CDs versus MP3s

Submitted by dust on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:02

Here's an topic for debate that has been rolling around for a few years, and recently for me, its become quite a frequent topic of discussion.

Will CDs die? Will MP3s and the digital formats that follow 'kill' CDs? Several respected research/strategy consultancies around the planet have suggested that CDs will be gone by 2009, to be replaced by digital formats.

How will it affect the concept of 'album' for the consumer and the artists?

Do we 'consume' singles only in the future?

What about vinyl? Is it dead but walking around all zombie at present?

Personally I'm quite dubious. They said the Interweb would kill books. They said graphic designers would all have to become web designers. They said posters would be replaced by micro-sites.

I've been lucky enough to live and work on broadband 10mb connections with unlimited traffic since about 1998, with pretty much free reign to access MP3s etc at will. However my CD collection is just stronger and stronger. I'm more passionate about owning CDs that I like. I'm finding better music. I'm spending more on CDs now.

Yours please..............

Comments

Submitted by Joanna on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:16.

I've found that I don't buy cds much anymore, but I suspect that might have more to do with the fact that I now get my greasy mitts on free ones more often than because I download whole albums - which I don't do, given that I'm on dialup at home and "essential internet use only" at work.

I am full of love for the ability to download random songs that I heard years ago which I'd never buy on cds, and I love being able to build mix cds from those mp3s.

That said, I think the idea of a cd as a whole album is still very very valid. It's why I never use "shuffle" unless I'm listening to every song on my ipod or hard drive. You don't fuck with the artist's art. It's nice having something tangible with pretty artwork and lyrics and whole packageness in your hand as well. A cd just feels nicer than an mp3.

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:16.

intersting topic.. i think alot of the pace things are changing at is influenced by cultural aspects.

like you said dust.. the book is not gonna die any time soon - but it will die.. i love leafing through a weighty novel curled up by the fire - theres something about it that a computer will not be able to offer for a long time... but subsequent generations will be less and less effected by this feeling - books will become more accessible and practical in digital formats.. our generations will die.. and books will rott.. but thats many years away.. i think we will resist these types of changes across all formats for a while yet..

the same goes with cd's or likewise - that warm fuzzy feeling you get from supporting your favourite bands by purchasing there hardwarde will die out... people will care less... people wount bother with cd's in a few generations.. i know that i certainly will continue to buy cd's.. my recent purchase of an ipod has introduced me to a swag of new artists.. of which i have tracked down there albums at my local cd store .... but thats just our folly

Submitted by Big_Stu on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:03.

//the book is not gonna die any time soon - but it will die.. //

I'm not so sure ... provided that this generation passes on the love of reading to future generations. For me the act of holding the book and turning the pages is as much a part of the reading experience as the actual reading. I just can't see myself enjoying the experience as much if I was reading from the display of some electronic device.

I have spent a fair amount of my working life messing around with technology of some sort so do not think that my objection is based on some sort of luddite attitude. Even today where my work revolves around using PCs I still prefer to print off documents in order to read them. Particulalrly if they are longer documents that require some "digesting." I find it much easier (and more satisfying" to flick through a paper document than try and navigate my way through screen after screen of text.

Submitted by cotter on Tue, 2004-08-31 20:55.

I agree with Stu. Has anyone ever tried reading an eBook? They're a pain in the ass to read and too big to print out and read elsewhere.

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 21:05.

yeah - im with noth you guys - i sometimes feel guilty for doing it , but i almost alywas print large documents out.. and important emails.. if i see the piece of paper littering my desk then i get reminded.. ..

but consider this example of change.. my younger cousins (13 or so) would never consider printing anything out.. they are broght up on those interactive story cd's .. they still read books.. but its about 50/50 .. and they are not even really a generation apart from me... my bosses print EVERYTHING.. i only do the important stuff

book will always be with us i hope.. as history.. but i doubt as a method as communication or storytelling - who knows how long it ill take.. but it has to happen..

Submitted by Stefan on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:17.

I don't know what to make of the SuperCD/DVD-Audio thing at the moment.
Since I listen to most of my music on my iPod it would require some sort of 5.1 headphone deal to get any benefit (and I do believe they exist).

