Interesting read. Like the writer of the article, I too concluded that I would need another lifetime just to listen to all of the music I have collected over the years. I have 1200 or so albums still packed away that haven't seen the light of day in years, along with a few boxes of cassette tapes and 45s; 100s of CDs; a dozen or so large capacity (500GB on up) external hard drives with downloaded music and videos, in addition to what's on the computer now. I was trying to get back into rediscovering and only listening to the stuff in the CD collection, but find I still search out stuff on the Web and download it if it interests me. And, I'm thinking now, of the dozens of live shows by the Stones, Neil Young, Springsteen, Dylan and others I have downloaded and yet to listen to. Madness, I tell you, madness. When does it stop? When the reaper comes by?

[www.npr.org]

Quote
dmay
When does it stop? When the reaper comes by?

Well, obviously yes...but the reaper won't be stuck with the chore of cleaning out all of your albums, CDs, etc. - some human will. You, of course, won't care at that point - but it might be a good idea to plan accordingly to lessen the burden of your loved ones.

As for the article..so much music, so little time!

Quote
dmay
... a dozen or so large capacity (500GB on up) external hard drives with downloaded music and videos, in addition to what's on the computer now....

I have been backing up my hard drives every couple of years when prices drop (again). I started with 256 GB... moved up to 500GB when they were as cheap as I paid for the 256GB... moved up to 500GB when they were as cheap as the.... moved up to 1TB when they were... moved up to 2TB when... now moving up to 4TB priced lower than than I paid for my original 256GB (and they are powered by USB.

The newer drives more solid, but I don't trust any of them for longer than a couple of years. Someday I will move to SSD, but they are still kind of pricey.



Do I have too much... yeah, I will never be able to listen/watch all the stuff I have, but it is fun being my own little Block Buster Video/Music store location (it is not for sale, thus not a store)


I just hope I never get a EMP where I live.
I have considered shielding for that... but... come on man.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-01-17 00:57 by Leonioid.

My CD collection gathers dust. I still play them, some of them, but they're in a place where they get dusty no matter what. With Google Play (Music), all the CDs I've uploaded to my PC are now online, so in a way I listen to my CDs via my phone or headphones on the PC.

I do listen to Spotify but maybe just a few times a month of music I don't own - if it's on there. There's YouTube as well. But even that is not often.

My CD burner just failed on me. My Discman just failed on me. I do play CDs on the Blu-ray occasionally.

What I don't do is listen to every Stones release and bootleg. Nor other artists that I have a lot of. There's just too much. When I do listen to the Stones etc I rarely play any of the hits comps and I tend to skip the hit singles on whatever albums. It's just a waste of time. I do not need or want to listen to Satisfaction or Paint It Black or SFTD or IORR or Miss You or Start Me Up or YCAGWYW or Honky Tonk Women and on and on and on again (although I have no issue listening to JJF, SFM, Gimme Shelter, Tumbling Dice or Brown Sugar - they're just too damn good to not listen to - that's the only reason you need).

Aside from buying a deluxe reissue (Soundgarden, Nirvana, etc) I tend to look at my CDs and then randomly pick something when I'm not sure what I want to listen to.

But there's also influences. Like the weather might determine what I want to listen to. Or if I'm cleaning the house. And so on. So moods can determine what I listen to - and sometimes it's something I haven't listened to in years.

So maybe that's one way to find a way to listen to all the various formats of music that you/people have. If there's time, of course, ha ha.

I don't have a huge collection, maybe 500 CDs (LPs, EPs, singles, promo singles, 3 or 4 box sets). I have about 200 vinyl LPs, a few 12" singles and EPs - that I don't listen to these days since the turntable is missing or it broke or whatever. I don't care at the moment anyway. They are fun to look at though.

But yeah, in general, there's too much music! Perhaps that's what happens with age. You get conservative with what you do listen to because you have too much and there's not enough time so you stick with what you like the most.

Sure seems that way for me the past 10 years or so.

If my loved ones don't enjoy the music I leave behind for them it's their loss.....

I still listen to all of my vinyl, cd's, and cassettes, and have a massive library that covers many styles of music (close to 50 years of accumulation).
Out of the all of that, I could hear something "new" every day for for the rest of my life and beyond, and I still buy stuff to add to it.
Thousands of albums, thousands of cd, probably a thousand cassettes, and about 20 8 track tapes lol...there can never be too much music!!!

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-01-17 04:30 by Hairball.

There's only too much insofar as I'll die long before I've listened to all the music I want to.

This past year I've been forcing myself to listen to artists and albums that I've never listened to before, but should have, and keeping a list of my progress (yes, I'm very Type A).

As easy and comforting as it is to listen to my favorites over and over, I also want to absorb as much music as I possibly can.

Henry Rollins described listening to new music as "protein listening", which he does all week, and listening to his favorite music on weekends as "carb listening", which I found humorous and accurate.

Good old Henry...

