CD Quality Versus Streaming Quality

+1 on Qobuz. I listened to Tidal for about a year and I can absolutely tell a difference on both my systems. Actually I still have Tidal since I bought a year subscription. I have tried switching back and forth. Most Qobuz songs have more depth and body to the sound. A good DAC also makes a big difference. I’ve compared Qobuz with a good DAC to CDs on Oppo and Marantz players. CD is either just the slightest better or indistinguishable. 

If you have a high quality dac ,and very good streamer
a key to help ensure noise is at its minimum

All this means "nothing" when the music you stream or download is compressed, as shown, in the last few pages, have you read them??
No amount of money spent can help that.

Cheers George

If you have a high quality dac ,and very good streamer 
a key to help ensure noise is at its minimum is a great network switch without spending too much $$ such as Uptone Audio 
ether Regen which is very apparent eliminating noise 
and the Excellent Bricasti M3 dac withNetwork streaming card.it
has tons of trickle down technologies from all they have learned in mastering studios ,exceptional performance that is actual to the point it surpasses a good turntable in many areas.I have friends 
with very good $10k + turntables and used to hate digital. A top CD player like Esoteric can be exceptionally good, but still not up to par with the pristine signal from Ethernet 
or usb from my experiences. A very good dac-streamer is better 
pin sonics,purity of signal Ethernet ,as well as I2S is a superior 
Digital signal. And cd is just Waay outdated.I use only if I can’t find 
on QObuz or Tidal.

I’ve been comparing quite a bit lately. My ears tell me the story. CD beats steaming (even high res) 9 out of 10 times.

Most likely because the later streamed re-releases, are far more compressed than your "older issue" less compressed CD’s.

And why the cat. no. should be supplied with any streamed/downloads before purchasing.

Cheers George

I’ve been comparing quite a bit lately. My ears tell me the story. CD beats steaming (even high res) 9 out of 10 times. 

And here we go!!!,
Just managed to search the DRDB site for just Qobuz entries 3 pages were ID’d and yes mainly only the latest compressed re-issues https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/1?album=Qobuz
There are sprinkling of untouched uncompressed ones that I would pay for but they are more your hi-fi show type CD’s which never got compressed re-issues. Muddy Waters, Miles Davis, Diana Krall etc etc

And again only the later re-issues from "HD Tracks"
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/2?album=HD+tracks
One one uncompressed 1986 Louis Armstrong https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/185788

Cheers George

BTW just found another Qobuz compressed to the max re-issue 
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/186934

Cheers George

(WITH the caveat that George points out too - provided they're the exact same mix/ release of the album.)”
The test was as follows;
On my son’s system, a Devialet Expert Pro 220 driving Magico S3 through Synergistic Research Foundation speaker cables run a stream of albums on Tidal that I have on CD and them compare them.

You know what the CD is because it has a "catalog number"
But what's the version is of the streamed one when there is no provenance you can get for it so you can check it on the DRDB you have no idea if it the latest highly compressed release or not??.

but some of the dig downloads I have purchased (new releases) have included cat numbers in the metadata.

Have you look at the DRDB to see what you got, and "PLEASE" give us the Cat no. of the streamed ones you managed to get form Qobuz so we can all see?
As this on is the rubbish latest release from them https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/58448 

Could be they dont WANT you to see the data so you cant do your due diligence and compare different master/remaster versions. Certainly not saying this is true but it is in the realm of possibility.

Ummmmm yes this is what I can see is why.

It’s easy to imagine that when streaming audio from a server farm miles away, errors could creep into the signal that would require error correction or interpolation.

Yes, it's only natural to think that there would be even more errors to correct than a CD, maybe compressing and uncompressing the download will create even more again??

Cheers George

@riaa

Red,
Your ASSUMING that the labels arent giving the services the data. Perhaps the info IS given and the services are choosing not to give you that info. Could be they dont WANT you to see the data so you cant do your due diligence and compare different master/remaster versions. Certainly not saying this is true but it is in the realm of possibility.

