Help me out here.

[crisnee]

Perhaps you and Theresa should start a club. The membership might be a bit small as most of here have many Redbook CDs that don't sound "crappier than crap".

 

Funny, I had the same thought.

 

I wonder if a hearing defect can cause someone to hear something in Redbook CDs that others without said defect can't discern? For instance, if one can't hear a certain type of sound (not necessarily frequency response, but perhaps something to do with timing or I don't know what) it uncovers sounds that to the people without the defect remain hidden. IOW, people with "good" hearing hear the masking sound while those with the defect hear what lies beneath the mask.

 

I, of course, haven't a clue of what I speak, but it seems to me that Theresa and Spdif aren't lying just for the hell of it, and I'm just looking for some kind of explanation.

 

-Chris

[sandyk]

This is really not even slightest issue these days. Netflix and Youtube are streaming 1080p and 4k content. FLAC compressed 96/24/2 takes about 2 Mbps bandwidth. That's what Netflix takes for SD video playback...

 

Netflix 4k averages 16 Mbps with peaks up to 20 Mbps. (works even over 4G mobile network here)

 

Then at least with YouTube and VEVO they go and dumb it down to AAC 187Kbs audio at best.

[sandyk]

Perhaps you and Theresa should start a club. The membership might be a bit small as most of here have many Redbook CDs that don't sound "crappier than crap".

 

Perhaps they are the ones that haven't had too much post processing, but generally still sound a little lacking than the same recording made at 24/192 ? IF those RB CD recordings are so damn good, then why do so many members still prefer vinyl ?

Perhaps there would be far more members of that elite club than you seem to think there would be ?

[kumakuma]

Perhaps they are the ones that haven't had too much post processing, but generally still sound a little lacking than the same recording made at 24/192 ? IF those RB CD recordings are so damn good, then why do so many members still prefer vinyl ?

Perhaps there would be far more members of that elite club than you seem to think there would be ?

 

Just because I have CDs that sound good doesn't mean this is my preferred format for music. I will listen to music I enjoy in the best possible format available. It would be great if everything out there were available in 24/192 or DSD but it isn't and it probably never will be.

[Kelly]

So, the new darlings of the streaming world (Qobuz and Wimp) will be coming soon to the US so we can stream cd quality music if i am understanding this right.

 

Pretty much everyone involved in high fidelity reproduction for the last 40 yrs or so has lamented at one time or another about the backwards direction that cd, with it's loss of information, has taken reproduced sound quality. Now it is to become the "new" standard all over again? Correct me if I'm wrong but somehow this doesn't feel like forward progress to me. With Sony, HDTracks, PONO, etc, etc all working hard to bring a new level of sound quality to digital music it just feels like a backward step in the evolution of recorded sound. When you listen to all the testimonials (on PONO) from artist after artist about the amazing differences between even 16/44 to 24/96 and almost to a person lamenting the flat lifeless sound of a CD it really makes me wonder what the hell is going on here?

 

My question is this, is this a diversion from the battle to higher standards or are we simply ready to accept "cd" quality sound as THE standard moving forward just because it's better than the abysmal crap that has been the new standard for the last 10 yrs or so?

 

I have been messing around with WiMP and it is super cool. It does sound markedly better than other streaming services I have used. But it doesn't sound as good as redbook played through JRiver. This is maybe because the WiMP player doesn't have ASIO or WASAPI capability. However it is very enjoyable and it makes me think twice about buying Redbook. The quality of WiMP streaming through a Squeezebox Touch is really quite good. I am very happy with it. The variety of music that is available in decent quality is good.

 

The problem is most likely that no one will care about how good it can be. Qobuz is entering bankruptcy. Spotify doesn't even make a profit. People will take what is free or very cheap and won't demand anything more. Those of us who actually care enough about quality to pay for it are such a tiny minority that we don't matter in the greater scheme of things. WiMP is marvelous for music discovery. I think it's price of $20 or 20 Euro is very cheap for what it offers.

[Kelly]

If you are unable to hear the fact 16/44.1 PCM sounds quite terrible even when it's well recorded and produced, you should more than probably just start to listen to some real music right now. Either that, or you might want to choose a different hobby.

 

So are you actually serious or just playing parody character/troll?

 

Check out some Mapleshade CDs. They actually sound quite excellent. Sound quality is better than the majority of even well-recorded high rate PCM or DSD.

[Teresa]

...anything less than 24/88.2 sounds fairly mediocre to me at best.

 

Agreed!

 

Check out some Mapleshade CDs. They actually sound quite excellent. Sound quality is better than the majority of even well-recorded high rate PCM or DSD.

