Downloading Music

Somnus

Malice_ wrote: »

That's another interesting point. Has anyone ever sat down and done a listening test with the original CD against a ripped MP3 or a FLAC?

I haven't really tbh. I mean you can clearly hear the difference when it's a low quality mp3 but with the others I haven't really checked so much. I just like listening to the disk if I have it

Star Bingo

you'll hear it on the hi-end stuff alright, crash cymbals in particular. hi-hats.. - long as it ain't wispy i'll survive, mosta my old 80s underground/wave was from cassettes anyhow. n vinyl - EPs more than albums, no-one's remastering that stuff for CD re-release, trust me..


-however as it becomes more of an artifact for the historians out there, maybe

--LOS--

The last cd I bought was Metallica's death magnetic, just coz I have all the albums and it would just seem weird not to have the completed collection but theres not many bands I would bother doing that for. I do miss buying and owning cds, I like listening to an album as a whole, the songs often lose their place when youre downloading them and I do hear the sound difference, cd is better quality but cds have not come down in price all that much since the introduction of downloading so you'd have to be a complete sucker to buy cds all the time. I've never actually paid to download anything either, I just don't give in to paying for something that you cannot copy from one place to the other and that is really only a temporary item, mp3s are easily wiped out and lost. Cds/dvds are still the most permanent form of storage, they are not easily damaged, I always copy music/movies from my laptop onto them so I dont have to worry about losing everything if a usb/hardrive breaks. I get all my music from youtube using a video to mp3 converter, moral or not, you cant resist the change in the availability of music nowadays, theres no way to prevent it and there are other ways of supporting bands now.

Motley Crue

I download albums to listen to them with the intention of buying them. If I like the album I'll try and seek it out, either new or second hand online, and in some cases I'll approach the high street on the day of release.

Another use for Internet downloading is back cataloguing, checking the past performances of a band that I have just gotten into (like Social Distortion) to see if they have any good material worth picking up other then what I have or, another use of Internet downloading, checking the material of a band I am going to see in concert that I might not be acquainted with (a support band or something) and I would rather listen to their music via studio ears then hear it dodgily over 20min on a support set and not know what the hell is going on

But no, Internet downloading en masse is wrong, but I do believe I support the music industry because I do buy new CDs, go to gigs and purchase merchandise....its all aimed at keeping the band on the road, allowing them to keep processing and making albums and allowing them to earn a living by taking a piece of mine (and I'm not bitter at all because most bands who take a piece of my living give me immense entertainment in return)

Jemmaa

Just checked my library - no albums downloaded from internet at all. I download music when somebody send me their own music to listen and wanna know what I think about that's pretty it.

Malice

--LOS-- wrote: »

the songs often lose their place when youre downloading them

Could you clarify what you mean by that? Are you saying that you can listen to songs in a different order than the default?

--LOS-- wrote:

I do hear the sound difference, cd is better quality

--LOS-- wrote:

I get all my music from youtube using a video to mp3 converter

You can't compare Youtube audio to CD audio. There's a huge gulf in sound quality so it's no wonder you can hear the difference. With a properly encoded MP3 though the gap isn't as big.

--LOS-- wrote:

I just don't give in to paying for something that you cannot copy from one place to the other and that is really only a temporary item, mp3s are easily wiped out and lost.

Could you clarify this as well? Are you saying that MP3s can't be copied or are you saying CDs can't be copied. Either way, both statements are false. MP3s might be easily wiped out and lot but CDs are easily scratched or dirtied.

--LOS-- wrote:

Cds/dvds are still the most permanent form of storage, they are not easily damaged, I always copy music/movies from my laptop onto them so I dont have to worry about losing everything if a usb/hardrive breaks.

Why not just keep a second hard drive and back up everything to that? Leave it in a safe place so you don't have to worry about losing or dropping it.

--LOS--

Malice_ wrote: »

Could you clarify what you mean by that? Are you saying that you can listen to songs in a different order than the default?



You can't compare Youtube audio to CD audio. There's a huge gulf in sound quality so it's no wonder you can hear the difference. With a properly encoded MP3 though the gap isn't as big.