Maybe (sounds a little extreme, but anything is possible I suppose), but given the fact that downloads from the labels / artist directly as well as the digital stores (pro studio masters, acoustic sounds any of them really), metadata in those are no better, in my experience.  Just artist, track, album etc.. minimal crap.  It should contain everything pertinent (what one would find on CD sleeve).

I've emailed Qobuz the exact question (looking to clarify cat number) and they were helpful, but I recall the response was something like that's what the label provided and they are not touching the metadata

4afsanakhan

It stands to reason that bits is bits.

Things are not always as they appear at a quick glance.

Streaming should sound no different than the CD. They are both after all 1s an 0s that are checked to be bit perfect.

That is mistaken. While outright errors on an audio CD are usually rare - there is redundant encoding of the data which are interleaved on the disc - the CD-A standard includes interpolation when an error cannot be recovered. By definition, the interpolation is an estimate and not necessarily bit perfect. ( The interpolation is needed because unlike a CD-ROM, an audio CD needs to read in real time.)

It’s easy to imagine that when streaming audio from a server farm miles away, errors could creep into the signal that would require error correction or interpolation. So it really isn’t accurate to say "bits is bits" if you're talking about audio playback in real time.

Red,
Your ASSUMING that the labels arent giving the services the data. Perhaps the info IS given and the services are choosing not to give you that info. Could be they dont WANT you to see the data so you cant do your due diligence and compare different master/remaster versions.  Certainly not saying this is true but it is in the realm of possibility.

@georgehifi

The streaming companies need to give the album Cat No. with all their streams/downloads, so you can find for yourself on the DRDB if
your paying for and listening to compressed rubbish.

That would be great and should be available without question for the very reason you state. I can only speak to Qobuz, but some of the dig downloads I have purchased (new releases) have included cat numbers in the metadata. 

I don't understand for the life of me, why the f*&% complete meta data isn't part of these dig purchases.  It's not the services fault, but the labels that provide the files.

Hi JPeter568,

Thanks for that great information. Your work as a senior systems engineer gives you the advantage of knowledge from a technical standpoint. Some very interesting and relevant points you make, although from my personal experience, and don’t ask me why, different players as transports do affect the sound one hears (note that I have only used players as transports, and not dedicated transports which could be a different result);

a) no noise is carried in the digital stream
b) even a modest or rather network setup, it is capable of carrying a bit perfect stream with no problem
c) Transports as separate from an external DAC will have zero effect on the sound quality

quote; “So to the original OP - my guess is that it was a difference in configuration or a setting that might have been off - certainly the dac WILL have an impact on the sound, so I'd recommend connecting a digital out on your transport, checking your settings to ensure you're streaming the same thing, and then re-doing the test. Because coming through the same DAC should be identical sound (WITH the caveat that George points out too - provided they're the exact same mix/ release of the album.)”

The test was as follows;

On my son’s system, a Devialet Expert Pro 220 driving Magico S3 through Synergistic Research Foundation speaker cables run a stream of albums on Tidal that I have on CD and them compare them. I also brought my Pioneer BDP-09fd to his house to use as CD player. We did the following;
- First test: Run ethernet cable from his router directly to Expert DAC input, then using iPad and Devialet Air, stream the songs via Airplay-Eth
- Second test; Connect Apple Macbook Air (first gen where direct USB connect possible without dongle) via USB into Expert Pro and stream same songs over USB, with the advantage of first stage MQA unfold
- Third test; Connect CD player via coax to Expert Pro to run digital stream to Expert Pro DAC, sourced from CDs or same albums of tidal streams
- Fourth Test; Connect CD player via analogue outputs running transparent ultra and synergistic research foundation i/c. In this case, the Wolfson DACs do to D to A conversion.

JPeter568,

Sir you are obviously very knowledgable as networks and systems connectivity is your professional vocation. Everything you’ve said make sense although i would have to offer an alternative viewpoint  on transports, only because i have observed the differences between several that I have. For example, as superb as the Oppo 205 and 203 are, purely as transports, they don’t sound as good as the BDP-09fd purely as transport, which produces a more dimensional and captivating sound to my ears. Again I can’t explain why. Perhaps its in the execution of the interface? As an aside, I think for 1080p, I prefer the picture and sound of that Pioneer $2,200 flagship from around 2008-2010 to the venerated (justly so) UDP205 and 203.

