CDs down, Vinyl and downloads up

[Kevio]

CD sales are down 15%.

Downloads are up 15%. Vinyl sales are up 50-100%.

Could Vinyl-download bundles could represent the future for the music industry?

[Luvin Da Blues]

On the bundle thing, you would think that they would offer the DLs in a lossless format.

[Rich-n-Texas]

On the bundle thing, you would think that they would offer the DLs in a lossless format.

And until such time that they do, these stats are irrelevant to me.

[Feanor]

CD sales are down 15%.

Downloads are up 15%. Vinyl sales are up 50-100%.

Could Vinyl-download bundles could represent the future for the music industry?

But who knows? At this rate vinyl will overtake CD in 10 years or so

Vinyl is a scam and vinylphiles dupes. Want vinyl "quality"? Rip your CDs to 256 kbps MP3; you'll find all the CD glare and edginess gone. OK, I'm trolling.

I'm a classical listener and CD is the only medium. But I'd be fine with CD-quality downloads -- by which I mean no less than 16/44.1 lossless. In fact there are a few sites with a limited selection of classical and other stuff in FLAC format.

Come to that, there is already a vast inventory of all genre available in FLAC as well as MP3. It's both (1) free, and (2) illegal. Oh well.

[vlad008]

i can't see how they would bundle them.

[Kevio]

On the bundle thing, you would think that they would offer the DLs in a lossless format.

You know, I gather that there are people here at AR that buy vinyl because it sounds better to them and then there are people who buy vinyl because it offers some tactile satisfaction, collectability, hipness, nostalgia or or other benefits unrelated to audio performance.

Clearly you can't go jogging with your turntable so that's what the download is for - at least according to the articles.

Does anyone here "rip" their albums to MP3 or lossless because that sounds better (as opposed to because the material is not readily available in digital format)?

[02audionoob]

Vinyl still looks insignificant at 1.9 million units compared to 1.5 billion units for the other formats. Increasing from 1 record to 10 would be a 1000% increase but would still be insignificant.

[RoadRunner6]

Kevio says "..........You know, I gather that there are people here at AR that buy vinyl because it sounds better to them........."

"to them" are the key words. They are the ones with hearing impairment.

Yes, I have LP's (what us really old farts call vinyl) that sound better than some CD's (not the same recording). An example would be some of my old Sheffield Labs direct to disc records. However, a properly produced CD from the same master by a competent label should always sound better.

".........and then there are people who buy vinyl because it offers some tactile satisfaction, collectability, hipness, nostalgia or or other benefits unrelated to audio performance..........." This is exactly what vinyl really offers.

RR6

[pixelthis]

But who knows? At this rate vinyl will overtake CD in 10 years or so

Vinyl is a scam and vinylphiles dupes. Want vinyl "quality"? Rip your CDs to 256 kbps MP3; you'll find all the CD glare and edginess gone. OK, I'm trolling.

I'm a classical listener and CD is the only medium. But I'd be fine with CD-quality downloads -- by which I mean no less than 16/44.1 lossless. In fact there are a few sites with a limited selection of classical and other stuff in FLAC format.

Come to that, there is already a vast inventory of all genre available in FLAC as well as MP3. It's both (1) free, and (2) illegal. Oh well.

EVER been to hdtracks.com ?

[Feanor]

EVER been to hdtracks.com ?

Thank you, Pix. It is well worth checking out. They have limited selection at true hi-rez, 24/96.

Their classical selection is limited as yet but growing. I can't speak to the other genres.

[Woochifer]

Downloads and vinyl still represent only a tiny portion of the overall record industry revenue. At least the vinyl sales are now close to 2 million. I recall people on this board getting all lathered up about a vinyl renaissance when sales were barely 1 million.

As much as I love my turntable and my vinyl collection, the hard truth is that vinyl remains a niche product. The sales seem way up only because they went so far down in the first place.

