So as you know, most CDs we buy these days come in plastic cases something like this:
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/cd-case-normal.jpg[/img]
As you may also know, these things are made of plastic and can be very, VERY easy to break, what with all the mechanical parts and whatnot.
Most CD jewel cases in my house (which aren't mine) have at least 1 crack in them (I like to think I take better care of my shit than the rest of my family).
However, some albums don't have cracked covers. To name but a few:
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/muse-the-resistance-1-cd-cover-artwork-28905.jpeg[/img][img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/biffy-clyro-only-revolutions-album-cover-41847.jpeg[/img][img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/fleet_foxes-fleet_foxes.jpg[/img]
Why? [i]They're all made of paper.[/i]
Remember when albums used to be like this?
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/3674209852_0d960f1938.jpg[/img]
LP sleeves were badass, could be made out of recycled paper and - most importantly - [i]didn't freaking crack all the time[/i].
Another advantage of paper CD sleeves in the style of records is that they take up about a quarter of the space of plastic CD cases.
Who's with me? Who else thinks all CDs should be packaged in paper sleeves like LPs?
I remember getting Meteora by Linkin Park back when that came out, it used a paper case as well. Always thought it was cool and all albums should be like that.
So yeah paper>shitty cheap easy to break plastic
Everything should come in nice paper cases.
Long live vinyl.
Death to CD.
:v:
Digipaks are the best.
[img]http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/7209/6paneldigipakoasiscd200.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=pie_is_good;24920255]Digipaks are the best.
[img]http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/7209/6paneldigipakoasiscd200.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Yes.
Miles better than gimmick packaging and jewel cases
My copy of the Resistance is in Jewel
Love paper cases. I have The Resistance and Fleet Foxes with paper covers. Same for Takk.. and Með suð í eyrum við spilum endalaust by Sigur Rós, Riceboy Sleeps by Jónsi & Alex, Bromst by Dan Deacon and Funeral by Arcade Fire.
Got Contra by Vampire Weekend and Neon Bible by Arcade Fire with a normal case in a paper sleeve. Paper sleeves are pretty crap :/
There's also another kind of jewel case that isn't as shit. I've only seen it used twice though, for "Infinity on High" by Fall Out Boy and "Made of Bricks" by Kate Nash.
This kind:
[img]http://www.jewelboxing.com/images/bigstan.jpg[/img]
the front is held on better, and it doesn't have those little plastic teeth that hold the CD in and then they break off if you apply any pressure on them.
I've got a few of those too, but they're still a lot bulkier than the paper cases
[QUOTE=Teto;24921861]This kind:
the front is held on better, and it doesn't have those little plastic teeth that hold the CD in and then they break off if you apply any pressure on them.[/QUOTE]
Selected Ambient Works 85-92 by Aphex Twin was re-released with that kind of case.
Also, digipacks are awesome
I think they should all disappear and lossless tracks should be purchasable online. Cut out the production and middleman, give us our product cheaper and faster.
Analogue requires a medium. Digital doesn't.
Vinyl and mp3 is all that is needed
:v:
[QUOTE=Akayz;24922841]Analogue requires a medium. Digital doesn't.
Vinyl and mp3 is all that is needed
:v:[/QUOTE]
MP3? Don't insult me.
I want direct-from-the-studio WAV tracks.
Vinyl can stay for the artwork, but as a means of listening I'm really not very concerned about it.
[QUOTE=SolidSnake52;24922718]I think they should all disappear and lossless tracks should be purchasable online. Cut out the production and middleman, give us our product cheaper and faster.[/QUOTE]
Downloadable music is always there as an alternative, but you really shouldn't restrict people who genuinely prefer using CDs/records/etc.
[QUOTE=CoolCorky;24923045]Downloadable music is always there as an alternative, but you really shouldn't restrict people who genuinely prefer using CDs/records/etc.[/QUOTE]
But what's the need?
Most people just rip the CD to their computer anyway, and then it winds up on their portable player if they have one.
Or at the very least, a lossless store with direct-from-the-studio recordings (not that hard to do, just compile each instrument/vocal track into one piece, upload, and profit) in addition to current markets and mediums.
Top-level quality at a lower price resulting in almost pure profit for the record company since they have no middleman.
Noone will give you "direct from the studio" wav tracks.
Analogue sound works great with great production, most superior at its best.
