Is it really worth buying CDs?

[Dave2002]

I ordered two CDs today - both fairly cheap. One is of Pärt's Spiegel im Spiegel - around £4 (Brilliant), the other is the Art of Fugue played by the Emerson Quartet for around £6 from Amazon.

Once I relaxed a bit from the exertion of having pressed the buy buttons, I thought I'd see if I could listen to the Art of Fugue. I found the Emerson's AoF on Spotify, and it sounded good enough. As I'll perhaps only play the CD a few times perhaps it would have been better to just stick with Spotify (or other services, such as Napster) ab initio.

The downside is that fashions may change, and as long as I have a CD player which works, and have the CDs in reasonable condition I'll still be able to listen long into the future, whereas there is no guarantee that any streaming service will provide continued service. Also, the sound quality should be better, though on this occasion I thought the SQ was satisfactory

Are many others thinking of giving up CDs (or other forms of round discs)? I'm not yet, but I am beginning to question my behaviour given the use I make of these things. It would save money and also space if I gave up disc collecting. End of an era, perhaps?

[Thropplenoggin]

This reminds me of many a Grauniad article: the rise of one medium must destroy all that came before it. e.g. Kindle is the book killer. Why can't both exist side by side - Kindle and paperback, digital and disc?

I would argue that these older media offer benefits that one appreciates because of the new media:

For example, in the same way that 'deep reading' is a dying art - we skim now, thanks to a life lived online - surely 'deep listening' is also in decline. Listening, that is, without a screen in front of us. But switching off, turning on the hi-fi, closing our eyes and concentrating on the music.

I have gone from buying CDs in my youth (teens, early twenties) to being solely digital to now buying CDs. I love hunting them down online. I love the anticipation of waiting for them to arrive. I love the fact that it isn't instantaneous. Waiting is a dying art, too. I love the CD inserts (well, not Virgin Veritas!) and reading up on the work. I love watching my library grow on the shelves. I love the fact that it's mine (for now - CDs degrade too), but I own it. Do you ever own a digital file or is it just on loan to you? A legal minefield now opening up for iTunes and Kindle users.

[MrGongGong]

Actually you don't really "own" it
even if you "own" the object there are limitations to what you can do with it

But i'm all for the CD , the object is part of the music IMV

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I have gone from buying CDs in my youth (teens, early twenties) to being solely digital to now buying CDs.

CDs are solely digital.

[gurnemanz]

I agree about having the best of both worlds. I'm slowing down with CD buying but mainly because I have more than enough to keep me going.

The advantages of downloading are:
- you can choose to buy only tracks you want
- you can obtain items not otherwise available
- it's immediate and can be cheaper

If I download tracks I usually burn them to CD because I like the idea of having something in my hand rather than just a load of digits stored in a memory. I heard someone on the radio saying that this is not limited to old fogeys like me but that many younger pop and rock buyers who have grown up with downloads are also starting to hanker after owning something physical that you can interact with. LPs have not yet died.

Can you can give downloads as a present? I suppose you can but you can't really wrap it up and put a ribbon on it.

It is certainly useful to convert some of your favourite CDs to mp3 for use on portable players.

[robk]

I get pleasure from the parcels arriving on the door mat, and from holding the case in my hands. I then rip the thing to my hard drive and rarely take it out of the case again. The booklet however does come out and almost justifies the readily accessible shelf space. I use Media Monkey to catalogue the files and tidy up the tags and generally to play the tracks, although I can also stream them with the Squeezebox Touch. I like the consistent way downloads and ripped CD's appear in Media Monkey and are easily located. I don't burn downloads to disc unless I want to listen in the car.
I agree with Thropplenoggin about "deep listening" (#2). I get the impression that many posters are able to achieve this, but sitting down & closing the eyes seems to have the inevitable consequence that I don't last for more than the first track. It never used to be a problem!

[Dave2002]

I get pleasure from the parcels arriving on the door mat, and from holding the case in my hands. I then rip the thing to my hard drive and rarely take it out of the case again.

In my case there's the added frisson of smuggling such items past Mrs D, but sometimes I get caught out and the postman knocks on the door when I'm out. I think she's resigned to it now, though, and for us it's the space rather than the cost which is usually the issue. I'm sure some others must have this added excitement too, together with admonishments sometimes "don't you dare buy any more ...", which are best left alone and then ignored after a few weeks.

[Nick Armstrong]

In my case there's the added frisson of smuggling such items past Mrs D

[richardfinegold]

[QUOTE=gurnemanz;218519]I agree about having the best of both worlds. I'm slowing down with CD buying but mainly because I have more than enough to keep me going.

The advantages of downloading are:
- you can choose to buy only tracks you want
- you can obtain items not otherwise available
- it's immediate and can be cheaper
quote

I'll take issue with with some of the above. Not all downloads let you order the individual track; frequently you have to purchase the "entire album." I recently purchased an entire EMI 14 disc Mahler box just so I could get Horenstein's Fourth because otherwise I would have had to download all 14 discs worth. I also wanted to purchase Jochum and the LPO in Brahms Fourth but I would have to buy the entire 2 disc set as an mp3, at only 10% of the savings compared to getting the set as a CD.
Available instantly? Have you ever downloaded a high Rez recording from a site as HD Tracks? Even with the fastest Internet connection a High Rez download can take around an hour, and don't you dare dream of using a computer for another purpose while this is occurring Admittedly, a standard rez recording goes quicker, but I wouldn't exactly call it instant.
I'm intrigued by the original poster stating that he thought spotify sounded as good as a CD. What bit rate does Spotify broadcast at? I thought I had read around 160 bps. The best Internet Radio (try Linn, for example) stream at 320, and they sound pretty good, but I don't think that they match CDs.

