• On GameSpot: Wii Fit tells 10-year-old she's fat
April 3, 2008 12:15 PM PDT

'98 to '08: What we lost along the way

Posted by Donald Bell
Photo of Sony Discman CD player next to Microsoft Zune 80 MP3 player.

If nothing else, we've certainly redefined our notions of portability over the last 10 years.

(Credit: Donald Bell/CNET Networks)


In the '90s, when the MP3 was new, it was difficult to predict the medium's effect on the music industry and our culture. Today, the results of the MP3 revolution are starting to show, and I sometimes wonder what we won.

It's fitting that 2008 marks the 10-year anniversary of two of the first MP3 players, the Eiger Labs MPMan F10, and the Rio PMP300, but chances are you didn't listen to a first-gen MP3 player in 1998. With the first iPod still three years off, most of us were in the heights of our compact disc addiction 10 years ago, content to hear our music on portable CD players. Hell, some of us still listened to cassettes.

The Sony Discman pictured above belongs to me. I never use it, but I like holding on to it because it reminds me of how amazing I once thought CDs were. Sure, they would skip like crazy, get scratched, or even break, but compact discs were the first medium to usher in the idea of "permanent" music--albums that (if treated kindly) would never degrade over time. After a lifetime of warped LPs and worn-out cassettes, CDs seemed almost magical.

Today, most of us take for granted that our MP3s won't wear out or skip. In fact, there's tons of antiquated annoyances we no longer worry about in the age of the MP3. For instance, when was the last time you had to special-order your music at a record store and wait a week or more for it to arrive? When was the last time you wanted to hear an album you know you own but couldn't locate in the mess of your apartment? As the music in our lives has evaporated into noncorporeal ones and zeros, the troubled memories of acquiring and maintaining a physical music collection are quickly fading into the past.

Despite the advantages of the MP3, I'm willing to wager that somewhere in your home you have a shelf, closet, or box filled with CDs, records, or cassettes (maybe even MiniDiscs). Why do we hang on to these antiques? Is it nostalgia? Is it the fear of losing something we can't regain? Or are we just lazy?

Screen shot of Apple iTunes music software.

Programs such as iTunes perfectly sort my digital music collection, but also homogenize artists into a spreadsheet of flat, impersonal squares. As a music lover, I can't decide whether technology has improved my relationship with music or simply sanitized it.

Call it the MP3-era hangover, but even as online music providers are finally offering the DRM-free downloads we asked for years ago, I'm starting to realize that my fascination with the MP3 is starting to wane. As a music fan, I can't completely accept that MP3s are the end of the line. I won't be reviving my old Discman anytime soon, but I can't help but wonder if we've lost more than we realize in the process of virtualizing our music collections.

I want to hear what you guys think, but to start you off, here's my list of music listening habits I had in 1998 that for reasons directly or indirectly related to the advent of the MP3, have died off. Admittedly, some of these habits are also related to the difference between being 19 and 29 (you can decide which are which).

Borrowing music

I know this may sound weird considering all the P2P music "sharing" going on these days, not to mention music-focused social networks such as Last.fm, but I miss borrowing CDs from friends. Like lending out a good book, lending music used to mean the lender actually gave up something, and that sacrifice imbued the music with personal meaning. Borrowing physical media also involves face-to-face interaction, oftentimes leading to great conversations. The modern age of copying, uploading, and linking to music has allowed me to discover new music at a much faster rate, but those discoveries seem much less personal.

Album artwork and liner notes

As far back as I can remember, whenever I brought home a new cassette or CD I would pop it in my stereo and immediately look over the album artwork and liner notes. Back then, I remember feeling ripped off if a group didn't include printed lyrics, but these days, I don't think twice that most of my music collection exists as a grid of basic metatags. Sure I can always jump on a band's MySpace page or Wikipedia entry if I want to know where they're from, what they're singing about, who their drummer is, or what their album cover looks like at full size, but I wish that information was still a part of the "product."

Used music

I spent more than two years of my life working in a new and used record store in Sacramento, where used CDs outsold new CDs about four to one. Used CDs not only offered our customers an inexpensive way to acquire new music, it gave people who were bored with their music a way to put money back in their pocket.