I'm not too clued up on mp3 conversion so I'm not even sure if the surround encoding would translate.

At the moment with viruses and harddrive failures who would want to keep something they have paid money for on a computer? I like the idea of being able to see my music collection, to browse it with my finger rather than some white arrow.

Submitted by dust on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:30.

// - 5.1 MP3s

Funnily enough I heard something about this just the other day. I think it may be part of MPEG4 formats (there is a whole myriad of specs up for grabs in that 'loose' format) that are being driven by 3GPP, 3GPP2, and CDMA networks strangely enough (cellphones)

Submitted by Stefan on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:33.

surround phone rings? then you will never find that bloody phone.

Submitted by tig on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:17.

//5.1 headphones

so wheres the sub??? this must just be a conversion back to stereo not 5.1..

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:25.

where be the center source.. or the back souces..

think stefan means more codec rather than playback.. and that would be a sticky one - as dolby have that pretty well stitched up - i hear they have developed 5.1 non cable broadcast tho.. not that we'll ever see it (hear it)

Submitted by Stefan on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:28.

read it here. I'm fo real yo.

[ http://www.bit-tech.net/review/261/ ]

Submitted by Escy on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:33.

AacPlus. Cellphones with high quality streaming radio, or personal jukebox which can be updated anytime or place, the next cellphone 'killer application'?

[ http://www.tuner2.com/ ]

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 20:20.

//I'm fo real yo.

holy super cans batman - sheesh

Submitted by tig on Tue, 2004-08-31 21:57.

// supercans

them freaky.. from what i can make of it its still only 3 channel.. still not 5.1 but cool.. correct me if im wrong...

from your site:

They require three connections to your DVD/home cinema setup/5.1 channel sound card, which are Front, Rear and Centre. I hooked them up to my nForce2 board and loaded up a DVD with a 5.1 soundtrack.

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 22:23.

maybe they are stereo connections?

Submitted by Stefan on Wed, 2004-09-01 06:15.

// from what i can make of it its still only 3 channel.

As samflux pointed out, front is two channels, left and right. rear should also be two channels plus centre makes 5.

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:25.

I encoded my entire CD collection into iTunes and never looked back. I love the idea of having any one of my 7000 songs play at any time. I can't be bothered getting up to change CDs.

That said, I still buy CDs. I love having them sitting in my room and I love artwork. I hope we never see the day when music dies a physical death.

Submitted by manamana on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:43.

i'm in the process of puting all my cd's onto my computer via iTunes. i'm not very clued up on how this kinda thing works so bear with my ignorance, cheers.

when i import cd's into itunes what happens to the music etc - i mean what are the files converted to, do they get shrunk, lose quality etc. do i have to convert them to anything else once they are imported into iTunes?

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:49.

It depends on the import settings you choose. there's a few options - aac, mp3, wav and Apple lossless, I think. AAC files are named as .m4a files, not sure about the rest. AAC files are essentially mp4s. You will lose some quality except for wav files and Apple claim that their lossless format does not impact on quality. Once imported you should be good to go.

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:50.

file - preferences - inporting

make sure your on aac encoder... switch the quality setting to custom - change settings to 320 kbos, 44.1 kHz, stereo

this is the best quality... note - only itunes can play aac codec.. so be careful

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:51.

oh yeah lossless - nah fuck that

Submitted by Stefan on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:51.

lossless codec only works on Macs no?
or at least only Mac iPods or some deal like that. I think.

Submitted by manamana on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:58.

hey thanks dudes that was a big help. i'm a bit slow getting onto these kind of things heh. any idea when the itunes store will be available here?

7000 songs! fuck how many gb is that!?

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:03.

>change settings to 320 kbos

pretty hardcore and i wouldn't recommend it. far too large

>only itunes can play aac codec.

not true, other players are either compatible or have plugins.

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:05.

//pretty hardcore and i wouldn't recommend it. far too large

pa - nah it must be done

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:07.

> 7000 songs! fuck how many gb is that!?

I encoded at 192kbps AAC which should be good enough.

It's 37.8GB or 20.1 days continous music ;) My laptop suffers because of it though.

