If "cd quality" continues to be a quality standard by which we judge streaming services -which it appears to be- why exactly do we hold cds in such disfavor? I understand the convenience and storage issues with cds but I also understand that with streaming you will never own the music which you do with cds.
CD quality is not “the standard” by which we judge streaming, and CDs are less and less held in disfavor as both recording and CD player/DAC technology have continued to improve. IMO, CD quality is more used to denote that the streamed music is at CD resolution (or better) and not a lowly compressed format like MP3. And with streaming you have the ability to buy any track or album by downloading it and thus own it if you wish. Also, what I pay for Qobuz each month is about the same price as buying one new CD or a couple used ones, and for that I have access to tons of music I’d never otherwise have heard, which is the most exciting thing to anyone who loves experiencing new music and doesn’t wanna just spin the same stuff over and over. Also, a lot of streamed music, and especially new music, is available in hi-res, which you can’t get at all with standard CDs. Last, my streamed music now sounds as good or better than spinning discs, and since 90% of all my CDs are available to stream I rarely play a CD anymore. In fact, the more I enjoy all the benefits afforded by streaming, getting off my butt to find and load a single CD just seems more and more limiting and ridiculous. Just my thoughts/experience FWIW.
|
+1 @soix
Excellent points!
|
In the "product as service" vein, I called upon one of the vendors we use for hvac maintenance, etc. We need to replace one of the furnaces--here in Texas, we rely far more on the air conditioning than the heat, but that cold snap in 2021 gave us religion. Anyway, one company has a new business model option-- they lease you the furnace, maintain it and charge you a monthly fee. You don't own your furnace- they do. At the end of the term, well, that's another issue. And if you want to sell your house, do you say, oh, btw, the kitchen is rented, we don't really own it--you have to take over the payments if the "lease" is assignable.
I won't go further on this but you can see the implications.
|
What are you missing, pmiller115?
First of all, and as several have already noted here, the quality of the original recording is vastly more important than the playback medium. If you've never heard the SACD versions of Fritz Reiner's 1953 "binaural" recordings (of Dvorak's "New World Symphony" and Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition"), prepare to be amazed. These "stereo" recordings were made before stereo playback devices had even been invented, much less made widely available to consumers. The detail, accuracy of instrumental timbre, even soundstage spatial specificity, are awesome in those very early recordings; far better than the majority of recordings made in the last ten years. Bottom line: if the original recording is good, it will sound good on your system, whether you play a vinyl record, a Red Book CD, an SACD, or a high-res stream.
But what about the argument that streaming allows access to tens of thousands of recordings for the price of one CD per month? My most knowledgable audiophile friend (he used to own our best stereo shop, and still writes for Stereophile) ditched his huge CD collection years ago, after ripping them all to a designated server. Last month, he unloaded his similarly huge LP collection, and sold his Oracle TT. Now, it's just streaming on his no-holds-barred audio system. Why not go down that road?
Speaking for myself, physical media for music is a lot like books. I'm a philosopher, and my house is full of books. Yes, I have laptops and tablets, and yes, I do read on those screens. But not only are old fashioned books special for lots of hard to defend reasons (the feel, the smell...), they also represent, in a very tangible way, my life and my mind. There are only so many hours in a day, and so many days in a life. The books I've read, and often re-read, are "me" in a very important sense. And I want to have them at hand—to know where they are in my house, and on their shelves, where they live; to loan them to friends when the occasion arises; to annotate them over the years we've known each other, so that when I take a book off the shelf I last read ten years ago, and first read 40 years ago, I can literally see younger versions of myself in the margins in pencil. Could I do something similar with e-books? I suppose so. But I haven't, because e-books didn't exist when I started reading.
