Is the music industry killing physical copies?

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: It's a good question. If downloading is killing physical copies then it's a slow death. Vinyl has actually increased in sales quite a bit over the past ten years or so. I admit cds are on the decline but I think it will be a while before they are phased out entirely(if that does even happen). I think there's always going to be some kind of demand for a physical copy of something. I think it's the collector mentality in many of us. For example books are still around also. Sure you now have kindle but people still like to read physical books. With music people like to see the artwork and hold it in their hands. Cds do have some advantages over vinyl and vice versa but both have advantages(and I suppose disadvantages too)over downloads. If physical copies were eradicated completely I think too many people would rebel and demand for their return.

I have to have physical copies although I do see more postings of "vinyls" on Facebook.  BTW I hate that term. When I was growing up they were LPs, singles (really they always had two sides, doesn't that make them a double?) I haven't had a functioning turntable in a few years now.  I wish I did because there are some albums I still need to copy to CD.  Larry Coryell in particular. I also have my newest 100 on my "phone" and am making a chronological pass through my collection.  Currently on 1978.  Back in what I consider the LP era, I'd always copy to cassette to preserve the record and for portability.

Edited by Slartibartfast - October 07 2017 at 15:42

Atavachron wrote: ForestFriend wrote: SteveG wrote: The very idea of music devoid of a physical medium was absolutely laughable to anyone in the music industry, from record manufacturers to retailers. There had always been LPs, tapes and CDs. Who could possibly be happy with just owning a  music file?   They found out the hard way. I mean, there was a time before recordings existed and people were content with listening to music performed live, or performing it themselves. Neat point.   Physically stored music is like a talisman: old and defunct but eternally substantive.   It exists outside the cybernetic realm even though it may require it.   It is the external, the existential and durable, the material that we can hold on to forever instead of relying on signals, numbers and light for storage.

Let me put this into a better context. Imagine if someone said that social media would become defunct because people used to communicate by written letters in the post. It's not the same analogy, but that's how the record industry and retailers viewed physical copies  of music prior to the age of Napster.

ForestFriend wrote: SteveG wrote: The very idea of music devoid of a physical medium was absolutely laughable to anyone in the music industry, from record manufacturers to retailers. There had always been LPs, tapes and CDs. Who could possibly be happy with just owning a  music file?   They found out the hard way. I mean, there was a time before recordings existed and people were content with listening to music performed live, or performing it themselves.

SteveG wrote: The very idea of music devoid of a physical medium was absolutely laughable to anyone in the music industry, from record manufacturers to retailers. There had always been LPs, tapes and CDs. Who could possibly be happy with just owning a  music file?   They found out the hard way.

I mean, there was a time before recordings existed and people were content with listening to music performed live, or performing it themselves.

Go back 100 years, and people would have been complaining about the death of live performances due to the availability of recordings. Of course, live performances and recordings are very different experiences, so that has helped the two work together instead of simply competing. I don't think the differences between a physical copy and a digital copy are as big (in terms of a CD vs a lossless music file, you're getting literally the same music file), but I think if vinyl can survive the CD era, I think vinyl and CDs can survive the digital era, even if that does mean they'll be more for collectors than the average listener.

It's a good question. If downloading is killing physical copies then it's a slow death. Vinyl has actually increased in sales quite a bit over the past ten years or so. I admit cds are on the decline but I think it will be a while before they are phased out entirely(if that does even happen). I think there's always going to be some kind of demand for a physical copy of something. I think it's the collector mentality in many of us. For example books are still around also. Sure you now have kindle but people still like to read physical books. With music people like to see the artwork and hold it in their hands. Cds do have some advantages over vinyl and vice versa but both have advantages(and I suppose disadvantages too)over downloads. If physical copies were eradicated completely I think too many people would rebel and demand for their return.

For me music is for the ears. I'm not sentimental about physical copies. Fair enough a vinyl copy can sound special, fair enough physical covers can look nice, but I have figured out that while being able to acknowledge this, I can easily do without. Keep the immaterial files coming! (I'll even pay.)

chopper wrote: Sean Trane wrote: It's probably more the smaller artistes that are killing the physical medium, so they can shun away from investing in CD or vinyl pressings...   Surely that's because physical CDs and vinyl cost a lot of money to produce and distribute?

Manuel wrote: For many small artists, that includes most of prog artists of today, is quite affordable to produce a digital copy of an album, rather that spending quite a lot of money to put out a CD, of which only a few copies might sell. You just upload it on bandcamp, or any other similar place, and hope for the best. Sad indeed, but unfortunately true.

I spend half my income on physical specimens of music. If more human beings did the same it would create something called demand. It seems a majority of music lovers are happy with a digital download. Vinyl LPs are back in fashion however it seems that the big names of the past are more in the position to capitalize on this trend than the newbies of the world. Guldbumsen is right in that there are more musicians than fans these days! EVERYONE is in on the action. That is a great thing that anyone can make music but let's face it. Not everything is worth our precious time to hear ;)

Unfortunately the industry at all levels has been killing music itself for decades. The nature of the beast. At least there was some semblance quality control back in the day. There does seem to be a craze for vinyl but is it a novelty that will wear off? Whenever I am in Toronto I hit the record shops that deal with both new and used vinyl more out of interest than anything. Thing is that they are asking ridiculous prices which makes it virtually impossible for younger people to experience what we did back in the seventies when buying records.. It seems that quality vinyl is only meant for the rich conniosseur. I recently saw a Tom Waits Black Rider vinyl from 1993 on sale for a hundred and f**king seventy five dollars. I mean we're not dealing Faberge Eggs here. It's freaking music. I also came across a copy of Lark's Tongues In Aspic that they wanted $60 for that you could also hear at a listening station. Just for fun I asked for a listen. The quiet parts were scratched to hell and skipped in places. I told the guy at the counter that he was f**king insane.  Used Pink Floyd vinyl is through the roof same with David Bowie.