Does the digital revolution drive music obsession?

😍

Honestly, I never really got into them growing up because I didn't have anything to play them on. The one radio station that actually played them was something I had to share with everyone else in the house, so it was a constant struggle.

Even if I managed to borrow a Discman once in a while, trying to track down burned CDs just wasn't cutting it. My ears were craving something much deeper than that...

Later on, things got easier when high-speed internet rolled in and I could download those first albums via 56k modem before WinMX even existed. I remember the first real hardcore band from NYC I found—that wasn't just some macho, garbage trash like the stuff I used to pick up—was Indecision's *Release the Cure*... man, I never got over that. It was pure euphoria. I was about 16 or 17, driving around, blasting them, and it felt like my soul finally found the peace I’d been searching for. You know that feeling when you discover a band all on your own? (Okay, truth be told, I heard about them through a guy at a local skate shop in LA who was handing out free flyers, but still). That's where it all started for me...

Anyway, don't get mad at me for such a random, rambling post, but man, I just had to get this off my chest...

Brenda Scott14 said:@ Spike Lee - I suspect it might be more about the fact that you were just a kid back then. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but I really feel like the way you connect with music during your teenage years is just fundamentally different from how you view it later in life. You tend to mythologize it so much more, and it becomes such a huge part of building who you are.

Well,
honestly, even though I occasionally get lost in the shuffle or miss those beautiful little details because there's just so much out there, I actually find myself quite excited by this whole digital revolution...

...but what I truly, deeply miss is that classic ritual of the B-side on a vinyl record. There’s just something special about that moment when a single album splits in two, and you hit that first track on the flip side 🙂

I suppose I should also point out that I don't really feel the need to turn on the radio anymore just to stumble upon something decent. If anything, two things have shifted since those days when I’d spend hours every single day tuned into the airwaves: the commercials have become significantly more aggressive—borderline obnoxious, really—and my own taste has evolved into something much more nuanced than what you typically hear during the daytime or evening slots.

Such a great topic! Honestly, I have a love-hate relationship with this whole revolution. What kills me is that I’m just a total nerd about it. An obsessive nerd who feels like he absolutely *has* to download and listen to everything—live experimental drone bands, death metal from Kenya, cheesy pop hits, lo-fi punk albums, you name it. A friend told me maybe we don't need to listen to everything, we just need to own it all. The tragic part is that it doesn't even give me much satisfaction anymore, but hey, that's just how I am. Once I get hooked on something, there's no turning back. Thank God I don't drink or do drugs, though I do wish my mom hadn't given me that chocolate once 😢

Anyway, I really miss the old days of dubbing tapes on that double-deck player I bought with money from my job at the local fish cannery (my family didn't care about music, so we didn't even own a record player). I miss being able to listen to every single album—and I mean *every* single one—at least ten times over. I miss when people actually lent you music. Now, when a friend recommends something, I just say, "Sure, I'll download it," while rolling my eyes because I have 25 gigs of music on my hard drive that I haven't even touched yet... Basically, I'm starting to understand why Matt decided to split up his vinyl collection. To be honest, I wouldn't share my CDs; I'd rather just right-click a folder and hit delete. But I can't bring myself to do it. Dammit.

On the flip side, I love that there is so much out there to discover. You can explore everything on your own without anyone forcing their taste on you (there was a phase where I only listened to bands with ridiculous names), and you have total freedom. It's not like I practice that much lately since I don't have as much time for music anymore, which makes me feel pretty pathetic. Now you guys have me feeling depressed. This thread is wrecking me.

Arthur Barnes said:As soon as supply spikes, individual value just evaporates...

Peasant logic: All music in the world is worth exactly one...

If there’s only one band, then their value is 1/1... which just equals 1.

If there are 1,000 bands out there, each one is worth exactly 1/1000th...

It’s a bit of a caricature, sure, but you get the point...

I couldn't agree more. Scarcity breeds appreciation; when something is hard to come by, you value it infinitely more once it’s finally in your hands. Back when I could only afford one single cassette, that one tape felt just as precious as fifty CDs do today now that I actually have the disposable income to buy them. It's a proven fact... I think I actually picked up about 50 CDs last month alone... 😳On one hand, it’s a bit depressing realizing I don't find nearly as much joy in individual possessions as I used to. On the other hand, there's a certain relief in knowing for a fact that chasing a massive paycheck won't actually make my life better—having mountains of stuff doesn't equate to happiness... At the end of the day, all a person really needs is a good woman, solid friends, a drink, and the first of the exploding hearts... 🙂

Brenda Scott14 said:I was thinking about much more trivial teenage identity building. You know, I'm 15, my backpack has my favorite band's name on it, my t-shirt features that same band, I've got a patch for them too, and I am totally THAT 🙂 and that's the most important thing you need to know about me 🙂

If a backpack is allowed to say THE RAMONES, then I haven't outgrown that developmental stage yet 😳

Nicholas Perez33 said:...but what I actually miss is the concept of the B-side (on an LP). There’s just something about that moment when a single unit splits into two, specifically in the track that opens up the flip side 🙂

Ever tried listening to "Combat Rock" without using the actual record? The tracklist order goes 6. Straight to Hell, 7. OVERPOWERED BY FUNK 🙂

Arthur Barnes said:Basically, when there's more of something, the individual value drops.