It stands to reason that bits is bits. Streaming should sound no different than the CD. They are both after all 1s an 0s that are checked to be bit perfect. There is of course the matter of jitter and I would suspect at the micro levels it doesn’t affect sound quality too much for the average high resolving system. But for über resolving systems that might be different.

So then, we are left with two possibilities that might account for the differences heard in the test we conducted. These differences are not massive but they can greatly affect ones enjoyment listening to music, and can be stated as loss ‘something’ especially in high frequency purity and clarity, bigger more clearly definite / solid  imaging or put another way  a more ‘definite’ presence and vitality to the sound, a more accurate less homogenized soundstage, more defined bass performance, and less ‘smearing’. Incidentally I should add, that on occasion I have heard streaming sound very very good, good enough to keep me with wine in hand sat in place for hours listening. The two possibilities as i see it are;

a. Noise, from EMI / RFI pollution
b. A compromised stream that is not full bandwidth or where compression algorithms are screwing up timing causing smear, and messing with information vital to the full sonic picture. Again sometimes the sound is better than others…

I have always loved music. I had a thousand albums.  I always seeked out the new trends.  And a $4 album was actually quite a bit of money.  

Move forward.  My old stuff was worn out.  My LPs gone, my CDs scratched.  I chose streaming.  I want to listen to music again or for the first time.  I have Amazon all the way to 24/192.  I like it.  Sounds good to me.  Details both soft and loud, dynamics, Imaging, 3D, frequency response is there.  Don't wish to argue but this setup works pretty damned good.

This is a very interesting topic and many of the points discussed thus far are valid. Its hard to deny that streaming won’t be going away and will (is) be the standard delivery model going forward.

Being this hobby comprises the smallest fraction of the overall streaming user base / listing base, influencing this model would appear to be difficult.

I think in its current form with the likes of Qobuz and other high-quality services (audiophile centric) it’s hard if not impossible to state streaming is worse than one’s local version. Meaning, it’s always about provenance / mastering version.

Of my 4k local albums that I have curated (1k are SACD’s) some of them are not the best version and Qobuz may have a better version, which I have on numerous redbook’s discovered. So how does one digest that? I’m certainly not going back through my entire library and comparing each one of them to the Qobuz version for example.  However, on my favorites / must have’s, I will hunt down the best version.

I have not been a streaming fan and sort of refused to use it in my big rig. One of the reasons is to purchase and support the musicians since they get squat on the streaming model. However, after much optimizing of my network (vlans, dedicated audio network and devices etc..) I have slowly begun to use it (Qobuz) off and on. My chain is dedicated Linux roon core (that is all it does), dedicated HQP wkst to upsample to DSD which then outputs via fiber Ethernet to optical rendu > DAC.

It’s getting harder to tell the difference on some tunes, I still prefer my local library most of the time, but I can’t in any sane way, listen to only my older music? Much of the new music/genre I listen to is mixed/mastered in high quality and many times I purchase their (artists) digital download

I will point out though my context is digital (e.g. ripped redbook/SACD’s/high quality purchased downloads) and I don’t have a high end CDP for reference. Maybe I am missing out in that respect? I am curious how that would sound, but much of this comes down to priorities. Spending 2-4k on a CDP isn’t gonna happen.

Getting the most out of ones rig is so massively dependent on room and spkr setup. Once you get that sorta dialed in, you’re in a much better place then not having put the time into that.

I am a huge RLJ fan.  Yes that release sounds great streaming like many of the female vocalists I listen to on Qobuz. 

Compressed Dynamic Range of music - yeah - it does suck when I’m trying to get that "audiophile" experience at home on my system. But in the car, or waiting for an uber, or jogging, it’s nice to have that volume compression so my ears don’t blow out between songs or between parts of songs.

Totally agree, "music compression" it has no place in hi-end audio. Neither do these later re-issue compressed albums that they stream/download, it’s done to drown out background noise in the car or walking/ipod and to be able to hear the quite passages with a jack hammer going a few feet away.

