Article: The Future Of HiFi

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Chris, Another thought. If you are working on new CAPS designs, there needs to be some that are optimized for streaming over local storage playback. Not sure what that would entail but it should be an interesting exercise. Thanks so much for all of your efforts on the CAPS designs in the past. They have set the standard for the hobby.

Thanks for the comments. CAPS is always in my mind and undergoing constant mental refinement. I won't disappoint when the next version is ready.

[Paul R]

LOL! Just like disk space, any communications channel tends to fill up to it's maximum capacity.

 

We need a lot more bandwidth and a lot more efficient way to use that bandwidth before most of the issues go away here. In the US, a very large percentage of people cannot get reasonably priced high speed service, unless you could 786K DSL as "high speed." And where one can, it is often expensive. Gigabit service is available only to a minute fraction of the population, unless one wishes to pay ruinous rates. ($60,000/month anyone?)

 

What we need are technologies that take effective use of older speeds - 2-6mbs downloads and < 1mbs uploads. Very high speed 1000:1 compression fits the bill for that. And as traffic grows, the available (virtual) bandwidth is much better utilized and distributed.

 

Just my two cents. This is a field I struggle with constantly.

 

 

Technology is fine.

Just move to a tech hub in the US and you can have it as well.

 

I am on a 4G router, and I just tested my bandwidth:

 

28024 kbit/s down

12733 kbit/s up

Ping 27 ms

 

That means that I can stream:

 

25 / 192 in 5.1 surround without breaking a sweat.

 

My iPhone will easily stream 24/192 as it clocked 18/10 right here in my living room.

 

 

I do propose wired service for streaming ;-)

[Kelly]

One interesting theme in the comments is just how far behind the US is in its Internet infrastructure. The decision to allow Internet provider monopolies by geography will continue to haunt us.

[The Computer Audiophile]

One interesting theme in the comments is just how far behind the US is in its Internet infrastructure. The decision to allow Internet provider monopolies by geography will continue to haunt us.

Big time.

[speavler]

Chris, spin the black circle.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Chris, spin the black circle.

Ha!

 

P.S. That song won a Grammy :~)

[drez]

Caps are in place because ISP's sell internet with the assumption that not everyone will max out the allocated bandwidth all the time. The network infrastructure they use only has so much bandwidth which must be shared around, and to be honest if the server is overseas there is even more of a potential bottleneck. Until we all have super-internet (as well as better distribution) this kind of streaming will remain sci-fi.

 

Saying this (once the limitations of internet bandwidth are taken out of the equation) there is nothing wrong with streaming in principle as even with downloads the music has to come off the internet and somehow into your hi-fi.

[Paul R]

Caps are in place because ISP's sell internet with the assumption that not everyone will max out the allocated bandwidth all the time. The network infrastructure they use only has so much bandwidth which must be shared around, and to be honest if the server is overseas there is even more of a potential bottleneck. Until we all have super-internet (as well as better distribution) this kind of streaming will remain sci-fi.

 

Saying this (once the limitations of internet bandwidth are taken out of the equation) there is nothing wrong with streaming in principle as even with downloads the music has to come off the internet and somehow into your hi-fi.

 

Well, yes, and no. There is far more available bandwidth available than is being utilized. Think dark fibre. At lest in part, caps are being used as a way to squeeze more money out of the consumer, protect the antiquated but very profitable cable tv subscriptions, and of course, as a negotiating tool.

 

We cut the cable years ago, and regularly run into data caps now from our ISP on the consumer side. It is a real bit of a problem.

[kirkmc]

Chris,

 

Interesting article as always. I've commented on several of your points here:

 

Kirkville | Is This the Future of Hi-Fi?

 

Best,

 

Kirk

[kirkmc]

One interesting theme in the comments is just how far behind the US is in its Internet infrastructure. The decision to allow Internet provider monopolies by geography will continue to haunt us.

 

As well as other countries where coverage is spotty at best. I live in a semi-rural area in the UK, and I can get a 2 Mbps DSL connection. That's pretty much the norm in this country, and even people in cities - outside of the center - often get such speeds.

