Why Do ~You~ Still Play CDs?

“Still love LP CD and Streaming...all serve a different purpose...not saying one format always sounds better, but they often sound different”
​​​​@jl35

Great perspective and appreciating each format for what it brings to the table. LPs can offer warmth and texture, CDs deliver consistency and ease, and streaming provides unparalleled access and convenience. I just got back into Vinyl and enjoying the wild ride!

The way I see it, they all are equally capable of exceptional sound quality.

“I play CD's because I can't get my turntable to work in my car.”

@aewarren 

This one is for you! 
https://youtu.be/rOt1Zpv-7wg

“cds sound better than streaming”

That statement has little to no merits. So many variables one must take into account…is it due to medium itself or playback equipment or laziness on someone’s part to setup a good streaming system.

Even an identical album would sound different through Vinyl and CD’s, then why consistently ding Streaming. The only knock on Streaming should be the ‘unknown provenance’ of recording being streamed and secondly, artists are not being compensated appropriately, IMHO.

Streaming, when done right, can indeed rival or even surpass physical media. I listen to CD’s, Streaming and Vinyl. You’re welcome to bring your best SACD/CD’s for a chance to hear how good streaming can sound :-)

“the shortest signal path is the best”
@nonoise 

Since you asked……

The “shortest signal path is best” principle originates from the analog era, where every additional connection or component introduced potential for signal degradation, noise, and distortion. This was especially true for fragile analog signals, where maintaining purity was paramount.

In the digital realm, however, the game changes. Digital signals are far more robust over distance because they are transmitted as data packets, which can be error-checked, corrected, and reclocked to ensure integrity. A digital signal traveling halfway around the planet via fiber optics or Ethernet can arrive virtually unaltered, assuming the network and equipment are high-quality. This is why streaming, when done right, can rival or surpass traditional physical media playback.

That said, the transition from digital to analog still matters. The quality of the DAC, power supplies, and even the local signal path in your playback chain remains critical. Audiophiles who value the shortest signal path may need to reconcile their beliefs with the fact that in the digital domain, distance and path length are less of a concern than implementation and system design.

Hope this helps! 

@soix 

Your perspective highlights one of the most compelling advantages of streaming—limitless access to world of music. The convenience of discovering new artists and genres has also transformed my listening habits after so many years of enjoying music through my private collection.
 

“streaming audio is very much inferior to 16 bit audio”

@brianlucey 

The claim that streaming audio is inferior to 16-bit audio is an oversimplification. Whether streaming sounds inferior depends on several factors, 

1. A well-optimized streaming setup can rival or surpass CD playback. This includes:

• High-quality DACs.

• Proper network infrastructure (e.g., fiber or galvanic isolation).

• Effective noise reduction in the streaming chain.

2. Source Material - Streaming platforms may sometimes use different masters than physical media, which can affect perceived quality. A poorly mastered track will sound bad regardless of the format.

3.  Many people compare streaming to CDs without considering the effort required to optimize streaming systems. Without attention to detail, streaming can indeed sound inferior due to noise, jitter, or poor network configurations.

Given your industry experience and perspective, it appears you have yet to experience a good streaming setup or have no desire to explore potential of streaming. Streaming services like Qobuz and Tidal offer lossless and high-resolution formats, often exceeding the 16-bit/44.1kHz standard of CD’s. And Streaming services like Pandora and Spotify offers mediocre quality, far less than CD’s resolution.  

@richardbrand 

Thank you for the kind words! I intentionally left out DSD as I did not want to over-complicate my response. I am a huge supporter of DSD and it certainly deserves a mention as a high-resolution format for its unique approach to audio reproduction. As you know, it is currently only available as downloads.

DSD’s ability to capture micro-dynamics and its “analog-like” character made it a worthwhile endeavor for me. While not without challenges (e.g., noise shaping at higher frequencies), DSD’s purity and simplicity remain compelling for me to keep buying …800 plus albums so far.

"high resolution" is a marketing myth
@brianlucey 

It appears you enjoy making provocative statements. May be that’s your thing! 

“maybe you’re someone who buys the sales pitch that you’re sold instead of someone who knows what they’re doing”

@brianlucey

That’s quite presumptuous on your part…LOL! Since you asked and folks with an aptitude to learn may benefit from this information,

What is High Definition (Hi-Def) Audio ~ High-definition audio refers to audio recordings with higher resolution than the standard CD quality of 16-bit/44.1kHz. It typically involves:

• Higher Bit Depth: Increases dynamic range and reduces quantization noise. Common values are 24-bit or higher.

• Higher Sampling Rate: Captures more detail in the frequency domain. Typical rates include 96kHz or 192kHz.

Why is Music Mastered at 96kHz Superior to 44.1kHz?

• Frequency Range - While 44.1kHz can theoretically capture frequencies up to 22.05kHz (Nyquist theorem), 96kHz extends this to 48kHz, reducing the risk of aliasing artifacts and better preserving high-frequency overtones, even if they’re outside human hearing.

• Phase Accuracy - Higher sampling rates improve phase coherence, particularly for complex waveforms, which contributes to more natural sound reproduction.

• Anti-Aliasing Filters: 96kHz allows for gentler filters in the ADC/DAC process, reducing pre-ringing and phase distortion.

However, the perceived superiority also depends on:

• Mastering Quality: A well-mastered 44.1kHz file can sound better than a poorly mastered 96kHz file.

• Playback Chain: Many systems don’t fully exploit the benefits of higher sampling rates.

How Does Upsampling Improve a Master File?

Upsampling doesn’t add new information but can improve playback by:

• Gentler Reconstruction Filters: By upsampling, DACs can use less aggressive filters, reducing artifacts like ringing or phase shifts.

• Noise Shaping: Moving quantization noise to inaudible frequencies improves perceived clarity.

• Interpolation: Smooths transitions between digital samples, potentially reducing harshness in the sound.

I do not believe in upsampling cause upsampling can’t recreate lost detail from a lower-resolution source. That’s why I always gravitated towards files in its native resolution and focused on optimizing playback system. This has served me well over the years as I am able to experience recordings as intended by artist or recording engineer.

Why is MQA More of What the Artist Intends vs. the Mastered File?

MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) claims to deliver “studio sound” through,

• End-to-End Authentication: Ensures the file you hear is identical to the studio master.

• Time Domain Accuracy: MQA emphasizes reducing temporal blur, which it claims improves the spatial and timing cues in music.

• File Compression: MQA uses a folding technique to deliver high-resolution audio in smaller file sizes, making it more accessible for streaming.

Artist Intent vs. MQA Mastered File

While MQA markets itself as aligning with the artist’s intent, this is subjective. The “intent” could already be achieved in the master file, and MQA’s processing may alter that….I could go on but I see no sense in debating a defunct medium.

IMHO, Artist intent is more about the quality of the original recording and mastering than any specific format or technology.

I don’t claim to be an expert, just a person with little bit of understanding on how technology works and deep admiration for musicians and engineers responsible for the music we have been enjoying in our personal space.

“I guess that was a reference to streaming!”
@richardbrand 

Yes! Correction to my previous post…DSD is available as downloads or physical media (SACD). My go to reference for downloads is NativeDSD and there are few others that are very transparent on provenance of file. If I am paying for music, I don’t buy until I am able to verify the file source. 

I do agree, delta-sigma conversion combines the strengths of both PCM and DSD, offering a practical solution to the limitations of traditional PCM DACs. However, to my ears, their sound is not as natural as DAC’s that uses Sabre ESS Pro Chips.