George - I agree with you on some things you mention here, but you’re confusing file compression with music compression and they are two very different things.

Yes I know they are two different things (worded it wrong).
I would "if" I downloaded to a HD would want whatever I purchased to be original size, not zipped up into a smaller package.
If I streamed and played it live I would also want it original which I think it has to be? or does it de-compress while playing?.
But "the biggie", I would very much want the "least compressed issue" of what I bought by knowing it’s provenance, so I can check to see if it’s had it’s "life squashed out of it" on the DRDB site, before buying it.

BTW Just got a used Rickie Lee Jones Pop Pop cd for $5, amazing, extremely dynamic album, shame about the album cover though.
Looks like she doesn’t allow compression of any sort even with re-issues, then it was late 90’s and later it started to happen.
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=+Lee+Jones&album=Pop+Pop


Cheers George

George - I agree with you on some things you mention here, but you're confusing file compression with music compression and they are two very different things. (Both have their place with music - but they're very different.) 

File compression allows you to zip a file to reduce it's size, or in music terms, it allows you to convert a raw 44/16 (or other - default CD quality)  file to a smaller file by eliminating "unneeded" portions of a song. A standard CD will play at something like 1024 - vs. an MP3 file at 128kb/s. The Bruce Springsteen album you reference from Qobuz is their hi-res 192/24 format - or roughly 4x the bandwidth the original would have used. (They're actually taking up far more bandwidth/ sending far more data for - what I agree with you - is a far poorer sounding mix.) 

Music compression on the other hand deals with the difference between the very loudest part of a song - to the most quiet in terms of DB level. That's the dynamic range - and what the website you cite, is talking about. It's a complaint about how modern music / sound engineers mix music that far less dynamic range - in terms of loud to soft - today than in the past. 

And, there are arguments for both. Is it what the artist originally intended? For older music, absolutely not! They meant for you to "lean in" and listen closer to the soft part of the music or vocals. But with kids 40 and younger today, with earbuds, and headphones, and car stereo systems, and Alexa speakers being used, it makes sense to form a better - more compressed, volume level so that you're not blowing out the ears of people or having to crank the volume up to hear the soft parts of a song, only to then have your ears blown out with the next song. 

I also can't speak to "clocks" in music - I have no idea - but with respect to data - bit perfect, data - I am a senior systems engineer and trust me when I say this, with even a poor network system today, bit perfect data can be delivered with ease. No matter the cables being used, or whatever linier power supply you think might be the weak part of the chain, it's absurd to suggest that digital anything will deliver "noise" to your system short of some kind of ground loop or malfunctioning equipment. CD transports costing 2k, or 5k, or 20k - I'm sorry to say this - but without an internal dac being used, will have zero affect on the sound. A $20, cheap sony CD player, is more than capable of delivering bit perfect data to your external DAC. (Now, if you're dac is internal to your transport - that certainly can make a difference.... but if you're using a strict transport, I can prove over and over and over again - it is absolute bit perfect data that is being exported to your dac no matter what device is used and will make zero difference to the music.) 

So to the original OP - my guess is that it was a difference in configuration or a setting that might have been off - certainly the dac WILL have an impact on the sound, so I'd recommend connecting a digital out on your transport, checking your settings to ensure you're streaming the same thing, and then re-doing the test. Because coming through the same DAC should be identical sound (WITH the caveat that George points out too - provided they're the exact same mix/ release of the album.) 

And again - to be totally clear with you George, I see and understand, and even agree with your point. Compressed Dynamic Range of music - yeah - it does suck when I'm trying to get that "audiophile" experience at home on my system. But in the car, or waiting for an uber, or jogging, it's nice to have that volume compression so my ears don't blow out between songs or between parts of songs. 

Wrapping all of this up - as a 40 year old, I have had the honor to live through the most dynamic changes ever witnessed for music (Short of when people had to attend live venues to ever hear music and instead, could listen at their home.) I had tapes in the car, and vinyl/ radio at home, and then CD's for both, and lived through sharing music on Napster, to what has flourished into bit perfect, steaming, uncompressed audio. And, we are at, what I think might be the last stage of music, but absolute, perfect surround music with Apple and Tidal introducing Atmos music. (it's game changing with the right setup and a well mastered mix.) So many audiophiles experienced that transition when music went from mono to stereo - and my generation is now experiencing that same change with surround. And, mixers today, despite having compressed volume, are getting there - we have settled on a great digital form, a standard, that hasn't existed for decades. 

