still-one
Active member
The rage for who? Audiophiles? That still makes them irrelevant in the big picture.
No CD's??
- Thread starter Mr Peabody
- Start date
The rage for who? Audiophiles? That still makes them irrelevant in the big picture.
Dr Tone
Banned
Don't forget hipsters.
still-one
Active member
jdandy
New member
That chart represents an approximate total of 8.832 billion CD's. Add the preceding 10 years (1989 - 1999) and that number is likely to be double. That is a tremendous number of individual CD's in the hands of consumers. Even if the retail CD market dried up completely, which of course it will not, those 17.6 billion pre-owned CD's will still be here. There will be buyers and sellers of these CD's for many decades to come. CD's aren't going away.
still-one
Active member
I am not saying CD's will disappear completely. I am saying they are becoming irrelevant to the general population as a source for content. That goes for DVD/Blu-Rays too. Streaming is the source of choice for the masses. Look at the following chart. The gap widens even more into 2016 and 2017.
Already many new cars are coming without CD players or are again an option.
Sure there is a second hand market for CD's but it is dismal if you are the one trying to sell them. My last couple of trips to unload some of my discs were fruitless. Both shops were very picky about what they would take so many just ended up in the trash. Their excuse was CD's take up too much space, sit there too long and bring in little cash.
Already many new cars are coming without CD players or are again an option.
Sure there is a second hand market for CD's but it is dismal if you are the one trying to sell them. My last couple of trips to unload some of my discs were fruitless. Both shops were very picky about what they would take so many just ended up in the trash. Their excuse was CD's take up too much space, sit there too long and bring in little cash.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
I prefer buying my music, Downloads, CDs, and SACDs. I put everythign on my Music Server and play it from there. I do not hear a difference from the CD and the ripped CD, and, I feel that my ripped SACDs sound better on my server than playing on my Oppo (DAC is better I suppose). I do not have any interest in streaming at this point. I do purchased disks but instantly rip them.
There are a few stores around selling vinyl. Here on the Central Coast of California there is no where to actually look at and buy equipment but there are three stores that sell new and used Vinyl and CDs (and you find a SACD once in a blue moon also). So I don't see it going anywhere soon.
There are a few stores around selling vinyl. Here on the Central Coast of California there is no where to actually look at and buy equipment but there are three stores that sell new and used Vinyl and CDs (and you find a SACD once in a blue moon also). So I don't see it going anywhere soon.
still-one
Active member
Similar but not really the same. The purchasing and downloading of files to "computers" has passed its highpoint too. Just ask Apple and Amazon. Those numbers are way down. According to an estimate revealed by music industry analyst Mark Mulligan at Canadian Music Week in Toronto, iTunes music downloads will still be worth an estimated $600 million in 2019, though that is down from peak revenues of $3.9 billion in 2012.
With streaming you are renting music. You only have access to streamed music as long as you pay your monthly bill or are willing to listen to commercials. When you play music from Tidal or Spotify it is streamed from their servers not yours.
I can't say I'm really surprised, most people find CDs a joke these days. The only new CDs I've bought recently have been either from small independent labels that wouldn't be carried at Best Buy in any case or 50s/60s compilation CDs of rare tracks, I think most of which are made in Europe. The majority of people just like to download their music onto their phone and that's that.
iTunes and Amazon only sell low resolution files.
Spotify allows you to listen to those same tracks for free (with ads) or pay for premium (no ads; better SQ). So it is no wonder that sales via iTunes or Amazon are down.
Tidal premium ($20/month) allows immediate access to millions of CD quality tracks. So why bother buying a CD when you can access that same music with same SQ anywhere you are.
Now high resolution downloads (higher than 16/24 resolution including DSD) are a different story. Those I am willing to purchase but only if I am certain of its provenance. (There are way too many so called "hi-rez" albums that offer no better sound than a CD).
Spotify allows you to listen to those same tracks for free (with ads) or pay for premium (no ads; better SQ). So it is no wonder that sales via iTunes or Amazon are down.
Tidal premium ($20/month) allows immediate access to millions of CD quality tracks. So why bother buying a CD when you can access that same music with same SQ anywhere you are.
