah, I buy one about once a day.
> 
> But sales are continuing to shrink which is all anyone has effectively said.


The point is, they are stabilizing. Those who continue to be devoted to CDs, like many posters here, will continue to buy them. They will continue to exist


----------



## KenOC

Triplets said:


> The point is, they are stabilizing. Those who continue to be devoted to CDs, like many posters here, will continue to buy them. They will continue to exist


Whether CD sales are "stabilizing" may depend on your definition of the term. The 2017 RIAA sales report is out, and CD unit sales have again declined, this time 10% from 2016 levels. CD revenues now are 17% of music industry sales revenues. Streaming revenues are up 43% from 2016 and are 65% of industry total revenues.

http://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/RIAA-Year-End-2017-News-and-Notes.pdf

BTW sales overall are _not _shrinking. 2017 is the 2nd consecutive year of growth, with recorded music revenues up 16.5% over 2016.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> I think CD sales are falling as listening via tinterweb increases (downloads, streaming).
> 
> "The remarkable life of Norwich's Prelude Records, one of the country's few remaining specialist classical music shops, is drawing to a close.
> 
> Andrew Cane, proprietor, plans to shut the doors of the St Giles Street shop for the final time on March 30, after more than 30 years.
> 
> Mr Cane said the decision followed a slow, but steady decline in business as download purchases and streaming music services have boomed."
> 
> - http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/classical-music-shop-prelude-records-is-to-close-after-more-than-30-years-in-norwich-1-4847370


download sales are also down, Mr Cane is mistaken
all growth is in steaming services


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> Just turn on any modern radio. I think that speaks for itself without me having to name names. Most of the music that is worth listening to is independently produced and gets no airplay and thus low sales. People just follow the masses for the most part and eat whatever diet is put before them without ever thinking there may be more and something better.


First off, radio?

Right there you "date" yourself. New music is not consumed via radio as it was.

But in any event, if I do turn on the radio I inevitably bump into political hate speech from the far right. A few stations are still spinning what I call truck driver rock. (It's time to let rock die)
Always a country station, always a Spanish.

Then you have one or two POP stations.

Not sure how any of this jumbles makes your case.

Are you speaking specifically to Pop music? (my guess is yes)

or do you find fault with classical as now recorded?


----------



## Guest

Fortunately, radio in the UK seems a lot different in its offering and its popularity. Just one easy example:

"Classic FM has posted a surge in listening figures, with 5.8 million people now listening to the station - 1.2 million of whom are under 35"

- Classic FM has posted a surge in listening figures, with 5.8 million people now listening to the station - 1.2 million of whom are under 35


----------



## DavidA

dogen said:


> Fortunately, radio in the UK seems a lot different in its offering and its popularity. Just one easy example:
> 
> "Classic FM has posted a surge in listening figures, with 5.8 million people now listening to the station - 1.2 million of whom are under 35"
> 
> - Classic FM has posted a surge in listening figures, with 5.8 million people now listening to the station - 1.2 million of whom are under 35


Classic FM a great listen in the car


----------



## Triplets

KenOC said:


> Whether CD sales are "stabilizing" may depend on your definition of the term. The 2017 RIAA sales report is out, and CD unit sales have again declined, this time 10% from 2016 levels. CD revenues now are 17% of music industry sales revenues. Streaming revenues are up 43% from 2016 and are 65% of industry total revenues.
> 
> http://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/RIAA-Year-End-2017-News-and-Notes.pdf
> 
> BTW sales overall are _not _shrinking. 2017 is the 2nd consecutive year of growth, with recorded music revenues up 16.5% over 2016.


If you examine the rate of decline, it is much less than in the past few years. The curve for decline is becoming asymptotic.
That is why it is stabilizing. I didn't say that the decline had stopped
The point is that there will remain a hard core of CD purchasers, especially when they continue to be issued at greatly discounted prices.


----------



## Joe B

Triplets said:


> The point is that there will remain a hard core of CD purchasers, especially when they continue to be *issued at greatly discounted prices*.


So I actually have something good to look forward to....yeah!


----------



## Kevin Pearson

eljr said:


> First off, radio?
> 
> Right there you "date" yourself. New music is not consumed via radio as it was.
> 
> But in any event, if I do turn on the radio I inevitably bump into political hate speech from the far right. A few stations are still spinning what I call truck driver rock. (It's time to let rock die)
> Always a country station, always a Spanish.
> 
> Then you have one or two POP stations.
> 
> Not sure how any of this jumbles makes your case.
> 
> Are you speaking specifically to Pop music? (my guess is yes)
> 
> or do you find fault with classical as now recorded?


Statisticaly more people listen to radio on a daily basis then any other form of media. I'm certainly not talking about "talk radio" but pop for sure. Whether that be rock, so-called Country, Christian or whatever. It's all about the same. There are some good PBS stations around the country where you can find music a little more of the well beaten path, but even many of those now are playing crap. And just to make matters clear I'm not talking about modern Classical music even though I might not like some of it I can appreciate it. Most of the rest of the modern music has just too much sameness to be of any value.


----------



## eljr

Kevin Pearson said:


> Statisticaly more people listen to radio on a daily basis then any other form of media. I'm certainly not talking about "talk radio" but pop for sure. Whether that be rock, so-called Country, Christian or whatever. It's all about the same. There are some good PBS stations around the country where you can find music a little more of the well beaten path, but even many of those now are playing crap. And just to make matters clear I'm not talking about modern Classical music even though I might not like some of it I can appreciate it. Most of the rest of the modern music has just too much sameness to be of any value.


I will say, I find your opinion common.

First off, how would you measure what is "not worth listening to."

There is no move away from music consumption, the move is in how it is consumed.

You said people are willing to listen to whatever is presented them. Do you think the basic nature of people has changed in 50 years or less? Or, were you the same?

I just think that the idea that music is not as good as it was is more a perception of age not fact.

I know I listened to Rock predominately for decades. It just lost it's luster. But why?

Was it because as you suggest, popular music is not as good as it was or is it because my life force is not as strong as when young and as a result attachments are not as strong. I don't fall in love as I did when I was young so is the same mechanism at work taking place with my attraction to music? 
Something else I have identified, I can't "relate" to a 30 something living in Brooklyn singing about his broken heart. Gives me the willies. But I know the music is popular and really that is the ultimate arbiter of "good."

Anyway, I can't imagine that society is progressing but in one area, music, just popular music, at that, we regress.

It just does not make sense to me.

Certainly I respect your differing opinion.


----------



## Blancrocher

KenOC said:


> Whether CD sales are "stabilizing" may depend on your definition of the term. The 2017 RIAA sales report is out, and CD unit sales have again declined, this time 10% from 2016 levels. CD revenues now are 17% of music industry sales revenues. Streaming revenues are up 43% from 2016 and are 65% of industry total revenues.
> 
> http://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/RIAA-Year-End-2017-News-and-Notes.pdf
> 
> BTW sales overall are _not _shrinking. 2017 is the 2nd consecutive year of growth, with recorded music revenues up 16.5% over 2016.


Please, KenOC, show some mercy ... I cannot bear these hard realities.


----------



## Mal

Harold Moores closed in London last year

https://thevinylfactory.com/features/harold-moores-london-lassical-record-shop/

Also, Gramex closed a few months ago ... I walked past the old shop last month and the whole row of shops that contained it were demolished! Lower Marsh had real character, some interesting shops there besides Gramex. Now they are to be replaced by boring hotels:

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/9166

Gramex might re-open elsewhere. Anyone know of a good premises for hire at rock bottom prices? Contact the owner here:

http://www.gramex.co.uk/

The only places I know now that sell second hand classical CDs offline are Foyles bookshop... the big one on Charing Cross road... and Notting Hill record exchange. Both buy for quite good prices, compared to online buyers, and have interesting stocks.


