-
Errrr,...
Could it just be the lingering recession? A recent college grad with $60,000 plus in outstanding college loans and crappy job prospects is NOT really concerned with the nuances, he/she is just looking for the cheapest, easiest way to get some music for his/her soul. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Simple as that.
Worf
-
Years ago, when I went to a friend’s house, they would be listening to LP’s or 8-tracks. Some would listen to FM, but if they wanted quality and the ability to select what was on, it was LP’s. Now it seems that most people tune into the music channels available from their cable or satellite companies. Or they listen to satellite radio. They get a much better selection than FM and better quality. They can turn it on and listen all day without hearing the same songs 15 times. It’s easy. That’s where the masses seem to live. It may not be audiophile quality, but it makes the masses happy.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
....
WE LOST TWO high res formats because the main market (audiophiles) were in love
with record players and wouldn't embrace them. And an idiotic format war didn't help, either.
BLU is an excellent format for music, but then again its an excellent format for
anything. But peeps are in love with portable, and unless you can figure out some
way to play a Blu disc on either an MP3 player or IPHONE it will be a niche product for
audiophiles living in the 21'st century, a small market indeed.:1:
It's rare but it happens: I agree with Pix on this one -- totally.
Hi-rez music (on physical media with copy-protection) will always be a niche product. So will the LOW-REZ LP. But vinyl has won the niche war and made fools of audiophiles, many of whom once said and still say they want "high fidelity". It's a crazy, crazy world.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
There's no way you can produce custom jewel cases and CD artwork for a nickel.
rw
Exactly! So as the consumers have been saying from the start, downloads should be cheaper than CDs... and the minimum difference in price should be the physical cost of the album: custom jewel cases, artwork, packaging, blank CD, costs to burn the CD, printing album and artist name on the disc, distribution/shipping costs to get CDs all over the country/world, etc...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Exactly! So as the consumers have been saying from the start, downloads should be cheaper than CDs... and the minimum difference in price should be the physical cost of the album: custom jewel cases, artwork, packaging, blank CD, costs to burn the CD, printing album and artist name on the disc, distribution/shipping costs to get CDs all over the country/world, etc...
We might as well let the subject rest. This is so obvious that only a delusional person would believe otherwise.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Worf101
Could it just be the lingering recession? A recent college grad with $60,000 plus in outstanding college loans and crappy job prospects is NOT really concerned with the nuances, he/she is just looking for the cheapest, easiest way to get some music for his/her soul. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Simple as that.
Worf
This is call "bit torrent", I fear.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
This is call "bit torrent", I fear.
Or streaming programs such as Spotify (which i use)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Worf101
Could it just be the lingering recession?
That's undoubtedly one of many factors, but keep in mind there are still a number of products in the economy that haven't suffered the sales decline of music. Craft beer sales are rising steadily. Smartphones and Ipads are growing dramatically. So it seems buyers still retain enthusiasm for products that interest them.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
We might as well let the subject rest. This is so obvious that only a delusional person would believe otherwise.
Agreed...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Doesn't seem to me that those portable players are spurring more sales does it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Your lack of a compelling reason speaks the answer.
Ok. that was funny. And, I couldn't agree more with
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
I still buy CDs because I don't want lossy crap - which is the only stumbling block to downloading for me.
Back to Smokey's post #1. Digital album sales are up. To me this indicates that digital downloads are in fact healthy and gaining momentum. You buy singles when you don't really give a sh*t and just want a sample. Buying an album is more of a commitment to the medium. Plus it brings more attention to the artistry and that should push up demand for quality. Signals to me that people are looking beyond the one hit wonder du jour, and looking for downloads.
Blu ray is great and all, but it's no more convenient than vinyl. I'm not so in love with gear that I own any vinyl. I don't want to have to power up everything and sit in the sweet spot, (not that I could with family and kid). Thats why I never listen to any of my SACD. I want good music, I want easy music, I want flexible music.