Putting aside my nostalgia for used music stores, I think we forget that MP3s are the first music format consumers cannot legally resell. Maybe I'm weird, but over the past 10 years, I've been happy to find myself on both sides of the used music economy--selling CDs to make rent, and buying great old records at garage sales. iTunes has never helped me pay the bills, and aside from illegal file sharing, there's no way to put your MP3s back into circulation after you're tired of them.

Music as furniture

I've known people with CD and record collections that take up an entire room of their home. Personally, I love going over to a friend's home and seeing what's on their shelves (books, CDs, DVDs). As our music collections disappear from our shelves and become entombed in our computers and iPods, something gets lost. Sure, it means dinner guests can no longer judge your bad taste in music, but it also means that when you want to hear Nick Drake on a on rainy Sunday afternoon, you'll need to boot up Windows Media Player or scroll through your iPod. Personally, I miss having Nick Drake live on my shelf as a tangible part of my life, and I miss seeing friend's music collections laid bare for me to analyze and admire.

So how about you? What do you miss about how you experienced music 10 years ago? Has today's technology made you feel more or less connected to the bands and musicians behind the music you hear today? Has the shuffle feature on your iPod opened you to new music, or just erased your attention span? I really want to know, so sound off in the comments.

Donald Bell is CNET Reviews' senior editor for MP3 players and portable audio, and one half of the MP3 Insider blog and weekly podcast. He also likes getting his hands dirty with digital audio tools for musicians and DJs.
Recent posts from MP3 Insider
Microsoft chopping Zune prices
Zune 3.1 firmware unleashed
How to convert AAC to MP3
MP3 Insider 123: Girls, girls, girls!
Earphones with short cables and stereo audio for one ear--Ask the Editors
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 325 comments
by rkinne01 April 3, 2008 12:59 PM PDT
What do I miss from the age of CD's? The ability to trade my music without the worry of RIAA dragging me to court. What I don't miss is that no wonder how well you treated the CD a smudge or scratch always ended up on the surface (now I worry about smudges and scratches on the MP3)! I still buy quite a few Cd's due to the fact that most MP3 sites (Rhapsody, I-Tunes) don't give you the choice of which quality of audio you'll get.
Reply to this comment
by rangel28 April 3, 2008 3:52 PM PDT
I find that I still buy CDs once in a while, especially if extra discs or bonus content is included.
I have more than 450 CDs and all of my CDs are ripped and on my MP3 players. I love the portability of MP3 players, and the fact that I can carry my entire CD collection on my Cowon X 5. That being said, I still like the feel of a CD. I am 46, so that may explain why I like CDs; I still enjoy the feeling of opening a CD for the first time (usually after I've struggled with it a bit!) and reading the liner notes.
Reply to this comment
by crimsonfenix April 3, 2008 4:58 PM PDT
To better understand why I hang onto my CD's, let me start by saying a couple of things I won't stand for in my media are censorship and aspect-ratio reduction.

In short, I hate feeling like I've been short changed when I buy and watch or listen to something with the expectation of it being a fair representation of the original. There is no way, at least in my opinion, that a track sampled at 192Kb or even 256Kb AAC or MP3 or WMA is a fair representation of a studio recording. When I'm at home, and I'm listening to music, I want to be able to hear what the composer, artist, song writer, or even the producer intended for the piece to be. That being said, a large portion of my library is in digital format, but as of late I have been using Flac more and more for archiving my discs and auto-converting that to MP3 or WMA when I want anything on my MP3 player (a Creative Zen if you're curious).

