Some labels to abandon CD's by 2012?
Does anyone think this article is for real? I just refuse to believe it and if it is I will begin my slow descent into morbid depression that I have to surrender to what I feel is a souless, uninspiring way to collect music. (please don't debate MP3's vs CD on this fucking thread)
- Relevant artist taggings:
- None
Thread not appearing correctly? Click here to rebuild | Report this
Twitter
Facebook
Last.fm
SoundCloud
MySpace
Friendster
RSS
I'd believe it...
...if I could see it.
http://www.side-line.com/news_comments.php?id=46980_0_2_0_C
whoops. tons of threads all over the internet talking abou it
It just doesn't make sense
I just bought all the recent Jesus and Mary Chain 2 disc reissues. They are amazing. Remastering is great, packaging is brilliant with great pictures and all the b-sides from the era. I just can't imagine losing this experience.
nah
It wouldn't be very logical as it still provides millions of dollars in revenue, and is still very profitable. What reason would they have to stop now? In typical record label style, CDs will remain until they stop being profitable.
Maybe some labels
But if there's money to me made from it, I'm sure production of CD's will still exist. And even if there isn't much financial sense to put out discs, I'm sure certain band will put out CD's - the way many artists conform to 'trends' and release cassettes now (no matter how impractical or niche the market is).
And considering you're on Drowned in Sound, I wouldn't worry too much. The bands you'd likely like, at least a half of them would be right into physicality and CD's and so sell.
Nothing to stress about.
They might stop selling them in high streets...
HMV has been collapsing for quite a while now, and there are hardly any independent stores still around, that are easy to find anyway. If it all goes even more tits up, labels will still probably sell CDs from their websites and stuff.
In my view, small labels should abandon CDs.
The bottom line is the numbers you need to produce (and especially the numbers you need to produce and can't sell because so many DJs and reviewers stubbornly refuse to accept MP3 copies) mean it just isn't a profitable exercise. Pretty much every small label I know takes a huge hit on pretty much every album they release on CD but still feels they have to do it.
I sincerely hope this happens.
I don't see that happening on a major level.
Maybe some small labels will decide not to issue CD's anymore, but instead will focus on releasing vinyl and downloads, but I think that most labels won't abandon releasing albums on CD's, since there is still a market for CD's and there are people who like buying CD's.
I bought LPs and CDs for a long time
Then decided it was just impractical. I'm going to be moving around at 17/18, and for the next decade. "The less you own the more freedom you have".
So I'm paying a few quid times 280
To have a wallet full of shiny plastic discs that I'll never use again?
Yeah, in your house where some guy could burgle it / it could get destroyed by a fire.
I stopped buying CDs a year ago really, once I realised I was just taking all the packaging out of the CD case and storing it and throwing away the plastic. And then never playing the CD at all after an initial burn.
You only save a 'few quid' maybe but I have bought most albums instantly at my desk and been listening to them there and on the way home from work that day.
It depends really on if you think you're paying for the medium or the music?
as someone who moved 700+ CDs around various London homes for eight years, I can sympathise with this idea
but, at the same time, rented properties are designed to be as bland and impersonal as possible, so it was hella nice that everywhere to feel like 'mine' because of my OBVIOUSLY amazing music collection.
I expect the only difference is that CD releases will now all be marketed as LIMITED EDITION and cost twice as much
Excellent point.
CD releases will be the same as vinyl, that is labels will print limited amounts of CD's, will market them as limited editions and will charge more that regular editions.
But, at the same time, KennyDope also made a great point that it's bizarre that people buy DL's when they are just a euro or two cheaper than CD's.
I think that in the future DL prices will drop (it's really stupid to pay 10 EUR for a DL when a CD costs ie. 12 EUR), but the prices of CD's will rise.
it's just more convenient for a lot of people to have the music there on itunes available to download. Human beings are lazy, and record companies realise this, so only releasing music via download would actually be a very clever marketing move on their part. Stillthough I agree, it's much nicer to have CDs.