Hi dear folks. Just thought this video might be helpful to the discussion. It is not a high-end system but my son had this before moving to the Expert. It still produces a terrific sound as you will hear somewhat (recording with iPhone has limitations and the wind was blowing the blinds and curtains so much noise) Headphones will sound best (i love wireless Apple EarPods actually). The CD player, preamp and m/c amp are Parasound Halo really quite old. I am aiming for sound quality along these lines from streaming, and I am now leaning towards the notion that this can only be achieved with a dedicated streamer setup with careful attention on EMI /RFI. The Etheregen product looks very interesting indeed, and many comments indicate it has a positive impact on sound quality. I cannot afford Roon on top of everything else unfortunately although I wish I could.
https://youtu.be/t2A1SCDa0oA

Yes and he's also a "fuser" that explain it all.

https://forum.audiogon.com/posts/1524084

Like I said, even with the truth shown to some,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMzd40i8TfA
they just can’t/won’t see the "forest for the trees".

Maybe it’s a new "Ignorant Division" of "Audio Scientology"

david1949
Records vs CD’s vs Streaming, which is best. Depending on you equipment, all could sound very good or not so good.

Sorry David, but not if your streaming/downloading the compressed streamed Quobuz release of this.
(Please take time to look at it carefully)
"Red is bad=compressed. Green is good= "uncompressed".
It’s same album!! very different re-issue dates 32 years difference!!!!

This is the "Bruce Springsteen" "Born to Run"

That Quobuz streams/downloads that you pay for.
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/58448
It’s the worst compressed version of all 28 re-issues/originals.

HD tracks, same as Quobuz, also shockingly compressed https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/78303


And here is the original 1982 uncompressed CD. (which would you prefer?)
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/98918

Cheers George

Records vs CD’s vs Streaming, which is best.  Depending on you equipment, all could sound very good or not so good.  At one time in my life I had McIntosh Tube amplifiers and Pre-Amps, 7 Wilson Speakers, expensive turntable and CD player.  The sound was exceptional (Streaming hadn’t been invented yet). All gone now. Now I have a NAD Streamer, a NAD Master Series Amp and Paradigm Persona Speakers. My old system was over $100,000 and the new system $20,000.  I had 1000 records, 1400 Cd’s and a large room for storage.  Now they are all gone.  Big fan of streaming. The sound to me is as good or almost as good as any other format. Certainly good enough for me and I like really good sound.  I will never go back, never.  

Also the Dynamic Range Data Base ( https://dr.loudness-war.info/ ) was attacked by some unscrupulous people deleting many entries, that didn't like what it’s trying to do for audiophiles, "guide them to the better releases" or expose for all to see the compression in our music!
You take your pick.

Cheers George

You’ve got it. (thank tweak1 for that link)
Wouldn’t be great to know the provenance what you get, then all you have to worry about, if they stream it to you compressed to save size (money), but that’s a easy size check, if you have an uncompressed CD to compare.Cheers George

This is the "Bruce Springsteen" "Born to Run"
That Quobuz streams/downloads that you pay for.

https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/58448
It’s the worst compressed version of all 28 re-issues/originals.

And here is the original 1982 uncompressed CD. (which would you prefer?)
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/98918

George, this is really shocking that Qobuz sees this amount of compression and can't get a better release from the record label. The streaming system is f#~ked up, the record label holds all the cards. 

In every case, there's no way to know the provenance of the master used to make the Qobuz copy. 

I've had some luck checking the copyright of an album on the Qobuz Info page, then checking to see if there's a matching date on DR Database or Discogs. 

My only recourse with the Qobuz Springsteen file is to listen to the album on CD.

George, which streamer do you use? Which service? Software?

