Greatest CD Online Store at Cheapest Prices Ever!

[hershon]

http://www.transcd.com/faq If you collect rock CD's, I just discovered the greatest and cheapest place to get great music, Trans CD [URL=http://www.transcd.com/faq]/URL] I just got my first CD from this place, so everything is Kosher and CD looks and sounds great. What this place does, apparently they send the CDs out of Russia!- it took less than 2 weeks for my CD to arrive, is they put on one CD mp3's of about 5-6 complete albums of a band, the music appears to be straight from a CD source not a record, call the album an anthology, in this case I ordered the Keef Hartley Group Anthology (He was a British rock blues contemporary of John Mayall) and the whole thing only cost $12.99 plus $4 shipping. The CD packaging is excellent. The CD plays perfectly on my DVD/CD player and my computer. The site also offers a bunch of music DVD's & I think regular CD's as well. I'm about to order more. Check this out, it might save you a bunch.

[N. Abstentia]

So they basically take 5-6 CD's, rip them to MP3, burn them on a CD-R and sell them on the internet for $13?

Sounds perfectly legal to me!

Think I'll order a bunch of them and then do a chargeback on my credit card complaining that the quality is bad. Copy them, send them back, get my money back. Sounds like an awful thing to do, don't it? Guess what..it's no different than what they do.

[hershon]

Bud, here's how I look at it. Record companies rip us off, artists rip us off, nobody gives a damn about us, so any way we can better ourselves, so much for the better. Quick example, if you're born rich or successfuly rich, people hand you more money ,free meals, free products, beautiful women, everything (I still get the beautiful women by making them think I have more money than I have!). But if you're middle class or poor nobody gives you anything and they want to take take take from you. We get to die in Iraq because some rich spoiled kid who never fought for his country is President of the US. We get screwed on health costs because we're supporting a bunch of illegal Americans. Here are 2 quick examples of 2 people I hate/despise. Paris Hilton who is rich by birth, is a spoiled untalented human being who gets rewarded with her own TV show and millions of more money to be spoiled on TV. Yeah like she needs the money. Kelly Osbourne another human being I despise, gets a fulltime acting part in a TV series debuting soon and I guarantee you its not for her looks or talent and probably is pulling in another couple of mill when she doesn't need it either. While I don't use Grokster, Kazza etc., excuse me if I don't care if Lars of Metallica is losing a few million as a result. Donald Trump by the way was born rich and thus had the opportunity to make big mistakes and prosper, he's no self made millionaire. I also don't watch the NBA or baseball. At least hockey and football players get the sht kicked out of them for their money.

Bottom line, this place provides great quality music at very cheap prices and if its ultimately taking money out of record companies who rip off musicians who squander their money anyway, my heart bleeds.
So they basically take 5-6 CD's, rip them to MP3, burn them on a CD-R and sell them on the internet for $13?

Sounds perfectly legal to me!

Think I'll order a bunch of them and then do a chargeback on my credit card complaining that the quality is bad. Copy them, send them back, get my money back. Sounds like an awful thing to do, don't it? Guess what..it's no different than what they do.

[JeffKnob]

Herson, I completely agree with you.

[Jim Clark]

Music is too important to me to want to spend time listening to MP3's in general. I guess they have their place but in general not something I'd ever aspire to.

Now I'm not the moral majority here and everyone draws the line somewhere based on their own rationalizations but to me this sounds like just about the sleaziest deal around. That Russia's complete lack of copyright acknowledgement makes this possible is common knowledge. What is not so clear is just where the money does wind up. Clearly it's not going to the labels, the band, the producer, back up musicians, the guy at the record store etc etc etc. Does it concern you that there is at least a chance that it's going to the Russian mafia or some other mob of ne'r do wells?

Class envy is generally not something I'd consider a positive character trait. I'm not sure what Lars, Paris, and Kelly have to do with Keef Hartley? Not being at all familiar with the music I'd have to guess that we're not talking about multi-millionaires here but I could be wrong. I guess based on what you said you have a problem with anyone in the music business getting rich but have no problem financing some unknown Russian entity that contributed nada to the entire process.I find that bizarre. BTW, having to lie to get a date doesn't strike me something to brag about either but it's your life to live as you please. The only time money is required to date or marry a beautiful person is when either of those people is deficient in the areas of looks, personality, or character or some combination of the forementioned.

jc

[topspeed]

Wow.