There's always room for discovering new music, while at the same time (and the older you get) there's room to rediscover older music.
Take the Beatles and Stones for example - I'll go months without listening to one or the other, and then plunge right back into it with a new sense of appreciation and enthusiasm.
Current cd's in my car: The Clash's first album. Prince's greatest hits (my wife's cd). Dennis Brown late '70's dub compilation. Northern Soul box- 100 Greatest. Buck Owens Best of Vol.II.
Last vinyl albums I listened to: Sid and Nancy Soundtrack compilation, and the Specials 12" extended single version of Ghost Town. Current cd's in front of stereo on table at my studio - it's a jumbled mess.

edit: And while at home on laptop, youtube has LOTS to offer - both old and new.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-01-17 05:27 by Hairball.

Exactly.

And when I say "new", I mean new to me, not newly-released. For instance (and I know this will blow peoples' minds who are in their 50s and 60s), I've never listened to a complete Beatles album in one listen. I've heard plenty of their music, but I've never REALLY delved into their catalog.

I guess I was such a Stones fanatic when I was younger that I never gave the Beatles much notice, and then I gravitated towards heavier genres and just never gave them much thought, but now I want to work my way through their discography.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-01-17 05:40 by keefriff99.

Yes keefriff99 - new can be new as well as something that is new to me, although there hasn't been much of anything new in the literal sense that has really grabbed me in recent years.
And as someone who is 54 years old - yes my mind is blown you have NEVER listened to a Beatles album from start to finish!!!
I believe you're in for a treat on your mission of discovery, but that's coming from someone who was born and raised on the Beatles since year 1.

Take it from Lemmy:

"The Beatles had an influence on everybody. They changed the way you looked at things. You have to realize what an incredible explosion the Beatles were. You really had to be there but I will try to tell you. They were the first band to not have a lead singer in the band. They were the first band to write their own songs in Britain because we always just covered American songs before that. Everybody was singing at the same time and the harmonies were great. The Beatles really turned the whole thing on its head. Daily papers in England used to have an entire page of the paper dedicated to what the Beatles had done the day before. When George died the guards at Buckingham Palace played a medley of George’s songs during the changing of the guard; that sort of thing never happens."

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

There's not much new music that interests me any more, but there seems to be a steady stream of archival releases. And there's no limit to them!

I have pondered - Its too much to keep up. I tried.
So I basically decided I try to stay with rock & soul. But I really do try to constantly find new acts.
I have a CD ROOM. And like many others I now have hit that point where I ask myself - Why am I buying CDs? They cost way more; and then Im stuck with storing
them. I get them, look at them, open them, rip them into PC etc. and tha'ts it.

Why don't I just buy them in file form? Because I am conditioned. I still think I have to "own" this shiny thing to really be able to appreciate the music.
I try to always carry a massive amount of music with me on some MP3 player, and then always have it on Shuffle.
When listening to Stones, I play all those Russian releases from years ago a lot. They did all official albums with extra tracks. Did them really well.
Boots - it is always Outtakes, studio stuff. And often Chess Studio, very, very early stuff.

Quote
keefriff99
Exactly.

And when I say "new", I mean new to me, not newly-released. For instance (and I know this will blow peoples' minds who are in their 50s and 60s), I've never listened to a complete Beatles album in one listen. I've heard plenty of their music, but I've never REALLY delved into their catalog.

I guess I was such a Stones fanatic when I was younger that I never gave the Beatles much notice, and then I gravitated towards heavier genres and just never gave them much thought, but now I want to work my way through their discography.

I was just the opposite--a MAJOR Beatles fan. I liked the Stones but only came totally on board in the late 70s. You ARE in for a major treat. The Beatles are beyond amazing.

Sure there can be too much music. See to:

1. Never listen to new bands. New bands run the risk of repeating what
previous bands have done. There are nothing to miss.
2. Never download music.
3. Never buy CDs, always LPs.
4. Get rid of music you no longer care about.
(-But this can be risky, be sure what you do)
5. Don`t be too faithful to veteran bands. Once good ain´t always good.
6. Don`t listen too much.

There are too many people, so maybe.
I was thinking the other day, as my 10 year old asked me for piano lessons (do not own a piano)
music in public schools looks to be to be declining as it is pitted against academics, but, will musicianship dwindle if the population keeps expanding?

I didn’t read the article.

There can be too much NPR, it just goes on and on.

That lengthy article link in the OP, it was just too much to take in for one read.

The article references in the first sentence a movie I'd never even heard of; it just became too much, too soon.

It's All Too Much: [www.dailymotion.com]

“I think music has gotten very girly. And there are some good things about that, but hip-hop is the only place for young male anger at the moment – and that’s not good."

..................................... BONO December 2017



ROCKMAN

Why don't you try this with music?

[www.nytimes.com]

Too Many Favorite Shows? Take Them In at High Speed

So much media, so little time.

