Scott Dolan

That's a good point, and I think you're using it the exact same way most folks of our generation do. Which brings up an interesting question that I'll put out there for everyone because I honestly have no idea what the answer is. OK, so Mr. Lyles forego's streaming, and instead downloads said track. For sake of argument, let's just say the track is 6 MB (bitrate be damned). He just chewed up 6 MB of his data plan. Now, if he were to stream the track instead, would it still end up being 6 MB in the end? On the surface it seems a silly question, but what about buffers and the like? Buffers loading would also use data, would they not? Or would they simply be a place holder like when your download temporarily stops? Same thing?

Hard drive storage is cheap as hell, and redundancy is FAR easier to achieve with it over CD. Just hook up a HDD, start transferring and go play a round of golf. It'll all be over before you get back home. Now, let's see you make copies of a thousand+ CD's that way.

That's cool. I've done some of those data calculators online, and since I only have a 3GB plan I've always shied away from streaming. But for some reason I thought when I added everything up it came to way more. I just did another one and I could safely surf the intertubes for 50 hours a month, AND stream music for 50 hours a month without hitting my cap.

That's interesting. How many hours a week do you average?

As far as I know there are no such contracts available here. The experience here is completely opposite of what you are experiencing over there. Not only are data rates not going down, but the major carriers have stopped offering unlimited data planst . And not only do you pay through the nose for overages, but most companies will throttle your speeds back once you reach a certain threshold. Streaming over the air will destroy data limits in short order, and then things get incredibly expensive. Taking the experience I have over here into account, you should at least understand why we are so far apart in our opinions.

Data is very expensive in the U.S. And comparing Austria to the U.S. is impossible to do since Austria is about as large as South Carolina, which is our 40th largest state. That makes for a logistical nightmare.

Oh no, there is absolutely no way that will happen. You are forgetting THE key factor in what you are predicting: data costs money. And lots of it compared to having your own copies that you can download to phone/music player. And the high speed internet everywhere thing is a lot further down the road than five years. And even then, it won't be free. And just as with data now, there will be caps.

The "best" format is the one you enjoy listening to. And that's really how subjective it is. Vinyl is not superior in any way. CD, vinyl, high bitrate digital files, whatever... You just have to decide whether you want it surgically clean, or spiced with some even order harmonic distortion. Arguments can be made for both, but anyone claiming one format being superior over the other is the same as someone proclaiming salted nuts as being superior to unsalted nuts.

I don't see downloads going anywhere any time soon. Even young folks still like to own copies of their favorite tunes. They may eventually go away, but I'd be willing to bet that is still another generation away. I really don't get the idea that just because someone plays jazz they are entitled to earn a living from it It's a common music and tens of thousands of people can play it. Same for singer/songwriters. There are probably millions who play sing and write but - here's the thing - it isn't streaming (or Andorrans) who are preventing them from making a living. Of course millions of people would love to make a living from their art, poetry, novels, music, etc. It's a market, and - dare I add - not everyone offers a superlative product. If it's that easy, you try to do it. Huh? Where did he say anything about it being easy?

30Mb/s I don't think that's the limiting factor. No, most definitely not. Something is going on though. I'll have to do a A->B with iTunes Radio and CD to see of there is a difference. I rarely use streaming, but those bitrate numbers are at least intriguing. Though, based on what you've said it doesn't appear that you're getting a true 320 at the end user.

Hmmmm... Then it obviously still can't match an actual download then. What is your download speed?

I'd be interested in hearing the full version of Spotify streaming at 320kbps. If it's a true 320 by the time it gets to you (I suppose your internet speed would play the largest role), there will be no discernable difference between it and CD.

I understand that. But this is a far more personalized society these days, and that goes for pretty much anything. I mean, consider tattoos. It's almost impossible to find somebody that doesn't have one these days. But are they all the same? But you can't deny that tattoos are a prominant part of our culture. Same thing with cell phones. Everyone has one, but are they all the same make and model? Do they all have the same apps? Hell, they usually don't even look the same because of all the personalized cases and covers... That still doesn't take away from the fact that they are an incredibly prominant part of our culture. You bemoan the lack of collective appreciation or shared knowledge/experience, but those actually are examples of that. Just on a more generalized level.

