 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I used to prefer CDs over downloads at a time when downloads where DRM and of lossy quality. Now, that downloads are DRM-free and high-res FLAC/ALACs, I am more than happy to buy downloads instead of CDs. If the price is identical, I prefer a CD over a lossless download, and a high-res download over a CD.
Streaming is a different matter, it's great for exploring lots of recordings I don't know, but if I really like something, I prefer to have it on my NAS (or earlier, my CD shelf).
With a Qobuz high-end subscription, high-res downloads are often half the price of CDs, so for me it's perfectly clear that I buy the high-res downloads in those cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Feb 21, 2021 - 12:22 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
OnyaBirri
(Member)
|
I used to prefer CDs over downloads at a time when downloads where DRM and of lossy quality. Now, that downloads are DRM-free and high-res FLAC/ALACs, I am more than happy to buy downloads instead of CDs. If the price is identical, I prefer a CD over a lossless download, and a high-res download over a CD.
Streaming is a different matter, it's great for exploring lots of recordings I don't know, but if I really like something, I prefer to have it on my NAS (or earlier, my CD shelf).
With a Qobuz high-end subscription, high-res downloads are often half the price of CDs, so for me it's perfectly clear that I buy the high-res downloads in those cases.
This makes perfect sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Feb 21, 2021 - 1:19 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Filmmaker
(Member)
|
Three issues, primarily:
1. There is a much greater likelihood that my computer will get a virus/crash/have a hard drive failure, which will cause me to lose my purchase entirely, have it corrupted, or require me to jump through irritating hoops to re-access it, than one where I will lose or damage my CD.
2. A lack of the feeling that I own a ‘complete package’. Subjective, sure, but perception is reality.
3. Most importantly, buying a digital exclusive sends a message to the label that I’m okay with them not offering a CD option and that they should feel free to continue such a myopic business model. In full disclosure, I say that while also agreeing with the gentlemen above who said, “Eff vinyls”, LOL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 21, 2021 - 1:24 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ian J.
(Member)
|
If all that is on offer is a CD, I'll take it, if I have the money OK.
I have no problem with download only either, as long as it's of a high enough quality (at least equivalent to CD, but prefereably higher resolution).
In the end, most of my purchases end up with me making a high quality MP3 with them so I can listen to them on different systems (at the computer, over headphones, etc). The CDs I can only play on my main audio system in my lounge, and I rarely do that kind of dedicated listening these days, I've just got too many other things I have to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three issues, primarily:
1. There is a much greater likelihood that my computer will get a virus/crash/have a hard drive failure, which will cause me to lose my purchase entirely, have it corrupted, or require me to jump through irritating hoops to re-access it, than one where I will lose or damage my CD.
On the other hand, it's much easier to back up a hard drive than CDs. I can just keep my music collection on a RAID NAS system and/or back it up in a cloud. It takes a couple of hours maximum to completely and bit-for-bit back up a collection of thousands of CDs. Can't do that just with physical recordings. If a CD is gone or breaks, it's gone or broken.
Also, at least as long as the download store exists, you could re-download your purchases (like Qobuz for example). If a CD is corrupt, you can't always get a replacement from the label.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I second Keky's thoughts word for word. I must be too old by now but to me music has nothing to do with computers, unless I have to duplicate something. I like to play a record and not files. That's why I see the future as pretty difficult in terms of getting the music I like. I can understand though that younger generations see it differently.
While I still buy CDs, it's been years since the last time I ever put in a CD in order to play it. I used to play a vinyl now and then, just for the heck of it, but it's been a few years that I actually played a CD.
I don't mind if music is still released in the CD format, and I will still buy them now and then, but I see no reason to play them anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My only gripe about digital is figuring out how to store it consistently. I've been burned before on committing to formats. If solid state drives were affordable, that would be the solution. Streaming and cloud services are out of the question (Why was there a question about those to begin with?).
Frankly, this "no CD" subject requires a poll for further study. Quick, to the Intrada forum!
Surely the music is king?
Y'hear that, context? Yer bumped to squire! Take a hike! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all your responses guys. I just struggle with the notion that if you watch a film and fall in love with the score but later find out it’s a digital release only, you would prefer to miss out on the score because it’s not on cd.
Surely buying that music will satisfy you (musically) and the composer gets the well deserved royalties?
That's another problem. Due to the generous (!) share taken by etailers such as Amazon, combined with the cost to power and cool servers (this is one reason per-track cost is so high), artists actually make far less money with digital than they do with physical albums. Most independent artists make their biggest album money selling their own CDs at concerts. Their profit is exponentially higher that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's another problem. Due to the generous (!) share taken by etailers such as Amazon, combined with the cost to power and cool servers (this is one reason per-track cost is so high), artists actually make far less money with digital than they do with physical albums. Most independent artists make their biggest album money selling their own CDs at concerts. Their profit is exponentially higher that way.
That only applies to streaming, not digital downloads, where artists often get a bigger share than from a physical disc. Though of course, if they sell their own pressings at concerts (no label involved), that may be another story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I pay music for a legit physical object, complete with the original film artwork, the tracklist, the copyright discograpy and eventually liner notes. I need to touch and to read, I'm a HUMAN so I need OBJECTS TO LOVE, not only music to listen to.
I DO NOT PAY FOR ELECTRIC IMPULSE ONLY. I'M NOT A COMPUTER. Files only are not enought, to me.
That's okay. But I'm different there.
Personally, I do not need any more physical objects. I always payed for the dots and zeros on the plastic discs, and if they now drop the plastic discs and just deliver the dots and zeros, I'm fine with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 21, 2021 - 3:43 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
.
(Member)
|
Streaming now opens up a huge expanse of new music for me to select from and experiment with and enjoy. Rather than listening to The Great Escape or Star Trek on CD for the 500th time, I'm now more likely than ever to listen to something totally new to me that I would never have had the opportunity to audition before – whether jazz, classical, or even more film music I'm unfamiliar with. So much more is now available to me. A few days ago I was listening to an aria from a Gluck opera and enjoyed it and, on investigating, there were at least a dozen performances to choose from – with versions for countertenor, tenor, mezzo soprano etc etc. It was really enjoyable making the comparisons and trying to decide which performers and conductors and recordings were my preference. Not so long ago, I could only make those choices by buying the CDs blind, with only a review in "Gramophone" or the like as a guide. Chances of hearing it on radio were virtually non-existent. I've wasted big money over the years on countless CDs I bought on impulse or after hearing an excerpt of, and ended up disliking. These days, I can make infinitely more informed decisions about what I might want to buy.
I'm still buying soundtrack CDs but I'm spending far less time listening to my collection of them as vastly increased amounts of other kinds of music are now at my fingertips. For me the streaming services are opening up a treasure trove of intriguing music and performances I've been mostly unfamiliar with till now. Right now, streaming and quality downloads suit me fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That only applies to streaming, not digital downloads, where artists often get a bigger share than from a physical disc. Though of course, if they sell their own pressings at concerts (no label involved), that may be another story.
Not true. It applies to downloads too, and it's quite bad. Though it's worse with streaming. Here's part of what used to be a much longer article, with a graph breaking it down. Note the article and graph is now ten years old! So it's probably much worse today, except the data on CDs is no doubt still true.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/11/how-musicians-really-make-money-in-one-long-graph/249267/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
