Buying music.
Old 15th August 2011
  #31
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
Currently the consumer has no choice on format for music . If he wants a physical product he has 29 year old Compact disc audio. He has a couple of extremely obscure niche formats but they are so poorly supported its not really much of a choice. No one is claiming that music went to mp3 against the consumers wishes , the point is to capture the consumer who does not wan't mp3 but a physical product.

Strangely the film and video industry manage to transition from VHS to DVD and then to blue ray and that is not a single business but an industry . The music industry has totally failed to transition from CD.

As for MP3 , please read the other posts of what a real independent industry wide standard distribution and sales platform could be like to see what consumers might wan't who do not want to support apple or the mish mash of half assed half baked other sites and providers we currently have.
The reason that the video and movie business was able to transition to newer formats was that the newer formats actually offered something to the average joe that was an obvious improvement. The audio industry does not have that - DVD audio and Blu-ray are not an obvious improvement to the average person who has no interest in multichannel formats and really can't appreciate the quality improvement - which isn't actually there in many cases as the records are made from 16 bit masters. And the market will not adopt a new format just because somebody is trying to sell it to them. They adopted MP3 because it offers convenience. DVD and Blu-ray are not more convenient that CD - in fact they might be less convenient.

If you want a format that actually sounds better (regardless of what the specs might say), try vinyl. It's not convenient, though.
Old 15th August 2011
  #32
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Virtually all my spending power is going to 'one man band' artists (electronica) or very small bands, and in both categories either self releasing or on tiny independents.

ditto.

though once in a while i grab something outside of that world. the rare good hiphop record (viktor vaughn) or radiohead or whatever not shitty other music comes out that i like. it's hard for me to find things i actually like.. i wish i could find $200 worth of (new) music to buy.
Old 15th August 2011
  #33
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post

Strangely the film and video industry manage to transition from VHS to DVD and then to blue ray and that is not a single business but an industry . The music industry has totally failed to transition from CD.
What's the ratio between DVD and Blueray.
I buy DVD's, and that's mostly what I see for sale.
There's nothing actually wrong with CD's.
Consumers have a legitimate choice between CD, Wav and mp3 for music, and quite a few genres are also offering vinyl.
Old 17th August 2011
  #34
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
The reason that the video and movie business was able to transition to newer formats was that the newer formats actually offered something to the aveage joe that was an obvious improvement. The audio industry does not have that - DVD audio and Blu-ray are not an obvious improvement to the average person who has no interest in multichannel formats and really can't appreciate the quality improvement - which isn't actually there in many cases as the records are made from 16 bit masters. And the market will not adopt a new format just because somebody is trying to sell it to them. They adopted MP3 because it offers convenience. DVD and Blu-ray are not more convenient that CD - in fact they might be less convenient.

If you want a format that actually sounds better (regardless of what the specs might say), try vinyl. It's not convenient, though.
I have sworn off vinyl , I have at least 5000 records with no where to put them!

I have been thinking about to easily improve the product while not focusing on the quality , as your right the consumer doesn't give a bollox about 24/96k or 1bit DSD or 17.4 3D surround sound or whatever else.

Ive come up with these :

1 Length - 72-76mins of audio , a little more if you don't mind some players playing it properly. Clearly this could be much more , and there is probably a good market for that , live concerts , compilations , continuous mixed music (djs). Even for the tradition "album" we can have multiple versions , edits , remixes .

2 Size - 5'1/4' is pretty big , this could be cut drastically and still give us better quality and run time . If we keep a small optical format it would still allow backwards compatibility. You could go back to having the product directly playable in portable devices , no ripping or converting .

3 Durability - This is my personal peeve , the cd fragile and especially prone to scratches , cracks , marks and over longer times corrosion. If we abandon optical discs the solid state alternatives are virtually indestructible in comparison

4 More features , options , content . Multi channel , multi language , multi track , multi media . You get the idea . We had a heap of crash and burn formats in the 90s trying to extend the CD , CDi CD+G etc , but it needs a complete whole of industry focus to achieve with a standard set of features that are universally available and included as standard content in every release. As one example I know I would buy a CD that had a 2nd version of the content that wasn't crushed into a haze of distortion like most music is now mastered like . If I had a button I could press and that would make the loudness war version go away and I could have a proper version of the music I paid for that would be a god send.