Submitted by rope on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:09.

yeah 192 is thoroughly useable,
above that the quality difference is negligible

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:11.

//My laptop suffers because of it though.

delete the files off your lappy... - switch off automatic update

Submitted by dust on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:17.

Yeah 192 is more than fine. 160 is fine too.

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:22.

//Yeah 192 is more than fine. 160 is fine too.

hmm - ok - change my prefs - still lots more cds to burn - i lazy - but 6.6 days so far

Submitted by manamana on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:25.

sorry for the topic heist, i should i started another one. i have more i need to know about music formats etc

Submitted by rope on Tue, 2004-08-31 17:58.

whoever invented cds need bullets to head and heart, such a mission to take care of,
harder than both tapes and records, and even if you're really careful you can still get a scatch,
md's have a much safer format;
so if they can bring out albums in some kind of format where the disc remains in protective sheath,
us messy and disorganized people will once again have a music collection with longevity.

it's quite difficult to ruin a book, you can spill coffee on it, but it's still readable,
but cds....i'd still take tapes anyday if i had a tape recorder.

Submitted by Heather on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:10.

Aw, I dunno - I think CDs are way easier to take care of, just I think people are less careful with them because of that; particularly after all the marketing involving peanut butter and golden syrup.

After all, once you've tried to use your 7" version of Dancing Queen as a coffee coaster, it's gonna be fucked. I've mulched a whole lot of tapes just by playing them over and over; probably it's similar to scratching up your cd surface in a shonky stereo. Same happened with tape recorders mulching up tapes, but at least the cds are still readable, and I've heard you can even get them resurfaced - once a tape was chewed up that was it...

Granted I keep my CDs in tip-top shape by ripping them onto my computer, then putting them back in the case and never playing them again...

That said, I want to see more vinyl.

Submitted by rope on Tue, 2004-08-31 23:29.

personally i've found it quite easy to keep tapes up to quality for years,
just got to give them a bit of a stretch, to make sure the reels aren't locked before every play,
good thing is you can replace them in a new cassette if need be,

vinyl scatches can be fun and interesting,
but cd's--especially rock and roll which is often best enjoyed with some liquour,
the two just don't seem to complement each other,
i understand for the more organized members of humanity this is not a problem,
but i'm yet to understand why they are heralded as any kind of solution

Submitted by dust on Tue, 2004-08-31 18:24.

My process seems to be this at present:

Listen to radio online and local, read magazines (less now than 5 years ago) and good music websites (more now), visit labels and bands sites, grab legit mp3s and less legit ones that im interested in. That all goes on the iPod or the ITunes. If I like more than 2-3 songs I tend to think about getting the album. I rate the songs on iPod and iTunes and ditch the low rated. Most of my CDs get digitised and the best rated MP3s stick around on the iPod. I use my CD collection as "source" material so that I dont worry about losing a file etc by mistake (I once lost 60 Gb of MP3s).

My iPod has become my goodness filter - if its on there its either a good track or being 'evaluated'. For me, full albums don't exist on the iPod only in either iTunes or CD format. Dunno why its just my process these days.

Wow how fuckin boring was that?

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 20:07.

> visit labels and bands sites, grab legit mp3s

Have you got the good stuff from Jade Tree? A lot of it is fucking good.

[ http://www.jadetree.com/ ]

Submitted by cotter on Tue, 2004-08-31 21:05.

This one's good too...

[ external link ]

Submitted by blink on Tue, 2004-08-31 21:37.

oh yeah...have spent many an hour at the matador download page.

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 21:40.

can you recommend some of the tracks?

Submitted by Stefan on Wed, 2004-09-01 06:11.

pedro the lion is tops.

Submitted by iluvtheclean on Wed, 2004-09-01 17:08.

