Digipaks Are Terrible
- Lukas Kendall
- Mar 16
- 1 min read
I recently ranted about a pet peeve: upside-down CD spines.
Here’s another one: digipaks!
I don’t get it. Jewel boxes are a pain when they break but at least they are replaceable.
I don’t exactly remember the first time I saw a digipak...but how can you not handle one of these things and not feel like just looking or breathing on it—let alone touching it—will permanently damage it?
Why do people use these things?
I am processing Douglass Fake’s collection for sale and of course there are a lot of digipaks, and I’m relieved when they are sealed. Because otherwise, just moving it from a box to my desk to type up could ding the corner or leave a fingerprint who knows what.
I was wondering if these are cheaper to manufacture than jewel boxes but can’t find a conclusive answer. I guess people use them because they look pretty?
I have never produced one of these and I don’t think I ever will.
I agree. Terrible. I've taken to storing them in resealable polypropylene sleeves sized for jewel boxes. It has cut way down on the shelf-wear and when I do access the cd, the sleeve is a bit of a reminder to "handle with care."
There's s special place in hell reserved for the inventor of the digipack. #my2cents
Never liked them as well. I wonder who came up with a Digipack first? We Europeans? Japan? No idea. Glad there aren‘t that many of them.
Digipaks are so much better to manufacture for the environment. But I never liked them and always dissuaded Doug when he wanted to go down that path, since our quantities are relatively small. And now that the majors have largely abandoned CDs, that’s a whole lot fewer jewel cases being manufactured.