[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Music piracy isn't the problem IMO.. I now buy songs for 10 cents a piece..High quality.. The music industry needs to put the blame on themselves..

Hi

May I ask what's hi quality to you?

10 cents a song, or a buck and quarter for an album in FLAC or 320kbps works for me.......

Does this exist anywhere?

USG

 

[lowmagnet]

"What Happened to Dynamic Range?" explains pretty well what happens after the recording engineer cuts his/her final master and what the 'mastering' engineer does to ruin it on behalf of the record company.

BTW, 'ruin' is not my opinion, since any time you run through a compressor, you risk losing information.

 

[Aman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lowmagnet /img/forum/go_quote.gif BTW, 'ruin' is not my opinion, since any time you run through a compressor, you risk losing information.

I don't know where this thing about compression came from. Not all compression is bad!

Sometimes the dynamic range is simply too broad, with some portions being inaudible and others being extremely loud, to the point of clipping. This is something that happens often in the classical and jazz worlds. When this happens, it is entirely necessary to use a compressor.

In a controlled studio environment, however, compression can be dangerous and is normally not good. It takes the space and air out of the recordings and, since the dynamic range is pretty much controlled already, it just further reduces the life in the breath of the music. But, well, losing information is a part of the recording industry. It happens all the time during the mixing, mastering, and even archiving processes of recording and producing music.

 

[lowmagnet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't know where this thing about compression came from. Not all compression is bad!

True enough. Compression is used all the time, but what they do is the type of compression that radio stations do anyway, which pulls up the quietest section above the floor of FM. Unfortunately, they don't do it in a controlled manner, and the recording often comes within one dB of the maximum for the media. Ouch.

The two sections here on Wikipedia explain the process for broadcast and 'marketing' compression: Compression

 

[Thelonious Monk]

the day that CDs go out of style is the day that i stop caring about ethics and torrent everything i've ever wanted. honestly i only buy CDs to rip them to the computer for computer-as-source and iPod use. if CDs start to become hard to find like vinyl, screw it, i am pirating the **** out of everything. if i get the short end of the stick, they aren't getting my money. criticize me all you want, i am not going to go out of my way and paying premium just to get music that i love. if crappy DRM downloads take over the industry, really, i don't give a damn about RIAA losing money. i have the first link in my signature there for a reason.

 

[james__bean]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherwood /img/forum/go_quote.gif In the top twenty artists you regularly listen to, all 10 are major label. Out of the next ten, 8 are major label. Only Claude Chalhoub and Amon Tobin aren't currently handled by a major. I believe that you dislike major labels, but I don't think you dislike them for solid reasons.

I dislike the big labels because they've prioritized profits over music. Just because I like artists on big labels doesn't mean I approve of what they do. Like I said, I dislike them, but not enough to boycott. In any case, my Last.fm page would probably look a lot different if some of the albums I wanted to listen to didn't cause me physical pain when I listened to them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherwood /img/forum/go_quote.gif You talk about loud-mastering. That practice hasn't been around for nearly ten years, and was uncommon even before then. Radio stations, especially post clear channel, re-master all their tracks for optimal FM play, a necessary and sonically beneficial process, which actually makes loud-mastered albums clip. The resulting tracks sound awful, even to everyday Joe consumers over their FM radio, so no one does it. And, even if they did, that loud-mastering would apply equally to the vinyl and cd releases, so re-buying the albums you don't like on cd would be pointless.

What do you mean no one does it, people are doing it more today than ever. I know some vinyl and cd come from the same digital source, and buying the vinyl is pretty much pointless. From what I've read, Californication on vinyl sounds just as bad as the CD. However, there are vinyl versions out there that sound much better than the CD. My comments are merely an acknowledgment that vinyl versions of albums are rarely, if ever, worse sounding than their digital counter-part. So why bother buying CDs anymore?

 

[Sherwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by james__bean /img/forum/go_quote.gif vinyl versions of albums are rarely, if ever, worse sounding than their digital counter-part. So why bother buying CDs anymore?

That is a good point. I only do it because It's a real pain to rip vinyl to lossless. It can be done, but it's more hassle than I want. I pretty much restrict myself to used classical and jazz vinyl, and keep my new purchases on the cd side for convenience. That's my preference -- yours obviously differ. Sorry, my post came off rather harsh. I just wanted to set the record straight, so to speak.

 

[Stephen_Ri]

As important as SQ is around here, compression does seem to be an issue; but its effects upon CD sales are negligible.

 

[james__bean]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen_Ri /img/forum/go_quote.gif As important as SQ is around here, compression does seem to be an issue; but its effects upon CD sales are negligible.

True. Most people don't care about SQ at all. In terms of why other people buy less, I think its simply because there are more media related items fighting for their dollar. On top of that, more people are buying indie music.

 

[Dimitris]

I think we are experiencing a big change. Back in my teenage years when the transition of majority of music from vinyl to cd occured, prices went up from $10 a record to $15 for a cd. The manufacturing cost of making a record is higher than a cd.

I believe that soon enough we will experience a drop in prices or at least thats what I would to happen.

 

[skeeder]

heres the issue...marketing.

The marketing companies should be slapped.

