are cd's dead?

superscaper

Fifer wrote: »

(The Squeezebox is pretty good too).

Yeah I'd definitely like one of those. Always been a fan of Logitech peripherals so I quite like that Logitech bought them.

Fifer

The nice thing is that Logitech seem to be allowing Slim Devices to operate as they did previously, but with big company backing. There aren't too many companies where the CEO, Chief Technical officer, Sales and Marketing Director and other key staff actively participate in their company's on-line forums. The slight downside is that some might be turned off buy a Logitech logo on mid/high end audio equipment, but that would be their loss.

buglawton

I can still remember when CD players first appeared. Even 3 to 4 years after the format became popular, medium to expensive CD players were still a real let-down in sound quality compared to vinyl. In those days the Digital vs Analogue debate had real meaning. Nowadays most consumer CD players from the big brands sound pretty good (now that this format's days are numbered too).

Avoriaz

buglawton wrote: »

I can still remember when CD players first appeared. Even 3 to 4 years after the format became popular, medium to expensive CD players were still a real let-down in sound quality compared to vinyl. In those days the Digital vs Analogue debate had real meaning. Nowadays most consumer CD players from the big brands sound pretty good (now that this format's days are numbered too).

Another problem was that many early CDs were very badly mastered from poor quality sources.

In the rush to get product to market, some record companies rushed out CD versions of classic LPs without bothering to go back to the original master tapes. They just took second or third generation analogue copies and put them on CD.

A classic example of this was Springsteen’s “Born To Run”. Some early CD versions sounded absolutely awful. I know this because I bought one and I was delighted when I was eventually able to replace it with a version that had been properly remastered from the original source tapes.

I think that they even managed to master some CDs without removing the RIAA equalisation that was applied to all vinyl so that the CDs sounded very bright with poor bass.:rolleyes:

Some of the greedy or stupid record companies issued double LPs on two CDs, when the total time would comfortably fit onto one CD. Fortunately this practice didn’t last too long.

buglawton

I recall that later they started issuing 'DDD' CDs to make a fuss of the fact that all steps were digital - and still the end result was STILL lifeless compared to Vinyl. Artists & studios have learnt loads since then, plus the D to A converter technology has improved immensely.

Fifer

buglawton wrote: »

I recall that later they started issuing 'DDD' CDs to make a fuss of the fact that all steps were digital - and still the end result was STILL lifeless compared to Vinyl. Artists & studios have learnt loads since then, plus the D to A converter technology has improved immensely.

I don't suppose it's terribly surprising that early CDs didn't sound brilliant. For well over 50 years, producers and recording engineers had been perfecting techniques and tricks aimed at getting the very best sound out of a format with limited dynamic range and an appallingly non-linear frequency response. Many had spent entire careers working with little else, then along comes a new format which did not have those restrictions. It's little wonder that the industry took some time adjusting to get the best out of it.

want2bmortgage3

>Some of the greedy or stupid record companies issued double LPs on two CDs, when the total time would comfortably fit onto one CD. Fortunately this practice didn’t last too long.<

what about the stupid releasing of a single on 2 seperate cd's, 3/4 tracks on each... does that still go on ??

isofa

Great thread.

I too still love CDs, and although I do buy the occasional track on iTunes (mainly just one offs for which I wouldn't buy the album), I still buy CDs - although I probably rip new ones immediately, I listen to them on the hifi and in the car for ages too. I can see them dying out, it is a real shame, it's a perfect compact format. Mind you, like many others, I've ripped all mine (thousands) and at least half are now in the loft, the more popular ones still kept by the hi-fi.

I've been into hi-fi since I was young, having a gorgeous Technics separates system, I replaced it a few years ago, purely because it was too big, (although it's still in the spare bedroom!) for a lovely TEAC mini separates system, Mission speakers, and an Optimum stand. Agonised over this against a Denon for ages! It sounds beautiful.

Although I love the iPod and digital music for convenience, for pure music quality it can't match a quality hi-fi set-up. However the yamaha speakers I have on a Mac, do sound very good, to the average person, they'd never know the difference with a good lossless track or a CD, I guess it's only when you've heard the full range you can appreciate the "missing" bits.

I still listen to CDs more in the car than the iPod too, the sound quality is much better.

esuhl

want2bmortgage3 wrote: »

what about the stupid releasing of a single on 2 seperate cd's, 3/4 tracks on each... does that still go on ??

I seem to remember that 10-15 years ago "they" decided that, with the proliferation of dance music remixes on CD singles, it wasn't fair to non-dance music to allow too many tracks on one CD. Many dance music singles would have 8 or so tracks, often of just one "song" that had been remixed by different people, whereas non-dance singles would have only 2 or 4 tracks. "They" thought that people were more likely to buy a CD with more tracks, tipping the charts disproportionately in favour of dance.

I seem to remember that they introduced some limits to restrict what was allowed to be in the single charts. If I remember rightly, it was a maximum of four tracks per CD, and I think there might have been a time limit too.

Does anyone remember Blue Room by The Orb? I *think* it was the longest single ever at a fraction under 40 minutes!

Fifer

isofa wrote: »

Although I love the iPod and digital music for convenience, for pure music quality it can't match a quality hi-fi set-up.

Best of both worlds. Quality and convenience.