Again this will not stop piracy , it will not save the music industry . But its about doing things a bit better and maybe clawing back 5-10% . And don't forget this gets us back to a physical product so we can have great things like artwork , photos , lyrics , liner notes , deluxe box set merchandise - we know its all crap but we love it! . All the things that made buying a new album and experience . One that isn't replicated by clicking the buy button on a screen.

Lots of this could be achieved now buy using an existing advanced format , but it must be a focused whole of industry objective . Its no use releasing a handful of SACD's , a fraction of the CD content , and then saying oh well we tried no one wants it.
Old 17th August 2011
  #35
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Guess what, they tried putting albums on solid state flash drives.. no one bought them!
Old 17th August 2011
  #36
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Convenience isn't with physical.
I can decide I like an artists and buy their album now, and listen to it more or less straight away.
(That's actually how I'm doing my music purchasing these days).
It's gonna take a lot to make me buy an album and wait several days while it arrives in the post, and I don't live anywhere near a major music store where I could buy the physical content.
Old 17th August 2011
  #37
Gear maniac
 

I can remember when I bought a CD !!!??
Gone are the days when every Monday morning I was at the record store buying new singles & albums...when I think of how many hours I spent at Virgin / HMV / Tower Records etc..my god!
Now, 6,000+ CDs and 3,000+ vinyls sitting on shelves..not getting any action!

If I want to check something new, a band or track / album.. I check Spotify (free account) or Youtube and there are loads of cool internet radio stations (if I am in a mood for "something quirky") otherwise, commercial radio is good enough
Old 17th August 2011
  #38
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
Ive come up with these :
Some interesting points. I don't really agree though - here's why:

Quote:
1 Length - 72-76mins of audio , a little more if you don't mind some players playing it properly. Clearly this could be much more , and there is probably a good market for that , live concerts , compilations , continuous mixed music (djs). Even for the tradition "album" we can have multiple versions , edits , remixes .
Albums are too long as it is - It's difficult for an act to come up with an album that can sustains listeners' interest for much more than 30-40 minutes. Much longer than that and acts tend to start including inordinate amounts of filler material that probably shouldn't be on the record. In fact, except for "concept albums" like Tommy or DSOM the old vinyl format with 15-20 minutes a side was superior in terms of sustaining listener interest and maintaining a higher quality of material.

Quote:
2 Size - 5'1/4' is pretty big , this could be cut drastically and still give us better quality and run time . If we keep a small optical format it would still allow backwards compatibility. You could go back to having the product directly playable in portable devices , no ripping or converting .
The smaller the size, the less the perceived value. People like nice album art and interesting, clearly legible liner notes. One of the problems with CD format is the shrinking of album art and liner notes to the point where you need a magnifying glass to read them - or they don't say anything interesting. Smaller packaging also makes it more difficult to include "extras" such as posters or other schwag. Not to mention that smaller objects are easier to lose and more difficult to catalog.

Quote:
3 Durability - This is my personal peeve , the cd fragile and especially prone to scratches , cracks , marks and over longer times corrosion. If we abandon optical discs the solid state alternatives are virtually indestructible in comparison.
Funny, that's what they said about the CD. It's actually pretty easy to take scratches out of a CD unless you REALLY abuse it. Solid State media is susceptible to static discharge and the fine internal conductors are vulnerable to corrosion over time. Plus they're really easy to break if you abuse them physically. (I've had a number of "smart cards" fail on me, for example. And I have a few broken memory sticks as well.) While they may be somewhat more durable than CDs (a point I'm not really convinced of) there is no such thing as a free lunch. Everything breaks if you abuse it and the format has not been around long enough to demonstrate long term durability.

