[kirkmc]

Chris Breen said:

>Oh, and then there's the joy of interrupting the flow of symphonies and operas to flip the record over or pull the second or third disc from the sleeve.

Chris points out something that shows that, first, CDs, and, later, digital music have overcome. In the past, you'd need to flip through a series of LPs to listen to Mahler's third symphony. Then, you'd only need two CDs. And with digital music, you can program the whole symphony (which is about 90 minutes long) without having to make a change. For me, this is a huge bonus. Think of longer works - operas, oratorios, or Morton Feldman's second string quartet (about six hours). You can always listen without breaking the flow. Granted, I don't listen to the Feldman often, and for those of you not interested in classical music, this is not an issue. But for many of us, it's essential.

[sandbag1]

Wow, a Deadhead that appreciates Classical music. :)

[Jon Seff]

sandbag1 said:

Wow, a Deadhead that appreciates Classical music. :)

There are many of us lurking...

[JohnD9]

There's no doubt Cd's are becoming obsolete and will one day be in the same category as VHS tapes. I couldn't tell you when the last time I bought a cd because now I get all my music from itunes. Downloading is the future.
John

[species5618]

Sorry Chris, but you made what sounded to me like an overly simplistic, blanket statement. Also understand that I acknowledged that CDs had some advantages.

[alexandrek]

downloads is good for "disposable" music, the stuff you'll listen during that one summer? for the good stuff (most of my music!) the CD is king: versatile, re-"ripable"?

downloads, cheaper? not really. an album on itunes costs 15.00 swiss francs? a cd goes for 16-20 swiss francs at the big retaillers.

so i guess i'm not ready to make the move yet!

[kirkmc]

sandbag1 said:

Wow, a Deadhead that appreciates Classical music. :)

As Jon pointed out, I'm certainly not the only one. I've always liked a wide variety of musics. These days, I listen to much more classical music than Grateful Dead, but I've been a Deadhead for more than thirty years, and that's not something you give up easily.

[mdawson]

XMattingly wrote what is probably the most eloquent description of the joy of purchasing (physical) media versus simply downloading music. Any 12 year-old can download tracks and not necessarily from legal sources. I have a media collection that can be seen and that is creates more of a reaction than simply having thousands of songs in iTunes. The reaction of one of my former classmates from grad school sums it up when he saw my CDs and records. At the time I had just under 1,100 CDs and just over 1,000 records.

Quote

(Looking at the CDs) That?s impressive.
(Looking at the records) That is really impressive!

The two school age daughters of one of the families I provide tech support for had the same elevated reaction when they first saw the 12,500+ tracks I have in iTunes then saw the nearly 1,200 CDs I now have and they are from the download-only generation. People generally seem to realize the difference between a collection that is genuinely built up over time and one that anyone can easily come by.

Beyond that, when it comes to downloads, there is the question of quality, as I am an audiophile, and controlling how I use the content. I control how my music is ripped into iTunes not Apple or any other distributor and I also control the quality of the cover art that I scan, color correct and import into iTunes and my Music Collector database. If I downloaded music from the iTunes Store, I would have to first find the cover art?not an easy feat?then extract it from an ITC file in order to get a copy into Music Collector. And, without a point of reference (read: an actual CD insert or album cover), I have no way to insure that it is color correct.

For those that simply wish to listen to music and have little concern over quality, downloads are fine. Unfortunately, that is the majority of people and the MP3 revolution is killing a decades-long trend in the audio market to achieve better quality. Convenience over quality has too long been the mantra of the typical consumer and those of us that demand quality for our dollar are ultimately left with few to no options in the long run.

Quote

It's a heightened experience, and the difference between a CD and a download is probably comparable to the difference between eating a meal in a nice restaurant and sitting at home with a Swanson's TV dinner.

I love that line.