Don't get me wrong, I would gladly give up on the CD trade if digital downloads become comparable in quality. That would mean an open, lossless format like Flac, Monkey, or WavePack. Being open is another important part of that; right now, I can buy a CD and play it or do with it what I will, rather that be play it in a home stereo, in a portable, in a PC, in a DVD player, etc. DRM free is a step in the right direction, but lossless AAC and WMA are both steps in the opposite; organic DRM if you will. For now, I view the current market place in much the same way others say the BlueRay HD-DVD conflict; there is no true "win" for the consumer and I am happy to stand on the side lines waiting for the dust to settle. I just hope there is something worth flocking to when it's all said and done.
Reply to this comment
by froasier April 24, 2008 4:04 PM PDT
You're wrongly using the term "aspect-ratio"--it has nothing to do with what you're talking about. Also, I dare you to take a double-blind listening test comparing 192kbps AAC or MP3 or WMA to the uncompressed track from the CD. Only then can you rightfully complain.
by jchastn April 24, 2008 9:31 PM PDT
I have to agree. MP3 is a format unfit for true music listening. My iPod is for the gym or the car only. CDs and vinyl are still the best.
by RichRa April 25, 2008 9:31 AM PDT
In response to froasier, I'm sure his mention of "aspect ratio" referred to the choice of buying full-screen (4:3) vs. wide-screen DVDs. Buying the full-screen DVD version of a wide-screen movie is, in many regards, comparable to buying an MP3 instead of a CD. Full-screen DVDs and MP3s are compromises. They have trade-offs. They sacrifice certain qualities of the original material for the sake of space utilization.
by Phloptical April 26, 2008 6:18 AM PDT
I'm not going to bash your opinion of audio preference. All I really care to comment on is that digital audio is digital audio no matter what the source. The real argument is between analog audio vs. CD. To say a CD represents what the artist intended us to hear is not, IMO, entirely accurate. What a CD really represents is what the artists _computer_ intended us to hear. It all boils down to trying to mimic a sine wave with ones and zeros. Something will be missed, in the translation, it has to be, no matter what lossless-high sampling rate codec you're using. An organic, transitioning sound is still represented by a 1 or 0.

Now, for my taste....an mp3 can sound pretty friggin good given a high enough sampling rate, or using the right codec. So good, in fact, that I'll defy anyone to say the analog version of the track sounds noticeably better than the digital one through a typical stereo. Actually, I'll take the pepsi challenge even on an "audiophile" stereo and predict that at least 95% of the people out there wouldn't notice the difference.
by GraysonBoone April 29, 2008 2:03 PM PDT
So are you telling me that if you listen to a song in MP3 format, recorded at a 256 bit rate, you are feeling jipped because a CD is in better format? Have you actually sat down and compared a CD against a 256 rate? I personally use a 192 bit rate and have about 17,000 songs in my digital collection. My in home sound system includes a Yamaha RX-V793 A/V receiver which is hooked to five top-of-the-line paradigm speakers, a tweeter by Realistic, and a 20 inch servo-controlled subwoofer. My personal headset is a pair of the Shure E-500. I have compared multiple bit-rates against the same CD that i ripped them from on both of these high quality audio sources, and have found no appreciable difference at a 256 bit-rate. Every know and then at 192, you might hear a crash cymbal distort ever so slightly, but i find it incredibly hard to believe that you can find any difference at all between a high end MP3 and a lossless CD. And even if for some reason you do have ears like Superman, rock and roll is not about hearing every bit of resonance in an acoustically sound room; it is about the music.
by greg987654 May 4, 2008 7:22 PM PDT
I'm with you. I don't want to rent music, I want to purchase music once to listen to it when and where I see fit from whatever format I choose to convert it too. I'll stick with lossless too. If you are comparing average rock and roll as WAV to MP3, you might not hear much difference because the recording quality of too many of the CDs I purchase is so poor and most people don't own stereo systems capable of reproducing the difference. The quality of mass market stereo systems stopped advancing about 10 to 15 years ago and its a shame that so many people haven't heard high quality recordings through a properly set up stereo system. It can send shivers down your back. There is a difference between MP3 and Lossless.
by ktreb April 3, 2008 7:56 PM PDT
Ten years later, I spend a lot less on music. Back in the "old" days, I would buy a cd for maybe those 2 or 3 songs that I really want. If I'm really lucky, I'll end up liking half of it. Rarely will I like all of it. And I would spend $500 - $700 a year. At most, I now spend $200 a year on downloads. This time every song is a wanted song. I still buy cds on occasion. I do have favorite artists that I've followed over the years that continue to make good/great albums.
Reply to this comment
by discsfordogs April 4, 2008 8:08 AM PDT
If you want to get rid of your old CDs and help the SPCA at the same time, check out www.DiscsForDogs.org
Reply to this comment
by jaycburke April 22, 2008 7:54 AM PDT
Out of curiosity, what type of music do they enjoy the most?
by weyez April 24, 2008 4:56 PM PDT
Thanks! I recently acquired a dog from the local animal shelter and will be more than happy to send you my now dust-collecting CD collection :-)
by captainpolaroid April 5, 2008 4:54 AM PDT
I still buy CDs (and records in fact) on a regular basis. I have only ever purchased a couple of mp3s and it felt largely unsatisfying, like I'd just bought nothing. I do listen to mp3s every day, in fact while reading this article I was listening to an album (one I ripped from a CD I own of course!) on a portable mp3 player, but only out of convenience. Like you, I miss the sleeves and liner notes, all the feelings associated with holding a physical album, browsing through second record stores hoping I'll find something I've been on the look out for and something I hadn't thought about until I read your article, the sacrifice you make when you lend a CD to another person. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your piece, thanks for writing it.
Reply to this comment
by RickBee April 8, 2008 5:16 AM PDT
Due I'm sure in large part to my baby boomer status, I'm still a proponent of physical media. However, I look at CD's (and yes, vinyl) in a very importanat light: They are the proof of lisence for any digital media I might have in my collection. Any ripped media one has on a computer implies the owner still has posession of the original physical media, or it's piracy!

