Nonetheless - Blu-ray

[leesmapman]

All the best to anyone who finds particular appeal in this release. It makes more sense to me than the Zoetrope record. Obviously it's a release for the audiophiles amongst us, so I may as well put the question our here...does anyone have any thoughts on how this would stack up sonically to the 24-bit FLAC release we'll probably end up having available to us, as well?

Like I said, it probably won't have a brickwalled mastering digital releases tend to have nowadays.

[NotInvisible]

who still owns/buys blu-ray players

People who want the highest possible quality, and access to media not on streaming services. I agree streaming is "good enough" for most people, the same way most people use Spotify rather than pay for the superior audio a CD provides.

[jasonjohn]

If this had more than the one video on it as extras, I’d buy it.

On Jan 17 there was a Pet Text with a photo of Neil at a video shoot. Some were hopeful it was for a second single.

But I guess not, because if there was a second video they'd definitely of put it on here

[MikeyC]

Eagerly awaiting the DAT! x

[trafaelwyr]

Imagine if this album is crap...

that's why I'm holding off on getting the blu-ray.

[trafaelwyr]

but who still owns/buys blu-ray players I guess it's still a thing.

People who still own blu-ray players, like me. Digital streaming media isn't all that, which is why people are now starting to turn back towards physical media like DVDs and blu-rays. Also, not all blu-ray / DVD releases around the world are the same - some have additional supplements / features that other countries don't get or a particular movie doesn't get released due to varying circumstances (copyright, releasing rights, etc).

[Drico One]

Who still owns blu-ray players? Huh? Some of us still own recorders, let alone players.

I've never left physical media. Streaming is convenient - that's it. It's never yours to own, is subject to the whims of prevailing social mores ("whose work should we cancel and delete?"), the availability of licenses, and expires when the sub dies. It's taking "disposable" to its logical conclusion. That's good - there's a need for that - but it's satisfying a different need.

It's a generational thing, but the pleasure of collecting, curating, archiving, and exploring physical media is simply not replicated by streaming. It's a different hobby.

Drico.

[leesmapman]

I've always compared it to TV and radio broadcasts. At the end of the day you want to record the stuff, hence the video and compact cassettes were invented.

[psbfannyc]

Who still owns blu-ray players? Huh? Some of us still own recorders, let alone players.

I've never left physical media. Streaming is convenient - that's it. It's never yours to own, is subject to the whims of prevailing social mores ("whose work should we cancel and delete?"), the availability of licenses, and expires when the sub dies. It's taking "disposable" to its logical conclusion. That's good - there's a need for that - but it's satisfying a different need.

It's a generational thing, but the pleasure of collecting, curating, archiving, and exploring physical media is simply not replicated by streaming. It's a different hobby.

Drico.

Beta vs VHS?

[Gabby]

If you dig a bit there's a stuff about how many old (and even not so old) movies and shows are being lost because of streaming, potentially never to return (perhaps beyond a Wikipedia page about it) simply because there is no physical release of it, and streamers don't support or show it.

Disney+ originally suggested they would not be releasing new content to physical media - that's taken a U turn recently with Loki, and announcements of other video releases of their popular shows in Star Wars, Marvel etc. Disney are the masters of releasing physical media, so if they're back on the bandwagon, there's definitely a market for it.

As someone already said, you wont get all that extra content on a streaming platform - commentaries, bloopers, extra scenes etc etc. Many maybe don't care but the vastness of why having a physical copy is so essential should compel anyone to reconsider their online subscriptions. As Drico said, there's definitely a place for streaming as a go-to for convenient access, but as someone who does both, I can assure you I dig out a DVD/BluRay and pop it on at least a few times a week simply because the streamers don't have what I want to see at that particular moment.

Think also historically how many episodes of Doctor Who just don't exist any more in any physical form (or are in the hands of private collectors who wont release them for the public). The BBC just didn't care back then, but I think time has shown there's a need to archive and protect these things for future generations.

[NotInvisible]

I think the quality issue trumps the others, even if those are important, too. The 4K UHD for The Abyss for example has something like five times the bitrate available on the streaming version, which has a material impact on picture and sound quality. Physical discs are superior to streaming in every way bar cost.

[DJAMIX]

They are trying to squeeze our wallets. I don't like that.