Consumers face a dizzying array of entertainment choices that include streaming video such as Amazon Prime Video, Hulu and Netflix; cable channels and apps from outlets like HBO and Showtime; YouTube; and as many as 28,000 podcasts.

With them all offering uncountable hours of addictive programming, how is a listener or viewer supposed to keep up? For some, the answer is speed watching or speed listening — taking in the content at accelerated speeds, sometimes two times as fast as normal.

While speed viewing does save time — devotees say it can save hours over the season of a series — others raise concerns that it undermines the rhythm of a production and can dilute some creative elements.

Jan Rezab said in an article in Forbes last year that his viewing eventually progressed from 1.2 times to two times as fast.

“As you continue to speed watch, higher speeds get easier and easier to comprehend,” he wrote. “I’ve been speed watching for the last 2 years, and I now feel comfortable watching at 2x the normal viewing speed.” He watches some even faster.

Be prepared to jump through a few hoops if you want to speed up your content, though. While some players make it easy to change your playback speed, others make it more difficult. On YouTube, it lives under settings. On Apple’s native podcast app, it’s right next to the play button, and other podcast players have a similar function. Audible, the major audiobook app, offers the option as well.

Netflix, Hulu and HBO, however, don’t offer higher speeds on their players, but there are workarounds available. It’s possible to speed up online video through a Google Chrome extension, and an open-source media player called VLC will play many formats of digital media. Some set-top boxes like TiVo allow high-speed playback of recorded programs.

It’s not clear how widely the practice has been adopted. In an informal poll on Twitter, David Chen, a host and producer of the movie and television podcast “Slashfilmcast,” asked, “Do you ever listen to podcasts or watch TV/films at a faster speed than intended?”

Of 1,505 responses, 79 percent chose the response “No, it’s an abomination,” while 16 percent said they did so for podcasts, and a total of 5 percent said they did so for films, television and podcasts.

On a recent episode of the podcast, Mr. Chen and his co-hosts, Jeff Cannata and Devindra Hardawar, took up the question of speed viewing.

A listener asked, “In this increasingly content-rich, time-poor world, I wonder, how much of a crime against culture I am committing by speeding through these shows?”

The podcast hosts seemed aghast.

“How dare you,” Mr. Cannata, said, adding that the practice “cheapens your entertainment.”

Mr. Hardawar said speed viewing did not allow time to soak in what was happening.

“I feel like you are not even actually watching it,” he said. “You’re consuming it. You’re not actually like absorbing it or letting it work on you in a creative way. So yeah, this is bad. This is bad.”

Speed viewing waters down the emotional impacts of a movie, Peter Markham, senior filmmaker-in-residence at the American Film Institute Conservatory in Los Angeles, said in an interview last week.

“If you were watching a play by Pinter, for example, the pause could carry the greatest meaning,” he said. “I can’t imagine watching a movie at twice the speed.”

Renan L. Borelli, 31, who is director of audience growth and engagement at MTV News and who has a 35-minute commute from Park Slope in Brooklyn to the West Village in Manhattan, is a big fan of podcasts. He listens to as many as three or four a day and subscribes to about 30.

Mr. Borelli estimated he could save about five to 10 minutes per podcast. “Even if it’s a couple of minutes, it’s a help,” he said in an interview, noting that he has “many gigabytes” of podcasts stored on his phone.

Nicholas Quah, who writes Hot Pod, a newsletter about podcasts, said in an email that it was unclear how widespread speed listening was, but that anecdotally, it appeared to be “an established behavior” among high-volume listeners. He said he saw no harm in it.

He wrote, “Speed listening might be more offensive to folks who make highly produced, preciously crafted and sound-rich podcasts (vs. a loose conversational one, like the Slate gabfests), but what we’re actually confronting here is that tension in the relationship between artist and consumer: Which is more important, the artist intent or the consumer’s preference?”

Mr. Chen, of “Slashfilmcast,” said in an email that speed listening was a consumer’s way of saying: “I don’t care how you wanted me to experience this work you’ve created. I just care about the information exchanged.”

Lost are elements of dramatic or comedic timing and intentional silences, he said. “It becomes a fundamentally different experience that disregards what the creator intended” at an accelerated speed, he wrote.

He said the practice was like trying to eat twice as many meals as normal to avoid missing any culinary treats. “Sure, you might actually be consuming more, but you’re probably having a worse, more grotesque experience,” he wrote. “And you’re certainly not doing it in a way that the chef intended.”

i used to own singles and albums, both vinyl and tape, also vhs tapes, but then got married, and as time passes, stuff gets thrown out and never replaced, i did around 12 years ago start an extensive dvd and cd update, but mainly stones and not much else, apart from stones i get most of my music on youtube,

i did buy a new record player last year that converts vinyl to memory stick, but rarely play it, would love to have the complete music collection of old, and new, like vinyl 45,s and 33,s and also cd,s and dvd,s, but i havent really got the space in my house, maybe when i move to a bigger house, got more cupboard space and no kids living with me then i will probably be more motivated to starting a collection again.