Could you clarify this as well? Are you saying that MP3s can't be copied or are you saying CDs can't be copied. Either way, both statements are false. MP3s might be easily wiped out and lot but CDs are easily scratched or dirtied.

Why not just keep a second hard drive and back up everything to that? Leave it in a safe place so you don't have to worry about losing or dropping it.

Haha I dont think its that unclear!

1. Obviously you can listen to songs in the same order as was intended by the artist when the cd was put together :rolleyes: but downloading music in general (not just downloading albums) does diminish that workmanship somewhat since its popular to just download one or a few songs instead of downloading the whole album. The artist has thought about where each song is going to go on the album, the little interludes etc, before people would have just bought the whole album of an artist they kinda liked, now a lot more people just get the songs they like.

2. I never compared youtube audio to a cd, but fact is everytime a particular track/album is passed on from one place to another, its compressed somewhat, its obviously not a huge difference but there is a difference.

3. I was talking about mp3s, as in paid ones from the likes of itunes, if you wipe your system or something, its gone, obviously you can back stuff up but point is its not gona happen with a cd. Some paid sites dont even let you transfer the mp3s from where you downloaded them to. You said yourself, mp3s are easily wiped out. And you can go on about scratching and dirt on cds but its far easier to damage the circuitry of a usb/hardrive (external or internal :rolleyes: )/mp3 player.

4. Thanks, I do use an external hardrive, but anything I really wanna keep goes onto cds/dvds, real important stuff. It's not losing or dropping it I'd have to worry about, the mechanics of usbs etc are more fickle than the mechanics of a cd.

Fad

Predominately download for a variety of reasons.

1) I want the industry in its current form to die, it is killing off bands.

2) Music I listen to can all to often to physically buy in Ireland (And I dont want to pay for a set of DRM files, and would realistically rather not get into internet shopping if I can avoid it, I'm a student with a small income and getting a credit card wouldnt be a brilliant idea......not good with money)

3) When a band bothers their arse touring here, I go to see them, I spend money on merch (More than most probably). I dont download their music to undermine their efforts to profit from their craft. But I cant justify spending €15 on a CD when the absolute max the band will see is a fiver per unit(And that's Metallica we're talking about).

If a local band (That I like) release a CD, on a tiny label or release it themselves, I really wont hesitate in buying it, but that case is seldom.

I buy the occasional CD for completions sake (Metallica, New Order, stuff like that) but beyond that very little. I spent silly amounts of money on CDs between the ages of 14 and 17 buying random CDs by bands, so at this stage, I've given labels enough money.......

--LOS--

Fad wrote: »

3) When a band bothers their arse touring here

Yep, they might think twice about zooming on by us.

Fad wrote: »

I've given labels enough money.......

I agree, who are we really supporting buying cds, most of it does not go to the artist. I do think that downloading has probably damaged the music industry as far as the quality of music is concerned but I just cant justify paying for music downloads, you cant ban every illegal downloading site or chase down every perpetrator, there will always be loop-holes and thats unpreventable. I would love to be able to afford to buy cds and ensure Im supporting the artist but thats just being nostalgic.

Mushy

--LOS-- wrote: »

Yep, they might think twice about zooming on by us.



I agree, who are we really supporting buying cds, most of it does not go to the artist. I do think that downloading has probably damaged the music industry as far as the quality of music is concerned but I just cant justify paying for music downloads, you cant ban every illegal downloading site or chase down every perpetrator, there will always be loop-holes and thats unpreventable. I would love to be able to afford to buy cds and ensure Im supporting the artist but thats just being nostalgic.

As much as I agree with yourself and Fad here bout not wanting to give the record labels money, I think it affects the decision for a band to tour places. I use porcupine tree as an example, if people in Ireland are downloading their album, obviously it won't entice them to come here. Hate the way my favourite roadrunner bands don't play here.

Motley Crue

Mushy wrote: »

Hate the way my favourite roadrunner bands don't play here.

I've done some promo work with RR in the past and a few other labels. I won't go into details but one of the reasons, as told to me by a Roadrunner Rep, about why bands don't usually come to Ireland either preceding or following a large UK tour is the expense.