You never know though, as you said, labels are currently releasing limited editions and B- sides on vinyl, and all of a sudden vinyl is coming back into fashion. maybe we'll see the same thing happen with Cds.
CD's are the new vinyl.
Personally, I like buying CD's more than downloading, cause I'm a sucker for the physical product and the booklet and the artwork etc., but I just can't afford it, since an average CD in my country is 20 EUR, and the other thing is that we can only buy major label releases, since no one wants to import releases from small labels no one has ever heard of, so I download most of the stuff.
Again, I don't see labels abandoning CD's, but they will definitely start releasing them a limited edition releases and will be charging them more than now (I don't know will it be twice as much, but CD prices will rise, IMHO.).
Oh yeah same, I agree totally. I think the issue is that music is just too expensive generally. Well, I suppose it is to those of us who can't afford to buy it as much as we would like- £10 for something that people have dedicated months of their lives to and comes from what must be a pretty soul- destroying experience is seriously good value. But yeah from a customer's point of view, music is too expensive. But that's a different argument entirely.
But I myself can't watch it from any other point of view than that of a customer.
I can understand why retailers in my country (Serbia) sell CD's at those prices, because they have to pay labels their asking price, plus 18% VAT and 20% customs on imports on top of that.
Idk, it's a difficult position for everybody, and I do think that more people will switch to DL's, especially if the prices go down, which they will, IMO.
Neither can I, I'm just considering the musicians' argument, and it's a fair one. But at the same time, I can sort of empathise with what you're saying (obviously not completely because I don't live in Serbia and CDs here don't cost £20).
i don't think it's a bad thing if people switch to downloads and it becomes the only medium by which to get music. I would rather have CDs yes, but at the end of the day, as long as I could still get the music I'd be happy.
Don't hold it against me, but I have to make one correction:
CD's cost 20 EUR, not GBP. If the price was 20 GBP it would be even more catastrophic.
I do agree that from a musicians point of view the price can seem fair, because of all the work they have put into creating a record.
I don't see CD's completely disappearing, but DL's will definitely be the main source of acquiring music for people, if it isn't already.
You can't buy off iTunes in Serbia.
Well, I don't for most.
The last DL I paid for was Radiohead's TKOL, which cost me 7 EUR, which seemed fair to me. I did try to download Sigur Ros' Inni live album and dvd, which is 15 EUR, but they wouldn't accept my credit card (apparently I have the 'wrong' kind of card for internet shopping).
Look, I do want to support the artists as much as possible (even though I don't want to support the yuppie lifestyle of the suits at major labels), but in most cases that's just not a possibility for me and for most music lovers in the Balkans.
Yeah I know, I just put £20 to put it into terms for myself really, as I'm shit at conversion and stuff. I'm guessing that 20 euros would be around £15? Which is actually still pretty bad.
It's 17.10 GBP, by today's exchange rate.
Bloody hell...
17 quid
It's like the early noughties all over again
The average monthly salary in Serbia is 256 GBP.
Now ask yourself how many people spend around 7% of their monthly earnings to buy CD's? I can tell to that the answer is not many!
The irony being that most labels'd be in a better financial position by realising a download you didn't buy than a CD that you did.
*releasing
Yeah but they lose a fortune on CDs.
4AD and Domino are big labels in the grand scheme of things - they probably make money from CDs on at least some of their releases.
But smaller labels certainly tend not to take a huge hit on CDs as they cost a fortune to produce. CD sales aren't high -aA lot of the bands the size DiS writes about will sell 500 to 1000 copies and perhaps even less. When you factor in how much CDs cost to make and that PR companies take about 200 CDs to send out as promo copies, they make a fair loss.
For example I know a band who released their debut album to good reviews and interviews, got into a couple of album of the year lists, had various 6 Music and Radio 1 sessions but only sold about 400 albums. Their label had spent grand promoting the album and took about a 2 grand loss overall - amazingly this was actually a good result for the label in terms of their general sales figures.
