CDs are in every way better than vinyl records. They are smaller, much higher quality audio, lower noise floor and don’t wear out by being played. The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad. The fact you can rip and stream your own CD media is fantastic because generally remasters are not good and streaming services typically only have remastered versions, not originals. You have no control on streaming services about what version of an album you’re served or whether it’ll still be there tomorrow. Not an issue with physical media.

The vast majority of people listen to music using equipment that produces audio of poor quality, especially those that stream using ear buds. It makes me very sad when people don’t care that what they’re listening to could sound so much better, especially if played through a hifi from a CD player, or using half decent (not beats) headphones.

There’s plenty of good sounding and well produced music out there, but it’s typically played back through the equivalent of two cans and some string. I’m not sure people remember how good good music can sound when played back through good kit.

  • Shimitar@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Foreword: I only stream my music, from FLAC preferably. I don’t own vynils but mostly i don’t own CD’s anymore either.

    CD is dead and should be dead. Rip it and stream it, full stop. No need or reason to keep a degrading digital format when you can just rip it (full quality and store as FLAC) and stream it. That’s the whole point.

    Vynil instead gives you the experience of listening, with all the associated crap/fun depending on your POV.

    So while there is a case for vynil today, but I don’t share it, there is zero case for CDs. Just download the bits. Don’t waste plastic and shit with a polluting and degrading medium that make no sense today that downloading a full quality uncompressed audio file takes seconds.

    • MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      Compartmentalized optical media is a really nice way of storing things, though. I’m way more likely to listen to an album from start to finish if it’s from a CD than a folder of files on my PC. Plus CDs are dirt cheap now more than ever. I get used CDs for like $2-5 each.

    • Wolf314159@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      CD is dead and should be dead. Rip it and stream it, full stop. No need or reason to keep a degrading digital format when you can just rip it (full quality and store as FLAC) and stream it. That’s the whole point.

      This sentiment is somehow hostile to both artists and listeners. That’s not the whole point. The whole point is that when I buy a thing (book, music, video), I own the thing and can store, backup, and transfer ownership as I see fit, not according to the whims of future licensing deals. I don’t want to buy what is basically an NFT of the music. I want to buy the physical object. I want to be able to physically transfer that object.

      You’ll own nothing and like it I guess. Not me though. I’ve lived through too many failing companies, disappearing websites and services, hostile licensing deals that alienate and disenfranchise artists and fans, and general corporate greed. Let me buy the CD as directly from the band as possible. Let me take it from there and use whatever I choose for equipment, format, or software to enjoy it.

      For the last few decades, very few people that have declared a popular media format dead have turned out to be correct.

      • Shimitar@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        You want to purchase a vibration of the air?

        a sound?

        I understand why you want a physical object to hold, but owning the music to me means no DRM, then the bits are mine and I can do whatever I want with them.

        Indeed go buy posters, lyrics, any physical item you want from your band. Caps, cups, t-shirts, any form of art.

        But I still don’t see a reason for CDs. Then buy vinyls, at least the art is far bigger!

        • Wolf314159@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yes, I want an unencumbered physical representation of the artists work, just like you’d expect from an art print or book. I thought I was pretty clear about that. I don’t want merch. I want the art. It’s my money to spend to support the artists the way I choose, not an argument you can “win”.

          • Shimitar@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Not trying to win anything. But isn’t the music the art from the artist? Do usually the artist also design the covers and albums themselves?

            • Wolf314159@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Obviously I was talking about the recording, not the album art. It’s like you’re going out of your way to misinterpret everything I’ve said that doesn’t already align with the way you think. Kinda super frustrating.

    • Snapz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You rip those CDs to get rid of degrading physical storage… onto a hard drive that can also fail. A hard drive being degrading/corruptable physical storage.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s pretty unlikely that all your harddrives fail at the same time. Just back them up regularly, it’s pretty easy compared to a physical CD or vinyl collection.

        That said, most of my music collection is stored in high quality mp3, not lossless. Lossless would make the backup process quite a bit more expensive.

      • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        We actually have the technology to make Audio CDs that last 100s of years, but the manufacturers refuse to use it in CDs, reserving it for DVD-R and BD-R discs for archiving. It doesn’t even cost much more to produce (but they certainly charge more for it).

        So I rip all my audio CDs to Flac and then burn them to a single 100GB M–Disc for archival.

      • Shimitar@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        We could print to stone maybe, with redoundancy and CRC codes embedded, using chisels.

        That could last a bit longer, maybe.

        /s

    • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’ve just realised you spelled vynil correctly and everyone else has been either spelling it wrong or pronouncing it wrong since its conception

      • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I just spent 5 minutes looking it up and can’t find any version of the word spelled vynil.

        It’s vinyl because that’s the material the records are made from. Just like vinyl flooring.

        • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          Vinyl is pronounced “vy”- “nil”. It’s written "“vi”-“nyl” which makes no sense to a non native speaker, which the OP obviously was.

          His spelling of it makes more sense than our native spelling of it

          I’m sorry you have to have jokes explained to you, the internet must be confusing ☺️

      • Shimitar@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Did I? Maybe because I am not an English speaker? Good to know tough, I went by instinct

        • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I was joking in that your spelling makes far more literal sense than the actual spelling

          I prefer yours and I’m using it from now on 😂

            • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Did you see how upset that other guy got about your spelling and my joke? Spent five minutes looking it up apparently.

              The British English for that is a pedantic wanker. It just trips off the tongue

              • Shimitar@feddit.it
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I can understand pedantic when referring to language, spelling and grammar…

                Bit honestly, in English? It’s probably the most fluid language in the world today… Spoken so differently all around the globe… Always evolving and surprising…

                No I am not a native English speaker, but I am sometimes pedantic on my mother language with my kids… So… :)