'There's a certain relief with not having to own music. It's a lot of work'

[The Letter M]

The way I see it - the more money you spend on music, the less you have to spend on food. Instant diet!

-Marc.

[Ħ]

Or you'll just buy more cheap, unhealthy, processed food.

[ZeppelinDT]

Or you'll just start eating your CDs

[Elite]

Which is most likely equally bad, or worse.

[ZeppelinDT]

Beatles CDs aren't bad.  They taste like apples. 

[Elite]

Try death metal cds with terrible album art.

[Fluffy Lothario]

I generally stream music to check it out. If I like it enough, I purchase it, in some form. Not because I MUST have a copy, but to support the artist.

But all of the people acting as if owning a collection of hundreds, if not thousands of CDs is no big deal have obviously never had to move overseas and fit all their life's possessions for a good length of time into a few suitcases and maybe a box or two sent by mail. Just because I'm not willing to spend hundreds of dollars to have huge boxes of hard copies of albums complete with their packaging shipped around the world, when I can fit it all onto a hard drive that's several hundred grams, doesn't mean I'm not passionate about music. It means I'm not an idiot.

In fact, even though I still make the effort to buy quite a few CDs, most of the albums I have bought as CDs in the last three or four years have either lost their cases along the way, or (in the case of the stuff I didn't like so much) I've just thrown the CD and everything away once uploading it to my laptop, iPod and hard drive. A baggage allowance is a baggage allowance, and the post charges by weight and dimensions, and you have to prioritise.

Also, two of my favourite bands both offer most of their albums as downloads directly from their websites, in 320kbps and in FLAC. It makes being a fan of them a much cosier affair.

[wolfking]

But all of the people acting as if owning a collection of hundreds, if not thousands of CDs is no big deal have obviously never had to move overseas and fit all their life's possessions for a good length of time into a few suitcases and maybe a box or two sent by mail. Just because I'm not willing to spend hundreds of dollars to have huge boxes of hard copies of albums complete with their packaging shipped around the world, when I can fit it all onto a hard drive that's several hundred grams, doesn't mean I'm not passionate about music. It means I'm not an idiot.

You're right, I've never had to move anywhere overseas.  I've moved house with 2000 cd's and it was the most annoying and time consuming part of the move, but I still don't regret owning all those cds.  Just because I don't know the extent of moving cd's across the world and me wanting to own that many pyhsical cd's, doesn't make me an idiot either.

[PuffyPat]

I stream music for two reasons. One is that it is a thing I do until I can get the funds to buy the music, and two if I don't really like an artist that much but they have a couple songs that I like. I much prefer owning the music though, because while streaming is free, you do need an internet connection. Which right now is not a problem, but I'm always on the go, and having an iPod with all of my favorite music on it is a HUGE convenience. I also just love having the physical CDs or in most cases the vinyl.

[TL]

This conversation is super depressing.

Yes, obviously streaming has its place. It's good for checking out new music and discovering different artists. It's also good for people who aren't as into music and just want to listen to whatever's popular at the time.

However, it's rage inducing when people who like streaming start acting almost overjoyed at the notion of getting rid of music ownership, or seem incapable of understanding that some people actually like owning albums.

It's about sentimentality. I like having a tangible physical thing. There are memories that go with those albums and films on my shelf. That specific copy has sentimental value for me. When you don't buy your media, you lose that. If someone else feels differently and chooses to go a different route, that's fine. When they start trying to get rid of the method I like though, that's crossing a line. It's just downright depressing when people (in these sorts of articles and such) so joyfully talk about the death of that sort of experience.

[darkshade]

However, it's rage inducing when people who like streaming start acting almost overjoyed at the notion of getting rid of music ownership, or seem incapable of understanding that some people actually like owning albums.

It's about sentimentality. I like having a tangible physical thing. There are memories that go with those albums and films on my shelf. That specific copy has sentimental value for me. When you don't buy your media, you lose that. If someone else feels differently and chooses to go a different route, that's fine. When they start trying to get rid of the method I like though, that's crossing a line. It's just downright depressing when people (in these sorts of articles and such) so joyfully talk about the death of that sort of experience.