Given a label needs to spend about £700 - £800 to get 1000 cds manufactured to an appropriate standard, and given whatever format they release things in they're unlikely to sell enough copies to break even, labels manufacturing CDs are usually simply increasing their losses.
"PR companies take about 200 CDs to send out as promo copies"
Sack that off for a start, then. Hosting's not free, but upload+link = a big saving on pissing 200 CD copies away.
"took about a 2 grand loss overall"
More bad business decisions. Don't outlay what you haven't got, or aren't gonna recoup.
"they're unlikely to sell enough copies to break even"
Stop making 1000 fanicily produced CDs then, and admit that the band just doesn't justify it.
None of these examples herald the demise of the CD, they highlight the delisions of grandeur that some bands apparently have.
for once
i massively disagree with you, wza
You don't even have to pay for a streaming link
Which will have less chance of piracy, thus a leak. It's less convenient to use a tool to pirate a streamed song.
A much adored British band released their new album the other week. Yet their record didn't leak. People were given a link to a private soundcloud stream instead.
you have to manufacture at least 500 CDs, it's the minimum production run
if you want digipaks then generally most places won't take less than 1000
I don't think the situation is quite as dire as Paul is making out though, but it is true that most bedroom labels are run at a loss and as a labour of love. I guess they are an indulgence in a way, but its one of the things that makes DIY music so fascinating in the wider scope, that people will work their backsides off by day in The System but spend their nights throwing often huge amounts of money at music they love.
(also it's no real secret that pretty much the entire industry works on a "release five things, one will make the money back" system)
I think the PR thing, though, is a killer. Whilst I can certainly understand the benefits of having them, I've always felt for most small labels, for bands that aren't going to Generate Buzz and get loads of features (as opposed to just reviews) and land big tour slots, that PR companies are like vultures circling around, waiting to get paid for an NME review and some quotelines pulled from some blogs that will disappear in six to twelve months.
and you can pretty much get 1000 for the same price
also that
the economies of scale above 1000 is pretty crazy.
and even if you're only getting 500 done in jewel cases, your production run is likely to be £700 or so tops, which equals to selling about 150 through a distributor or 80 copies direct.
There's quite a good Dublin label called Skinny Wolves
who only release vinyl, cassette and download. I find this quite annoying.
Vinyl is expensive
and I don't have a record player in my car.
CDs are a souless, uninspiring way to collect music.
For that matter 'collecting music' isn't exactly the most soulful or inspiring thing I can think of
?
Accidental ^this-age
but I'm not opposed to the sentiment...
racist
IS COLLECTING MUSIC KILLING MUSIC?!
Oh dear...
2nd part = brilliant
Cementimental, you are an intellectual champion.
It's because the noise music you make is exempt from any format
Since it's just a brickwall. Doesn't matter whether it's on vinyl or CD.
You can't be serious? What about collecting books? Is that pointless too?
Obviously
Haha you're really lucky you're clueless about how elitist/pretentious some noise people are about formats and analog/digital etc ^__^;
No books are cool, records are aesthetically pleasing, plastic disks in tacky plastic cases not so thrilling.
Noise people will be some of the few still putting out REAL CDs...
serious business, noise.
