BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Is there any reason to keep cds?

 
 
Jack Denfeld
09:55 / 19.03.07
So I've downloaded all my cds to my computer, and I start thinking of all the cds I've lost, or destroyed, or let people borrow over the years and how I wish I would've been able to store them all back in the day on a computer as soon as I bought them from the store.

So then I start thinking, now that I have all these cds saved, why not bring all the cds to the record shop and trade them in for store credit and get more cds?

Do CDs do anything for you? Just the physical cd, are you attached to them? I'm not. It's just little discs that have some of my favorite songs on them, but if I can just store the songs elsewhere I don't see any reason to keep the cds. It's not like comic books ya know? There is something about a physical copy of a comic book, or especially a trade paperback that just seems more, sentimental to me? And the reading experience just kinda blows away a torrent comic away. But maybe some of you feel that way about cds.

So, anyone considering just saving all their stuff to a hard drive and getting rid of their cds? From browsing through this forum over the years, I know some of you have several thousands of cds, and I imagine you'd save a lot of space just by scrappin' them. Then again, as your collection gets bigger do you get more attached to them? Just wondering.
 
 
Spaniel
10:04 / 19.03.07
Jack, I may be wrong but I bet you haven't saved all your music as CD quality, so that's one reason to keep your CDs even if you're not sentimental about them as objects: they'll still sound better than the compressed tracks taking up space on your hard drive. That said, with drive space as cheap as it is you could probably reasonably look to digitise your entire collection at CD quality for very little expense.

Also, there is the question of having a back up just in case your computer cops it.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
10:08 / 19.03.07
I may be wrong but I bet you haven't saved all your music as CD quality
I really don't know if I have or not. I just kinda copied them all to my itunes, and the plan was to transfer the whole kaboodle to an external hard drive later this week.
 
 
Spaniel
10:12 / 19.03.07
Then you almost certainly haven't.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
10:14 / 19.03.07
Oh snap. Well, good thing you brought that up then.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:47 / 19.03.07
You will have recorded them probably as 128-196kbps MP3s or AACs - compressed files.

Also, and I speak as one whose external hard drive has just apparently gone for a burton, think how easy it is to break several hundred CDs. It would take _hours_. An external hard drive you just have to drop.
 
 
Mistoffelees
10:48 / 19.03.07
A usual CD can take up 700 MB of disc space, the mp3 version needs ca 60 or 70 MB.

I have ca 700 CDs, and I won´t get rid of them. As Boboss has said, the data on the CD is superior to the mp3s, and maybe in a couple of years I can put them on a harddrive in all their glory (ca 490 GB!).

And if some "authorities" ever confront you because of your music files you can point to your CDs. I don´t know about US copyright laws, but in the last years it has become pretty strict around here, with "illegal copies are theft, you can get five years in jail" propaganda in front of every movie in theatres and on DVD.

Also there´s the memories, and the collector in me. I´ve got hundreds of books, DVDs, CDs and thousands of comics. I wouldn´t throw away any of these just because I can load or scan them on my harddrive.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
10:49 / 19.03.07
In fact, the few times I've bought online music I've burned a copy to CD as external back-up in case Mr Complete Fuckup pays a visit to Mr CPU.
 
 
Sniv
12:14 / 19.03.07
But is the quality-issue really that important? MP3 and AAC compression is a fair bit better than it used to be, and the standard 128k AAC files that iTunes makes are usually of quite excellent quality. I'm not an audiophile by any means, but I do listen to my music very closely, and I hardly ever hear much digital distortion on albums that I've imported from CD.

Also, since I now have all my music on either my PC or my iPod (which I also have a nice stereo connector for, so I can take it and play it on my friends stereos), I haven't used a CD since, and I can't see many instances that I will need to use one either. I can even burn CDs from iTunes to give to people, and I can backup my entire collection with just a bunch of DVDs rather than the boxes and boxes of CDs that I had to lug up the stairs when I moved house last month. I think I'm with Jack, maybe it is time to chop them in, buy some pretty things with the proceeds.