So with music. My life isn't long enough to listen to everything that's out there. Nor do I even want to. I love music not as background, not incidentally, but as something to learn, to get to know over years and decades, to listen to again and again and again. I do still discover music new to me—both new performances of familiar pieces, and new artists, even new genres. But, despite the fact that I play several instruments, and I do have an extremely good musical memory, I need repeated listenings to really get to know a piece that I find rewards my attention. So the undeniable fact that there is a vast number of things available on streaming services is a moot point for me. I can discover new music on Bandcamp or even Youtube, and then seek out CDs on eBay for cheap of the music I want to really get to know by means of repeated listening. In short, my music library is "curated" as is my library of philosophy and literature and history. It's not just "available" in principle by maintaining a subscription, it's "mine" in a very strong sense: it has become part of my personality over a long lifetime. I would not want to surrender that, any more than I would willingly give up my identity.
|
@clearthinker
That was just a rhetorical question to cast light on the idea of subscription vs ownership. I don't subscribe to the idea of subscriptions. I like to own land as well. And I'd rather play a record or a CD.
I'm sure in the US there are timeshare scams. But timeshares never appealed to me.
|
@sandthemall
Thanks. I'm right there with you. I prefer physical media too. And ownership in preference to renting, sharing etc.
Many suggest that the availability of 1,000,000s of recordings is advantageous because you get to hear a lot of different stuff. I don't really see that; you get to hear mostly stuff that is a waste of your valuable time. To source music I haven't previously heard I prefer to consult favoured critics and publications whose ears chime with mine. This filters out a lot of the time-wasting dross (of which there is uncountable quantity today when anyone can record to the internet at nil cost or streaming at close to nil regardless of lack of talent or even anything to say).
I chucked my TV more than 30 years ago because of mainly vaccuous content. Today we have hundreds of channels (if not thousands) and finding any worthwhile content would take longer than watching it.
Ho hum. Is the world really a better place now?
|
Sounds to me like there is a lot of: “we have always done it that way, so I want to keep doing it that way”. Nothing wrong with that. If you are 70 years old like me it makes sense. Although my streaming and vinyl are about the same, a bit better than spinning CDs. If you are 40, getting into physical media is crazy unless you are just into nostalgia.
By my nature and profession (scientist, high tech executive / strategic planner) I am constantly assessing technology… dismissing much of it, but recognizing those that will stick. There are trends that are irreversible driven by technology and social change. The movement from physical medium to virtual is irreversible. It does not mean the physical will go away… I have a library of leather bound books… about 400… but we got rid of the 1,500 other books that we used to have. We now have about a thousand books in Kindle and Audible). We have gotten rid of all out video laser disks, 8 tracks cartridges, Cassette tapes, VCR, BetaMax, DVD, and most recently all my CDs. We still have about 500 blu-ray disks, but haven’t bought one in a couple years… they are next to go. We stream (4K movies, and music) and I listen to vinyl.
So, much of this depends on your time horizon. I enjoy the best of both worlds, i am currently listening to a heavy vinyl, Living Stereo (RCA Victor… 1958 recording) of Prokofieff’s Lieutenant Kije on a fantastic analog rig. It makes sense for an old fart like me. But if I was 40 and not into nostalgia, it would be crazy for me to be investing so much money into past technology for so few incredible moments of music when investing in streaming and the future would get me there so much more quickly and less expensively. Buying CDs… that would be crazy unless you own an ungodly good CD player and don’t have the money to acquire an equally great DAC and streamer. But in a few years you will be getting rid of the CDs and player… of course unless you died of old age. And then, good call.
|
Point well made, and taken, ghdprentice. But it only makes me wonder why people under 40 embrace vinyl, of all things. Bear with me a moment. My son-in-law is a Brooklyn hipster and guitarist; he and my daughter have decent day jobs, but share a tiny apartment near Prospect Park. Tiny! Half of it is taken up by his guitars.
Oh, and his turntable and vinyl collection. He seeks out, and buys, very expensive 180 gram pressings of new stuff, but listens to them on a Project Debut TT (I had one of those; junk, IMO), and that's the best component in his system. Not to mention: did I say their apartment is TINY? Terrible acoustics, and neighbors that preclude listening loud anyway.
So here's my bewilderment. Why does he privilege vinyl? Back in the day, when vinyl was supposed to be definitively supplanted by CDs, one could buy used vinyl at almost any "record" store, and for pennies on the dollar. Not anymore! Now, those new deluxe pressings he favors are way more expensive than their digital equivalents (CD or streamed). And way inferior sonically, IMO. He gifted me, for instance, with Tool's "Fear Inoculum" last Christmas: a huge box set, no compromises. But I already loved that album (as he knew), and never play the vinyl because the CD just sounds better: more open, more detailed, not to mention superior track access, no surface noise, etc. etc. And I bought the CD used on eBay for $10. The LP set cost over $100!