dunno what 'exempt from any format' means but i kind of like the sound of it ^u^;
Seriously tho
pretty obviously the packaging/collecting experience is MORE important not less in a genre where much of the actual sound/music is to a degree (tho not always and some people would get very upset at the notion) intentionally interchangeable, unrecognisable or worthless
the argument
that CD's come in cheap jewelcases that you just throw away just doesn't hold any water anymore either. I bought the new Kate Bush yesterday and the packaging's a beaut. It's like a smaller, hardcover book with pictures that compliment each song. Several album releases have been artistically done, the new M83 is really exciting and was its images were obviously thought about and labored over by Gonzales as being important to the world the album draws you into. I just find it hard to believe that those that grew up understanding that for bands like the Smiths the physical product was paramount in drawing you into the entire world they had created and are happy just tossing that aside. If you look at the recent run of deluxe editions that have come out (Suede, Jesus and Mary chain) those have gone far in making CD buying really exciting again as they are a collectors dream. I assumed CD's would die out as future brain dead ipod generations took over but 2012 just doesn't seem right. I can't even imagine trying to burn my 1500 cd's made up of remasters, deluxe editions etc to my crappy computer that can anihilate it at the drop of a button. Sad those in my position would be forced to adopt a method of consuming music that doesn't work for us. Also I believe piracy will even go higher with this move. I certaintly will be downloading a lot more albums I would have happily paid for on CD.
Do bands even make money from CDs?
Extravagant deluxe issues (ala bundles), perhaps vinyls, might be the only way to make money from your new album. You can tour, but a lot of younger bands are happy to even break even. Checking out some stories and figures in this very thread, I can guess that the few who buy CDs might not be even contributing to the band. Would pirating help?
And that is a sincere question, not rhetoric.
About does CD buying contribute the band, it depends.
I do think that it does help bands who are on small labels and independent labels, but if they are on majors, buying CD's only contributes to the drug-fueled yuppie lifestyle of the suits at the majors.
Pirating helps in spreading the word about good bands, and to me that benefits bands in the long run, since more people from more countries will hear about them, and bands will be able to play more gigs.
Simplistic Music Industry Economics 101
yoo bandz make all yer munny from merch salez noaw?
it's funny how often freetards bring this up
helpfully ignoring the fact that a large proportion of a band's inventory merch will be, uh, recorded music formats.
havent bought a cd in years so donnt mind
Vinyl with download code made them pointless for me
Seems unlikely they'd disappear altogether in a year
surely all those Adele albums at Tesco are still profitable? Probably will become increasingly niche though, as smaller labels use the digital option with super limited special edition physical versions.
All of which is just bullshit perpetuation of a connection that doesn't exist: music is invisible and auditory, and thus all packaging attached to it is artificial visualisation of a purely aural medium.
record sleeves and packaging
is artificial visualisation? Looks pretty real to me.
In the sense that they exist, yes
In the sense that they represent or form part of the music, no.
There's no such thing as a purely aural medium
Or at least there's no such thing as a purely aural object/event
I've never liked CDs
The clicky jewel cases, the smallness of the artwork, slotting the booklet back under those fucking tabs. I have a load of vinyl and a hard drive full of mp3s only, CDs were sold off a while back. If they came in DVD style boxes I may have thought again. I can see them dying out, they are essentially a physicaly form of an mp3 (to most people, forget the audiophile argument...) with some added pictures and a booklet. They don't harbour much sentiment in many people like LPs do. Meh.
I forgot to mention
I download all my mp3s illegally, so pay £0.00 for them. That is a big plus in my eyes.
I'm never gonna be paying for mp3s on any kind of scale.
They're close to worthless to me. Certainly worth less to me than 'they' are prepared to sell them for.
If all labels stopped selling CDs tomorrow, I'd just go with spotify and radio and podcasts, resulting in naff all revenue for the labels/artists.
But that's not gonna happen on any scale in a hurry, so meh.
But that's not gonna happen on any scale in a hurry, so meh
but this article claims it is going to happen...next year! Unless this article is a bunch of crap which I'm hoping is the case. I read somewhere that a little over 52% of album sales come from CD's so I just can't understand suddenly ditching them. I find MP3's utter worthless as well and can't even imagine a life of paying 9.99 USD for an album off of there. If the physical product completely goes then the "album" as a concept will easily go with is. Never understood music fans being ok with that.
I don't understand the argument that MP3s are worhtless. You're still getting the music aren't you?
Worthless in the sense that they're not something I wanna hand over money to own.
Ripped mp3s obviously have some value in terms of their portability.