Well put, JC.

[hershon]

Before I go on your entitled to your opinion. I don't really lie when I'm initially going out but initially wine and dine women and then gradually ease down to pizza and stuff like that by which time I've done the deed and they'll accept me more for the lazy coniving middle class man I am. I hate to tell you this but if you go after hot looking women, you have to play yourself up as good as you can or you don't get in the front door. If you go to a job interview chances are you embellish yourself a bit. Anyway, I'm proud that I know how to play the game and if you think a person shouldn't have to play the game to get these hot broads, fine.

Yeah, I'd rather have my money go to the Russian Mafia if they put out quality product at affordable prices rather then a bunch of fat cat weasels in the record industry. Here's a simplification of how it works and why I have trouble understanding how you can have any empathy for these (not talking about the Mafia) people. They overcharge you a bundle for CD's, remember when records used to be about$4 well its cheaper to manufacture a CD but they made CD's 4 to 5 times the price of a record, they generally try to rip off the artist for as much as they can all recordings costs have to be paid back by royalties before the artist sees a dime other than an advance, the artist will use the money (not all do) to put it up their nose or what have you, charge hundreds of dollars for tickets if they make it big etc.
Too be honest if the Mob ruled this country it would be a safer and more efficient country.

The backup musicians that you quoted don't see a penny from CD sales sorry they get a set session fee. If producers like Shana Twains husband or musicans like Lars of Metallica only see $2 million dollars instead of $10 million I'm suppose to care and feel guilty? You think any of these people would ever help you out? If you ever even tried to approach them their bodyguards would beat you up.

In regards to the middle of the road musician, they don't sell that many CD's anyway and make their income through performance. They also get lousy royalty rates.

Did you ever hear of Bo Diddley? Think he'd be rich right? Well Bo got so ripped off by the record industry he had to work for a while as a fulltime sherriff after he was well established.

Lastly, the groups I'm buying from this place, I wouldn't ordinarily buy their CD's anyway at least not at $12 to $20 apiece, and the sound quality of these CD's are excellent.

-
Music is too important to me to want to spend time listening to MP3's in general. I guess they have their place but in general not something I'd ever aspire to.

Now I'm not the moral majority here and everyone draws the line somewhere based on their own rationalizations but to me this sounds like just about the sleaziest deal around. That Russia's complete lack of copyright acknowledgement makes this possible is common knowledge. What is not so clear is just where the money does wind up. Clearly it's not going to the labels, the band, the producer, back up musicians, the guy at the record store etc etc etc. Does it concern you that there is at least a chance that it's going to the Russian mafia or some other mob of ne'r do wells?

Class envy is generally not something I'd consider a positive character trait. I'm not sure what Lars, Paris, and Kelly have to do with Keef Hartley? Not being at all familiar with the music I'd have to guess that we're not talking about multi-millionaires here but I could be wrong. I guess based on what you said you have a problem with anyone in the music business getting rich but have no problem financing some unknown Russian entity that contributed nada to the entire process.I find that bizarre. BTW, having to lie to get a date doesn't strike me something to brag about either but it's your life to live as you please. The only time money is required to date or marry a beautiful person is when either of those people is deficient in the areas of looks, personality, or character or some combination of the forementioned.

jc

[nightflier]

I think there are good points on both sides of this argument and I'm not taking sides, but I do have some opinions:

- $4 per record in 1980, is not $4 today if you figure in inflation. That said, I also doubt it comes out to $16-20.
- Music that was hip 20-40 years ago, even 10 years ago, should not cost the same as new music, yet is is being sold at today's prices.
- No matter what side of this debate you're on, we can all agree that artists do not get paid a fair share from the record companies.
- Record companies control the market so tighttly that new and inovative artists can almost never get in. The Internet was the most lucrative outlet for these bands but now that too is controlled and tarriffed.
- An MP3 is a lower quality digital sample and should not be sold for the same as a full-quality song on CD with a case and liner notes. Sorry, but even 99 cents is a rip-off.
- The Digital Millenium Copyright Act, is a perfect example of how government is no longer interested in the will of the people.
- And here's the one that burns me: if I already own the song on cassette or LP, why can't I download a fresh copy off the internet to listen to at work?

