For a while I was doing Room/Tidal, but I found no motivation to spend time burning CDs. I had some that I had burned previously, and Roon picked them up just fine, but I found myself just going straight to Tidal 90 percent of the time. So now I’m CDs, records, and Tidal.
As far as quality goes, I’m just fine with 16/44.1. I can hear no perceptible difference between the same files played from different media (same file sent to the same DAC). Your signal path, and the components you use, will of course effect sound quality.
I’m sure that some of you have the knowledge, experience, and the sufficient hearing ability to discern audible differences caused by jitter, oversampling, hi-res, etc. I certainly can. But I am perfectly satisfied with a well recorded and mastered 16/44.1 file. |
I agree about Tidal. I find myself listening to it most of the time. I am blessed that I can't tell the difference between the same digital file presented to my DAC by different digital sources.
cycles2: your comments regarding artists is smack on. For years we have been bullied by record companies feeding us whatever they can sell profitably, and hyping up photogenic pop stars and producing massively compressed recordings seems to be the best way they can maximize their profit. The democratization of quality recording and digital distribution has changed the game. Music is supposed to be fun and participatory, not the sole domain of record companies and over-payed pop stars trying to make money.
|
I just signed up for IDAGIO. I can't put it down! This thing is going to ruin me. For three nights in a row I have been up past my bedtime listening to music. I think that anybody who is into classical music should give it a try! |
The sound quality of IDAGIO is exactly what I would expect: excellent.
I am so fortunate that I am not cursed with ears good enough to reliably discern between 16/44.1 and any higher resolution. Or perhaps my el-cheapo $10k system just doesn't have the resolving power. Either way, I am perfectly satisfied with 16/44.1 material.
The good thing about "greater than 16/44.1audio files" is that many of these recordings have been re-mastered. In most cases, that same master is used for 16/44.1 playback, so I have the benefit of enjoying the new mastering without having to listen to it at higher resolutions. I have the gear to do so; it's just not worth the trouble. |
Compression. Absolutely vital for recorded music intended for mass consumption. Listening to Beyonce's latest release through earbuds or while driving would be tedious without it. Listening to background music at a party or while doing housework is actually enhanced by compression.
When I sit down to listen to music, it is generally not going to be pop music. I mostly listen to jazz and classical, which usually doesn't seem to suffer from heavy compression. Most of the rock and alternative music I listen to is delightfully free of excessive compression. This is not the material that is going to be consumed by the average casual listener, so the material is mastered for a more critical audience. I do seek out better recordings when possible. For example, I have some recent Grateful Dead releases that are substantially less compressed than my old CDs, and listening to them is a revelation. But for the most part, especially considering what I listen to and how I listen to it, compression is not that big of a problem for me. |
brayeagle: you will be stuck with what they have. But they have more material than I could find space to store on CDs. Tidal has a fairly decent assortment, but individual recordings can be tough to track down. I look them up on google, then search for whatever performers name the album is listed under (usually the soloist, sometimes the conductor, rarely the composer). A little rough. So far, Idagio has been a more pleasant searching experience. |
fleschler: I might have stated it wrong. What I meant is that most classical and jazz recordings are not highly compressed. I did not mean that highly compressed jazz and classical recordings are in any way preferable when listening through a resolving system.
Compression is always used in any kind of close miking situation (there are some very rare exceptions using discreet two-mic recording techniques, but that doesn't necessarily make the recordings better, just that the emphasis is on different sounds such as ambience, natural room reflections etc.). Without judicial compression mixing close-miked signals, mastering would be practically impossible and the result would be a sonic mess.
Compression is also a good thing when listening to music casually. If you are not sitting in your listening chair and concentrating on the music, compression can help even out the sound dynamics and create a less tedious listening experience. Fortunately for those of us who sit glued into listening positions, the compression is usually light when applied to classical, jazz and "less mass-consumer oriented" music. Pop music is usually heavily compressed, but the consumer is generally listening while moving around the room or as background music, through a low resolution system or cheap earbuds or headphones, or in their car.
It is delightful, sometimes, to hear the old classic rock albums that have been re-mastered with less compression. I've already pointed out the example of recently released Grateful Dead recordings (some of those older CDs sound muffled in comparison). It is worth looking into some of these newer releases, but be aware they may not sound just like you remembered. The Jimmy Page authorized (he was involved in the re-mastering) Led Zeppelin releases almost sound like new music!
A lot of recordings from the '50s and '60s have very little compression. They were designed for the new high-end stereos that were coming out. We consumed music differently back then; the fidelity of most radios and cheap record players was so low that compression levels didn't matter. |
|
Georgehifi: the thing is we want to listen to recordings that are not compressed. The other 99% of music consumers benefit from some amount of compression, for all the reasons you listed and more. The big record companies know where their bread is buttered. That's why I appreciate the serious efforts of all the small independent companies that bother with releasing remastered material for us hifi nuts. And it makes it worthwhile digging up vintage recordings at thrift stores and vinyl shops. |
The Mofi 45rpm releases of "American Beauty" and "Workingman's Dead" are wonderful. |
Just get the steaming service and be done with it. I have a "family plan" from Tidal with 5 users, so it comes to $6 month/user. I am by no means wealthy, but that is a trivial expense for me.
I just recently subscribed to Idagio. So far I have been very impressed. Searching (classical) is much better than Tidal (Tidal is great for pop). If you have enough information about the specific performance you want, you will either find it or they don't have it.
I still buy records and CDs. But I am constantly amazed by what is available through my streaming services.
PS: the streaming services I use stream up to 16/44.1. I am perfectly content with that. I used to use Classical Archives (excellent service) that streams 320 kbps. Yes, I can tell the difference, but only if I really concentrate on sound quality and listen for specific sound signatures of compressed files. That is exhausting, and I'll wager that if you tested me I would be less discerning than I think I am. It's like the difference between having 22 vs. 23 marshmallows in you bowl of Lucky Charms. But if you obsess on it, it could ruin your listening experience. YMMV.
|
Tru-Fi. Give me a break already. There is no absolute truth in anything, let alone sound reproduction. Those who think there is some kind of "perfect truth" that only can be brought out using the most "accurate system" are wrong.
I would advise anybody to get this notion out of their head and proceed along more sensible lines.
It can be vexing to pick out the "perfect" system. Depending on why you are reproducing music in the first place, that "perfect" goal is a moving target. I have a number of audio systems available for me to listen to; different needs can be best addressed with different systems.
My advice is to first determine what you are trying to accomplish. Are you looking for a car stereo? Home Theater? Kitchen radio? Headphone system? The second step is to go out and listen to different gear that is designed for those identified applications. You may end up with a Meridian Signature Studio system in your car, a Focal Sib Evo home theater, a Tivoli radio for your kitchen, and a Schiit Stack with some Senn 800s for you headphone listening. You might end up with BAT electronics and a pair of Wilsons for your 2-channel system in your listening room. They will all sound different, none of them will be "true" to anything, and they can all be eminently satisfying for the application they were designed for. |