Also, wrt 'ownership', I've lost track of the amount of CDs that I can't find, either due to losing them (how?!) or lending them out that I have since downloaded off bittorrent for nowt. What do you guys reckon is the ethical stance for this (the legal is obviously dodgy, I assume)? I've already paid for it once, I look at it as the internet is storing these things, is taking what I've paid for once still okay?
 
 
petunia
14:52 / 19.03.07
I go through this question every now and again. A few points of view to take in:

- Quality -

Most of the time when i'm listening to music, i'm not too fussed about quality. I use cheap headphones on my Portable, i use my MacBook's speakers when surfing. Much of the music i listen to doesn't have much taken from it by being lower quality, in fact some of it can benefit from this :-)

However, when i want to plug my music into a good sound system and play it really loud and forget there's anything but music, i get a bit miffed when there's a loss of quality. Much of the time, i will only notice if i've already heard the track in cd/vinyl version, but it does glare occasionally.

For example, i recently downloaded a performance of Arvo Part's 'Fratres'. The files came in the .flac format - an open-source 'lossless' filetype which compresses the music so you can fit it on your hard drive, but keeps it pretty much cd-quality.

My portable player doesn't play .flac, so i had to convert the track to .mp3 to play it. Nice to listen to when i'm on my way to work. But when i plug it into the main stereo in my lounge, it sounds a bit poor. Plug in my MacBook and play the original .flac, Much better.

With intricate music with a large range of volume and tone, you can really tell the difference between 'lossy' formats (.mp3, .aac, .ogg etc) and 'lossless' (.flac, .wv, .wav etc). This goes for other music too, but that depends more on your ears and your stereo equipment. Which brings us to:

- Equipment -

Most people i know own an ipod or other portable music thingy, but only half of those people own a phono cable. A few of these people don't have a stereo that will accept a line in. The amount of times i've had to connect ipod to cable X, to cable Y which connects to the tape adaptor is more than.. say.. five.

I still think having a bunch of music in one little box is a lot easier when you're on the move than having one little box and X cds, but at there's something to be said for having cds around. There's a pretty good chance there will be a cd player wherever you are going, but less chance there will be the requisite cables.

I suppose this one ties in with - Quality - in that each time you add another part to the route the music takes from your player to the speakers, the more crap gets added to the noise. There's also a problem with low volume on many portables. A pair of headphones needs a lot less oomph than a pair of speakers, so it makes sense to make a portable player less powerful - especially when it's battery-powerful - but it's annoying to have to turn your portable all the way up, then turn the stereo all the way up, just to be able to hear the music at a normal volume. And then someone comes along and puts a cd on... LOUD.

So if you have the whole music collection on one hard drive, how do you have it set up? Is the hard drive external or internal? If it's internal, do you have your pc attatched to the stereo or do you burn cds from it/copy desired tracks to an ipod and play these on the stereo? If external, wouldn't it be annoying to have to connect the drive every time you want to use it?

There's a lot to be said for the immediacy of cds. If you want to listen to a track, you grab the cd, you put it on, you play it. The audio quality is of a high standard and there are few points between the cd and the speakers to add noise. If you want to play that track in the kitchen, you grab the cd and take it there.

I suppose a lot of the - Equipment - argument is reliant on the current state of technology. We are on the turn from cds towards computer-held music, so much of the technology is still in its infacy (the ipod is only six years old - what did we do before then?). There are already solutions to the whole home-stereo system; you can buy high-end equipment that will stream audio from a server and play it at cd quality on your stereo, they just cost a bit at the moment.

As has been said, disk space is getting cheaper by the day. While a terabyte seemed like a fearsome thing a few years ago, it's becoming not-too-uncommon to have a Tb of storage on a pc, so it's quite a viable option to have your whole music collection on one computer.

Though, as Haus says, one quick drop or a spill of beverage is all it takes...

