Unless someone is a big classical music fan, I am always amazed by the fact that many have thousands of LPs and cds. With classical music, you can sometimes have a hundred copies of the same composition performed by different musicians in different places. As an example, I like fusion era Miles. For my taste, absolutely best albums from that time are Bitches Brew and Pangaea. And that's exactly what I have, just these two because everything else from him after it is either much weaker or just junk. Or take Pink Floyd. Wish You Were Here and Dark Side are the best, so I have them. The Wall is OK, I don't have it, and the rest is just not worth it at all. Deep Purple. Machine Head and maybe Live in Japan, that's all, though I think that Demon's Eye from Fireball is a great song. Why listen to what is worse along with what is better? To make "better" even better by comparizon? I think that there is no good music, classical aside, for thousands of titles though there are many good songs scattered in many albums. Maybe some keep many titles because of one or two songs, I don't know.
Musical taste is 100% subjective. What I think is good might not be what you enjoy and what you love most may not float my boat. It is just different from person to person and I will never question others musical taste.
When I have to chose, I am fairly selective but still always looking to like something new or different.
However, since going with a music server, I spend a lot of time listening to my CD tracks queued up randomly via Squeezebox.
I listen to most everything that queues up and seldom skip or select. I find I enjoy a much broader assortment of music this way, when the computer decides what to play next rather than me.
It's a different way to listen that for me shifts the focus on being surprised by what plays next as well as sampling your entire music collection and surprisingly consistently enjoying whatever happens to be served up next. I will buy a new CD, often for the purpose mainly of expanding my library in some new direction, rip it to the server, and may not get to hear a cut for some time. Then it comes up with no advance warning and less expectations which makes for a more unbiased listen. A great way to broaden your listening horizons gradually over time.
I equate it to having you own personal radio station that plays only the music you own. You evolve your playlist by ripping and adding new CDs to the library/playlist as desired. I spend many hours listening this way and discovering new gems in my collection often when least expected. Highly recommended.
I agree with quality over quantity. I'm always looking(listening) for new music but if the content doesn't rate close to a 10 forget it. I'm much more lenient when considering recording quality.
It takes all kind, but to frame the question as being selective is presumptuous. It could just as easily be "How Pedantic Are You?" Sometimes it's the less than perfect works that that makes an artist truly interesting.
You make a good point. I would ask it this way, if you could get a full refund on any cd or lp you gave up, how many would be left in your collection? A lot of stuff we keep because it's not worth a lot to get rid of it. I have the 1963 Karajan beethoven set on LP in alsolutely mint condition. Played once while being taped. But it's not worth anything. I think I saw one for sell for $15. Better just to keep it. I too have given away many LPs everytime I moved while in the Military.
Elizabeth, that's for certain. I too am always on the quest for new music but usually I find a song maybe two from an album that I like so I would either just have to use the computer or buy a cd, if available, and record those songs onto a tape with slight drop in fidelity, then sell that cd. By the way, I don't really expect anyone to publicly admit that a big part of their collections may be just sitting on shelves for years without being played.
Elizabeth, how can you listen for ten hours every day? It is hard for me to imagine. I can do five hours as a background music from time to time but even that is a lot. It is also a question of money. Maybe better to get that dream amp and sell some lps and cds. They might not be worth much, but if we are talking thousands..
I do three hours in the morning. It's as much a part of the start of my day as coffee is. I can also do 3 or 4 hours at night. Late at night it seems to sound better.
Maybe Liz does not watch TV. If it weren't for TV I could do 10 hours easy.
if you could get a full refund on any cd or lp you gave up, how many would be left in your collection?
I'd keep 99%. I can't tell you how many times I've listened to albums that I initially dismissed as no better than okay, and years, even decades later, came to the conclusion that they were great albums. The reverse also happens and that okay too. Why would I ever get rid of a record just because I don't think it's the greatest recording of all time anymore?
If the low sound quality issue is ever addressed, music subscription services will make most questions about personal music collections moot.
I can't count the LP's I have, which indicate I must have been under some kind of bad influence. The record covers are pretty and interesting, but the music is so lousy, I really can't stand it.
Now I'm much more selective. Almost 100% of my listening is from the "computer play list" and music is playing all day every day, sometime maybe only one or two cuts from each LP.
I try to purchase only CDs which I am fairly certain I will enjoy for a long time. Sometimes I get fooled by samples or fool myself, and those get tossed, eventually. I periodically prune my collection, keeping the ones which bring great joy and dumping the posers. I never buy or keep a recording because of its popularity or historical significance. I am not a collector, but only keep CDs I know I will continue to listen and enjoy.
Not all releases are great from an artist. Sometimes I only like part of what is on some of an artist's releases. If I like the tracks well enough I will rip/burn those tracks from multiple CDs for my own personal "Best Of". Sometimes it is just a matter of eliminating one or two clinkers in the bunch so I'll do just that - so I never have to hear them again and can enjoy the remaining to their fullest.
