No I don't think that the CD should be "killed" since it will die on its own. That being said I do think that the manufacturers should fiind a way to embrace and prosper from the internet/computer based digital music world we live in.

Here's just one idea of how to survive in the present climate: make recordings available for download in multiple formats, such as mp3, lossless in redbook CD resolution and lossless in true high resolution (24bit/88.2kHz or higher) with all the formats priced the same.

They do something about the Loudness Wars and end all that crappy compression on the recording end, then why keep CD alive or for that matter Vinyl? How do we go about ending the horrid compression? As long as they think people want it "louder" then it will continue.

I say no because; like vinyl, alot of people still like tangible formats. Cd remasters still sound great depending on who does the remastering. My Wadia 8 transport and Levinson 30.5 Dac still amazes me in it's ability to recreate beautiful life-like reproductions. I believe there is plenty of room for all formats. Variety is the spice of life. just my two cents.

i just switched " back " to vinyl myself and i wouldn't go back to any digital music even if you paid me to listen to it. i don't care what kind of DAC you have - $20,000 or whatever. you get out what you put in. (imo)

I like tangible formats, from professional and personal experience I have found computers terribly unreliable. I like and buy vinyl and CDs. CDs will be around for some while yet. I think very few record companies can afford to lose the format financially no matter how attractive downloads look.

officially. the moment they decide to offer 24-bit downloads on itunes. 

I had a PC meltdown last month. While I back up my music, I found several files corrupted when reloaded on the new PC. I want to be ab le to reload when required.

Let the market decide.  In much the way the market left and came back to the LP, I think we will have the CD for quite a while, with a difference.  LP is slowly crawling out of it's niche and back into the near mainstream.  I think once the CD is dead it's dead.  As a doornail.  8 track dead.  

I just don't think we will wake up one day and there won't be a CD section at Best Buy.  I think you'll walk in to BB and see still more LP's (strange, seeing LP's in Best Buy, BTW), and a dwindling selection of CD's, and a download station.  And soon on after that, you will have a home theater section with even more big screen TV's, more network streamers, and a download station to download your HD movie directly to your SS memory based universal player that you plug directly in to your TV or receiver.  

We are at a pretty amazing point in physical media.  All the formats, including "old fashioned" DVD and CD and LP, are now/still pretty damned good at what they do.  The consumer has an extremely broad selection of formats that all have excellent performance.

I am not in love with CD's, but I detest the concept of dragging a little rock through a squiggly track cut in a vinyl disc spun by a rubber band attached to an electric motor. 

Physical formats of some kind will continue, if only on a smaller scale.  Too bad the CD format can't be upgraded to 96kHz/24 bit.  I think that would be quite sufficient.  Oh wait, it could...on DVD or Blu-ray!  Where are those recordings?

I'm a collector and what I collect is music that I enjoy hearing.  I plan to continue.

I remember the time when every magazine told me that CD are out and DVD-A or SACD are the only formats to consider in a few years.  I agree with the idea that formats with better resolution than CD are making music more enjoyable but only if the recordings are of sufficient quality and at least for the (realitvely few) SACDs I got that was true only for about 1/3 of the recordings. That same  apparently applies likewise to high Rez downloads.

I am interested in a wide spectrum of music and what is called audiophile recordings is mostly not very exciting to me - a lot of stuff recorded some decades ago. May be that reflects the demographics who is interested in stereo and has enough money to pay for the 3rd or 4th version of the same recording. Beeing only a part of a narrow fringe market would not be giving me the musical joices I want. Whether the CD format survives is dependent on the cost of distribution i.e. does Amazon want to stock CDs or decides that a server bank with MP3 is way more profitable.

I hope well recorded music survives but I am not sure about that. 

hcsunshine wrote:

i just switched " back " to vinyl myself and i wouldn't go back to any digital music even if you paid me to listen to it. i don't care what kind of DAC you have - $20,000 or whatever. you get out what you put in. (imo)

One of the things that might at least help is to completely bypass the analog/mute stages of the DAC/player, if the design allows for it. I did and the sound was noticeably better. One only loses  half the signal, 6db, but approximately 1 volt output still exists from the DAC chip. Be sure to current and voltage protect.

(The mute section only prevents thumps on power on/off, but in between songs or CDs, there is no problem. Worth a try.)

There just is not enough room to design a truly good gainstage, and why use a stage with gain of only two to begin with? It is just not needed.

Personally, I hope CDs are continued, and not become extinct.