- Legality -

Tricky one, this. Obviously, you are fine if you keep your cds, but once you ditch them, you have no proof that you are legally allowed a digital copy of your music.

Ethically speaking, if you have payed for a cd (and given an artist support), there is no problem with you copying that and ditching the cd. In a way, this is more ethical than buying a cd second hand, where an artist receives no money for the transaction.

I suppose you could retain the receipts for each of your purchased cds, but nobody does that and i'm not sure how valid it would be in the legal sphere.

I actually know sweet fuck-all about copyright law, so i might leave this one to other people.

My mentality tends to consist of 'Well, they have bigger fish to fry, and even if they get me, i can delete the tracks. Even if it gets to court, i'll make such a beautifully-put argument concerning the idiocy of copyright law that the judge will be embarassed and make me Prime Minister of the world.'

So yeah, best left to people who know...



I'm sure i had a few other points, but they've left for now.

But basically

- .mp3s are (noticeably) lower quality than cds, but you can encode in other formats to keep the quality (some ipods can play the 'Apple lossless' format).

- Higher quality means more hard disk, but hard disks are getting cheaper.

- Hard disks break, but you can always backup to dvd (and blu-ray/hd-dvd soon) for when the drive says 'bye'.

- Hardware compatibility issues can often make it a nuisance to play quality music where you want to hear it, but technology is becoming available to change that. Or you can just write cds with the tracks you want.

- The legality of your actions might be up for question, but who cares about that? What are you? One of them?

Oh yeah, cd covers can be real nice when an artist puts the effort in, but usually they don't. So while vinyl = 'lovely, part of the whol experience, man', cds = 'm'eh'.
 
 
the permuted man
14:52 / 19.03.07
I can definitely tell the difference between 128 and 192; but say 192 to 320 is a lot harder. Personally, the V0/VBR (you can encode to it free with LAME and any program which uses LAME) is a really nice encoding and I can barely tell the difference between it and the CD even using studio monitors. In itunes, I'd recommend using VBR and set the minimum to 192. This means it'll always use 192, but will go dynamically higher (up to 320) if the song demands more quality.

Re: keeping CDs. In general I like album art and have stapled a fair share of it to my walls. It's also easier (with many of my friends) to lend out a CD, or take a CD to their place or in their car, than a digital equivalent.
 
 
Sniv
16:48 / 19.03.07
There's a lot to be said for the immediacy of cds. If you want to listen to a track, you grab the cd, you put it on, you play it.

Y'see, but there isn't for me. If I want to listen to a quick tune, I'll just open iTunes, scroll to the song and double click, the music comes out in front of me on my (reasonable) speakers. Alternatively, if I want a cd on, I have to cross the room, find a cd in my crowded cabinet, open it, put it in, find the track, put in on, then go sit back down. The digital alternative is obviously much easier.

I don't really get the chance to listen to my music super-loud, because I live in a block of flats and don't want to piss off my neighbours. That said, I find portability is the key - if I'm going to a party, my friends usually put me in charge of tunes becuase i'm the obsessive one that probably will have all kinds of stuff that people ask for. I usually, if going to/getting ready for a night with friends, set up a big 5 or six hour playlist (I've got about 7 now that I rotate, and one mahoooosive megamix that I use as a general radio-station). That is much easier to transport than the same amount of cds, even if I was to take the (not inconsiderable) time to burn off mix-cds to cover the evening.

And as for cables, I have all the necessary cables from bog-standard phono cables (and their red/white line adapters) to a cable that comes from the usb-port in the ipod into a red/white cable (that can then be adapted to phone if necessary). I find this set-up covers pretty much all eventualities.

I think you're right though, we're in the middle of a shift in the way that we 'use' music, carry it around, digest it, the places that we listen to it, it's all in flux at the moment. Still, I think the shelf-life of my cds is reaching an end, at least for most of them (the replaceable ones, as far as internet popularity goes).
 
  
Add Your Reply