//My iPod has become my goodness filter

wish i could do that. i just listen to the first minute of everything and if it seems worthy or partially worthy, i chuck it on the iPod. though there have been some embarrassing moments when some godawful mix of Kelis's 'Trick Me' comes on, especially if i have jacked the iPod into the mixing desk as post gig music.

t'other day, when Bob Scott was playing before us at the Crown (i won't say supporting, as, well, he's in the Clean and therefore a musical demigod of mine) i put it on a nz music playlist ... everyone was beside themselves with patriotism. some magnificient apocalyptic live Snapper track came on, pretty much all conversation stopped, beer server pumped the volume, fantastic stuff.

off-topic ... i'm so salivating over the new iMac. goddamn, the mold i never thought would be broken is broken. i so dig the idea of the computer regressing away out of sight so more of my clutter can take over.

Submitted by dust on Wed, 2004-09-01 17:18.

//wish I could do that

Well here's the go: Buy that new G5 iMac (goddam whole internet has gone crazy over it!), run everything thru iTunes, get the plugin that forces you to rate songs while playing (only ones that are unrated), then upload only the 4's and 5s to the iPod. Set-up a 'smart playlist' in itunes that only plays the 4's and 5s etc and copy it to the iPod (not sure you can create those directly on the iPod)

Works a treat and avoids those embarssing moments. Call me in the morning if monster-playlist pain still persists!

Submitted by iluvtheclean on Wed, 2004-09-01 17:24.

oooh! thank you Dr Dust! now i will never have to suffer those embarrassing "this is coming from your iPod?" moments every again!

but i tell ya, life can get pretty interesting if you just fade William Shatner into Plagal Grind into Trey Parker + Matt Stone's "Timmy! Libbylahlibbylah Timmmmmoh!" into the Gordons.

Submitted by Joanna on Wed, 2004-09-01 17:41.

That is a ridiculously sexy computer.

I wish I could get apple to make me over.

Submitted by schmash on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:23.

I'm still buying cd's as much as i used to, which isn't very often, becuase i can't fuckin aford them.

[b]BRING DOWN THE PRICE OF CD'S.[/b]

If cd's retailed at $20 instead of $25-$30, imagine how far cd sales would shoot up...
Imagine $15 for a new release cd.
I spose it's an often debated topic, but really.. there's no need to sell a cd @ $30.

There should be a two week trial of lower cd prices.
Then we can all spend up large in case of the price rising again, they'll think "shit, huge increase" and leave it. (yeah yeah i know.) Would this increase profits? Hmmm.

Thus, mp3's provide a vice for new music. I buy a cd whenever I can, on top of gear etc.

Mind, if you can afford an iPod... that's like, 30 cd's or so.

Submitted by schmash on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:27.

Forgot to add

I don't think cd's will die. Ffrom my experience, bands like to release cd's. at least mine do. It gives the band something material to sho for their efforts, and designing etc is part of the fun.

Maybe lables could start releasing reduced price mp3 cd's. This could provide for some awesome compilation cd's at that. Full band collections etc for like, $50.

Submitted by tig on Tue, 2004-08-31 19:30.

well quality wise.. mp3 speels out a more top end hiss.. if you think of it like a photo where the whites are the top end of your sound and you trasfer your photo to digi (or wateva) and your whites 'bleach' out more.. this happens to your tops in mp3 conversion.. they start to bleach.. however it seems there will be a strong industry move to 96k 24bit for mixing engineering purposes and it wouldn't surprise me if a disc format was bought out at a higher rate then your average cd 44.1k 16bit maybe by 2009???.. aac better then mp3s however its still degrading.. im sure with time they'll figure out some way for a small digi format that will not be sound altering..... from my point i would rather listen to cds for quality reason.. however with 3thousand songs on my ipod that is kinda countered..

//cd out by 2009

wouldn't surprise me at all..

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 20:04.

One really liberating thing is to purge a collection and dump all the average CDs. I'm in the process of selling a whole heap of stuff I can't take me with me overseas so I've whittled my CD collection down from about 400 albums to less than a 100. Thus, I have what I consider to be a kickarse collection and now I only buy CDs I really like.
The beauty of it is I still have the songs in iTunes where the albums don't quite stack up. Pablo Honey, anyone?

Submitted by Vietnow on Tue, 2004-08-31 20:10.

[ external link ]

Submitted by samflux on Tue, 2004-08-31 20:34.

hmm - interesting - i've signed up .. not sure i want other people knowing what im listening to - but we'll see - cher vietnow