Study Finds CD Sales Still Strong in the Face of Digital Downloads



+ Add a Comment


"A survey of 1,000 people is hardly a proper sampling group of millions of people (310,000,000 USA alone = .0003% sample) and if that was global it's even worse."


Actually, when you add this to the global surveys done (like a recent one in Britain) you find that this survey's results are EXACTLY right. They came up with the very same number.

I stick with physical media because it's an investment. Professional archivists---who are paid to know as much as possible about this---have all been skepticalabout how long digital files last. I am not about to shell out 100s of dollars for a bunch of files that won't play in 20 years.



I don't like all the extra BS -minus added value, that you get with mp3, over the CD.

I started using Vorbis, when Napster hit the Fan... I don't want anyone else choosing my format, my bitrate, or possibly telling me I've got an error of some kind that makes my file unreadable, and I may not be allowed a no-cost replacement. I also had the idea one/more of the media companies could just buy the mp3 idea from the creators, tell us ALL we owed them $0.004 for each mp3 file...

One of my brothers uses iPod +iTunes... a couple years ago, He had an "upgrade" that didn't work and converted his entire stored collection to a new file-type, incompatible with his old iTunes version. (this was before the no-drm option from Apple) ---this is All just too much unnecessary crap.

I've downloaded "pirate" mp3s. --stopped it, years ago... I miss the chance that gave me to find new stuff, based on other people with similar tastes. [no streaming, no broadband] With a CD, at least I have the chance to find the "hidden gem" I wouldn't have heard/noticed, otherwise.

As a result of my "piracy," I have been buying CDs with most of the stuff I got for free. It's just how I find the "new" [to me] and different, now.
I really do regret the great Bands and Artists that didn't get a new or sweeter contract, because we were taking their work, for free... (I never distributed)



I just buy CDs used. All I need is the CD itself to encode my music in FLAC and then store it in a binder. Granted I'm not necessarily "stimulating the economy" but at least I can say I own what I ripped to my computer.



I prefer CDs, I like having the artwork, lyrics, etc that are packaged.  I also have more CD players so I can take the disc more places. 

I won't lie it is also the "value" feel, when I spend $10 on a CD I feel as if I received more for my money by having the physical object.   Also the higher sound quality of CDs, even though vinyl does have more "warmth". 

It is also nice not having to worry about backing up the CD in the event my computer crashes or the hassle of deauthorizing, moving the files, etc when switching hard drives.


The Relic

I will stick with 8-tracks, thenkyewverymuch. What was good enuff for my parents is good enuff for me ^_^. (song-song-CLUNK-song-song-CLUNK, etc...)



I'm noticing as I convert my 12" and 7" vinyl classics (some of which will never ever be released on CD) that a lot of the cd mastering made the mixes flat, lifeless and sad.  Everything from Alien Sex Fiend to Clan of Xymox sounded better on vinyl, even vinyl interpreted through a cheap and dirty Ion USB turntable.  Add to that the bling you get (picture disks, tattoos and stickers and lyric sheets, collector cards and so on) when you buy a real thing and it is no comparison.  I like my La La stash, but I like the original deal better.



While I do buy a few downloads, especially when I want a specific song, my prefrence is CD's. The reason? Sound quality and no DRM. With a CD I can rip into any format I want as often as I want.



  I prefer CDs, because they simply sound better. Lossless > 128/256KBs. Also, I can lend it to anybody who wants it without having to worry about the RIAA sueing me for more than I have. It seems most MPC readers would agree, nothing beats having the hard plastic in your hands (be it in vynil or cd format)




Most 1rst year math/stats students can tell u it is the power of random sampling which we can infer results from 1000 samples within +/- 3% error.  If the result is poor, it's usually the method that needs refining.

Anyways, at 99 cents per song, if you buy the song individually it is a good price (though recently Apple and WalMart have raised some of their per song prices).  If you can wait for an album to go on sale, it can be cheaper to get it physically than digitally. 

Price is a big issue.  As another blogger pointed out, songs sold through the digital medium should be a lot cheaper than $0.99 since there's no need to physically record, transport and store the CD.  Me thinks the greed that had a whole on the retail CD stores are getting a hold in the digital world.   Besides, quality is pure coming from a CD and you can rip into what ever you like from it.  That being said, I think CD's will be staying for a long while and refuses to die like the 3.5" floppy (i.e. until another cheap medium that can be as cheap and used ubiquously as CD').



The reason why almost one fourth prefer to buy a CD is that the survey probably didn't include "be a jackass and illegally download the music over LimeWire" as an option. Almost everyone I know pirates their music. A-holes.