----------



## DBLee

eljr said:


> Anyway, I can't imagine that society is progressing but in one area, music, just popular music, at that, we regress.
> 
> It just does not make sense to me.


That is an awfully dubious major premise from which to draw a conclusion, especially when it is not necessarily related.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Blancrocher said:


> Please, KenOC, show some mercy ... I cannot bear these hard realities.


You almost get the impression that he hates CDs.


----------



## KenOC

Fritz Kobus said:


> You almost get the impression that he hates CDs.


I have plenty of CDs. But hey, facts is facts.


----------



## SixFootScowl

DBLee said:


> Mega.nz offers 50 gig free (I assume they only call themselves "Mega" out of modesty). That can be substantially upgraded for a reasonable monthly charge. I've used it for a few years, and have nothing negative to say about it.
> 
> However, it is data storage only--it doesn't come with the music player interface with which Google Play, Amazon Music, etc. come.


As it turns out Mega.nz only gives 15GB for free. Here is how the free account works:

15 GB base quota
35 GB account registration bonus (lasts only 30 days)
20 GB Install MEGAsync (valid 180 days)
10 GB Referral Bonus (valid 365 days)
15 GB Install their mobile app (valid 180 days)

So effectively it is a 15 GB free account. All the rest is geared to move you into a paid account. However, 4.99 Euros per month is not a bad fee for the Pro Lite Account with 200 GB storage. So I maybe could do that. Uploads are easy, I just uploaded 5 CDs worth of tracks in one drag and drop. Ate dinner and it was done.


----------



## eljr

DBLee said:


> That is an awfully dubious major premise from which to draw a conclusion, especially when it is not necessarily related.


An "awfully dubious major premise" you say...

Welcome to the forum.

Do you have an opinion on the sidebar that developed where it was suggested that popular music is lesser today?


----------



## Granate

1. Do you know that Bandcamp exists (independent music streaming + buy service)?

2. When I started to listen to Classical Music "hardcore", I left behind almost all the independent music I used to listen to. I still like the genres of Indietronica, Ambient and Drone, but when Classical Music became my "difficult listen" past-time, I started to balance listening to more and more radio-friendly pop music. I just swiped Indie for CM.


----------



## DBLee

eljr said:


> An "awfully dubious major premise" you say...
> 
> Welcome to the forum.
> 
> Do you have an opinion on the sidebar that developed where it was suggested that popular music is lesser today?


Thank you for the warm welcome.

As for my opinion, I am not a fan of modern popular music. Part of that is undoubtedly attributable to the fact that I am not of the age to which popular music is targeted. But I hear so very little of it--I listen to *none* of it by choice--that I couldn't call my opinion informed.

Here is a 20-minute video that discusses what makes modern pop music "so terrible."






It seems like he's reaching on some of his points. However, some of it seems right on. Again, based on what little I know of today's pop music.

And as for the premise that society is progressing in every area, I am sure that 5 seconds of reflection will readily refute that.


----------



## Guest

DBLee said:


> Here is a 20-minute video that discusses what makes modern pop music "so terrible."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems like he's reaching on some of his points. However, some of it seems right on. Again, based on what little I know of today's pop music.


Thanks for posting, an interesting 20 minutes. One of the most depressing revelations was how so many are written by one of just two people.


----------



## elgar's ghost

^
^

I'm too scared to watch.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> Thanks for posting, an interesting 20 minutes. One of the most depressing revelations was how so many are written by one of just two people.


FYI

The video is complete and utter ********. (I never speak like this)

I am very familiar with this video and completely debunked it on another site back when it first reared it's stupid head.

If you or anyone else want to believe that music today is in anyway lesser than music of the past, I got a bridge to sell you.


----------



## millionrainbows

eljr said:


> FYI
> 
> The video is complete and utter ********. (I never speak like this)
> 
> I am very familiar with this video and completely debunked it on another site back when it first reared it's stupid head.
> 
> If you or anyone else want to believe that music today is in anyway lesser than music of the past, I got a bridge to sell you.


Does that include the surrounding land?


----------



## geralmar

millionrainbows said:


> Does that include the surrounding land?


Are you Matty Moroun?


----------



## DBLee

eljr said:


> If you or anyone else want to believe that music today is in anyway lesser than music of the past, I got a bridge to sell you.


When it comes to music, "lesser" or "better" will always be largely subjective, no?

So, in your opinion, music is static?


----------



## Guest

eljr said:


> (I never speak like this)


And yet you are.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> And yet you are.


did

------------------:tiphat:


----------



## Guest

Well that's fine, because as you said upthread:

"There is no right nor wrong, no winning and losing. It's about understanding. 

Understanding means there are many perspective and each persons perspective is their reality."

Even that man in the video.


----------



## eljr

DBLee said:


> When it comes to music, "lesser" or "better" will always be largely subjective, no?
> 
> So, in your opinion, music is static?


anything can be quantified and quantified so subjectivity can often be eliminated

The problem with this is what we see in this video.

It is quite easy, whether intentional or through bias to set criteria to your personal bias.

As in the case of the "study" referenced in the video, you then get the results you want.

-----------

My opinion, music continues to unfurl in what to the end user, you and I, can only be viewed as the greatest time in the history of music.


----------



## SixFootScowl

All music is crap to someone who doesn't like it.


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> Well that's fine, because as you said upthread:
> 
> "There is no right nor wrong, no winning and losing. It's about understanding.
> 
> Understanding means there are many perspective and each persons perspective is their reality."
> 
> Even that man in the video.


I dont recall saying that but it sounds like me, that's for sure.

Claiming a fact, music today "is getting worse" than 50 years ago is not the same as offering an opinion of the same.

Also bear in mind in such conversations that you can have an opinion in the absence of fact, not in conflict with it.


----------



## eljr

Fritz Kobus said:


> All music is crap to someone who doesn't like it.


I would not challenge you on this but for myself, I believe there is good music and there is great music, there is no bad music.


----------



## Granate

I don't agree with some people with their attitude towards contemporary pop music, but in a certain way I can wonder how they think when I talk about TV, TV-shows, crime serials and Cinema in general. I just can't put myself in front of a cable tv with hours of S.W.A.T and Navy Los Angeles.

Everyone has their personality and digs in the hobby they like the most. Some of us cannot get over the fact that millions of people don't care for music as the art it is. Just a past-time. Pop can be like the tv shows that are economically reliable for producers. I like some pop artists and dislike others. I have my own arbitrary reasons to despise Ed Sheeran in 2012 and be mad for his Multiply album in 2017 (plz Sam Smith do the same you are talented).

And I agree with FK's last sentence. 

For now, the only music I would buy CDs of would be Classical Music and Independent Artists thay I support. I used to buy Pop CDs for my parents but now I regret heving some of them in the shelves.


----------



## geralmar

I am a CD loyalist-- have been since 1983-- but I am bothered that a pre-1981 technology has been set in stone. The maximum recording time of a CD is a little over 80 minutes; but my DVD can comfortably contain a three hour soundtrack in spectacular sound plus the movie in full color-- all at a third of the price of a list-price music CD. I know about Blu-Ray, SACD and music DVDs; but couldn't the basic CD simply have been upgraded in playing time and (if needed) recording quality? (Or replaced by one of the above?) Of course with the decline in "physical media" the CD might be in trouble anyway; but at least I'd have a complete Beethoven symphony cycle on a single standard CD.


----------



## DBLee

eljr said:


> anything can be quantified and quantified so subjectivity can often be eliminated . . .
> 
> My opinion, music continues to unfurl in what to the end user, you and I, can only be viewed as the greatest time in the history of music.