Lossless are just pointless because they aren't official or superior to anything.
You are a pathetic audiophile.
I think these are coolest:
[IMG_thumb]http://i52.tinypic.com/2vl5d0m.jpg[/IMG_thumb]
I collect vinyl so I can enjoy a superior sound that I don't hear on my ipod when i'm out and about. It also gives me more time to experience the music, it is an experience.
MP3 is a format for simple portable use. An easy fix, perhaps.
I am happy to enjoy good quality music on an ipod or computer through that.
Then we come to presentation. CDs and vinyls present albums far better than mp3s do. They are physical real copies, that can be cherished in a collection. Vinyls have a stronger presence in terms of artwork, so I choose them for that too.
Lossless is pointless :buddy:
Solidsnake, you sure are making yourself sound like a real asshole right now.
[editline]12:38PM[/editline]
just because you can't appreciate holding a piece of music in your hands doesn't mean other people can't
[QUOTE=King_of_Town;24923497]Solidsnake, you sure are making yourself sound like a real asshole right now.[/QUOTE]
And I'm perfectly okay with that.
Hate me or love me it's my opinion either way.
[QUOTE=Akayz;24923145]Noone will give you "direct from the studio" wav tracks.
Analogue sound works great with great production, most superior at its best.
Lossless are just pointless because they aren't official or superior to anything.
You are a pathetic audiophile.[/QUOTE]
What are you even on about? Just because you like vinyls does not make them better. Technically speaking, they are inferior to CD's .wav files in just about every way. Lossless tramples them.
Records are a different medium, thus they have a different sound.
Then again I listen to medium-quality mp3s without a single complaint, unless it's an album that deserves a really high-quality rip.
It's a similar debate to why some people choose to smoke pipes when there are "better quality" and more portable cigarettes you can buy.
It's about personal preference.
But anyway I wasn't saying we should get rid of CDs, just get rid of the crappy plastic cases
[QUOTE=Mister_Jack;24923537]What are you even on about? Just because you like vinyls does not make them better. Technically speaking, they are inferior to CD's .wav files in just about every way. Lossless tramples them.[/QUOTE]
Technically superior. Yes
But sound wise and mastering? God no.
[QUOTE=Akayz;24923776]Technically superior. Yes
But sound wise and mastering? God no.[/QUOTE]
Soundwise? That's actually what I meant. As far as reproducing the original recording, CD's completely destroy vinyls.
And don't even start on mastering. You're looking at a very cut and dried issue through rose-tinted glasses.
You keep saying CDs destroy vinyl in every sense.
I have yet to hear this superiority, or maybe you're just defiant to actually study the formats in depth.
[QUOTE=Akayz;24924042]You keep saying CDs destroy vinyl in every sense.
I have yet to hear this superiority, or maybe you're just defiant to actually study the formats in depth.[/QUOTE]
Do you even understand what the term 'analogue' means? It's an analogue of the original recording.
[editline]03:13PM[/editline]
You're the one that proposed that vinyl is 'most superior at it best', burden of proof is on you, not me.
Analogue recordings sound real and have depth in terms of bass and high response as compared to remastered albums that cut out sound from the original.
Some newer masters even sound better on vinyl due to a better master being used.
You are just going to have to discover it for yourself as I'm not bothered with an arguement clearly heading nowhere.
I was joking about and then pretend audiophiles turn up to whine about how better lossless is than everything else. Thinking they are getting "original studio sound".
Which is never true at all
'Sound real' is no tangible measurement. I'm talking about quantitative qualities of the formats, not which one makes [I]you[/I] feel fuzzy inside. Besides, that's just flat out wrong. CDs have better response frequency ranges than vinyls do.
I'm not talking about 'some newer masters' I'm talking about the format.
That's some copout you got going there. Right up there with 'you just wouldn't undestand.'
I wouldn't call myself an audiophile. If 320 kb/s MP3s were the only thing available I probably wouldn't even mind. Lossless sounds good sometimes, but it's not practical. I have a very few select things in lossless just because they're emotionally significant to me. I never said it was the original sound, I said CDs come closer to it than vinyls.
Vinyls dont always sound superior. Sometimes the mix/production is terrible. Bad quality vinyls also produce bad sound.
I don't collect bad quality vinyls :smug:
But i'm no audiophile, I just enjoy the experience of vinyl sound as compared to CDs.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