Right, but isn't that the most awesome aspect of it all? Who cares about common understanding of the charts? It's almost preaching conformity over diversity. The love of music is the commonality. The framing of your life with music. That is the cultural aspect of it. Not whether we collectively appreciate the same artists or top 40 sludge. Culture is the social behavior of a society, and music may be the front runner across many cultures these days. It doesn't have to be fodder for the water cooler in order for it to be a cultural leader.

Art, it seems you are confusing the collective appreciation of a specific artist or genre as "cultural". Music appreciation is much more diverse and personal now which you seem to be overlooking. People are walking around to soundtracks of their lives everywhere you look. And they often run into each other and ask, "so what are you listening to?" Just because physical copies aren't flying off the shelf, or some international super star like Michael Jackson, isn't the norm anymore means absolutely nothing. Music is far more integrated into everyone's lives more now than it ever was in the past. That is a fact that simply cannot be argued against.

Can you explain this further? Everywhere you look people are walking around with earbuds in. Music is still incredibly important culturally. Possibly more so than ever.

Some beautiful stuff going on in that Hoffman thread. kevintomb says: "So apparently it is not just me that does not know "What to listen for" or "Does not own a resolving enough system"? Kinda what I have been saying for years. Mastering and the recording matter, So called Hi Res is an advantage in "Theory" Are we gonna ban the phrase "Night and day differences" finally?" To which gloomrider responds: "Yes. That will happen around the same time we ban the phrases, "your system is not resolving enough", and "foreground listening". Oh, how this all sounds SO familiar...

Yeah, and I think if you are a subscriber and listening on a lap/desktop they are now streaming at 320kbps. It's still 160 if you are using the free version. Which sounds OK, but not great. Your point about if you were 14 is really interesting, though. On the surface I'd say hell no, I still want to own copies. But, I've also got 30 years on a 14 y.o. and grew up in an era where there was only one choice. What I CAN say is that even though I did grow up in the physical copy era, I haven't purchased a CD in well over two years. Once I learned that I couldn't hear a difference between what's offered in the iTunes store and a CD, that was it for me. So, I think what you're saying has a ton of merit.

Well, I'm not entirely sure I agree. Although I don't use iTunes Radio, they are streaming 256 AAC. That's the same format as the music they sell in their store, and I still encourage anyone and everyone to take up the challenge I presented to Mr. Lowe some time back to compare it to CD. He said it was too close to call, and I say I hear absolutely no difference whatsoever. Now, I still haven't tried to A->B iTunes Radio against CD, but the technology is obviously in place and advancing. Other streaming services will have no choice but to keep up. I wouldn't be surprised if at this time next year all the major streaming services are cranking out at 256kbps for free. That is when things will really get interesting.

There's nothing left to save, IMO. Most artists have the tools and ability to completely take over the entire process at this point.

A fine victory for those who already knew better. http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/24-bit-vs-16-bit-blind-test-results.364032/ http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2014/06/24-bit-vs-16-bit-audio-test-part-ii.html

I'd make damn sure they were actually remastered, because quite a few of them aren't. Then check iTunes to see if they have a Mastered For iTunes version. If not, then you'll have to pay the premium...

my useage precisely.... you'll pry my cd collection from my cold, dead hands. does anyone else find this pricepoint exhorbitant? The special prices aren't terrible, but you could find CD copies for far less. Or just download regular copies for even less than that. It's not like you're going to be missing anything.

Jen from Shawnee Mission Kia.

It's nearly impossible to get a bad steak in KC. Or bad BBQ, for that matter. Philips Chop House had the best steak in town while they were around, then it was passed on to Plaza III. Haven't ever been to Anton's. Will have to check that out one of our next trips over. Perhaps I've been missing out.