Setting aside the assanine RIAA for a moment, the file-sharing and downloading phenomenon is obviously not going away. Apple Music just hit 5 million downloads in only a couple months. I was talking with a friend of mine the other day and we were discussing the ramifications of downloading as distribution and we hit on a couple of key questions. What that starts to bring up are a few questions: 1. Is the long-play (LP) record or CD going to become obsolete? People aren't downloading entire recrods. They are downloading the songs they like or obscure stuff that isn't released and leaving the rest. That brings up interesting questions about the full-length release. Will every song recorded have to be a hit for the record company to want to release it and people to want to listen? Will it matter if songs fit together like they do on a CD? Will the inudstry begin to stop paying for the recording of records favoring instead for only recording singles? Will bands even want to play songs live that never got recorded for fans who probably won't care? 2. Will they ever solve the sound quality issues or are we destined for a continuing degredation of sound quality? When albums were eliminated from regular production, the audible sound quality of music was altered. For some who utilize a lot of digital technology, this was a positive thing. It has also been used to enhance music and sound for video as well as beginning the expansion into surround sound (which is dramatically increasing in popularity among engineers and producers). However, there is no question that even digital recordings sound better on vinyl. The process just changes things and makes it warmer. Technology has certainly improved, but even 128 bit recordings sound warmer on tape and vinyl than they do on CD. That is why, though there has been a proliferation of digital recording equipment due to the tremendous flexibility and ridiculously low cost compared to analog, every studio also has a ton of analog and tube-driven equipment to do everything possible to "warm" up the sound of digital. Given all that, MP3's sound awful compared even to CD's. The compression used to fit them into a small file size really effects the songs in a negative way. Even on Apple where they use 128 bit encoding and claim to have the best MP3's on the net, the sound is audibly different from any original copy. With all of the millions of dollars put into production, it seems a shame that mass distribution is rendering a wholly inferior product. We all know, I think, that we have seen a dramatic and historic shift in how we listen to and acquire music. The convenience is the greatest benefit. Digital recording has brought previously un-affordable technology into the home for the average musician/songwriter. I think all of these are positive. But, I wonder if the possible sacrifice of full-length recordings is a good thing. In essence, once the RIAA gets a hold on this downloading thing (and, eventually, they will) and finds a way to profit by it, there is no reason for them to support artists in the traditional ways any longer. They will actually have an incentive to eliminating production and promotion costs in favor of the convenience brought by the web. I also wonder if sacrificing sound is such a good thing. Even at extremely high recording bandwidths, the sound still has a brittleness that can be harsh. Overall, I'm a big fan of the digital revolution in sound. It affords me opportunities I never could have had when I first became a musician. But, it also makes me wary of changes to come.
I'm "concerned" about #1 you list above, Jeff. I put quotations around concerned because it's not world hunger or world war iii type of concern.... but i enjoy the way an LP lays out. my understanding is that great musical artists seek to create not just a song...but an album. a compilation that belongs together in some way. yes, tracks can be heard and sampled individually..but the whole LP is the product. i think of certain albums that just flow well together...where the songs tend to progress on one another...i sure hope that isn't lost.
Apple have said that half of the songs that they've sold have been purchased as part of a whole album. With reference to the sound quality, increasing bandwidth will eventually allow the practical transmission of lossless audio, which will be exactly the same as the CD. Not right now, but soon, I think.
Jeff, I agree with your last statement completely. I still own and use a 1972 Pioneer heavy swing-arm turntable, and I still own about 150-200 LPs of music that is not available on CD. To me, there is a huge difference between the sound on an LP and the sound on a CD. LP's have a much warmer and fuller sound in my opinion, and that's why I keep listening to them. The elimination of full-length recordings will, in my opinion, lead to a further sacrifice in the quality of the music being released. I hope that the download phenomenon does not mean a further degradation in the quality of the sound, but I'm afraid that this is the direction things will be taking, and there isn't a whole lot we can do about it.
I am very concerned with the way things are going in music today. I cannot get into burning CDs and using downloads and all that stuff. I can't tell you guys how much money I have spent on CDs in the last 3 years, but it is probably enough to pay off my current Credit Card debt of 7 grand. I look at CDs as an investment and something that I will have until the day I die. The last thing I want to get is something with inferior sound like an MP3 or a burned CD. The only burned CDs I have are "The Top" by The Cure (burned by my sister and that was only because it is a very expensive import and she volunteered to do it for me), "Machina II/Friends and Enemies of Modern Music" by Smashing Pumpkins (only available as a download off the Internet), and a double burned CD of Aussie bands done for me by Smeg (it was a gift by him and one that I greatly appreciate). On a somewhat related note, did y'all know that Bob Dylan is having like his whole catalog re-mastered? I think 14 of his CDs are supposed to be available as SACD by August and it includes "Blood on the Tracks", "Highway 61 Revisited", "Bringing It All Back Home", "Blonde on Blonde" (already has a SACD option but this one is supposed to be better), and "John Wesley Harding". Other than the last one I named and "Nashville Skyline", I have all the other Dylan CDs that I want.
Diehard fans will continue to buy the entire CD to collect all their favorite artists' works and for the non-digitized sound. However, they may no longer be massed produced. It's good for the average consumer who is currently forced to buy the entire CD just to get 1 or 2 songs. Im not sure how the current Apple site works and whether you can preview the music. I can see a situation in which local record stores will have a setup where you can listen to all the songs you want and then create a CD right in the store.