 

I agree with spdif-usb (vinyl nerd) here and strongly disagree with you, while there are poor sounding high resolution downloads, research will usually show they sound poor because they were either recorded or mixed to low resolution PCM, such as 16/44.1kHz. Well recorded high resolution PCM and DSD music files sound more lifelike, comfortable and enjoyable to me. So I see no reason to purchase poor sounding CDs that I would not enjoy especially while my DSD download wish list is currently 149 and growing and I can only afford to buy three or four per month.

 

I have tried Mapleshade CDs and they were only slightly less offensive than most other CDs. The only acceptable CDs I have ever heard are the Reference Recordings HDCDs as decoded by my old Adcom GDA-700 HDCD DAC, however Reference Recordings LPs, SACDs, 24/176.4 HRx’s and downloads sound considerable better than their HDCDs!

 

Perhaps you and Teresa should start a club. The membership might be a bit small as most of here have many Redbook CDs that don't sound "crappier than crap".

 

While I am happy that you and others can listen around the sonic defects of 16/44.1kHz PCM not all of us have the ability to do so, please have some sympathy.

 

For me it is not about resolution per se, but the more important issue is my personal enjoyment of the music itself and how it makes me feel. If a format keeps me from connecting with the music it turns me off. Most CDs and 16/44.1kHz PCM turn me off.

 

I like analog the best especially those 2-track 15 IPS master tape copies from The Tape Project but they are too expensive for my limited budget, however I find many audiophile LPs very enjoyable if cleaned with a good record cleaning machine and played with a stylus such as a line-contact that is shaped to play the bottom of the groove as these have considerable less surface noise. However, playing LPs is such a royal pain that I have settled on DSD downloads as my preferred music format as these feel the most like analog to me. Most of my high resolution PCM and DSD downloads are from well made analog masters as my favorite music is rock music from the 1960s-1970s and jazz from the 1950s-1960s. I also enjoy modern analog recordings from Opus 3, Blue Coast, Groove Note, APO (Analogue Productions Originals) and others as DSD music files.

 

Note APO (Analogue Productions Originals) is the new release label of the remastering label Analogue Productions and are recorded in the world-renowned Blue Heaven Studios, a church-turned-recording studio and mastered in analog.

[Sam Lord]

Like so many people here, I've marveled at how much music and musicality I've derived from DSD128 resampling (realtime using HQPlayer) of my CDs. But there are areas where the older redbook recordings *still* fall short and will *always* do so: massed strings and voices. Even with all that up-and over-conversion, they still have a noticeably bleached, metallic quality on massed voices or strings compared with their vinyl predecessors (if those were done with reasonable care).

 

I have often said that the poor sound of CDs on large-scale material is largely responsible for both the decline of symphonies AND the boom in chamber music in... what period? The heyday of CDs!

 

BUT, one cannot compare a good redbook recording made TODAY with the ones of yesteryear! If you use good gear properly with very good conversion, you have a tiny fraction of the timing (jitter) and amplitude (linearity) errors of the past: less than 1%!!

 

For example, a symphony recorded today with great mics using Blumlein, NOS, or Jecklin Disk techniques, great micpres, Grimm SD ADCs with great clocking and downconversion (e.g. using Saracon) will yield a fidelity which earlier recordists could only dream of.

 

Of course for such recording I would prefer to download the DSD (x1,2,4...) or hires PCM file, but I'll know that the redbook version will still be outstanding. I don't know if *all* the bleaching will be gone, but I'll be very happy to hear the result.

 

Cheers

[spdif-usb]

So are you actually serious or just playing parody character/troll?

I am 150 percent serious.

Check out some Mapleshade CDs. They actually sound quite excellent. Sound quality is better than the majority of even well-recorded high rate PCM or DSD.

Completely disagree; I use CDs as beer coasters because none of them are listenable.

[Bystander]

I use CDs as beer coasters because none of them are listenable.

You're missing out on a lot of great music.

[beanbag]

Funny, I had the same thought.

 

I wonder if a hearing defect can cause someone to hear something in Redbook CDs that others without said defect can't discern? For instance, if one can't hear a certain type of sound (not necessarily frequency response, but perhaps something to do with timing or I don't know what) it uncovers sounds that to the people without the defect remain hidden. IOW, people with "good" hearing hear the masking sound while those with the defect hear what lies beneath the mask.

 

I, of course, haven't a clue of what I speak, but it seems to me that Theresa and Spdif aren't lying just for the hell of it, and I'm just looking for some kind of explanation.

