Death of the iPod (Everyone's buying vinyl)

[fasstrack]

Why are people having so much trouble getting my simple point? All I mean to say is if people aren't talking live to other people that's not interacting to me. Yes, listening to the same podcast puts people in a group of sorts. Until they meet and talk about it over a beer or something that's not a real 'community' to me.

No thanks on the boom boxes. There's a guy in my 'hood who rides through the streets on a bike blasting Latin music. Amusing up to a point, but...  

 

[JSngry]

God, I'd hate to live in a town where you couldn't walk down the street without everybody endlessly gabbing, especially if they feel a need to include me because I look disengaged or something. I have a podcast to listen to, dammit.

[paul secor]

I get your point, Joel. Lotsa folks with iPods, phones, etc. walking around like zombies oblivious to everything and everyone around them. Annoys me too.

And there are always going to be folks here who will argue about anything. Some of them must not have much else to do.

[rostasi]

This iPod has been sitting here on my desk for a very long time without use.
Walks and bike rides are opportunities to discover new combinations of sound
and so I don't take any music (tho I may, at times, take the "opposite": a recorder). 
Driving inside the US, I'll play discs, but for overseas travel, I stopped taking any music
at all beginning at least 10 years ago because I never felt the need to listen to anything
other than my varied surroundings, so weeks can go by without intended recorded music. 
There's a set of earbuds around here somewhere, but they're used occasionally for things other than listening.

[fasstrack]

4 hours ago, paul secor said:

  Some of them must not have much else to do.

[Scott Dolan]

On August 25, 2016 at 10:17 AM, fasstrack said:

Why are people having so much trouble getting my simple point? All I mean to say is if people aren't talking live to other people that's not interacting to me. Yes, listening to the same podcast puts people in a group of sorts. Until they meet and talk about it over a beer or something that's not a real 'community' to me.

No thanks on the boom boxes. There's a guy in my 'hood who rides through the streets on a bike blasting Latin music. Amusing up to a point, but...  

 

I completely understand your point, which I already agreed with to a certain point. I was just offering some additional food for thought. 

But, I also have to ask, how much interacting was going on before the portable music player? I rode subways, buses, walked around many towns well before the iPod was a gleam in Steve Jobs' eye. People seemed to pretty much stay to themselves then, as well. Whether they were reading, (or later) working on a laptop, talking on a cell phone, or simply lost in their own thoughts. 

Edited August 26, 2016 by Scott Dolan

[fasstrack]

5 hours ago, Scott Dolan said:

 But, I also have to ask, how much interacting was going on before the portable music player? I rode subways, buses, walked around many towns well before the iPod was a gleam in Steve Jobs' eye. People seemed to pretty much stay to themselves then, as well. Whether they were reading, (or later) working on a laptop, talking on a cell phone, or simply lost in their own thoughts. 

That's the modern world. I guess I have to accept it, and adjust. There are great things about it, too. (The technology, not the disconnections).

I'm kind of an idealist, and a bit old-school in some ways...

[Scott Dolan]

Oh, I hear you. My wife has always said of me, "you've never met a stranger". And she's right, I'll strike up a conversation with anyone. But, I also get that people live incredibly busy lives these days, and sometimes in order for them to accomplish other things (i.e. family time) they have to squeeze in things like music or podcasts on the fly. I can dig that. I don't think, in most cases, they're intentionally shutting out the world around them, I just think they're maximizing their time. 

[JSngry]

And in so many places there is no such thing as silence (or even quiet), so why not exert some choice over what noise you get bombarded with? Granted, that runs the risk of turning into a myopia of environmental entitlement but life is not without risk.

[A Lark Ascending]

2 hours ago, JSngry said:

And in so many places there is no such thing as silence (or even quiet), so why not exert some choice over what noise you get bombarded with? Granted, that runs the risk of turning into a myopia of environmental entitlement but life is not without risk.

Very true. When I'm in a town for a concert and want a pub or coffee shop to sit in between gigs, finding one without background music is very difficult. The iPod can (up to a point) shut that out.

I suspect most of those people walking round with their earbuds in are perfectly adept at taking them out at the appropriate time. We probably all look a bit like sheep/zombies in the eyes of others (speaking as someone who always wears t-shirt/jeans/trainers [these days]).  

[fasstrack]

16 hours ago, Scott Dolan said:

  But, I also get that people live incredibly busy lives these days, and sometimes in order for them to accomplish other things (i.e. family time) they have to squeeze in things like music or podcasts on the fly. 

I also find it rather sad that people can't (or won't) make an appropriate amount of time to properly take in these things. Being busy is a poor excuse for short-shrifting so many important parts of life. Sigh...

[A Lark Ascending]

All very Bloomsbury Group. I think you'll find that 'people' make plenty of time for what they consider the 'important parts of life'.

Edited August 28, 2016 by A Lark Ascending

[Scott Dolan]

I agree. What's "important parts of life" is subjective, and only the individual can decide what those things are. They can't be dictated by others. That's just a wee bit presumptuous. 

[fasstrack]

On 28/08/2016 at 10:31 PM, A Lark Ascending said:

All very Bloomsbury Group.  

? sorry, that reference sailed over my head...

9 hours ago, Scott Dolan said:

I agree. What's "important parts of life" is subjective, and only the individual can decide what those things are. They can't be dictated by others. That's just a wee bit presumptuous. 

Maybe I should have said 'important to me'... 

Edited August 29, 2016 by fasstrack

[A Lark Ascending]

2 hours ago, fasstrack said:

? sorry, that reference sailed over my head...

Early 20thC aristocratic 'art for art's sake' crowd (Virginia Woolf etc) who looked down their noses at the 'common herd' for lacking their cultural taste and discrimination. They assumed the 'masses' had no independence of thought but merely copied others. They'd be apoplectic if they could see the world of iPods and mobile phones. 

Edited August 29, 2016 by A Lark Ascending

[fasstrack]

7 hours ago, A Lark Ascending said:

Early 20thC aristocratic 'art for art's sake' crowd (Virginia Woolf etc) who looked down their noses at the 'common herd' for lacking their cultural taste and discrimination. They assumed the 'masses' had no independence of thought but merely copied others. They'd be apoplectic if they could see the world of iPods and mobile phones. 

I don't fancy elitists. Not where I'm coming from at all. My beef is wholly with the 'disconnectedness'...

[Scott Dolan]

Elitist would be too strong a word for you, IMO. But, idealist certainly seems to fit. I fully sympathize with the frustration you've noted, but I think there may be a bit of Golden Age Fallacy in your thinking. 

[fasstrack]

4 hours ago, Scott Dolan said:

Elitist would be too strong a word for you, IMO. But, idealist certainly seems to fit... but I think there may be a bit of Golden Age Fallacy in your thinking. 

Yes, idealist for sure.

Maybe I am a bit retro in some ways...

[ArtSalt]

Elitist, hell yes! All art is elitist. Who wants to be part of the herd?

[Scott Dolan]

I think you might want to double check the definition of elitist there, Art.

[fasstrack]

4 hours ago, ArtSalt said:

  Who wants to be part of the herd?

Woody's band? 

[A Lark Ascending]

Wouldn't one simply DIE without 'Art'!

[Scott Dolan]

Oh my! The sounds serious...

[fasstrack]

7 hours ago, A Lark Ascending said:

Wouldn't one simply DIE without 'Art'!

I might. But then if it was never here I wouldn't know to miss it...

[JSngry]

We'd invent it even if it didn't exist.

Or more to the point, I definitely believe in "art", it's "Artists" that I need some convincing about. Just because art is damn near everywhere does not mean that Artists are. Art is an outcome, a result.