I'm not old...I'm vintage.
 
I drove myself to a Zepplin gig.
 
:-)

{oldFartsDisgustedWithThePresentYutes}
Hey you kids, get off my lawn.
{/oldFartsDisgustedWithThePresentYutes}
 

Although I do not have a MP3 player I am for anything that helps sell music. The key word here is sell. I am against anyone who steals music.
 
PS – if anyone here wants to throw away his or her gear please PM me and I’ll supply an address that you can send it to.
　

I get that portable music is convenient. But as a musician who'd like to turn a better dollar and maybe garner higher numbers at shows? My only problem with the devices that hold thousands of songs, is that it's breeding listeners who have no idea who some of the artists are that they're listening to in the first place. There was once a time where people knew specifically who the artist, the album title and they could even tell you what track number the song was on the CD without looking. (I realise that this isn't effecting the really big names but the mid echelon and small timers appear to be getting the raw end, something chronic.)
 
It's ridiculous, the amount of times in recent years I've had friends tell me about this awesome song that I just have to hear! Only to spend the next 15 minutes, flicking tracks, trying to find it because they don't even know the name of the artist or song. (But they've supposedly listened to it "heaps.")
 
It's a bit off topic but coupling this with the whole free ripping debate, the excuse I hear people who download for free, say all the time is, "If I really like the songs? I'll buy the album!"
 
Well that's a great sentiment, except that most of my friends who do this haven't parted with money for a song, let alone an album, for the last 6 years or more. How could they, when they don't even know the name of the artist to begin with? What are they going to do? Go into a CD store and play every album in the store until they hear that song, that they only know by the way it sounds? Of course, obviously they're always far too busy to take note of what it is, when they're playing it and liking it?
 
And sure they love it now but it doesn't seem to take long to get buried by the new 1000 songs (over exaggeration?) they download over the next 12 months and be replaced by yet another song that you just have to hear if only they could find it? Cue the: "Oh I know who it is, I just can't think of the name at the moment? I think I saved the song as a favourite? Give me a couple of minutes to find it? I'm not sure if it's? Oh I think it's after this one? No? Oh I was sure it was in this bunch of tracks somewhere? I'll know it once it plays! When I'm jogging, it comes on when I've reached the park bridge, so that takes me about 25 minutes to reach it, so? Ummm? You know what, just take a seat and I'll find it, you're going to love it though..."
 
For the love of crap! I've been at festivals with these people who whilst walking between stages, hear a song being played and all of a sudden exclaim that they really love that band but had no idea what their name was and didn't know that they were playing at the festival. Which would be cool if they then locked down who the band was and maybe (wishful thinking) bought an album from them and perhaps (god forbid) some merch? Fast forward to a week later and they can't recall the name of that band again, but swear they were awesome and supposedly love them.
 
Perhaps in the same way that it's impractical for everyone to have amazing speaker setups, is it also in this day and age, now impractical for listeners to dedicate themselves to who the bands are and what they are about?...

Royal Yaksman
 
So if there's a point to this post? I'd like to ask Cake to build a ridiculous, dynamics trashing, max-boost EQ. There are no dials. It has only one purpose/setting. And that purpose is to pump the living sh*t out of everything, so the consumer doesn't have to! I realise we can already do that via manual adjustment of existing plugs? 

Music is a product.
The record industry dictates what the consumers want to consume. So if there's a point to this post CW should include artist branding in their next release.

WDI

RickJP909

robert_e_boneNow THAT is funny - and sad. Bob Bone 

What's even funnier and sad Bob is the fact that the ear buds have now been replaced by expensive Beats Dr Dre Solo's!!!  So we have people downloading poor-quality MP3s from iTunes (being the biggest retailer) and on to their iPhones or iPods (poor quality playback device, but yet people will happily pay premium for them) and then played back in Beats Solo HDs (premium price for these too)! Q: So where's the logic of shoving HQ-Audio converted to compressed low quality audio and shoved through high quality expensive headphones?

A: There isn't any logic behind it, it's just about pure image - they look good and trendy!

I bet I could play you the song of your choice downloaded from iTunes on your pick of apple device on your pick of stereo system and you would have a difficult time in a blind AB test with a CD as long as the volumes were equal.