So to summarize, no I don't want the russian mafia distributing music, but if they are the only ones who have the muscle and distance to combat the inequities of our system, then I have to acknowledge that others will be drawn to them. I'll admit it, I'm worried about downloading free MP3's, copying my own CD's, or lending my DVD's to friends (yes that's illegal too), so I pay the higher prices here at home. But I long for a system that will correct the corporate rape of what used to be my favority hobby: enjoying music.

Ever noticed how for most people music has gone from a passtime and hobby to just background noise. How many of us will still sit and listen to the radio on a Firday night instead of playing some overcommercialized talk-dominated FM station while we work in the garage? I used to camp out all night to get a new record or concert tickets, now I can't even think of going to the store if I know they don't have the CD I want. What happened?

[kexodusc]

Last time I checked no artist, record company, or rich fat cat millionaire capitalist pig ever twisted an arm and forced anybody to buy anything...Funny how people will complain about this.
If it's good I'll buy it. If it's worth the asking price, I'll buy it. If I buy it and it's not worth it, the guy getting rich of my stupidity deserves to be rich. Period. Funny how everyone is against the rich millionaire artists and record producers, but loves to buy their coffee and clothing from the lowest bidder.

FWIW: I just did a quick calculation based on the inflation rates from 1980 to 1999, and then used 2 and 3% for every year since then (which isn't unreasonable)...depending on your assumptions you can easily get $16-$20...so it's not really that much of a stretch. Remember inflation was disgustingly high in the 1980's.

[N. Abstentia]

Okay, some quick questions for the supporters of this 'steal music and sell it over the internet' dealie.

Let's pretend you had a job..and that job was fixing computers. You fed your family and paid your light bill with the money you make by fixing computers. Well one day I bring my computer into your shop and you spend 2 days fixing it, let's say the charges come to $200. Then when I come to pick up my computer, I explain to you that Microsoft is a multi billion dollar company and they screw everybody and I'm sick of it and I'm taking my computer and leaving.

How is that different from the artists not being paid for the work they do?

[kexodusc]

N. Abstentia's right...not all music is worth paying money for, and I don't buy the insincere "don't pirate music or movies" ads you see at the theaters these days, but if the music's good, there's nothing wrong with people making a buck off of it. No matter how rich the billionaires get, there's an aweful lot of "mid and low income"earning mouths being fed by the industry too.
The market is full of idiots, unfortunately they will dictate CD prices.

I can't see how supporting another rich and unethical organization in a foreign country that gets rich off other people's work is noble or just in any way.

[nightflier]

OK, so with inflation it does come to $16 or thereabouts. You got me there. And I also don't think that sending the money to Russia is the best thing. But what he is paying for is an MP3 file. It's not the same thing as the song on a red book CD, with a nice cover and case. And then there is still the issue that this is music that is older than the latest pop hit. How many times has it been re-recorded by record companies to make more money from, while the artist most likely only got paid once for it (Columbia House anyone?).

Even if we don't mind that the money we spend on a CD is incorrectly allocated, we have to admit that copyright law and the campaign to stop music downloads has spiralled out of control. We can ignore the ads about downloading MP3's, but can we ignore that they also suggest that it supports drug dealers and terrorism? Can we ignore that 99 cents is too high of a price? Can we ignore that every commercial music source includes ads to get us to buy other things? Can we ignore that new CD's are copy-protected, when part of the price goes towards royalties for allowing copies? Can we ignore that thousands of artists are being snuffed out of the industry because it competes with the big guys? And not to belabor the point, but why is it illegal to download music we already own in another format. It's been paid for already. Statistics show that 80% of MP3 downloads were for music that was already owned.

