>>63790637
Listening to that album is no different than having feces slam into your ear drums at such an incredible speed that you suffer permanent hearing loss.

Please. Anyone out there? Reply...

>>63790899
Holy kek

MY NAME IS BLURRYFACE

>>63790905
What is there to discuss? Go kill yourself, shithead.

>>63790637
If it weren't for durability I'd definitely go digipack, but they get fucked up far too easily

>>63790637
I understand the appeal of jewel cases, but I personally prefer digipak because I make it a point to treat my cd packages with care, so damage is a minor concern of mine. Additionally, a greater degree of customized packaging options is available. [windows in the box, etc] Finally, I simply prefer the vibrant colors of the artwork printed directly on the viewing surface, instead of having a shiny plastic window over it. Plus it gets rid of that annoying window near the spine.

Digipak has always felt more "personal" to me, so probably them. CDs are a bad meme anyway, it might as well not be a physical format if it just stores digital files.

>>63790982
>>63790992
Definitely this
Jewel cases ALWAYS break for me anyway

>>63790637
Haha jewel case all the way man. While I admit pic you provided the digipack looks cooler you're sacrificing durability for aesthetics so yeah I'd rather have a god tier plastic encasing around the valuable notes and CD desu

>>63790940
>>63790637
Literally, insecure, the band.

>>63790999
I only buy analog physical copies, cassettes, vinyls, wax cylinders, the list goes on.

>>63790637
i like digipacks

why do i want some indestructible case? i feel like my digipacks will age well. everything is impermanent, so why not observe the process?

>>63792800
>everything is impermanent

True, this is why shortly after buying a cd or record I throw it in the garbage.

>feat Ride
I didn't hear Stefan?

digipaks look nicer, but they can get damaged whereas with jewel cases it's easy to replace the case

Jewel cases mainly because they close.