 

Kirk

[The Computer Audiophile]

Chris,

 

Interesting article as always. I've commented on several of your points here:

 

Kirkville | Is This the Future of Hi-Fi?

 

Best,

 

Kirk

Hi Kirk - Thanks for pointing out some items you disagree with in this article. Perhaps I could have clarified the following point better.

 

"But Chris is wrong when he suggests:"

All music is sent directly from the Cloud to a HiFi component without traversing through the remote control iOS or Android device.

"Oh, my, this is the last thing we need. In fact, if this were the case, it would kill music streaming."

 

 

What I tried to explain in the article is that HiFi companies are bad software and interface designers. Thus, using apps from WiMP, Qobuz, and Spotify enable HiFi manufacturers to stay out of the app business. The iOS app sees the HiFi device just like an AirPlay device, but once selected the audio flows between the Cloud and the HiFi device. The iOS apps are the current apps in use by Spotify (lossy), WiMP, Qobuz, Beats (lossy), etc...

[mav52]

Good column Chris, Streaming Music to me equals "radio". I use Pandora One ($4.99 a month) and Spotify ($10.00 a month) at home if it will stay up, I also have Sirius xm radio which I pay $75.00 a year. With Siriusxm I get dedicated channels of Jazz, Classical, Blues, Classic Rock, Bluegrass and the content is there for my music taste and it works both in my home and my car not to mention realtime coverages of sporting events like soccer, football, racing, golf and I don't have to worry about sorry internet service with dropped connections, slow response from Pandora or Spotify or using up my data in my "plan".

 

To me, Streaming is the future if the cost are comparable to other services and if the US internet providers can fix their sorry networks and if the content and my chosen artist are there to support my music taste and if these streaming companies add unlimited skip per hour.

 

But I still at my old age love to hold that jacket and set back and listen to LP's/CD, but I also like to get in my car and drive or walk down to the beach and set and listen to music which means I like to be in control and that means I can chose downloads vs Streaming . To me it's all about the music, any way I can get it.

 

Regarding CAPS, what I find interesting is in the US many of the cable companies in the next 5 years are going to CAP data. ""Comcast executive VP David Cohen revealed the cable and Internet service provider would start capping data usage within the next five years ""http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/05/comcast_cap_data_usage_limit_time_warner_cable.html

 

And even with DISH Network's best satellite Internet plan, you still only get 15 GB of data that you can use at any time for anything and their Off-peak Bonus Data may only be used between 2 am and 8 am. So until all of these possible providers of data build out their networks and if streaming does take off, I see slow and packed networks that will limit users of all services.

 

I see streaming related to that faucet on your sink, you can only get so much water out of that faucet unless to add a larger faucet and adding a larger faucet is going to cost someone.

[kirkmc]

 

[/i]What I tried to explain in the article is that HiFi companies are bad software and interface designers. Thus, using apps from WiMP, Qobuz, and Spotify enable HiFi manufacturers to stay out of the app business. The iOS app sees the HiFi device just like an AirPlay device, but once selected the audio flows between the Cloud and the HiFi device. The iOS apps are the current apps in use by Spotify (lossy), WiMP, Qobuz, Beats (lossy), etc...[/font][/color]

 

So how is the music streaming then? Are you advocating Bluetooth? I don't think that has the bandwidth for what you want (high-res).

 

Or are you suggesting that these apps actually act as remotes for the hi-fi devices? If so, they still need the actual apps on the device, and there still needs to be a standardized platform, and, if you take "smart" TVs as an example, it's pretty clear that will never happen.

 

Kirk

[The Computer Audiophile]

So how is the music streaming then? Are you advocating Bluetooth? I don't think that has the bandwidth for what you want (high-res).

 

Or are you suggesting that these apps actually act as remotes for the hi-fi devices? If so, they still need the actual apps on the device, and there still needs to be a standardized platform, and, if you take "smart" TVs as an example, it's pretty clear that will never happen.

 

Kirk

Not advocating bluetooth.

 

Not advocating smart TV style software.

