i think you were flamed because of your username. :)
two things i don't understand about these discussions.
1. the whole "no more cds" after 2012 is a rumor. some nameless execs are cited in a news source most people don't regularly read. it's not like it was in the new york times and the major labels have spoken out with an official statement. as it is, this is more like the reports of the world ending with the mayan calendar in 2012. if the world ends, it is likely that cd production will come to a halt, but this little "news" item strikes me as meaningless.
2. why do people have to "take sides" when it comes to cds and computer files as sources?
if you're like rgs92, with 1000 cds of music that he regularly enjoys listening to and a state of the art cd player, there is no need for him to make computer audio an undertaking, unless he feels like undertaking it and he can do it when and if he feels like it. and if he were to wait 5 years to do so, the technology would have advanced to the point that it would be relatively painless to make any sort of transition.
if you're like me, and have spent more time on computer audio in the past 10 years, why should i upgrade my cd player past a certain point? i might have 500 cds, but they're all ripped into flac and wav files. i have not bought more than a handful of cds in the past 10 years, and most of my new music has been vinyl or digital downloads. of course, the advantage of cds today is that they are inexpensive relative to digital downloads. i just bought two remastered muddy waters cds for $12 on amazon. digital downloads would have cost more, and sacd and vinyl versions would have cost significantly more. i'm satisfied with the cd version, but if i wanted to go over the top, i could purchase the 180g 45rpm or sacd version for $65 to $100.
a number of the manufacturers of equipment seem to be source agnostic and offer the ability to use whatever you want. bryston, linn, naim, esoteric, luxman, etc.
i honestly don't understand all the fuss or the need to proselytize. enjoy your favorite formats. leave others to enjoy theirs. i imagine it's clear to everyone on the forum that audiophiles are a relatively small market for the music industry as a whole and the major labels are going to do what they do to make money and move product. on some of my new vinyl purchases, they offer digital downloads. i've been routinely offered the option of flac files. quality wise, that's fine for me. at my price point of equipment, i don't have any illusions with regard to "absolute sound."
btw, rgs92, coming from an EMM you'll probably need to do a little better than iTunes if you ever decide to get into digital downloads. :) more like jriver or foobar2k on windows and pure music or amarra on mac.
two things i don't understand about these discussions.
1. the whole "no more cds" after 2012 is a rumor. some nameless execs are cited in a news source most people don't regularly read. it's not like it was in the new york times and the major labels have spoken out with an official statement. as it is, this is more like the reports of the world ending with the mayan calendar in 2012. if the world ends, it is likely that cd production will come to a halt, but this little "news" item strikes me as meaningless.
2. why do people have to "take sides" when it comes to cds and computer files as sources?
if you're like rgs92, with 1000 cds of music that he regularly enjoys listening to and a state of the art cd player, there is no need for him to make computer audio an undertaking, unless he feels like undertaking it and he can do it when and if he feels like it. and if he were to wait 5 years to do so, the technology would have advanced to the point that it would be relatively painless to make any sort of transition.
if you're like me, and have spent more time on computer audio in the past 10 years, why should i upgrade my cd player past a certain point? i might have 500 cds, but they're all ripped into flac and wav files. i have not bought more than a handful of cds in the past 10 years, and most of my new music has been vinyl or digital downloads. of course, the advantage of cds today is that they are inexpensive relative to digital downloads. i just bought two remastered muddy waters cds for $12 on amazon. digital downloads would have cost more, and sacd and vinyl versions would have cost significantly more. i'm satisfied with the cd version, but if i wanted to go over the top, i could purchase the 180g 45rpm or sacd version for $65 to $100.
a number of the manufacturers of equipment seem to be source agnostic and offer the ability to use whatever you want. bryston, linn, naim, esoteric, luxman, etc.
i honestly don't understand all the fuss or the need to proselytize. enjoy your favorite formats. leave others to enjoy theirs. i imagine it's clear to everyone on the forum that audiophiles are a relatively small market for the music industry as a whole and the major labels are going to do what they do to make money and move product. on some of my new vinyl purchases, they offer digital downloads. i've been routinely offered the option of flac files. quality wise, that's fine for me. at my price point of equipment, i don't have any illusions with regard to "absolute sound."
btw, rgs92, coming from an EMM you'll probably need to do a little better than iTunes if you ever decide to get into digital downloads. :) more like jriver or foobar2k on windows and pure music or amarra on mac.