[kirkmc]

mdawson said:

XMattingly wrote what is probably the most eloquent description of the joy of purchasing (physical) media versus simply downloading music. Any 12 year-old can download tracks and not necessarily from legal sources. I have a media collection that can be seen and that is creates more of a reaction than simply having thousands of songs in iTunes. The reaction of one of my former classmates from grad school sums it up when he saw my CDs and records. At the time I had just under 1,100 CDs and just over 1,000 records.

> (Looking at the CDs) That?s impressive.
> (Looking at the records) That is really impressive!

Any 12-year old can buy a CD at WalMart. And if you buy CDs just to impress people, well...

[Chris Breen]

species5618 said:

Sorry Chris, but you made what sounded to me like an overly simplistic, blanket statement. Also understand that I acknowledged that CDs had some advantages.

Go back and look at the statement I was replying to.

[thinkingcrowd]

I've read the various arguments here. Predominantly by those favoring the higher quality CD over the downloaded versions. I have hundreds of CDs and hundreds more tapes purchased in my teen years when price was king. Now, I have three problems: tapes are crap and degrade with play, CDs take up a lot of space (a lot of moving over the years reinforces this), and CDs are also not archive quality as they too get scratched/warped with use. Digital backup is (by far) the safest way to maintain my library. And, the selection of an online store is way better than the limited selection of the vast majority of music stores. Having the millions of songs at my fingertips only a purchase away makes me a more prolific music buyer and I'm able to reconnect with songs from yesteryear in a way I can't anywhere else.
I've been buying from the iTMS from the beginning for music, TV shows, and movies. My 160 GB iPod classic is jammed with all of my music, my entire 30+GB photo library and whatever videos/podcasts are to my fancy. Convenience is not AN issue in music, it is THE issue. The vast selection of music, the ability to buy singles vs. albums, and the obvious advantage of instant gratification make online music the obvious winner in my book. And, I think those people buying online aren't wringing their hands about this transition much...

[matt_kizerian]

An important aspect of the shift away from physical media is the ability to have it NOW. Buying a CD involves jumping in your car on or the metro, traveling to the store, finding the disc, buying it, unwrapping it (not trivial :)...all before actually getting to listen to the music. Why do all of that when a simple click lets me buy the music directly from iTunes or Amazon? I get the files in less time than it takes to rip a CD.
The quality of purchased digital music is improving as storage space grows increasingly cheap and abundant. As far as album covers and liner notes go, artwork is readily available for digital music, and many albums come with pdf versions of the liner notes. Additionally, the inclusion of CoverFlow in iTunes was a very shrewd move on Apple's part since it furthers the perception of actually owning "something" when browsing through your music library.
While there will always be those who prefer to have physical media, I bet that CD sales will undergo a dramatic decrease in the next 10 years. The immediacy and convenience of online purchasing will trump other considerations for the majority of consumers.

[mdawson]

Quote

kirkmc wrote:

>

Quote

Any 12-year old can buy a CD at WalMart. And if you buy CDs just to impress people, well...

First if all, if you bothered to read my entire post, it would be evident to you that I do not by CDs to impress people, so spare us the ad hominem to which you are so prone to resort every time you have ever responded to any of my posts.

Secondly, how many tweens do you or have you ever known that own hundreds let alone 1000+ CDs, records or tapes? As I stated earlier, it is very easy for people to have large collections of downloaded music partly due to the fact that it is very easy to acquire music without paying for the content. A significant number of people that would have never purchased a considerable quantity of physical media do have large libraries of downloaded music. Before downloading became ubiquitous those that had large music collections were most often those that have a passion for music. Audiophiles and avid music collectors are not in it to impress others, so please do get over yourself.

I would expect better forum etiquette from one of Macworld?s writers, Kirk.

[Itsallinthehair]

Downloads might have a better future if they were better quality. Yes, mp3s can play on just about any computer, but some of them really don't sound good. I think CD's will be collectibles like records and everything will go digital, which will benefit the Ipod.
I made a timeline of the Ipod versions at http://www.collegeaf...egory/blog/fad/