New decade, end of the CD?

Sean Trane wrote: Dean wrote:   If I have to rip from vinyl to create that playlist first then that's a different issue all together and not related to burn-speed or storage formats. Your method would not take 100 minutes, it would take 160 minutes minimum unless you have some really clever means of ripping from vinyl faster than real-time. How so??   let's just say that I want to do an 80-mins CD-r compilation with tracks from two vinyl albums, both lasting under just 40-mins (so they would fit >> including the time of change the vinyls , initializing the CD-r and finalizing it, I can do it in 90-mins , no problems....   BTW, you hi-fi CD-r graver can digitalize the music and engrave the CD-r at the same time.... actually it (probably) can't do the two separately >> I don't know if it's feasible on computers, but I technicalmly don't see why it couldn't , if engraving at playing speed   read you tomorrow.... I'm off the the Brosella F&J festival under the Atomium.

Okay - I didn't realise you were still doing it all on a hi-fi burner, how quaint.

Bronsonia wrote: It's a good thing you mentioned that CD-R's can degrade over time. About 3 years ago, I burned Tarkus to a CD-R that I bought from a drug store and now when I play it, the CD player takes longer and longer to recognize it and play it, and sometimes there is popping noises. Then again, the CD-R's were dirt cheap.  So basically, if I buy some higher quality CD-R's, use lossless files to burn them instead of MP3's, it will last a long time?

The time they will last is irrespective of what you put on them - it could be mp3, wav or just Word documents from your PC - to the CD it's just 1s and 0s - it is the CD-R that has a finite lifespan. The quality of the CD-R can make a difference, but you're still talking years and not decades - it depends on how long you expect the copy to last and how well you look after it - even finger-prints and micro-scratches can affect the life of a CD-R.

Finnforest wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ On first thought I would say that these nostalgic products aren't going anywhere as long as there are enough people who are willing to spend a lot of money on them. But then again these markets don't work like that. The big music companies sometimes want to steer the markets in a new direction, and in order to do so they are willing to sacrifice revenue. The only way out of this is to change music from a product into a pure work of art, which would involve cutting out the companies (middle men) completely.  There also seem to be some indie musicians willing to make the physical disc available on their merch pages.  I wonder if the technology for self producing cds becomes cheap, will this not allow those of us into the nostalgic disc trip to continue on if we wish to seek out that experience?   Or will that ability (of musician to self produce physical stuff in a quality manner) never get cheap enough to be widespread?

TheGazzardian wrote: Finnforest wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ On first thought I would say that these nostalgic products aren't going anywhere as long as there are enough people who are willing to spend a lot of money on them. But then again these markets don't work like that. The big music companies sometimes want to steer the markets in a new direction, and in order to do so they are willing to sacrifice revenue. The only way out of this is to change music from a product into a pure work of art, which would involve cutting out the companies (middle men) completely.  There also seem to be some indie musicians willing to make the physical disc available on their merch pages.  I wonder if the technology for self producing cds becomes cheap, will this not allow those of us into the nostalgic disc trip to continue on if we wish to seek out that experience?   Or will that ability (of musician to self produce physical stuff in a quality manner) never get cheap enough to be widespread? It seems to be rather affordable, a number of artists seem to do this already (Deluge Grander, Phideaux, etc...). I think that those who have a passion for music and crafting it regardless of financial gains are often also passionate about "owning" it, and will try to create a hard copy if possible. This seems to be the norm for a lot of bands these days.

That was where I was going sort of.  I realize Mike is right about the big dogs giving up once the likelihood of mass profits is gone.  But I figured there would likely be a convergence of eventually-affordable technologies which would  allow basement musicians to provide a quality CD product for the fans out there who do want something tangible, tactile, similar to their collection, and possibly worth something in the future if they want to sell it, though this last part is mainly the Japanese stuff or rare stuff.  These kinds of factors probably mean nothing to the download guys out there who have already converted and like "the download", but I think I'm not alone in my desire to stick with physical discs for my collection.  I still get a kick just from looking at my shelf and scanning the titles, trying to pick out the one that "feels right" for the day.  I don't think I'd enjoy scrolling a screen library in the same way personally.

I'm really hoping artists will continue to provide both when possible and realistic for their bank book.  I've been seeing both for new artists, and I always spend more to order the physical CDs from them. 


Edited by Finnforest - July 10 2011 at 19:24

Bronsonia wrote: So for the best listening experience, lossless is the way to go?

^ Lossless usually only sounds noticeably better if you make stuff up.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ Lossless usually only sounds noticeably better if you make stuff up.

If you are using iPod earbuds straight into your motherboard's headphone jack, it's going to sound like poop regardless of the quality of the file.

Triceratopsoil wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ Lossless usually only sounds noticeably better if you make stuff up. If you are using iPod earbuds straight into your motherboard's headphone jack, it's going to sound like poop regardless of the quality of the file.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: Finnforest wrote: That was where I was going sort of.  I realize Mike is right about the big dogs giving up once the likelihood of mass profits is gone.  But I figured there would likely be a convergence of eventually-affordable technologies which would  allow basement musicians to provide a quality CD product for the fans out there who do want something tangible, tactile, similar to their collection, and possibly worth something in the future if they want to sell it, though this last part is mainly the Japanese stuff or rare stuff.  These kinds of factors probably mean nothing to the download guys out there who have already converted and like "the download", but I think I'm not alone in my desire to stick with physical discs for my collection.  I still get a kick just from looking at my shelf and scanning the titles, trying to pick out the one that "feels right" for the day.  I don't think I'd enjoy scrolling a screen library in the same way personally. I'm really hoping artists will continue to provide both when possible and realistic for their bank book.  I've been seeing both for new artists, and I always spend more to order the physical CDs from them.  Well, I think that this point of view is holding musicians back and is making it much harder for them to release their music on their own. You're free of holding that view, but I wish there were more people who put the music above the packaging.

I don't see how this is holding musicians back - if the artist isn't providing what the consumer wants then it's not the consumers fault. The decision rests entirely with the artist - it's his product and his choice in how to present it - many consumers want the downloads for free, and many artists are still selling their downloads - again, that's their choice and their decision, the consumer is not dictating how the artist provides the goods and no one is holding them back. We all put the music above the packaging, to say otherwise is a little insulting, but if the option is there and we are willing to pay for it, that's not our fault - this is not an either/or situation, both can be made available and the consumer can make the choice depending upon what he wants and how much he is prepared to spend.

Edited by Dean - July 11 2011 at 02:20