The Current State of CD Packaging

[JKL2000]

Not really a dilemma for me, but curious to hear people thoughts/frustrations/dreams on this.

My music collection has sadly been a mess for many years. I never really had any good place to display things, and I had put all my jewel case CDs into Jewel sleeves for storage. Now that digital music makes more sense for me than it has before, that seems like a better move than it did for a while there. But soon(ish) we'll be moving into a new house with more places where I can put in a big bookcase or some racks devoted to music storage/display - possibly even something of a man cave, though it will be in a basement so not ideal. But we'll have a lot of ground floor space so maybe on the ground floor.

Anyway, I've been unboxing some stuff and putting it into some better storage boxes for the move, and just as a chance to organize. I'm realizing how the CDs in the mini-LP format ones don't fit into the storage boxes, and also the smallish box sets where all the CDs are in thin cardboard sleeves, and those are all in a box don't fit into the storage boxes. And some of the digipaks are even too big. I don't mind that much because I'll probably end up with all the boxed sets of any size, and all the digipaks and mini LP ones (I don't really have many mini LP sized ones) in bookcase type shelves deep enough to hold larger box sets, and all the jewel case ones in jewel sleeves, digitized and stored away. So basically I'll be displaying the nice looking stuff only, which is a lot these days with all the deluxe sets, etc.

But it's become quite a hodge podge of different types of packaging hasn't it? I used to have only regular LPs, gatefolds, and a handful of single 45s. Does the current state of CD packaging bother some of you? What's your strategy? I think it's pretty funny that there are still lots of CDs released in jewel cases, as the other day I struggled to open the shrink wrap on one. I think it's good that in a lot of cases they moved away from jewel cases, but do you wish they'd standardized on something? Sorry this post is so disorganized, but it reflects the state of CD packaging!

My Laser's Edge orders used to be packed so neatly, but my last, since it included a big artbook edition and a few digipaks, was weird, with the digipaks (shrinkwrapped) taped to the cardboard around the artbook. Quite a challenge for the vendors these days I guess.

[Facelift]

I don't buy much any more, but the vast majority of what I do comes in standard-sized packaging. I didn't realize that the standard sized packaging was being moved away from.

[bob_32_116]

I don't think it's necessary to have every CD packaged the same way, but I have got to dislike jewel-cases. There is hardly one in my collection that does not have at least a hairline crack somewhere - and it's not from ill-treatment.

I will willingly pay a couple of dollars more for a "digi-pak" over a jewel-case. Whenever I look at a digi-pak I am impressed by how much more it looks like a quality product than if it was in one of those cheap looking plastic cases.

[AdventAlan]

Greetings,

My biggest complaint is actually the recent proliferation of Eco-Wallets. I don't mind the heavy-duty ones that come with protective (ideally soft) inner sleeves like most from Japan, but I don't think the typical US-manufactured version protects the CD very well--and, being an obsessive collector, I don't like having to slide the disc in and out directly against cardboard. (It's not the most abrasive surface, of course, but not what I would consider ideal as well.) They are both cheap and ecologically friendly, of course, but I explicitly wanted to upgrade the new Advent CD (Silent Sentinel) to a Digipak to have a nicer, stronger, and more protective cover. Now that I've personally shipped out hundreds of these Digipak-enclosed titles, I've also been happy by the fact that the cardboard exterior of the Digipak seems to do a good job protecting the enclosed plastic CD tray from getting cracked in shipping (and we had quite a few issues with cracked jewel cases for our previous release, even though I always packed them carefully for shipping). Digipak covers are also a bit lighter in weight than jewel cases, which is at least a minor benefit in this age of skyrocketing shipping costs (at least here in the USA).

Cheers,


Alan

[rcarlberg]

Back in the LP days we valued the album covers for their artwork. It puzzles me therefore why so many CD collectors have decided to discard the covers and store just the discs, or even worse, discard the discs too and store just the music files.

I love living in the basement. It gave me room to set up a listening room, and it gave me room to set up a library room for all my CDs and LPs. I did my own custom built-in walnut shelves, which are large enough to accommodate almost every Digipak or boxed set I have. Exceptions are the "long-boxes" like the John Oswald box, the Randy Newman box, the Doo-Wop box, the early surf music box. Those have to go on top of the other CDs, in the approximate alphabetic location.

I like innovative packaging except when it's fragile and cannot be repaired. Then it sucks.

[JKL2000]

I don't think it's necessary to have every CD packaged the same way, but I have got to dislike jewel-cases. There is hardly one in my collection that does not have at least a hairline crack somewhere - and it's not from ill-treatment.

I will willingly pay a couple of dollars more for a "digi-pak" over a jewel-case. Whenever I look at a digi-pak I am impressed by how much more it looks like a quality product than if it was in one of those cheap looking plastic cases.

