What am I missing?
When discussing streaming we often hear the quality achieved by streaming compared to "cd quality". "Cd quality" seems often to be the standard by which streaming is favorably compared while cds have at the same widely fallen into disfavor as a medium. 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? More sophisticated dacs can always be employed with cd transports as they are with streaming. 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. This becomes even more unclear to me when considering the resurgence of vinyl and the storage and convenience issues involved with this medium. I don't believe the music industry ever wanted us to own the music we listen to but rather preferred we only rent and pay for that music each time.
@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? |
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. |
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. To me, streaming is the best deal ever (except maybe OTA radio 😜). |
@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?
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?
|
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
|
@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 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 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 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. |
"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 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! |
@retiredfarmer There's also a huge difference between a $5000 and $20,000 streaming system. @ghdprentice can tell you all about that. |
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. |
Case in point: You will never be able to Not make me enjoy this.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF177Aj59C8&list=RDMMbhQRS6iy23w&index=25 (...the ’long lunar note’ has been known to blow breakers....That, in itself, amuses me.....) |
@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...😏 |
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. |
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. |
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? |
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. |
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. |
+1 @soix Excellent points! |
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. |
The idea you can "timeshare" 1,000,000 albums for the price of one is enticing. Assuming 1n hour/album and no eating, sleeping, working-type distractions, it should take a bit over 114 years to listen through all of them. Of course, by the time you've finished your first pass, over 90% of those likely are no longer available. You could just start over, knowing you'd rarely be subjected to the same music twice. Personally, I have a lot of albums that are worth more than that to me. I suspect a lot of them are not available streaming (local artists often self-produce). Increasingly, these are crowd-funded through ArtistShare, GoFundMe, etc. |
@sandthemall"Why own a single property when you can subscribe to many more."Because here in Europe time-share was the most widespread property scam ever, that's why. Did you suffer the same scams in the US? |
@clearthinker said: "No. Not more than ever. in the 50s 60s 70s everyone had a vinyl player and vinyl. But certainly the most since CDs got embedded in the late 80s." Of course you are correct. In absolute numbers the vinyl market today is niche. I guess my point was the potential customer seems to have far more options in the variety of tables, arms and cartridges than I remember from the '60s and '70s and in that sense, we have it good (albeit at a price). Thanks for the comment. Bill
|
This really isn't about what's better. It's about 'experience'. This is why LPs are still around. This is why my mixed tapes, CDs,tubes and reel-to-reel are still around. People want the experience. If it's streaming...great. If it's ownership...also great. Streaming popularity will drop the price of LPs and CDs and that's a good thing too. Some people actually like ownership. This will happen to real estate. Why own a single property when you can subscribe to many more. To each her own.
|
@larryi That may be true in some cases, but for artists with larger catalogs there are generally many versions of same recording to choose from. Very rare case when I can't find at least decent sound quality from one of the available versions. I do have both Tidal and Qobuz. Also, both Tidal and Qobuz constantly adding to titles available.
With most newer or more obscure artists multiple masters not available either via physical or streaming media. |
The problem with streaming is that the particular mastering of a particular recording may not be the best, and there seems to be no attempt by the various services to seek out the best mastering. Even high resolution masters can be crappy versions. While it is true that many CDs being offered these days are truly crappy, one can, if so inclined, seek out better versions to purchase. |
For those who feel the need to own the music vs renting/leasing whatever you want to call it. I already own far more physical media than I can play, I derive virtually no value from physical media I no longer play due to new listening preferences, tons of my vinyl and all cd's in storage with difficult access to. Since my listening preferences constantly changing and evolving, at least some music becomes obsolete, don't need or want more obsolete possessions, already far too much of that.
The other thing I love with streaming is the ability to access my music via smartphone at workplace and in car. Long trips made far more pleasurable with this. |
It took me a little over 3k. Wifi extender Ethernet cable Optical isolation to cleanup ethernet Linear power supply for streamer Streamer USB cale to dac Dac Power cords for dac, isolator and linear power supply. All described in my house of stereo system. You do not have to spend the high amounts mentioned by many to achieve great sound. My system proves it. But for people who are willing to spend over 20k for a streamer, good for them.
