There's an interesting addendum to the monthly dubstep piece over at Pitchfork, which describes the unlikelihood that the music’s producers and DJs will shift in format to digital - and which sets out the reasons why this will not happen. I realise that this subject has been done to death, but I just don't go along with the simplistic 'it's what comes out of the speakers that matters' argument. Of course, that’s what really matters, but the format is important too. We’re all too aware of the convenience and economic arguments in favour of the digital format, but having a physical accompaniment is not just desirable, it’s essential. It provides a lasting document of an artist’s travails, it looks great and it sounds superior (cue frantic, incensed posting by WAV and AIFF-loving readers). So what if it doesn’t make a gazillion dollars for the labels – it’s art, it’s niche music, it’s not meant to be profitable. If you are running an electronic music label to make money, don’t, just become an accountant. It’s also interesting to note that the relationship with this format seems to often (but not exclusively) have a direct correlation with the style of music. Electro house and mnml labels are beholden to the digital format – especially given that the latter sound’s poster boy has based his career re-launch around laptops - something that’s audible in the dreck that clogs up the majority of Beatport’s charts. Meanwhile, drum’n’bass, dubstep, techno and house – in their less trendy, less popular yet infinitely more exciting forms – as well as ‘real’ electro (eg, the music that was called electro before that word was stolen) still place an emphasis on vinyl. What this suggests to me is that a lot more care, time, effort, passion and money are put in by the people who run labels catering for these styles and that (generally) the opposite is true in the mnml/electro house – anyone with a few part-time producer friends and a burning desire to be flavour of the month can do so.
I’m not trying to insinuate that there is a generational divide at play here - some of the most vocal vinyl supporters are in their 20s - or that the same distrust that lingers among hardware-based producers for software is felt by vinyl labels for those who don’t include the format. Let’s face it though, it would be much easier to run a net/digital label and put out a ‘record’ every week. Maybe it would be even more democratic from a cultural standpoint to do so, to unleash every recording ever made by every producer and to let the public decide. To a lesser degree, this is what is happening right now – there are countless labels springing up with the word ‘digital’ after their name, but when their wares have long since been consigned to the desktop trash box and their owners have finally joined the echelons of the salaryman classes, their physical counterparts will continue to crackle and pop their way towards immortality.
Defo agree with you on the types of music which generally favour digital, and the resultant type of fans who favour digital over vinyl, and vice versa. It's really nauseating the amount of crap music that gets put out on digital labels, and gets sent around in countless generic promo mailouts.
however.. i do think there was still an awful lot of crap music being released on vinyl back in the day too. just now, so many vinyl labels have folded or gone digital, that the ones that are left are being ultra, ultra selective in what they put out.. which is a good thing of course. (although there's also crap still being put on vinyl too, but this is more subjective )
however, trying not to get into the digital versus vinyl debate.. i do think its great that so many strong labels are adding their back catalogue onto beatport and similar sites. Yep ,the trawl through crap is omnipresent, but if you know what you are looking for, its nice to get a proper quality file to replace your crackly, skipping vinyl copy. (for a serato / vinyl user like myself)
to tie back to the first point though, i do think its a pity that more real electro is not available digitally. apart from various bits and pieces of new vinyl that i pick up here and there, unfortunately my electro buying has taken a dive as a result of so little of it being available digitally.
Posted by: Chymera | August 19, 2008 at 02:23 PM
Totally agree: ten years ago, there was a load of bad stuff put out on vinyl. while there is still some dreck out on on vinyl, most of the poor stuff gets released on digital only nowadays.
it is a pity that the really good electro stuff has such niche appeal allright - some great stuff coming out at the moment...
Posted by: Brophy | August 19, 2008 at 03:20 PM
Dance music and vinyl are tied together historically and culturally, and I can't imagine ever collecting my music in any other format.
Pretty much everything I like is available on vinyl, only the rare track appears on digital that I wish was on vinyl.
Obviously bad stuff is still pressed, that is inevitable, but nothing has convinced me to go digital. And I'll always love the randomness of the great track you over-looked for ages on an ep, something that people who buy one track on beatport will never have.
Posted by: Kenny | August 19, 2008 at 06:49 PM
Same story, different format - electro house/mnml replaces the dominant sound of the time (loopy techno springs to mind about 5 years ago), and the desktop trash replaces secondhand record bins. Crap music continues to be released albeit cheaper and on a greater scale.
Couldn't agree more about vinyl being a lasting document of an artist’s travails.