Cheers. 

Steve

SAS Audio Labs

hcsunshine wrote:

i just switched " back " to vinyl myself and i wouldn't go back to any digital music even if you paid me to listen to it. i don't care what kind of DAC you have - $20,000 or whatever. you get out what you put in. (imo)

I enjoy listening to both formats, provided the system's are setup with some integrity. The one I most prefer usually depends on the recording, mood and genre also being variables. 

                                                                                                         Regards  Tim

I don't think so for several reasons.

Baby boomers are largely computer illiterate.

Secondly, CDs are easy to use.

Thirdly, there are those who enjoy having a fairly indestructible medium

vs Computers which can be sensitive and scary for many.

I think it will take a generation if, if the cd does beome

extinct.

Cheers.

most of them are 24-bit/96kHz. The DVD-A format will do 24-bit/192kHz in 2.0 stereo and 24-bit/96kHz in 5.1 surround.

http://www.musicdirect.com/c-512-dvd-audio.aspx

http://www.cduniverse.com/browsecat.asp?style=music&cat=1028

http://www.elusivedisc.com/products.asp?dept=907

The LP's demise came primarily from cassette sales, but only AFTER prerecorded cassettes got better and were pushed harder by labels --- when CD and CD player prices came down, the mass market understandably embraced CD instead. We vinyl lovers know the LP's full capability wasn't available to most people, because buying a $59 Sears record player wasn't going to help much.

Back in the LP's heyday, people bought vinyl because they knew early cassettes, 8-Tracks were crap. The later prerecorded cassettes, with better tape formulations, Dolby HXPro etc. really helped cassettes gain decent sound (for many people, using boomboxes and car stereos. Note that decent cassette car stereos were rare and expensive in say, 1980 but plentiful and cheaper by 1990.)

Regarding my subject line, LPs were "helped out the door" by labels who reduced U.S. distribution in the late 80s. By the early 90s, they were all but gone from mainstream titles and stores.

Consider Clapton's Unplugged from 1992. A Grammy Winner! (and more). Wildly popular MTV special, right? CD, cassette, VHS, Laserdisc versions existed. No LP for the U.S. market.

Universal Music Group audibly (they say inaudibly) watermarks their lossless FLAC downloads. I'm not wishing CDs disappear anytime soon, so long as one of the world's largest label groups pulls that shit.

I have a Mac Mini.  I bought 2 G-Drive brand 2TB FireWire drives.  FireWire is incredibly fast and you can "daisy chain" them together. To backup my library, I FireWire the second drive to the main one.  The Mac still sees them as two separate drives.  I delete the backup library that exists on the second  (backup) drive.  I then drag music library from the main drive to the now empty second drive to copy it.  I then unplug the second drive and put in In a closet, so it can't get taken out by a lightning strike or surge.  FireWire is so incredibly fast that it takes less than an hour to backp my library of 500 albums in AIFF format.

When I plug the backup drive into the Mac Mini, in place of the main drive, iTunes doesnt act any different.

It really is the safest way I could be comfortable with.

Optical devices are basically all dead at least for audio!

SAS Audio wrote:

I don't think so for several reasons.

Baby boomers are largely computer illiterate.

 

That is pretty funny.  Who do you think invented and built the Internet?  Who do you think invented the personal computer?  Who do think invented the WWW, and almost all the software used by Mark Zuckerberg?

Because babyboomers developed computer technology, most babyboomers lived without the knowledge of computers and internet. That's why most babyboomers are not proficient with computer technology!

Quote:

Because babyboomers developed computer technology, most babyboomers lived without the knowledge of computers and internet.

Born in 1948, I am by definition a babyboomer.

In 1981, I built my first computer from a kit (a Sinclair ZX81) and learned how to program it in Basic. By 1983, I was using my next computer, a BBC Micro, to prepare text for typestting and had written a tagged text language compatible with the professional typesetting programs in use at that time. By 1986, I was using the same BBC Micro to control audio test equipment (which I had designed and built myself) and had written a number of useful programs (again in Basic) to analyze the test gear results. (I still use some of those programs today.) By 1987, I was subscribing to various dial-up bulletin boards and by 1989 I was using email regularly, again with a dial-up connection, along with almost all my contemporaries.

So with respect, I believe your are committing the ubiquitous error of the young, in assuming that before your generation came along, there was nothing.

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

Sorry I couldn't help myself, I will accept my punishment.