Quote:
4 More features , options , content . Multi channel , multi language , multi track , multi media . You get the idea . We had a heap of crash and burn formats in the 90s trying to extend the CD , CDi CD+G etc , but it needs a complete whole of industry focus to achieve with a standard set of features that are universally available and included as standard content in every release.
The reason none of those formats went anywhere was lack of customer interest. Nobody really wants those features. People generally can't even set up a stereo properly, multichannel, multiformat stuff just confuses the. Artists are generally not gonna want to record multilingual versions of their work. Most artist find it hard enough to write a song in ONE language; they're not gonna want to have to record every song in bunches of languages.

"Industry focus" isn't the problem. People won't buy something they don't want just because the industry wants to sell it to them. That's a common mistake made by both technical visionaries and inexperienced (or overly egotistical) marketing people. The reason that Steve Jobs is such a marketing genius is that he has a knack for identifying what people want to buy and selling it to them - and doing it in a form that fits their desires and ease of use better than the competition.

Quote:
As one example I know I would buy a CD that had a 2nd version of the content that wasn't crushed into a haze of distortion like most music is now mastered like . If I had a button I could press and that would make the loudness war version go away and I could have a proper version of the music I paid for that would be a god send.
Not gonna happen. I'd like to have a big red button to press that would make all the focus groups that make those stupid artistic decisions go away but that's not gonna happen, either. If they actually understood the need for non-smashed music (and the fact that smashed music actually sounds LESS loud when broadcast processing is applied) they simply wouldn't do it in the first place - or would put out alternate versions.

Quote:
Again this will not stop piracy , it will not save the music industry . But its about doing things a bit better and maybe clawing back 5-10% . And don't forget this gets us back to a physical product so we can have great things like artwork , photos , lyrics , liner notes , deluxe box set merchandise - we know its all crap but we love it! . All the things that made buying a new album and experience . One that isn't replicated by clicking the buy button on a screen.
Nope. It's a red herring. Even if everything you want came to pass it wouldn't do a damn bit of good unless piracy was stopped FIRST. And if piracy was stopped first sales would return without all that.

Quote:
Lots of this could be achieved now buy using an existing advanced format , but it must be a focused whole of industry objective . Its no use releasing a handful of SACD's , a fraction of the CD content , and then saying oh well we tried no one wants it.
As I pointed out above, an "industry objective" isn't the problem. The problem is market demand. There has to be a demand for a product or it simply won't sell, no matter how good it might be.

FM radio is a case in point. When it was introduced nobody could see the point of a broadcast format that couldn't reach nearly as far as the dominant AM radio. The fact that the audio quality was vastly superior didn't help at all. Major Armstrong and his investors (including one of my relatives) lost their shirt and the format was a nonstarter beyond a few college stations (because it didn't compete for bandwidth with AM and hence was available for noncommercial use) and classical stations in large urban centers. It stayed that way for approximately 30 years until the combination of the hi-fi craze of the late '60s and "alternative radio" driven by demand from the hippie movement caused enough demand to make a (relatively) short range, high quality, stereo-capable radio format viable.
Old 19th August 2011
  #39
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Convenience isn't with physical.
I can decide I like an artists and buy their album now, and listen to it more or less straight away.
(That's actually how I'm doing my music purchasing these days).
It's gonna take a lot to make me buy an album and wait several days while it arrives in the post, and I don't live anywhere near a major music store where I could buy the physical content.
It doesn't bother you that your used mp3 collection is basically worthless , yet I have vinyl in my collection where 1 12' single is worth 100s of dollars on its own?

seems to me to be a big problem with digital media. If I was going to buy an album and the artist offered me some deluxe collectors edition at a reasonable price that I had a good chance of keeping or even increasing my investment I would go with that option personally
Old 19th August 2011
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Muser's Avatar
 

There's a difference between a principle and what you feel you are forced to do because of monetary constraints.

what we are being forced to do is hand over power to legislation because we can't define the principles for ourselves, as Artists & creators.

if you think that John or rack gear or chrisso is just looking for an excuse to hand over power to legislation or governments, then I have to strongly disagree with you.

guys!! for every argument you win there are a thousand others waiting in the wings to restart the process. It might have some uses I guess, for google searches, but even those are now being personalized. so there is not even now any consistent Google common ground, to support that effort.

it's time to make people agree on the principles.. regardless of whether they download music or not. The key is WHAT people advocate. and WHY.