The band can have a bad night in Newcastle, for example, but make it up in Leeds the following night...whereas coming over to the Republic means currency changes, tax, transport costs, extra fuel costs and paying support bands to come with them...then you've got the Insurance for the group and using the equipment, which has to be changed to deal with a company that deals within Ireland.....Ireland also has late night ferries to get groups back across to the UK in time for another gig the next night but these can be extremely expensive on a budget

it's hard to break even with costs and most of the bands who do come here for smaller scale tours (American Head Charge, WASP for example) end up loosing more money then they gain...but that's just one reason, there could be countless other's, but it's as valid as any

Malice

--LOS-- wrote: »

Haha I dont think its that unclear!

Well obviously you don't, you wrote the post . The phrase

the songs often lose their place when youre downloading them

didn't make sense to me at the time. Now that you've clarified it, it does. So :rolleyes: right back at you.

--LOS-- wrote:

1. Obviously you can listen to songs in the same order as was intended by the artist when the cd was put together :rolleyes: but downloading music in general (not just downloading albums) does diminish that workmanship somewhat since its popular to just download one or a few songs instead of downloading the whole album. The artist has thought about where each song is going to go on the album, the little interludes etc, before people would have just bought the whole album of an artist they kinda liked, now a lot more people just get the songs they like.

You do realise that people have been taking individual songs and putting them together for a long time? Downloading didn't begin that trend, I'd say mix tapes did.

--LOS-- wrote:

2. I never compared youtube audio to a cd, but fact is everytime a particular track/album is passed on from one place to another, its compressed somewhat, its obviously not a huge difference but there is a difference.

Well, maybe you didn't compare them directly but what you posted was

I do hear the sound difference, cd is better quality

and

I get all my music from youtube using a video to mp3 converter

As for the YouTube sound quality, sure you can be fortunate and get a decent-sounding track, other times you get something that sounds like it was recorded through a loudspeaker with a Fisher-Price microphone with added crackle and hum for an authentic bootleg experience.

--LOS-- wrote:

3. I was talking about mp3s, as in paid ones from the likes of itunes, if you wipe your system or something, its gone, obviously you can back stuff up but point is its not gona happen with a cd. Some paid sites dont even let you transfer the mp3s from where you downloaded them to. You said yourself, mp3s are easily wiped out. And you can go on about scratching and dirt on cds but its far easier to damage the circuitry of a usb/hardrive (external or internal :rolleyes: )/mp3 player.

I don't use iTunes so I can't comment on how easy it is to back up downloads from there. I still think you're being unfair to USB devices though. I once closed a car door on a USB stick (I had left it plugged into a computer which was on the floor between the back and front seats). The top half of the case cracked and fell off but the unit itself was grand and still works. I can't imagine a CD surviving the same treatment .

--LOS-- wrote:

4. Thanks, I do use an external hardrive, but anything I really wanna keep goes onto cds/dvds, real important stuff. It's not losing or dropping it I'd have to worry about, the mechanics of usbs etc are more fickle than the mechanics of a cd.

Each to their own I guess. Speaking of which, I see Komplett are now selling a 1.5TB external drive for just under €100.

--LOS--

Malice_ wrote: »

So :rolleyes: right back at you.

Well I just thought it was pretty condescending to ask if I thought that songs cant be played in their default order!

Malice_ wrote: »

You do realise that people have been taking individual songs and putting them together for a long time? Downloading didn't begin that trend, I'd say mix tapes did.

Same goes for this^^
I have many cassette tapes but you still cant deny that downloading encourages way more people listen to music "shuffled" if you like, I'd put a cd on, let it play, put another on, I'd know the songs by the track number, now its become a habit to have everything together on a randomiser, certainly for myself and especially for bands you are not that that into, before I would have just bought cds by artists I wasnt all that familiar with, I would have given their whole body of work more of a chance before.

Malice_ wrote: »

I still think you're being unfair to USB devices though. I once closed a car door on a USB stick (I had left it plugged into a computer which was on the floor between the back and front seats). The top half of the case cracked and fell off but the unit itself was grand and still works. I can't imagine a CD surviving the same treatment .