 

Think of it as an AirPort Express type of HiFi product that talks directly with streaming services. No user interface is available on the HiFi product. The WiMP app is only a control much like the Television remote control.

[kirkmc]

Good column Chris, Streaming Music to me equals "radio". I use Pandora One ($4.99 a month) and Spotify ($10.00 a month) at home if it will stay up, I also have Sirius xm radio which I pay $75.00 a year. With Siriusxm I get dedicated channels of Jazz, Classical, Blues, Classic Rock, Bluegrass and the content is there for my music taste and it works both in my home and my car not to mention realtime coverages of sporting events like soccer, football, racing, golf and I don't have to worry about sorry internet service with dropped connections, slow response from Pandora or Spotify or using up my data in my "plan".

 

To me, Streaming is the future if the cost are comparable to other services and if the US internet providers can fix their sorry networks and if the content and my chosen artist are there to support my music taste and if these streaming companies add unlimited skip per hour.

 

Skips are only an issue with radio-like services, such as Pandora and iTunes Radio; on-demand services, like Spotify, don't have skip limits.

 

It's too bad Sirius XM isn't available outside the US, as they do have a lot of interesting channels; I'd pay for them, in part because you don't, as you say, have to worry about data. However, you can only listen on more expensive radios.

 

Kirk

[kirkmc]

Not advocating bluetooth.

 

Not advocating smart TV style software.

 

Think of it as an AirPort Express type of HiFi product that talks directly with streaming services. No user interface is available on the HiFi product. The WiMP app is only a control much like the Television remote control.

 

I see. So an Apple TV, with channels, that connects to an amp or receiver.

 

The Apple TV doesn't use AirPlay, except when you stream from a device through it; it can connect directly via WiFi or Ethernet. I think that's a more serious contender, if and when Apple opens the platform. Also, it gives you the option of using the TV as the interface, which is a good thing; you can see a lot more information there than you can on a smartphone.

 

Kirk

[firedog]

I'm somewhere in the middle on this. I think the general direction is as Chris sees it. I'm older than many of you but streaming Redbook or higher quality appeals to me - if it ever becomes available. However, I'd see it as a supplement to music downloads that I buy.

 

Music I especially like I prefer to own and have a local copy so that it is always available. In the past couple of years I've bought about an album a week - mostly hi-res downloads. I only buy discs these days when they are the only legal alternative. I prefer saving the space, and disc packaging doesn't do much for me anyway.... The only thing I miss about LPs (I own a few hundred but don't play them) are the covers. They are nice to hold and read while listening, unlike disc packaging/booklets.

[jhwalker]

I'm somewhere in the middle on this. I think the general direction is as Chris sees it. I'm older than many of you but streaming Redbook or higher quality appeals to me - if it ever becomes available. However, I'd see it as a supplement to music downloads that I buy.

 

Music I especially like I prefer to own and have a local copy so that it is always available. In the past couple of years I've bought about an album a week - mostly hi-res downloads. I only buy discs these days when they are the only legal alternative. I prefer saving the space, and disc packaging doesn't do much for me anyway.... The only thing I miss about LPs (I own a few hundred but don't play them) are the covers. They are nice to hold and read while listening, unlike disc packaging/booklets.

 

About the same here - I tend to purchase 2-3 albums / week, all lossless downloads, many hi-res (PCM or DSD). I only buy physical discs when a lossless download is not available.

 

I use Qobuz's lossless streaming service, but I tend to download / cache all content to my hard drive (at least temporarily) to avoid any buffering issues. Even though I have an 85MB download service (so downloading a whole 16/44 album takes just a few seconds), I prefer that "security".

 

When / if I find a release I really like, I'll go ahead and buy it, but listening to a lot of new releases via Qobuz scratches my "itch" and often confirms I'm actually *not* interested in it

[flatmap]

While streaming can be amazing, I don't like it that particular recordings may cease to be available at the whims of the rights holder. What good is a streaming service when your favorite recording of Bach's B Minor Mass is no longer available to you? You simply have no control over this -- as you would if you own the physical file. That's my biggest concern.