None, I have a friend who owns Soundstage Australia he reviews them and many other things, he assures me it the very best hook up. I hear it on his very revealing system a/b against just the Yammy (as a transport) both into the Total dac D1 now upgraded to the later Total dac https://www.soundstageaustralia.com/index.php/reviews/508-totaldac-d1-direct-digital-to-analogue-con...

This is his system
https://www.soundstageaustralia.com/images/stories/equipment1/201711_wilsonalexia1.jpg

Associated Equipment

• Speakers — Wilson Audio Alexia Series 2,
• Amplifier — Gryphon Audio Antileon EVO
• Preamplifier — Supratek DHT Reference, Lightspeed Attenuator LDR passive
• Sources — Yamaha CD-S2100 used as transport, Totaldac d1-core DAC,

And sometimes mine if I get the chance and he comes over and logs on to whatever he stream services he uses..
Which being big ESL’s (ML Neolith panels 150hz to 10khz), Plasma tweeters >100khz, and SV12 bass <150hz, based, even more revealing I think, don’t know if he does, he doesn’t cross that line.
But it’s his bread and butter, you won’t find controversy with his reviews, but what’s said with a red in one hand privately is another story when we do a/b’s .
Cheers George

George, which streamer do you use? Which service? Software? What is your digital path from wall to streamer? This will help me better understand your particular streaming experience.  

joscow
For me, I prefer the sound from a well recorded CD over all of the streaming. BTW, I have a collection of over 2500 CDs, 1200 vinyls, 40,000 on a separate hard drive in AIFF format, 300 cassette tapes, and subscription to several streaming services.

Yes until the streaming/download companies put up which version releases they stream/download so you can be assured not not getting the "usually compressed later re-issue ones", you never know until you paid for it.

And then they have to guarantee they don't compress it to send it to save themselves bandwidth costs also, but you can check that with a file size that's sent against a uncompressed cd size, (if you have it)

Cheers George

This is an interesting subject with no correct answer no matter how long or how frequently it is discussed. One can offer all of the technical explanations to explain their belief there they hear one format sounds better than the other but at the end of the day it is how it sounds to the listener and that will vary from person to person. 

I have followed high end stereo and the various formats of music that have evolved since 1965 and spent time extensively listening to all of the music formats in reasonable high quality equipment. For me, I prefer the sound from a well recorded CD over all of the streaming. BTW, I have a collection of over 2500 CDs, 1200 vinyls, 40,000 on a separate hard drive in AIFF format, 300 cassette tapes, and subscription to several streaming services. 

At the end of the day, whether you think the sound quality from streaming is better than CDs is reflection of your system and what appeals to your ears and that will vary from individual to individual.

https://ibb.co/ft90zdp 🤷‍♂️

a troll is a person who posts inflammatory, insincere, digressive

You just described yourself, and what I posted up is fact with proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMzd40i8TfA

Like I said it’s going to ruffle some feathers, and looks like starting with YOU!!!😖

Just posted this up on the  
"Can we talk about Qobuz for a minute" thread.
Watch it ruffle some feathers!!.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/can-we-talk-about-qobuz-for-a-minute/post?postid=2215612#2215...

Cheers George

Well, the advantage of streaming is at least you didn't have to purchase the cd or vinyl only to find poorer sound quality than expected.

You don't have to purchasing the cd or vinyl either, if you check it on DRDB for compression.
Cheers George

Well, the advantage of streaming is at least you didn't have to purchase the cd or vinyl only to find poorer sound quality than expected.  Download service providers should provide provenance, entire history. I thought HD Tracks did that, haven't purchased download in a couple years.

What audiophiles need if they want to stream/download.
                                         Is a "Audiophile Streaming/Download Service"
1: That reveals all the origins/history/cat no’s of anything they sell you. (so you can check if it’s version is compressed yourself)
2: And then guarantee they will "not compress it in any way" when they send it to you, to save themselves a fortune. (and you check the download size)

Cheers George

Totally agree on provenance of recording. First of all,I don't listen to a lot of commercial music, there are many contemporary recordings that aren't compressed within an inch of their life. The 2500+ cd rips I have are from 80's through today, and they sound better than playing with any cd transport I owned, the last being a Mark Levinson  No.37 which used Phillips CDM 12 industrial transport mechanism with quality proprietary mounting system . When I say streams sound every bit as good as rips I'm comparing best of both.
Sure, there are a lot of compressed recordings on streaming services, just as there is cd's and vinyl. Quality streaming requires clean network, using generic grade equipment won't do. And I do have quality analog setup with well over 3000 albums from 1950's-today. Streaming can be a quality listening choice, one need not suffer inferior sound quality.