That is interesting. I would very much like (no sarcasm intended at all) to see a quantifiable means of demonstrating that the present is the greatest time in the history of music. Unless, of course, you mean that at the present we have access to the music of preceding decades and centuries--I assume you mean present musical output.

Sorry for participating in the thread derail--let me add that while I listen to music using various media; when I really want to enjoy music and listen closely, CDs tend to be my preferred medium.


----------



## Guest

Subjectivity only applies in the opinions of others (due to bias and/or incorrect information). My opinions are objective, because they are without bias and are based upon a rational appreciation of all the relevant verified information.


----------



## eljr

geralmar said:


> couldn't the basic CD simply have been upgraded in playing time


to what end?

Personally I have no need of longer CDs.

30 -45 minutes that an LP provided is about perfect.

For longer performances, it is not inconvenient to have 2 or 3 CD's.

What I particular do not like is a 35 minute recording released on LP pre-CD, that is then released on CD and then the CD filled to 80 minutes with outtakes, alternate versions or previously unreleased stuff.


----------



## Triplets

geralmar said:


> I am a CD loyalist-- have been since 1983-- but I am bothered that a pre-1981 technology has been set in stone. The maximum recording time of a CD is a little over 80 minutes; but my DVD can comfortably contain a three hour soundtrack in spectacular sound plus the movie in full color-- all at a third of the price of a list-price music CD. I know about Blu-Ray, SACD and music DVDs; but couldn't the basic CD simply have been upgraded in playing time and (if needed) recording quality? (Or replaced by one of the above?) Of course with the decline in "physical media" the CD might be in trouble anyway; but at least I'd have a complete Beethoven symphony cycle on a single standard CD.


My understanding is that the approximate true limit of a Red Book CD, without compression, is in the 80 minute range. With compression mp3 nitrates and the like) it can hold many times that amount


----------



## eljr

DBLee said:


> That is interesting. I would very much like (no sarcasm intended at all) to see a quantifiable means of demonstrating that the present is the greatest time in the history of music. Unless, of course, you mean that at the present we have access to the music of preceding decades and centuries--I assume you mean present musical output.
> 
> Sorry for participating in the thread derail--let me add that while I listen to music using various media; when I really want to enjoy music and listen closely, CDs tend to be my preferred medium.


A couple points.
1) I or you can quantify and qualify about anything to get the result we want. 
2) Yes, I do mean that today we have access to most all the music ever created. It's a glorious time for music enthusiasts!


----------



## eljr

dogen said:


> Subjectivity only applies in the opinions of others (due to bias and/or incorrect information). My opinions are objective, because they are without bias and are based upon a rational appreciation of all the relevant verified information.


LOL, 

As I too am perfect in thought, :devil: I would also qualify as infallible in opinion...

Yet we don't agree.... now this is a conundrum. :lol:


----------



## eljr

Triplets said:


> My understanding is that the approximate true limit of a Red Book CD, without compression, is in the 80 minute range. With compression mp3 nitrates and the like) it can hold many times that amount


74 minutes is the red Book standard

anything more is not Red Book standard.

we tend to have many non Red Book standard CD's that we think of as Red Book.

"Playing times beyond 74 minutes are achieved by decreasing track pitch (the distance separating the track as it spirals the disc) in violation of strict Red Book standards." 
this can allow up to 80 minutes of play.


----------



## Mal

Does streaming provide too much choice?

Before my streamer stopped supporting Spotify, I had dozens of choices I could make to listen to Haydn string quartet Op.20. Where to start? And why start?! I already had one of the two most critically admired on CD. Wouldn't I be better off just listening to that again?

For new pieces, with Spotify, I tended to glance at Penguin guide, pick the most likely candidate and listen, then quit if it sounded "not great", try the next recommended , and so on. Might it not be better to study all my sources of CD guidance, then just buy a CD? (This is what I did before streaming was possible.) By the time I'd listened to 10 bits of ten different streamed performances, I'd be feeling too jaded to choose well, or to listen with full appreciation to a single performance.

Also, having so many performances available to stream pushes you to seek out the new, so I wasn't listening to my wonderful CD collection! But I knew I was likely to get a better listening experience by listening to my CDs.

"Increased choice, then, can make us miserable because of regret, self-blame and opportunity costs."

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...e-stressing-us-out-dating-partners-monopolies

"... the paradox of choice ... as someone's level of choice goes up; their level of engagement and satisfaction typically goes down."

http://www.uxforthemasses.com/paradox-of-choice/


----------



## RobertKC

geralmar said:


> I am a CD loyalist-- have been since 1983-- but I am bothered that a pre-1981 technology has been set in stone. The maximum recording time of a CD is a little over 80 minutes; but my DVD can comfortably contain a three hour soundtrack in spectacular sound plus the movie in full color-- all at a third of the price of a list-price music CD. I know about Blu-Ray, SACD and music DVDs; but couldn't the basic CD simply have been upgraded in playing time and (if needed) recording quality? (Or replaced by one of the above?) Of course with the decline in "physical media" the CD might be in trouble anyway; but at least I'd have a complete Beethoven symphony cycle on a single standard CD.


In theory, Pure Audio Blu-ray could/should be the "new CD": http://www.pureaudio-bluray.com/

IMO, Pure Audio Blu-ray would be a much better deliverable than a box set that contains 100 CDs. And, of course, a modern recording that was mastered at 24bit/192kHz could be delivered in that format, without downsampling to the CD's 16bit/44.1kHz format.


----------



## Mal

Taking on board the "paradox of choice", I'm sticking with CDs. Once you've made that choice, you can get on with listening in a "good enough" format without spending all your time worrying about a multitude of matters concerning a multitude of different players and a multitude of different formats.


----------



## eljr

RobertKC said:


> In theory, Pure Audio Blu-ray could/should be the "new CD": http://www.pureaudio-bluray.com/
> 
> IMO, Pure Audio Blu-ray would be a much better deliverable than a box set that contains 100 CDs. And, of course, a modern recording that was mastered at 24bit/192kHz could be delivered in that format, without downsampling to the CD's 16bit/44.1kHz format.


Agree, but who needs Blu-Ray when we have 24/192 available to download?


----------



## RobertKC

eljr said:


> Agree, but who needs Blu-Ray when we have 24/192 available to download?


For large box sets - equating to more than 100 CDs - some people might think that a few Pure Audio Blu-ray discs would be more convenient than downloading that many files. I suppose it depends on your internet speed.


----------



## CDs

RobertKC said:


> For large box sets - equating to more than 100 CDs - some people might think that a few Pure Audio Blu-ray discs would be more convenient than downloading that many files. I suppose it depends on your internet speed.


I would take a 100 CD box set over a few Blue Ray audio discs. For one I listen to my CDs through a player that only plays CDs and is not connected to a TV. Secondly as a collector a big ol' box set looks cooler on a shelf than a DVD style set.
But what really makes a great box set is the booklet. I can't stand it when a set has no booklet or a booklet with little to no information. And yes I know all that info is available on the internet but I like to have that info in physical form with the set.


----------



## eljr

CDs said:


> I would take a 100 CD box set over a few Blue Ray audio discs. For one I listen to my CDs through a player that only plays CDs and is not connected to a TV. Secondly as a collector a big ol' box set looks cooler on a shelf than a DVD style set.
> But what really makes a great box set is the booklet. I can't stand it when a set has no booklet or a booklet with little to no information. And yes I know all that info is available on the internet but I like to have that info in physical form with the set.


I too would choose the 100 CD box. It's a preference.

BTW, you don't need a TV to listen to pure audio Blu-Ray.


