Sticking it to the labels: The used CD gambit
With all the talk about MP3 sound quality, Cnet’s Crave blog turns to audio expert Steve Guttenberg, who offers up some audio-quality tips.
While a 192 kbps MP3 is not going to disappoint many listeners, as I’ve said before the growing use of a lossless format of one sort or another will resolve even the minor issues that remain. Guttenberg’s suggestions are all OK, but it’s suprising he didn’t articulate the most obvious one. If you’re still ripping your CDs to your computer, go inside the iTunes preferences and tweak your settings. If you’re importing as MP3s, make sure you’re bringing them in at 192 kbps.
Anyway, this was the most interesting suggestion:
*Buy used CDs. Though CDs probably aren’t Neil Young-approved, it’s a vastly better quality experience than MP3s. Plus, it’s kind of a deal, Guttenberg says. “It’s cheaper than buying iTunes (songs) and certainly sounds a million times better.”
Leaving aside the audio-quality factors, this brings up an overlooked issue: Why buy catalog stuff on iTunes for $10 an album, when it might be available at your friendly neighborhood used-CD store for half that or less? You can rip it and pass it along to a friend.
Story idea: What’s the used-CD market like these days?
I took a look at Amazon, to see what the market was like. Why are people buying digital albums, when a hard copy in many cases is so much cheaper? Examples:
Dark Side of the Moon for $7. (With shipping, this is close to being a wash.)
Steel Wheels for 98 cents! *
Their Greatest Hits by the Eagles, $3.99
Pearl Jam’s Ten for $1.49. (Insanely, Amazon’s offering Ten as an $8.99 download as well!)
Linkin Park’s Hybrid Theory for $2.23.
Kingdom Come by Jay-Z for 1.69! (Here too, Amazon’s selling a digital version for $9.29.)
Blonde on Blonde for $6.29. (It was a two-record set, back in the day, but a single CD now.)
2 Comments so far
Leave a reply
I’m lucky to have two pretty-good record stores here, both of which carry used stuff. I always look at these places first for anything that’s “not new.” If I can find it used, it’s always cheaper than the download price.
Buying a used CD is a great option, not just because of the price, but because it represents a great backup solution. If something happens to your MP3 file, you can choose to make another at even higher quality.
I think you’re absolutely correct that files that use some sort of lossless protocol will eclipse MP3s within a few years. Disk storage is becoming so inexpensive that even those who are satisfied with the sound quality at 128 bps won’t mind the additional space it takes to store a lossless file.
I started encoding at 192 bps a couple of years ago. But a few months ago, I started using 256 bps for files I rip from CDs and 320 bps for files I rip from my LPs. Here’s a surprise: files ripped from LPs sound way better than files ripped from CDs, even at exactly the same bit rate. I don’t know the correct audio terms, but they are brighter and punchier. It makes me eager to create MP3s for all the good music I have on LP, even if I already have the same music on CD. If you’ve still got a turntable and an old amplifier–my amp dates to 1977 and my turntable to 1984–it’s easy to make MP3s with the free Audacity program for Windows; it’s just time-consuming. (It’s even easier on a Mac, but I’m between Macs now.)
I’m hardly an audiophile. I do half my listening via iPod through headphones, forty percent via iPod (or CD) through a Cambridge Soundworks table radio, and the other ten percent via iPod through a home theater setup that includes cheap in-wall speakers that came with the house. I switched to 192 bps when I found I could tell the difference on earbuds or small speakers. I switched to 320 bps mainly because I knew I probably wouldn’t bother ever making new files from my LPs due to the time factor.
That said, I can remember when I stopped buying LPs and started buying CDs, occasionally of the same music. Although I was impressed by the perfect clarity of the CD sound–no background hum or hiss, no pops at all–I was often disappointed by a comparitively lifeless aspect that I couldn’t put my finger on. It was particularly apparent when the recording featured a solo acoustic guitar. When I played the LP, the guitar sounded like it was being played in the same room. On CD, it sounded like–a recording of a guitar.
CDs got better, but they still don’t have that snap. When I listen to the 320 bps files I made myself from the LPs, they’ve got most of it back.