So no, I don't share MP3 files, but I can understand why so many people want to. In the end, I don't enjoy music like I used to. I think that is a tragedy. And I'll go out on a limb here, but I think many others feel the same way.

[Woochifer]

This is just bizarre at so many levels. First off, if I'm buying music that I want to listen to and collect, the last thing I want to do is buy music in MP3 format. I've invested in an audio system, why would I want to play something that compromised in sound quality on my system, especially since I don't have a MP3 player hooked up to my system and in my car. For music that I enjoy, I want to know that I'm getting the best available sound quality for what I buy.

Second off, I'm with the others -- as much as I dispise the recording companies, some unknown Russian entity is hardly a place where I'd want to send my money. If indeed this company has Russian mafia ties (and a great proportion of Russia's economy currently has ties to organized crime, especially in areas like piracy), then you had damn well better care about where that money's going. I mean, if you knew that the $13 that you paid for that CD was going into a fund that obtains nuclear materials for Islamic terrorists, would you still buy them? Say what you will about the recording companies, but I seriously doubt that their activities are going into the pockets of murderers and terrorists.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2242/is_1648_282/ai_102747651

Third, the whole rant about hating these wealthy attentionmongers. I'm not a fan of the aforementioned people either, but you if you really want a way to stick it to them, then JUST IGNORE THEM! Do the terms "famous for being famous" or "bad publicity is better than no publicity" sound familiar? Celebrities who warrant my attention are the ones who add to my everyday enjoyment of life -- ones whose artistic talents or contributions to things that I enjoy -- I will reward by simply buying them music, books, movies, etc. The ones who just do idiotic stuff to get attention, I ignore them. The attention is what they crave, so if you really don't like them and what they do, then don't give them what they want! Trump, Hilton et al could care less if everybody hates them, so long as everybody talks about and obsesses about them.

Lastly, lying about your income to get a date?! If my income is even a consideration with a date, then that's all I need to know to hit the eject button!

[N. Abstentia]

nightflier, I know where you are coming from. Over the last year I've started to enjoy music a lot more than I had previously, and I think it has a lot to do with the crap that is being released. I look back at my Nickelback, Creed, Matchbox 20, Fuel, Bush, Third Eye Blind, etc CD's that I had been buying and finally realized that "hey, this is all pure C R A P." That, along with all the junk on MTV got me soured for the whole music scene.

So guess what..I went back to the basics. I thinned out my collection. I took about a hundred CD's to the used CD store. One interesting thing I picked up with my new cash was something old and new at the same time...Yes's Fragile on DVD-A. I'd never heard this whole CD, but man this was an eye-opener. This music made 30 years ago has more heart and soul in the opening riff to Roundabout than most of the junk being released today has put together. I also picked up In Absentia by Porcupine Tree which gave me hope for modern music!

So, after Fragile came Close To the Edge. Man, that did it for me. This is what I have been looking for. And it's OLD! But along those same lines, I picked up what I felt was the modern day version of this old type of Yes stuff...more Porcupine Tree. Spock's Beard. Chroma Key. All absolutely incredible, and it all got me excited about music again. This led me to rediscover my old Fates Warning, Rush, Queensyche, Iron Maiden, Faith No More, Pink Floyd, The Who, and Genesis CD's/LP's.

Sometimes you just gotta start over :)

[hershon]

First off the MP3 collections I'm buying, are of groups I normally wouldn't chance buying CD's of anyway- groups I'm vaguely familiar with but don't know that much about. These are mainly 60's to early 80's groups that aren't ever played on radio. If websites like Amazon which puts a lot of sample music online expanded their samples from 30 seconds to 2 minutes, I'd have a pretty good idea what these groups and their albums sound like and buy the album. But 30 seconds at least for me is not enough for me to evaluate a track unless its amazingly good or bad. The thing with the old Napster that these greedy record companies didn't realize is that alot of people such as myself bought albums based on what we heard on Napster. Napster was a great tool of exposure for lots of bands, etc.

