Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

What should I do with my audio CDs?

<< < (2/9) > >>

CWuestefeld:
I don't think you can (legally) give or sell them away. Then the music would have two simultaneous owners.

That said, it seems like the music industry wants it both ways. They want to consider that you're only buying a license, which is transferred away from you if you don't have the media in your possession. So far, I think they're stupid, but within their rights.

But there are a number of albums that I've used so much that they've worn out and had to be replaced. If the media only represents a token for the actual license, then when this happens, I should be able to replace my worn media for free, or media cost at most.

I think if they'd offer a program like this, they might make some headway into convincing people of how the license works. But their refusal to acknowledge this instead undermines their cost.

Renegade:
SOMETHING ELSE:

Use cutters to take chunks out of the edges, then use them as ninja stars to kill RIAA lawyers.  :Thmbsup:

Or you could rip them to FLAC, OGG, WMA, WAV and store them all on DVD to save space. Or get a Bluray burner and use that -- even better! But whatever - lossless audio is the way to go.

mrainey:
I tossed my cassette tapes last year, the CD's still get played quite a bit.  Guess I'm behind the leading edge.   ;D

Ampa:
Thanks for the replies so far - keep voting, I'll need a lot more opinions to sway me one way or the other...

Re: Lossy Vs Lossless (MP3 Vs FLAC)

I understand that MP3 is less than ideal where quality is concerned, but it is just so damned convenient! It is the one format that will just work, regardless of whether I am at home, in the car, on foot, at a friend's, on the PC, on my hifi etc.

I could certainly rip everything twice, once to the HD as FLAC and once to a data CD as MP3, but that is twice the work, twice the time...

In the end I suspect I (like most of the world) would end up sacrificing a small (?) amount of quality, for the sake of convenience.

Ampa

PS - I would at least do the ripping part properly (EAC, LAME, with high quality VBR), which must count for something?

CWuestefeld:
I understand that MP3 is less than ideal where quality is concerned, but it is just so damned convenient! -Ampa (January 11, 2008, 07:56 AM)
--- End quote ---
In my ears, I can easily hear a degradation in quality at 128kbps. But when listening in the car, with wind and road noise, does it really matter? Double that, at 256kbps, with headphones, I'm hearing nuances out of my Zune that I'd never noticed through my decent mid-range stereo system.

Probably a portion of the difference is that the errors introduced by MP3 are different from those introduced by your speakers, amp, etc. So maybe a 256kbps MP3 through the Zune reveals things that I can't hear from my stereo, but conversely I would hear things through the stereo that I can't hear through the Zune. I dunno.

I would at least do the ripping part properly (EAC, LAME, with high quality VBR), which must count for something?
-Ampa (January 11, 2008, 07:56 AM)
--- End quote ---
Agreed here. You only rip something once, and then listen to the results of that countless times. May as well pay the price for that one rip. I use the same as Ampa -- EAC using the default hi-quality profile, which means hi-quality VBR (IIRC it's 192) using LAME.

Anyway, I can't see just getting rid of the old CDs. Throw them into a box in the basement as a backup, or proof against the RIAA for when they start searching houses for unlicensed music.  :o

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page