----------



## CDs

eljr said:


> I too would choose the 100 CD box. It's a preference.
> 
> BTW, you don't need a TV to listen to pure audio Blu-Ray.


I assume you need a player that can play DVDs right? A strict CD player cannot play blue ray audio?


----------



## eljr

CDs said:


> I assume you need a player that can play DVDs right? A strict CD player cannot play blue ray audio?


No,you need a Blue-Ray player.

or a universal disc player.


----------



## Tristan

Unless digital downloads are lossless, they won't replace CDs for me. And streaming will never replace them because I prefer to own my music. So it's CDs and vinyl for me at this point. If people don't want CDs, I'll take them. More music for me.


----------



## CDs

eljr said:


> No,you need a Blue-Ray player.
> 
> or a universal disc player.


That's what I thought. I do have a blu ray player but it will go through either TV speakers or a cheap soundbar.
I do have plenty of SACDs, XRCDs, Gold CDs, and SHM CDs. So I do have HiRes music. Thanks for the info eljr!


----------



## Art Rock

CDs said:


> That's what I thought. I do have a blu ray player but it will go through either TV speakers or a cheap soundbar.
> I do have plenty of SACDs, XRCDs, Gold CDs, and SHM CDs. So I do have ways to get great sounding music. Thanks for the info eljr!


Can't you connect it to your sound system? I have a DVD player hooked up to my amplifier (via aux).


----------



## CDs

Art Rock said:


> Can't you connect it to your sound system? I have a DVD player hooked up to my amplifier (via aux).


Yes I could but CD player and receiver are in one room TV/DVD player are in another. I don't watch a lot of TV or movies so I have never wanted to combine them or get a second amp. I get I'm weird and do things different.


----------



## CDs

Tristan said:


> Unless digital downloads are lossless


Downloads will never be lossless because at some point you will lose them.


----------



## realdealblues

Just saw this article:

https://www.circa.com/story/2018/03/26/whoa/cds-and-vinyl-records-are-coming-back-in-style

The article says CD and Vinyl sales in 2017 are up over Digital Download for the first time since 2011. Both are obviously still behind Steaming Services, but perhaps another sign that "Physical Media" is not quite dead yet...


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> I have plenty of CDs. But hey, facts is facts.


Facts don't always reveal everything, especially when not all the facts are in. I searched and cannot find any facts regarding the sales of classical CDs over time and feel that the downtrend is most likely representing decrease in CD sales to pop listeners. Who knows, classical CD sales could be level or even trending upward.


----------



## eljr

realdealblues said:


> Just saw this article:
> 
> https://www.circa.com/story/2018/03/26/whoa/cds-and-vinyl-records-are-coming-back-in-style
> 
> The article says CD and Vinyl sales in 2017 are up over Digital Download for the first time since 2011. Both are obviously still behind Steaming Services, but perhaps another sign that "Physical Media" is not quite dead yet...


More a sign that people are not bothering to own music at all as all ownership fell. CD, LPs and downloads. Downloads simply fell the most, which makes sense because streaming gives you an unlimited library on the fly.


----------



## eljr

Fritz Kobus said:


> Facts don't always reveal everything, especially when not all the facts are in. I searched and cannot find any facts regarding the sales of classical CDs over time and feel that the downtrend is most likely representing decrease in CD sales to pop listeners. Who knows, classical CD sales could be level or even trending upward.


Long term, even if true, why would Classical music be any different?

The biggest reason CD's do still sell at all is because people do not like change and the older you are, the less you are apt to adapt.


----------



## SixFootScowl

eljr said:


> More a sign that people are not bothering to own music at all as all ownership fell. CD, LPs and downloads. Downloads simply fell the most, which makes sense because streaming gives you an unlimited library on the fly.


Well, there will be a split, with classical being more into ownership of hard media vs pop streaming. That is my prediction.


----------



## SixFootScowl

eljr said:


> Long term, even if true, why would Classical music be any different?
> 
> The biggest reason CD's do still sell at all is because people do not like change and the older you are, the less you are apt to adapt.


That has a nice ring to it: Apt to adapt!

Well classical listeners as a whole probably trend to older listeners vs. pop listeners. So more likely to hold on to their CDs.


----------



## KenOC

Four years ago, classical represented 2.8% of album sales, seemingly referring to physical product and not downloads. However, the top of the classical charts isn't likely to appeal to many on this forum. See:

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-41076483

I agree that the classical percentage may be growing, albeit of a shrinking total, since classical fans tend to be older and more set in their ways - unwilling to give up their desire to "own" the music.

BTW this was discussed at length several years ago. At that time, classical sales were given by several sources at between two and three percent of market. But it was often uncertain whether that included soundtracks, or if it was for physical product only, or if it was based on revenue or unit sales.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

If classical sales are suffering how come there are so many new recordings every single month? Classical probably has one of the strongest bases because classic owners want whole pieces of music. Very few pop music lovers want whole albums anymore. They just download their favorite tracks. I've also noticed that many artists used to provide at least 60 minutes of music to fill up most of a CD and now the trend is backing toward closer to 40 minutes. The re-emergence of LPs may have something to do with that though.


----------



## KenOC

Kevin Pearson said:


> If classical sales are suffering how come there are so many new recordings every single month? Classical probably has one of the strongest bases because classic owners want whole pieces of music. Very few pop music lovers want whole albums anymore. They just download their favorite tracks. I've also noticed that many artists used to provide at least 60 minutes of music to fill up most of a CD and now the trend is backing toward closer to 40 minutes. The re-emergence of LPs may have something to do with that though.


Lots of albums, but think about the numbers posted a while back by Normal Lebrecht:

''The latest weekly Nielsen stats from the US are deeply discouraging. The highest selling album - CDs and downloads combined - was Andrea Bocelli with fewer than 400 sales.

The next two, still above 300 units, were the Benedictines of Mary and Hilary Hahn's new DG Mozart concerto. Below these three chart-toppers, no classical record cleared 200 sales last week.

And the May issue of Gramophone is so light on ads it looks anorexic.''

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


----------



## Kevin Pearson

Well, I know BBC Music reviews at least 120 new recordings every month and that's not even all the releases they could review. Music companies would not continue to release so much music if there was no profit in it. So, I have to believe that the statistics are not at all accurate.


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> However, the top of the classical charts isn't likely to appeal to many on this forum. See:
> 
> http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-41076483


Having looked at the top 100 in this chart, I wonder to what extent, if at all, it is actually a reflection of the listening habits of classical music listeners (as opposed to some other "type" of listener)? Aren't classical music listeners interested in albums that generally feature the name of a composer? 99 of this 100 do not. (The one that does is at number 100).


----------



## KenOC

Just found some current classical music figures, from Nielsen's _2017 Year-end Music Report_. Nielsen sorts music into eleven genres, including "classical." Here are the 2017 numbers. Not so good.

Market presence of classical music:
1.0% of total volume, tied for lowest
2.0% of physical album sales, tied for second lowest
1.8% of digital album sales, third lowest
0.7% of on-demand audio streams, tied for lowest.

Overall, classical is tied with jazz for last place in market share and is a bit below children's music.

How classical music is bought:
38% physical albums
22% digital downloads
34% on-demand audio streams.

Nielsen sees the 2017 music market, all genres, this way:
Total audio market, up 10.2% in volume
Physical album sales, down 16.5%
On-demand streaming, up 43.0%

http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2018/2017-music-us-year-end-report.html


----------



## fjf

Yes, classical music is negligible, and we use old, outdated playback methods. We are on the brink of extinction. Long live Taylor Swift!.


----------



## DBLee

eljr said:


> 1) I or you can quantify and qualify about anything to get the result we want.