Concerning the price of a CD, from my experience as a small label owner a decade ago, it costs something in the range of 50 cents to 1.50 today to manufacture a CD with jewell case and booklet. This is excluding recording costs and graphic arts costs. So don't tell me $16 is reasonable.

What I laugh at these greedy pigs and what they won't admit, they are losing an overall fortune on their "online music sales" because as some previous posts note, who in their right mind is going to pay 99cents for an mp3 file? These people would rather have 100% of nothing then 5% of something. If mp3 costs were like 5-10cents millions and millions of people would pay for them and the record companies would be making money on their online sales.

Without trying to get into right or wrong, you say you don't want your money going to the Russian Mafia but is it better having your tax money going into stupid wars killing people, paying millions of dollars to see if Clinton really had orral sex with a fat homely woman, etc?

Me personally, I don't begrudge a person who's successful and making money based on his talent and work ethic, but after a certain amount, no I don't feel sorry one bit if they aren't getting all the millions they deserve.

While I don't buy bootleg movies (mainly because of the quality), I have to laugh about all these comercials the movie industry puts out about how stealing is bad and how many people are hurt by them. Yeah, it would really break my heart if Brad Pitt or Julia Roberts only got paid $2 million a movie instead of $15 million because of bootlegers.





nightflier, I know where you are coming from. Over the last year I've started to enjoy music a lot more than I had previously, and I think it has a lot to do with the crap that is being released. I look back at my Nickelback, Creed, Matchbox 20, Fuel, Bush, Third Eye Blind, etc CD's that I had been buying and finally realized that "hey, this is all pure C R A P." That, along with all the junk on MTV got me soured for the whole music scene.

So guess what..I went back to the basics. I thinned out my collection. I took about a hundred CD's to the used CD store. One interesting thing I picked up with my new cash was something old and new at the same time...Yes's Fragile on DVD-A. I'd never heard this whole CD, but man this was an eye-opener. This music made 30 years ago has more heart and soul in the opening riff to Roundabout than most of the junk being released today has put together. I also picked up In Absentia by Porcupine Tree which gave me hope for modern music!

So, after Fragile came Close To the Edge. Man, that did it for me. This is what I have been looking for. And it's OLD! But along those same lines, I picked up what I felt was the modern day version of this old type of Yes stuff...more Porcupine Tree. Spock's Beard. Chroma Key. All absolutely incredible, and it all got me excited about music again. This led me to rediscover my old Fates Warning, Rush, Queensyche, Iron Maiden, Faith No More, Pink Floyd, The Who, and Genesis CD's/LP's.

Sometimes you just gotta start over :)

[kexodusc]

Concerning the price of a CD, from my experience as a small label owner a decade ago, it costs something in the range of 50 cents to 1.50 today to manufacture a CD with jewell case and booklet. This is excluding recording costs and graphic arts costs. So don't tell me $16 is reasonable.

$16 ain't so bad...you start putting markups in there and goes to $16 pretty quick. Here's a question: Do you own any stock in any record companies or their parent companies? I do (not much)...take a look at their bottom lines in the annual reports (might have to read the notes depending on the company)...they're not making as much as you'd might expect. In fact, your local music store makes more off them than they do! But, most of these local music stores aren't making an absolute crapload either. They do alright, but not 30% profit or anything outrageous. Why? They've got wages, leases, lights, advertising, returns, and other bills to pay too.
Stuff's not cheap.

I'm sure if the volume was to decrease because people start stealing more and more music, prices aren't going to drop much.

But I agree with you...Napster was an excellent to get people into music they might not otherwise have been exposed to.

Lots of other good points in this thread too. I really like the one about paying today's prices for old music...I guess the logic is that music is a commodity like coke or something...same stuff, just more expensive every year. Good music doesn't expire.

I didn't know you couldn't download music you already owned, legally. My understanding was that downloading was still "legal", it's sharing that's bad? I grew bored with the lawsuits a few years back when they started taking 12 year old girls to court...

