CD's Gone By 2020?

What's to stop songwriters and publishers and copyright owners from petitioning Congress to extend the copyright laws?
Hasn't this already happened in the past?

 

I wouldn't bet against it. Certain artists got the Europeans to extend their copyright law from 50 to 70 years.

 

I do not think that Congress will pass a law lengthening copyright any longer than it is, but of course this is not impossible.

 

Digital playback has improved greatly since 2000. You should try putting half the effort you put into vinyl playback into improving your digital playback. You might be surprised.

 

Could have been brickwalled CD's at the time which, unfortunately, is still a thing today.

Mickey is scheduled for the public domain in 2024.

Unless Disney steps in again.

 

Oh, I do. They're going to just keep extending and keep extending and keep extending copyright under pressure from lobbying from media companies. The Supreme Court has been reluctant to put limitation on these extension because the constitution gives congress the power to grant copyright protection "for a limited time," and, you know, even 200 years wouldn't be an unlimited time.

 

Well, that one is complicated. Mickey is also a trademark, which is perpetual, for as long as it's being used.

The only "Micky" things that will go out of copyright right away is the earliest renditions of Mickey. Which don't look like Mickey. That's another thing that one can do to protect copyright on a character - keep changing the look slightly. The copyright of each rendering starts when it is created.

 

Right. Start acquiring a decent digital frontend that match your turntable in terms of quality.

 

Well I got an Esoteric SACD/CD player years ago. Of course most CDs made after 2000 I find sonically unlistenable as @Gaslight mentioned so it is used to play CDs from the 90s mostly plus the occasional SACD. But the advice takes little note of the steady disappearance of quality CD players or SACD players for that matter and the price escalation of the few superior models. Then there is the issue of laser replacement or transport functioning.

This is quite depressing to me as an advocate and supporter of Albums. Believe me I want both CDs and LPs to survive but the CD production sonics are making it tough to enjoy more recent Albums even where I like the material per se.

 

As a couple others have pointed out, it depends greatly on how things are mastered. Either format can sound great. I have more or less come to the conclusion that cds are mastered for the general public, and vinyl more to audiophile types. No amount of effort will change that. Also, I have already put the effort into vinyl. I’m there, and loving it! And I think most labels have received the memo that they needed to do a better job with vinyl. I have seen steady improvement in the last 12 months. Of all artists, the new Madonna on vinyl is an audiophile listen, as others have pointed out in another thread. The cd is brickwalled as usual. Can’t do a thing about that.

 

Krell amp, Krell digital D/A converter etc. Some cds are fantastic. Most are not mastered to sound that way. It is what it is.

 

It was the reverse when CDs were new.

 

I bought my first cds when Warner Bros put out their first 12 titles. I sure wish I had kept all my first issues. You’re right, many did sound great then. I foolishly drank the kool-aid and repeatedly bought remastered cds and got rid of older ones for space reasons, not realizing at the time that they were slowly destroying the sound on many as they added compression. It got to where it was getting harder to listen to them with any real pleasure. I just didn’t understand why at the time. It was obvious when many years later I got out my table and put vinyl back on. It wasn’t a subtle difference. But likely many first edition cds would in fact sound wonderful.

 

I think the word "most" in your post is problematic. It really entirely depends on two thnigs: What music you listen to; b) How diligent you are about getting the best mastering on CD.

As an example, the vast majority of Jazz and Classical is mastered excellently. Most "early" CD's - often first prints - were mastered well. I certainly have brickwalled CD's ion my collection, just as you likely have some Vinyl with surface noise, but I work diligently to make sure I get good masterings of the things I love.

Let's remember, brickwalled CD's was a consequence of mobile listeners (imo). That can change at any time. Once CD becomes more of a boutique item, we may see something glorious happen. Let's not forget, Vinyl is, relatively speaking, quite costly. I want so much music, I simply have to factor that in. That said, if the best version of an album if a Japanese Mini LP, and the cost is comparable to Vinyl, then I pay the money.

in short - if a CD is brickwalled, don't buy it.