The point is this.. you are a musician and an Artist. we, nor anyone else want you to starve or sing for your supper. in fact, quite the contrary.

you need to live to produce and WE need you to do that. otherwise culture is lost if the Artists are lost to being reduced to a mere stocking filler for large tech industry.

The medium is not relevant in that case. CD ... CF ... DVD ... SD... irrelevant !!! what is relevant is that you argue for the Artists worth being forcibly reduced to zero against their will. If you download, don't argue for it to justify the position you feel the system has gotten you into. if you are an artist and believe in that, then argue for artists. you don't have to automatically be advocating for government or corporations in order to do that.

if you do, you only relinquish your personal power and you take everyone else with you.

I've looked at what I think are the most important arguments about Art and how it transforms in respect of the technology of mechanical reproduction.
I reduced it to this.
imvho... you either support Artists freedom or you don't.
one of those freedoms is the freedom to live, and keep making Art and the message in the Art.

if you want to be subsumed into advertising and corporate power as the (only) way to survive for an artist, then you had better have a good argument, because I already have mine set.

so if you think that's a good argument, then go for it.. but btw an argument for (necessity) is not sufficient.
there is no argument for necessity. There's only some auxiliary emotional argument for your unthinking capitulation.
and no one is going to buy that one in a heart beat.

tvsky. you said.
i don't remember last time I bought a cd or anything.
I just listen to everything on you tube for free .

I get the feeling you are either making an important point about the power of a medium in general, or you haven't thought about your own impulses much.

I'll take the first as the springboard for the argument.

if it's the first assumption, then it seems to me that anyone seriously advocating that position, is someone who would hand themselves over to a youtube assumption of value. so you would have to make a credible argument about why you think (youtube) have it right, in respect of Artists interests.

EDIT.
prince perfected the simplification.
Quote.
Let the baker make the bread.
Old 19th August 2011
  #41
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
It doesn't bother you that your used mp3 collection is basically worthless , yet I have vinyl in my collection where 1 12' single is worth 100s of dollars on its own?

seems to me to be a big problem with digital media. If I was going to buy an album and the artist offered me some deluxe collectors edition at a reasonable price that I had a good chance of keeping or even increasing my investment I would go with that option personally
What makes you think a CD collection is worthless? I can sell my used CDs (if I wanted to, which I don't) to any one of several used record shops in town. Granted, they're not worth nearly a much as some vinyl - but wait a few years for the market to mature.

An MP3 collection OTOH - now THAT is worthless.
Old 19th August 2011
  #42
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
What makes you think a CD collection is worthless? I can sell my used CDs (if I wanted to, which I don't) to any one of several used record shops in town. Granted, they're not worth nearly a much as some vinyl - but wait a few years for the market to mature.

An MP3 collection OTOH - now THAT is worthless.
CDs are not worthless , but their value will be greatly diminished if the format becomes obsolete , like many other formats before it . Thats why I am not as keen on investing in CD when I feel its getting pretty close to end of life.

I would feel more comfortable investing again in newer format that I knew had another 20+ years a head of it. Kinda stuck between a rock and hard place , cd on its way out , mp3 the only option and your investment collapses to nothing the second you purchase.
Old 19th August 2011
  #43
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
if it's the first assumption, then it seems to me that anyone seriously advocating that position, is someone who would hand themselves over to a youtube assumption of value. so you would have to make a credible argument about why you think (youtube) have it right, in respect of Artists interests.
its not up to me to decide artists interests and their value to YT , its up to the artist and the site . If they are both doing what they are doing then obviously they think its a correct relationship.

Ive just noticed that currently YT is serving my need for casual listening to the point I have not felt compelled to use anything else .