But mp3s also require you to arrange your own backup (or know where they all came from, and know damn sure that the service you bought them from will allow you to re-download for free, FOREVER, or at least for the rest of your life).
Then there's the potential for faffing around with folders, and filenames, and tagging. Even something like spotify isn't as user-friendly as 'buy cd, play cd'. http://drownedinsound.com/community/boards/social/4309273 is a bit of an extreme take on faffery, but worth a mention.
No physical manifestation means the ability to treat it as a collection kinda evaporates. I'm no defender of jewel cases, but, regardless of others' views, collecting music is a thing. I admit that, on the one hand, collecting music can be an entirely separate thing to enjoying music. But on, on the other hand, they go together pretty well.
Hmm...
Granted there are problems with technology and the downloading system isn't as hands on or easy as just buying a CD or vinyl. And I completely empathise with the view that having the physical product is much nicer.
However downloading MP3s is just easier and often cheaper. Also, I see my itunes library as something to be proud of and very much a music collection. Obviously I treasure my own CD collection probably more so, but speaking as someone who listens to music pretty much constantly and, quite a lot of the time, on the move, itunes and my ipod means a lot to me. it's still a collection, just not a physical one.
Has anyone considered that
If the majors were indeed planning to abandon CDs in 2012, or at some other time in the near future, it would suggest that they anticipate a climate where online piracy is either massively reduced or practically nonexistent?
It sounds paranoid and is, but if the majors could force everyone to go digital *and pay for it*, then from their point of view cutting out CDs would be of huge benefit. When you consider also the influx of 'cloud' services (Spotify, Google, Apple, Amazon et al), and the potentially powerful new law to take down piracy-enabling websites (Stop Online Piracy Act), it actually makes it seems a bit pausible.
Otherwise I don't see why they'd cut out a major income stream when the industry is already struggling. The other possibility of course is that the quoted-- and totally unsourced-- article is a mound of crap. Let it be so.
You make an interesting point, one that everyone has failed to do so far (including me).
SOPA is a dangerous law that, if passed, could introduce major censoring on the internet, which is the only truly free media outlet today in existence, under the guise of protecting copyright. This law would not only threaten sites with pirate material, but also sites which use CC licenses and open source sites.
I don't see the majors abandoning CD's completely, but I do see a possible reduction in printing CD's and a slow transition into a limited edition releasing method for CD's and download becoming the main, standard edition of upcoming releases.
I don't think there's any evidence that buying digitally is better for The World
Yeah internet servers run on fairy dust and moonbeams
standard try hard indie bellend response
Yeah the servers that magically sprang from the ground when the internet was invented and never get replaced, upgraded or new ones added
Never
no u
if you want to talk about the environmental issues in a serious way, there's absolutely no evidence to suggest that iTunes and Spotify servers farms that run 24/7 until the end of time are any better for the environment than stamping music onto plastic discs.
(tedious troll this'd this)
why would I say that?
because it's true ^_^
to be honest, i love physical music product
but to dismiss his point re the environment is a bit knee-jerk. it's a fair point. doesn't mean i'm going to go digital, the world is screwed anyway, but yeah it's a valid criticism. itunes and spotify servers are always going to be there
He was trying to make a point?
the internet has a massive and growing carbon footprint
so the straw man argument of LOL HIPPIES BUYING RECORDS is not so much of a point at all.
that's a faintly ridiculous counter-argument and you know it.
the internet is used for many, many things, not just streaming music.
i don't want to pursue this too much,
cos like i said i'm a fan of record shops, vinyl, cassettes, blah blah, but that kind of argument is a bit like saying 'why should people stop driving cars? trains use energy too!'
