yes i still buy CDs, not in a massive amount but 5-6 a month.
i used to use oink obsessively though and download lots and
lots of stuff and then i go out and buy what i like from my local
shop. i have no problem whatsoever to listen to good quality
mp3 (320, v0 etc), i would never ever use something like FLAC,
bullshit format imo, cannot be used in itunes or ipod - a pretty
important factor since i don't know a lot of people who doesn't
own an ipod. i listen to music on the ipod through a couple of
porta pro's, or in my home through a regular not fancy denon/kenton
setup, so the weakest link is still the output.
i wouldn't mind at all buying mp3s (ive bought some on itunes),
but i don't want DRM (in fact my drm-buying days are over),
and i dont have time to go to each label to get their stuff, i want
one place that holds everything (like oink did, or like the local
store i go to holds pretty much everything i want). and i need them
to be available for download an infinate amount of times, if i
delete the file, or my HD crashes. the physical CDs are basically
working as backup for me, so i can return to them if my files get lost
somehow.
i only purchase vinyl if the release isn't available on CD, and when
i buy my CDs i mainly rip it down to the computer, and put the box
in the shelf after having looked at it for five minutes.. then i don't
ever use the CD again really
the demise of oink will have an enormous impact in my musical
imput, now i have to find new sources of listening to new music,
and what it probably eventually will result in, is basically that i will
buy less records, not more...
On 10/26/07, Esa Ruoho <esaruoho@gmail.com> wrote:
quoted 101 lines what cheeses me off about all of this is that i was going to put my new ep
> what cheeses me off about all of this is that i was going to put my new ep
> on OiNK as 320kbps mp3s and try and see if doing that would mean more
> people would link to my shop and purchase the physical item. and then the
> whole thing got shut down. fancy that!
>
>
> On 26/10/2007, David William Newman <dwnewman@clara.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Yes but the point is that alot of mp3s are sold at below 320kbps
> >
> >
> >
> > jason parent writes:
> >
> > >
> > >> The claim that mp3 quality sucks is bogus imo.
> > >> If the bitrate is at the maximum (320kbps), you won't hear the
> > difference
> > >> with the original CD.
> > >
> > > there are a number of factors.
> > >
> > > listen to "wish you were here" by pink floyd on a 320 kbps mp3 played
> > > through a set of tannoys or kefs or other good quality speakers at a
> > high
> > > volume, coming from a high powered receiver and tell me it sounds the
> > same
> > > as a cd does, if the cd player has high quality DACs. i picked that
> > record
> > > because everybody knows what it's SUPPOSED to sound like, and because
> > the
> > > range is very wide.
> > >
> > > you'll hear major differences in the low end and in the high end. even
> > the
> > > mix comes out funny.
> > >
> > > you could do the experiment with lots of different stuff. i heard a
> > major
> > > difference in thom yorke's solo album, as well as the latest nine inch
> > > nails record [which i was previewing as downloads before i picked them
> > up,
> > > as i was skeptical about the end quality of both of them]. even the last
> > > tool album [which was a weak record] had major reproduction problems on
> > > the low end.
> > >
> > > however, if you're listening to the new spice girls record through a
> > pair
> > > of tinny headphones coming out of a portable device, i would agree that
> > > it's unlikely to make much of a difference, but i personally can't stand
> > > to do something like that. the last time i tried to listen to something
> > > coming out of the headphone out on my cell phone was a john zorn record,
> > > and it sounded so awful i haven't even bothered using the mp3 player in
> > it
> > > since...
> > >
> > > meaning the following: casual users will probably migrate to mp3s due to
> > > convenience. cds didn't kill records because they were cheaper to make
> > or
> > > because the sound quality is "technically better" (let's not get into a
> > cd
> > > vs. record argument because unlike the cd vs. mp3 argument, the cd vs.
> > > record argument is purely subjective and depends not on reproductive
> > > ability but personal taste), it was because you can skip tracks on a cd
> > > and you can't do that on a record. likewise, mp3s will prevail for
> > casual
> > > users and those who enjoy the convenience.
> > >
> > > but, serious audio geeks can immediately tell the difference and will
> > drop
> > > cds in favour of dvds; they didn't drop thousands into their sound
> > systems
> > > to use compressed files as a sound source.
> > >
> > > ....meaning that, i guess, cds are pretty much dying. but the future is
> > in
> > > dvd audio, not mp3s.
> > >
> > > reminds me of the cassette vs. cd wars in the 80s.
> > >
> > > j
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ∞
>
--
fenmark@gmail.com
http://www.french.se/portfolio
http://www.french.se/plod
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org