Will local files come to be regarded as being as obsolete as turntables?

actually you can with smart extra additions like rooExtend and an ADC and another roon extension that does something similar - in #tinkering

Does anyone have any idea where we are today with regards to local files vs streaming among Roon users? I am 99% streaming, I only have local files for music that I desperately wanted and is not available on Tidal. I suppose Roon keeps some statistics on that?

I’m 99% local files. Different strokes for different folks. :wink:

5 Likes

Same here. I use Tital only for sampling a new album release before I purchase.

If I like, I will buy it.

Prefer local playback.

–MD

3 Likes

Just as likely to use local files as streaming.
In fact still play cds and use FM radio.

1 Like

honest curiosity here: Why do you buy music that you could stream?
To support the artist?
Doomsday prepper thinking?
A bit of both?
Something else?

I like supporting the artist for sure. But also there has been many times when albums or songs in a playlist, when out of the blue they are no longer available for streaming for whatever reason, but is gone.

It is never gone with my local files. I would re-missed if I did not say except when my internet is out. :grimacing:

–MD

4 Likes

Look, all of us oldsters have local files. We lived through the days of Napster and iTunes and iPod, which caused us to create massive on-disk libraries of music. But it’s a blip, historically speaking. The iPod is gone, CD sales have declined dramatically, kids are spinning vinyl in what they think is an ironic reference to their parents’ nostalgia for bygone eras, and even music downloads are on their way out.

And it’s a good thing. Simplicity in life, not having to manage possessions, etc.

Music files are just one more historical artifact, which in twenty years won’t be a thing anymore, IMO. The interesting question is, what does the curve between now and twenty years from now look like?

3 Likes

Dani, that’s an interesting article. Of course, it’s on a site called “hypebot”. Is that really the place to look for well-reasoned discussion?

I’d agree with all of the point he makes: cheaper to make, faster to make, easier to carry, easier to take home from a concert. But those are all comparisons to big old obsolete vinyl records. Which have never made much sense over the past 30 years. The only vinyl I’ve bought in that period are records for one of my nieces, who’s enchanted with, I think, the reference to the olden days.

But even CDs are not as convenient as saying to an Amazon Echo, “Play Lady Gaga”.

I tend to “bond” more with music I own than music I am streaming. And even streaming will change in time.

2 Likes
  1. I’ve been collecting physical media since I got my first album in 1964.
  2. I already had 5000+ CDs before streaming started.
  3. I have a holiday cottage with no internet access
  4. I like at least quasi ownership, so now things I really like I try to purchase lossless downloads if possible.
  5. I do like supporting artists and purchases seem to do more.
  6. I always buy a CD when I see an indie artist as they make more from the merch table than from the gig.

p.s. I use spotify to try out things and to have music on the go.

4 Likes

:rofl:

Me, too. Well, not 5000 (I think), but boxes and boxes of records and CDs sitting in my basement. For good, I think. I never have the impetus to pull them out, even though I sometimes buy a CD and add it to the pile! Usually, as you say, to support an indie artist.

But that’s the point. We were conditioned by our pre-streaming past. The YouTube generation hasn’t been.

2 Likes

it was simply reported the first site I found where it reported official data (in this case RIAA data)

1 Like

What is quasi ownership?

As long as we will have physical media (which I hope we do), local files will be of value.

But to buy physical media just to rip and store in a box is wasteful. Just download the files.

1 Like

Ostensibly, Gary is right. Quasi or pseudo ownership is correct.
Too many posters on this site bandy about how they prefer to “own” their music. Well, I, too, have a large local music collection, but I do not own any of it.

Look, folks, unless you are the hedge fund buying up Bob Dylan’s catalog or similar, you do not own the music. You cannot replicate it or distribute it or sell it. From what is rapidly becoming a bygone era, you may own physical media or downloads that convey personal listening licenses. However, that is all, just the physical objects and/or the personal licenses. You do not own the music.

AJ

4 Likes

With digital files I own the right to use the underlying intellectual property (the music). Just like in the old days. One could buy software on a disk to install, but legally one is buying a license to USE the software. So to me this is quasi ownership (I’m a licensee). But I’m not trying to argue any strictly legal interpretation here as I’m not a lawyer.

1 Like

I agree fully. I’m just stuck in my ways. And not only as it relates to music. I still like manicured lawns even though that’s probably killing the planet.

1 Like

Not sure I follow. Does having 8-track tapes make local files valuable? No. Are you referring to hard disks? Cloud-based storage options like Dropbox are also replacing those, particularly the insidious device-related things like Google Cloud Storage (Android back-up and GMail) and Apple’s iCloud (iPhone and iPad). Physical media, as something you keep files on, will disappear too, the solidstate storage in our phones and laptops being simply caches for the network primary storage.