TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Will vinyl become cool and take over?
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

this 'discuss' schtik should be left for the cor.

quote:

Originally posted by AlleN F The song inconspicuous mentioned Daypak & Padberg- Black Beauty is a prime example. It isn't available digitally anywhere.

it's on beatport.

quote:

Originally posted by Dojomaster26 They're just too expensive, period. Why pay $18 after shipping for a tune

That's a very good question. I have never wasted that much money on any vinyl release and I've bought some pretty expensive ones as well. Stop shopping at the most expensive place.

most expensive vinyl I bought was Art of Trance "Wildlife On One" album at 35 dollars. Bad ass album though. Definitely framing it.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery That's a very good question. I have never wasted that much money on any vinyl release and I've bought some pretty expensive ones as well. Stop shopping at the most expensive place.

You are in Finland. Shipping there from UK is always going to be cheaper than to US. Shit, out-of-print LP's from Warp Recs are around 23 Euro with shipping to US.

quote:

Originally posted by ibizzzaaa You are in Finland. Shipping there from UK is always going to be cheaper than to US.

Again, it depends on where you order.

Stop making shit threads.

I think the CDJs where you can write tracks on vinyls and play them may become popular.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Again, it depends on where you order.

He has a point, it does also depends where you are located. When I was buying a couple of vinyls 2 or 3 years ago it was absolutely impossible to get them any cheaper than say, 8 or 9 euros per disc and this already by buying several discs in one order - the cheapest way was to import them from the UK, the national records stores were ridiculously just as expensive and with poor selection of tracks.

quote:

Originally posted by Dojomaster26 Ah, the sweet smell of sarcasm ibizzza hits the obvious point against vinyls. They're just too expensive, period. Why pay $18 after shipping for a tune on Juno when I can get the same tune on Beatport for $2, eBay on CD-single for $8, or PerfectBeat on CD-single for $11? There are multiple stores that are all trying to get me to buy the same song, and right now the digital stores are providing the best (cheapest) bang for my buck...

This is a gross assumption:

Why pay $18 after shipping for a tune on Juno when I can get the same tune on Beatport for $2

Technically they are not the same what so ever, even if the sounds are similar. One has the ability to whip out their 12 inchs and hit people in the face with it. On the other hand having an mp3 doesn't say much.

quote:

Originally posted by inconspicuous it's on beatport.

Haha..so it is (wasn't aware), but the fact remains that it was limited to vinyl for quite awhile before its digital release. While many will eventually see digital releases, having a track months before others (sometimes even longer), is a great way to stay ahead and not play the same as everyone else. (It is a growing trend that many charts have the same tracks or mixes as well..take a look at the RA charts for this month and you will see this...and LOL bas has one.)

As far as pricing goes if you look enough there are resources that can cost less for North American customers depending on the EP's ordered and such. It isn't advertised on Phonica, and i do not know about Juno...but if you become a very regular customer they give preferential treatment in terms of pricing and even in terms of giving you first crack at low stock/limiteds/promos. When you spend alot, they will do things to make you a satisfied customer and keep your business. Try ordering in bulk instead of one EP at a time. The first thing that gets waved is the shipping fee, if you keep a constant clip of solid purchasing they will even offer you freebies from time to time. They will not do this unless you ask, as the most profit possible is in their interest...but become an important customer and you will reap the benefits. With all the competition they have to operate this way.

Mp3 will always be more practical...but those of you who buy records know that good records smell sweet (shit ones smell bad sometimes its weird), feel good, and just give you so much satisfaction when the package comes in. Its just not the same when emptying a crate and clicking with a mouse...the lack of anticipation and romance makes it somewhat less special. I'm more selective about what wax i'll buy, when sometimes i will rush buying mp3's.

I just don't feel like having to spend $16 for the "honor" of owning a tune on a format that I don't spin. Plus, without great needles on my TTs there is a noticable sound quality difference in favor of the digital track or CD for me...

quote:

Originally posted by we_R_DNA This is a gross assumption: Why pay $18 after shipping for a tune on Juno when I can get the same tune on Beatport for $2 Technically they are not the same what so ever, even if the sounds are similar. One has the ability to whip out their 12 inchs and hit people in the face with it. On the other hand having an mp3 doesn't say much.

quote:

Originally posted by AlleN F Haha..so it is (wasn't aware), but the fact remains that it was limited to vinyl for quite awhile before its digital release. While many will eventually see digital releases, having a track months before others (sometimes even longer), is a great way to stay ahead and not play the same as everyone else. (It is a growing trend that many charts have the same tracks or mixes as well..take a look at the RA charts for this month and you will see this...and LOL bas has one.)

iiiiiiironyyyyyyyyyy

I'm sure it's another way to distinguish yourself, with respect to track selection (though I never shop for vinyl. the only time I come across them is when I'm trying to get my hands on a track, and I find that it's not out digitally yet), and there definitely is a certain romance to it, but it's still less practical & has more limitations than other formats.

