Music CD's to become extinct soon?

[ElFenix]

I think we're talking physical vs data-digital.
And I see where you might be going, in that many people still believe music CD's being digital, are inferior compared to those vinyl records. At least when it comes to bass reproduction.

it has already been predicted that blu ray is the last physical format for media distribution.

 

[sportage]

problem with most CDs is that with most albums ~80% of it is garbage filler to try and justify the price of obtaining access to a few hits

That is a good point too. With digital downloads pay-per-track pricing, you can customize and own only the tracks you want. But at far less cost that before, with buying an entire album for the good tracks and bad. I wonder how that impacts the artists? Are they selling more 99 cent tracks of that big hit, rather than selling that full album that "includes" that big hit? Do they actually sell enough of that 99 cent big hit, to gain more in the long run than they would by selling a more costly plastic album?

I loved that part in the movie "The Social Network" where Timberlake as Sean Parker tells Zuckerberg, "even though the record companies won the battle (with Napster), he (Sean Parker) changed the game... FOREVER!!!!!"
So so true, for that point in time.
But eventually the music industry would have discovered wonders of the world of digital media, anyhows...

 

[alent1234]

Paying for music...lol

cheaper to pay spotify than keep your computer on 24x7 and suck up electricity

 

[ElFenix]

That is a good point too. With digital downloads pay-per-track pricing, you can customize and own only the tracks you want. But at far less cost that before, with buying an entire album for the good tracks and bad. I wonder how that impacts the artists? Are they selling more 99 cent tracks of that big hit, rather than selling that full album that "includes" that big hit? Do they actually sell enough of that 99 cent big hit, to gain more in the long run than they would by selling a more costly plastic album?

the artists aren't seeing much difference as most of them weren't paid much per album anyway. artists have mostly made money touring.

people are often only purchasing the hits. though they can afford to purchase a lot of hits rather than just a few albums. so... total music spending may actually be up compared to what it might have been because people are getting a higher fraction of quality tracks so feel its a better value to purchase. :hmm:

 

[alent1234]

it has already been predicted that blu ray is the last physical format for media distribution.

what about when 4k TV's become reality?

 

[Murloc]

I have never bought a music CD. I'm almost 20 years old.

I don't even have a good audio system, so why would I care about sound quality? 320 kbps MP3 is good enough for me.

The problem is that an online store selling FLAC audio files, would require huge server resources.
Most people don't even know what audio compression is, so they'll be content to listen to shit compressed stuff with their shitty apple headphones.
Spending lots of money for the 1% who cares, is not worth it for those online stores.

That's why physical mediums are still selling.
They will go extinct eventually, because with time internet connections get faster (hopefully), but CD quality audio files keep their size, so they'll start offer better quality stuff, or everyone will have enough storage space and cheaper internet connections, so that they can download lots of FLAC files from the internet, while buying the original in iTunes, this way it's legal and you don't use online music stores' resources to obtain higher quality.

 

[Jinny]

The problem with a lot of music today is the "Loudness war". Producers intentionally limit the dynamic range of the music and compress down peaks and valleys to one garbled mess of LOUD NOISES.

THIS. 320kbps mp3 rips or even lossless rips are still shitty sounding if the source is ...shitty sounding to begin with.

 

[sportage]

So my next question to artist....
Why sell music in a "collection" i.e. album, at this point, in the first place?
With todays "pay per play" type of music purchasing, does an artist even need to toss in a bunch of ...(crap)... along with the hit(s)?

Could the day of the "album" itself possible be doomed to extinction?
An artist could just release singles, those "hits", and never actually release an album of any kind. That is unless it would be an album of only their "hits".
And that would bring us back 360 to the days of the 19??'s thru the 1970's, where you could actually buy a single track on a two sided vinyl disc.
But without the flip side track...

 

[Imp]

The problem with a lot of music today is the "Loudness war". Producers intentionally limit the dynamic range of the music and compress down peaks and valleys to one garbled mess of LOUD NOISES.

I cared enough years ago to blow $700 on a hi-fi system, but now I haven't been caring as much. Part of the reason is my room sucks and has a 3m wide door plus another storage room door, so it's hard to place the sub properly.

I still buy CDs if I really love the artist/album, then I rip to higher grade digital. Otherwise, I just buy individual songs off iTunes.

 

[Juddog]

it has already been predicted that blu ray is the last physical format for media distribution.

I seriously doubt that. If America was keeping up with say South Korea in terms of broadband, then sure, but in the meantime it's simply not practical to download a 25 - 50 GB movie and streaming services which offer 1080p are already running into issues trying to deliver content at that quality level.

 

[alien42]

wait, CDs aren't already extinct?

 

[vi edit]

I cared enough years ago to blow $700 on a hi-fi system, but now I haven't been caring as much. Part of the reason is my room sucks and has a 3m wide door plus another storage room door, so it's hard to place the sub properly.

I still buy CDs if I really love the artist/album, then I rip to higher grade digital. Otherwise, I just buy individual songs off iTunes.

You don't even need expensive systems to hear the problems with some of the worst offenders of dynamic compression. Metallica's "Death Magnetic" album is compressed to the point of clipping on many tracks. Just about any stereo in a car or junky set of headphones will point that out.

Bigger issue is that many people don't think it's the CD and blame it on their equipment. When really it's the music itself that's distorted, clipping trash.

 

[alent1234]

I have never bought a music CD. I'm almost 20 years old.

I don't even have a good audio system, so why would I care about sound quality? 320 kbps MP3 is good enough for me.