[Woochifer]

$16 ain't so bad...you start putting markups in there and goes to $16 pretty quick. Here's a question: Do you own any stock in any record companies or their parent companies? I do (not much)...take a look at their bottom lines in the annual reports (might have to read the notes depending on the company)...they're not making as much as you'd might expect. In fact, your local music store makes more off them than they do! But, most of these local music stores aren't making an absolute crapload either. They do alright, but not 30% profit or anything outrageous. Why? They've got wages, leases, lights, advertising, returns, and other bills to pay too.
Stuff's not cheap.

I think you've nailed it on the head. As much as record companies take advantage of artists, they also take a helluva lot of chances with each new artist that they sign. For every multiplatinum artist, you got dozens of others who never catch on with a large audience. In a way, it's those big sellers that are supporting the opportunities for dozens of other unknown artists. It works the same way in the movie industry, which loses money on the majority of movies that they release. The thing about record companies is that they assume a huge amount of risk with every artist that they sign. Things like production costs, promotion, and distribution are risks that the record companies assume up front. It's a double edged sword for the artists. They have to give back a lot to the record companies, but in exchange they also get the full weight of a major label's promotional machinery and technical resources.

[hershon]

This might be a little bit off the topic, but am I the only one who finds Tower Records the most absurd large record store in the Universe? Specifically, based on my experiences with different Tower Record stores in different cities and countries, most of them only have 1 or 2 at most people operating the cash registers for the entire huge store? They can't afford more help and thus better customer service? I understand they've filed bankruptcy and I can see why.

While I feel sorry for a few record stores going under, to be honest, you'd have to be a fool opening up one today so for the new owners I don't feel the least bit sorry as they knew the risk. I'll occassionally go to Tower Records mainly for the magazines and books but will buy a CD once in a while if its a hard to find item. The problem is most record stores don't carry good backstock of stuff, especially the 60's to 80's stuff I love and collect. I buy almost all my CD's online either from Amazon's merchants or on Ebay as they're the only ones that might have CD's by a group like Colosseum- a great 70's English jazz rock blues
band with some of the best musicians ever- check them out!

In regards to the music business today, my personal feeling is that in the 60's and 70's it was at least run by people who loved the music and gave us new and innovating groups once in a while instead of today where all you (for the most part) get is the same recycled garbage. The funny thing is, I wasn't into punk rock in the 70's, but compared to todays crap, punk rock doesn't sound so bad!



$16 ain't so bad...you start putting markups in there and goes to $16 pretty quick. Here's a question: Do you own any stock in any record companies or their parent companies? I do (not much)...take a look at their bottom lines in the annual reports (might have to read the notes depending on the company)...they're not making as much as you'd might expect. In fact, your local music store makes more off them than they do! But, most of these local music stores aren't making an absolute crapload either. They do alright, but not 30% profit or anything outrageous. Why? They've got wages, leases, lights, advertising, returns, and other bills to pay too.
Stuff's not cheap.

I'm sure if the volume was to decrease because people start stealing more and more music, prices aren't going to drop much.

But I agree with you...Napster was an excellent to get people into music they might not otherwise have been exposed to.

Lots of other good points in this thread too. I really like the one about paying today's prices for old music...I guess the logic is that music is a commodity like coke or something...same stuff, just more expensive every year. Good music doesn't expire.

I didn't know you couldn't download music you already owned, legally. My understanding was that downloading was still "legal", it's sharing that's bad? I grew bored with the lawsuits a few years back when they started taking 12 year old girls to court...

[nightflier]

(To the other posters: I agree that MP3 music isn't what I purchased my surround setup for either, but for when I'm in the gym, or need to travel light, they sure come in handy).

Another thing I liked about napster, was that people could put together their own mixes and skip those tracks that they didn't want. This was all possible at a reasonable price. Today, if I wanted 16 songs from when I was a teenager, it would cost me more than it should ($16 per track to download, ~$3 for burning to a CD considering the burner, DSL, blank CD's, etc.), and a good 2 hours of labor. And that's if I can find the all tracks I want on that site.

The reason people did this when the tracks were free online is because it had the correct valuation. They were willing to pay for the other costs, if the music was free (about ~$3 per CD). It goes to show that if record companies want to boost online sales, that is the pricepoint they need to reach, or at least they need to meet the customers somewhere in the middle.