John Atkinson wrote:

In 1981, I built my first computer from a kit (a Sinclair ZX81) and learned how to program it in Basic. By 1983, I was using my next computer, a BBC Micro,

In 1981, I was a systems analyst and senior progarmmer on huge main frame computers. We didn't consider your computers as "computers" at all. Because they are too primitive and didn't do any useful things. We were in "very rare profession" at that time.

Still do you think that every one did what you did? Only a tiny group of professionals like me and hobbist like you was with computers! Then word processing and spreadsheeting came next. The general use by average people started with the internet at late 1990s!

I still have many people who need my help!

jackfish wrote:

Sorry I couldn't help myself, I will accept my punishment.

You deserve it again!

I had the latest microsoft update turn off my wireless ability on my i5 laptop. It cost me $24 on line to find someone who knew how to hit Microsoft+R at the same time to let me enable the ability again. I am 60...I think the idea that baby boom folk as a group are less than PC lterate is sound.

Quote:

do you think that every one did what you did?

Not everone, of course, but most of my friends were actively involved in working with the then-new PCs and seeing how they could be incorporated in their working lives. It was an exciting time to be alive - the second half of Steven Levy's book Hackers captures some of that excitement.

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

JIMV wrote:

I had the latest microsoft update turn off my wireless ability on my i5 laptop. It cost me $24 on line to find someone who knew how to hit Microsoft+R at the same time to let me enable the ability again. I am 60...I think the idea that baby boom folk as a group are less than PC lterate is sound.

Don't worry.  Most everyone would have that problem. 

Being born in 1947 places me squarely in Baby Boomer territory. I take umbrage at the suggestion that we as a group are computer illiterate. I learned COBOL on an IBM 360 before PC's existed. I also learned Fortran on a DEC VAX. I then moved on to Oasis on a Zilog Z-80. Various Commodores, Atari's and TRS-80's passed through my hands and along the way I taught myself 6502 machine language programming amongst other things. Around this time I got tired of being an EE and biomedical engineer and went back to school to get a MS, Comp Science. I taught programming and computer languages for a while before going into business for myself. Along the way I took time to get a whole slew of certifications including CNE, MCSE, A-Plus, Net-Plus and Cisco. Although I'm officially retired I still write custom DB's, web sites and have a couple of corporate customers. 

I've had an email address continuously since the early 80's. Back then it was a dial up connection and Compuserve. My current email address has been the same since Verizon first offered DSL service for home users. My baby brother has the same sort of background I have. He has a thriving business doing repairs, programming and private instruction. 

As far as people needing my help? Older people will admit they don't know. They ask for help and get it. Younger people won't admit they need help. When they do it just costs them more to have me fix things. Being able to gossip on Facebook and use a word processor or spreadsheet hardly qualifies one as being computer literate in my book.

The group is much larger than some think!

24x48 wrote:

jackfish wrote:

Sorry I couldn't help myself, I will accept my punishment.

You deserve it again!

The statement wasn't an error, it just wasn't very nice. Better than calling someone an idiot I suppose.

I was born a little after JoeE, 1958. I didn't get near a computer till I retired two years ago, I'd consider myself computer illiiterate. I guess there's a few of us old fudgers on both sides of the fence.

Tmsorosk wrote,

"...I'd consider myself computer illiiterate."

:-)

I don't like to brag but I took machine language and advanced mathematics for computers in 1962.  The person who helped start my web site was the first PhD in Computer Science from U. Illinois Urbana, where he was one of the designers of the advanced computer represented by HAL 9000 in 2001 A space Odyssey.

Geoff Kait

Www.machinadynamica.com

Wasn't HAL ( Heuristic algorith ) designed more for entertainment purposes?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

HAL in the movie was for entertainment.  The advanced computer developed at Urbana (the center of computer science research and development in the 60s), was not for entertainment, incorporating concepts such as artificial intelligence and artificial intuition. In the context of the movie HAL was developed at U. Illinois Urbana, revealed when Dave is removing HAL's memory storage modules.

Geoff Kait

machina dynamica

I remember reading years ago that HAL was one letter before IBM for all three!

Thank goodness for Wikipedia.  (No offense to anyone regarding what the acronym HAL stood for.)