Now hold on a minute. Of course that's true, but earlier you said



eljr said:


> anything can be quantified and quantified so subjectivity can often be eliminated


If our quantification does nothing more than give apparent credence to our preconceived results, how is subjectivity eliminated?



eljr said:


> 2) Yes, I do mean that today we have access to most all the music ever created. It's a glorious time for music enthusiasts!


Okay--I am in firm agreement with this. And whether we prefer streaming subscriptions, downloads, CDs, or--who would have thought it 20 years ago--*LP's*!!--we can enjoy it in our favorite format.


----------



## KenOC

dogen said:


> Having looked at the top 100 in this chart, I wonder to what extent, if at all, it is actually a reflection of the listening habits of classical music listeners (as opposed to some other "type" of listener)? Aren't classical music listeners interested in albums that generally feature the name of a composer? 99 of this 100 do not. (The one that does is at number 100).


Supposedly that list is based purely on sales, specifically of albums classified as "classical." It's sorted by 25-year total sales, so no trend data can be gotten from it. It may be UK-only, not sure about that.

Anyway, any list that puts the _Four Seasons_ down at 100th place can't be all bad!


----------



## wkasimer

eljr said:


> BTW, you don't need a TV to listen to pure audio Blu-Ray.


But don't you need a monitor of some kind to navigate through the Blu-ray disc? That's what's kept me from hooking up a Blu-ray player to my main audio system (the electronics and source components of which are situated in a closet).


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> Supposedly that list is based purely on sales, specifically of albums classified as "classical." It's sorted by 25-year total sales, so no trend data can be gotten from it. It may be UK-only, not sure about that.
> 
> Anyway, any list that puts the _Four Seasons_ down at 100th place can't be all bad!


What I was alluding to is that these albums are not really albums purchased by "classical music listeners." My partner is a perfect example of what I mean. She has been to several concerts by these sorts of artists (eg Katherine Jenkins, Il Divo). Yet she hardly ever listens to music at home and in her CDs generally collecting dust is only one classical album - you guessed it - Four Seasons, Kennedy. She would not describe herself as a classical music fan.


----------



## KenOC

dogen said:


> What I was alluding to is that these albums are not really albums purchased by "classical music listeners." My partner is a perfect example of what I mean. She has been to several concerts by these sorts of artists (eg Katherine Jenkins, Il Divo). Yet she hardly ever listens to music at home and in her CDs generally collecting dust is only one classical album - you guessed it - Four Seasons, Kennedy. She would not describe herself as a classical music fan.


I think you're quite correct. It is based on sales, not the classification of the buyer. The same is true of all sales statistics we've been discussing here. But if most of the buyers are not really fans, as you suggest, that means that sales to fans are vanishingly small -- _way _below 1% of the market.


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> I think you're quite correct. It is based on sales, not the classification of the buyer. The same is true of all sales statistics we've been discussing here. But if most of the buyers are not really fans, as you suggest, that means that sales to fans are vanishingly small -- _way _below 1% of the market.


Yes I entirely agree of course. If the Big Names in the list are such a small percentage, that doesn't leave much purchasing by classical music fans. Assuming that we are measuring in the right place.


----------



## RobertKC

wkasimer said:


> But don't you need a monitor of some kind to navigate through the Blu-ray disc? That's what's kept me from hooking up a Blu-ray player to my main audio system (the electronics and source components of which are situated in a closet).


The following was excerpted from: http://www.pureaudio-bluray.com/concept/

The Pure Audio Blu-ray can be operated either with or without a screen: by on-screen menu navigation or by screen-less navigation.

Since users have learned the straigthforward, screen-less navigation from CDs over the last decades, it was key for the research team that the Pure Audio Blu-ray also works screen-less - as simple as a CD. Just insert the Pure Audio Blu-ray in your Blu-ray player and navigate through the tracks via the standard transport controls (Skip Forward/Backward; Fast Forward/Backward). And for direct access to the tracks use the numeric keys - just as on a CD.​
IME, you will need to temporarily connect a TV screen to the Blu-ray player in order to configure its software settings.

P.S. I just tried it, and you can navigate a Pure Audio Blu-ray disc without a screen. Obviously, without a screen you are missing out on Blu-ray videos of ballet, opera, and classical concerts Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts


----------



## KenOC

dogen said:


> Yes I entirely agree of course. If the Big Names in the list are such a small percentage, that doesn't leave much purchasing by classical music fans. Assuming that we are measuring in the right place.


Yes, we're not only a tiny demographic but (as used to be said of Cadillac buyers) a dying breed. We used to have a commercial FM classical station here, KMZT. It was a money-losing labor of love. Its ads were mostly for cancer treatments, funeral homes, and Forest Lawn burial plots.

Our remaining classical station (KUSC) reminds us all day long to donate our unneeded cars to them, evidently on the theory that we're too old to drive any more. For many of us, it's true!


----------



## Mal

ReNew are trying to keep CDs alive in NE England:

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/entertainment-store-gives-away-entire-12463701

Anyone in the NE recommend ReNew? I just bought a CD from them on Amazon, where they score 99% even though they are committed to advertising as Like New!


----------



## Mal

dogen said:


> What I was alluding to is that these albums are not really albums purchased by "classical music listeners." ... in her CDs generally collecting dust is only one classical album - you guessed it - Four Seasons, Kennedy. She would not describe herself as a classical music fan.


Some "bomb proof" critics dare to praise it, e.g., Rob Cowan in his Guinness 1000 guide, "Nigel Kennedy's famous digital EMI recording brings 'period' wildness to a modern instrument." I have it, I quite like it, he says behind a mask of anonymity .


----------



## Guest

Mal said:


> Some "bomb proof" critics dare to praise it, e.g., Rob Cowan in his Guinness 1000 guide, "Nigel Kennedy's famous digital EMI recording brings 'period' wildness to a modern instrument." I have it, I quite like it, he says behind a mask of anonymity .


That's fine! It's all the Very Best Popular Chill Out Relaxing Escape Smooth Christmas Gold Ever Vol.17 stuff that is perturbing.


----------



## realdealblues

eljr said:


> More a sign that people are not bothering to own music at all as all ownership fell. CD, LPs and downloads. Downloads simply fell the most, which makes sense because streaming gives you an unlimited library on the fly.


I'm curious how much is due to music listening in general with much of the younger generation. In my youth my friends and I listened to music all the time. At the house, in the car, on a portable player at the beach, etc. We always had music going. The 2 dozen or so teenagers that are constantly at my house visiting my Girlfriends son don't listen to music at all. They play video games, or watch pointless videos on YouTube. They don't stream music or listen to the radio because they are glued to TV's watching videos or playing games.

For me as an "Extremely Avid Listener" streaming will never work because of the extremely limited library. As I've said before in other posts, you won't find half my collection on Apple Music, or Spotify or even YouTube. I don't feel the geezer syndrome of being unwilling to change has as much to do with me personally. Yes, I like to read booklets for things that I really love but I don't physically own CD's or Cassettes or LP's of many, many things. I have thousands of MP3's that aren't available on CD, or LP or any format for that matter. I have thousands of Radio Broadcasts that you can't physically own. For me it's more about being able to hear what I want, when I want, and right now that can't be done with any streaming service. End of my rant for the day...


----------



## Granate

realdealblues said:


> I'm curious how much is due to music listening in general with much of the younger generation. *In my youth my friends and I listened to music all the time. At the house, in the car, on a portable player at the beach, etc. We always had music going.* The 2 dozen or so teenagers that are constantly at my house visiting my Girlfriends son don't listen to music at all. They play video games, or watch pointless videos on YouTube. They don't stream music or listen to the radio because they are glued to TV's watching videos or playing games.


