I'll literally click on the playlist I'm listening to right now and start listing albums that don't appear available physically on Amazon.
(1) Til The End - MitiS
(2) Dear Me, - Borgeous
(3) Ultraviolet - 3LAU
(4) Mau5ville Level 1 - Deadmau5
(5) Sleeping With Roses - Chelsea Cutler
I could go on, because I literally didn't skip a single song. I started at the top and went down. On this playlist of 300 songs, I would guess that fewer than 20 have physical albums widely available. In some cases, the artist will sell one on their website (ironically LPs are even more popular nowadays).
And why should they? CDs suck. But they do two things really well: they have clear ownership, and they're pretty close to a master recording. Digital does not have to remove these advantages; we can improve instead of regress. Products like Bandcamp do an excellent job of replicating this experience digitally, but few artists distribute on there, because consumers-at-large demand music on Spotify/iTunes/GPM/etc. Tidal also does a really good job of getting masters, but doesn't have the "you own it" advantage.
In other words, consumers have ruined music for both the artists and audiophiles by changing the rules of the game and forcing the markets to adapt in a way that isn't backward compatible with how things have worked. Artists make shit money on most streaming services, and people who actually care about the audio quality also get shafted.
Yeah, but what I was trying to say is that even before you couldn't get every song or album on CD, some were distributed only on tape, some only on vinyl, if you could even get a CD player or buy a CD (not too long ago USSR existed). I'm not saying your situation is ideal, but I am not saying it's a regress that some audiophiles can't get lossless but more people can consume audio (so easily).