The problem is that an online store selling FLAC audio files, would require huge server resources.
Most people don't even know what audio compression is, so they'll be content to listen to shit compressed stuff with their shitty apple headphones.
Spending lots of money for the 1% who cares, is not worth it for those online stores.

That's why physical mediums are still selling.
They will go extinct eventually, because with time internet connections get faster (hopefully), but CD quality audio files keep their size, so they'll start offer better quality stuff, or everyone will have enough storage space and cheaper internet connections, so that they can download lots of FLAC files from the internet, while buying the original in iTunes, this way it's legal and you don't use online music stores' resources to obtain higher quality.

for the 1% they are selling vinyl copies of albums with a bunch of extras for $50 or so. maybe more maybe a little less

 

[lxskllr]

So my next question to artist....
Why sell music in a "collection" i.e. album, at this point, in the first place?
With todays "pay per play" type of music purchasing, does an artist even need to toss in a bunch of ...(crap)... along with the hit(s)?

Could the day of the "album" itself possible be doomed to extinction?
An artist could just release singles, those "hits", and never actually release an album of any kind. That is unless it would be an album of only their "hits".
And that would bring us back 360 to the days of the 19??'s thru the 1970's, where you could actually buy a single track on a two sided vinyl disc.
But without the flip side track...

Don't support artists that release crap. I have tons of albums, ranging from vinyl to digital download, and the "one hit" albums I have are <1%. By supporting garbage, you get garbage. That's why modern radio sucks.

 

[SP33Demon]

You don't even need expensive systems to hear the problems with some of the worst offenders of dynamic compression. Metallica's "Death Magnetic" album is compressed to the point of clipping on many tracks. Just about any stereo in a car or junky set of headphones will point that out.

Bigger issue is that many people don't think it's the CD and blame it on their equipment. When really it's the music itself that's distorted, clipping trash.

It's been beat to death, but Metallica's DM guitar hero version isn't compressed. It sounds great. Also, only audiophiles would be able to discern the difference, but to the average Joe Schmoe it sounds great (and that's why they do it).

 

[zokudu]

I will buy CDs until I can buy every album in a lossless format of some sort. It is not about sound quality. It is about being able to transcode my music to whatever format I was without losing anything.

 

[IGBT]

for popTard popular music mp-3 is good enough. If you like Jazz/Classical.. CD's are the only way to go and are still widely available.

 

[sportage]

what about when 4k TV's become reality?

If that involves a physical plastic disc, I doubt that would prove to be worth their investment.

With in expanding internet bandwidth, and the media makers getting over this limit of quality crap offered to the public for home viewing, 4K could still come about. Just not on physical media. And thus enter the government getting far more involved with internet regulations.
We knew that was coming. At some point, some day. Another unholy alliance.
But now justified.

Aw the future of home media....

 

[vi edit]

It's been beat to death, but Metallica's DM guitar hero version isn't compressed. It sounds great. Also, only audiophiles would be able to discern the difference, but to the average Joe Schmoe it sounds great (and that's why they do it).

The Guitar Hero/Rock Band versions of Metallica songs should be open for some sort of musical psychology research. They put the unclipped versions of Death Magnetic in there and the ....Justice tracks in those games actually have an audible bass track in them unlike the studio album.

People don't know what they are missing (or given) until they have the opportunity to hear it a different way. Then you never hear it the same again.

The mastering on the CD version of Death Magnetic is disgusting and the backlash it received from many people was appropriate.

 

[Juddog]

Also in regards to higher quality music, downloaded or otherwise, most of the newer computer system audio hardware is already set to be able to play the higher quality sound (192 khz / 24-bit, and potentially multiple channels at that rate).

While even an audiophile probably can't tell the difference between 96 vs. 192 khz, I think that many people can tell the difference between 48 and 96 (96 is the surround sound sampling rate on a DVD for 5.1). Past 96 is a bit of a mystery area where people start to argue whether it makes a difference or not.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

A lot of time and effort is put into the artwork included with some albums so I don't see that going away completely.

As far as sound quality goes, I never have and probably won't have anytime in the near future play back equipment that would allow me to distinguish the difference.

 

[vi edit]

While even an audiophile probably can't tell the difference between 96 vs. 192 khz, I think that many people can tell the difference between 48 and 96 (96 is the surround sound sampling rate on a DVD for 5.1). Past 96 is a bit of a mystery area where people start to argue whether it makes a difference or not.

It comes down to original source and the encoding mechanism. I can still hear quite a difference between 128kbs WMA files vs my LAME encoded 192 kbs MP3's.

 

[Juddog]

It comes down to original source and the encoding mechanism. I can still hear quite a difference between 128kbs WMA files vs my LAME encoded 192 kbs MP3's.

kbps =/= khz though - just thought I'd point that out. If the source material is a CD, then no matter what encoder you use, it will be limited to CD quality.

 

[Bateluer]

As long as digital music downloads cost the same as a plastic CD, I will continue to buy CD's or "steal" the MP3's. I'm not paying the same price and getting less, a CD is still a good storage medium (I have many that are 15-20 years old), and sound quality is retained. You download an MP3 from Amazon or Itunes, who knows how it is encoded, and it almost definitely isn't lossless.

Simply, I'm not going to pay the same to get less.

Uh, they are encoded with 256bit MP3. They don't hide that. Still lossy, but plenty of quality.

 

[spidey07]

SACD/DVD-A

The quality of music recordings the last 10+ years has been terrible, and people have accepted it. 🙁

We need HIGHER quality, no lower which is where we're headed.