Best Of 2000-2010 Tracklist

[Headache in a Suitcase]

There will always be a place for collectors.

The general public won't be buying CDs in 5 years.

The general public doesn't buy CDs now.

 

[DaveC]

As long as it has Vertigo x2 on it then I'll buy a copy.

Spoiler

Maybe that's not a new joke, but fuck going back through 13 pages of this shit

 

[digitize]

It bothers me a bit that there's no particularly good way to get lossless audio except from CDs.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

There's Tidal, but that's failing miserably so far. As is Neil Young's thing. Just not enough people interested. Tidal's website where they show you what the difference is and why you should only use their lossless service is a friggin joke. Unless you have quality speakers you can't tell the difference whatsoever.

The technology to compress the file size without lowering sound quality can't be that far away.

 

[DaveC]

The idea of streaming lossless audio is great, but I have a pretty decent data plan and even just using Spotify from time to time crushes my data allowance. There's no way I could even afford a data plan that would let me stream lossless audio more than rarely (enough to justify paying extra for the Tidal premium subscription, anyways).

 

[digitize]

The technology to compress the file size without lowering sound quality can't be that far away.

It exists: see FLAC, or Apple Lossless, or any of a few others. Truly uncompressed audio is WAV, which is unmanageably huge. FLAC and Apple Lossless generate files that are substantially smaller than WAVs, but substantially larger than, say, 256kbps MP3. But there are mathematical limits to how small lossless compression can go, and society at large has accepted that the small, nearly-indiscernible loss in quality from lossy compression at reasonably high bitrates is worth it for the significant file size reduction. It's the same reason why cameras store their 10 megapixel photos in JPG (lossy) instead of PNG (lossless): PNGs would be enormous, and it's hard to see the difference without very sharp lines.

I can't tell the difference between 256kbps MP3 and FLAC/CD/WAV. But I still wish that there were a good source of FLACs for purchase, because it's ridiculous for CDs to exist, but some segments of the market (those who really can appreciate lossless audio) can only go to CDs for what they want in most cases.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Like you said... the majority of people can't tell the difference, so the market just isn't there.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Neil Young's Pono Sore and HDTracks have been quite successful...the latter has seen its business rise substantially over the last few years. So hi-res (above CD quality) audio is definitely taking off and with album price tags at like $25 a pop and no physical production overhead, that's a HUGE resource for an industry now reliant on stream royalties that are a fraction of a penny.

Tidal, for the record, is just playing tracks in full CD quality (16 Bit). I agree that it's ridiculous to expect people to have the connection (or data allowance) to successfully play these sort of songs on the move. But that's not hi-res audio for what it's worth. You need a good system/headphones (or speakers) to really get the most out of 24-Bit audio. And there's certainly no way that people listening to 16-Bit CD rips on their shitty earbuds on Tidal are really going to notice the difference.

It's kind of ironic that Jay Z is essentially asking you to pony up in order to listen to audio that's the exact same thing you heard on your portable CD players two decades ago...those devices were likely better at it then your phones, especially if anti-skip was turned on.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

U2 have rehearsed one song from No Line On The Horizon for the upcoming tour. If it actually makes the setlist, it should be a lock for the second spot on a compilation for that album (after "Moment of Surrender" obviously).

The song is:

Spoiler

Magnificent