Parting with CDs

Ah okay, well I guess he can get back talking about The Beatles then.

 

I haven’t had a haul in quite awhile. Time for me to hit the Goodwill’s and Sound Exchange again.

 

Actually, hasn't been a better time to reenter the cd market. Players have long bottomed out, even higher end models. And they are practically giving CDs away today.

 

Then there's no point in owning it.

 

Barely a large percentage thought is it?

 

Yes, and I remember The Logical Song one warm spring evening in 1979, my bedroom having no air conditioning and me keeping off the light near my bed because teenage me thought it was making additional heat. Such an amazing song. Couldn't wait for WPLJ in New York to play it again.

And I remember buying Out Of The Blue by ELO in 1977 from my local Sam Goody record store in the mall strictly on the basis of its Star Wars futuristic cover without even knowing who the band was or what songs they sang. And opening that gatefold and seeing that interior rendering. That would have been enough. But the music? Not a month goes by I don't listen to Big Wheels.

And that's a photo of me, January 1969, holding the birthday present I had just received. It's amazing to know exactly what I looked like and exactly what I was wearing the first time I heard Hey Bulldog.

I could go on. The point is, I have no attachment to the media on which those songs were played. What matters is the music. And it's the same music hitting my ears whether it's from an old FM tuner, an old vinyl record, or a streaming smart speaker.

 

You come from one helluva family, but it's good to know that you have as much contempt for grandpa as you do for record collectors.

 

Anything is only as special as what it means for the person who wants it. One man's trash is another man's treasure, better it go to a thrift store and be resold than to go to a landfill.

`

 

His mother gave birth on the side of the road on the way to the hospital.
Car was a BMW.
True story.

 

The music landscape does not consist only of hit-makers and dudes in subways. And you know it.

There are also many musicians and bands that get record contracts but don't end up making any real, sustainable money; and many, many artists that make good music and have had the occasional album released on a small label or maybe even on a major label, but who you (and I) have never heard of. And it's entirely possible that if you heard that artist's music, you would enjoy it more than you enjoy the music of some artists who are very well known to you. And you know that too.

What's wrong with Wisconsin? And what's wrong with making music in a basement?

Some bands are really good live, and some are more creatures of the studio. And you know that too.

Live music also is quite formative for many people, even those who go to fewer (or zero) concerts as they get older. And you know that too.

If the person you were responding to does any introspection, they will quickly realize that your claim here is a tautology, not an argument.

Record labels, for all their exploitative practices, always have kept many money-losing artists in their stables and helped counterbalance the losses with the massive profits from the Sinatras, Beatles, Led Zeppelins, Michael Jacksons, Madonnas, Biebers, and so on. I assume you know this - if you don't then everyone in the thread who's saying you should be ignored is right. Those money losing artists have been kept around for a mixture of reasons, including (but I'm sure not limited to) the labels gambling on many artists with only a few paying off, and some people at the labels championing certain artists because they believed in their artistic merit. I believe Chris Blackwell always insisted that Nick Drake's catalogue be kept in print, for example, even when he was out of fashion and selling almost no copies. But his stuff stayed in print on life support, so it was able to be revived when it became popular again.

And BTW, Drake didn't sell a lot of records and it really depressed him, and he died tragically of an OD of anti-depressants. Like many artists, he was not terribly successful during his lifetime, but his work has since become more appreciated (and in this case better selling) later on. Today Nick Drake would be a "weakling" in your book and it's not clear that having one or two of 45 million songs on Spotify would enable his music to circulate the way that Drake's LPs did over the years immediately prior to its resurgence.

Now, if streaming does help keep artists around, that's great. But the question isn't your Social Darwinist one of who is a weakling vs a champion (a question that has zero to do with art), but rather how the compensation of the average artists signed to a label in the past stacks up against the compensation of the average artist on streaming services now. If the starving artists of yesterday were no better compensated by the LP and CD system than starving artists are by streaming today, then it's a wash. But if there is a difference, that's significant. If you know of some data that can help us with that, please do share. If you don't, then you can kindly take a seat.

That's a shame. One of the hallmarks and joys of emerging from childhood into adulthood is understanding the wide range of experiences that we can get pleasure and meaning out of, and understanding that just because someone likes something different than you doesn't mean they're weird or not properly developed as a person. Excessive reliance on what is normal and popular can lead to all kinds of emotional problems.