The other reason I'm still purchasing and holding on to my discs is BACKUP. You never know when the 'ol hard drive is going to crash, takkng with it your entire collection. This is the modern equivalent of leaving your records near a heater and having them all warp :)

Used CD:s and records are also a great way to inexpensivly add to the collection. I love going to the music shop and looking through the .99 vinyl and finding an obscure jazz record from the '60's. It's like a treasure hunt!
Reply to this comment
by hotshot982 April 24, 2008 7:04 PM PDT
I totally agree. At almost age 18, you'd think I'd be ready to embrace the new tech at the expense of the old. I've experimented with paid downloads, and gave them up because of DRM. Now that Amazon offers high-quality DRM-free music, I'll buy a track if it's all that I want off of the album, but I'll spring for the CD, either uber-cheap online or from my local, independent music store. There's definitely something to tangible ownership. CD's are still the way to go for playing in cars that don't have the line inputs, and the backup is a very practical reason as well. Why should I waste space on my external drive or burn backups when I can get a professionally-made, high-quality, uncompressed disc with all of the artwork and liner notes?
by bhartman35 April 8, 2008 7:14 AM PDT
I still treasure CDs. It's not that I like the physical format (which I don't). But the big advantage to a physical CD is the sound quality. Most of the music stores provide music at 192kps, or 256kps, at best. That's just not good enough for some music. If it's music I really want to hear well, I always buy the CD. I then rip it at 320kps. While you still lose something in the ripping, at least you lose less. And if you want, you can still rip to WAV format, which of course misses nothing.

The other thing CDs are good for is getting cheap music. Used CDs are alive and well at sites like Amazon. You can literally get 3 used CDs for the price of one new one. Most of the time I've done that, the only thing I lost was the shrinkwrap (although occasionally you'll get a crack in the jewel case).