To add to that, what also gets lost is the personal attachment to the music. When you don't own an album, or listen to a lot of stuff you've never heard just because you can, you start shuffling through a bunch of songs and albums, and over time, the older ones get lost in the mix because you didn't stick to that one album you might have really liked but moved on from before you could be attached to it.

[antigoon]

However, it's rage inducing when people who like streaming start acting almost overjoyed at the notion of getting rid of music ownership, or seem incapable of understanding that some people actually like owning albums.

That's funny because the only thing I've seen in this thread is the opposite.

[TL]

However, it's rage inducing when people who like streaming start acting almost overjoyed at the notion of getting rid of music ownership, or seem incapable of understanding that some people actually like owning albums.

That's funny because the only thing I've seen in this thread is the opposite.

Well, no, but I'm mainly referring to these types of articles, and people outside of this forum.

[Fluffy Lothario]

But all of the people acting as if owning a collection of hundreds, if not thousands of CDs is no big deal have obviously never had to move overseas and fit all their life's possessions for a good length of time into a few suitcases and maybe a box or two sent by mail. Just because I'm not willing to spend hundreds of dollars to have huge boxes of hard copies of albums complete with their packaging shipped around the world, when I can fit it all onto a hard drive that's several hundred grams, doesn't mean I'm not passionate about music. It means I'm not an idiot.

You're right, I've never had to move anywhere overseas.  I've moved house with 2000 cd's and it was the most annoying and time consuming part of the move, but I still don't regret owning all those cds.  Just because I don't know the extent of moving cd's across the world and me wanting to own that many pyhsical cd's, doesn't make me an idiot either.

I'm not saying you're an idiot for holding onto your CDs (or other possessions for that matter) when moving in general, even thousands of miles. But if you're going overseas, let's say even for a long time, and as is normally the case, you're insanely limited to what you can bring, and you choose to take a thousands CDs with you... I mean, I just can't see how that wouldn't be a stupid decision, regardless of how much the person in question cares about the music they listen to.

[ZeppelinDT]

However, it's rage inducing when people who like streaming start acting almost overjoyed at the notion of getting rid of music ownership, or seem incapable of understanding that some people actually like owning albums.

That's funny because the only thing I've seen in this thread is the opposite.

Well, no, but I'm mainly referring to these types of articles, and people outside of this forum.

I don't think many people are particularly "overjoyed" at the notion of completely eliminating the concept of music ownership.  I couldn't possibly care less if other people want to limit themselves listening to music they own.  I think the "joy" part comes more from the fact that they are no longer being forced to limit themselves to listening to music that they own.  For me, I love the fact that I can legally access so much music without having to actually buy it.  That's where the joy comes from.  Whether or not other people want to continue buying their music is completely irrelevant to me.  In fact, I like that purchasing music is still an option, because I do still like buying music.  I love buying vinyl, and occasionally I even still buy CDs.

To add to that, what also gets lost is the personal attachment to the music. When you don't own an album, or listen to a lot of stuff you've never heard just because you can, you start shuffling through a bunch of songs and albums, and over time, the older ones get lost in the mix because you didn't stick to that one album you might have really liked but moved on from before you could be attached to it.

I think that's quite a gross overgeneralization.  My personal attachment with music comes from the music itself and the experiences and memories associated it.  It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I own it.  And I don't think ownership or lack thereof has anything to do with albums getting lost in the mix.  I have plenty of albums that I own that I have completely forgotten about, and there are plenty of albums I only listen to through streaming that I play far more often than anything I own.  It's at the point now where a lot of the times I even forget which albums I actually own and which ones I just have saved as Spotify playlists.

[Priest of Syrinx]

Dr. Phiest of Syrinx.

Telling us were fat and lazy. 

I have over 3000 cd's and I'm fat as all hell so......

I didn't say owning CD's would make you skinny.  Don't argue with a member of the clergy, son.   

[Priest of Syrinx]

I don't see how that makes any sense. A smartphone is basically a phone, with computer capabilities. Its only advantage over a computer is its portability.
I don't see how I won't be able to get by using only a phone and a computer in this "future" of yours. You're making it sound like you think that smartphones will be replacing computers 

Sadly, there are millions of jobs that require smartphones, both for information transfer and for instantaneous status updates.

