Streaming vs traditional


My son is talking about the "lossless" audio one can stream.  I have a good collection of CD's as well as a couple of TT and LP's with more than than I should invested in both.  (some may say too much, some may say not enough)  Anyway, thought I would come to a relative neutral forum to ask for reviews on the streaming audio.  It kinda reminds me of the Bluray and Betamax wars of years past-no standard version/format yet.  I guess it's relatively in it's infancy with lots of software and format devices on the market.  I love the convenience of CD's and the warmth and ambience of analog.  So-what's up with the streamers?
handymann

Showing 5 responses by tomcy6

The Bluesound Node 2 is a good way to dip your toe into the streaming waters ($500), There’s an Auralic mini at the same price. My experience with the Node 2 is that I love streaming but would like better sound quality.

Right now, Tidal streaming MQA is the only big (3,000+ albums and adding) hi-rez streaming operation going. There is a lot of opinion that MQA will just be another failed format, but it has 2 of the 3 major record labels on board and many hardware and software manufacturers.

Tidal also has millions of cd quality albums to stream and, as you probably know, a well done cd can sound better than a poorly done hi-rez recording.

There are probably a lot of albums out there that you would like to listen to once or twice but don’t really want to own, or would like to hear before you buy, and streaming gives you that option. We all buy albums based on reviews or word of mouth and wonder what those people who recommended them were thinking.

I think I read that HDtracks is planning an MQA streaming service also.

So you can give MQA a try now, wait a couple years to see how it pans out, or wait 5 or 10 years for the next hi-rez streaming format to try its luck.
willemj is one of the doubters and there are many of them, but there are also many who have heard MQA and say it is an improvement. Some who have heard it are very excited about it. High-end audio is a subjective pursuit and hard scientific proof of better sound quality is not very common. Something is making high-end manufacturers like bel canto, Burmeister, Cary, Harman Kardon, Esoteric, Kef, Linn, Martin Logan and many more make their products MQA compatible and pay to do it. You can see the full list on the Tidal website. The Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group are remastering some of their catalogs for MQA. I just don’t think that they would do that if they couldn’t hear a difference between cds and MQA.

There’s nothing wrong with cd quality in my opinion, though, and streaming gives you access to a lot of cd quality music.

So it’s your call. You can try MQA now (Tidal will give you a free 30 or 60 day trial to try their HIFi service, which includes MQA) or wait and see if enough people buy into it to make it successful. I expect that MQA will improve over time just as other digital audio is steadily doing.
willemj, Do you choose your audio gear and music by the results of double blind tests or by listening?
willemj, Since you are a scientific guy, I’m sure you know that double blind tests that have not been published in a peer reviewed journal have zero scientific credibility. I am not a scientist, but I can assure you that that study would not survive peer review and would never be published in a peer reviewed journal.

I’m not opposed to blind testing in audio, in fact, I’m for it. It’s just not scientific evidence. It could be used to see who has the best ears or the most revealing system or who is being a little too hyperbolic in their reviews at a given point in time and in specific circumstances, but that’s about it. It can’t tell you which gear or music or format you will like in the long run.

I’m sure that Meridian has double blind tests that show that MQA sounds superior to cds. So who’s right?

I don’t know if MQA sounds better than cds. I have read comments from many people who have heard it and believe it does. I think that streaming is a great thing and right now you can get MQA thrown in for free, so anyone who is interested should check it out and decide for themselves. If you’re not sure, just wait a couple years and see whether they can convince enough people that it’s worthwhile that it survives in the marketplace. We don’t have to wave double blind studies at each other, time will tell.
" To the best of my knowledge Meridian have never published any of their work in a scientific journal."

Correct, which makes their data equivalent to the study you referenced, not worth much.

willemj, no one is making anyone listen to MQA.  The streaming services will eventually charge a premium for MQA and we will be able to decide for ourselves whether we want to pay extra for MQA or not.   If anyone wants to listen at cd quality or mp3 quality they will be free to do so.  I am all for choice in listening options.  So what is the problem?