How lucky you were. Until I was 17 and opened up about my music tastes I always listened to music alone, but then I was sharing my free-time with videogames and studying. I don't know how old those "teenagers" are, but my insane love for music listening began at 16, just after I was done with all my music subjects in school (which I didn't particularly follow with interest, that was for Spanish, English and Natural Science).

I've always been a geek for my personal life and my tastes. Talk Classical is the first place I talk about music I listen to. Just before that, I only did talk with close friends from university, but they never had the same tastes as I did. I though it was impossible to have personal debates about music or to share successfully the things we liked the most. And given that we both listened to music regularly, it was unusual to find another person like that.

When you talk about those teenagers and "pointless" youtube videos, I remember those shows that were a conversation topic. I feel identified because I don't "read" books or either like watching films. But I recently realised that I may have an attitude problem towards "fiction", so I should focus on all the national and international press I read and develop a hobby for reading "non-fiction" and Michel Foucault.

My advice is to look for other teenagers. It needs patience.



> I have thousands of MP3's that aren't available on CD, or LP or any format for that matter. I have thousands of Radio Broadcasts that you can't physically own.


It's an interesting topic, because I don't think many fans of my age would be keen on streaming radio and recording a broadcast on a computer. In fact, at my age, there are hundreds of CM recordings that were released and praised when I wasn't even born. And many, including tough Historical Broadcast in the 50s and 60s, *are available in streaming services.* I think I should give them a try before focusing in the present time. I listened yesterday to an _Aida_ performance conducted by Nino Sanzogno in la Scala in 1960. It wasn't particularly brilliant except for listening to Birgit Nilsson with a lighter voice than in the EMI studio recording with Mehta.

The phenomenon of "Pirate" recordings is very recent and the majority older than 50 years, are now available at a reasonable price. I don't know what will happen when Historical labels start to release broadcasts in Stereo from the 70s and 80s, as Myto did in the early 2000s and OperaDepot subsecuently "stole".

Anyway, the topic of historical (mono or stereo) broadcasts is a topic that only attracts to the most keen and avid music listeners in a particular genre (Classical Music or others like Rock concerts, etc). If I was lucky enough to make some friends join to my cult, I doubt they would get into radio broadcasts. This is the time where music is available through multiple forms, not only phisical or radiophonic, but Digital On Demand. Which opens the music universe of the 20th century to people who were born in the 90s or later and have the majority of commercial recordings available at one click in a streaming plattform.

However, those teenagers could do like me and listen to contemporary music (Independent or Classical) completely ignoring anything made in the 20th century. I don't think that would be more rewarding.


----------



## eljr

Fritz Kobus said:


> Well, there will be a split, with classical being more into ownership of hard media vs pop streaming. That is my prediction.


Yes, classical listeners tend to be older so more resistant to change. 
I think your prediction is already true.


----------



## eljr

DBLee said:


> Now hold on a minute. Of course that's true, but earlier you said
> 
> If our quantification does nothing more than give apparent credence to our preconceived results, how is subjectivity eliminated?
> 
> Okay--I am in firm agreement with this. And whether we prefer streaming subscriptions, downloads, CDs, or--who would have thought it 20 years ago--*LP's*!!--we can enjoy it in our favorite format.


Subjectivity *CAN BE *eliminated.

If you quantify and qualify without eliminating bias you do not get an objective result.


----------



## eljr

wkasimer said:


> But don't you need a monitor of some kind to navigate through the Blu-ray disc? That's what's kept me from hooking up a Blu-ray player to my main audio system (the electronics and source components of which are situated in a closet).


no, just hit play

we are discussing Pure Blu-Ray Audio not Blu-Ray.


----------



## eljr

realdealblues said:


> I'm curious how much is due to music listening in general with much of the younger generation. In my youth my friends and I listened to music all the time. At the house, in the car, on a portable player at the beach, etc. We always had music going. The 2 dozen or so teenagers that are constantly at my house visiting my Girlfriends son don't listen to music at all. They play video games, or watch pointless videos on YouTube. They don't stream music or listen to the radio because they are glued to TV's watching videos or playing games.
> 
> ..


interesting observation

I have observed the opposite.

Although no one owns a "stereo" today, portable music is easier than ever and I see people appreciating music as much as ever. Don't forget, totally music consumption is up, very healthily so.


----------



## wkasimer

eljr said:


> no, just hit play
> 
> we are discussing Pure Blu-Ray Audio not Blu-Ray.


Right; I already have a Blu-ray player attached to the TV, so this would be only for audio.

I assume that I need a player with RCA outputs - or is there some sort of cord or unit to accomplish this with a player that lacks them?


----------



## RobertKC

wkasimer said:


> I assume that I need a player with RCA outputs -


Yes - I recommend "old fashioned" RCA "line-level" red & white connections between the Blu-ray/universal-player and the audio amplifier. You can connect the universal-player to the AUX input (or CD or tuner input) of any "traditional" stereo amplifier. For example, I connect my state-of-the-art Oppo UDP-205 universal player to my 1950's era McIntosh MC30 mono tube power amps via RCA connections - and when playing modern high-quality hi-res recordings (e.g., SACD, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, 24bit/192kHz FLAC) this combination of "old & new" sounds _fabulous_.

Don't let anyone tell you that RCA connections are obsolete. When playing digital recordings, there must be a DAC (digital/analog converter) somewhere in the chain (i.e., at one end of the interconnect cable or the other). I recommend having the DAC in the universal-player (e.g., Ultra HD Blu-ray player), so that you are free to choose whatever hi-fi amp you want - vs. being forced to use HDMI to carry audio and video to a black-plastic-"big-box-store"-made-in-China-AVR. But … that's just my 2 cents …

Many manufacturers of inexpensive Blu-ray (and Ultra HD Blu-ray) players have eliminated the red & white RCA connections (and associated DAC circuitry) in order to lower COGS (cost of goods sold). Their argument (which is a load of BS) is that all "modern" hi-fi equipment uses an HDMI connection to carry audio and video from a Blu-ray player to an AVR (audio/video receiver). The fact of the matter is that there are state-of-the-art universal players (e.g., Oppo UDP-205) that have built-in "audiophile grade" DACs and analog circuitry (and line-level analog connectors), that enable you to connect via RCA red & white interconnect cables to any traditional stereo amplifier you choose. (I prefer vintage tube amps.)


----------



## SixFootScowl

eljr said:


> Yes, classical listeners tend to be older so more resistant to change.
> I think your prediction is already true.


And given my age (only 60) I think there will be plenty of CDs around for the rest of my lifetime.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Given my age I probably already have enough CDs to last for the rest of my lifetime! Maybe I should stockpile a few CD players to be on the safe side in case I'm in for the Eliot Carter-style long haul.


----------



## eljr

Fritz Kobus said:


> And given my age (only 60) I think there will be plenty of CDs around for the rest of my lifetime.


No doubt.

This is an issue that will not impact you or I.


----------



## eljr

RobertKC said:


> I connect my state-of-the-art Oppo UDP-205 universal player to my 1950's era McIntosh MC30 mono tube power amps via RCA connections -


You use the 205 as a preamp I see. I also did for a short time but the fact that it dos not have a trigger out really bugged me.



> I recommend having the DAC in the universal-player (e.g., Ultra HD Blu-ray player), so that you are free to choose whatever hi-fi amp you want


There are plenty of good Dac/Pre-Amps to be had which then allows you many options. People generally use more than one source to enjoy celestial sounds!



