Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did Napster kill music quality? Discuss.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:29 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
Opinions?

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Did Napster kill music quality? Discuss.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:51 am 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
no.

[/thread]

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Did Napster kill music quality? Discuss.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:05 am 
Offline
User avatar
Coast to Coast
 Profile

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:21 am
Posts: 23078
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Gender: Male
Quality how? Like... overall quality? Or just audio quality?

I happen to think the music that came out of the post-Napster decade (2000-2009) is better in terms of quality than the music from the decade preceding it (1990-1999).

_________________
For more insulated and ill-informed opinions, click here.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Did Napster kill music quality? Discuss.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:05 am 
Offline
User avatar
Master of Meh
 Profile

Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 11:00 pm
Posts: 13226
Location: Adelaide, AUS
theplatypus wrote:
Quality how? Like... overall quality? Or just audio quality?

I need some clarification on this point too.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Did Napster kill music quality? Discuss.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 5:37 am 
Offline
User avatar
Menace to Dogciety
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:54 pm
Posts: 12287
Location: Manguetown
Gender: Male
Anything 192kbps or above sounds fine enough to me.

_________________
There's just no mercy in your eyes
There ain't no time to set things right
And I'm afraid I've lost the fight
I'm just a painful reminder
Another day you leave behind


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Did Napster kill music quality? Discuss.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 11:51 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
theplatypus wrote:
Quality how? Like... overall quality? Or just audio quality?

I happen to think the music that came out of the post-Napster decade (2000-2009) is better in terms of quality than the music from the decade preceding it (1990-1999).


Sorry, I was trying to type a reasonable post about this, as reasonable as I am capable of, but had to deal with a screaming baby and just hit submit. I meant overall quality.

When I think about music, more specifically music on the radio, I feel like the song writing and performance quality has gone to shit in favor of basically the same song over and over just with different lyrics. And it is my guess that Napster is to blame because it really was what really enabled the music consuming public to select just one or two songs, rather than splurge on an album. Yes, I am aware 'singles' existed prior to Napster, but it seems like now most mainstream records are one variations on one or two songs. Maybe it's just that Napster pushed the industry forward in a direction it was already going. I dunno. I was just wondering what others thought on the idea.

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Did Napster kill music quality? Discuss.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
Meh, I think it died with the invention of portability (8 Track) (Cassette)

Napster had some pretty awful uploaded files when it began but I mean I still prefer vinyl and cd/sacd/DVD Audio etc.

Many people don't really care about audio quality I'm sure, but that said. nice DAC's (and insanely expensive headphones) are hot selling expensive items right now so apparently some digital listeners are craving a better experience (or they just think wearing huge white headphones with a big red B makes them look cool)



As to your other point, I think it's more ITunes than Napster. Napster was the impetus of course, but no one was getting paid from that at the time. Itunes and Youtube have changed the industry from album focus to single focus. No one cares much about album sales in the industry anymore, they care a ton about downloads of single songs.

So yes absolutely. Digital Downloading has significantly degraded the overall quality of albums in modern music.

That said, what Katy Perry has been doing is remarkable on a variety of levels. I have not listened to the album so I have no idea if it's cohesive or not, but as a collection of singles, wow, she's sold a ton.


Also, back in the 90's record stores that sold singles were charging around 5 bucks for them. Albums were nearly 20 dollars (since I believe there was a class action suit and prices have come down)

Napster made music more available and accessable to everyone. Itunes made it legal and roughly a dollar per download.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 3:13 pm