Recently picked up some Scion Versions despite them being a tenth of the cost digitally. There nice to have and I know ill be glad to have them in 10 years or whenever my dancing shoes are long gathering dust.
Posted by: Russell | August 20, 2008 at 03:47 AM
"but having a physical accompaniment is not just desirable, it’s essential"
I couldn't disagree more with this assertion. At least it shows we live in a material world were a lot of people have difficulty relating to immaterial things, such as music. If you need a piece of plastic to enjoy music or feel some attachment to it, I feel sorry for you.
Plus there's the collector bug humans have the tendency to possess. People just love objects and having tons of them.
If you spend time online building you a quality digital library and paying for it, maybe you'll be able could feel the value it has even if there is not physical object attached to it.
I know that every digital release I buy has been carefully evaluated, sometimes for weeks before I commit $$$ to it. As this process takes time, energy and real money, I feel connected to my digital collection.
I expect every other reader of this blog to disagree with me, telling me I don't know what I'm talking about and that vinyl or whatever object r0x0r, that it is part of the music etc...
Posted by: b0b | August 20, 2008 at 10:43 AM
@ Bob: people need a physical relationship to interact with art, be it visual art, books/literature or music. This has been going on for hundreds of years and this relationship is an integral part of modern/popular culture. I don’t understand why you feel sorry for anyone who enjoys this relationship. Which leads us onto the question as to whether someone with a hard drive full of MP3s can be deemed a collector in the same way as someone who buys records. I don’t think they can - but I certainly wouldn’t feel sorry for them…
Posted by: Brophy | August 20, 2008 at 12:32 PM
In the previous post I may came as a vinyl hater - which I'm not. And I wanted to dismiss the popular belief that you can't be connected to a digital collection because there's no physical representation of it. I'm just a bit annoyed by the common thought among vinyl collectors that it's the holy and one true format for music and that a physical format is essential (what you say). It's not essential. What's essential is that I can listen to the music.
. If one find a digital only release that he really likes and don't buy it because it's not on vinyl, getting an illegal mp3
instead, I find that a bit lame. Among vinyl lovers, I see a lot of "a mp3 is worth nothing" especially "not paying for it" attitude, a good excuse to get it illegally since it's worth nothing compared to a mighty vinyl heh?
And there's the funny case of people discussing a vinyl release packaging for 60 messages and not one message on the music itself...
As for you digital collector remark, it's relatively comparable to a vinyl collector as long as you love the music, don't buy everything because it's cheap and easy (to maintain some quality control), don't download ilegally everything because you can.
Posted by: b0b | August 20, 2008 at 01:29 PM
"people need a physical relationship to interact with art, be it visual art, books/literature or music. This has been going on for hundreds of years and this relationship is an integral part of modern/popular culture."
Says who? How can you be so absolutist about it? While I can understand people who have grown up with a vinyl culture having an attachment to it and favouring it over mp3, I can't undertand how they can be so arrogant as to not appreciate that not everyone feels the same way. How do you know how other people experience art? If you hear a tune or a mix on mp3 are you incapable of engaging with it emotionally in any way? Similarly, would this blog mean any less if it was read in a magazine as opposed to on the web?
Posted by: Tom | August 20, 2008 at 02:30 PM
@ Bob
"that it's the holy and one true format for music and that a physical format is essential (what you say). It's not essential. What's essential is that I can listen to the music...." - I think I would echo Kenny's feelings on this that vinyl is the true format for music. I think it is essential for this style of music - obviously you don't, so we have a difference of opinion. I think I mentioned in the post that of course the music is of paramount importance, but that the format is also relevant. I stand by that opinion...
Posted by: Richard Brophy | August 20, 2008 at 03:19 PM
@ Ronan, sorry I mean "Tom":
"Says who? How can you be so absolutist about it? " - well people have been reading books for centuries, painting for thousands of years, so there's no question of being absolutist or not. A physical relationship with art has been in existence since we were cave dwellers
"While I can understand people who have grown up with a vinyl culture having an attachment to it and favouring it over mp3, I can't undertand how they can be so arrogant as to not appreciate that not everyone feels the same way." - people aren't arrogant about it, just passionate. Compared to vinyl they feel MP3s/other digital fomats are inferior. It's just a matter of taste...
"How do you know how other people experience art?" - well, by studying history, history of art, being aware of trends in culture, staying informed, that kind of thing...