 

-Chris

 

They're like those blind ninjas that use sound and smell and etc to give them super-human abilities. I see this all the time in movies and anime, so there must be some truth to it.

[spdif-usb]

You're missing out on a lot of great music.

I am well aware of that. If I put on a CD, I have to turn the volume down because else the listening fatigue or earbleed just makes me want to leave the room and go to some place where I can enjoy the silence, but fortunately I have more than a ton of 24/96 and some 24/192 music material (stored in FLAC format, most of it transferred from good quality vinyl) so that very much eases the pain and tragedy.

[spdif-usb]

They're like those blind ninjas that use sound and smell and etc to give them super-human abilities. I see this all the time in movies and anime, so there must be some truth to it.

Sometimes I wish I had the super-human ability to travel back in time, then break into Philips' headquarters to steal their plans and bury them.

[James1776]

My question is this, is this a diversion from the battle to higher standards or are we simply ready to accept "cd" quality sound as THE standard moving forward just because it's better than the abysmal crap that has been the new standard for the last 10 yrs or so?

 

I want DSD...until that is streamed, I'll settle for anything better than MP3

[James1776]

I didn't know that Sony, HD Tracks, PONO were streaming hirez music.

 

And the samples one plays on their sites, even in the best companies like Blue Coast and Linn, are well recorded MP3's. The files bought are high rez but what you hear on the site is not due to streaming limits.

[crisnee]

I am well aware of that. If I put on a CD, I have to turn the volume down because else the listening fatigue or earbleed just makes me want to leave the room and go to some place where I can enjoy the silence, but fortunately I have more than a ton of 24/96 and some 24/192 music material (stored in FLAC format, most of it transferred from good quality vinyl) so that very much eases the pain and tragedy.

 

Do you have any kind of hearing defect? I'm actually truly interested in why cds affect you the way they do.

 

I have a friend who hears unpleasant sounds/sound that no one else does. He's not an audiophile so I didn't delve deeply into that side of things. However the sound he can't stand is something that happens in many cars. He thinks it has something to do with the motion system (tires, wheels, wind sound). He's had to buy a car that he basically dislikes a lot just because its sound doesn't aggravate his ears as much, and still he had to have it retrofitted with different tires and some other stuff. (After just riding a few miles in a "faulty" car he develops strong but temporary tinnitus).

 

He has a hearing defect. His hearing is down considerably in the 2 khz to 6 khz range, but perfectly normal at the high end.

 

By the way, he says he prefers vinyl. He says it's probably because his cd player is a very old cheapy. However he also says he doesn't mind cds.

 

-Chris

[Teresa]

I use CDs as beer coasters because none of them are listenable.

 

Novel idea! I sold my collectable CDs such as MFSL online. However because the resale price of most CDs is so low I donated most of my in print audiophile CDs to the library (Telarc, Reference Recordings, Mercury Living Presence, etc.) and when something promises to improve the sound of CD I check them out of the library. The last time was last year when I tested to see how 16/44.1kHz sounded on my new Teac UD-501 USB DAC and I found even the best audiophile CDs were still unacceptable either sonically or musically. For me it’s well recorded analog, true (not up-sampled) high resolution PCM or DSD or it doesn’t exist in my world.

 

You're missing out on a lot of great music.

 

With audiophile LPs, 24 bit PCM and DSD I have plenty to enjoy and my want list continues to grow faster than I can afford new high resolution recordings. If it’s low resolution 16/44.1kHz PCM I couldn’t possible enjoy listening to it, so why waste money?

 

My biggest complaint is SACDs, DVD-Audios and phony high resolution downloads from 44.1kHz-48kHz PCM and sold as 24/88.2kHz PCM and higher. Companies should release these in the resolution they were recorded and mixed at, let the customer upsample if they want. I want the real thing only.

 

…If I put on a CD, I have to turn the volume down because else the listening fatigue or earbleed just makes me want to leave the room and go to some place where I can enjoy the silence, but fortunately I have more than a ton of 24/96 and some 24/192 music material (stored in FLAC format, most of it transferred from good quality vinyl) so that very much eases the pain and tragedy.

 

I agree the sound of CD and 16/44.1kHz is such a sonic and musical turnoff for me, if that was the only thing that existed I couldn’t listen to music period. I use to call it CD hell, a place I never want to be! Thank goodness for analog, real high resolution PCM and DSD!

 

Sometimes I wish I had the super-human ability to travel back in time, then break into Philips' headquarters to steal their plans and bury them.