Right now downloading isn't worth the expense and effort. I'm back searching online CD sites (most local stores just don't have the selections) for whole albums with tracks I could care less about. Sure there are your classic rock compilations that might be worth it, but for the more obscure stuff, good luck. And it's not like I can listen to those obscure CD's first, no, only the top 40 stuff. I think if the online price-per-track drops to 10-15 cents, or better yet, the older stuff would cost less than the new stuff, then this could work. But for now, it's a pretty miserable outlook.

[hershon]

You might no know this already but if the CD's you get for just a couple of tracks weren't worth the money to you, put them on Ebay or Amazon.com marketplace for sale and chances are you'll have made at least your initial investment back. One little trick Ive learned is list the Cd at a low starting rate but specify shipping/handling is $4-$5 and $8-9 if overseas. If you save old bubble mailers (if you get stuff sent to you online you can mail the CD bought from you on these recycled mailers and it will only cost you about $1.25 so you've made $2.75-3.75 just on postage and Ebay isn't collecting a % on this (Amazon has a low standard mailing rate unfortunately).


(To the other posters: I agree that MP3 music isn't what I purchased my surround setup for either, but for when I'm in the gym, or need to travel light, they sure come in handy).

Another thing I liked about napster, was that people could put together their own mixes and skip those tracks that they didn't want. This was all possible at a reasonable price. Today, if I wanted 16 songs from when I was a teenager, it would cost me more than it should ($16 per track to download, ~$3 for burning to a CD considering the burner, DSL, blank CD's, etc.), and a good 2 hours of labor. And that's if I can find the all tracks I want on that site.

The reason people did this when the tracks were free online is because it had the correct valuation. They were willing to pay for the other costs, if the music was free (about ~$3 per CD). It goes to show that if record companies want to boost online sales, that is the pricepoint they need to reach, or at least they need to meet the customers somewhere in the middle.

Right now downloading isn't worth the expense and effort. I'm back searching online CD sites (most local stores just don't have the selections) for whole albums with tracks I could care less about. Sure there are your classic rock compilations that might be worth it, but for the more obscure stuff, good luck. And it's not like I can listen to those obscure CD's first, no, only the top 40 stuff. I think if the online price-per-track drops to 10-15 cents, or better yet, the older stuff would cost less than the new stuff, then this could work. But for now, it's a pretty miserable outlook.

[nightflier]

...One little trick Ive learned is list the Cd at a low starting rate but specify shipping/handling is $4-$5 and $8-9 if overseas. If you save old bubble mailers (if you get stuff sent to you online you can mail the CD bought from you on these recycled mailers and it will only cost you about $1.25 so you've made $2.75-3.75 just on postage and Ebay isn't collecting a % on this....

Well, I agree with you on the MP3 stuff, but I sure hope that the CD's I bought on eBay weren't from you....

[N. Abstentia]

[QUOTE=hershon]This might be a little bit off the topic, but am I the only one who finds Tower Records the most absurd large record store in the Universe? Specifically, based on my experiences with different Tower Record stores in different cities and countries, most of them only have 1 or 2 at most people operating the cash registers for the entire huge store? They can't afford more help and thus better customer service? I understand they've filed bankruptcy and I can see why.

QUOTE]

I've never been to one of their stores, but I love their website. They have the most sound samples, usually the lowest price (or within $1 or so) and free Priority Mail shipping. I ordered two SACD's the other day with free shipping and they were here in 2 days. One of them was Alison Krauss and they were the only place that even had it in stock!

[Woochifer]

This might be a little bit off the topic, but am I the only one who finds Tower Records the most absurd large record store in the Universe? Specifically, based on my experiences with different Tower Record stores in different cities and countries, most of them only have 1 or 2 at most people operating the cash registers for the entire huge store? They can't afford more help and thus better customer service? I understand they've filed bankruptcy and I can see why.

Not really, Tower's just a victim of larger trends in the music industry. They got to be a global player because they were basically the first music store to go with a deep catalog foramt at all of their stores. For the longest time, if I was looking for an obscure title, Tower was the place to go. Independent stores could top Tower for specific genres, but for top to bottom selection, they were the only game in town.