[richardfinegold]

[QUOTE=gurnemanz;218519]I agree about having the best of both worlds. I'm slowing down with CD buying but mainly because I have more than enough to keep me going.

The advantages of downloading are:
- you can choose to buy only tracks you want
- you can obtain items not otherwise available
- it's immediate and can be cheaper
quote

I'll take issue with with some of the above. Not all downloads let you order the individual track; frequently you have to purchase the "entire album." I recently purchased an entire EMI 14 disc Mahler box just so I could get Horenstein's Fourth because otherwise I would have had to download all 14 discs worth. I also wanted to purchase Jochum and the LPO in Brahms Fourth but I would have to buy the entire 2 disc set as an mp3, at only 10% of the savings compared to getting the set as a CD.
Available instantly? Have you ever downloaded a high Rez recording from a site as HD Tracks? Even with the fastest Internet connection a High Rez download can take around an hour, and don't you dare dream of using a computer for another purpose while this is occurring Admittedly, a standard rez recording goes quicker, but I wouldn't exactly call it instant.
I'm intrigued by the original poster stating that he thought spotify sounded as good as a CD. What bit rate does Spotify broadcast at? I thought I had read around 160 bps. The best Internet Radio (try Linn, for example) stream at 320, and they sound pretty good, but I don't think that they match CDs.

[jayne lee wilson]

richardfg - do you use the download manager for hi-res? I've not bought from hdtracks, but with dacapo, eclassical etc the easy-to-set-up download manager brings home the hour's worth of 24 bit files in 30 minutes or less, at least on this connection, (which isn't hispeed fibreoptic). When I first began doing 24/96 from TCS, it did indeed take an hour or more, which was roughly halved when they too started employing a manager. You can get free software to do it, but I've never needed that yet.

I buy whatever I fancy really - just recently Simon Rattle's original EMI Angel CDs 2ndhand (stunning sound), certainly unavailable as files. Been great fun seeking them out in France & Germany etc. I'd agree about the quality of 320kbps AAC - it's a minimum benchmark for me to enjoy a listen. 320 mp3 isn't too bad. But neither quite match CD, no, and a good player will show that very clearly.

Just do what you enjoy - whatever makes it fun!

[Stunsworth]

[QUOTE=richardfinegold;218552]

What bit rate does Spotify broadcast at? I thought I had read around 160 bps

Spotify stream at 320k. If you want to stream lossless FLAC - 16/44.1 - try Qobuz.

[Dave2002]

[QUOTE=richardfinegold;218553]

I'm intrigued by the original poster stating that he thought spotify sounded as good as a CD. What bit rate does Spotify broadcast at? I thought I had read around 160 bps. The best Internet Radio (try Linn, for example) stream at 320, and they sound pretty good, but I don't think that they match CDs.

That's not quite what I wrote. I used the phrase "good enough", regarding rapid access to tracks on a CD which I have also ordered, and which has not yet arrived. I subscribe to Spotify - about £10/month. AFAIK the bit rate is 320 kbps and it uses Ogg-Vorbis encoding. That level of compression should be quite good for many people.

Often concerns about SQ on compressed audio are because: 1. the actual bit rate is lower than claimed, so a claimed rate of (say) 256 kbps might actually be 180 kbps, 2. the encoding is not done well, even if the bit rate is correct. 3. Other problems can arise with the audio in the processing, before the compression process, such as clipping, or some other form of distortion being "added" in. One of the biggest problems is 4. problems due to gaps in albums with many different tracks, which should play continuously, so some musical pieces really dont' work well with streaming services.

It is very hard for most people to hear a difference in a well compressed audio file if the bit rate is 250kbps or higher, and if a decent compression method is used. Some versions of Spotify, depending on subscription, do use a lower bit rate, and will not sound as good.

You say that Linn Radio is good, but not quite good enough. Are you sure you can really tell? As I've already stated, problems may be due to other factors, not just bit rates - though that doesn't of course mean that the quality might then be compromised, compared with CDs. The safe option is always to use CDs, and unless there is another form of master, it is clear that CDs should in general be better Techniques such as Apple's "Mastered for iTUnes" might in some cases lead to higher perceived quality with downloads - though personally I stilll don't believe that. There are now, however, some downloads using so-called high resolution audio files, either for downloading or for streaming, and using lossless compression such as flac. It is possible that such downlloads might sound better than regular CDs.

The other point I made related to costs. If I use Spotify for 20 days/month, that's costing me 50p/day, so a CD such as the Emerson Bach Art of fugue can be played via Spotify for around 50p. The price I paid for it was just over £6, so I'd have to listen at least 12 times to break even - assuming I am prepared to continue with Spotify.I have lots of CDs which have been played fewer than 12 times, and many still to play. At the current price levels I think Spotify and Napster are good value, and I use them quite a lot, for sampling, and also for listening in different locations. Some would argue that I will never "own" any music using streaming services, but really do I or others care, if such services have what we want to listen to, in acceptable quality?

[akiralx]

For me, no. I only tend to buy SACDs, anything else I buy on iTunes.

[HighlandDougie]

CDs were developed by Philips (and by Sony) as a storage medium for data in a digital format - initially music, then data, video, whatever - so EA is correct to say that they are digital. While the source material might be analog in nature, it still has to be converted to a digital format. And your use of an expression which, if I used it here in the Alpes Maritimes, would get me a thump on the nose or worse is a bit excessive, n'est-ce pas?