Do the CD lovers still have ipods as there is no arguing a an ipod nano is for more practical than a CD walkman!
I had a (non-iPod) mp3 player until it broke, just for commuting and the like. It was full of albums ripped from CD, not downloads, but for portability, yeah, iPods make a lot of sense. I'll probably buy another one at some point.
I couldn't have one as my sole music source, though. (They don't make one that'll hold all my albums for starters.)
Albums are an anachronism - they flourished briefly in the mid/end of the 20th century. we're back to singular songs. This is a good thing, though creators of music are still rather wedded to the idea of an album being greater than the sum of its parts.
On Saturday, I went to the world's best records shop (Piccadilly Records, Manchester). I bought 7 albums. I could have bought all of them on vinyl. Instead, I chose CDs - why?
Convenience - I can listen to them in the car, rip them to my ipod, listen on my stereo at home. LPs would have restricted me to listening at home only, and then ensuring Baby North doesn't wreck my LP12.
Now, were all the LPs to have come with an option for a free download of the album, then I could have had the glories of the music at home and on the move.
we're back to singular songs
Not yet, we're not
Do the CD lovers still have ipods as there is no arguing a an ipod nano is for more practical than a CD walkman!
Yeah, I have an iPod Nano. 8Gb, and I could do with one with more storage as it doesn't hold anywhere near all my albums. It was a pressie from the other half. It pretty much stays in my work bag so I can listen to music at work, and I also use it sometimes when walking to the shops etc. I am yet to plug it into my stereo & use it as a main source, although I keep meaning to get some ickle speakers to take camping that I can use it with.
An mp3 player is infinitely more practical than any other portable music device, agreed.
But I always struggle to decide what to listen to with my iPod. I don't know why. I scroll through the albums back and forth and invariably stick it on random. At home with CDs, I look at them & my mind makes a decision very quick about what kind of mood i am in and what album I should listen to. Weird, I've never understood why that is.
Not yet, we're not
Bunno, bought a few albums recently, all rubbish despite most of them coming off the back of a string of good singles. Chase and Status was good, but only because the tracks are all brilliant, there's no theme or cohesiveness to the album.
Even Masterdon admit their latest album was written as a load of singles rather than arround a story/theme.
The other symptom of this is that albums now seem to have over 50% released as singles, and even more recently the idea of releasing singles mid week to coencide with their playing on the radio thus ensureing the single isn't released on the internet first.
I have a strong dislike for the prevailance of poor quality encoding, people just don't seem to care...
nope really don't care. I want to impressed by the artistry not the sound quality.
There are atill 1000s of albums released every week, so we're not back to individual songs.
I want to [be] impressed by the artistry not the sound quality
Absolutely.
I couldn't have one as my sole music source, though. (They don't make one that'll hold all my albums for starters.)
An ipod classic holds 40000 songs apparently, you have a lot of music! ! !
But I always struggle to decide what to listen to with my iPod. I don't know why. I scroll through the albums back and forth and invariably stick it on random. At home with CDs, I look at them & my mind makes a decision very quick about what kind of mood i am in and what album I should listen to. Weird, I've never understood why that is.
That's interesting as on itunes and I imagine the windows alternative you have so many settings you could easily group the genres. Do you think you would use the ipod more if all of the cover art and sleeve info was also on a screen in front of you?
Oh, and the crackle - can't beat that...
Albums are an anachronism - they flourished briefly in the mid/end of the 20th century
nope really don't care. I want to impressed by the artistry not the sound quality.
stumpy01 wrote:
At home with CDs, I look at them & my mind makes a decision very quick about what kind of mood i am in and what album I should listen to
that's what headphones are for LOL
the point is, music isn't made worse (for me) when I hear it through my cheap speakers or on my iphone.
I'm guilty of picking music though, I know I've got albums that I haven't listened to all the tracks. I make playlists to go with the stories I make up in my head. 
Soon all my CDs and DVDs will be ripped to a NAS and played through media streamers or synched with my Android phone so from day to day I won't use CDs or DVDs. However I refuse to pay for compressed music or music which has DRM which restricts what I can play it on or how many copies I can take so I'll still buy CDs until I can buy lossless music files free of DRM such as FLAC files available from 7digital or Linn
the point is, music isn't made worse (for me) when I hear it through my cheap speakers or on my iphone.
I don't buy the "good music is good music" deal, at least as far as sound quality goes. O.K. I've got some CDs of 70s / early 80s punk that sound awful on any system, but are still great, but you can get SO much more out of a quality recording played through a decent system and some nice floorstanders.
