restorer-john
Grand Contributor
When it comes to sharing music with friends, nothing beats listening together, I believe. That’s something the lack of physical media can’t take away.
Well said @Room314 You should post more.
When it comes to sharing music with friends, nothing beats listening together, I believe. That’s something the lack of physical media can’t take away.
Yeah, that is great when possible. In other cases physical standards are missed. Sharing a thumb drive isn't the same as sharing a CD with jewelcase, coverart etc. I have seen thumb drives under 2$ when bought in bulk. It's quite afforadable but aesthetically it is just not the same unfortunatly.Well, I wouldn’t call myself young anymore, but yes. A couple of years ago I got a CD as a Christmas present (from someone younger than me, which is weird in itself). I had already given up CDs for years, so I tried to hide my surprise as best as I could... The gift was, of course, appreciated, and at that time I still had an older laptop with a CD drive, so at least I could simply rip it. Thankfully, it wasn’t a vinyl record or cassette (which probably would have surprised me less, given their recent comeback).
When it comes to sharing music with friends, nothing beats listening together, I believe. That’s something the lack of physical media can’t take away.
Yes, for sure. Even if I'd never consider turning to vinyl (or returning to CDs) myself, I still enjoy record sleeves, CD booklets etc. whenever I get the chance. Thankfully, not everyone has gone fully digital yetIn other cases physical standards are missed. Sharing a thumb drive isn't the same as sharing a CD with jewelcase, coverart etc. I have seen thumb drives under 2$ when bought in bulk. It's quite afforadable but aesthetically it is just not the same unfortunatly.
I think so. Often laptops don’t have cd drives anymore. I think the only issue with higher sample rates would be that it takes up more space on the drive. But if you want to present your music in a nice package with a booklet or art, then a cd is nicer.Is a thumb drive going to be a more accessable medium to share audio for listening purposes than a CD?
No one I personally know under the age of 60 (I’m 61) has any interest in physical media of any sort. If I gave them a CD, cassette, or even a thumb drive, they wouldn’t have the equipment or software to play it. I mostly just send links to BandCamp or whatever streaming service they subscribe to.
Personally, I gave up physical media when iTunes became a thing. That in conjunction with the cool early iPod hardware was too much to resist (1,000 songs in your pocket!). I don’t really have any nostalgia for CD and vinyl, and I’m satisfied with streaming.
Realistically I send my friends links to Spotify playlists via SMS. It's not nearly as nice as having physical media, but the market has moved far, far away from physical media for a while.How would you share your audio like this these days?
If you happen to have a thumb drive handy when you know the tune you like is coming up then that would be good, too. Typically, when listening to a radio or stream, you may not have that advance warning.The 1st thing I thought of (if you don't have a CD) is a USB thumb drive. They are cheap enough that you can give them away.
Most music seems to still be released on CD and/or you can still buy & own MP3s from Amazon and M4As from iTunes. Maybe that will change in the future. I usually buy CDs (or an MP3 if the CD isn't available) but I'm old (over 65) and I already own most of the music I want so it's getting rarer for me to buy one.
...But it is a copyright violation if you keep the original and give-away a copy. I don't loan anybody CDs, DVDs, or books anymore because I've lost some. If I want to share I'll make a copy and tell the person that they can scrap or destroy it if they don't want to permanently-keep a pirated copy. And if they like it, of course they can buy their own copy. I don't tell them to destroy it when they are done "borrowing" it. So yeah... I'm guilty. But I usually buy music (and movies) when I can. A couple of times I've "recorded" from streaming or downloaded a pirated copy when it wasn't available legitimately. (No, I don't copy books... They have to get their own copy.)
Purchased (or other good quality) MP3s and M4As are quite good! In most cases you can't hear a difference in a proper blind ABX test, or you have to listen very carefully to hear the difference between the original and the lossy copy. That's assuming it's the same master and the same recording... Sometimes MP3, M4A, or streamed copy is a different version (maybe remastered).
Not only that. Even for those being into audio, those several variants bonded together are more or less redundant anyway and 44.1 kHz / 16 bit (or given ideal filtering probably even 32 kHz / 12 Bit) would do it in virtually all listening cases.Perhaps putting all that on a thumb drive for someone that isn't that much into audio might be confusing?
Don't confuse the container (officially MP4, aka M4A for audio-only content) which can feature many different codecs (although mostly going along with AAC, given) with the codec itself (MP3).Also is there any problems with FLAC in some applications, and there is a benefit in including m4a or even mp3?
As long as companies can make a profit on CDs, they'll be around.I still have a Philips CD-100 in working condition for sentimental reasons. Bought it second hand a few years ago because I couldn't afford it when was released. You are absolutely right: the CD was a revolution in terms of accessible sound quality and we will never whitness something like it again.
In fact I suppose we will see a degradation of sound quality in future due to the fact, that most of the young people simply don't care and are satisfied with a cellphone, Bluetooth and some portable active-speaker-thingis...
Oh hell, I asked to borrow a friend's laptop 10 years ago. He handed it to me. I asked where the hell the CD drive was. He laughed.I think so. Often laptops don’t have cd drives anymore. I think the only issue with higher sample rates would be that it takes up more space on the drive. But if you want to present your music in a nice package with a booklet or art, then a cd is nicer.
Even the highest bitrate mp3 is so small, in what scenarios is that even a concern these days?Technical benefits of lossy codecs I see besides the obvious storage savings (if not foiled again by the use of too high bitrates):
Okay, I guess that mp3 is more supported that the apple options? Do you know what is the most supported lossless one?- in case of MP1/2/3 probably extremely high compatibility, probably still way exeeding that of many lossless ones
Okay, I did not know anything about that. Where can I read up on this subject, or which key words should I look up?- getting the charme of floating point representation, resulting in extremely high dynamic ranges which may easily exceed that of 16 bit or 24 bit integer PCM. Mostly theoretical though and might rather come in handy when converting or downmixing from other floating point schemes without the risk of clipping in case of decoding to integers bound to the 0dBFS-limit.
You can get USB CD players but of course they lack the emotional attachment of actually holding a full-sized desktop CD player...the smell...the feeling of sliding it into the desktop and attaching the SATA cable... Also there's no room on the ridiculous tiny boxes USB CD Player boxes typically come in for all the photos and boilerplate electronic certification text you used to read on the box of a real CD player.Oh hell, I asked to borrow a friend's laptop 10 years ago. He handed it to me. I asked where the hell the CD drive was. He laughed.
I cried.
Yes, the rather general "concern" was to point out that at (very) high bitrates, one quickly has not only diminishing returns in terms of quality/size - ratio but also gives away the essential advantage of using a more efficient codec in the first place as most will be completely transparent then anyway.Even the highest bitrate mp3 is so small, in what scenarios is that even a concern these days?
I'd say, MP3 (and the predecessors MP1 and MP2) are unbeaten when it comes to compatibility, AAC also relatively decent by now. For movie soundtracks, I often create 5.1 or 7.1 AAC while others may prefer Vorbis which is also very good.Okay, I guess that mp3 is more supported that the apple options?
"Knowing" something for sure is always a tough one, but I'd say FLAC it is.Do you know what is the most supported lossless one?
E.g. 1 and 2 with the hint to MP3's global gain function relatvie to ReplayGain where one can change the decoding result without having to re-encode the original but only changing the metadata.Okay, I did not know anything about that. Where can I read up on this subject, or which key words should I look up?