> Many manufacturers of inexpensive Blu-ray (and Ultra HD Blu-ray) players have eliminated the red & white RCA connections (and associated DAC circuitry) in order to lower COGS (cost of goods sold). Their argument (which is a load of BS) is that all "modern" hi-fi equipment uses an HDMI connection to carry audio and video from a Blu-ray player to an AVR (audio/video receiver). The fact of the matter is that there are state-of-the-art universal players (e.g., Oppo UDP-205) that have built-in "audiophile grade" DACs and analog circuitry (and line-level analog connectors), that enable you to connect via RCA red & white interconnect cables to any traditional stereo amplifier you choose. (I prefer vintage tube amps.)


You don't think it's best to buy an inexpensive Blu-Ray player and connect it to a DAC/Pre-Amp along with all your other sources?
Oppo is moving away from audio, as you know, so maybe it's not the best direction for someone entering the market with a concentration on music? Plus, the price point of the 205 is significant if you only want to add a Blu-Ray sound.

just throwing this out there, the 205 can do very nice audio BUT it's principle design is for video. Why pay for all it's video abilities if you do not have a new 4k TV and surround system?


----------



## eljr

wkasimer said:


> Right; I already have a Blu-ray player attached to the TV, so this would be only for audio.
> 
> I assume that I need a player with RCA outputs - or is there some sort of cord or unit to accomplish this with a player that lacks them?


Sure is. lots. https://www.google.com/search?q=hdm...ome..69i57.12164j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

State of the art with HDMI input to RCA analog out http://www.essenceelectrostatic.com/essence-shipping-hi-def-dac-hdmi-input-blu-ray-audio/


----------



## wkasimer

RobertKC said:


> Yes - I recommend "old fashioned" RCA "line-level" red & white connections between the Blu-ray/universal-player and the audio amplifier. You can connect the universal-player to the AUX input (or CD or tuner input) of any "traditional" stereo amplifier. For example, I connect my state-of-the-art Oppo UDP-205 universal player to my 1950's era McIntosh MC30 mono tube power amps via RCA connections - and when playing modern high-quality hi-res recordings (e.g., SACD, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, 24bit/192kHz FLAC) this combination of "old & new" sounds _fabulous_.


Thanks - very helpful. I'm in the same situation; I have an older Simaudio preamp that I'm not going to part with for sonic reasons, but it predates HDMI.


----------



## wkasimer

eljr said:


> Sure is. lots. https://www.google.com/search?q=hdm...ome..69i57.12164j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
> 
> State of the art with HDMI input to RCA analog out http://www.essenceelectrostatic.com/essence-shipping-hi-def-dac-hdmi-input-blu-ray-audio/


Excellent - thanks. I sounds like I can do this "on the cheap" to start out, and see if it's worth more serious $$$.

Sonically, is there much difference between the audio output quality of various Blu-ray players? Or are there specific features I should be looking for if I'm only interested in audio?


----------



## eljr

wkasimer said:


> Sonically, is there much difference between the audio output quality of various Blu-ray players?


No, it's digital.

Sound differences do not come into play until the signal goes into a Dac and out analog. (RCA plugs)


----------



## 13hm13

Some stats on CDs (etc.) from _Newsweek_, 24 April 2017: "HOW CDs HAVE BEEN SUPPLANTED BY MUSIC STREAMING"

http://www.newsweek.com/how-cds-have-been-supplanted-music-streaming-588819

"The dominance of CDs peaked in 2002 when CD sales accounted for 95.5 percent of recorded music sales."

"Adjusted for inflation, CD sales last year [2016] were the lowest since 1985, the second year CDs were available."


----------



## KenOC

13hm13 said:


> Some stats on CDs (etc.) from _Newsweek_, 24 April 2017: "HOW CDs HAVE BEEN SUPPLANTED BY MUSIC STREAMING"
> 
> http://www.newsweek.com/how-cds-have-been-supplanted-music-streaming-588819
> 
> "The dominance of CDs peaked in 2002 when CD sales accounted for 95.5 percent of recorded music sales."
> 
> "Adjusted for inflation, CD sales last year [2016] were the lowest since 1985, the second year CDs were available."


Thanks! This seems to be a good, thoughtful article. It's based on the RIAA 2016 figures. Both they and the 2017 Nielsen figures have been discussed here and pretty much tell the same story.


----------



## eljr

13hm13 said:


> "Adjusted for inflation, CD sales last year [2016] were the lowest since 1985, the second year CDs were available."


The times, they are a changing.


----------



## Triplets

wkasimer said:


> Right; I already have a Blu-ray player attached to the TV, so this would be only for audio.
> 
> I assume that I need a player with RCA outputs - or is there some sort of cord or unit to accomplish this with a player that lacks them?


I played Blu Ray Audio, and DVD- A, on my Oppo 105 easily without a monitor. It takes a few minutes working with the Oppo remote to figure it out.
I ultimately added a small monitor to the system to help play downloads from usb sticks. I could have also just run a HDMI cable from the Oppo to a Windows Computer to navigate the downloads (Macs don' Have HDMI inputs) but that would have been a hassle.
If you have a receiver in your set up, I suggest running to HDMI cables from your Oppo to it, 1 for video and 1 for Audio.


----------



## eljr

Triplets said:


> It takes a few minutes working with the Oppo remote to figure it out.


It does?

All I do is hit the play button.



> If you have a receiver in your set up, I suggest running to HDMI cables from your Oppo to it, 1 for video and 1 for Audio.


But then you are not using the DaC in the 105. Why would you buy a 105 and then use a receivers DAC?


----------



## Guest

I've just heard an interview on Radio 3 with the Modulus string quartet. At the request of younger people, their new realease is going to be ...on vinyl.


----------



## TurnaboutVox

dogen said:


> I've just heard an interview on Radio 3 with the Modulus string quartet. At the request of younger people, their new realease is going to be ...on vinyl.


*Sigh* I'll wind up the old gramophone and sharpen a needle, and prepare for one last nostalgic (and otalgic) evening of snap, crackle and pop.


----------



## Guest

TurnaboutVox said:


> *Sigh* I'll wind up the old gramophone and sharpen a needle, and prepare for one last nostalgic (and otalgic) evening of snap, crackle and pop.


I know. I was glad to see the back of them, as I'm sure many were.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

CD's make get beer coasters you know, use a Ring cycle and you have a matching set


----------



## Dan Ante

I read a news item 7-10 days ago that said something along the lines of "the cassette tape is due to be the latest thing in hi fi audio products" I think the industry is in dire striates, all people are doing now is streaming so obviously sales in the industry are falling, quality has lost out among the plebs, no disrespects to your love of vinyl Eddie but compared to the user friendliness of the CD both the LP and tapes are history and I have draws full of tapes and still have a lot of LPs and EPs which do get the occasional spin.


----------



## SixFootScowl

While the cassette tape was somewhat of an improvement over the 8-track tape, I do not miss trying to pull several feet of tape out of the guts of the player after it somehow sucked it in.


----------



## KRoad

I decided to play some cassettes lately as I accumulated a great many of them - back in the day - as the Americans say. This raised my curiosity of cassette culture in general and I can confirm that new "quality" cassette decks are now next to impossible to locate new and unused for purchase. Fortunately, I have a Tascam 424MkIII in very good condition which has the added advantage of three EQ controls per channel (including a sweepable mid), very important for fine-tuning a cassette for optimal play back results. Once fine-tuned in this way, the reproduction quality of a good quality chrome tape is really not soooo bad at all. Should I wax lyrical on analogue warmth? Okay, not 16 bit Red Book perhaps - but really quite listenable to. 

Would I return to cassettes or even welcome a cassette renaissance, no. But I won't be throwing my tapes out either. 

Tapes? Worth a spin if you still got something reasonable to play them on.