Plus, I like that they've always supported new music formats, and have sections set aside for local bands. They carried DVD-A and SACD before anyone else, and they're the only store I've seen that carries a lot of D-VHS titles (currently the only available prerecorded HD video format). Back in the day, they had a full selection of half-speed mastered and direct-to-disc LPs, they carried quad discs, they stocked dbx LPs, they were the first stores to stock a huge selection of CDs, and they were the only stores where I've seen prerecorded Minidiscs, DATs, and DCCs.

Their current trouble have arisen because they're getting squeezed by Best Buy and WalMart on the best sellers, and by other players like Virgin and HMV who also go with the deep catalog superstore format. And everybody's getting hit by the downloading phenomenon, and the simple fact that there's been no compelling new music trend to take over for alternative and hip hop, which passed their artistic peak years ago.

If you only see a couple of registers open, then you're probably going there off hours. I don't think the lines there are any worse than the ones at Virgin or Amoeba or HMV.


While I feel sorry for a few record stores going under, to be honest, you'd have to be a fool opening up one today so for the new owners I don't feel the least bit sorry as they knew the risk. I'll occassionally go to Tower Records mainly for the magazines and books but will buy a CD once in a while if its a hard to find item. The problem is most record stores don't carry good backstock of stuff, especially the 60's to 80's stuff I love and collect. I buy almost all my CD's online either from Amazon's merchants or on Ebay as they're the only ones that might have CD's by a group like Colosseum- a great 70's English jazz rock blues band with some of the best musicians ever- check them out!

Most record stores don't carry that backstock because a lot of it is out of print or difficult to obtain. My understanding is that if a title cannot generate about 1,000 units of sales annually, the record company will delete it. And we're not even on the subject of smaller labels that have disappeared altogether. That's why a lot of 70s and 80s music is unavailable in its original album format.


In regards to the music business today, my personal feeling is that in the 60's and 70's it was at least run by people who loved the music and gave us new and innovating groups once in a while instead of today where all you (for the most part) get is the same recycled garbage. The funny thing is, I wasn't into punk rock in the 70's, but compared to todays crap, punk rock doesn't sound so bad!

I'm not sure about that. It's always been a business, and about trying to print money at the customers' expense. Music is getting recycled because none of the more experimental music trends have caught traction with the buying audience. I haven't seen anything that's on the verge of exploding into full mainstream acceptance the way that alternative rock and hip hop did in the early-90s. Every era has its disposable pop music. For every Britney Spears, you have a Tiffany and a Bay City Rollers from decades before.

[nightflier]

Most record stores don't carry that backstock because a lot of it is out of print or difficult to obtain. My understanding is that if a title cannot generate about 1,000 units of sales annually, the record company will delete it. And we're not even on the subject of smaller labels that have disappeared altogether. That's why a lot of 70s and 80s music is unavailable in its original album format.

I don't want to belabor the point, but this is the whole reason hershon is going to some site in russia to get his music and that Napster was the single most exciting new tool on the Internet since webpages. The fact is that the traditional record store business model is no longer profitable and the customers are having their say. I think the big media giants were frustrated by someone who built a better mouse trap and rather than building an even better one, they sought to destroy all mouse traps.

Interestingly, every other country in the world is meeting the customers somewhere in the middle (Canada comes to mind), but here in the U.S. downloaders are treated like terrorists. Makes you wonder about the times we live in....

[hershon]

Thanks for putting it in better terms than I could. You the man!


I don't want to belabor the point, but this is the whole reason hershon is going to some site in russia to get his music and that Napster was the single most exciting new tool on the Internet since webpages. The fact is that the traditional record store business model is no longer profitable and the customers are having their say. I think the big media giants were frustrated by someone who built a better mouse trap and rather than building an even better one, they sought to destroy all mouse traps.

Interestingly, every other country in the world is meeting the customers somewhere in the middle (Canada comes to mind), but here in the U.S. downloaders are treated like terrorists. Makes you wonder about the times we live in....