Agreed George. I find streaming is the same as CDs in that some sound great while others don’t recording to recording. Find both equal in the percentage of good to poor sounding recordings in my experience. Same sonic frustrations with both in my experience. This morning I listened to three new artists (streaming). Two sounded good and one great. Yesterday I listened to a really poor recording. Same with my CD collection of old. I am not noticing more of the poor when streaming. I listen to jazz, folk, acoustic, Americana, female vocal…..not classic rock.

If you think streaming sounds bad, you’re listening to poor streaming solution.

That maybe, but it all starts with the source, "THE MUSIC"

If they (the streaming/download) companies, send you the later re-issues they have, that are big percentage compressed, as shown in the DRDB (Dynamic Range Data Base), then your getting compressed junk.

The streaming companies need to give the album Cat No. with all their streams/downloads, so you can find for yourself on the DRDB if your paying for and listening to compressed rubbish.

Nothing in life in this world your hearing is compressed including live music gigs, why do it to our purchased retail music?????

Cheers George

If you think streaming sounds bad, you're listening to poor streaming solution. Every single little thing matters in streaming, the network extremely important. All network equipment should have linear power supplies, quality ethernet cable, optical conversion, switches with OXCO clock. USB renderer, high quality usb cable, oxco clock in dac. And of course high quality server powered by high quality lps. Evolution of clocks is major upgrade in streaming.

Steaming sounds every bit as good as 2500 cd rips on Synology NAS powered by high quality lps.

You're exactly right.  I have listened to some serious streaming components and hear the same thing.  Sometimes, in fleeting moments the streamed music can be very good but on a whole it's just so so.  Now a setup that uses a hard drive (NBS) can sound great.  A dealer in town demonstrated for me their setup and it frankly blew my mind.  Their twelve thousand record collection plus master tapes, even original mofi cassettes, not to mention cd's, etc., all sixteen terabytes worth available through an iPad changed my world view about recorded music.  But this is a unique situation; one owner is a recording engineer who uses I don't know, one or two hundred grand worth of Nagra equipment.  These rips are like no other that I ever listened to.  In one two hour listening session I sat on the sofa picking any music that came to mind; jazz, blues, rock, prog rock, classical, even some recordings of mine and well, streaming systems, are not even close.  And one killer example of a rip of many was listening to the Solti Vienna Wagner ring lp collection, ripped from an unopened box set that I somehow ran into.  The idea of not flipping through all those lp's and when directly comparing the rips to the original vinyl, not a whole lot of difference and not enough if any to bother me.  I just wish I had the space for something like that.

Look at what happens to the great dynamic range in the 1st page then deteriorates the more pages you go and the younger the albums get (in re-issues).

What I have been saying!  Try it with Mark Knopfler, Enya, Bruce Hornsby, Sarah McLachlan, Joni Mitchell, Donald Fagen, Sting, Tears for Fears, U2, and Yes.  This short list is drawn from a list of discs that I own and could easily be expanded.  Norah Jones is not included, for instance, because a boxed set of SACD's released in 2012 came with dynamic range between 11 and 14 and allowed me to dispose of some CD's of the same titles that had much poorer DR.

SHM-CD??? Had to look it up. Some are saying it adds a sheen to the sound??? "false dynamic reading" maybe???

SHM-CD is simply a high quality CD, most often made and sold in Japan.  While these releases tend to be mastered a bit bright, that seems to be common with Japanese remasters generally and is unrelated to the technology so far as I know.  I gather that you encountered SHM-CD in connection with Elton John.  The SHM-CD remasters released in 2019 are very highly regarded.  The seven that I own have DR ranging from 12 to 14.