But getting back to the format thing as I refuse to pay for an MP3 that is worth nothing after the purchase my options are more limited than others.

I was quite astounded when people said if you listen to a song on YT more than a couple of times you should buy it . If the state of the industry depends on charity and good will there's probably not much hope yet.
Old 19th August 2011
  #44
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
CDs are not worthless , but their value will be greatly diminished if the format becomes obsolete , like many other formats before it . Thats why I am not as keen on investing in CD when I feel its getting pretty close to end of life.

I would feel more comfortable investing again in newer format that I knew had another 20+ years a head of it. Kinda stuck between a rock and hard place , cd on its way out , mp3 the only option and your investment collapses to nothing the second you purchase.
You mean like those old, obsolete vinyl records?

Don't you see that your arguments are self-contradictory?

You don't want to invest in an current but possibly soon to be "obsolete" format but your really "obsolete" recordings are worth much more than recordings in the current format because the current format might become "obsolete"...........

Cake. Mouth or cake box. Can't eat it AND keep it. Make up your mind.

(Or simply concede that your arguments don't make sense because they're not internally consistent.)
Old 19th August 2011
  #45
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
its not up to me to decide artists interests and their value to YT , its up to the artist and the site . If they are both doing what they are doing then obviously they think its a correct relationship.
No, not really. It's just that artists are forced to take the slightly less distasteful of two undesirable choices - either accept the pittance that YT is offering and make SOMETHING, even if it's pitifully small, or get locked into a perpetual game of whac-a-mole filing takedown notices, which actually cost the artists money.

It's like a choice between getting raped and being shot in the head.
Old 19th August 2011
  #46
Lives for gear
 
Muser's Avatar
 

I would hazzard it's not such a great marriage by any stretch. I'm not sure what you mean by (doing what they are doing).

it doesn't follow that what someone is doing is automatically correct or a good idea, just because someone is doing it.
because to argue that would be to assume that anything anyone does is automatically correct.

Quote:
its not up to me to decide artists interests and their value to YT , its up to the artist and the site . If they are both doing what they are doing then obviously they think its a correct relationship.
Old 19th August 2011
  #47
Lives for gear
 
Muser's Avatar
 

Quote:
But getting back to the format thing as I refuse to pay for an MP3 that is worth nothing after the purchase my options are more limited than others.
it's true that this is getting to the point it has no real subsequent value. but sirely the Q should be WHY! it has no value.

because no one will re purchase it from you.

this is why the tech industry will no doubt be looking to move to the cloud based model..

I would argue that this model will soon transform into the (pay per experience model) Then you will be charged by the tech industry on a, pay per view experience model.

will the Artists still get any money from that ? they will be lucky.

and why ?

because all these arguments are ill founded in the first instance, is my argument.
Old 19th August 2011
  #48
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
You mean like those old, obsolete vinyl records?

Don't you see that your arguments are self-contradictory?

You don't want to invest in an current but possibly soon to be "obsolete" format but your really "obsolete" recordings are worth much more than recordings in the current format because the current format might become "obsolete"...........

Cake. Mouth or cake box. Can't eat it AND keep it. Make up your mind.

(Or simply concede that your arguments don't make sense because they're not internally consistent.)
not contradictory

vinyl as an analog medium is infinite and timeless , it will always have value , it will always be current . Its market size will shrink and expand as per the times but it will never be obsolete because nothing will ever come out to supersede it.

You should know this better than anyone being a R2R multi track owner . Even now people choose to record to tape , bounce digital recordings to tape and back .

No one ever says lets bounce some tracks down to adat for some vibe! We choose digital recording because of what it enables us to do and how much easier it lets us do it . As soon as the next tech comes along to let us do more quicker and easier , the old tech is obsolete.