 

I wish you luck, here is something I wrote on Audio Asylum two years ago: A subject after my heart, I miss...

 

I want DSD...until that is streamed, I'll settle for anything better than MP3

 

I might consider subscribing to a streaming service if it’s DSD, until them I’ll purchase DSD downloads.

 

Do you have any kind of hearing defect? I'm actually truly interested in why cds affect you the way they do.

 

I know this is addressed to spdif-usb (vinyl nerd) however the strident, cold, unmusical sound of CDs is a real problem for many listeners. That is one reason for the LP revival and why people turn to high resolution for digital. You might want to read some of the anti-CD quotes I’ve collected.

 

When I first got on the internet many, many years ago I was shocked to see so many people defending CDs and actually listening to them. I have come to the conclusion some people are able to listen around the sonic defects of 16/44.1kHz PCM and I admire this trait.

 

I don’t know if hearing the adverse qualities in CDs is a defect or not. Those who find only displeasure and pain in enduring CDs should not listen to them and those who enjoy CDs should continue to listen to them. Why can’t we all get along?

[crisnee]

 

I don’t know if hearing the adverse qualities in CDs is a defect or not. Those who find only displeasure and pain in enduring CDs should not listen to them and those who enjoy CDs should continue to listen to them. Why can’t we all get along?

 

I'm not saying that "hearing the adverse qualities in CDs is a defect," what I am asking is whether you and/or spdif have a hearing defect. I'm speculating that a defect of some sort may be creating a sensitivity in another area of your hearing that is enabling you to hear something that people without said defect can't hear. I'm just trying to do a bit of science here. So, it's not at all a question of getting along or not.

 

-Chris

[sandyk]

I'm not saying that "hearing the adverse qualities in CDs is a defect," what I am asking is whether you and/or spdif have a hearing defect. I'm speculating that a defect of some sort may be creating a sensitivity in another area of your hearing that is enabling you to hear something that people without said defect can't hear. I'm just trying to do a bit of science here. So, it's not at all a question of getting along or not.

 

-Chris

 

Perhaps it's those that don't hear the shortcomings of many CDs , low Bit Rate .aac audio and low bit rate (almost all ?).mp3 are simply not very discerning ? Many Musos for example are quite happy listening to the lowest possible denominator recordings and playback gear, even Boom Boxes, and appear to use their musical background to have their brains automatically filter out what they don't want. They probably even create a picture in their mind's eye of how it should sound , which may be quite different to reality. even in the high ambient noise levels of a ute or pickup where they appear to be able to manage to tune out all the road and engine noise. They are probably able to tune out what they don't wish to hear from SWMBO also, and get into trouble for it . (?)

I know of a Professor of Music that is able to extract enjoyment from almost all recordings that he likes, no matter how compressed or rolled off they are. That however doesn't stop him from thoroughly enjoying much higher quality material, where his analytical mind hears things that most don't even notice, such as the sound of the hall,(dry, reverberant etc.) and the location of the various instruments.

[crisnee]

Perhaps it's those that don't hear the shortcomings of many CDs , low Bit Rate .aac audio and low bit rate (almost all ?).mp3 are simply not very discerning ? Many Musos for example are quite happy listening to the lowest possible denominator recordings and playback gear, even Boom Boxes, and appear to use their musical background to have their brains automatically filter out what they don't want. They probably even create a picture in their mind's eye of how it should sound , which may be quite different to reality. even in the high ambient noise levels of a ute or pickup where they appear to be able to manage to tune out all the road and engine noise. They are probably able to tune out what they don't wish to hear from SWMBO also, and get into trouble for it . (?)

I know of a Professor of Music that is able to extract enjoyment from almost all recordings that he likes, no matter how compressed or rolled off they are. That however doesn't stop him from thoroughly enjoying much higher quality material, where his analytical mind hears things that most don't even notice, such as the sound of the hall,(dry, reverberant etc.) and the location of the various instruments.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful response Alex. I really appreciate it. I don't know what some of your Aussie? abbreviations stand for; SWMBO for instance. I'm guessing that Musos is musicians?

 

Anyway, I agree with what you're saying happens, to a degree anyway, but I think the cases I'm talking about are too extreme. I mean these people loathe the sound of cds and would rather give up listening to music than put up with it. Theresa and Spdif are the only two people who I've come across who feel that extremely. I know that you can't stand most mp3s, but you do appreciate good cd recordings.

 

And my friend has this strange affliction where he has a hearing defect but also hears things that others can't, and can't stand those sounds only he hear.