----------



## Roger Knox

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> use a Ring cycle and you have a matching set


but at the end it goes up in flames


----------



## Granate

Aaaaarg!........... Lol


----------



## eljr

RobertKC said:


> The fact of the matter is that there are state-of-the-art universal players (e.g., Oppo UDP-205) that have built-in "audiophile grade" DACs and analog circuitry (and line-level analog connectors), that enable you to connect via RCA red & white interconnect cables to any traditional stereo amplifier you choose.


.... bad news, no more state of the art Oppo UDP's.

If this is not proof that CD's and all disc's for that matter are on life support, I don't know what is.

I was both shocked and upset to hear Oppo is history but it is what it is.

My question is, where do I find a UDP now?


----------



## wkasimer

eljr said:


> My question is, where do I find a UDP now?


http://www.us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=BluRayDVD&ProductId=UD7007


----------



## DaveM

wkasimer said:


> http://www.us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=BluRayDVD&ProductId=UD7007


And there's a mess of those on eBay starting at $500


----------



## RobertKC

wkasimer said:


> http://www.us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=BluRayDVD&ProductId=UD7007


I've looked at this Marantz machine only briefly. There appear to be deficiencies compared with the Oppo UDP-205: No Ultra HD Blu-ray. No 5.1 analog audio outputs. Will not function as a DAC for a PC. No TOSLINK input (access to DAC). No HDMI input (access to DAC)? Line-level sub-woofer connection? Again, this is not a complete assessment. I'm not saying that this Marantz unit won't meet some people's needs, but it doesn't appear to do everything the UDP-205 did.


----------



## RobertKC

eljr said:


> My question is, where do I find a UDP now?


OPPO _might _do another production run of the UDP-205: https://oppodigital.com/blu-ray-udp-205/


----------



## Triplets

eljr said:


> It does?
> 
> All I do is hit the play button.
> 
> But then you are not using the DaC in the 105. Why would you buy a 105 and then use a receivers DAC?


I am not using a receiver DAC. I am using a Bryston DAC3, which accepts the DSD from an SACD, once the Oppo has been configured to output the DSD layer, which takes about 1 minute to configure.


----------



## Dan Ante

UDPs can be located at all BNBS and some FHART sites but the best is DFM @ FABC or if that fails GON and MMNN, hope this HELPs


----------



## eljr

Triplets said:


> I am not using a receiver DAC. I am using a Bryston DAC3, which accepts the DSD from an SACD, once the Oppo has been configured to output the DSD layer, which takes about 1 minute to configure.


You said, "If you have a receiver in your set up, I suggest running to HDMI cables from your Oppo to it,"

if you run a digital cable from the Oppo to a receiver the DAC in the receiver will do the conversion to analog.

You would have to run RCA's to the receiver if it would accept them and it could pass the signal through to use the OPPO dac.


----------



## Granate

Today we watched a news piece about warnings in primary schools. It was about the toxic elements of "slime", which is becoming quite popular on YT. My parents (teachers) and I talked about how children love to find out about things (like farm animals) by the touch. They told me that they'd rather have a phisical poker card on their hands than seeing a big picture of it on a screen.

That reminded me of my behaviour with CDs. I don't know if you can relate to it, but is it a childish attraction?


----------



## Pugg

Granate said:


> Today we watched a news piece about warnings in primary schools. It was about the toxic elements of "slime", which is becoming quite popular on YT. My parents (teachers) and I talked about how children love to find out about things (like farm animals) by the touch. They told me that they'd rather have a phisical poker card on their hands than seeing a big picture of it on a screen.
> 
> That reminded me of my behaviour with CDs. I don't know if you can relate to it, but is it a childish attraction?


YES, YES, YES!!!!
The other no.


----------



## Mood Drifter

I used to be a big stickler for physical media for music, buying at times a couple CDs a week, but I'm glad I left that fold. It was an ego thing. Of course I don't like the breakneck pace of life in the 21st century (which is why classical has lost its mainstream appeal!) but there's much more worthwhile battles in the culture war than what format you listen to your music on.


----------



## Art Rock

Granate said:


> Today we watched a news piece about warnings in primary schools. It was about the toxic elements of "slime", which is becoming quite popular on YT. My parents (teachers) and I talked about how children love to find out about things (like farm animals) by the touch. They told me that they'd rather have a phisical poker card on their hands than seeing a big picture of it on a screen.
> 
> That reminded me of my behaviour with CDs. I don't know if you can relate to it, but is it a childish attraction?


Completely in agreement. I also prefer to play chess on a real board with real pieces against a real opponent. And even my downloads I burn on CD's.


----------



## Granate

Pugg said:


> YES, YES, YES!!!!
> The other no.


Do you like those opera boxes on CD that brought a libretto and a cardboard envelope in the 80s and 90s? It's like they are endangered, and I only own the original Sinopoli Nabucco. Great that I could catch that one new for 14€ instead of 30 or more like in CD stores.

However, I also like reading librettos on PDF in my mobile phone or the PC. I mean, I don't care if they are phisical or a digital file like the ones they sell today (the bad thing is that the letters are very small in the book and I don't have the best sight).


----------



## Weird Heather

I also used to collect physical media; one entire room was packed full of records and CDs. Even though it was well organized, it was a pain to find things simply because there was too much. I eventually started copying CDs to a hard drive, but the records were too much work. I digitized a few favorites, but mostly they were unplayed because it was too inconvenient to get to them.

Eventually, I moved to southern California, where housing is extremely expensive. I simply couldn't justify the cost of renting a large apartment just to store physical media. Almost all of the records had to go; unfortunately, I didn't have the time or energy to digitize them. I just kept a handful of 78s to play on my Victrola, and the quantity I kept fits into the Victrola's cabinet. CDs and DVDs can take up a lot of space if it is necessary to get to them. However, copying them onto a hard drive renders easy access to the physical media unnecessary. I have boxed them up and stacked them in a dark corner. They don't take too much space now, but I don't want the quantity to grow, so now I rarely buy physical media. Hard drives have become so inexpensive that it is economical to keep my entire music and video collection on a single hard drive, and maintain multiple backups, including one that I keep at work (so that I can have my entire collection available there and have an off-site backup). It isn't even necessary to compress music into mp3 files; the hard drives are so big that lossless CD-quality (or better) flac files can be stored. Furthermore, it is easy to get to everything. I have organized my classical music and video collection by composer. If I want to listen to a particular piece, I can find it in seconds, and if I don't happen to have it in my collection, a download can usually be obtained in an instant. These days, more and more of the downloads even include digital copies of the notes. With vocal music in particular, I like to have the notes so that I can read the libretto. However, for most reasonably well known pieces, a libretto can usually be found online somewhere, so a lack of digital notes isn't necessarily a show stopper.

I can't imagine going back to physical media. Nowadays, I buy CDs only rarely. Sometimes, I see something in a used CD store for a price that can't be beat, and sometimes a recording I want isn't available to download. Hopefully in time, everything will be available to download, along with electronic copies of notes. Video is more of a problem; DRM-free video downloads don't tend to be available (except as pirated copies), so a DVD purchase is still necessary if I really want something. Of course, when I get a DVD, it is immediately copied onto my hard drive, and then it goes into a box.


----------



## Pugg

Granate said:


> Do you like those opera boxes on CD that brought a libretto and a cardboard envelope in the 80s and 90s? It's like they are endangered, and I only own the original Sinopoli Nabucco. Great that I could catch that one new for 14€ instead of 30 or more like in CD stores.
> 
> However, I also like reading librettos on PDF in my mobile phone or the PC. I mean, I don't care if they are physical or a digital file like the ones they sell today (the bad thing is that the letters are very small in the book and I don't have the best sight).


I'll try to get them as original as possible, even if they are a little more expensive. On the other hand , like the last Popp release La Navaraise, there is only one option so I go for that on.


----------