Having said that I don't have lots of vinyl because I like to ponder the timeless infinities of analog sound , the music I bought only came on vinyl at the time so I have lots of it . But its long life and sustained value have taught me a lot about music formats , product cycles and their long term value . Enough to stay the hell away from investing large sums in mp3!
Old 19th August 2011
  #49
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
No, not really. It's just that artists are forced to take the slightly less distasteful of two undesirable choices - either accept the pittance that YT is offering and make SOMETHING, even if it's pitifully small, or get locked into a perpetual game of whac-a-mole filing takedown notices, which actually cost the artists money.

It's like a choice between getting raped and being shot in the head.
you know I am in total agreement on this , I have posted this exact thing so many times in this forum you tried to get YT discussions stopped

BUT

I am not going to buy CDs just to make people feel better about it!
Old 19th August 2011
  #50
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
it's true that this is getting to the point it has no real subsequent value. but sirely the Q should be WHY! it has no value.
Personally I think for 2 reasons

1. The content itself is given away buy the industry for free , usually in lesser quality but often in good enough quality. This devalues the content itself . Piracy obviously devalues that much further as quality is the same as the retail product . But giving away stuff legitimately devalues the content for the market that does not steal music.

2. It has no physical object and humans are suckers for physical tangible objects , apples , gold , blocks of dirt whatever. We instinctively assign value to physical objects.

Probably the best model we are seeing at the moment is cheap digital version , some are even doing it for free , and then up sell to a deluxe bells and whistles limited physical product
Old 19th August 2011
  #51
Lives for gear
 
Muser's Avatar
 

I guess there's some way that we value physical media. it's odd that it's likely that soon CD will be as lamented as a medium as vinyl.

but there's always one re-occurring theme. (value)

some people argued, why should I value vinyl ? because I can copy it to tape.
then they argue the same about CD being copyable to MP3.

then the same about the MP3 being less fidelity. so the value perception reduces. so why should I pay etc.

It's a truly interesting phenomena, but there are two consistent components.

the medium and the perceived value.

given that the medium changes, the only consistent case that seems to remain is (value).

personally, I think value is in the Artists creations. so regardless of whether or not people think corporations or industries have any meaningful claim on value, the last in the line will always be the creative entity at core.
e.g. the Artists themselves.

so I support the Artists, irrespective of any other entity, is I guess what I will always end up at.

Best

Muser

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
Personally I think for 2 reasons

1. The content itself is given away buy the industry for free , usually in lesser quality but often in good enough quality. This devalues the content itself . Piracy obviously devalues that much further as quality is the same as the retail product . But giving away stuff legitimately devalues the content for the market that does not steal music.

2. It has no physical object and humans are suckers for physical tangible objects , apples , gold , blocks of dirt whatever. We instinctively assign value to physical objects.

Probably the best model we are seeing at the moment is cheap digital version , some are even doing it for free , and then up sell to a deluxe bells and whistles limited physical product
Old 19th August 2011
  #52
Lives for gear
 
Muser's Avatar
 

btw, I agree with you tvsky.. it's partly about how people ascribe value to tangible objects.

my point I guess is that, this is not where value needs to be now placed, in a world of intangible code. The only correct possible places left are either with the (community) or (the Artists creativity).

in a world that is steeped in personal freedom and tangibility, I'd argue that technically and strategically, it's best to argue on the side of the Artists. come what may.

though, I do actually think that the Artist is going to be the foundation of value for some time to come, in any case.

but there is one class of Artist that already thinks and believes it has the ultimate right.
Those Artists are called Advertisers.

They need to be educated imho.
Old 19th August 2011
  #53
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
not contradictory

vinyl as an analog medium is infinite and timeless , it will always have value , it will always be current . Its market size will shrink and expand as per the times but it will never be obsolete because nothing will ever come out to supersede it.
"Infinite and timeless"? Not really. Not even close. Vinyl wears out much more rapidly than CD and is far more fragile.

"Always be current"? You have an odd definition of current is all I can say.

Quote:
You should know this better than anyone being a R2R multi track owner . Even now people choose to record to tape , bounce digital recordings to tape and back .

No one ever says lets bounce some tracks down to adat for some vibe! We choose digital recording because of what it enables us to do and how much easier it lets us do it . As soon as the next tech comes along to let us do more quicker and easier , the old tech is obsolete.