the internet may have a massive carbon footprint
but thats beside the point, its out there it exists and is used for many reasons, in that context comparing buying a physical album in a shop or mail order compared to having it delivered over the internet the later is going to have a much smaller carbon footprint. I dont doubt itunes et al have massive energy usuage but if you compare the amount of energy they use to the amount that would be used delivering the same amount of physical albums its not going to be in a same league. So if someone were a really ethical consumer and they wanted to buy an album minimising their carbon footprint then digital download would blatantly be the way to do it (being an ethical person theyd also limit their internet use but thats a different matter)
if the internets existence depended on music and it would dissapear without it then there may be a case but as an information infrastructure that already exists it is the most efficient way to distribute things that it possible for it to distribute.
also I reckon mp3 players probably use less power than mp3 players, because of the lazer and moving parts, so it uses less power at the listening stage, but then I guess lots of people listen to music using their computers which are probably alot worse then cd players, but then I guess if the computer is on anyway and being used for other stuff the additional power to play music might not be that much
^
i'm not trying to be a dick here, but it's the kind of argument that people want to believe (and i can sympathise), i don't think even the people arguing it really believe, deep down, that it stands up.
nobody's actually arguing either 'side'
nobody's actually arguing either 'side'
you're arguing that digital consumption and physical consumption
use comparable amounts of energy/have similar footprints. you know, deep down, this is not true.
or implying, if you don't like the word 'arguing'.
i love arguing
no i was dismissing the original argument that people are 'hypocritical' to buy cds and be concerned with the environment
if you were a hardline environmentalist
as well as ordering music to be delivered long distances instead of downloading it, then yes you probably would be flirting with hypocrisy. he may have been trolling, but essentially he's got the bones of a point in there. i doubt many DiSers are hardline environmnentalists, that's where his post is flawed
anyway,
i'm not so much defending his post as criticising the counter-argument to it. this is what happens when someone feeds the troll :)
I buy vinyl so cant really talk but, I dont know for certain, but i'd be very surprised if downloading and album off itunes had anywhere near the carbon footprint as buying a cd
the energy and materials used in making a cd and transporting it etc vs sending some 1's and 0's over the internet. Obviously servers use a huge amount of energy but they do a huge amount of work, on a one physical album vs one digital the former is gonna dwarf the laters carbon footprint
dunno if this is any good but looks likely to me
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/greeninc/downloadchart.jpg
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/the-carbon-case-for-downloading-music/
As an aside
Amusing story about Coldplay, donating about £20,000 to environmental causes to offset the production costs of one of their albums, this money went to a cause in India where they bought 20k's worth of mango trees, plunked them in the wrong sort of soil, all the trees died. Absolute fail.
more proof that global warming is a lie
Packaging is only excessive if you throw it away.
Not an awful idea.
I like having CDs for some things (eg Madlib's Medicine Show series) but overall I have so little interest in them now - they cost too much over here in France and to be honest, I am going to be moving around so much for the next 5 or so years that the thought of adding to an already huge collection makes little sense. I fully salute Boomkat for making downloads of great, interesting stuff available on download. Pretty much get everything off there these days.
That original story cites no sources whatsoever other than they thought for a while it might happen
It won't while supermarket sales still hold the whip hand for majors. Outside the DiS bubble it's an outright lie to suggest everybody downloads or would instantly move onto digital sales were CDs to be abandoned.
In fact
CDs made up 82% of UK album sales in 2010.
What I enjoy about CD's is the quality and value for money
They're cheaper (or the same price) than downloads most of the time and I enjoy reading about where the music was mastered, who produced it and the important contributors. Of course, this isn't really about the music at all - I've bought a number of albums from boomkat in FLAC and couldn't be happier. If all artists (big and small) began to release their music in lossless I'd be all over it, but this won't happen for a while and in the meantime I'll be taking advantage of Amazon UK's 25 pound free international shipping (I live in Australia) and buying about 6 CD's for 35 dollars AU.
It's a move that makes completely sense.
Stopped reading at ^that point.
Update
This is bullshit apparently. Although NME does cite this thread, bizarrely.
http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=146&title=are_major_labels_about_to_abandon_the_cd_1&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
You read it well.