" If you hear a tune or a mix on mp3 are you incapable of engaging with it emotionally in any way?" - think you're going off the deep end here as usual "Tom". as i said in the original post, the music is the main concern, but the format is also of relevance.
" Similarly, would this blog mean any less if it was read in a magazine as opposed to on the web?" - who knows, so many questions, so little time. what do you think - maybe you should start a magazine full of blog posts?
Posted by: Richard Brophy | August 20, 2008 at 03:26 PM
does this mean you don't have an mp3 player ? or burn cd's to listen to ?
Posted by: todd | August 20, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Here we go again... :)
Posted by: Martin Dust | August 21, 2008 at 12:46 AM
I'm with Richard/Kenny on this I think. I don't know about the collector bit, but playing a piece of music is about an experience, and that experience is the sum of the music, the quality of the recording, the handling of the medium, the rituals required to play the track (be it double-clicking, or cueing up a stylus), how you feel at the time, etc etc. You cannot seperate the experience from the medium, or from the way you interact with it.
On the quality control front, there are similarities with the glut of bad vinyl in the 90s, but it's not the same situation, as vinyl always cost to press, so there was a disincentive to endlessly releasing rubbish. That disincentive does not exist with digital files, as there is practically zero financial penalty to releasing poor quality material on an unending basis - there is no risk to keep things in check.
I say fair play to everyone who likes, plays, and DJs from digital files - it's just not for me (although it would be fantastic not to have to carry a heavy bag). On top of the fact that I personally feel that the imperfections of vinyl *improve* the quality of the audio, the physical interaction with the medium is so intrinsically connected with the quality of your experience, and when something is spinning at 7200rpm, it's just too fast for me to develop a relationship with - especially when I can't see it or touch it.
Posted by: Dave A | August 21, 2008 at 01:46 AM
does this mean you don't have an mp3 player ? - correct, i don't have one
or burn cd's to listen to ?- only listen out of necessity to CDs (eg if they are sent for review). if i like the music i always ask for a vinyl or just buy one and throw the CD away
Posted by: Brophy | August 21, 2008 at 07:24 AM
at least you're consistent, i do find it hard to believe that the vinyl lovers don't use mp3 players, burn cd's, or upload there own vinyl made mp3 mixes for others to hear. when you spend alot of your time walking, in cars or buses than mp3's really are useful. the sound is no doubt not up to vinyl standards but it's by no means unlistenable, mp3's and weed sounds pretty good to me. it seems to me like it would be a drawback to vinyl if you just wanted to read a book or something to a playlist but you can't cause you always need to be there switching records, but i guess that's where your physical/mental association comes into play cause you do need to be there to keep the shit going. also, it certainly must aid in dj's memory of records just cause of the physicalness of touching it, like when you write something down.
Posted by: todd | August 21, 2008 at 08:24 AM
"well people have been reading books for centuries, painting for thousands of years, so there's no question of being absolutist or not. A physical relationship with art has been in existence since we were cave dwellers"
Music pre-existed any physical form of archiving it. Same with stories. Painting by its very nature has to be physically archived.
"people aren't arrogant about it, just passionate." No, I think arrogant is the right word. Being passionate about vinyl isn't the same as failing to apprciate that others might not feel the same way about it.
"well, by studying history, history of art, being aware of trends in culture, staying informed, that kind of thing..."
that doesn't give you insight into how people experience art, only how they consume it. Are you saying by studying art history you know that nobody can get the same enjoyment out of an mp3 that somebody else gets out of vinyl?
"maybe you should start a magazine full of blog posts?"
That sounds more up your street. Keep it physical.
"It's just a matter of taste..."
my point exactly
And I don't know why you're snidely trying to insinuate I'm Ronan. I assume you mean Ronan Fitzgerald and no, I am not Ronan.
Posted by: Tom | August 21, 2008 at 12:34 PM
@ Tom/Ronan:
“Music pre-existed any physical form of archiving it. Same with stories. Painting by its very nature has to be physically archived” – thanks for the potted history lesson, but hasn’t recorded music been around for long enough now and surely by this stage it has to be physically archived, to borrow your own phrase (which kind of backs up or agrees with the point I originally made)…..
." No, I think arrogant is the right word. Being passionate about vinyl isn't the same as failing to apprciate that others might not feel the same way about it.” - no I think passionate is the right word. Only an arrogant person would start to diss someone who feels passionate about music. At no stage did I say that people shouldn’t buy/use/consume digital music, just pointed out that it’s not for me….