Also, there are times I think the track order stinks so will rip/burn for better flow of the tracks.
Dig what Mapman has going on. The built in assumptions or expectations that usually come in to play when choosing what to put on can reduce the odds of getting into some great music that might already be right in front of you. Also on board w/Onhwy61...few things are more gratifying than those times when something you previously weren't into clicks and you start to get it. The original post question seems to really be... how rigid are you once you form an opinion ?
...Or maybe how important is it for you to maintain your current level of ignorance?
"I'd keep 99%. I can't tell you how many times I've listened to albums that I initially dismissed as no better than okay, and years, even decades later, came to the conclusion that they were great albums"
This is very very true. Most of what I buy is based on reviews, but sometimes, I just don't get it until much later.
I wish I could do it the way Rockadanny does it. Just not in me.
Good grief - what an insular attitude and, I have to say, somewhat arrogant as well. I love classical music but the majority of my collection, numbering around 4500, is rock and Prog rock. I am very fussy with regards to the albums I buy, I am not made of money after all. In all that collection, I have perhaps 50 - 100 that I no longer want and would consider selling. The remainder of my collection comprises albums that are in the main excellent with only a few duff tracks. I know exactly what I like and most albums have been bought blind or as a result of hearing one track. I have a current CD "want" list of around 700 albums, all of which I own digitally. I have had to stop listening to new music to give myself a chance of familiarisation of the existing stock. I could easily keep listening and buying as there is no end to new and exciting music.
If you feel that most non classical albums are poor in general, just face the fact that you have a somewhat constricted taste. That's not to say that that is any way a bad thing - just a fact of life. You are tailor made for the digital age - download what you like and don't worry about the rest.
" The record covers are pretty and interesting, but the music is so lousy, "
Back in the day when LPs were $2.50, I bought many of my LPs based on the album art. Found a lot of good music that way. Now with CDs right at $20, the reviews must be great, and from a lot of people. I no longer take chances.
Yeah, I heard that Stereophile has a share, just don't know how big a share, and who else has big shares. It's too much money affairs everywhere, difficult to find a place to talk to other people normally. Some LP covers are just great. Bitches Brew, Pangaea, Agharta, Into the Labyrinth come to mind immideately.
Don't let me think about when I retire, as I've around 14,000 l.p.'s & 2000 c.d.'s Mostly the vinyl is classical, opera & jazz, c.d.'s are a mixture of jazz, country & m.o.r. I sometimes admonish myself for having 4 or 5 of the same l.p.'s and even the same pressings. But from January this year I cancelled all my subscriptions to re-issues series and stopped buying c.d.'s - going cold turkey!
I've bought music using two methods. One is to seek out first pressings of music I am familiar with due to reviews and members' preferences, or hearing a piece on Sirius radio or Pandora. The other is random impulse buying. Thing is I've been surprised in a good way by a lot of the random buys. Have 1086 LP's and over 500 cd's.
I subscribe to MOG, Rhapsody and Pandora. For a monthly fee of less than 3 CD's, I have access to an endless supply of new music and access to practically any album I want to hear at any time. I may never buy another CD or album again.
Inna i will agree with your opinion that is not worth to buy "album" containing a few good songs of many...but there is a different tastes and pockets...regarding pink floyd...i like their earlyer work...dont get me wrong i like dark side and wall is ok...but that cant match their thematic and atmosferic sound of their early work by my taste and dont care how good dark side sonicaly sounds better...if money is not issue i would probably buy all i like on vinyl...but for now few hundread of well selected ALBUMS is all what i really need...rest is on harddisk and sounds good thru DAC(about 40k songs)...
I have a huge rack of LP's that could serve as "frizbies", for all the playing they get; which is none. When we had to buy LP's based on what we derived from the information on the cover, I made a lot of mistakes; and that includes very well known artists.
well back in the days you could only buy vinyl so as Orpheus says it were a lot mistakes in buyin and experiment with artists...today you get all on download...so im thankfull to digital age becuz i easyer come to many different materials witch i could separate good from the bad not wasting the money on blind buyin of albums...95% of albums i have on vinyl are masterpieces of many different genre of music by my taste...some are really expensive paid some are cheap but i knew what i was buyin...and i have to collect bout 200 more LPs to finish collection...for rest theres allways pc...
The ability to pre-screen is nice but is only part of the equation... it doesn't do much to increase the likelihood that people will expand their horizons or develop good sensory equipment as listeners, (highly selective can mean highly F.O.S.). There are lots of us who will work like hell to maintain the i like what i know and i know what i like cycle. Opinions that express confidence in assigning relative artistic merit often reek mightily.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