I don't have an audiophile mega-expensive system, just some reasonable Pioneer seperates, but my Tannoys are the best thing I've ever bought in my life.
tails - Member
That's interesting as on itunes and I imagine the windows alternative you have so many settings you could easily group the genres. Do you think you would use the ipod more if all of the cover art and sleeve info was also on a screen in front of you?
Yeah, I don't really use iTunes to select music as most of the time I am not listening to it from my computer. My computer is generally just the means to get it onto the ipod.
I use that coverflip thing on the ipod to scroll around all the album covers, but it's still not the same although it does help sometimes to make a decision!
With regards to grouping into genres - I never really think of doing that, I just tend to browse by artist or album A-Z and I don't have one playlist on my iPod (apart from the ones that I think it makes by default, which i have never used.). Perhaps I should get myself a bigger capacity mp3 player & become fully acquainted with what it can do.
MP3 players, just don't excite me though......my old cassette walkmans were much more interesting. I used to spend ages comparing walkmans and deciding which one I would buy next when my current one died. I had one of those teeny tiny ones that was barely bigger than a cassette case & loved it.
An MP3 player to me is just a box with a display on it, which is odd as normally I am quite into the geekery of gadgets.
higher quality digital formats will become more common which will make CD's sound like tapes.
Dunno about that, CDs are already uncompressed wav files and very high quality. Yes you can get higher sample and bit rates but unless you have really good speakers and ears you're not gonna hear a difference.
nope really don't care. I want to impressed by the artistry not the sound quality.They're not mutually exclusive - what's wrong with both decent artistry and a sound that can envelop you?
The last hifi show I went to had rooms chock full of enveloping sound quality: unfortunately most of it from insipid artistry selected by geeky, tech-obsessed blokes.
What I would have given then for a badly copied mix of One In The Jungle...
I'm currently listening to a tape-rip of One In The Jungle! LTJ Bukem, from around 96?
I blame the beards
Currently facing the prospect of having to archive my CDs since there's no room in the lounge. However, I would still rather buy a physical copy and rip it. Everything I have is ripped to wav so I'd like to continue that.
unfortunately most of it from insipid artistry selected by geeky, tech-obsessed blokes
I do wonder about their taste in music, if the sound quality is more important than the track. In my mind they sit there scratching their chins to tedious old shit like "Private Investigations"...
I could be wrong though!
I was about to argue for the CD.
I like CDs as a format. As others have said, you're buying a package rather than just music; artwork, sleeve notes, a tangible 'thing' you can hold, an album as a whole rather than simply a bunch of tracks. For downloads to replace that fully for me, there'd need to be a more cohesive multimedia offering that just "mp3s 1 through 12."
That said; it occurs to me that I used to by CDs fairly regularly, but I can't actually remember the last time I bought one. In the car I listen to DAB radio, at home I surf the music channels on Sky, and I'm so rarely out and about on my own that my 'personal stereo' usage has fallen to nothing. I no longer own a CD player - I'd use the BD player or Xbox as a source if I wanted to play a CD - and I can't honestly say I've missed it.
I think I'd probably just rip all my CDs to disk and box 'em up if I could settle on a future-proof format and method.
As for the vinyl argument,
I had the pleasure of listening to Dark Side of the Moon in full at a festival earlier this year, in a small dark room on a high end (Linn) turntable setup courtesy of Classic Album Sundays.
It's a lovely, warm sound and I kinda get now why people pap on about the 'depth' of vinyl. I just couldn't escape the fact that every time there was a quiet part it sounded like someone was frying chips.
I no longer own a CD player - I'd use the BD player or Xbox as a source if I wanted to play a CD - and I can't honestly say I've missed it.
Can't have been much of a player, then...
Can't have been much of a player, then...
Very presumptuous of you, there.
Can't have been much of a player, then...
I think he meant it can't have been much of a system, to not make you want to listen to it
I bet it didn't even have directional cables. 
Quelle horreur!!
Cougar - Member
As for the vinyl argument,I had the pleasure of listening to Dark Side of the Moon in full at a festival earlier this year, in a small dark room on a high end (Linn) turntable setup courtesy of Classic Album Sundays.
It's a lovely, warm sound and I kinda get now why people pap on about the 'depth' of vinyl. I just couldn't escape the fact that every time there was a quiet part it sounded like someone was frying chips.
From my limited experience with turntables, the better the turntable, the less snap crackle & pop you get.
A mate of my brother's used to be really into his hi-fi. All his kit was second hand and he had about £2.5k worth of bits (price to him, second hand). All he had was an amp, speakers and a turntable.
