ifood for thought...

One of the main ideas Nabeel put forward to do with record collecting, was the notion of the “visual & tactile sensation of artefacts”, and the aesthetic beauty of the record/vinyl. Vinyl record companies put lot of energy & resources into designing the package of a particular record. On the record itself, there was only small area at the centre of the vinyl where the song’s title, the artist’s name, and the record company’s logo could be placed. However, it is interesting to see how advertising has changed and adapted to the music players, through the different stages of their technological evolution.
For instance, after the record, the cassette came out. The cassette was smaller than the vinyl, & but had slightly more area on physical cassette itself, for labelling to be placed. This was followed by the CD which, thanks to technological advancements in the printing industry, allowed an entire face – a single plain surface, much larger than on vinyl cassette- to be slapped with a colourful, iconic sticker. Furthermore, I don’t think much thought was given into the design of the items themselves, I mean if produced a tape that was shaped like eagle- it wouldn’t work in most tape decks; or produced a CD that was remotely thicker, then the appropriate devices would be unable to play them. So companies were very limited as to how they were able of making their cd’s, vinyls, tapes themselves (ignoring their packaging) unique to their potential buyers, and up until this stage, colourful sticker/inks would have had to have sufficed.
However, up until now, one had something to look at to, to hold; something that physically represented what we spent our money on. Mp3’s on the other hand, don’t provide one with such a pleasure, as an mp3 itself is not a tangible item. Perhaps this is why a 2/3’s of internet users don’t feel guilty downloading music through bittorrents, etc. To quote that ad “you wouldn’t go into a store & steel a CD” as is ethically wrong & would require a lack of commonsensically not worth it. I propose that it is the mp3’s absence of mass/lack of object that eludes one into feeling guilty when downloading. Furthermore, mp3player manufacturing companies (or mp3player manufacturing sectors of companies) profit through downloads, as downloaders need the players to hear the music when they are on the run. Also, these companies profit from the demand for visually pleasing products (as with the aesthetical beauty of vinyl a record) by supplying mp3 players that are fashionable/cool. In Apple’s case, every generation of iPod, has subtly evolved (eg: the removal of unnecessary buttons present on the first & second generations). Through their aesthetic appeal, & brilliant marketing campaigns, Apple has seen their mp3 player ranges become mp3 player trend setters when it comes to mp3. They were designed to look good & work efficiently; for visual appeal & practicality. iPods are status symbols- signifers of cool-ness. When they’re switched on, one can view everything from the song’s lyrics to its album artwork- everything. BUT, what happens when the battery dies? Well, one would not be able to take the music out & play it in a friend’s iPod, nor would one be able to insert new batteries- as the effort required to do so makes it simply not worth it.
Mp3 players have become the physical representation of mp3’s, and because the latter do not have a physical shape/existence of their own, that we have seen companies such a Apple produce mp3 players that look good, fulfil the demand for aesthetically cool artefacts.

PS: for those who don’t know how a vinyl is made, follow this link: So to relate this back to the discussion of