Today's vinyl market is way different than it was 10 years ago, because right now, vinyl is getting marketed as a high-priced, high margin premium product. Vinyl is no longer a mass market medium because the titles get issued as limited edition pressings, and it's only a limited selection of titles that get released on vinyl. The record companies will order up a production run from RTI or some other pressing house, and once that run is done, that's it. 26 years after the introduction of the CD, the record companies have figured out how to make money with vinyl, but it's no renaissance if the vast majority of LP releases are catalog titles.

And vinyl benefits from its niche with the dance music/DJ market, where vinyl never stopped being a viable format. The Technics SL-1200 DJ turntable continues to sell in the thousands, and will probably outlive every optical disc player out there.

[nightflier]

Today's vinyl market is way different than it was 10 years ago, because right now, vinyl is getting marketed as a high-priced, high margin premium product. Vinyl is no longer a mass market medium because the titles get issued as limited edition pressings, and it's only a limited selection of titles that get released on vinyl. The record companies will order up a production run from RTI or some other pressing house, and once that run is done, that's it. 26 years after the introduction of the CD, the record companies have figured out how to make money with vinyl, but it's no renaissance if the vast majority of LP releases are catalog titles.

The article, and everyone else here, is conveniently forgetting the used market. I would guess that 80% of record sales is used LPs. It's not profitable, glamorous, and still not significant compared to downloads and CDs, but it's were this renaissance is really happening. I just don't think people are willing to pay $20-50 for a new LP, even if it includes a coupon for the free download, and even if it is high-quality. That LP sales are way up is remarkable considering how much more they cost compared to when CDs were still new.

I never paid more than $10 for any Iron Maiden LP, and I purchased every one of them new. Today, if I can find it new, it's easily $40, and touted as some novelty item. Forget that. I bet my original releases are worth way more that that anyhow. And the same is true for other music, too. Some of my jazz and classical LPs are limited production releases and you can't even find them as downloads. So yes, I have "ripped" them with all the cracks and pops, used software to clean them up and lost part of the superior sound in the process, but what other options do I have?

Regarding the DJ disks, I bought several crates of LPs from a guy who had switched everything to digital. Sugar Hill Gang, Jonzun Crew, Planet Patrol, Art of Noise, Paul Hardcastle, and a bunch of other titles. Granted, not everyone's cup-o-tea, but they were all in very good condition. Yes you could probably find some of that stuff on iTunes, but that digital file, all pristine and sterile, is worth $.99; and free if you search bit torrent. But the snap-crackle-popped disks in this crate will easily sell for $3-5 on eBay, some for much more. While I'm not planning on selling these, there is a relative value to used LPs that no digital format can match. If you really want to bake your noodle, consider this: can you legally resell a digital file? I guess that $.99 just turned to $0.

[Woochifer]

The article, and everyone else here, is conveniently forgetting the used market. I would guess that 80% of record sales is used LPs. It's not profitable, glamorous, and still not significant compared to downloads and CDs, but it's were this renaissance is really happening. I just don't think people are willing to pay $20-50 for a new LP, even if it includes a coupon for the free download, and even if it is high-quality. That LP sales are way up is remarkable considering how much more they cost compared to when CDs were still new.

And by bringing up the used market, you are conveniently forgetting about sales from used CD. I would venture to guess that used CD sales outpace used LP sales by a substantially wide margin.

I never paid more than $10 for any Iron Maiden LP, and I purchased every one of them new. Today, if I can find it new, it's easily $40, and touted as some novelty item. Forget that. I bet my original releases are worth way more that that anyhow. And the same is true for other music, too. Some of my jazz and classical LPs are limited production releases and you can't even find them as downloads. So yes, I have "ripped" them with all the cracks and pops, used software to clean them up and lost part of the superior sound in the process, but what other options do I have?