Now high resolution downloads (higher than 16/24 resolution including DSD) are a different story. Those I am willing to purchase but only if I am certain of its provenance. (There are way too many so called "hi-rez" albums that offer no better sound than a CD).
Mr Peabody
Well-known member
- Thread Author
- #31
Thanks for everyone's comments.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
I don't think I agree. In streaming I am referring to online streaming sources, Tidal, Deezer, Spotify, etc. If I am playing from a Music Server connected straight to my DAC I do not classify that as streaming because bandwidth, Internet Connections, etc., are not involved.
Ah! I can see your point.
You are correct in that Tidal, Spotify, etc are “online” streaming.
However if you have music/video stored in a NAS or a tablet and use Wi-Fi or Bluetooth or Airplay to send it to your player, you are streaming too. It is not “online” streaming but streaming nonetheless. That’s what I was referring to.
I would rather own a CD than stream. Why should I pay a monthly fee that will go up in price each year or so. At least I will have a physical copy that will last for a long time. Although I do understand the great appeal of streaming and having limitless music.
If you already have a large Collection and only buy CDs sporadically, I can see your point.
But if your CD collection is small or are just starting, paying for streaming and having immediate access to millions of tracks is the way most cost efficient way to go.
Keeping a physical copy of a CD for my heirs to sell at a estate sale for $1 a pop makes no sense to me.
KeithR
Active member
Also, there are many albums that i'd not pay $15 for due to recording quality that I can stream at a much lower cost but still enjoy. See The War on Drugs albums...
Some people focus more on the quality/gear than the music, but I think a mix is necessary.
The demise of the “on street” CD purveyor has certainly been evident here over the years. I think there will still be specialists labels around and also the number of self publishing musicians seems to be on the up. So I don’t think CD’s will disappear completely too soon.
The way I tend to use Tidal is like an old fashioned record store, the sort where you used to be able to go off to a little booth and hear a prospective purchase. If I want to try something new I often try and find it in Tidal and if I end up playing it a few times I will then go and buy the CD or download. I think most of us have read how little money the musicians get from plays over streaming services and so I feel happier paying for music more directly if I am going to keep and play it more than a few times.
On the cost side I have found this saves me money too in the long run. Where I used to buy about 10 CDs a month at about £10 a pop, of which at least half would be played once and then popped in the CD rack never to see the light again, I now pay my Tidal subscription and my purchases of CD’s and downloads are more considered and less spur of the moment and ultimately fewer.
The way I tend to use Tidal is like an old fashioned record store, the sort where you used to be able to go off to a little booth and hear a prospective purchase. If I want to try something new I often try and find it in Tidal and if I end up playing it a few times I will then go and buy the CD or download. I think most of us have read how little money the musicians get from plays over streaming services and so I feel happier paying for music more directly if I am going to keep and play it more than a few times.
On the cost side I have found this saves me money too in the long run. Where I used to buy about 10 CDs a month at about £10 a pop, of which at least half would be played once and then popped in the CD rack never to see the light again, I now pay my Tidal subscription and my purchases of CD’s and downloads are more considered and less spur of the moment and ultimately fewer.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
I sort of agree on this point. If you are using a NAS through WiFi then you are doing a type of streaming. Not the same as streaming across the Internet, but....
I personally do not "stream" through WiFi. All my music sources are directly connected to my DAC (or preamp for Tuner
)... the way I figure, we all believe that cables make a fairly big difference, so how could we possible not loose something going through crappy WiFi?I agree with your point. My son and I just had this discussion the other day. Streaming certainly makes sense if you do not have a lot of music. I would just hate to be at the mercy of the streaming service as far as quality, music and price. Lucky for me that I have about 4tb of music.
FWIW, I have found that the SQ of Tidal (CD Quality option) is on par with that of my own CDs when comparing the same versions.
However, one big advantage of a streaming service is that they may have newer (remastered) versions of our CDs that sound much better than the old versions.
I have actually replaced the majority of my CD library with remastered Tidal versions. One example is my entire Led Zeppelin CD collection that I bought way back when. Tidal offers the Deluxe Versions of those recordings (recently remastered by Jimmy Page himself).