Anyway, I prefer to download my music in iTunes because I usually don't want every song in the album. Only the ones that I find myself singing to myself find their way onto my hard drive. 


The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.



 Unfortunetly, that is true most of the people I know also do some Illegal downloading.BTW, the article said 73% of people prefer to buy a cd, and last I check 73% is closer to three fourths than one fourth. So, you're in the minority buddy. Downloading from iTunes is still better than pirating however, at least if you want to support the artist.



Da Man

A survey of 1,000 people is hardly a proper sampling group of millions of people (310,000,000 USA alone = .0003% sample) and if that was global it's even worse.

That's why random surveys don't work so well when dealing with large scale topics.



The reason some people prefer to buy the disc is that it still often costs about the same as getting the digital download, but you actual get something physical for your money. It's not hard to find a cd for $10, which is about what most digital albums cost, however, you look at all the costs it takes to make that cd, ship it around, use shelf space in  a store, pay someone and the store to sell it, and it just seems to have more valuable than some file you download in 2 min that bypasses all of that. The quality is another issue, but thats pretty minor for most people who can't tell the diffrerence between a 128kbps mp3 and a SACD. Even if they could, the junk headphones and other audio equipment they use would probably obscure the difference to nothing anyway. Really, mp3 downloads should cost less than half of what they do, 50c per song is a compelling proposition, $1 isn't. The stupid music industry needs to realize that the loss of 50c per song will easily be ofset by the number of people who buy it instead of pirating once the product is convenient and not overpriced. I also like the idea of paying $10/mo to download as much music as I want, but I don't see them ever doing it without DRM, and I'm never going to use it if had DRM. I would have bought an Audible audiobook the other day except that it won't play on my Pre because of the DRM.



As with a few other people, I am a record collector. I have noticed in recent times that the 12" vinyl album has made yet another comeback. Thankfully, the new 12"s come with a code to download a digital copy of the album, thereby allowing you to listen to it on any device. I am sure that "collectors" represent a small number of people who prefer physical media to downloads, but such a category does exist. Not just for vinyl, either. There are plenty of people who collect CDs as well. Hopefully the digital download will never replace physical media, and this article, for me, offers great news.

"Who disrupts my coronation?"



As a former Mastering Engineer for EMI Music at a compact disc manufacturing facility, this doesn't surprise me. That the original CD is superior in sound quality to an MP3 rip is a gimme. But the convenience that an mp3 library gives for playing a large number and a wide variety of songs can't be topped. I start Media Monkey, set it to shuffle mode and let it play without having to swap discs or pick and choose tracks. However, I prefer to do my own ripping and that is where owning the cd comes in. Not to mention the Artwork and lyrics that come with most discs.



1. Instant gratification: Insert CD in drive, select track, enjoy music > traverse thru countless menus for each song.

2. More portable: Leaving a CD case in the car is > carrying around another peripheral with me everywhere I go -- and I don't need to carry my entire collection with me.

3. No DRM > DRM.

4. I can make lossless digital or analog copies of my CDs.




I've been known to use Amazon's (always DRM free) mp3 service occasionally, but for music I really care about, I buy the CD and rip to FLAC.



The problem (DRM) some downloads have it and some don't. Some charge extra for no DRM some don't. They need to go back to the days when MP3 was a simple file format no DRM and you don't have to pay extra for DRM free music. Some people may even be confused and think if they download a song on the internet the RIAA may be coming after them next. Me i stick with CD so i have the physical media i can put it on as many devices as i want with no limits.



I always buy the CD but don't use it to listen to the music. I'll look at the pretty pictures and read the liner but then it's into the PC for a good ripping.



Me?  I'm one of those whacko's who thinks they can tell the difference between analog and digital and am psyched that vinyl is making a come-back!

That being said, I do play my rips when I'm away from my Accoustat Model 1s and prefer to rip them from CD myself, although I have been known to buy single (DRM-less) songs for things like dance mixes.



I always prefer digital media when all other factors are equal.  The problem with this survey is that they are not. Sure, you can buy the music from iTunes and you get all that DRM for free.  Nobody wants their music to be chained up any more than they would want a boot on their car.  I haven't played a music CD in years, my catalog is all digital but sidestepping DRM is more hassle than most people want to deal with.  So they buy a CD, rip it, throw the cd on the rack and forget it.



I'd prefer the option of a lossless codec to mp3. Plus I'm a bit of a control freak when it comes to cd rips, I just don't trust the quality of others, even corporations. There's also the issue of first sale and fair use rights in regards to digital content in general.



I personally would rather have a physical CD. Not only do you get lyrics (most of the time), you get pics, names, and actual art work thats on the front cover. I can always rip my CD's for my MP3 playin prowess.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.