Mp3s etc are great for space saving but from my own experience Ive had cds for years and theyre perfect, Ive damaged a few usbs in that time, cds actually cope pretty well with dirt/damage thanks to their error correcting codes. What Im really saying is that if Im going to spend money on music, Id probably rather have the cd coz its more permanent imo, in some cases theres not even much difference between the price of legal download and cd. I think the price of legal ones need to be a lot cheaper to justify losing a load of music and having to download it again. Im pro usbs, my issue is with paying for what is to some exaggeration a disposable item when all music/movies are readily available free which is now unavoidable and needs to be accepted.

o1s1n

--LOS-- wrote: »

I have many cassette tapes but you still cant deny that downloading encourages way more people listen to music "shuffled" if you like, I'd put a cd on, let it play, put another on, I'd know the songs by the track number, now its become a habit to have everything together on a randomiser, certainly for myself and especially for bands you are not that that into, before I would have just bought cds by artists I wasnt all that familiar with, I would have given their whole body of work more of a chance before.

Who cares what it encourages to be honest. If you like to listen to albums through then it doesn't matter what media you listen to them on, you still have that option with mp3s. Saying that's a negative point with mp3s is a bit silly to be honest. It's just to do with your own self control.

I listen to mp3s all the time and would say I mostly listen to albums through.

--LOS-- wrote: »

Mp3s etc are great for space saving but from my own experience Ive had cds for years and theyre perfect, Ive damaged a few usbs in that time, cds actually cope pretty well with dirt/damage thanks to their error correcting codes. What Im really saying is that if Im going to spend money on music, Id probably rather have the cd coz its more permanent imo, in some cases theres not even much difference between the price of legal download and cd. I think the price of legal ones need to be a lot cheaper to justify losing a load of music and having to download it again. Im pro usbs, my issue is with paying for what is to some exaggeration a disposable item when all music/movies are readily available free which is now unavoidable and needs to be accepted.

I agree with you when it comes to paying for stuff. If I pay for something I want a physical copy. I have never paid for a download and never will. If I did I'd be pretty paranoid about losing data.

Seeing as I download everything for free, there really isn't as much a fear of losing data. Well, I wouldn't like to lose my music collection as it would be a right pain to get back, and I've built it up over many years, but at least it's possible! I do back it all up onto ever hard drive I buy though.

--LOS--

o1s1n wrote: »

Who cares what it encourages to be honest.

I dont! It was just a comment on cd culture pre downloading, I really didnt care for going into detail on it, only someone asked me to clear something up.

o1s1n

--LOS-- wrote: »

I dont! It was just a comment on cd culture pre downloading, I really didnt care for going into detail on it, only someone asked me to clear something up.

Funnily enough, you could say the same about CDs.

When my parents first bought a CD player, my dad commented on how they promote skipping tracks.

'Back in my day when I put on a vinyl record, I'd listen to the whole thing through..it was too much trouble to get up and lift the needle'

Malice

--LOS-- wrote: »

Well I just thought it was pretty condescending to ask if I thought that songs cant be played in their default order!

That wasn't what I asked you. I asked you to clarify what you'd written. It wasn't meant to be taken as condescending at all.

--LOS-- wrote:

you still cant deny that downloading encourages way more people listen to music "shuffled" if you like

Well if they've only downloaded one or two songs off an album that's all they can do isn't it?

--LOS--

Motley Crue

^^what's ironic is that while you too have been fighting I've been downloading illegal music:rolleyes:

Malice

Motley Crue wrote: »

^^what's ironic is that while you too have been fighting I've been downloading illegal music:rolleyes:

Can't you multitask? Anyway, I wasn't fighting, I was conducting a discussion.

Catari Jaguar

To think of all the trees chopped down to provide the paper for sleeves, how many billion plastic cases are made and thrown out, the fortune spent on mass production. The amount record labels take from artists to produce the album. The end result is digital so it makes no sense to have hard copies. Especially CDs, they have no longevity.

Just record it, upload it and if people wanna buy it fair enough, if they want it for free fair enough. No one NEEDS a personal wealth of €40 million. Make art for art's sake, or for the love of it. Anyways, I pay for merchandise and tickets to concerts. That's where the money should come from.