2. digital
  3. 151521-101338

Unintended Consequences? Digital Streaming

My system has become more revealing through gear upgrades over the past year.  This is a good thing right?  Well perhaps yes and no.  I've begun noticing that even while streaming 24 or 32 bit/44khz files over Qobuz that many albums now sound compressed to me and that I don't lose that "compressed" sound until I move up into the 32 bit/96 kHz files and above.  This certainly adds to the magic I realize while playing through my vinyl front end which sounds humongous, open, and vibrant but much of my streaming digital experience has become less than satisfying. 

Am I imagining this compression while streaming supposedly lossless files?  Can anyone else relate or have similar experiences?
128x128three_easy_payments

Showing 8 responses by three_easy_payments

three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
@jond 

I thought about posting on the Auralic forum regarding this as I do post there from time to time.  I too listen mainly to jazz and I will say the compressed sounding titles tend to be non-jazz such as rock and 90s power pop which likely are lower quality original recordings and masters compared to the jazz titles.  But when I stream Talking Heads "Speaking in Tongues" at 24/96 or Son Volt "Trace" also at 24/96 they sound brilliant.  I know for a fact those happen to be two really well recorded albums to begin with.  I think I have my answer.  
three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
@david_ten 

Yes, original recordings...sorry.
three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
@lalitk 

I totally agree on the 24/192 over Qobuz.  They sound fabulous.  My issue was with the 44kHz FLAC files over Qobuz sounding compressed.  It certainly could be my imagination as perhaps my ear is focusing on the relative resolution differences.  This is definitely not a vinyl vs digital thread.

Hopefully this link works.  Listening to a Sonny Rollins track that indicates its 32 bit. 

https://postimg.cc/2bJFtZg2
three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
@lalitk 

Good question about the upsampling capability as I'm not really sure and I'm having trouble determining this.  Perhaps someone else can chime in if they know - I'm using an Auralic G1 Vega through Lightning DS platform.

I started this thread because I wasn't sure that I was hearing a difference related to any actual compression or perhaps sounds of apparent compression only when making an A/B comparison between 44kHz and 192kHz for example.  Also it's tough to differentiate what I'm hearing as being related to what could be simply an inferior source recording vs anything that's an artifact of the digital processing.
three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
@erik_squires

Could be very DAC specific, agreed.  Can I share?  I had mentioned earlier in the thread that I'm using an Auralic Vega G1.  Is that what you're asking me to share?  Sorry, didn't quite understand your request.
three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
Appreciate the input.  I may simply be noticing compression in original recordings more so these days.  To make a generalization, I suspect the albums that are presented in hi-res are more likely to be of higher original recording quality than titles that aren't provided in hi-res.  Not a blanket statement but perhaps a fair generalization.
three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
@david_ten

I’ve concluded that I must have misattributed compressed sounding titles to a 16bit/44mHz format when it was more likely due to lesser quality, compressed sources instead.
three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments OP
2,097 posts
 
Doing some poking around on the Auralic site it appears the G products do indeed include an upscaler and many prefer the upscaling quality over Roon.  Hence how I'm ending up with 32 bit titles instead of 24.
More to discover