[Kaputnik]

They are trying to squeeze our wallets. I don't like that.

No, they aren't. Their label are trying to make up for the huge drop in sales across the board with physical music, since streaming and cost of living. But they do it in a nice way - you can basically have the full album for free if you subscribe to a streaming service (or literally free if you know where to look) or if you're a collector or want different versions then you can buy them. By nice, I mean there isn't a bonus track exclusive to one of the highest costing formats.

The Nonetheless release is very very tame compared to other releases, which have different tracks on every format, and multiple bundles.

If anyone is squeezing your wallet, it's you, nobody at all is forcing anyone to buy. But there are people who want these releases and are happy and excited by them, so I don't understand why you'd want to stop that.

[DJAMIX]

They are trying to squeeze our wallets. I don't like that.

No, they aren't. Their label are trying to make up for the huge drop in sales across the board with physical music, since streaming and cost of living. But they do it in a nice way - you can basically have the full album for free if you subscribe to a streaming service (or literally free if you know where to look) or if you're a collector or want different versions then you can buy them. By nice, I mean there isn't a bonus track exclusive to one of the highest costing formats.

The Nonetheless release is very very tame compared to other releases, which have different tracks on every format, and multiple bundles.

If anyone is squeezing your wallet, it's you, nobody at all is forcing anyone to buy. But there are people who want these releases and are happy and excited by them, so I don't understand why you'd want to stop that.

1. I think releasing, for example, remixes in different formats instead of the same thing aiming in fans rather the general public would be a better response to the so called drop in sales (and that's why bands do gigs more often). They used to do that (as any other band). But I see thet your concept of "nice" is different than mine (and I'm ok with that).

2. I don't want to stop that. I just don't like it. I don't know why you are so sensible about that. And I'm not squeezing my wallet because I just buy what I want or / and what I can. If you can buy every format of everything, be my guest. Just no need to be rude (unless you work for the label or you are the PSB lawyer lurking through the forum )

Obs: The strategy of remixes is also to link 2 artists, for exemple, if the PSB song is remixed by David Ghetta, Sofi Tucker and Steve Aoki, some of their fans will also listen to or buy the song.

[Kaputnik]

They are trying to squeeze our wallets. I don't like that.

No, they aren't. Their label are trying to make up for the huge drop in sales across the board with physical music, since streaming and cost of living. But they do it in a nice way - you can basically have the full album for free if you subscribe to a streaming service (or literally free if you know where to look) or if you're a collector or want different versions then you can buy them. By nice, I mean there isn't a bonus track exclusive to one of the highest costing formats.

The Nonetheless release is very very tame compared to other releases, which have different tracks on every format, and multiple bundles.

If anyone is squeezing your wallet, it's you, nobody at all is forcing anyone to buy. But there are people who want these releases and are happy and excited by them, so I don't understand why you'd want to stop that.

1. I think releasing, for example, remixes in different formats instead of the same thing aiming in fans rather the general public would be a better response to the so called drop in sales (and that's why bands do gigs more often). They used to do that (as any other band). But I see thet your concept of "nice" is different than mine (and I'm ok with that).

2. I don't want to stop that. I just don't like it. I don't know why you are so sensible about that. And I'm not squeezing my wallet because I just buy what I want or / and what I can. If you can buy every format of everything, be my guest. Just no need to be rude (unless you work for the label or you are the PSB lawyer lurking through the forum )

Obs: The strategy of remixes is also to link 2 artists, for exemple, if the PSB song is remixed by David Ghetta, Sofi Tucker and Steve Aoki, some of their fans will also listen to or buy the song.

Firstly, nothing in my reply was rude.

Secondly, putting unique remixes on different versions would be cruel on those who can't afford to buy them, this is simply the same version on multiple formats meaning anyone not interested only needs to buy it once, if at all.

And if you actually think causal listeners (or general public as you call them) would buy multiple versions, in this encomic climate, because of a remix then you're very wrong. Maybe in the past but not since streaming. It's only fans buying physical, and luckily for fans they can have the one version and have the exact same music as everyone else, or they can buy every format if they wish.

I'd rather their approach than Taylor Swift and having 4 vinyl versions of the same album each with one bonus track. That's squeezing wallets.