Using some backyard logic here: All the music in the world equals 1.

If there’s only one band out there, they're worth 1/1 = 1.

If there are 1,000 bands, each one is only worth 1/1000.

It’s a massive exaggeration, obviously, but you get the gist. If I heard X today, I’d think, "Hey, this is good," and then I’d move on to a thousand other things because I have options. Back when I first heard X, I listened to it exclusively because I didn't have a choice—that made it feel "more valuable." Plus, I was just a kid; back then, a scoop of ice cream felt like the greatest peak of human existence.

I’d argue you’ve actually nailed the current reality. To get the same musical satisfaction you used to get from, say, 100 bands, you now need to sift through 1,000. 😁

By the way, my take is that this surge in accessibility is a net positive, mostly. But there’s a catch: you end up spending way more time just hunting for music that actually hits the spot compared to back in the day. It's all because we're drowning in information now. At the end of the day, it feels like trying to find 1,000 needles in 1,000 different haystacks. 😁

Kevin Chavez3 said:I'm totally with you on this. I guess when something is scarce—when it’s actually a struggle to get your hands on—you end up valuing it way more once you finally own it. Back when I could barely afford one single cassette, that one tape felt just as precious as fifty CDs would today in an era where I can easily swing fifty discs 😳.

For me, I value that IBM record you guys gave me for my birthday more than the Racer x I could just order whenever I wanted—mostly because the IBM LP is such a pain to find. Then again, the music on the Racer x is better. It's apples and oranges, I suppose. 🤷

Kyle Wilson74 said:Basically, I realized I’ve spent this year cycling through about thirty albums released back in 2008. Some even before they officially dropped—just like all of you. It’s actually a bit depressing. I find myself leaning toward judging an entire record based on just two or three tracks; after all, who has the bandwidth to listen to everything when there's still so much undiscovered gold out there? And who can actually remember every significant layer or catch every tiny detail?

You know, I’ve been thinking about this—the era of cassettes and early CDs was great, sure, but honestly? I prefer things now. Throughout high school, I pretty much listened to whatever my social circle forced on me because I didn't have any other options. No satellite radio, and don't even get me started on what they played on MTV... My friends were all into mainstream pop, so that was my only lane. Ever since the internet made everything accessible, I’ve discovered a million incredible bands that most people haven't even heard of, let alone known exist. Nowadays, when I mention to someone who isn't into metal that I went to a Nightwish concert, they look at me like I'm speaking a foreign language😢 and admit they wouldn't even know who that is if it weren't for the web. As far as I'm concerned: long live accessibility, long live the internet.👍

We can't overlook the massive influence MTV had on the whole landscape... and honestly, everything that paved the way before it too. I’m talking about those late-night radio shows on stations like KROQ or whatever else our parents used to tune into back in the day. There was a time when having MTV or a top-tier radio station meant something—they were the gold standard for quality. You didn't just listen because there was nothing else on; you listened because what they played actually mattered. It felt like there was less music being pumped out, which meant there was significantly less garbage.
Nowadays, more music basically equals more trash. To be honest, it takes a hell of a lot more willpower and effort to dig through the noise to extract something genuinely good. That’s why I believe the digital revolution is directly linked to this obsessive way people consume music; it’s practically the only way for someone who truly cares about the art to find what resonates with their specific taste and helps them grow musically.
The real question is: at what point does this hunt—this obsession with discovery—stop being a tool and start becoming the sole purpose? Since it’s entirely up to the individual, I’d venture to say that once that happens, it isn't even about listening to music anymore.

Lisa Flores74 said:Back then, MTV was actually the gold standard. You didn't just tune in because there was nothing else on; you tuned in because the stuff playing was actually good—most of the time, anyway. It feels like there was less music back then, which meant there was significantly less garbage...

Exactly. Back in the day, everything from Michael Jackson to Prince was absolute perfection...🙏 🙏 🙏

Lisa Flores74 said:Nowadays, more music just means more garbage... you have to work way harder to actually dig up anything worth listening to.

I don't really see it that way—actually, I think it's the opposite. There's plenty of great bands out there, even if they're hard to find.
Most of my favorites were mostly 80s rock acts, but I'm honestly glad I live in the States now, just because there's so much variety and everything is so easy to access.

Plus, you can always watch old legends reunite and see how they still hold it together despite the arthritis.