I still buy records and record to tape. But I definitely see a place for MP3 players and MP3s.

Tapes hiss and always needed adjustment in the player to avoid lossing high end. I always turned Dolby off as I would rather hear the hiss than have all the high end cut out. Plus tapes got eaten and degraded. Copies lost noticeable sound quality.

Records pop and crackle, warp and in general need a lot of care.

An MP3 player hooked to a car radio properly sounds much better than the FM radio.

The earphones that come with MP3 players are the same quality if not better than came with Walkmans.

I recently pulled out my CD Walkman to listen to a CD and couldn't figure out how I listened to it ever as it sounded far worse than my iPod and iPhone.

Oh did I mention being able to carry your entire music library in the palm of your hand. Or previewing and buying new music without ever having to go to the store.

Etc....

To me the worst thing about MP3s is short attention span. I find myself jumping around a lot more picking songs rather then just listening all the way through.

Good for Dre Beats. Not really my style though. I got the Bose.

Hi WDI.
 
My friends think I'm a "pedant" when it comes to music as that's been tried already by them & I'm afraid I picked out the CD from an MP3!  Well, to be fair it was a 128kbps & a 192Kbps.  It was easy for me as those two lacked a bit of high-end which I was able to perceive & the mids sounded harsher to me however I admit that I don't believe I can tell between a 256Kbps, 320Kbps & CD but I may try as an experiment!
 
I'd also like to say that I'm guilty of using MP3s as I not only use them in my car but I also use my iPhone as an iPod now & I'd agree that with a decent pair of headphones, they sound Hi-Fi to me!  For the record, I never liked the headphones that came with Walkmans anyway!
 
I think it's fair to say that modern technology has advanced enough to get high fidelity from many compact devices now.  I was just highlighting the use of highly compressed MP3s such as 128Kbps which was the standard of iTunes for a long time.  Even though I believe they now use 192Kbps, it's still borderline for me & on a portable device or in the car I think it's fine but I can tell you that on high-end speakers such as my full range floor-standing Kef's with decent kit attached, I can hear the difference which is why on that system I only play CDs or if there's no alternative, 320Kbps MP3s.
 
Regardless of whether you can hear the difference or not the fact is that MP3s alter the dynamics of uncompressed audio and in some recordings, it sticks out to me as I don't like the end result.
 
I agree that any medium that sells music has got to be good for the industry but the original creator of that diagram I linked in this thread just points out the irony in the general listening public.
 
I therefore think it's fair to say that the general public don't really care much for Hi-Fi music, as long as it's good enough & accepting highly compressed audio isn't the only thing which has been accepted either as its been well documented that we've had a loudness war for years even with many releases having so much compression applied, that the dynamics have been lost & some clipping which will have introduced distortion into the recordings, being bought by the masses which means they either accepted those recordings as good enough or are clearly tone deaf as I can think of many recordings which sounded awful to my ears & so I avoided listening or buying them as I didn't personally consider them acceptable.

Royal..I think you are just in a complaining mood lol.  You do realize is that it is much easier now to identify that random unknown song than it has ever been?  Again, nostalgia has serious blinders.  How many blank cassettes were sold during the 70's and 80's when the it was ruled it was perfectly legal to record songs off the radio.  How many of us had cassette copies of albums, whether it was our own LPs recorded to cassette or copies from friends?  I like my chances of figuring out the title and artist of a random mp3 than an unmarked cassette.  I was listening to a dj mix in my car from an underground dj from Hungary and a passenger used spotify to not only id the song in the mix but the name of the mix and the dj.  Kids don't know every artist and song for the same reason nobody remembers phone numbers anymore.  We can retriecve all that information in a few clicks.

i also find it hilarious that people act is if people in the past were somehow more discriminating. people who care that much about the quality of their sound (always has been the vast minority) have always gone the extra mile.  I rip my cds to 320 as i am sure some of you do.  i voulteer for a blind organization and sound means a lot more to them.  They tend to look for higher quality sounds.  The average joe, hower, takes it in any format tha twill fit on his mp3 player/phone/ipad the same way listeners took whatever they could fit on 8-track, cassette, etc