First off, ALL of us know that the band doesn't get that money. Its the label, so why buy? IF we do buy...why is it still $10-15 a CD? thats how much it was in 1991 when CD's first hit the markets really. Shouldn't this technology be cheaper now? its cheaper to make thats for sure.

Second, digital is cheaper...I could...move out of my comfy chair and go find a CD, or download it for a small fee and toss it on an mp3 player and take it with me everywhere. So digital is cheaper, AND easier...

If they remarketed CD's to $5-7 each for NEW CD's coming out they would be cheaper than the digital form and I would think that the CD sales would boom again.

 

[werdwerdus]

I agree with what some have posted above: I download a lot illegally, but this has only broadened my horizons IMMENSELY, and exponentially increased the number of CDs I buy. If it weren't for the ease of downloading, the music industry would be getting a LOT less of my money. Also, fwiw I belong to a private torrent site that is lossless ONLY, and about 99% are 100% secure rips with offset corrected, cue files, gaps detected, etc.

edit: please DO NOT pm me asking what site this is, it's a private site and I can't get you invited.

You might be asking, "If you downloaded a 100% perfect lossless copy of the CD, why even bother buying the CD?" My answer is that I would like to have the original hard copy and not rely on digital hard copies. And it's just so much more satisfying to be able to hold something in your hand!

But I bet my priorites are quite different than the average non-head-fi listener: I like to have the best quality I can, and right now CD is the easiest and most hassle-free (best quality commercially available as well as unrestricted). Joe Sixpack absoutely could not care less about the "sound quality" of the mp3s he downloads, as well as the iTunes music he "buys".

That's my rant for the year I guess, lol

 

[gjkphd]

In addition to the illegal file sharing sources there are some innovative websites that offer an alternative to buying new CD''s

I've been using a couple of websites lately to get music for my collection. One is MusicGiants which sells for download full CD's and individual tracks that are in WMA format. I don't listen through my computer, I burn CD's from these downloads and they are very high quality.

More recently, through a billboard at my local post office I've been turned on to Lala.com. This is great, it's a system that allows you to trade CD's with others for a small fee (you pay 1.75 for each one you receive, including shipping and they supply the shipping supplies). In about 6 weeks I"ve sent out and received about 60 cd's. Some of their profit is paid to the artists. For folks like me who burn their own CD's of just the songs they like this is terrific. Of course, the burned copy does lose a little fidelity but that's another topic

 

[Aman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeeder /img/forum/go_quote.gif heres the issue...marketing. The marketing companies should be slapped. First off, ALL of us know that the band doesn't get that money. Its the label, so why buy? IF we do buy...why is it still $10-15 a CD? thats how much it was in 1991 when CD's first hit the markets really. Shouldn't this technology be cheaper now? its cheaper to make thats for sure.

It is cheaper. Don't forget to factor in inflation.

An indie label most likely produces a single CD for somewhere around 2 bucks each (raw materials wise). This, factored with other costs (employment, talents, etc.) makes for a pretty solid business plan of selling around $15 a CD.

Quote:

If they remarketed CD's to $5-7 each for NEW CD's coming out they would be cheaper than the digital form and I would think that the CD sales would boom again.

Not that significantly. People don't buy CDs because they've "moved on", not because they think there isn't enough of a value. Those folks have probably moved on to vinyl, believe it or not. The target demographics for the music industry at the moment are people that don't have any money - teenagers and young adults. People with time on their hands and need occupation. They turn to music, but in illegal fashions because they often can't find the ability to spend money on such things. If we moved our resources towards making more music for those who can afford it (catering to the older male crowd is what most people think is proper) THEN CD sales would boom.

The thing is that most major labels make money from marketing off their signed artists, and not even from the CDs anymore. Some actually do this in order to MAKE UP FOR THE LOSSES incurred by producing their CDs. Major labels are more interested in getting their signed artists onto Pepsi commercials and onto MTV with music videos (things that consumers overall do not pay for), because these corporations need the public recognition that major label artists can provide. We need to start putting the money back into the art and into the physical distribution, and less into the "artist". This is how we will begin to see an increase in CD sales.

 

[Sherwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman /img/forum/go_quote.gif People don't buy CDs because they've "moved on", not because they think there isn't enough of a value. Those folks have probably moved on to vinyl, believe it or not. The target demographics for the music industry at the moment are people that don't have any money - teenagers and young adults. People with time on their hands and need occupation. They turn to music, but in illegal fashions because they often can't find the ability to spend money on such things. If we moved our resources towards making more music for those who can afford it (catering to the older male crowd is what most people think is proper) THEN CD sales would boom.

I think you're expressing your personal bias far too much here, Aman. I'm presuming you're an older male (though I don't know for sure) and you obviously prefer vinyl. According to the RIAA, vinyl sales made up 1% of music sales last year ... 1% of a dwindling market. It's true that percentage is increasing, but vinyl is relegated to a fringe niche of the population. No one trying to revive an industry is seriously considering what the fringe niche wants to happen, only what the majority of the population wants to happen. Putting it in perspective, there are more people who get ALL of their music off FM radio than who get SOME of their music off vinyl. Should the industry cater to that crowd and stop selling music altogether?