However, if the industry had any sense they'd quickly consolidate everything to blu ray (or vinyl, heh heh) and DRM'd digital streams or files. Why they haven't is, to me, one of life's greatest mysteries.
Of course, I'm looking forward to the day when I can buy everything directly from the artists, under their terms (DRM or no).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
Or streaming programs such as Spotify (which i use)
Wait... a young person using a streaming site for music... If only someone had mentioned that in the previous page... oh wait, I did say that...
and to tie this in with what E-Stat said earlier:
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
I still buy CDs because I don't want lossy crap - which is the only stumbling block to downloading for me.
The fact that downloads are lossy is also a major reason to go with streaming (and why I now prefer to stream than buy an album)... If downloads were all high res or at least lossless, then I'd have an incentive to buy, but since they aren't then streaming is just fine...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
Or streaming programs such as Spotify (which i use)
What? We're talking about streaming again? Well, maybe it can work for a lot of people.
But I've got a few problems with it:
- I hate paying a monthly fee for any service; I'm having to pay so many now that I've got a real resistance to another. I prefer to pay and own a piece of music and be able to use in on any device, (no DRM).
- What resolution these downloads? I don't even know: if Spotify mentions that, it's burried in the fine print; (like, I guess most users don't care).
- I listen to classical music 95%. Does Spotify do that? Which streamers do that? Let me know, and I'll check them out.
- As a classical listener and I'm not interested in "tracks". I listen to entire compositions that are typcally multi-track.
Downloads are better for me. However (1) the classical choice is relatively limited and (2) most of the selection is 320kbps. I object to paying $10+ per album for less that CD resolution. Between these factors, I don't download a lot.
Internet radio as a pretty good choice of classical stations, but you can listen to what you want when you want it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
...:
The fact that downloads are lossy is also a major reason to go with streaming (and why I now prefer to stream than buy an album)... If downloads were all high res or at least lossless, then I'd have an incentive to buy, but since they aren't then streaming is just fine...
True, like I said, I hate paying $10+ per album for 320kpbs.
I think the main reason CD rez isn't availble for download is the industry's pathological fear of illegal copying.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
True, like I said, I hate paying $10+ per album for 320kpbs.
I think the main reason CD rez isn't availble for download is the industry's pathological fear of illegal copying.
Isn't the whole reason behind NON CD resolution so the file is small enough to fit many crappy songs on a dinky little crappy Player so people can stick crappy little infection causing earbuds in their ears and walk around oblivious to their surroundings?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
Blu ray is great and all, but it's no more convenient than vinyl. I'm not so in love with gear that I own any vinyl.
While I'm not "so in love with gear", the earliest part of my music collection going back forty years is vinyl. So, I have two turntables to enjoy it. You're correct in that any single-disc format is not as convenient as server based music. The genie is already out of the bottle and there is no turning back. Gen Y doesn't know anything differently.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
Isn't the whole reason behind NON CD resolution so the file is small enough to fit many crappy songs on a dinky little crappy Player so people can stick crappy little infection causing earbuds in their ears and walk around oblivious to their surroundings?
That's what THEY tell us, eh? I'm not sure I believe them however; (let's grasp that industries, e.g.big oil, big banks, lie to consumers, Congressional committes, etc.).
I doubt that it's the reason that classical music sources like Naxos or ArkivMusic only provide the lossy format. I remember that ArkivMusic surveyed customers 2-3 years ago on whether people wanted to download: I, for one, was quite categorical that I would only be interested in lossless.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
Isn't the whole reason behind NON CD resolution so the file is small enough to fit many crappy songs on a dinky little crappy Player so people can stick crappy little infection causing earbuds in their ears and walk around oblivious to their surroundings?
NO.
At least it didn't start out that way. Hackers striped the MP3 format off of mpeg1, and used it to store music. But the main reason was to create a file size small enough to be downloaded
on a snaillike , usually phone, modem.
The first mp3 I downloaded was five MB. Took twenty minutes.