Also, a tablet is basically a smartphone without the phone, and larger.  Pretty soon, for many people, smartphones/tablets will replace the traditional PC or Mac.

[Nick]

I know it's kinda off-topic a bit, but rather than start a new thread I figured I'd post this here. It's a response piece by an economics of music professor and details amongst other things the general decline of the music industry since the download culture has taken over and the shortcomings of places like spotify even if they are a step above the alternative.

https://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/letter-to-emily-white-at-npr-all-songs-considered/

[MrBoom_shack-a-lack]

I know it's kinda off-topic a bit, but rather than start a new thread I figured I'd post this here. It's a response piece by an economics of music professor and details amongst other things the general decline of the music industry since the download culture has taken over and the shortcomings of places like spotify even if they are a step above the alternative.

https://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/letter-to-emily-white-at-npr-all-songs-considered/

Wow, that was absolutely spot on!

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

Yeah, clicking a few web pages and entering some credit card numbers and then receiving the cd a few days later all while I stil on my fat fucking ass is a lot of work.  I guess unwrapping the cd's can be a bit time consuming at times.  Especially those import stickers on the top.  I've never worked so hard in my life when a cd has those, it's almost not worth it.

 

Geez, I don't know how anyone put up with such a taxing chore for so many decades of purchasing entertainment and keeping it.

Take heart, because while there's relief on the listener's part in not having to own music, there's probably equal relief on the part of a lot of the bands they listen to in not having to actually perform any.



HEY-OH!

[Aramatheis]

I don't see how that makes any sense. A smartphone is basically a phone, with computer capabilities. Its only advantage over a computer is its portability.
I don't see how I won't be able to get by using only a phone and a computer in this "future" of yours. You're making it sound like you think that smartphones will be replacing computers 

Sadly, there are millions of jobs that require smartphones, both for information transfer and for instantaneous status updates.

Also, a tablet is basically a smartphone without the phone, and larger.  Pretty soon, for many people, smartphones/tablets will replace the traditional PC or Mac.

Sure, millions of jobs may require smartphones, but countless millions more require or rely on computers and computer networks.

And for your second point, if we keep that line of reasoning, we can just say that a tablet is basically a computer, but smaller, mobile and with no mouse or keyboard.

And if that's the case, then:
1. smartphone=tablet
2. tablet=computer

QED  smartphone=computer


And that is not the case, so your reasoning there is a bit off. Plus, claiming that a tablet is like a smartphone without the phone but larger is just ridiculous
ANY device is like a phone without a phone, because then IT'S ANYTHING AT ALL


Plus, anyone who replaces their PC or Mac for a tablet is quite frankly an idiot, IMO. A keyboard and mouse are far too useful to give up like that.

[Super Dude]

This conversation is super depressing.

Yes, obviously streaming has its place. It's good for checking out new music and discovering different artists. It's also good for people who aren't as into music and just want to listen to whatever's popular at the time.

However, it's rage inducing when people who like streaming start acting almost overjoyed at the notion of getting rid of music ownership, or seem incapable of understanding that some people actually like owning albums.

It's about sentimentality. I like having a tangible physical thing. There are memories that go with those albums and films on my shelf. That specific copy has sentimental value for me. When you don't buy your media, you lose that. If someone else feels differently and chooses to go a different route, that's fine. When they start trying to get rid of the method I like though, that's crossing a line. It's just downright depressing when people (in these sorts of articles and such) so joyfully talk about the death of that sort of experience.

And owning a physical or digital copy of a musical product is a great way to deal with that pesky prospect of record companies suddenly deciding to revoke your license to listen to that music (whether for free or at all). With streaming I feel like that's a constant danger. And if you don't like that they can do that? Sucks for you.

[kirksnosehair]

Ownership = More Options

Streaming = Less Options

I think this works both ways.  On the one hand, yes, maybe it is true that there is more available to own than there is to stream.  But on the other hand, streaming provides for greater exposure than ownership.  So while it is true that, in the abstract, the overall scope of availability is broader with ownership, when you look at it realistically, streaming will allow the listener to be find and discover a significantly broader variety of music.