So why go there? Especially if your budget is limited, and you're too young for the nostalgia element that ghdprentice notes, why would one not go digital?
To my mind, this is just an irrational fetish, like preferring fixed-gear bicycles, or (for that matter) being kosher. It only "makes sense" given a host of mysterious values that are not rationally defensible.
Now, I'm all in on irrational, indefensible values! Frankly, I could make an argument (and have, in print) to the effect that ALL "values" are finally "irrational," even the preference for "reason" in science. But be honest, at least. Don't "argue" for your irrational preferences! Live and let live, and eschew forums like this one.
But we're not wired that way, are we? We want to believe that OUR values are "better," and to persuade others of this, we need to marshal arguments.
|
@snilf ...be happy he's listening....and 'junk' is subject to taste & budget....
Better 180 g. lp's than a gram or so of the 'alternative alternatives.'....although there's that when stuck into a micro-manse'.... ;)
'Better' is so wrapped up in preference that it becomes almost preaching to the choir (esp. here ) when one wants to debate that into the same degree of oblivion...
One listens to what one prefers.
You are what you eat, even if it's through your ears.... ;)
Embrace son-in-law...he's young. That, in itself, makes a huge diff in this era of earbuds and 'questionable electro-devices' that deliver it into ones' head.
Irrational is a POV.
You've yours, I've Mine. I can argue you into a corner over it. And so WTF is the end game for you and me.
Gift him with what you feel is the 'better alt' is my suggestion...he's family now, has the attention of your dau, so...better to try to love 'im than the alt, Right?
...unless you just Have to be the Grinch...😏
|
|
I embraced streaming years ago as my taste in music was shifting. Internet radio streams allowed me to explore without spending needlessly. When I heard a song I liked I would take note and further check out the album/artist. My days of purchasing CDs “blindly” were over. Truly game changing.
At present I still utilize radio streams, support a favorite jazz station, subscribe to Qobuz, and purchase the occasional CD/download I want in my core library. I couldn’t be happier.
|
@snilf
Yep, that is like the definition of a hipster. That says it all. Bohemian nostalgia… and a bit of eclectic by buying 180gram. We were all young once as well. I was a hippie for a couple years.
|
Well when talking cd quality I always giggle when people compare streaming to cheap cd players there is a huge difference between 5000 dollar and under cd players and ones over 20000 dollars.
|
@retiredfarmer There's also a huge difference between a $5000 and $20,000 streaming system. @ghdprentice can tell you all about that.
|
I don't think CD sales are up. but they should be. Lets think of this logically, why would you buy CDs if you can stream your music for free. However you should be buying all the CDs you can get your hands on because that is the format including DVDs they want to do away with. When you find out the existing storage suddenly disappears you got nobody to blame but yourself. Ha!
|
"CD Quality" is nothing more than a bitrate. (which happens to be 1411 kbps). The audio that comes over those bits is what you should REALLY care about.... and what comes over the streaming networks is NOT the same as what you get from the actual CD.... much less if it's a 20+ year old CD. Nearly everything on streamers has been remastered to be very loud and compressed, BUT I'd rather hear an old 80's CD recorded with primitive A/D converters, that still retains it's natural dynamics. Some remasters are done sensitively, but not often in popular pop & rock genres.
|
I think it’s important in this conversation to include the artists who create the music. Whatever format you use, please remember that we have to support the artists or there won’t be music to listen to.
|
Quality is what I’m looking for. I’ve had good sounding records and bad sounding records. The same with cassettes, reel to reel, CD’s and even some HD downloads! Poop in, poop out, no matter the format or in some cases, reformat.
|
Nearly everything on streamers has been remastered to be very loud and compressed
@mirolab That’s just not true. Sites like Qobuz and Tidal exist to stream content in full CD 16/44.1 resolution. And a lot of music is available in hi-res that you can’t get at all on a traditional CD. You seem to be referring to highly compressed MP3 streaming that really has no place being discussed on this site because it sucks and nobody serious about audio would listen to it critically.
