# CD Packaging?



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

For those of you oldsters who still collect CDs as opposed to simply down-loading your music I have a question about you preferred CD packaging. Personally, I think the hard plastic jewel-cases are the absolute worst. The damn things break at the first drop or even if you just clutch them too hard... thrilled by a particularly moving passage in Wagner (or a particularly well performed version of Cage's 4:33). The damn hinges continually snap off... and they are so slick that if you find yourself needing to carry a stack of them somewhere, you are almost certain to have them scoot out of your hand, drop to the floor, and well... you know where that leads.) It is almost as if the recording industry CEOs thought to themselves, "Let's find a way to keep the worst aspects of the cassette tapes in these new CD thingies."

For the life of me I cannot figure out why they simply didn't approach the CDs as miniature LPs. Personally, I find that I vastly prefer the cardboard cases/sleeves employed by some labels and on some discs that are not far removed from the old LP sleeves. I quite like the packaging of Glossa and Zig Zag Territories. Of course ther are even better packaging designs. Most of the recent discs of Cecilia Bartoli (as well as Anna Netrebko's _Souvenirs_) have been marvelously housed in a hard-covered book that makes one almost willing to shell out the full list-price (almost... I still bought these from secondary dealers online). Then, of course, there are some marvelously produced box sets. I am particularly fond of the recent Harmonia Mundi Jacobs sets of Mozart's operas, Glossa's fold-out set of Monteverdi's 7th Book of Madrigals... complete with two books: one of critical commentary and the second of just the text to the works themselves. Perhaps my absolute favorite is this metal boxed edition of Charlie Parker:










Everything about the packaging is great: the box and the wild cover photo, the great book and the fabulous historical photographs and graphics... and of course the music.

Anyway... I've rambled on long enough. Any other thoughts on CD packaging?


----------



## andruini (Apr 14, 2009)

Digipaks for life, yo! They're slicker, don't break, and the cd is well protected!


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Good topic. I do care a lot about CD packaging. Partly because I have so many and intend to keep them until I die (many decades to come, I hope) and partly because the overall packaging does make the product look appealing to the eye or not. Of course, the latter has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the recording, but as this thread is about CD packaging (not about the recording), I thought I shall mention it.

Agree with you StlukesguildOhio about the physical characteristics of the standard plastic jewel case. The following are what irritates me those most about them:-

(1) I buy numerous CD's via the internet, and they almost always travel long distances from Europe and North America to reach here, in Australia (and the southern part of Australia for that matter). A small percentage of them arrive with cracked cases, perhaps due to the freight/transport and handling. The damn things are more fragile than you might think. What do I do? I have to spend additional (small) money on buying blank CD jewel cases to replace those cracked and badly scratched cases. I know it's not a big deal, and you may laugh, but it just bothers me with the extra tasks! All the new CD's I buy this way come in plastic wrap/sealed but those wraps are just an indicator of newness.

(2) The cardboard "case" / booklet way to house the CD is lighter than the plastic CD jewel but I don't think they will last as long as the plastic. Neither hold well when we grab a bunch of CD's because they are all slim (ignoring box sets for the moment).

(3) Yes, my favourite are the box sets. Many of these contain CD's in paper envelopes, some contain individual plastic jewel cases. None of my box sets are in metal cases. I wonder why.

I can see why though, the industry has decided to stick with plastic jewel cases. It's all a compromise between relative durability, relative light weight and of course, cost. No.2 does well, but probably not as durable. Metal case would be the most durable, but expensive and heavy. But as Naxos, a budget price label, chooses to use plastic jewel cases, I think that's a sign that plastic cases will stay here for as long as CDs are for sale.

The Harmonia Mundi special release of Handel's _The Messiah_ and _Saul_ under Rene Jacobs was attractively packaged as per no.2


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

andruini said:


> Digipaks for life, yo! They're slicker, don't break, and the cd is well protected!


Is this what you call _digipak_? They are good. I like those. I have many.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I first started buying Cds in the 80s - usually operas so multi-pack jewel cases. In those days they put a thin layer of foam between the CDs. I've mostly got rid of it, but the other day I opened an old set and aaargh, little bits of foam disintegrated all over me, the carpet, the CD, the cat.... At least they've moved on from that


----------



## Earthling (May 21, 2010)

I don't keep many store-bought CDs these days (except my Bach collection and a few other things). But I ABSOLUTELY HATE those thick plastic multi-CD jewel cases-- the ones that are the width of two normal CD jewel cases. The CDs are always slipping out, and being loose, the can get scratched up easily. Unfortunately, since many of my Bach albums are double or triple CDs, they are often in these horrid cases. 

There are other jewel cases that contain multiple discs but are as thin as a normal single jewel case-- at least these don't get knocked loose. But those big milti-jewel cases ought to be BANNED. They are evil!!