 

By the way, I'm probably one of the Musos you refer to, again, to a degree only though. I can hear the beauty in music even on fairly shabby music systems, as long as their faults are more faults of omission rather than excess. On the other hand I have a real problem listening to poorly recorded music and/or many historical recordings no matter how good the performances.

 

-Chris

[sandyk]

SWMBO = She Who Must Be Obeyed.

[Kelly]

I appreciate a true high end system when I hear it and hope to have one someday, but the recent discourse on various threads about even enjoying listening to music in certain types of formats is a bit much. The difference between listening to a CD on a high end system vs hi-res on a high end system is ultimately counting angels on the head of a pin (which is an activity I enjoy, btw.) But if the day comes when I can't put on some shitty headphones and rock out to some poorly recorded AC/DC when I'm jogging or when I rolling down the road in my ancient car with all the windows down on some nearly bald tires is the day when I've gotten too anal about audiophilia. There are some posters recently that I wonder about why they even bother as they've clearly lost what is important.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful response Alex. I really appreciate it. I don't know what some of your Aussie? abbreviations stand for; SWMBO for instance. I'm guessing that Musos is musicians?

 

Anyway, I agree with what you're saying happens, to a degree anyway, but I think the cases I'm talking about are too extreme. I mean these people loathe the sound of cds and would rather give up listening to music than put up with it. Theresa and Spdif are the only two people who I've come across who feel that extremely. I know that you can't stand most mp3s, but you do appreciate good cd recordings.

 

And my friend has this strange affliction where he has a hearing defect but also hears things that others can't, and can't stand those sounds only he hear.

 

By the way, I'm probably one of the Musos you refer to, again, to a degree only though. I can hear the beauty in music even on fairly shabby music systems, as long as their faults are more faults of omission rather than excess. On the other hand I have a real problem listening to poorly recorded music and/or many historical recordings no matter how good the performances.

 

-Chris

[sandyk]

There are some posters recently that I wonder about why they even bother as they've clearly lost what is important.

 

Perhaps it is you who have lost what is important to an Audiophile, as distinct from someone who just enjoys music from any convenient source ?

For many it's the sense/feeling of "being there" , and the electronics seemingly disappearing as exemplified in this thread started by Superdad.

 

 

ATTENTION Current Mac mini/A+ users: Boot Mavericks from an SD card, load a RAMdisk, dismount your internal SATA drives, and pour a drink for the musicians walking out of your speakers

[tranz]

I'm not saying that "hearing the adverse qualities in CDs is a defect," what I am asking is whether you and/or spdif have a hearing defect. I'm speculating that a defect of some sort may be creating a sensitivity in another area of your hearing that is enabling you to hear something that people without said defect can't hear. I'm just trying to do a bit of science here. So, it's not at all a question of getting along or not.

 

-Chris

 

Some people are more sensitive to digital than most. Just like some people are more sensitive to EMI fields, or certain food types. Once people can accept that not everyone is built the same, and that the audio experience can be different for different people, many of these arguments can be put to bed, as just that, differing experiences.

 

There was a vinyl dealer, back when I still had my deck, that would get physically uncomfortable with digital playback and could only handle live music and vinyl. Luckily I do not have this, but I completely understand. To this day I am still trying to perfect my digital playback to remove completely any fatiguing. Put a digital playback system with noisy switching power supplies and a Class D amp in front of me and I will want to turn it off. Turn on Sirius radio in the car, and I would rather walk. But many people are not bothered by any of it. Defect? Perhaps, but if everyone's hearing and sensitivities would be the same, we would all be listening from the same box and method.

 

Cheers

[sandyk]

Put a digital playback system with noisy switching power supplies and a Class D amp in front of me and I will want to turn it off

 

Some people are easily pleased. aren't they ? When I started with Telstra ( Post Master General's Dept.) after leaving school I was fortunate enough to work in a Sydney Telephone Exchange where the >15KHZ equalised program lines of the A.B.C. (National Broadcaster) passed through on the way north to Newcastle. Being exposed to high quality vinyl playback ( in mono) at a young age helped to form my desire for further improvements, as the received AM signal was still clearly lacking in comparison with what we were hearing through the Exchange monitors. This led to me constructing wideband TRF (Tuned Radio Frequency) and Homodyne tuners (Phase Lock Loop type) in order to get more benefit from what I knew the A.B.C. was transmitting back then. AM radio at the LF end of the AM band was permitted wider bandwidth in those days.

Even FM Stereo when it finally made it's appearance "Downunder," was very good indeed before the inevitable Loudness wars between stations, and the introduction of automated .MP3 carts for automated after hours programming.