• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

The Amazing Collapse of CD Sales

My first foray into streaming was iTunes and buying songs which I could burn. Think of all the albums and CDs you own. How many killer tracks on AVERAGE on each one? 3? 4? Why suffer through 10? Even greatest hit CDs - how many were really great and do you want to listen to an hour of one artists music?

Enter iTunes. I can BUY songs and mix them in a CD. Wow - all great songs on one CD. Now take streaming. I can choose from 50M or more songs and call up what I want, when I want it. I can assemble songs into playlists to suit my mood - straight, buzzed, exercising, winding down. To me CDs are already dead. One caveat here, no streaming companies are making money, yet. The future is still evolving and we may need to pay more to stream. We'll see where that goes.

Today I streamed Frank Sinatra Live at the Sands while sipping a drink and catching up on the news on my phone. I used my phone to skip a few tracks then bounced into some Indie new releases. I changed tracks, artists, volume without leaving my chair. Sounded great through the Mac amp and pre. Before that though, I worked out on the bike and weights in my bsmt streaming Spotify on my Bluetooth wireless earbuds. Can't sit all day.
3/4ths of the fun of music, to me, is the discovery. There's a ton of great music that gets passed by because it was never a "hit". "My Sharona" isn't the best song on "Get The Knack", the Goo Goo Dolls were actually an awesome punk/power pop trio prior to **** like "Name" and "Iris", Van Halen's best cuts are absolutely not their hit songs, and there is WAY more to The Marshall Tucker Band than "Can't You See" and "Heard it in a Love Song". For me, that's the beauty of music. Learning about the band's music through listening to all of it.
 
Rise and Fall of CD compared to Rise and Fall of Digital Cameras.
Curious but why...let me ask my smartphone "Siri, why the decline in these two..."

Screen Shot 2020-12-17 at 3.03.35 PM.png
 
Posted above-

How many good tracks on an album anyway?

That depends on who you like.

I have many, many albums where all or nearly all tracks are good, and even more where 1/2 the album is good.

The loss is that aside from any "radio" songs, most will never be exposed to those other tracks with today's "just buy the single" mentality.
 
3/4ths of the fun of music, to me, is the discovery. There's a ton of great music that gets passed by because it was never a "hit". "My Sharona" isn't the best song on "Get The Knack", the Goo Goo Dolls were actually an awesome punk/power pop trio prior to **** like "Name" and "Iris", Van Halen's best cuts are absolutely not their hit songs, and there is WAY more to The Marshall Tucker Band than "Can't You See" and "Heard it in a Love Song". For me, that's the beauty of music. Learning about the band's music through listening to all of it.
I agree. I don't ever equate good with popular. In fact, my tastes now are anything but popular. My point was, for most of the albums and CDs I've owned, there are many songs I'd skip past after hearing them the first few passes through. That's why Id never load a 300 disk CD changer and just hit shuffle. I'd go through too many batteries on the remote hitting the skip button.
 
3/4ths of the fun of music, to me, is the discovery. There's a ton of great music that gets passed by because it was never a "hit". "My Sharona" isn't the best song on "Get The Knack", the Goo Goo Dolls were actually an awesome punk/power pop trio prior to **** like "Name" and "Iris", Van Halen's best cuts are absolutely not their hit songs, and there is WAY more to The Marshall Tucker Band than "Can't You See" and "Heard it in a Love Song". For me, that's the beauty of music. Learning about the band's music through listening to all of it.
Yeah, I agree with that. Though there are certainly albums in my collection where I tend to play just a few tracks off of, more often than not I like to hear the whole album, which in this day and age seems to be a quaint, very old fashioned idea. I think of the entire album as being the work, rather than it being a collection of smaller works (songs). I do like albums that are comps as well and I like to listen to certain radio DJs play sections of their favorite music. Mostly though for myself, I'm happy to listen to album and not bother with making playlists or haring any kind of random mix. This is one big reason why I haven't yet really gotten into the whole streaming thing, is that I'm very happy to take in albums a side, or even whole work at a time...
 
Wouldn't you know it, my generally reliable Internet service went out yesterday, so my wife said "just play some CDs." Good to have a couple thousand CDs and LPs stored in the basement.
Or have them ripped to a music server with the same instantaneous access without the considerable disk shuffle time.
 
That's why Id never load a 300 disk CD changer and just hit shuffle. I'd go through too many batteries on the remote hitting the skip button.
A considerable limitation of obsolete tech. While I don’t choose to listen to all random tracks from my music server, I don’t have to wait for the considerable physical shuffling of disks and track locations before making the decision - I see the next twenty or so in the upcoming list and choose to bypass them in advance with phone, pad or watch. Batteries?
 
I wonder how long it will be until the cheapest streaming plan is $89.95 a month?

And whether anything besides records and tube gear will work after the EMP wars? ;)
The top 3 or 4 streaming services continue to lose money. It can't go on for much longer. They need to either raise prices, garner more subscribers or both. I suspect Spotify may lose the free service and just do a free trial along with adding a hi-fi tier. Tidal continues to burn through gobs of cash. Maybe Amazon comes out on top?? Time will tell.
 
Streaming companies are interested in gaining control of a portal .. loose money now and make money later from control of the portal (goose laying golden eggs) playing forward. To use a Monopoly metaphor .. be the owner of Boardwalk & Park Place.

If you go to time marker 42:45 on the video below, Author Stephen Witt (How Music Got Free) explains this in a question and answer session. It's as good of an explanation as I've ever heard that made sense to me. This video was uploaded 5 years ago .. the trends he talked about are still in place.

 
Last edited:
Streaming companies are interested in gaining control of a portal .. loose money now and make money later from control of the portal (goose laying golden eggs) playing forward. To use a Monopoly metaphor .. be the owner of Boardwalk & Park Place.

If you go to time marker 42:45 on the video below, Author Stephen Witt (How Music Got Free) explains this in a question and answer session. It's as good of an explanation as I've ever heard that made sense to me. This video was uploaded 5 years ago .. the trends he talked about are still in place.

I can see the winner(s) of these "streaming" wars being able to dictate which artists are promoted on their sites. Any artists which don't align with the ownership's philosophy/ideology will not see any airtime.
 
Or have them ripped to a music server with the same instantaneous access without the considerable disk shuffle time.

True. I've got 765 albums ripped. Great for when I'm at the beach house. Not gonna throw crates of LPs in the Jeep when I travel South.
 
Again- a good live show will guarantee income for the artist.

...and they're still selling t shirts!

5+ lines 15 people deep last arena show I went to.
 
I wonder how long it will be until the cheapest streaming plan is $89.95 a month?

And whether anything besides records and tube gear will work aftýer the EMP wars? ;)

Is there something you're not sharing with the rest of us...?!? :dunno: :rflmao:
 
I can see the winner(s) of these "streaming" wars being able to dictate which artists are promoted on their sites. Any artists which don't align with the ownership's philosophy/ideology will not see any airtime.
You mean how stations like ESPN, owned by Disney, uses music by artists in their videos who are either signed to a wholly owned Disney label or to their strategic partner Universal Music Group?
 
You mean how stations like ESPN, owned by Disney, uses music by artists in their videos who are either signed to a wholly owned Disney label or to their strategic partner Universal Music Group?


That's how we got the Waylon "Dukes of Hazard" theme.
 
Back
Top Bottom