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I agree with Earthling, I don't like those bulky cd cases which house 2-4 cd's. The cd's often become loose and the cases take up double or more storage space than normal cd's. Yes, the thinner cases have clips that seem to be much tighter & the cd's never come loose. But yes, the downside is that these thinner multi-cd cases are much more fragile (fortunately, I have not dropped one as yet, I try to be careful). I also don't mind digipaks, except (maybe?) the cd's are more exposed to dust. But wouldn't those cardboard disc cases that St. Luke's is talking about allow the cd's to warp in the long term? (especially if they are stored horizontally & not vertically - those cases are softer than plastic)...


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

In a way, the single most important feature of the original, quite thick "jewel-case" which launched the CD in the 80s has't been mentioned yet. That was the fact that the centrepiece - the little plastic dome - actually held the disc in such a way that neither the 'playing surface' nor the label side was in constant contact with any other material. I guess they were doing as much as possible to fulfil the promise of 'perfect sound, forever', or whatever it was.
I believe you ought to be able to press down on the centre spindle of any sort of packaging with one finger, and then lift the CD out (without bending or flexing it) by the edges. Sadly, too many CD - and DVD too - fail this simple handling test, yet to me, it's the most important factor. In 1985, all CD's did it. Don't know how we lost that ability, but it's been a retrograde step, that's for sure...
cheers,
G


----------



## Chris (Jun 1, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> For those of you oldsters who still collect CDs as opposed to simply down-loading your music .....


'Down-loading'  Must look that up in my Pears Encyclopaedia.

I agree plastic CD cases are wretched, but allegedly cardboard sleeves can scratch your disks, if bits of fine grit get between disk and sleeve as you remove or replace the CD


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

But those big milti-jewel cases ought to be BANNED. They are evil!!

Yes! One of the worst I have is my boxed set of Karajan's recordings of Beethoven's symphonies. The damn thing must be 3" thick and involves two of those stupid multi-disc jewel-cases! My boxed Dvorak symphonies must be only 1/3rd as thick... in spite of having just as many discs and a booklet no smaller than the Beethoven set.


----------



## Earthling (May 21, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> But those big milti-jewel cases ought to be BANNED. They are evil!!
> 
> Yes! One of the worst I have is my boxed set of Karajan's recordings of Beethoven's symphonies. The damn thing must be 3" thick and involves two of those stupid multi-disc jewel-cases! My boxed Dvorak symphonies must be only 1/3rd as thick... in spite of having just as many discs and a booklet no smaller than the Beethoven set.


And I've tried removing the inserts to put them in one of those slimmer multi-volume cases, but the inserts won't fit, so you're stuck with them. And its not just CD releases from the 80s and 90s-- my Decca Ashkenazy Bach WTC comes in one of these contraptions, released in 2005. When I move I have to pack all these discs with something to keep them from flying loose.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

The Beethoven set is obviously just packaged in such a way to stand out like a great hulking giant among all those lesser CDs. Now I love Beethoven's symphonies and Karajan's performances... but geez! my Haydn complete piano sonatas set must be 15 or so discs plus booklet and it takes up less the half the space.

By the way... I forgot another pet peeve: that stupid seal placed at the top of some CDs that you have to pick and pick at and which still leaves damn adhesive all over the top edge. LP packaging was never so paranoid: just some shrink wrap. At least some lables came up with the better (yet still irritating) idea of just a little seal... metalic with a holographic image... so I can be absolutely certain my CD is truly virginal.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Earthling said:


> I don't keep many store-bought CDs these days (except my Bach collection and a few other things). But I ABSOLUTELY HATE those thick plastic multi-CD jewel cases-- the ones that are the width of two normal CD jewel cases. The CDs are always slipping out, and being loose, the can get scratched up easily. Unfortunately, since many of my Bach albums are double or triple CDs, they are often in these horrid cases.
> 
> There are other jewel cases that contain multiple discs but are as thin as a normal single jewel case-- at least these don't get knocked loose. But those big milti-jewel cases ought to be BANNED. They are evil!!


The worst thing about them is that you can't find identical blank multi-disc jewel cases to replace the ones that are damaged.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

DVD cases seem better with the press & release centre thingy so you could use those. They take up more room though.


----------



## AmateurComposer (Sep 13, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I find that I vastly prefer the cardboard cases/sleeves employed by some labels and on some discs that are not far removed from the old LP sleeves.


Some of those cardboard sleeves are so tight that it is very hard to take the CD out of its sleeve without touching its surface.



andruini said:


> Digipaks for life, yo! They're slicker, don't break, and the cd is well protected!


Thanks for the information about the digipaks. I am looking into this option.


----------



## AmateurComposer (Sep 13, 2009)

The initial information which I found about digipaks is not encuraging.

http://musicians.about.com/od/ah/g/digipacksleeve.htm


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

*The trays in digipacks break much more often then in jewel cases. There's not as much protection since the outer portion of made of paper, so the teeth that hold the CD in place crack and fall out easily.

*When the teeth of the tray does break in a digipack, the CD falls out of the bottom of the digipack, because unlike jewel cases, there is nothing to hold it in.