Royal Yaksman
I get that portable music is convenient. But as a musician who'd like to turn a better dollar and maybe garner higher numbers at shows? My only problem with the devices that hold thousands of songs, is that it's breeding listeners who have no idea who some of the artists are that they're listening to in the first place. There was once a time where people knew specifically who the artist, the album title and they could even tell you what track number the song was on the CD without looking. (I realise that this isn't effecting the really big names but the mid echelon and small timers appear to be getting the raw end, something chronic.) It's ridiculous, the amount of times in recent years I've had friends tell me about this awesome song that I just have to hear! Only to spend the next 15 minutes, flicking tracks, trying to find it because they don't even know the name of the artist or song. (But they've supposedly listened to it "heaps.") It's a bit off topic but coupling this with the whole free ripping debate, the excuse I hear people who download for free, say all the time is, "If I really like the songs? I'll buy the album!" Well that's a great sentiment, except that most of my friends who do this haven't parted with money for a song, let alone an album, for the last 6 years or more. How could they, when they don't even know the name of the artist to begin with? What are they going to do? Go into a CD store and play every album in the store until they hear that song, that they only know by the way it sounds? Of course, obviously they're always far too busy to take note of what it is, when they're playing it and liking it? And sure they love it now but it doesn't seem to take long to get buried by the new 1000 songs (over exaggeration?) they download over the next 12 months and be replaced by yet another song that you just have to hear if only they could find it? Cue the: "Oh I know who it is, I just can't think of the name at the moment? I think I saved the song as a favourite? Give me a couple of minutes to find it? I'm not sure if it's? Oh I think it's after this one? No? Oh I was sure it was in this bunch of tracks somewhere? I'll know it once it plays! When I'm jogging, it comes on when I've reached the park bridge, so that takes me about 25 minutes to reach it, so? Ummm? You know what, just take a seat and I'll find it, you're going to love it though..." For the love of crap! I've been at festivals with these people who whilst walking between stages, hear a song being played and all of a sudden exclaim that they really love that band but had no idea what their name was and didn't know that they were playing at the festival. Which would be cool if they then locked down who the band was and maybe (wishful thinking) bought an album from them and perhaps (god forbid) some merch? Fast forward to a week later and they can't recall the name of that band again, but swear they were awesome and supposedly love them. Perhaps in the same way that it's impractical for everyone to have amazing speaker setups, is it also in this day and age, now impractical for listeners to dedicate themselves to who the bands are and what they are about?...

When I was a young kid most of my music was taped off of my brothers, friends or the radio. Lots of these where probably second hand copies of second hand copies etc. We didnt think twice about sharing our music.

I'm definitely not trying to justify downloading MP3s for free off the Internet illegally. That is wrong and stealing. I agree with Metalica for taking a stand. Somebody needed to do it. But at the same time I wanted to point out what most of us where doing with cassettes when we were kids.

I do realize there is some big differences though such as tapes reduced quality and your pool was much smaller from people you knew rather than some huge pool from unknown people.

I appreciate iTunes for what it is. One place where you can legally buy MP3s of almost any artist you want. That is a good thing. They do a good job. It's convenient knowing they will more than likely have the music.

One area I think iTunes and the iPods have failed at is the artwork and artist information. Thier huge database should include all the artwork and artist information such as biography etc which you should get when you buy from them and display on the MP3 players. That could be used to draw people to buy from them legally rather than download illegally. I have gotten PDFs containing the album artwork with some purchases but these only display on the computer. Plus the format is kind of lousy.

RickJP909

WDI

RickJP909

robert_e_boneNow THAT is funny - and sad. Bob Bone 

What's even funnier and sad Bob is the fact that the ear buds have now been replaced by expensive Beats Dr Dre Solo's!!!  So we have people downloading poor-quality MP3s from iTunes (being the biggest retailer) and on to their iPhones or iPods (poor quality playback device, but yet people will happily pay premium for them) and then played back in Beats Solo HDs (premium price for these too)! Q: So where's the logic of shoving HQ-Audio converted to compressed low quality audio and shoved through high quality expensive headphones?

A: There isn't any logic behind it, it's just about pure image - they look good and trendy!