I agree - I have so many broken jewel cases, with missing teeth!

Back in the LP days we valued the album covers for their artwork. It puzzles me therefore why so many CD collectors have decided to discard the covers and store just the discs, or even worse, discard the discs too and store just the music files.

I love living in the basement. It gave me room to set up a listening room, and it gave me room to set up a library room for all my CDs and LPs.

I like innovative packaging except when it's fragile and cannot be repaired. Then it sucks.

Oh, I didn't discard any of the packaging for my CDs - that's the idea with the jewel sleeve- it holds the CD, booklet, and tray liner.

About the basement, the problem is dampness - our current and future basement are both below ground, so damp. I do run a dehumidifier but that's not perfect.

Alan, when I go downstairs, I'll take a moment to admire the Advent packaging!
Thanks for putting so much thought into it.

[AdventAlan]

Alan, when I go downstairs, I'll take a moment to admire the Advent packaging!
Thanks for putting so much thought into it.

Thanks a lot for the kind feedback, Jed. Of course, Michael Phipps deserves most of the credit for his excellent cover painting as well.

All the best,


Alan

[Jay.Dee]

Back in the LP days we valued the album covers for their artwork. It puzzles me therefore why so many CD collectors have decided to discard the covers and store just the discs, or even worse, discard the discs too and store just the music files.

These days there are less and less people actually storing music files; they access and organize their bookmarked music on-line through streaming and cloud applications.

First people dumped any form of art from their living spaces, then books, then music, and now I am looking forward to seeing them dump their bodies.

A brain in the jar will suffice, everything they need will be instantly delivered by wires and pipes. Why bother with something such clumsy and unwieldy as body? Convenience above all.

[rcarlberg]

A brain in the jar will suffice, everything they need will be instantly delivered by wires and pipes. Why bother with something such clumsy and unwieldy as body? Convenience above all.

THE JAR IS UNDER THE BED.

[Scott Bails]

I like digipaks, but the only issue there is when you store them on a shelf, like a book, I find that the top of the spine gets abused.

[spellbound]

I used to repackage odd size CD cases into standard dimension jewel cases, because most of my CD storage shelves had limited vertical space. But over the years I have acquired more CD shelving, some of which is more generous vertically, and some of which have adjustable shelves. Coupled with a greater appreciation for the original packaging, I now find I can house most CDs packaged as purchased, and sorted alphabetically. Occasionally one won't fit and I store it elsewhere. Most are still in full view on the shelves, with the exception of a few 12" X 12" box sets. Digipacks are great, unless the plastic spindle breaks. Eco-wallets can be defeated (as far as CD care is concerned) by buying a box of those paper/cellophane CD sleeves, and putting the CD in a sleeve so that it doesn't directly contact the cardboard. Often, this requires trimming the flap off the sleeve. Sometimes even more drastic measures are required. But I like a challenge and refuse to be defeated by designers of the grand parade of lifeless CD packaging.

[interbellum]

Well crafted digipaks are fine for me. What I hate are those cheap covers with a very small back on which the name of the band and title of the album are hardly visibible. Sometimes there's not even a back! When you store those CD's in a shelve you'll have the chance never to find it again if you don't put it in the right place. Covers from Abstract Logic have this problem. I can't imagine this kind of cover-policy will make those who doubt wether to buy the CD or download the music for free will choose for the CD.

When it comes to sizes: a lot of those Japanese mini-LP covers are too high for my storage-system.

[rcarlberg]

Basements can be sealed from dampness these days. Highly recommend it. Nothing worse than moldy albums.

[Hobo Chang Ba]

Jewel cases all the way for me. Digipaks are too fragile and can't be replaced. They also don't store as nicely (at least with my terrible haphazard storing system).

Worst is definitely the mini-lp/cardboard foldover/cardstock gatefold/etc sleeves that have no protection for the disc (admittedly, sometimes they have a paper/plastic sleeve for the disc). Thankfully, the damage has been minimal for me, but I can't imagine a boatload of scratches on the disc is a good thing.

[spacefreak]

Worst is definitely the mini-lp/cardboard foldover/cardstock gatefold/etc sleeves that have no protection for the disc ... Thankfully, the damage has been minimal for me, but I can't imagine a boatload of scratches on the disc is a good thing.

I always use CD plastic sleeves, to protect the sleeveless ones (eco-wallets, miniLP-sized etc).

https://www.dustygroove.com/item/487047

[Hobo Chang Ba]

I always use CD plastic sleeves, to protect the sleeveless ones (eco-wallets, miniLP-sized etc).

https://www.dustygroove.com/item/487047

Better than nothing for sure, but many times the disc already has scratches on it upon arrival. Thanks for the tip though, I might invest in these.