|
@soix I have Tidal, and it's absolutely true. Everything has been remastered. I have many many original CDs, and what's on Tidal does not sound anything like the originals. I can pull the audio into my Audio Workstation and show you literally hundreds of examples of New vs. Old mastering jobs, where the new audio is much louder and compressed. And I mean dynamically compressed & limited, not data compressed which is a different thing. And as for Hi-Res..... same thing. What good is Hi-Res if the dynamics have been squashed out of the music?
|
@mirolab Everything has absolutely not been remastered — that’s ridiculous. Switch to Qobuz. My DAC says everything is 16/44.1 or better, and my streaming now sounds better than spinning discs. Tidal sucks as does their absurd and total BS MQA algorithm. It needs to die. Feed that into your Audio Workstation.
|
@soix Don't mean to drag this out, but I think maybe you don't understand what remastering is. It has nothing to do with bitrate. I've done remastering (& recording, mixing & mastering). I've done some great stuff, but I've also been paid to do some really terrible things to audio.... against my audiophile sensibilities!
I do want to try Qobuz, as I really dislike Tidal's interface and music suggestions. They don't seem to tune into my preferences, and push modern rap & R&B music, which I don't like. Lately I've enjoyed the free version of Spotify more, just because they have better playlists than Tidal. I also don't care for MQA.
|
@mirolab
very good that you want to try Quobuz. Now you just have to do it😉
I did id 2 years ago and do not regret it.Bdw, you will get a free trail for 1 month.
soix is right about the SQ offered by Quobuz. If it sounds better than sound from a CD is, at least in some cases, debatable. But I have no intention to start such discussion.
Cheers! eagldriver
|
Don't mean to drag this out, but I think maybe you don't understand what remastering is. It has nothing to do with bitrate.
@mirolab You may well be right, but I’m willing to learn and would love to hear your thoughts. It’s hard for me to imagine anyone would bother to remaster existing 16/44.1 recordings. Why would anyone take the time/$$$ to do that?
I do want to try Qobuz, as I really dislike Tidal's interface and music suggestions. They don't seem to tune into my preferences, and push modern rap & R&B music, which I don't like.
Totally with you on that. I switched from Tidal to Qobuz, as many others here have done, and would never consider going back. I’d really like to hear your thoughts on Qobuz content quality if/when you give it a try. Hell, it’s free and you don’t seem to be a big fan of Tidal either, so why not?
|
Qobuz suggestions aren't great either. And how hard would it be to add a usable history to the menu?
|
Wow, rent the music? Ok, so for 8.99 a month, I get instant access to almost anything I'd care to listen to and a bunch of stuff I don't. I mean, it's less than buying a new release LP or CD a month, and I get so much more.
I work from home, and lately, about half my day (8+ hours) I listen to digital, the rest of the time I listen from my 3000+ LP collection. Most of the time, when I listen to streaming it's for background music, or in the car. I'll be going back to the office in January, and I'll be listening to streaming closer to 8 hours a day.
To me, streaming is the best deal ever (except maybe OTA radio 😜).
|
Quality vs. Variety:
I have a Node 2i for streaming, and I love its alarm feature. My living room system has a timer (thanks Anthem) and it turns on at 5:50am. The Node 2i alarm is set for 5:55 and I've set it to play a New Wave internet station (from Norway i think). I'm not sure of the bitrate, likely 128k, and I can definitely hear the data compression, but I love more than anything getting to hear several songs every morning that i've never heard before, in a genre that I like. Some of the songs are really awful, but that's ok. It's part of the charm. I'd rather hear something new and fun, than songs I've already heard a million times. It's a great way to start each day.
|
Some of the songs are really awful, but that's ok. It's part of the charm. I'd rather hear something new and fun, than songs I've already heard a million times.
@mirolab Heh heh, and totally agree the ability to hear worlds of new music has been a reawakening for me as a music-loving audiophile. I’ve also had success using the Shazam app on my iPhone to identify new music when I hear something interesting in my car. What a great time to be an audiophile, eh?
|
Digital music files stored locally are easier to use than CD. Streamed files (from Qobuz, Spotify, etc) are even easier to use, but may not sound as good as local digital files.
The only advantage that CDs have is potentially better sound quality than locally stored digital files.
|
