JDanger wrote:My question is this:

Didn't those hurdles sweeten the reward

Maybe it did for you.

and kids are losing out by getting it all at once?

Doubt it.

Or am I just bitter?

Seems that way.

I'll take the ease of ordering albums I want for myself online versus years of searching, but hell if I want an enormous collection of disposable downloads.

I was very anti-iPOD for a while. "I just want to listen to one album at a time."

I borrowed my girlfriend's 60 GB and, I gotta say, having most of the highlights of western music in my pocket to listen to beats the hell out of hearing some douche driver honking or some idiot ordering a latte. Hearing Fugazi next to Sidney Bichet will put things in perspective also. I'm more concerned about the volume and my hearing than anything else.

I'm not worried about mp3s/dl'ing/blogging cheapening the experience of discovering/listening to music for people now and future generations. Let them treat it like it's disposable. Let Pitchfork tell them what to listen to. I mean, we've been in the Post-Rock 'n Roll era for quite a while, right? Are we in the Post-Recorded Music era now?

givemenoughrope wrote:I borrowed my girlfriend's 60 GB and, I gotta say, having most of the highlights of western music in my pocket to listen to beats the hell out of hearing some douche driver honking or some idiot ordering a latte.

You have an admirable degree of confidence in the quality of your non-record collection.

I know. I do.

Okay, I meant "one's ability to have the Library of Congress' music collection" in his pocket. Happy? She won't let me erase the Smiths. Damnit.

japmn wrote:I don't own any records I don't want.

You don't? Jeez, I've got records I haven't even listened to side 2 of. I would not have made the mistake of buying them if I could have listened to them first.

For the OP - Jettison was not a good enough record to have listened to exclusively for anything longer than a night. I would have K-I-L-L-E-D to have the access to music that I have today when I was in high school. It's a wonderful thing. I never would have had to convince myself that I liked Hugo Largo just because I spent $7.50 on the record. I could have been listening to the Birthday Party instead, who I'd never even heard of.

Music is less precious, more available and there's so much more of it. Good.

= Justin

I don't get the argument. What's wrong with good music being more accessible?

Shitty music has always been accessible. Hell, it's more than accessible, it's ubiquitous! It's crammed into your earholes everywhere you go. Walk into a clothing store, a grocery store or a fast-food restaurant and what do you hear? Crap music. Turn on the TV or radio, what do you hear? Crap music. Go out to any random club or bar on any random night, what are you likely to hear?

Good music is far less common.

It used to be that if you wanted to listen to something non-mainstream, you'd have to go to a record store and spend a lot of money on imports or indies, if they even had what you were looking for, and they often didn't. You could special-order it and wait 2 weeks or more for it to come in, but if was OOP you'd be SOL unless you could find it in some specialty record shop for several times the original price.

I'm not just talking about rock music here. It's even harder to find good jazz and classical stuff in record stores, again, unless you go to the specialty shops.

Nowadays you can download music and listen to it, then if you like it you can order the CD online or you can just download a high-quality or even lossless sound file of it for a few cents, or even for free if yuo want to go that route. You can find a *ton* of rare, foreign small-label or OOP stuff on eBay or in record collectors' forums. No more trolling every used record store in town or attending swap meets to find used vinyl.

A wider variety of music is easier to get than ever before. This is awesome!

What is the problem with this? You're thinking I won't appreciate the music as much because I haven't placed a false, extrinsic value on the physical medium the music has been encoded into? Are you insane?

I'd say the reverse is true. Nowadays, music stands on its own merit rather than how obscure or rare it is to find. I used to know collectors who would spend $75 on a rare European import by the band SPK, only to get it home, throw it on the wheel and find out it's 20 minutes of a single 2-bar beat running on a cheap drum machine with a bunch of fucking test tones dubbed over the top of it. This guy would put it in his "collection" along with all his other dubious prizes, stuff he paid a small fortune to own but never even listens to, for fear of scratching it or wearing it out, or else just because it sounds like fucking bullshit.

Nowadays I can listen to a song, decide whether I like it, then buy it (or not), all from the comfort of my own home. I buy music on the merits of the music itself, not the album cover or the positive reviews I've read or because it will complete my set of the 23 rare live concert recordings that have only been released in limited, numbered pressings of 5,000.

Justin from Queens wrote:

japmn wrote:I don't own any records I don't want.

You don't? Jeez, I've got records I haven't even listened to side 2 of. I would not have made the mistake of buying them if I could have listened to them first.

= Justin

Things have changed a bit since returning to Chicago but I am an advocate of purging. It comes from a time in my life when I was moving at least once a year and sometimes more. Records are fucking heavy and take of a lot of organ/amp room in your 97 Escort wagon on a long trip across country. I keep essentials and rely heavily on my friends collections.

Remember back before teleportation, when touring the country meant three months away from home driving from city to city?