I do, however, agree that physical media are on the way out, and because CDs are digital and therefore perceived as identical to streaming content, they are especially vulnerable to being wound down entirely in a way that LPs and perhaps cassettes are not.

I say this as someone who came of age with CDs - they are my preferred medium. But I am under no illusion that I am anything but a member of a tiny minority of music consumers and listeners. Fortunately as a middle-class person in an advanced industrial society, I have the luxury of indulging in any of a number of hobbies, and collecting CDs happens to be one of my favorites. When I buy a used CD, the artist gets nothing. When I buy a new CD, the artist gets a lot more from me than if I'd streamed their music (unless I stream it incessantly for years and years). When I buy a new reissue or remaster, the artist gets even more. When I buy a new CD, I contribute to a petroleum-based economy. When I buy a used CD, I keep a petroleum-based product out of the landfill. If I don't subscribe to a streaming service and I don't keep all my music in the cloud, then I don't add to the massive environmental toll taken by the gargantuan server farms necessary to sustain the cloud economy.

Supporting artists, the environment, the ethics of buying new vs buying used vs renting - these are important issues but it's basically all a wash. The systems are too large for a small number of individuals to make a real difference one way or the other based on a few thousand streaming subscriptions out of tens of millions or a few thousand used CD purchases. And the systems are too complex for any lay person (not to mention researchers) to fully tally up the butcher's bill either way.

So enjoy your physical media if you want, and sell it all off if you want. Stream if you want, and stream if you feel you have to. This is consumption, pleasure, and a hobby - ethical principles are for better or worse not decisive in this context.

 

It's a shame that she dropped him on his head.

 

I think physical media has a few more years to go yet. Look at how vinyl has made a comeback. Certain music enthusiasts like to hold their albums (whether it be CD/vinyl) and look at the inside artwork, photos, liner notes and sometimes lyrics etc.

I'm not just talking about people of an older generation either.

 

I suspect that it does too... The End was predicted to be around the corner starting 20-years ago. They're cheap and profitable, if a reasonable portion of the pressing sells. I have yet to encounter a 'new release' that I wanted to purchase that was only available via streaming. There are more and more archival releases available for DL-only... Sony is doing a lot of them. I assume that all of that music is on the streaming services and the DL-marketing is a an afterthought.

Time will tell. I'm sure that I'll eventually start streaming. But with a sizeable collection and a growing "comfort food" mentality about what I listen to... I can't imagine myself ever streaming much music. I've been downloading more and more from Bandcamp and 7Digital (with hard copies of Bandcamp CD's piling-up at my daughter's house for delivery... TODAY!). I assemble artwork for the DL-only stuff, it's a fun hobby and I find the manual labor aspect [computer, printing, scoring, cutting, gluing] very relaxing.

 

The difference between a valuable CD sitting on a collector’s shelf and the same CD sitting on a shelf at Goodwill is the difference between a smart vendor with an eBay or Discog account and a clueless person who dumps CDs for pennies on the dollar at the wrong place.


Cat

 

I don't care for new music really. Look at all these box sets coming out featuring archive material from a specific artist. People even upload "unboxing" videos to YouTube which I often enjoy.

 

That’s a minefield...cause I can guarantee that whatever you get rid of will turn out to be the best sounding CD in 20 years time and whatever you’ve kept will be a compressed disaster in 20 years time...

 

You don't have a collection.

 

Paid downloads were a failure in the sense that they did turn around the earnings of the music industry. Why? Because they couldn't compete with Napster, which was free. Streaming is a success largely due to the trivial amount paid per month, and even then it relies on promotions to increase its subscription base. Increase those subscriptions to $30-40 per month and I'm pretty sure the streaming model would collapse. People would revert back to filesharing.

 

Very adult response to an obvious joke.

 

No, but what surprised me was the fact it was a new release. Not something on the Verve that barely sells 1,000 units per year.

 

They aren't giving new CDs away, and boxsets etc are the only CDs I buy. They're the most expensive music I've ever bought.

 

I think he means used CDs, which certainly can be cheap.

 

Exactly! If you don't physically posses it, you don't have a collection. All you do is rent music.

 

So, you made pages and pages of posts and all you had to do was just post this and be done with it. Sheesh!

BTW, the one thing I will agree with you on is that "The Logical Song" is amazing. But, it sounds great on the Mobile Fidelity CD.

 

Parting with cds?

How can one part with DCC/MFSL gold discs unless s t on e y broke, suppose. But those folk will be crying in their beer for years to come.