|
To me, it’s the recording, not the format. Dynamic, well rendered recordings can be heard in their glory in 16/44 Redbook CDA, whether streaming or from CD. Using more data may squeeze a bit more realism out, but mediocre recordings are far more common in general, no matter what the bit rate. One thing I like about Tidal is the opportunity to compare releases of the same album. Some are far better than others. Not all Master files are the best ones… |
I’m happily acquiring cds either buying or “mining” at record store thrift shops etc. I rip them to my nas and they sound great, better than playing the cd itself. I’m not sold on the sound quality or reliability of streaming yet. To me, as long as your paying monthly you have the music. When you quit, your done left with nothing. Renting music. I can’t get past this yet. Maybe I will at some point. Until then my library of cds, XRCDs, sacds, and vinyl expands. |
Agree with all you say. But "At the same time, we are still enjoying a hi-fi renaissance in our little corner of the universe- more vinyl, turntables, tonearms, cartridges, etc. than ever." No. Not more than ever. in the 50s 60s 70s everyone had a vinyl player and vinyl. But certainly the most since CDs got embedded in the late 80s. It is strange the biggest growth in vinyl sales is in the 20-30 age bracket, who spend their lives glued to their handphones, yet many want to listen via a near 100 year old technology. |
Terrabyte drives have become dirt cheap. Load from the source of your preference, with the means of choice. Save the vid/images/lyrics of same with same. Next itteration of means/media, transfer. Soon enough, you can 'go to the concert, pick where 'at' it you want, and how you hear it'. Our era is fading away, as is always the case. Live the future, live with it...or stay put where you choose. I prefer to pursue, in the method and means of my choice and costs. Same deal, different day.... ;) |
Many good points brought forward in this thread. I’ve never had a vinyl collection worth talking about nor a setup that would make it worth listening to so I ditched it all 30+ years ago and went with CD format. Even today I feel Redbook format is the best- especially when ripped for solid state drive playback. There have been a few threads in the past couple of days regarding music and its availability, accessibility, how we find it and prefer to use it. In reading these I see how many have/are embracing the world of streaming and although I understand all of the positive points I just can’t get past the sound quality- I don’t feel it’s there regardless of what format it claims to be. As of today I stream music frequently with my low budget Sonos but that is only for auditioning new stuff to buy. As I don’t want to be totally closed minded to the fact that many others here are really happy with streaming I can’t help but think there must be some combination of equipment that would pull the streaming experience up to that of what I’m using now. But what is that $$ amount? |
"Mass market" standards rarely meet the expectations of audiophiles-- the bulk of consumer electronics sold are cheap, essentially disposable, can tie into a phone or computer and CD is certainly better than MP.3 I think you have to put all this into context -- when the record business was booming based on physical media sales, the big labels had money to advance to unknown bands to develop. The labels took the risk on a lot of artists that never made it in the hope that one would grab the gold ring and make up for these outlays. When Napster first opened the door to file sharing, everybody was "Yeah, I don't wanna pay for a whole album. I just want one track." (Assuming that they were willing to pay for even that much). I don't lay the demise of the old industry structure entirely on the advent of file sharing-- there was heavy reliance on legacy acts, less A &R and more follow the trend than ever, but artists who did sell got paid through advances, whether or not they fully earned them back. Now we are at a point where the majors got gutted, pretty much like the major motion picture companies- no more back lots, no more in house studios and performance spaces-- simply distribution arms. The gate keeper is Big Data. Music is more commoditized than ever. And it almost always migrates downward to the lowest common denominator. At the same time, we are still enjoying a hi-fi renaissance in our little corner of the universe- more vinyl, turntables, tonearms, cartridges, etc. than ever. But, think about all the threads here now devoted to streaming--its easy, convenient and can sound pretty good. You are paying more for the gear and services that will do that, but its a small investment compared to what you'd wind up spending on physical media. It's also a no-win for the artists. Touring is costly, ticket prices are hard to justify and unless a song catches and gets used in a tv show or commercial, very few songwriters make big money these days. The supporting musicians make very little. Composing for film or TV can still be lucrative. I feel for the artists, try to support them in various ways, but the reality is, music isn't the kind of high priority purchase that it might have been in the '70s when a good stereo was part of the lifestyle. "Good enough" is usually fine. |
The use of “cd quality” is used to establish a benchmark. There are way too many formats to list here for music files. Some are terrible compared to cd and some are superior to cd. It all has to do with the bit rate and amount the information is compressed. The lower quality highly compressed uses less bandwidth. That was necessary a few years ago as the bandwidth coming into our homes could not achieve hi res files. CD’s imo are only falling out of favor from the advancement of quality dac’s. A cd player will never have an internal r2r balanced dac in it. Yes they are making transports only but with the quality of streaming who needs it unless as like I do I still have my over 2000 cd’s. I use an old blue Ray player feed into my Gustard R26 dac and they do sound very good. |
Convenience? Streaming Quality streaming? Tidal over Qobuz that sounds a tad forward for me. YMMV and by the numbers probably does. SACD over CD - But by this stage it’s recording rather than format. Vinyl who? Business models are out of our reach but not the top artists. Some things have changed. Mostly impact audience rather than studios and marketers. |
