Preferred FORMAT???

[Cementimental]

it may be my ears playing tricks on me but if I try to listen to mp3s even through good speakers it all sounds flat after a while. Flacs and wavs are better but hardly portable.

It is your ears/brain/emotions. An MP3 burned to CDr played thru a hi-fi sounds the same as an MP3 played from a computer/ipod played thru a hi-fi unless either your sound card or your CD player are cheap enough to sound noticeably bad in some way, or there's something wrong with how you're connecting them.

[HongKongGoolagong]

it may be my ears playing tricks on me but if I try to listen to mp3s even through good speakers it all sounds flat after a while. Flacs and wavs are better but hardly portable.

It is your ears/brain/emotions. An MP3 burned to CDr played thru a hi-fi sounds the same as an MP3 played from a computer/ipod played thru a hi-fi unless either your sound card or your CD player are cheap enough to sound noticeably bad in some way, or there's something wrong with how you're connecting them.

I must have 300+ CD-Rs of hideously rare bootlegs (not all noise by any means) from the golden age of free music blogs a few years ago - the sort of thing you would once get your hands on after five years of working in tape-trading circles of the 80s and 90s like Syd Barrett 1974 tapes etc. And even through great speakers and with some tweaking while mastering I think I can tell when the source was mp3. It's flat somehow, even the hi-rate stuff hurts your ears worse than a CD. I have a grey market compilation of punk licensed through Cherry Red to a shady German outfit where it's obvious that the CD is mastered quickly and lazily from mp3 too. The Grey Wolves mastered their poorly received but interesting/experimental Division CD from what seems obviously very lo-rate mp3s as a kind of deliberate statement on decay. And sadly most music of all genres is being mastered for the mp3/streaming format nowadays with the loudness wars. I guess this sort of discussion might be more suited to the mindbogglingly retentive stevehoffman.tv forums.   

[Zeno Marx]

Are you involved in torrenting?  If you really want that stuff in better quality, a good percentage of it is easily found on the various torrent sites.  If you hadn't mentioned Syd Barrett, I wouldn't have bothered mentioning it.  The classic rock audience --many of which are throwbacks from when stereos were a big deal and in every home, and from when nothing else was competing for their attention than music-- is diligent about upgrading their copies of demos, live, etc.  The hobbyists are more reliable and interested in musical integrity than most in the professional field, and many of them have connexions to get near the masters.  It's a private world gone public and with surprising enthusiasm for sharing and highest fidelity.  They're getting good enough at it that groups like Tangerine Dream and King Crimson are now selling those same recordings on their websites as group-sanctioned product.  Cannot help with the portability.  Listening to music outside the home has never given me much satisfaction, and even in the car, I prefer talk radio.

[Cementimental]

I must have 300+ CD-Rs of hideously rare bootlegs (not all noise by any means) from the golden age of free music blogs a few years ago

That's definitely a great benefit of listening to MP3s on CDr :) But backups of the original MP3s on a hard drive would be better if you need to share them again online without losing even more quality re-encoding.

It's flat somehow, even the hi-rate stuff hurts your ears worse than a CD.

Certainly low bitrate or wrongly/re-encoded ones can sound really bad but I don't believe 320 kbit/s MP3s are really distinguishable from CDs by the human ear. Possibly some people with good hearing could detect a difference when listening very carefully and comparing the compressed and uncompressed recording but if the CD doesn't sound 'flat' or 'hurt your ears' (...aren't we on a forum dedicated largely to music intended to do so? ^_^) then neither does the 320 MP3.

[nahàsh atrym]

all format are an interest

[bitewerksMTB]

I prefer buying vinyl. I like tapes, cd's are ok.

My biggest problem with cd's is they're difficult to re-sell or sell when they're new. Vinyl & tapes are much easier to get rid of.

[Bleak Existence]

cassette

[SNR]

All format, except lossy low-rate mp3 downloads, and low quality CDr (unprinted disc, no artwork, etc.:.)... for physical ones, tapes and CDs are the best. Vinyl for me is too, eh, fastidious? Even if they are looking, and sounding good, I didn't started to collect them for this reason. Tapes are better for an analogue carrier, but it's just an opinion.. but I've think if someones want an exact content, or sound, the format doesn't really matter. I mean, if your selected artist would release a tape/CDr/digital download etc:. anything, what you would not purchase in normal case, would you reject it, even if everything looks good about it? I doubt it, you just want to hear/read/own that kind of content... but I must say, the best to have multiple formats for each releases, so everybody can pick it's liked one.

[burdizzo]

I must say, I don't buy things that are not on a physical format ie. CD/ CDr, LP, or tape.

[Dr Alex]

I must say, I don't buy things that are not on a physical format ie. CD/ CDr, LP, or tape.

Same. It's stupid to pay for files.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

Preferred is the format that suits particular piece of sound.
I have absolutely no dislike for CD. I think most of ambient and more quiet experimental music works best for CD. Same goes for a lot of dynamic harsh noise.
Plenty of industrial & rough PE benefits from LP format. But can also be damaged by too poorly done LPs. And there are plenty of those these days.

I think there used to be some sort of poll about what people like/prefer and what they actually buy/use. I only hope to have format that compliments the piece of sound. Though sound quality as well as practical matters as possibilities of length etc. And also visual aspects of packaging and overall design.

[Otomo_Hava]

I must say, I don't buy things that are not on a physical format ie. CD/ CDr, LP, or tape.

Same. It's stupid to pay for files.

It's stupid as paying for files as downloading MP3s either for free.
Multiple times prefer to listen something from a regular format on a proper and decent stereophonic set rather something corrupted and alienated on my computer.

[dmkerr]

The CD replaced the LP and cassette mostly, IMHO, due to its imperviousness to generational losses.  No matter how much care you give to an LP or a cassette, with each play it degrades.  I've gotten around 200 plays on certain LP's before I've noticed anything but I've also had cassettes start squeaking after a few dozen.  In general, the CD is more robust... assuming we look past the possibility of CD rot!  If the data on a CD becomes corrupt, the music is gone.  At least on a vinyl LP, it can always be played not matter its condition.

As for me, I usually prefer the sound of vinyl.  It depends on the recording but vinyl usually trumps. The frequency range it works within, while not as wide as the CD, sounds more natural most of the time.

[Cementimental]

I find it very odd how a lot of people have this notion that a computer is good enough for recording, editing, mastering and CD-authoring music/noise, but somehow mysteriously not good enough for listening to it.

[Bleak Existence]

computer is good for listening but you need good speaker of course