HAL

Origin of name

Although it is often conjectured that the name HAL was based on a one-letter shift from the name IBM, this has been denied by both Clarke and 2001 director Stanley Kubrick.[1] In 2010: Odyssey Two, Clarke speaks through the character of Dr. Chandra (he originally spoke through Dr. Floyd until Chandra was awoken), who characterized this idea as: "[u]tter nonsense! [...] I thought that by now every intelligent person knew that H-A-L is derived from Heuristic ALgorithmic".[2][3]

Clarke more directly addressed this issue in his book The Lost Worlds of 2001:[4]

As is clearly stated in the novel (Chapter 16), HAL stands for Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer. However, about once a week some character spots the fact that HAL is one letter ahead of IBM, and promptly assumes that Stanley and I were taking a crack at the estimable institution ... As it happened, IBM had given us a good deal of help, so we were quite embarrassed by this, and would have changed the name had we spotted the coincidence.

Also, IBM is explicitly mentioned in the film 2001, as are many other real companies. IBM is given fictional credit as being the manufacturer of the Pan Am Clipper's computer, and the IBM logo can be seen in the center of the cockpit's instrument panel.

[edit]HAL's history

[edit]HAL in 2001: A Space Odyssey

HAL became operational in Urbana, Illinois at the HAL Plant (the University of Illinois' Coordinated Science Laboratory, where the ILLIACcomputers were built). The film states that this occurred in 1992, while the book gives 1997 as HAL's birthyear.[5] In 2001: A Space Odyssey, HAL begins to malfunction in subtle ways and, as a result, the decision is made to shut HAL down in order to prevent more serious malfunctions. The sequence of events and manner in which HAL is shut down differs between the novel and film versions of the story.

GCK

machina Dynamica

I wouldn't necassarily call today's generation more computer litterate, maybe more computer aware?  My neices are in their late teens and early 20s and have grown up all their lives with a computer in their house.  I still need to fix it at least a couple of times a year from all the spamware and virus's they get. 

Back on the topic of cd's being dead.  I don't see it happening any time soon.  How people purchase cd's I think will continue to move from store floor space to online but I think they will be around for a long while still. 

Well said subroc, CD is a lot futher from daed that the guy that started this thread.

let it die(and vinyl too). bring on the downloads only.

digital is the better performer, the most convenient, and future proof.   I look forward to a total migration to streaming(and abolition of vinyl replay systems and golden eared audiophiles)

Here's to buying more CDs in 2013!

Happy New Year.

I am a baby boomer but as far as I am concerned I got interested into computers only in 1997 when they came up with the first computer with a DVD drive. The progressive picture on a computer screen was sensational, much better than on an interlaced TV screen, much better than the fist DVD players playing on a TV. I got into computers and computers built by Digital Connection at the time only because of their upscaling capabilities on the cheap and my love of watching  movies on a big screen with a Sony G70 projector. I was never interested of audio on a computer though. Instead I was interered in commercial CD changers, then streaming audio and Pandora. I still use CDs, I still buy them, often after listening to Pandora, then playing with my Alesis 9600 and inserting them into one of one of my Denon  changer. I still collect good movies after watching them on Netflix, now at 1080p. There is nothing to replace CD at the present time.

Although I download from HD tracks I'll never rely on downloading or streaming for all my music. I don't use the cloud for storing important data. Current streamiong technology is heavily compressed MP3 files. I don't want to listen to MP3 files.

Having an actual CD in my possession IMO has it all over purely electronic storage. Stuff in the cloud is only accessible through the internet. Sure I have internet access virtually everywhere. But, why would i want to have to go online to listen to music that I own?

Music that's downloaded and stored on a local drive is only there as long as the drive works. From experience I know that hard drives die. When that happens the music that was stored there is gone. Having CD's/LP's or some other type of hardcopy of my music is something I'll never give up. Having them satisfies the need for a permanent backup.

When my computer drive died it took my backup drive with it . I replaced the computer and core router but not the music that was on it .

Computer audio and hard drive servers may be the future but it's a temporary future.

to get to the music. Same reason I buy downloads and vinyl. It is to get to the music. There are problems with every delivery system, but we put up with them to get to the music. So I will spin cds even if just to rip them to my computer so long as there is mucin on those discs I want to hear.

Trey

...to get to the music is the best way to say exactly what I`m also thinking. And as far as quality goes, with todays audio tools a guy put together a very musically satisfying system using CD`s as the source medium. 

Its also a convenience thing. Like plenty of others here, I like quality downloads too.  I`m use HD Tracks frequently but they dont have an unlimited library and sometimes I cant find a decent download of the music I`m looking for so its onto e-bay for a CD for now until it comes out in hi-res download.