“that doesn't give you insight into how people experience art, only how they consume it. Are you saying by studying art history you know that nobody can get the same enjoyment out of an mp3 that somebody else gets out of vinyl? “ – No not at all, I am merely replying to you a question you about how I know how people interact with art. You’re adding one and one and getting fifty seven as per usual Ronan, sorry Tom…
“That sounds more up your street. Keep it physical.” - good man, now you’re learning
“my point exactly” – great, so we’re agreeing, even though I’m arrogant
“And I don't know why you're snidely trying to insinuate I'm Ronan. I assume you mean Ronan Fitzgerald and no, I am not Ronan.” - are you sure? You have a very similar IP number and a really similar style or arguing. Are you sure you’re not his little brother or some relative of his? Hey, maybe you could start a blog together….
Posted by: Brophy | August 21, 2008 at 01:41 PM
Maybe i'm completely wrong, but surely some music had to be archived in written notation so it could be performed long after the composers died, or did orchestras just go with a piece of music after it was hummed to them by someone who heard it before them. ;)
Posted by: Kenny | August 21, 2008 at 03:49 PM
"by this stage it has to be physically archived"
I don't think so. If it survived without it before, it can survive without it again.
"Only an arrogant person would start to diss someone who feels passionate about music." So because you're passionate about music you should be inoculated from any criticism? That's a nice get out clause. And I stand by the claim that failing to appreciate that others might not feel the same about a format is arrogant. It has nothing to do with their passion for the music, which I have no reason to doubt.
"No not at all, I am merely replying to you a question you about how I know how people interact with art. You’re adding one and one and getting fifty seven as per usual Ronan, sorry Tom…" This doesn't even make sense, apart from your increasingly heeeelarious insinuations that I'm Ronan.
"You have a very similar IP number and a really similar style or arguing. Are you sure you’re not his little brother or some relative of his?"
Similar or the same? Having a similar IP address doesn't make me almost Ronan, just like getting someone's phone number almost correct doesn't almost get you through to them, or to someone similar. And no, having a similar IP address doesn't make you their relative either......
Posted by: Tom | August 23, 2008 at 05:07 AM
Richard, seriously check your IPs and then check your head or go for a walk or something.
I hadn't read Test in about 2 months, I barely have time to keep my own site ticking over, I only am posting here now cos my friend messaged me to tell me you thought someone else was me!
I have no desire to argue with you about this topic!
Posted by: Ronan | August 23, 2008 at 06:03 AM
I agree with Ronan on this one.
Posted by: Jean Luc | August 23, 2008 at 06:34 AM
I agree with Tom here, very much so. As another separate internet user, albeit with a similar "ip number" I have to say he's very much correct here.
Posted by: Rolo Tomasi | August 23, 2008 at 06:36 AM
Slighty off-topic (but more on point than the last few posts): Here's a link to a small video portrait about a real vinyl afficionado.
Bittersweet stuff and some truthful words of wisdom. Check it out.
http://www.vimeo.com/1546186
Posted by: hum3 | August 24, 2008 at 06:54 AM
@ Tom: "I don't think so. If it survived without it before, it can survive without it again." yes, maybe it would, but it be a far poorer place without vinyl
“So because you're passionate about music you should be inoculated from any criticism? That's a nice get out clause” - I never said that. However, I would hope passion wouldn’t be mistaken for arrogance. Obviously you think I’m arrogant, so let’s leave it at that. I have already wasted enough time arguing with someone like yourself who has the debating skills of a three-year-old with ADHD….
“This doesn't even make sense, apart from your increasingly heeeelarious insinuations that I'm Ronan.” - your failure to argue your point in any kind of coherent way, your willingness to quickly trade insults and your poor debating skills make you his clone (or maybe just a poor man’s Ronan - at least the original runs a blog and is active - you just seem to be happy to snipe)
Posted by: Brophy | August 24, 2008 at 09:40 AM
@ Ronan
“Richard, seriously check your IPs and then check your head or go for a walk or something.” – went for a walk earlier, lovely weather, feeling very clear headed
“I hadn't read Test in about 2 months, I barely have time to keep my own site ticking over, I only am posting here now cos my friend messaged me to tell me you thought someone else was me!” _ I take your word for it and can only assume that you have a copy cat poster. I’m not sure if you should feel flattered or worried.
“I have no desire to argue with you about this topic!” – no worries
Posted by: Brophy | August 24, 2008 at 09:42 AM