Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Buying music online VS Buying the CD

L

Liquinn

Suspended
Original poster
Apr 10, 2011
3,016
57
Hi, what are you lots thought on the subject of legally downloading music and paying for it versus buying the physical CD?

I honestly do both (buy the music/album online) and buy the physical CD.

But a download you can't get signed by the band, even if you have paid for it?

And a CD is more showy to some degree and then you can rip it to how you want it.

Thoughts?
 
Jo-Bros got no prob signing your digital downloads.

winitJBipod.jpg
 
If I just want a song or two, I purchase and download individual tracks. For entire albums, I mostly buy the CD.

Do whichever is going to make you happier. I don't think there's a "right" way to buy your music.
 
Always buy CDs if I want the album. I like lossless, populated shelves and the price (I leave a ton of stuff in my HMV wish list, eventually 90% will drop <£5).

If I want a single I'll get it from iTunes, then pirate the FLAC/ALAC and run it through a spectral analyser to make sure it's real.
 
AdrianK said:
Always buy CDs if I want the album. I like lossless, populated shelves and the price (I leave a ton of stuff in my HMV wish list, eventually 90% will drop <£5).

If I want a single I'll get it from iTunes, then pirate the FLAC/ALAC and run it through a spectral analyser to make sure it's real.
Click to expand...
thegoldenmackid said:
Prefer the physical one unless I can download in lossless.
Click to expand...
The Wiki confused me. What is lossless?
 
Firestar said:
The Wiki confused me. What is lossless?
Click to expand...

MP3 and AAC (what iTunes uses) are lossy formats. They take in input, but they discard lots of the less essential material when encoding to save space.

Lossless encoding takes and input and encodes it without removing anything. It is bit-for-bit identical to the original.

This is NOT the same as compression. Compression is lossless in that no information is ever destroyed, just stored in a more economical fashion. Lossy formats almost always utilise compression (after all, the point is to save space), lossy can be either, ALAC and FLAC are both compressed.

CDs are encoded with LPCM (uncompressed lossless), digital downloads are very rarely available in a lossless format.

Images are another example; JPG is lossy and PNG is lossless.

Here's a graphical comparison:

Lossless
Screen%20Shot%202011-08-28%20at%2017.54.17.png


Lossy
Screen%20Shot%202011-08-28%20at%2017.54.52.png
 
Last edited:
AdrianK said:
MP3 and AAC (what iTunes uses) are lossy formats. They take in input, but they discard lots of the less essential material when encoding to save space.

Lossless encoding takes and input and encodes it without removing anything. It is bit-for-bit identical to the original.

This is NOT the same as compression. Compression is lossless in that no information is ever destroyed, just stored in a more economical fashion. Lossy formats almost always utilise compression (after all, the point is to save space), lossy can be either, ALAC and FLAC are both compressed.

CDs are encoded with LPCM (uncompressed lossless), digital downloads are very rarely available in a lossless format.

Images are another example; JPG is lossy and PNG is lossless.

Here's a graphical comparison:

Lossless
Image

Lossy
Image
Click to expand...
Thanks for taking the time to type all that. So does using lossless make it sound better, or more intricate or something? :eek:
 
Firestar said:
Thanks for taking the time to type all that. So does using lossless make it sound better, or more intricate or something? :eek:
Click to expand...

It makes it sound just like the original.

Lossless is essentially that. It doesn't lose any quality. Lossy loses some quality to save space.
 
Firestar said:
Thanks for taking the time to type all that. So does using lossless make it sound better, or more intricate or something? :eek:
Click to expand...

It's all subjective, really. Some people won't nice, some will - especially on high-end equipment.
 
How often are people getting CD's signed by the band? Don't think I've ever gotten one of mine signed back when I did buy CD's
 
Digital downloads only for me... not only do I save money (I bought an album for 9,99$, which was sold for 35,99$ at the local record store), but I don't even have to get off my chair. If I want an album right now, I get it right now.

And I don't mind the loss of quality. I can hear it on 128kbps mp3, but not on 320kbps mp3 or 256kbps AAC.
 
the low bit rate mp3s that iTunes had available in their earlier years were hit or miss as far as sound quality went. Once they switched to AAC, sound quality definitely improved.
I still have 100s of CDs on the shelf and will occasionally buy a physical copy if it's a band I already have a history with..but the convenience of digital downloading is getting tough to beat
 
I prefer to buy the CD ... still have the first CD I bought in 1987 ... Supertramp Crime of the Century
 
However having found the new HD music service that lets you download FLAC files.... This is nice. If I could get all of my future cd purchases like this, I wouldn't buy the cd any more. I would, like everyone, make sure I have a good back up plan.
 
When I buy, I prefer the CD.

I also have MOG. It is a music rental type service (like Spotify, Rhapsody, etc) and they use 320kbps encoding. It allows me to have a universe of songs are my disposal in a very good format. If a lossless service with the same catalog came along, I would switch, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back