At least this way I`ll always have a back up copy.

i like having the "hard copy" of music. it's reassuring. i also buy vinyls, but cd's are nice simply for their portability. i don't think they're going anywhere for a long time.

I support the continuing release of hard copy music by actually buying some. I ordered four CD's this morning!

"CD" ... wuz, dat homes? .... uh ... Computer Data? Computer Disc? Coded Data? 

Hardly a youngblood. But not an old geezer like most of y'all ;) 

CD: I could never go back to anything so cumbersome. It's NOW all about playlists and convenience ... and clearing much-needed shelf-space. Even the routine of playlist files, played on Foobar or iTunes, in a modern Win 7 or Mac, is gettin' old... fiddly...labor-intensive. Tablet PCs, iPads, or something like Head-Direct/HiFiMan or Colorfly or other cheap-but-audiophile-grade, high-rez-capable, portable devices from the new wave of "high-end" China manufs, are my PRIMARY sources...IOW ... a way out ;)

As far as software (files) ... Japan continues to release remastered CDs-- lossless copies of which can be obtained online. There's HDTracks, of course. And there are very HQ file-sharing or torrent communities that, IMO, put out the best stuff (yes, these files are worth paying for, but Apple or Sony/BMG don't want to tackle the job (eg. SACD/DSD in *.ISO format). The torrent community consistently uses quality soft/hardware (and have proper technical skills/experience) to create HQ "rips". E.g., see avantgardeproject.org.

You may ask: "What about the Gorilla and Elephant in the room: vinyl/LPs or analog open-reel tapes"? 

My reply: Pfffffffff. I don't like music or audio THAT much. LOL! 

--

My nephews (early 20's) tell me they listen to music "in the car" or otherwise "with headphones". They do not see the thrill in listening to music at home or understanding that what they are hearing has many levels of sonic quality. Maybe its because with the boomer generation, sound got better with each decade, thanks largely to increased technology in the recording industry. All of us boomers remember our first home stereo.

I remember the first Sony Walkman (AM/FM) I got a hold of (around 1981) and it blew my mind with reference to its sound quality. Those who grew up in the 1970's generally had to have a home stereo to put the headphones on..beat boxes with headphone jacks didn't come around until the 1980's.

Teenagers nowadays see even less of a need for a home stereo. If you start talking to a teenager about audio quality their eyes quickly glaze over. My kids are not the least bit interested in my NAD/PSB home stereo setup. They don't even ask about my albums.

The recording industry - and artists alike - are just trying to find the most lucrative means to distribute their product. You cannot argue with that. All those artists of the past have lost royalties due to the burning of CD's and swapping online. I feel for Neil Young, and apparantly that requires him to affix a price tag of $60 on his new vinyl album. No kid under the age of 40 is gonna buy that.

Like the rest of the industry, the manufacturers of sound equipment are not doing any end user any favors. None of those younger segments of our population can afford to own such equipment that is spoken of in most of these sound magazines/forums. None of it is available where those kids shop - best buys..hhgregg..etc. There are no boutique sound shops anymore to promote this method of "listening". And where do sales explode? In inferior iSound equipment, thumpy Dre Beats headphones, and car stereo equipment which is generally "portable" and requires far less investment. It's all related to CD and Vinyl purchases. Home stereo equipment is vital to a "collector". If your tooling around with Dr. Dre or iSomething, phooey to lugging around or keeping anything more than you need.

While I consider myself to be an audiophile, there seem to be WAY too many hi-end manufacturers out there marketing to older folks like me, but nary a manufacturer who is going after the younger market or can provide them with a turntable for $100 that is not considered inferior. CD's, like records, will die because there is no marketing of equipment to a younger crowd who would like to have something tangible but cannot afford it. Its far easier to come up with $1.29 than it is, $10-$20, especially when an artist only needs one "hit" nowadays (see GoTye  - how many own his single "Somebody that I used To Know" vs. his CD, er Album????). I'm no even sure that in 10 years an artist will find a need to release 10 songs at one time (album) vs. 1 song a month.

The buck starts with the person who creates the music and the medium is adopted by the distributor who can pay them the most money. Its just too bad the manufacturers feel they cannot make a difference with regards to thier own future. Most will find themselves out of business when boomers pass on because without a tangible product (CD; album) the demand for equipment to play music will be a small, cheap, portable wireless device connected to the internet. 

No. The CD is not going to die anytime soon!