[progholio]

Last year i repackaged all of my cd's from plastic jewel cases to these -

https://www.bagsunlimited.com/p-3319...yethylene.aspx

Takes up a fraction of the space and does a pretty nice job of containing the disc and j-cards. I have everything alphabetized and the kept the digipacks and use those as reference points since the print is on the binding, works great. Ended up donating the empty cases to a local used record store who in turn gave me some discount vouchers, hell, i was thrilled to have them outta the house and not in the landfill.

[Supersonic Scientist]

Last year i repackaged all of my cd's from plastic jewel cases to these -

https://www.bagsunlimited.com/p-3319...yethylene.aspx

Wow yeah, I like this idea...I've been wanting to ditch the jewel cases for quite some time now but couldn't come up with a decent answer.

Thanks...

[cannygoodlike]

Wow yeah, I like this idea...I've been wanting to ditch the jewel cases for quite some time now but couldn't come up with a decent answer.

Thanks...

I've used something similar. I got mine from a place called The Jazz Loft, which doesn't seem to exist any more, but the same sleeves look as though they are available from here: http://shop.spacesavingsleeves.com/

What I like about them is that you can keep all of the essential bits of packaging from a jewel case but the space needed is a fraction of the original case. The main downside is that the spine is hard to read. In practice I find that is not a problem as my collection is digitised to FLAC and that is my main means of playing it; the CDs are mainly the backup these days. Also, I have enough CDs scattered amongst the shelves that are in digipack format, boxes, etc., and which are readable, that it is pretty easy to find stuff, based on an alphabetical ordering. (Incidentally, storing my CDs - and my LPs before them - alphabetically has always been completely natural to me. How would I find them otherwise? But it doesn't seem to be the norm in the general population based on many conversations I have had which have left me feeling like some sort of anal retentive/OCD nerd.)

[rcarlberg]

(Incidentally, storing my CDs - and my LPs before them - alphabetically has always been completely natural to me. How would I find them otherwise? But it doesn't seem to be the norm in the general population based on many conversations I have had which have left me feeling like some sort of anal retentive/OCD nerd.)

People with a hundred or two items in their collection can afford to be a bit more flexible.

[Rarebird]

People with a hundred or two items in their collection can afford to be a bit more flexible.

My dad has his CD's sorted on label.

I don't think it will work for me, considering lots of stuff I own is on different labels.

[Halmyre]

I've used something similar. I got mine from a place called The Jazz Loft, which doesn't seem to exist any more, but the same sleeves look as though they are available from here: http://shop.spacesavingsleeves.com/

What I like about them is that you can keep all of the essential bits of packaging from a jewel case but the space needed is a fraction of the original case. The main downside is that the spine is hard to read. In practice I find that is not a problem as my collection is digitised to FLAC and that is my main means of playing it; the CDs are mainly the backup these days. Also, I have enough CDs scattered amongst the shelves that are in digipack format, boxes, etc., and which are readable, that it is pretty easy to find stuff, based on an alphabetical ordering. (Incidentally, storing my CDs - and my LPs before them - alphabetically has always been completely natural to me. How would I find them otherwise? But it doesn't seem to be the norm in the general population based on many conversations I have had which have left me feeling like some sort of anal retentive/OCD nerd.)

Other than (maybe) by year, I can't think of any other way of arranging them. Average track length? Average BPM? Cover artist?

[bob_32_116]

Other than (maybe) by year, I can't think of any other way of arranging them. Average track length? Average BPM? Cover artist?

I started a whole thread about this some time ago. Deciding to arrange them alphabetically is only the start. Does the definite article get ignored, or do The Beatles get filed under 'T' instead of 'B'? Artist's surname, or complete artist name? If using surname, what about bands like Jethro Tull, which although derived from the name of an actual historical figure, is just a band name? What about soundtracks? Does the Blade Runner soundtrack go under 'B', or under 'V' for Vangelis? Classical works filed by composer, or performer? And so on. The more you look, the more complications you find.

[Brad to the Bone]

Other than (maybe) by year, I can't think of any other way of arranging them. Average track length? Average BPM? Cover artist?

Sort them by bar code, of course!

[rcarlberg]

Other than (maybe) by year, I can't think of any other way of arranging them. Average track length? Average BPM? Cover artist?

Archie Patterson (who some of you may know) sorted by the number of releases: bands with four albums, bands with five albums, bands with only a single release. Rob, the guy in the movie High Fidelity, filed by date of purchase.

Regarding what to file by, alphabetically, the key is to file by whatever you"ll remember. Therefore for me soundtracks go under the movie name (not the composer) while the Beatles Concerto goes under B, not Jeremy Rifkin.

[Edit - see, I got the composer wrong!]