I mean, in my experience, I would say that, when I limited myself to ownership, then maybe I had more options AVAILABLE to me, but for all practical purposes, I feel like my options were much more limited, because my willingness to experiment and explore was limited to what I was willing to lay out money for in advance.

That argument would hold a lot more water if it were impossible to find the vast overwhelming majority of practically everything that has been professionally produced and released available to stream to your heart's content from YouTube.....but the reality is, you can find just about anything you want to hear samples of -full song samples, not just snippets- on YouTube and other than your internet connection service fee, you pay $0.00 in advance.
Last week alone I spent almost $200 on music and I only took a chance on maybe 5% of that material, since I was able to find and sample the vast majority of it on YouTube at no cost to me.

How is YouTube not a form of streaming?

I never wrote, implied, intimated, or otherwise conveyed in any way, shape or form that YouTube is not a form of steaming.  I stream from YouTube to listen to music IN ADVANCE of buying it. At $0.00 cost to me.

You're trying to argue that those of us who want to OWN music as opposed to simply streaming it are somehow "limited" and, well, that's just not true.  Everything you want to buy is out there, available to listen to -in full- prior to buying it.  Once you buy it, you can do what you want with it.  When you stream it, you can stream it, stream it, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, you can stream it.

[The Letter M]

When you stream it, you can stream it, stream it, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, you can stream it.

We can stream if we want to
We can leave your friends behind
Cause your friends don't stream
And if they don't stream
Well they're no friends of mine.

-Marc.

[Sigz]

When you stream it, you can stream it, stream it, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, you can stream it.

Once you've bought a CD you can listen to it, listen to it, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, you can listen to it.

[ZeppelinDT]

That wasn't really my point.

When I said owning music requires you to lay out money in advance, I was talking in terms of people who ONLY own and don't stream at all.  Your equation of "Ownership = More Options" kind of implies that you're talking about ONLY ownership versus ONLY streaming.  OBVIOUSLY anybody who streams AND owns has more options than somebody who ONLY streams.  But if that's your approach, then your "equation" should really be rewritten as:


Streaming + Ownership = More Options

Streaming = Fewer Options


And I completely agree with that.  In fact, streaming + ownership is the combination I use for all my music listening.  I use Spotify to stream music, and when there's something I especially like or feel is particularly important to me, then I also buy it.

[kirksnosehair]

When you stream it, you can stream it, stream it, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, you can stream it.

We can stream if we want to
We can leave your friends behind
Cause your friends don't stream
And if they don't stream
Well they're no friends of mine.

-Marc.

 

[kirksnosehair]

When you stream it, you can stream it, stream it, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, you can stream it.

Once you've bought a CD you can listen to it, listen to it, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, you can listen to it.

Well, yeah, but you can also rip it to your MP3 player, copy it to your laptop, your iPad, make a copy of the CD to keep in your car, bring the MP3 files to work to listen to them, etc, etc, etc....you can't really don any of that with a stream, unless you really want to use software to capture that stream as audio (most likely at 128kbps, which sounds like wombat ass with 'roids)

[ZeppelinDT]

I know it's kinda off-topic a bit, but rather than start a new thread I figured I'd post this here. It's a response piece by an economics of music professor and details amongst other things the general decline of the music industry since the download culture has taken over and the shortcomings of places like spotify even if they are a step above the alternative.

https://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/letter-to-emily-white-at-npr-all-songs-considered/

This is a great article, and I pretty much agree with all of it.  I'd love to see the total elimination of illegal file sharing and the expansion of streaming services that do a better job of compensating artists.  I would without a doubt be willing to pay a bit more for streaming.  Right now I pay $10/month for Spotify premium and I consider that to be incredibly cheap.