Regarding price, it's not that digital releases are so much cheaper (unless they're on one of a select few sites), but that, if you only want one track, you don't have to pay for the whole release. It's not as if there's an option with vinyl to only pay for one side, for half the price. Whereas, if I don't like the remixes on a release, I can just buy the original for $2. I rarely buy an entire release, unless it's filled with tools, or it's just that good. Beatport almost never offers discounts for buying them all, anyway, so there's even less incentive. You have to want to pay for each individual track, 'cuz you're not saving any money by adding the whole thing. That's one of the major gripes I have with the site, though, especially when there are other places selling standard 4-6-track releases for $3.99.

also:



lulz.

haha..you killed the black beauty. Lol bas. I agree with everything you said, before i started playing i was always a collector. (this extends to stuff way outside of edm.) I had the privaledge of having an uncle be around and DJ during the birth of the Chicago house scene. The amount of records i inherited from him is not only astounding, but is the major influence and reason why i got into electronic music. Its definately something i have always loved, and it will never be the most practical thing. To be honest i don't mind buying a whole release. Sure I might not like a B side track when i first purchase it. Sometimes though after letting them "breathe", i have found myself more in love with them than the original track i wanted. It can be really fun to stumble across something you have owned forever but never took the time to appreciate. It can also get the creative juices flowing. It all comes down to either you get "it", or you don't. There are no wrong answers as long as you are happy with what you bought.

I definitely agree, and if I was using the stuff I bought more often, I'd probably buy a lot more mixes of tracks. After you're familiar with a track, hearing a new take on it, regardless of how it might have sounded at first, is often nice, even if only for the novelty of it. I go back & pick up remixes later on sometimes, but picking up a bunch of versions just for having different versions has a lot more use to somebody who's playing all the time than for somebody who mainly listens to this stuff, with a mix here on a whim.

I don't even have turntables. There's a 'record player' sitting around here somewhere, but that doesn't count. I still have a few vinyls, though, just because they're fun to look at.

And yeah, the irony of that track being available digitally (especially on beatport) is overwhelming. I wonder which version will sell more.

I only have one deck now. Listen/rip/stick in the shelves. In that order. I want one of those laser record players, but want to wait to see where that technology goes. I'm scared to play some of the older stuff...no needle=no problem.

I am not making a living on music so I can't tell for sure but I will say that digital is much more versatile, cheaper and easier to handle. It's just smarter business instead of carrying stacks of vinyl my goodness.

Many people had a hard time moving from horse carriages to vehicles though. But why would anyone buy mp3? Mp3 is lossy format so you get ripped on quality so I would only consider lossless tracks to buy

quote:

Originally posted by AlleN F I only have one deck now. Listen/rip/stick in the shelves. In that order. I want one of those laser record players, but want to wait to see where that technology goes. I'm scared to play some of the older stuff...no needle=no problem.

Laser record player!!!!!!!?What's that?I'm curious.

quote:

Originally posted by palm its called compact disc and was invented 1979 or something

I think he's actually talking about the record player that reads vinyl with a laser. There were some pics and whatnot posted here some time ago and it was expensive as fuck.

quote:

Originally posted by palm its called compact disc and was invented 1979 or something

No.Actually it's this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable

Here is a proof that vinyl still owns. For a change, instead of going on beatport, I decided to get on juno, go to "releases of last 8 weeks", switched to the mode in which only vinyl releases are shown, and damn - of course not all tracks sound innovating and interesting but at least there aren't any of those that sound like they were slapped together on FL Studio in 30 minutes. That is how I'm going to search for new releases from now on. Although ironically enough I'm still going to end up buying what I like in mp3 (I already explained why), at least I won't have to go through hundreds of awfully those written shit-tracks. Because that used to be a torture for me and I would always keep putting off the "beatport browsing" until the next day and do the same thing that next day.

But this new way made record browsing fun for me again.

There will always (well for the next few years at least ) be a hardcore of vinyl devotees but will it become cool again & take over? Sorry nostalgia fans but no chance, I'm afraid it's had it's day.

Digital music stores are just too convenient with every man & his dog claiming to be a "DJ" these days - though 90% of those people probably wouldn't bother if it meant spending most weekends hunting through record stores & 2nd hand stores for a hard to find classic

I don't fully buy the idea mp3 is cheaper although it's true in part. A vinyl record probably costs �8 to buy on average (I'm guessing) & you probably get 4 tracks. Some mp3 stores will charge up to �2.49 per track. Some even charge �2.99 per mp3 & it's generally more if you buy wav format. Effectively if you buy like for like, track for track on each release, mp3 can potentially end up costing a similar amount to it's vinyl counterpart.

This is what I don't understand. With vinyl there is a cost for manufacture, transport, advertising (in magazines not internet). With mp3 there is no production cost, no transportation cost, advertising budgets must have been slashed, what with free advertising on all the bollocks myspace style social sites. There must of course be a fee to have your track listed amongst the "featured tracks" or showing under "if you like this track, other users also bought...".

With the cost of getting music delivered to the masses being lowered it doesn't take much brain power to work out who is pocketing the difference

Sorry, most of that was probably better suited to another thread!

quote:

Originally posted by Trance Android With mp3 there is no transportation cost

wrong! bandwidth is not free.
but i do agree that the prices aren't really what they should be. greedy bastards always want more and more.

Producing the tracks isn't free either, you know. Why would anyone even sell the tracks if there was no profit to be made.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Producing the tracks isn't free either, you know. Why would anyone even sell the tracks if there was no profit to be made.

Agreed the producer probably receives a similar amount whichever format & no one will ever have any issue with that. But if the cost of getting tracks out there for sale is reduced why does it still cost a similar amount to buy mp3 to vinyl? Someone is getting greedy. Its not the hardworking producer & it's unlikely to be the label ...so that leaves...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.