I think that there will be a market for CDs for as long as online music stores refuse to sell quality digital recordings.
Reply to this comment
by julzcompufreak April 8, 2008 7:31 AM PDT
I'm only 16 and I still buy CDs. Sure, I have a huge collection of songs of which I also download, but I still like the idea of buying a CD. The thing about *buying* mp3s is that you don't physically get it in your hot little hands, it feels as if you don't own it at all. I like the idea that I bought something worthwhile and good to listen to with my hard earned cash, something with a bit of weight to it, and you get the REAL album artwork as well! You also have to remember that you can't accidentally delete, reformat or lose your physical CDs due to ignorance or hard disk failure, unlike that of MP3s. My only ever gripe with CDs is the fact they get scratched, but I suppose thats the way of everything in life.
Reply to this comment
by MMBURG April 8, 2008 7:56 AM PDT
I think among the things missed is the notion of music as art form - whether in the context of "album cover art" or in the context of high quality sound. Indeed, the development of the digital format was a first step down this slippery slope, as the CD, no matter what the sampling rate, cannot compete on high end audiophile equipment with LP, the latter having a sweeter and better rounded sound. Moving from the CD to MP# - again, regardless of sampling rate - compounds the problem. Of course, we no longer sit and listen to music, whether alone or in a social group; rather, music serves as background as we walk from place to place, transport ourselves in some conveyance, or conduct our work. We have lost much in the interest of convenience, and most do not even recognize (or care?) about what has been lost.
Reply to this comment
by DarkHawke April 9, 2008 4:13 AM PDT
Perhaps, but how many of us can afford such high end equipment or would care to take the time to tweak that last little "perfect" db from an analogue playback system that has so many inherent limitations and defects? Not that I'm dissing the quest for better sound, let alone your own personal pursuit of same, but you don't need to become an audiophile and lay down beaucoup bucks to get some VERY decent sound. Just speaking for myself, but I'm listening to much the same music I did as a teenager, yet for all the 21st century, digital age nature of the delivery, it sounds LIGHT YEARS better that it did back in the day of LPs and FM radio for a comparatively modest investment of time and cash. I appreciate your desire and quest for sonic purity, but the aural circumstances of the modern age need not be so dire as you propose.
by 7Fred7 April 24, 2008 10:07 PM PDT
MMBURG: "I think among the things missed is the notion of music as art form - whether in the context of "album cover art" or in the context of high quality sound. Indeed, the development of the digital format was a first step down this slippery slope, as the CD, no matter what the sampling rate, cannot compete on high end audiophile equipment with LP, the latter having a sweeter and better rounded sound."

That says it all for me. I miss LPs. Magnificent glossy sleeves with so much info on the back. There's the disc on the turntable, with the stylus pressure adjusted to half a gram...and out of this world sound quality. Expensive, inconvenient, but beautiful works of art.
by tbcass April 29, 2008 3:27 AM PDT
You and other audiophiles make me laugh. Let me start by saying that at one time (60's to the 80's) I was an audiophile. I had stereo systems that in todays dollars would cost well over $10,000. I was constantly upgrading in an effort to get the "best" sound. I found that CD's were a revolution in sound. I was NEVER satisfied with the quality of even the best vinyl records. The surface noise, compressed dynamic range and general "coloring" of the sound (due to the vinyl's much higher harmonic distortion) were never able to properly reproduce the feeling of a live performance (I'm a musician). In the vinyl days the most prized recordings were digitally mastered. Now digital is frowned upon. Why? It's because Audiophiles need that feeling of exclusivity, that they are somehow superior. Now that same group of people who championed the superiority of digital now champion Tubes and Vinyl. That said as long as mp3's are a lossless format the CD will be a viable master.
