# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bruno Mars - Versace on the Floor (Billboard Music Awards 2017) (Official Live Performance)

# data[].attributes.body
The "Dark Star" by The Grateful Dead is a perfect example of this. Ratliff states "There are 219 recorded live versions of the Grateful Dead playing "Dark Star" between 1968 and 1994...", there are no artists today recorded as much as this in modern music. This sheer volume of recording's perfectly represents what Ratliff is arguing here. This availability of music allows that deeper connection with the listener and allows that collectibility aspect that modern music doesn't. Even though 219 recordings maybe doesn't sound like it is that much, it practically endless in terms of music, relating back to that point made by Ratliff earlier, that its the musician giving you an endless supply of content that allows for this connection.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the most recorded artists of my current generation I think is Bruno Mars, in particular his song Versace On the Floor. As I stated earlier in my argument, not many artists are recorded at length like they were several decades ago, but Bruno is recorded quite a bit for modern day artists. Throughout his different live performances you can hear several differences between each other as well as the studio recording. You can clearly hear in several versions, different sections where he is putting more effort and more "soul" into the verse compared to previous live performances. I think these several versions of this song allow the listener to begin to develop that deep connection to the music that Ratliff is arguing about in this chapter, but still not to the depth as listener were able to in the past.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes I do agree with Ratliff's, argument. In my opinion Ratliff is right that all of the recordings of these bands that used to be available are not available today. The only versions I ever hear of a song are the studio recorded version and maybe one live performance but never more than one. I think Ratliff is right that not being able to listen to these multiple versions of a song doesn't allow me or the listener to develop the deeper connection with the artist and see the differences in the song over periods of time. Not being able to have that deeper connection also eliminates that type of obsession that people would develop over a single artist. Also, I can't remember the last time I went and even bought a CD or a record. Everything is now digital and online which almost completely eliminates the art of collecting music.

# data[].attributes.body
Ratliff's argument about endless inventory is that it is one of the deepest forms of listening that is a dying form. With the technological advancements that have happened in the past several decades, the idea of collecting records has almost completely died off. And with it has this incredibly deep form of listening. This form of listening is almost an infatuation with one artist and one type of music. In the chapter Ratliff states that this type of listening is "...the principle of the musician giving you a seemingly endless supply while also imparting that to you the understanding that there is always more." Ratliff is arguing here that this type of listening can't occur anymore like it used to because artists are not recorded in the sheer volumes they were 20 years ago, because of this it makes it impossible for a person to listen to almost every single performance of a song. Having access to all of these different recordings allows the listener to hear the differences between versions and develop a deeper form of listening that can no longer be found in todays music.