THE mp3 player came next.:1:
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
True, like I said, I hate paying $10+ per album for 320kpbs.
I think the main reason CD rez isn't availble for download is the industry's pathological fear of illegal copying.
IT IS AVAILABLE.
Go to hdnet.com(if they are still around).
And then theres newsgroups. THE stuff is older, but there are flac and monkey audio newsgroups.:1:
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
It's rare but it happens: I agree with Pix on this one -- totally.
Hi-rez music (on physical media with copy-protection) will always be a niche product. So will the LOW-REZ LP. But vinyl has won the niche war and made fools of audiophiles, many of whom once said and still say they want "high fidelity". It's a crazy, crazy world.
Ahhh,,,, agreeing with me, the beginning of all knowledge.
A lot of so called "audiophiles" say they like music reproduced as accurately as possible,
but the truth is that they cling to low rez formats like records because it reminds
them of how they started.
I used to enjoy that time, records were the end all be all.
ITS SAD, really, the almost frantic way fanatics like Micheal Fremmer hang onto
vinyl(100,000 system).
CAN'T ADMIT the worlds, changed.:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
IT IS AVAILABLE.
Go to hdnet.com(if they are still around).
The difference is that you can get virtually anything in low rez MP3 whereas the catalog of high resolution downloads is highly specialized and decidedly limited to say the least.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
The difference is that you can get virtually anything in low rez MP3 whereas the catalog of high resolution downloads is highly specialized and decidedly limited to say the least.
rw
ThaT is true. BUT I like Jazz, and there is quite a bit of lossless jazz on newsgroups.:1:
-
Personally I just like a physical format to use even though I have two laptops and a dac with usb input to use to play my music and set up my system with a server. I will not say that I won't do it at all but for now I download flac and burn it to disk at a slow enough speed to not change the quality. I also have software to burn dvd audio disks which I know are not popular to buy at music stores but you can find high def flac downloads in 24 96 format and with programs like dvd audio solo you can burn your high res flac to dvd audio and get the high res format and through my oppo player and ps audio dac it sounds as good as any format I have heard and even though dvd audio is dead in the music stores and in direct downloads it works well to burn to for these formats.
As far as streaming goes I think that it works well for casual listening like a radio station but for audiophiles with good systems when it comes to anything past that there just is not enough people out there requesting it. When the mass public out there do not have systems capable of hearing the difference between mp3 and flac and also the fact that most younger people go with what they know(or have heard) all they know is mp3 type formats that to them sound fine because they have not been educated in the abilities that today's high def formats can do with the right equipment. But unfortunately the companies selling streaming content or download content want to charge a premium for higher def versions of the songs they store. Its something that will be interesting to see what happens in the audio world. I don't think the high end audio market will die but I do see it changing and how it will change is yet to be seen.
-
Personally I just like a physical format to use even though I have two laptops and a dac with usb input to use to play my music and set up my system with a server. I will not say that I won't do it at all but for now I download flac and burn it to disk at a slow enough speed to not change the quality. I also have software to burn dvd audio disks which I know are not popular to buy at music stores but you can find high def flac downloads in 24 96 format and with programs like dvd audio solo you can burn your high res flac to dvd audio and get the high res format and through my oppo player and ps audio dac it sounds as good as any format I have heard and even though dvd audio is dead in the music stores and in direct downloads it works well to burn to for these formats.
As far as streaming goes I think that it works well for casual listening like a radio station but for audiophiles with good systems when it comes to anything past that there just is not enough people out there requesting it. When the mass public out there do not have systems capable of hearing the difference between mp3 and flac and also the fact that most younger people go with what they know(or have heard) all they know is mp3 type formats that to them sound fine because they have not been educated in the abilities that today's high def formats can do with the right equipment. But unfortunately the companies selling streaming content or download content want to charge a premium for higher def versions of the songs they store. Its something that will be interesting to see what happens in the audio world. I don't think the high end audio market will die but I do see it changing and how it will change is yet to be seen.
|