by cayucodies April 8, 2008 8:21 AM PDT
I remember when my dad left to work in another country, and one of the most meaningful things I had to remember him was his LP and CD collection. He always wrote all over the covers, imprinting special dates, signatures of his friends and his own, even autographs. In the covers or folders I used to find pictures of him, concerts he went to and more. The music room in my house was sacred to me. Even the old LP player style reminded me of him. With portable music, that music room would have been empty. By looking at all his albums I learned of hundreds of songs, artists, places where they came from. It made me like music more. Now a days, on top of the fact that most new songs don't reach you in the heart, if your go to some one's house, most people don't think of sharing their music with you. Ultimately, the social aspect of it suffered a big hit.
Reply to this comment
by April 24, 2008 6:15 PM PDT
Wundrful comment. I am the era as yr dad, I am 55. The LP format was so rich (it was BIG too !). Including much printed info and, every now & then we'd get a 'fold-out' leaflet with more photos and more media....... I recall a time or two when the artist included a bonus, thin, SQUARE, playable plastic 33-1/3 insert !! The circle of friends I was in always regarded the 1st playing of any LP as a "Master" and we recorded that playing on Reel-To-Reel or 'Metal' cassette for posterity ! Any 'hiss or rumble' that was present on the recording was easily overcome (it really was not that audible folks). Your dad's flare for collecting autograghs and comments is precious, sir, and it is obvious that he loved his music & friends. I applaud your connection to the (his) past, and wish you continued pleasure as you embrace music, the way it was for so many, many years. Folks now who banter the pluses & minuses of CD's and MP3's have no perception of what it was like in the days of analog LP's. NONE. Do you have a tube amp ?? If you want to experience pure, existential music the way it was..... i wholeheartedly recommend a good tube amplifier, a good LP turntable and a weekend of meaningful listening to your dad's LP collection. You will NOT be disappointed. A money-back guarantee ! I still retain 300+ LP records. A major let down a few years back was when a litter of kittens was allowed to sharpen their claws on the edges of the paper jackets ! Not that it affected the LP in any way, but now it is hard to discern some of the Artist/Albumn by looking at the edge of the jacket....as we then used to do....... Regardless, thanks for a wonderful & special posting today. Tell your dad I love him plenty too! kenny
by wuchmee April 8, 2008 8:57 AM PDT
We're collectively losing the notion of achieving better sound quality. CDs themselves are still problematic with regard to what THEY ushered in. The trade-off for a smaller, non-needle-and-groove format (especially in the first 15 years) was quite evident - bad, or indifferent, mastering for CD releases was responsible for some truly horribly sounding releases. There was quite a bit of longing for the sonic glories of vinyl, and still is in some quarters. (It took 20 years for the industry to REALLY get CD mastering.) And yet, if it weren't for the CD, the re-releases and box sets and that we now take for granted would NEVER have happened. NEVER. So, after these years of refinement and remarketing, I would never go back to vinyl. No skipping needles, no more albums as dust magnets, no more sonic (i.e., groove) deterioration after the first few plays.

