Record Albums

In the increasingly-complicated world of digital technology, there is crossover between the functions of different devices. For example, telephones commonly take photos, surf the Internet, and play music. I personally own a computer, and I own CD players, but I do not possess an “iPod”, “smartphone”, or any other smaller device that plays digital music files.

I probably own a couple hundred 33 rpm “record albums”, as well as dozens of “45s” and even a good number of “78s”.

(Perhaps there might already be people reading this that do not realize that these numbers refer to the speed that the record needs to turn to accurately reproduce the recorded sounds. The earliest of these three formats rotated at 78 revolutions per minute, whereas the revolutionary “long-playing” records -- “LPs” -- rotate at 33 revolutions per minute, and the popular “single” records, generally with one song on each side (like the earlier 78s), rotate at 45 revolutions per minute.)

All three of these formats depend on a “needle” following grooves in the surface of the record, and all are subject to scratches and wear. LPs are particularly subject to “warping” -- for the needle to accurately follow the grooves, the record needs to remain relatively flat. Fans of the newer technologies note that CDs and MP3s are dramatically less subject to wear and damage. CDs are easier to carry around than records, and MP3s, being digital files, hardly need to be carried around at all, and can even be transmitted wirelessly. There continues to be debate about the precise audio characteristics of the different formats, with some record purists maintaining that records have a better “sound”, while acknowledging problems with things like wear, scratches, and even dust.

I love record albums. On a superficial level, the fact that record albums are dramatically larger than CDs means that everything associated with their packaging is larger -- especially the photographs or other artwork. Occasionally, record albums were packaged with posters or other extras. CDs still have photographs and other artwork, and are commonly packaged with CD-sized booklets containing additional photos or lyrics or other information, but they are always at least somewhat limited by the relatively small size. There are also less tangible benefits to record albums. I like holding them, and I have a certain enjoyment of the entire process of “playing” a record.

At the same time, I have slowly acquired a few CDs, and a certain appreciation for some of their apparent advantages over records. They certainly seem less fragile and subject to wear, and their size makes them easier to transport. The fact that modern technology has made it possible to duplicate them yourself is also a plus, but there are complicated legal and moral issues here. This brings up the entire issue of cassette tapes, which I have not mentioned.

It was possible for home users to make their own cassettes long before it was possible to make their own CDs or digital media files. For example, I have a much-loved series of cassettes that I recorded off of radio broadcasts. I also have a cassette I purchased from a local band in a third-world country. Cassettes enjoy some of the benefits of CDs, with their small size and relative convenience, and also make it possible for anyone to easily copy a record, CD, or other cassette. They are not packaged with large photographs, artwork, or posters. Unfortunately, cassettes are perhaps the most subject to wear of all the common music formats.

Record albums, pre-recorded (store-bought) cassettes, and pre-recorded (store-bought) CDs all share one profound attribute lacking from more current digital media: They generally contain multiple songs grouped together, in a specific order, sometimes with a subtle, or even obvious, theme that links them together. At the very least, the songs tend to represent a sort of snapshot of what the artists were doing during a given time period.

Yesterday I was listening to one of my records by David Bromberg. I had never HEARD of David Bromberg, until I repeatedly heard ONE of his songs on campus radio while I was in college. I liked that song so well that I eventually purchased the album containing that song. David Bromberg is an amazing musician, capable of playing many instruments and many styles of music, and it turns out that the album contained a wonderful assortment of his music. I later purchased more of his albums. Though I still enjoy that first song, it is not necessarily my favorite song on the album. AND my tastes continue to evolve. There are songs on the album that I do not appreciate much, but I realize that perhaps someday I WILL.

If I was in college today, and heard that song on campus radio, there is a good chance I would purchase just THAT SONG, and nothing more. Since David Bromberg’s music is so varied, if I decided to purchase another David Bromberg song, without hearing it, there is a good chance it would be so different from the initial song that I might decide not to risk my money on any more of his music.

In fact, I do not know how any “modern” college student would be lucky enough to be exposed to the full range of David Bromberg’s music. Perhaps they might hear him in concert -- though I understand he has dramatically cut back on his performance schedule, and of course some day he will cease to perform publicly, as all musicians some day do. Perhaps someone will recommend that they listen to his music -- but that never happened to ME. My entire love of David Bromberg’s music traces back to that one song, which led to the purchase of the album, which led to the purchase of other albums.

I am not qualified to discuss all the subtle benefits of listening to an entire album of music, an album that contains songs you would not necessarily CHOOSE to listen to. As you repeatedly listen to an album, your tastes WILL evolve. Songs that you never noticed, or even songs that you initially disliked, may become your favorites. This is a good thing.

This truly becomes a much larger issue. Someone with their iPod can ask, “Why should I spend even one second of my precious time listening to music that I did not specifically CHOOSE to listen to? Life is too short for that.” I cannot adequately answer that question, but I know that you SHOULD spend time listening to music that you did not specifically choose to listen to, and music that no one else chose for you. I suppose it has to do with the fact that we cannot know what we enjoy before we experience it for the first time -- and even then, we cannot know what we MAY enjoy with repeated experience, or as we ourselves evolve.

Truth is complicated.