[kirksnosehair]

I know it's kinda off-topic a bit, but rather than start a new thread I figured I'd post this here. It's a response piece by an economics of music professor and details amongst other things the general decline of the music industry since the download culture has taken over and the shortcomings of places like spotify even if they are a step above the alternative.

https://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/letter-to-emily-white-at-npr-all-songs-considered/

This is a great article, and I pretty much agree with all of it.  I'd love to see the total elimination of illegal file sharing and the expansion of streaming services that do a better job of compensating artists.  I would without a doubt be willing to pay a bit more for streaming.  Right now I pay $10/month for Spotify premium and I consider that to be incredibly cheap.

It is incredibly cheap, but at least you're paying something.  Sadly, I don't think we'll ever see the "total elimination of file sharing" because it's just too easy to get away with and there are no consequences for it.  Until or unless there are consequences -painful legal or financial consequences for the vast majority of common thieves downloaders- it will continue to happen and the growth of these legal options (like streaming from Spotify) will be pretty flat.

[ZeppelinDT]

I think streaming services also could become more viable if they improve them a bit.  As of now, while Spotify does have pretty broad content, it's still somewhat limited.  It'll probably also depend on the future availability of unlimited data plans on smartphones.  The bulk of my Spotify usage is through my phone, but that's because I've got an unlimited iPhone data plan.  If I had to pay extra for data usage that would probably kill me and I don't know if it would be worth it.  I think Spotify also was a questionable interface.  It's becoming slightly more user-friendly, but it's not really where it needs to be.  And of course, streaming quality is also an issue.

I'll be interesting to see if general usage picks up though.  If the concept of streaming starts to appear profitable, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple begins their own streaming service that's somehow integrated with iTunes.  If that happens, it's got the potential to be a game changer.

[Nick]

For anything to work illegal file sharing has to first be eliminated. Streaming is great, and I always thought it would be a great improvement if sites like spotify allowed you to stream an album say... 3 times, but then charged a buck or two for continued streaming of that album, and that money went mostly to the artist.

Problem is, people will stream 3 times and then just download more often than not.

[ZeppelinDT]

Hmm... idunno if I'd go for a system where you have to pay for the right to stream a specific album.  Not sure that would really be all that viable.  I personally would prefer to pay a flat subscription fee for unlimited streaming of whatever I want, whenever want.  I'd be willing to pay a significantly higher subscription fee for that.

[Priest of Syrinx]

I don't see how that makes any sense. A smartphone is basically a phone, with computer capabilities. Its only advantage over a computer is its portability.
I don't see how I won't be able to get by using only a phone and a computer in this "future" of yours. You're making it sound like you think that smartphones will be replacing computers 

Sadly, there are millions of jobs that require smartphones, both for information transfer and for instantaneous status updates.

Also, a tablet is basically a smartphone without the phone, and larger.  Pretty soon, for many people, smartphones/tablets will replace the traditional PC or Mac.

Sure, millions of jobs may require smartphones, but countless millions more require or rely on computers and computer networks.

And for your second point, if we keep that line of reasoning, we can just say that a tablet is basically a computer, but smaller, mobile and with no mouse or keyboard.

And if that's the case, then:
1. smartphone=tablet
2. tablet=computer

QED  smartphone=computer


And that is not the case, so your reasoning there is a bit off. Plus, claiming that a tablet is like a smartphone without the phone but larger is just ridiculous
ANY device is like a phone without a phone, because then IT'S ANYTHING AT ALL


Plus, anyone who replaces their PC or Mac for a tablet is quite frankly an idiot, IMO. A keyboard and mouse are far too useful to give up like that.

Though you're getting a tad ridiculous with your strange extrapolation, you are actually arguing for my point.  Smartphones & tablets *are* computers.  In the consumer space, the traditional desktop PC is dying, soon to become a niche market.

Notice I'm saying "PC", using the term in the traditional sense, not "computer".

As far as a tablet being a smartphone without the phone, well, uh... do you know what a smartphone is?  For many users, the "phone" is actually one of the lesser-used capabilities.

[The Letter M]

As far as a tablet being a smartphone without the phone, well, uh... do you know what a smartphone is?  For many users, the "phone" is actually one of the lesser-used capabilities.

Everyone just needs to be issued one of these from now til the end of time:


Larger image here - https://www.tegato.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/lifebook_thumb.jpg

-Marc.