 

If any performance suits you as well as any other performance, then perhaps streaming is just the right thing.

[kirkmc]

While streaming can be amazing, I don't like it that particular recordings may cease to be available at the whims of the rights holder. What good is a streaming service when your favorite recording of Bach's B Minor Mass is no longer available to you? You simply have no control over this -- as you would if you own the physical file. That's my biggest concern.

 

If any performance suits you as well as any other performance, then perhaps streaming is just the right thing.

 

Also, as streaming becomes more prevalent, there will be fewer CDs available. So if that Mass in B Minor is no longer streamable, it may be out of print on CD. It might still be available for sale by download, but it might not.

 

So, if you really, really like a specific performance, it's better to own it.

 

Kirk

[newby11]

Count me in the minority: ownership is the only way to go. In my case, I've actually had Amazon erase an ebook off my iPad and had Sony CDs put a virus on my PC when I ripped 'em (yes, I OWNED those CDs). Ergo, I simply don't hold the music and tech folks in such high esteem as CA denizens apparently do.

 

Moreover, why is paying forever for the privilege of renting music that the industry decides you can/cannot hear at its whim considered a desirable or even benign development? My 40-something mind just can't understand--or accept--that concept.

 

I want all the convenience of music-as-universal-data-files, but I want to own my music and know that it is mine--even if in storage bins in the basement. It's the same reason I refuse to pay Sirius every month to listen to the radio in my car--instead, I loaded up my 160GB iPod Classic, connected it via USB invisibly in the storage bin between the front seat, and never looked back. Think about it: Can you pass on your cloud music subscription "collection" to your kids?

[tne]

Keeping physical ownership but with the expanded horizon of streaming/cloud capabilities seems like it will be the most reasonable option for me. Here in China, the internet speed and stability is truly horrid (for several reasons, some of them not being technical ones). If I needed to rely on streaming for my music, I would truly be one deprived MF.

 

In addition to personal preferences and circumstances, the new horizon that you describe will enhance our music experience, but we can also maintain the formats that we listen to music now. Many options is clearly a good thing.

[bobbmd]

Chris, Very well said. How do YOU have access to WiMP? it seems a lot like Qobuz which I subscribe to here in upstate central ny but only after jumping through considerable hoops to get them to accept me. Between you and me i'll never go back to lossy/320kbps reproduction but i still TRY to listen to my 250+ playlists from MOG that are now on BM(an apt acronym for BeatsMusic) but it takes forever to load songs to play and sounds really pretty good through amarra's sQ app( as does Qobuz lossless) then to my gungnir DAC to my system. I still have my 1000+ cd's in aiff on my mac mini hdd and use amarra plus amarra sQ to improve the lossless quality even more. Your visionary thoughts seem to have already happened in some respects and for my 1960's ears i have sound nirvanna unbelievable sound quality and access to almost any genre I have ever wanted to listen to( as long as my CFO doesn't mind the 20 euros/ month for Qobuz) bobbmd

[One and a half]

Cloud services, whether it be an office suite, movies, books, and music is all about control and how much money from subscriptions can be raked in by the huge pool. Money is then calculated as a steady revenue stream despite the content being poor or not to your taste, either way, you pay.

 

Streaming data, cures the ancient distribution of physical media, and messy, costly warehousing of real estate. No staff to employ either, databases spew out how much users listen per second, so the revenue stream keeps continuing to the labels. Internet connections raised by many here are not optimum, with outages and slow speeds typical which creates another problem. YOU, the music lover, still keep paying per month, not OUR fault YOUR internet connection went down or is slow, how are WE to know?

 

Another thing with cloud services, all those millions of users on a database is a very tempting target for hackers, like the Terminator, they won't stop, ever.

 

No thanks, not today, or in the 'near future'.

[InfernoSTi]

It's interesting some of the security features being implemented for the cloud. For example, breaking files into multiple parts with each part located on a separate server and a locally stored encryption key...a much more robust solution that assumes the servers will be hacked someday or if someone hacks the local key, it only opens one file, not all files. Very nice thinking...