I bet I could play you the song of your choice downloaded from iTunes on your pick of apple device on your pick of stereo system and you would have a difficult time in a blind AB test with a CD as long as the volumes were equal.

I still buy records and record to tape. But I definitely see a place for MP3 players and MP3s.

Tapes hiss and always needed adjustment in the player to avoid lossing high end. I always turned Dolby off as I would rather hear the hiss than have all the high end cut out. Plus tapes got eaten and degraded. Copies lost noticeable sound quality.

Records pop and crackle, warp and in general need a lot of care.

An MP3 player hooked to a car radio properly sounds much better than the FM radio.

The earphones that come with MP3 players are the same quality if not better than came with Walkmans.

I recently pulled out my CD Walkman to listen to a CD and couldn't figure out how I listened to it ever as it sounded far worse than my iPod and iPhone.

Oh did I mention being able to carry your entire music library in the palm of your hand. Or previewing and buying new music without ever having to go to the store.

Etc....

To me the worst thing about MP3s is short attention span. I find myself jumping around a lot more picking songs rather then just listening all the way through.

Good for Dre Beats. Not really my style though. I got the Bose.

Hi WDI. My friends think I'm a "pedant" when it comes to music as that's been tried already by them & I'm afraid I picked out the CD from an MP3!  Well, to be fair it was a 128kbps & a 192Kbps.  It was easy for me as those two lacked a bit of high-end which I was able to perceive & the mids sounded harsher to me however I admit that I don't believe I can tell between a 256Kbps, 320Kbps & CD but I may try as an experiment! I'd also like to say that I'm guilty of using MP3s as I not only use them in my car but I also use my iPhone as an iPod now & I'd agree that with a decent pair of headphones, they sound Hi-Fi to me!  For the record, I never liked the headphones that came with Walkmans anyway! I think it's fair to say that modern technology has advanced enough to get high fidelity from many compact devices now.  I was just highlighting the use of highly compressed MP3s such as 128Kbps which was the standard of iTunes for a long time.  Even though I believe they now use 192Kbps, it's still borderline for me & on a portable device or in the car I think it's fine but I can tell you that on high-end speakers such as my full range floor-standing Kef's with decent kit attached, I can hear the difference which is why on that system I only play CDs or if there's no alternative, 320Kbps MP3s. Regardless of whether you can hear the difference or not the fact is that MP3s alter the dynamics of uncompressed audio and in some recordings, it sticks out to me as I don't like the end result. I agree that any medium that sells music has got to be good for the industry but the original creator of that diagram I linked in this thread just points out the irony in the general listening public. I therefore think it's fair to say that the general public don't really care much for Hi-Fi music, as long as it's good enough & accepting highly compressed audio isn't the only thing which has been accepted either as its been well documented that we've had a loudness war for years even with many releases having so much compression applied, that the dynamics have been lost & some clipping which will have introduced distortion into the recordings, being bought by the masses which means they either accepted those recordings as good enough or are clearly tone deaf as I can think of many recordings which sounded awful to my ears & so I avoided listening or buying them as I didn't personally consider them acceptable.

I actually agree with a lot of your points. But I think someone needed to play devils advocate in this thread and I just happen to pick your post. Really didn't mean to pick on you.

I hate the over compressed mastering of many of the modern releases. I will not listen to it. There is no excuse for things being released this way. Need something louder, that's what the volume control is for. We need better amplifiers in our portable players, not overly compressed masters being released to make them sound louder.

And yes, MP3s are technically a compressed lossy format of lower quality. And that is what you get when you buy from iTunes, though I think they are 256 kbs now without DRM. It is a shame that many of the kids now will have bought an entire music library of lesser quality perhaps not even realizing that. I was totally against buying music this way. I have given in a little and have bought a number of albums from iTunes. It's always out of convenience. But at the same time I haven't been disappointed with these purchases. They sound good. But I know I could have gotten a better version for probably the same price if I had been patient and bought them on CD. Lately I've been buying records and making MP3s from them. Go figure.

I guess my point was that MP3s are not the garbage that some people like to make them out to be. And in some regards are no better or worse than some of the older formats. There's pluses and minuses.

Good thing I was replying on my iPhone. I had to look up the definition of pedant. :)