I went round to listen to it once and was seriously impressed. It sounded absolutely great. And you couldn't hear any 'noise' associated with the vinyl aspect of it.
Some of us like the crackle!
Especially the first record in a good mix...
I think he meant it can't have been much of a system, to not make you want to listen to it
I think he was casting aspersions as to my choice of equipment based on the fact that if I wanted to listen to a CD currently, which (as was the point in the rest of my post) I don't, then I could use the BD player. It assumes that the BD player's sound reproduction would be of poor quality, and it assumes that by accepting this I would obviously have had 'similarly' poor CD players in the past. Both of these assumptions are just that, assumptions.
In summary, bite me and get back under your bridge.
(-:
Some of us like the crackle!Especially the first record in a good mix...
AUDIOPHILES: don't waste money on expensive record players! Get the same effect by simply listening to a CD whilst eating a bowl of Rice Krispies.
Many people here would benefit from reading Perfecting Sound Forever The Story Of Recorded Music, by Greg Milner. An absolutely fascinating book, which goes into a great deal of detail about recording, and studio tricks and such like. In particular the trick of compressing the dynamic range of music to make it sound 'louder' on crappy phone speakers and suchlike. Apparently the typical dynamic range of a contemporary CD is less than before CD's appeared. Vinyl was 'compressed', it had to be, it couldn't handle sharp transients in low or high frequencies because grooves would bleed into one another. I've got albums which used to jump because grooves crossed over on a particular sharp sound. Too much treble caused the lathe cutting head[/i] to 'ring' and overheat, so the studio mastering tape was EQ'd, which is why vinyl sounds 'warm'. Early CD's were mastered from tapes EQ'd for vinyl, hence the remastering of discs from the 80's. Some haven't fared too well from the process, and yes, I'm talking to you, Jimmy Page. You should never, ever haves been allowed to be even in the same room as the mastering suite. FWIW, and I've said it before, at 320Kb it's almost impossible to tell a recording apart from a full-fat CD original. And I have made a comparison between a number of tracks I obtained as FLACK downloads when I ordered a CD, most recently Laura Marling's new album. That was listening through Shure SE215 monitors and UE TripleFi 10 Studios.
You can clearly hear differences in studio mastering on various albums at that bitrate, and some albums which I loved on CD when listened to more intimately through quality 'phones have proved to be rather disappointing, in particular Fairground Attraction's First Of A Million Kisses, which really lacks sparkle, like viewing something in a dusty mirror.
Someone said disparaging things about Dire Straights, but Love Over Gold is a stunning recording, irrespective of one's personal opinion of the style of music, which is irrelevant here. The original vinyl was mastered by Bob Ludwig, at Masterdisc, and early pressings had their stamp in the runout groove. Later ones were mastered at Sterling Sound from second generation studio safety masters, a copy of a copy, and you can clearly hear a difference. If played on a reference system like my Logic DM101/Zeta/Audio Tecnica M/C/Rotel 820 Pre/Crimson Power/B&W system. However, few people are going to stump up £2500 or so just for a turntable, which is why the vinyl/CD debate is flawed, because the average listener with a cheap tower system is instantly going to hear a vast improvement when played a good CD on a reasonable priced CD/Amp/speaker separates system. Which I demo'd time and time again in the early 80's. I stopped buying vinyl when the fifth copy of Peter Gabriel's fourth solo album went back to the shop because surface noise rendered it unlistenable on my Logic. A good pressing is a wonderful thing, but all too easily compromised by neglect, and you never know how the thing has been messed up in the mastering, although that brings us nicely back round to the poor mastering of many contemporary CD's, and where we came in.
Read that book ^^, it'll open your eyes. And ears.
The day I'm forced to buy music by download only, will be the day I stop buying musicdont get this attitude
I dont ever want to stop buying/listening to music. the artist/music is waaaaay more important than what you listen to it on.
I couldn't agree more.
I like CDs because they're convenient, they're reliable & I can play them in the car.
I also like them because they're cheap & easy to create & give out/sell at my gigs. And when I buy them I have the same joy as I used to have with vinyl (I still own a turntable AND a cassette deck, and surprisingly enough, more than a few LPs & cassettes)
When I buy a download, what's the first thing I do? Yep, burn a CD copy so I can play it in the car. And I download as much of the sleeve notes as I can get, and print my own copy. Sometimes, what I want is not available on download, so I have to buy a hard copy. Vinyl would be nice, but again, not always available
the day I stop listening to / buying / playing music is the day they put me in a box
You must log in to post.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