From the digipacks that I have seen, the "teeth" used to hold the CD in place are of a different design than that used in many jewel cases... the type that break easily and cause the CD to fall about freely.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

I don't really care for conventional jewel cases unless the performance or packaging is really something special (such as ECM's Arvo Part releases; they have wonderfully simplistic design and practically definitive performances in wonderful audio). However, I've become very much attracted to Harmonia Mundi's packaging scheme; wonderfully attractive and they don't crack as do jewel cases. And the performances and sound are about as close to perfect as anyone could wish for.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

I prefer the traditional jewel casing. Of the paper material, I have good examples from harmonia mundi, Brilliant Classics, DG, and Sony.


----------



## Christian37 (Jul 27, 2010)

I had so many problems with my collections cases breaking at the hub, so far I found one that is much sturdier than the rest. I found it here: Brackley Industries. I think they have a large variety of media packaging that you could choose from. Learned about them after purchasing a dvd of the avatar and got impressed with it's strong design.


----------



## tgtr0660 (Jan 29, 2010)

I still collet cds and prefer the traditional jewel case.


----------



## Octo_Russ (May 11, 2010)

DigiPaks are the pits, here's why,

1 The cardboard covers have no protection, they get scratched, dented, and worn and frayed at the corners/edges.
2 If the prongs that hold the disc in place break, you can't replace it like a standard jewel case, it's glued to the cardboard.
3 DigiPaks without disc holding prongs, slip into a cardboard sleeve, much like a gatefold LP, but you only have to get a tiny piece of grit in there, and you are scratching the disc as it is pulled out and put back.
4 Also the booklets can be tucked away in a gatefold sleeve, and are hard to get out, others have a slit/pocket, but the booklets can easily fall out.

I don't like those multi cardboard boxes either, the ones that have a hinged lid, and the discs are in paper sleeves, the boxes are square, and don't fit in my racks as they're taller than jewel cases.

I am a fan of the fatbox jewel case, that hold 2-4 discs, i find them robust and still fairly compact.

Probably the ideal packaging is the new SACD disc cases, the ones with big hinges on the spine, and a more robust disc holding rose on the inside, they've taken the standard jewel case, and looked at its weaknesses, and strengthened them, seems to be the best of both worlds.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Well, for single discs- I still like the standard jewel-case, even though they scarcely stand up to any impact. At least they're easily replaceable, if something _does_ happen to them.

Two-disc sets is where it gets interesting. The first of their kind were the fat-box jewel-case, which I think is sub-optimal... but IMO, it's not as bad as the 'page-turn' duo-CDs in a single-thickness jewel-case, like the old Double-Decca series. The central piece of plastic has got to be the flimsiest thing in the history of CD-casing manufacture. To my mind, the best is the "switchback-hinge' twin CD in a single width case, e.g.: the EMI Gemini sets.

I like box sets, and box-set packaging... but with one BIG exception. When the box is SO MUCH LARGER than needed based on the number of CDs inside, it kind of defeats the whole point of it! One example off the top of my head is the initial run of the Haitink Shostakovich Symphonies box. Another one is the first release of the stereo Keilberth _Ring_. The was a way around that latter, though- 14 discs & four booklets can easily fit in two of the four boxes provided... so that's how they're stored on my shelf!


----------



## KaerbEmEvig (Dec 15, 2009)

Special edition of Opeth's Watershed album has a very cool digipack (I prefer jewel-cases, though); it looks like an old letter:


----------



## Montarsolo (5 mo ago)

An old topic but a good one! Nice first post, I agree. I came across this topic via Google when I was looking for an alternative to the juwel case (didn’t found it). I never loved the jewel case. They break quickly and scratch quickly. And they are ugly. A row of LPs in a living room is beautiful. A row of CDs in a living room is ugly.

It is a big mistake that they didn’t keep the LP covers, containing a CD. That would also have kept the cover art alive. Although I understand because the CD was something groundbreaking new. You should also express this in the packaging. 

I did come across this but that is still a bridge too far for me (although I will use the version for dvd's):
CD sleeves for CD storage with space for cover - 100 pcs.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

The best thing about those old plastic jewel cases is that after years of collecting and ditching cds I now have about 200 spare ones. If anyone wants to buy some.... 😄


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Merl said:


> The best thing about those old plastic jewel cases is that after years of collecting and ditching cds I now have about 200 spare ones. If anyone wants to buy some.... 😄


I buy them 100 at a time, for $30 postpaid from Amazon. I doubt you could ship from the UK for that....


----------



## geralmar (Feb 15, 2013)

Jewel cases are fragile: the plastic case cracks easily and the insert's prongs are prone to breaking off; but at least they are easy to replace. I regularly buy CDs cheaply at thrift stores solely for pristine jewel cases, which I use as replacements. I'm particularly on the lookout for multi-disc jewel cases. Of course there's then the problem of what to do with the suddenly orphaned CDs; but that's a separate issue. 

I suspect the jewel case was introduced to make the first CDs "special", justifying their then premium price-- they are called "jewel" cases. But I do wish CDs were packaged in mini cardboard albums, mimicking L.P.s.


----------