Along with box sets and re-releases never happening, neither would ripping - and therein lies the deal with the devil we've all made. The form factor's easy assimilation into the modern PC/Mac has been a double-edged sword, at best, for consumers. (As well as the music industry, but that's another story.)

The lossy formats - MP3, AAC, etc. - have stalled the gains that the audio industry had achieved well into the late-90s/early-2000s, coinciding with the age of the CD. Portability is now the rule, SQ be damned. Instant gratification is the driving force (Bell admits this himself) behind the general acceptance of crappy sound. MP3 and AAC (throw in OGG, too) will NEVER sound as good as CD, no matter what the respective proponents claim at Hydrogen Audio and the like. (It does make for fascinating reading, though.)

Even the first assault on two-channel audio - home theater - didn't change the notion that portable sound could and should sound good. MP3/AAC have been used to offer consumers better portability - no contention - but with a BIG step backwards in general sound quality. Larger flash-based units with better battery life coupled with wider acceptance of FLAC and ALAC (not WAV) or whatever may supplant them, may be the best alternative. Maybe. Only maybe.

That said, I would not go back to portable CD players when running of workng in the yard. THIS is what MP3 was made for: non-overly discriminating, casual use. When inside, it is CD. Period.
Reply to this comment
by epgibson April 8, 2008 9:42 AM PDT
There are several quality compromises with MP3 format. I too want the original studio recordings. CD format isn't perfect but it is engineered by music professionals. My biggest complaint about MP3 format is GAPs. I can't believe more people don't demand a solution to this problem. The gaps created by MP3 format absolutely mangle any recording that doesn't have distinct 3 minute songs. Live recording, classical recordings, dj mixes, etc. MP3s and digital music are great. Wouldn't want to go back but we have willingly sacrificed a fair amount of quality for convenience. Wish we were a little more demanding of quality.
Reply to this comment
by sdengineer April 8, 2008 10:59 AM PDT
I want to reiterate a points captainpolaroid and RickBee made: I miss the brick-and-mortar shopping experience associated with physical media. Admittedly, there is a lot of convenience shopping online for either CDs or downloads -- instant access to user reviews, recommendations, etc. Fortunately for me, we have an excellent local independent music store in my neighborhood (M-Theory Records, on Washington St. in San Diego). I was in there the other day -- walked up to the counter with a handful of new and used discs, and the person there asked me if I had "found everything I was looking for." I thought about it for a second and replied, "Yes, not only what I was looking for but a couple of things I *wasn't* looking for, which is exactly what keeps me coming back to your store." Sure, you can have a similar thing happen when shopping online, but there is a certain spontaneous thrill one gets in a physical store that can't be matched. I confess there is some nostalgia at work here (I'm 43) and I fear this effect is not enough to ensure their viability as a business in the long term, but for now it works for me and I will continue to do business there as long as they are around.
Reply to this comment
by svasco April 8, 2008 11:21 AM PDT
Then there's the part about waiting for a new release on Tuesday, waiting at a store, seeing the possibilities of new releases you didn't know about, browsing, and everything else about going to a store to purchase something tangible and real. The New Release rack was a second home to me at one time. I can't find that in an MP3. I still, and always will, buy CDs. Long live the CD!
Reply to this comment
by ohmssandfrwl April 8, 2008 11:28 AM PDT
I sold all of my CD's in 2007 after I downloaded everything I wanted into my MAC. I sold over 2500 discs. It took forever, but it was the best thing I could have done with what started to become an albatross around my neck. Also, I'm glad I sold it while people are still buying (I wish I would have thought that way about my laser disc collection???). Now that I have reduced my "catalog" to 19,000 MP3's that I can play wirelessly from a few clicks of the mouse through Airtunes to my stereo, it is the greatest thing. I read all kinds of comments about lack of quality on MP3; however, I remember the same argument when people bought cd's over albums. Now, vinyl is preferred again. I guess if you are listening to music on some really high end audio equipment and speakers, maybe that is the case. For me, I like having my catalog in a five pound hard drive vs. hundreds of pounds of media.
Reply to this comment
by robthreeone April 24, 2008 8:52 PM PDT
And what will you do when your digital "archive" is lost when your hard drive or OS decides to push up daisies? You can keep endless back-ups, but having the source of your mp3 goodness on hand is not the "next best thing", it IS the best thing. Good luck restoring your music collection the next time we have an EMP attack;).
by wbowblis April 8, 2008 11:54 AM PDT
Over the last 10 years, I've accumulated a lot of music on MP3 and a few other compressed formats. I've also continued to buy CDs and even some vinyl. I have to say that in a lot of cases, I can't hear a difference between the CD and MP3 versions, but there are times that I can. I can attest to the fact that some music simply sounds better on vinyl, but I suspect this is not the medium as much as the recording technique.
Vinyl does not have a hard upper limit on recording level. Most records are recorded about the same, but they don't need to be. My brother has a Wagner record that has a section that is so loud, you can see it! They had to spread the groove for this one very loud sound. You can't do that on CD or MP3 without reducing the rest of the recording. This is an exception, but a lot of CDs and MP3s I've seen are recorded right up to the last bit and they have to be limiting or clipping the peaks because there simply isn't any room to keep them. Vinyl allows keeping them.
So... CDs beat vinyl on longevity and freedom from noise, but vinyl usually retains the dynamics better. MP3s are mostly more convenient (a lot more), but they are almost always a sonic comprimise.
Reply to this comment
by rszekely April 24, 2008 7:16 PM PDT
I'm sorry, but with analog recordings we always have to contend with the medium's noise floor: whether it's tape hiss, 60-cycle AC hum, or groove noise. The advantage of digital formats, particularly if the original recording is made digitally, is that all of the bandwith is available for music - none is consumed by noise. When vinyl sounds better, it because the recording was mastered better. I'm sorry, but when anyone claims that vinyl "sounds better", they're relating a completely subjective experience. Yes, analog has more headroom, and the harmonic distortion that results from overloading the recording levels is musically pleasing. So use analog masters to create digital copies, if that's the sound you're trying to capture.

I personally like to convert old analog recordings to digital, because used records and tapes have been, until recently, a cheaper way to listen to older music. In some cases, it's the only way to get a hold of music that's out of print. And if you give me a well-recorded, well mixed record in good condition, I can convert it to a CD that sounds just as good as the original record - sometimes even a little better, by using limiting, expansion and a touch of EQ. But then, the noise floor always comes over as well.