I've seriously curtailed my used LP purchases in recent years because the condition of most used LPs I see in store bins has gotten really bad. I used to buy used vinyl all the time because well-maintained LP collections were getting dumped right and left as people repopulated their music collections with CDs. An abused CD can potentially play just as well as a pristine CD, but no way does that apply to vinyl.

With mass production of LPs now a thing of the past, you got a limited number of traded/sold LPs out there, and their collective condition deteriorates with every passing year. They get played, they get abused, etc. The best you can hope for is that they get maintained. But, most people out there either don't know how to take care of an LP or don't do it regardless. It's now a lot harder to find LPs in decent condition in the used bins.

Like any collector's market, the value of a used LP comes down to its condition, its scarcity, and how many people out there want it. A used Iron Maiden LP that originally sold over a million copies is probably not worth much precisely because there are so many copies already out there (unless you're talking about a rare edition or a factory sealed copy). Any new versions produced recently would cost $40 because 1) that's not far off from the $30 list price on most major label LP releases; 2) it might be a limited edition that's now out of print; and 3) it's likely a 180g/200g pressing that's thicker and heavier than the original issue version. A used copy of the original mass-produced LP won't fetch anywhere near $40, unless there's something unique about that particular copy.

Regarding the DJ disks, I bought several crates of LPs from a guy who had switched everything to digital. Sugar Hill Gang, Jonzun Crew, Planet Patrol, Art of Noise, Paul Hardcastle, and a bunch of other titles. Granted, not everyone's cup-o-tea, but they were all in very good condition. Yes you could probably find some of that stuff on iTunes, but that digital file, all pristine and sterile, is worth $.99; and free if you search bit torrent. But the snap-crackle-popped disks in this crate will easily sell for $3-5 on eBay, some for much more. While I'm not planning on selling these, there is a relative value to used LPs that no digital format can match. If you really want to bake your noodle, consider this: can you legally resell a digital file? I guess that $.99 just turned to $0.

The reason why dance titles retain high value is because DJs need them for mixing, and dance singles go out of print very quickly. While a lot of DJs have begun using the Pioneer pro CD players with the jog wheels, anyone who aspires to become a world class DJ has to know their way around a turntable.

[nightflier]

Wooch, as you pointed out the type of music has a lot to do with it. I typically have pretty good luck with classical LPs. I buy them at local flea markets and when I can get up to LA I buy them at a couple of stores I know. I've even found some that are still sealed. Estate sales are another good place, if I remember to go in the middle of the week. Last year, up in Orange, there was an estate sale that included a multi-thousand dollar Avid TT. All the dealers were bidding on that and the gear, but no one on the LPs, I snatched up a decent number for pennies apiece in quantity. Given that the guy had had such a nice TT, I took it for granted that the LPs would be well taken care of, and they were.

As for my Iron Maiden LPs, I actually have some still sealed because I bought the CDs to actually listen to them (funny considering I now believe the LPs will probably sound better). But back then, I was on a mission to collect them for the artwork. I even have several sealed picture disks, singles, and limited edition releases, mostly foreign stuff. I guess when everybody was collecting comic books, I was collecting LPs. Anyhow, if I choose to sell them, I'm pretty sure they'll fetch more than $5 each.

Also, not all new LPs are 180/200g or good quality. One of my friends bought some brand new LP re-releases (REM, Bowie, etc.) and when we checked them out some were thinner and the sound was pretty bad. The most depressing thing about new LPs is that most re-releases are all over the place as far as selection, music style, and quality. Good luck trying to put together a decent catalog of your favorite artist. With classical and jazz, the situation's not as dreary, but the selection is still meager. I think the record companies aren't really sure how to do this anymore and are just taking shots in the dark hoping something makes it worth while for them. I still think that the real action, if not in value, at least in quantity/selection is with used record sales.

[Kevio]

One snag for the vinyl resurgence is that a lot of the knowledge, craft and equipment for mastering and pressing LPs has passed on. This might explain spotty quality for the newer releases.