I agree with MM, there's something about the way a full album is "laid out". Even if there are a few songs I don't like, I download them anyway just to get a feel for the whole album. I hope that #1 doesn't come to pass. You're right about the sound quality of a "real" CD vs. an MP3. There's just no comparison. I usually download a whole CD, listen for a few days, then decide if I'm going to buy it or not. I have downloaded all of DMB's studio albums and bought them all a week later for that exact reason.
Off topic, but... How is that? I got Machina I and was very disappointed and I'm a huge Pumpkins fan. Should I bother with II?
I'll always continue to listen to vinyl. I think this medium has survived it's doubters and predicted extinction. It will continue to have it's own niche in the marketplace.
It is okay but realize that you are not getting a "Siamese Dream" or "Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness". I think it is about the same as Machina I. I only got it because I am a completist on certain artists with the Pumpkins being one of them. It is better than a lot of the stuff out there now.
I guess I'm not the audiophile you guys are, or maybe my hearing is bad. I have LP's, CD's, and MP3's and they all sound fine to me. although, when I listen to LP's I do hear hiss and pops. Maybe if I listened extra hard I could tell some difference in the different formats, but life is too short to spend time trying to hear something that may or may not be there. I suspect there are many people out there like me, people who are happy with a 128bit MP3. Does anyone here agree with me.
I don't know all the details behind this new Apple Music thing, but I don't see myself wanting to PAY for an mp3. I have no problems buying CDs (I have 800+). I want the booklet and all that stuff. I want something tangible. An mp3 doesn't give me that, and the quality is inferior. What I've been doing is downloading 3-5 songs from an album to see if I want it. I'll never get more than that, b/c 3-5 is plenty to see if I like it or not. I like the songs, I buy it, if I don't, I don't buy the album. Without that option I usually resort to research (reviews, etc), if it's an artist I'm not familiar with but may be interested in. I use sound clips (amazon, etc) as well. But I can't imagine a situation where I would want to pay for an mp3. Maybe only if that were the only medium the music was available in, I guess.
Actually, on the issue of sound quality, I disagree with you, Jeff. Recording MP3s at 196 instead of 128 helps sound quality quite a bit. Sure, it's not perfect CD quality, but it's damn close, IMO. However, in the near future, if we're forced to only download/pay for MP3s that are encoded at 128, then you've got a point. That being said, as an HT nut (I'm the guy using $150 earbud headphones with my Ipod), I'm very concerned with the "sound of music." However, I think there's room for both mid-quality sound and high-quality sound in the market. Sure, we all tend to think of MP3 when we think "digital sound," but there's also SACD and DVD-Audio, as Manny mentioned before. If anything, SACD and DVD-A bring music to the next step in sound quality. The problem is, no one uses them. However, I think, slowly but surely, people will start to migrate towards SACD and DVD-Audio DVDs. It may not happen today, but it will happen in the future. First, the average consumer buys a DVD player to see what all the fuss is all about. Then, they buy a 5.1 audio system to take advantage of all the whizz-bang effects. If properly marketed (and it's currently not, unfortunately), the consumer can then make the leap between digital sound for movies and digital sound for music, since they'll already have the appropriate equipment to take advantage of high quality sound (a lot of new players now also play DVD-A). Now, will the medium take over MP3s in popularity? Hell, no! But it will give audio aficionados another option if MP3 just isn't cutting it, sound-wise. Too bad the amount of DVD-A/SACD titles are severely lacking, though (much like the doomed Nintendo 64 library).
I agree with you. I do notice a slight difference but not anything worth paying $15 for the actual cd. Also, I almost always download entire albums rather than just occasional songs, and burn the songs in the exact order as on the album. My goal is to duplicate the cd album as closely as possible, I listen to every song before to check for sound problems, and I even go as far to download the cd art to stick on the burned cd. Screw the damn record companies, a really good band or artist will make their money from touring and live shows.
I have never downloaded a entire album. I'm not interested in "collecting" music like it's Star Wars action figures or something. I will usually download what I can from an artist and weed out what I don't want. I always the the cd player on shuffle anyways, unless I am in the car but I don't drive that much. Quality isn't that much of an issue to me unless it is totally screwed up. It doesn't matter that much to the kind I music I listen to. And If I have the home cd player on, that means I'm in the backyard drinkin so WTF.
I realize that I'm probably a lot more sensitive to it than most. When you've spent half your life in a recording studio like I have, you tend to pay very close attention to the details. As for full-length albums, this is usually VERY important to musicians. You spend a long time working to get it just right and in a certain order - you really think about that stuff - and then everyone can just divide it up without even listening to the whole thing. That can be frustrating.
I think what will happen is that downloadable singles will become the "medium of choice" for most listeners (casual and young listeners to pop-type music). Albums will still be available, but because only die-hards will want them they will get way more expensive. Hopefully the packaging and extras will be improved to make them worthwhile. A little off-topic... but I'm in the "a well mastered CD sounds just as good as a well mastered album" camp (at least on my Maggies!). However, there are a lot of really badly mastered CDs out there.
AAC. And yes, technically it's not an mp3. Testing done by Dolby Labs said that people listening to AAC files encoded at 128 kbps and the original recordings couldn't tell the difference. Check out Apple's site if you want to know more... it's somewhere on there.
AAC = Advanced Audio Codec IIRC. I believe it's the audio component of MPEG-4 (boring 1000th post BTW)