 

Yes, the mastering is probably the #1 factor responsible for the digital format dissatisfaction among members here.

60% of my listening is from classical music which IMO benefits the most from the digital format in comparison to the vinyl. I seldom go back to my vinyl collection to spin a classical record or would have to replace a version by a remastered one. The sonics are just right.

The remaining of my listening is from rock, prog, jazz and ambient on either vinyl, cd, sacd or hirez files. I use streaming as you would listen to radio. Thanks to this forum, I am now carefully choosing some of my new acquisitions based on members reviews and comments.

 

Well, the extensive and excessive use of brick wall look ahead digital limiting and average level boosting was a '90s phenomenon, predating the introduction of the iPod at the end of 2001, and the arrival of Napster in 1999 and the widespread MP3 file sharing and lossy digital mobile listening that followed. When products like TC Finalizer appeared in 1996, that's when the practice really took off and you wound up with famously horrible stuff like Santana's Supernatural. I think it was as much driven by what the new tech did and did easily, and by the ability to show clients that you could deliver an exciting, new, hot and modern sounding master that would pop compared to other recorded it might have been played side by side with that drove the practice, at least at first. As mobile listening to lossy digital became more and more common, it might have grown. But it was the thing do to before for quite a few years before the mobile digital lossy music explosion.

 

Mobile listeners was correct, in that people want(ed) to hear their music lourder where there was extra noise like in the car, on the subway etc. But as you mentioned, it was before iPods and smartphones - this was happening with Discmans.

So if MP3s / iPods never happened, CD's still would have been brickwalled in the aughts.

 

You're right, there are a lot of cds that are just unlistenable and I'd guess that Madonna would be solidly in that category. I don't listen to modern pop so I come across those mashed cds a lot less.

 

Brickwalled CDs have been around for awhile, yes. But brickwalling really accelerated in the 21st Century.
This came right at the end of the 20th Century:
Supernatural (Santana album) - Wikipedia

 

I thought they got 25 or 50 more years added. And that it's a much much longer copyright now.

 

Mickey's oldest variant (from Steamboat Willie) is still on target for public domain.

Trademarks, of course, will be unchanged.

 

I do wonder if the unfortunate inferior cd mastering (and I acknowledge it happens on vinyl as well, but in my personal experience it is a lot more rare when it happens) is more genre driven. There is such a divide in opinion on what sounds better in general, and I don’t doubt the opinion of those that feel the CD is superior. I also wonder how much of the “remastering” phenomena is simply labels trying to move more product. I fell for that for years. It was such a subtle movement to more and more brickwalling I really didn’t catch on until around 2005. There is an interesting article on an ABBA site about the mastering of each album, and as the CD’s were reissued they were further and further compressed. They recommend for the most part finding the original issues.

I don’t know a sole that likes brickwalling, yet they still do it. They could do that just for streaming and download services if that is their concern. I think all physical media should sound as good at it can. I guess around here we aren’t going to hear from folks that prefer brickwalling. Are we the minority? Hard to say.

 

Well, point taken and I more or less talked about that above. I think you’re absolutely right, and that applies to vinyl as well. If anything, it’s much harder to find the right pressing on that format. Either is an investment of time if you want the best, and I do concede it isn’t all format based. I bought a CD of a 70’s compilation that our host mastered. I know all of those songs well. I have never heard those songs sound better. As vintage CD’s generally sound the best, I think for the most part that applies to vinyl as well. I know it’s likely not possible to master both the same, due to the eq curve for vinyl, but I think the only way to really tell is to run the exact mastering through each format. Again, our host did that and revealed vinyl was the most accurate, but again, that isn’t always what everyone wants.

 

Classical sounds glorious on CD.

 

Have always heard that from day one (or course, pop stuff did too in the beginning, which was why I dumped all my vinyl then). And I get it: with classical, I have to concede that pops and clicks would not be an asset. For some reason I think it’s far more forgiven in other music genres. It really isn’t distracting to me, but I do have a few instrumental songs I like a lot and it’s certainly less tolerable.