Where on earth do you even find them? 🤣
I’m not saying there wasn't any garbage back then, but... in most cases, the acts at the top of the charts actually had a reason to be there. Nowadays, it feels like all kinds of mediocre stuff just sails right through. 🤷

@gentlepuma20/">@@gentlepuma20: I agree that there are tons of great bands out there today, but for the average listener—you know, the ones who don't go out of their way to hunt down the good stuff—most of them will stay completely unknown. That's really all I meant: mainstream popularity hasn't been a measure of quality for a long time now.

Kevin Chavez3 said:I'm totally with you on this. The rarer something is, the harder it is to get your hands on, the more you're going to obsess over it once you finally own it. Back when I only had enough cash for a single cassette, that one tape felt just as massive as fifty CDs would feel today in an era where I can afford a whole stack of them (true story, pretty sure I actually dropped money on 50 CDs last month 😳). On one hand, it sucks that I don't get that same rush from individual items anymore, but on the other, it’s kind of a relief knowing I don't need to make a fortune to be happy. Having "mountains of stuff" doesn't change anything... honestly, all you really need in life is women, friends, booze, and the first record by Exploding Hearts 🙂

Picture this: you have this holy grail album called Peter. You managed to track down Peter because eight different cousins from Germany somehow stumbled upon it via some guy dating your cousin's friend's sister from Australia, and after eight years of hunting, it finally lands in your lap because you heard gentlepuma20 mention it was good—and she apparently heard it once on a train ride from Chicago to New York through some cool guy's Walkman, assuming such a guy even exists.

Peter has 12 tracks, runs for 56 minutes, and it's just pure killer stuff from start to finish. That's it. Every riff hits, every drum beat makes you bounce, the lyrics rearrange your entire worldview, and the bass just hits you right in the gut. Cool.

Let's take it a step further.

Say, gentlepuma20 tells you Peter is great, so you just grab it off a torrent site. You download it. It’s the exact same Peter—same 12 tracks, same 56 minutes of madness, same riffs, same drums... and you're trying to tell me that album wouldn't be just as incredible as if you'd hunted it down on a cassette back in 1972 the way I described? Because in this second scenario, you were downloading four other albums at the same time—one was trash, one was malware, one was mediocre, and the fourth was something you already owned but the disc got scratched?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about the sentimental value of a physical object—like, you went through hell to find a CD or some girl gave it to you after your first time, and now you're emotionally bonded to that specific piece of plastic, so if it breaks, you lose your mind.
I'm talking about how you value the music itself.

It feels like some people think an album is better just because it was a struggle to find or because they're the only ones who have it. Like, if everyone has it and you grabbed it in two clicks, suddenly it's not as good, or at least not *that* good.

To me, that's just nonsense that stops you from fully vibing with the music—or whatever else. What does the delivery method have to do with anything? Does it matter if you have 25GB of other music sitting next to Peter if Peter hits every single one of your chakras and fixes your soul like nothing else ever could?

I guess what I’m trying to say is... the difference lies in how often I'd actually listen to Peter. Back then, I would have played his stuff maybe 324,329 times because he was pretty much all I had... but now? Even if Peter's music is still incredible, I wouldn't be spinning it nearly as much. I've got like a hundred other albums on my list that I’m dying to get through because they seem amazing... so it doesn't mean his work has lost its value or that it's a worse album, per se... it just means I don't value it quite the same way anymore. Which I think was actually the whole point of the discussion in 🤷

First off, let's get one thing straight: what actually determines how much something is valued? Is it just the number of streams? I really hope that's not the case... 🤷

Lawrence Torres37 said:but honestly, I think the real kicker is just how much I'd end up listening to Peter if he was the only game in town. I'd be spinning his stuff 324,329,234 times because there'd be nothing else. Now? Peter’s still killer, but I'm not gonna be stuck on him constantly because I've got like 100 other albums on my list that I think are absolute gems. It doesn't mean the music loses its value or that the album sucks; it just means I don't value it quite as intensely when I've got options. Pretty sure that was kind of the point of this whole thread anyway. 🤷

So you're saying some albums only seem like masterpieces because you had zero other options? 😢

Lawrence Torres37 said:I would argue that the fundamental difference lies in what one would actually end up listening to. If I only had Perica’s music available to me, I would have listened to it millions of times simply because there were no other options. Now, while Perica remains just as incredible as ever, I find myself spinning his records far less frequently because I have a backlog of a hundred other albums I am eager to experience, all of which I believe are fantastic. This doesn't imply that the album has lost its value or that its quality has diminished; rather, it means my appreciation for it is distributed differently. Isn't that precisely what this entire discussion was intended to address? 🤷

Oh, please. Is it really too much to ask that you actually encounter an album worth listening to three million times in a single day? 🤷