Having said that I don't have lots of vinyl because I like to ponder the timeless infinities of analog sound , the music I bought only came on vinyl at the time so I have lots of it . But its long life and sustained value have taught me a lot about music formats , product cycles and their long term value .
I don't bounce digital recordings to tape for vibe. My tape machine isn't a distortion box. I'm far more likely to mix analog tape down to digital than take a digital recording to tape which is a waste of tape IMO. Analog tape is an original capture format; digital is a delivery format. If you do your initial capture to digital the damage is already done - you can't "un-dij" something. And music seems to survive being transferred to digital after initial tape capture that if initially recorded to digital. Dunno why (or much care.)

Quote:
Enough to stay the hell away from investing large sums in mp3!
I don't purchase MP3s at all and try to avoid the format in general when possible. I find CD to be a perfectly viable compromise. I'd consider purchasing WAVs if the music wasn't available in hard copy and it was something I absolutely had to have.
Old 19th August 2011
  #54
What I've done recently is that I've spent money duplicating my Cd, and then sold a couple of them already
Old 19th August 2011
  #55
Lives for gear
 
Muser's Avatar
 

John I think it's true that CD must be able to take more replays, (if kept) in good condition than Vinyl could take. but in another way I bet it's partly what will make vinyl more precious than CD. or at least, a factor.

so I guess vinyl is thought to have a shorter half life. so we tend to ascribe more value in terms of the amount of possible play experiences.

I mean, this might sound like navel gazing I guess, but musicians and Artists really need to get in touch with what value is thought as being, and what it's based on.

because, if we don't Artists will be driven over.

Chris has been able to unlock some latent tangible value in his CD's for example. That's because someone else feels there's some kind of value in them.

the problem Artists have these days, is everything is telling them that there is no value in what they do.

I utterly disagree with that position. Artists are critical to retaining value in non tangible phenomena.. I mean, isn't that what the oral tradition of music always was anyhow ?
Old 19th August 2011
  #56
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

In that vein then..
.. here's my "new" format.

It plays 2 times then disintegrates..!

People should pay through the teeth then right?
The hard core environmentalist should love it, and it's a very finite product. i think i'll charge $50 (to cover R&D) so.. approx $25 a play. That's some valuable songs!

What?
No one is lining up to buy them? how could that be? oh, they're at Pirate Bay downloading the MP3s .....
Old 19th August 2011
  #57
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

CD's don't need to hold their value, or become more valuable.
I've never bought a vinyl LP or CD in my life because it might be worth something one day. You buy it for the music.
At the cost of a CD/mp3, compared to a coffee. or a restaurant meal, or a movie theatre ticket, once you've listened to the music for a year, you've more than recouped your investment.
Old 20th August 2011
  #58
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
John I think it's true that CD must be able to take more replays, (if kept) in good condition than Vinyl could take. but in another way I bet it's partly what will make vinyl more precious than CD. or at least, a factor.

so I guess vinyl is thought to have a shorter half life. so we tend to ascribe more value in terms of the amount of possible play experiences.

I mean, this might sound like navel gazing I guess, but musicians and Artists really need to get in touch with what value is thought as being, and what it's based on.

because, if we don't Artists will be driven over.

Chris has been able to unlock some latent tangible value in his CD's for example. That's because someone else feels there's some kind of value in them.

the problem Artists have these days, is everything is telling them that there is no value in what they do.

I utterly disagree with that position. Artists are critical to retaining value in non tangible phenomena.. I mean, isn't that what the oral tradition of music always was anyhow ?
Nah.

2 factors:

1.) Vinyl is an older (more "obsolete") format, and therefore more collectible. (People tend to collect older things.....)

2.) Vinyl generally has more aesthetically pleasing packaging and is therefore more collectible. (People tend to collect more beautiful things.....)
Old 20th August 2011
  #59
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Spent another 200 bucks today, BTW.
Old 20th August 2011
  #60
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Spent another 200 bucks today, BTW.
There's an award for that.
Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.