There is the tactile experience of handling, and then looking at an album cover while listening to the music, particularly if there's a gatefold, or lyrics are printed on the sleeve - even when they include this content in CD booklets, it's harder to read for many of us, because of the minute print, and the degree of reduction. It sort of makes the whole experience somewhat smallers, as well.
by SprkJonz April 8, 2008 11:59 AM PDT
I buy a lot of music, mostly from Emusic and OtherMusic (my mp3 music library is at about 180GB). It's clear that I have embraced this means of owning & managing music via PC. However, here are some odd things I miss about owning stacks of CDs:
1) Feeling committed to giving an album a chance because I paid$15 for it and the CD is staring at me when I come home. Some of my all time favorite albums didn't sink in for me until repeated listens. I've even had CDs that I resented by artists I previously liked. In the new world of mp3 downloads, if I don't like an album after 2 rotations, I may banish it to it's obscure directory, never to hear it again.
2) New album visibility. Back in the day, I could keep 15 or 20 CDs in my CD wallet (black nylon, CaseLogic) and the artwork would jump out at me whenever picking music. Now, if I add new albums to my library, I have a hard time remembering what I recently bought and what I can listen to - it all goes into the big mix. Using a low capacity Walkman mp3 player for daily use does help a bit. And MediaMonkeys listing albums by year does as well.
Reply to this comment
by brianwolters April 8, 2008 12:14 PM PDT
My first player was (is still) the first gen Zune. And I am still blown away by its simple use and overall fun. Yes, I think shuffle has hurt my attention span some (sometimes skipping just to get another listen credit online) but it is nice to have all of my music with me. I may soon go to the 2nd gen.
Reply to this comment
by the_thoughtful_blogger April 8, 2008 12:20 PM PDT
I will buy a CD if the majority of the album merits a purchase. That seems to be all too seldom of an occurence with todays music. In most instances I have no problem downloading music and enjoying it at between 256kbps-320kbps, or high quality variable bite rate. My sound equipment isn't $100k worth of audiophile snobbery, but it is nice studio reference quality equipment that sounds EXCELLENT when fed well recorded material. I'm in my 20's and I remember the discman, although I was never that fond of them in the first place. I always felt they were too bulky.

www.thethoughtfulblogger.blogspot.com
Reply to this comment
 See all 325 Comments >>
Subscribe to the MP3 Insider podcast

Subscribe to this podcast using an RSS reader other than iTunes

Subscribe to this podcast using iTunes

advertisement

About MP3 Insider

MP3 Insider is a blog and weekly podcast created by CNET's MP3 technology experts, Donald Bell and Jasmine France. Each week, Jasmine and Donald discuss the latest digital music (and video) news, hardware, software, and media services, and address reader calls and e-mail. Send us e-mail at mp3insider@cnet.com or call us at 1-800-720-CNET (2638) and be a part of the show.

View all MP3 Insider podcast episode blog entries

Add this feed to your online news reader

MP3 Insider topics

More on MP3 Insider
MP3 Insider live stream (Tuesdays, 11:30AM PST)
CNET Reviews: MP3 players and PVPs
Music posts at Crave blog
Music downloads at Download.com
Audio and video software at Download.com
Donald's Zune Social profile
Donald's Last.FM profile
The hosts of MP3 Insider
Donald Bell Donald Bell is an electronic musician, a veteran record store employee, and a fearless hardware hacker. He's also CNET's Senior Editor for MP3 and digital audio.
Jasmine France Jasmine France is CNET's resident digital audio doyenne, writing and editing product reviews, crave blogs, and feature stories on all things MP3. And if you need advice on headphones, she's your girl.

Latest posts from Crave

MP3 Insider Weekly/newsletter
MP3 Insider Weekly Delivered on Wednesdays. Brings you the latest reviews and tips in the world of digital music. view all CNET newsletters
Podroll
Here are a few of our favorite podcasts elsewhere in the universe.
XLR8R TV
Stones Throw
Mad Decent Worldwide Radio
Better Propaganda
Music Sessions from Studio C
Other CNET podcasts
  • © 2008 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved.
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of use
  • Visit other CBS Interactive sites: