CD is the perfect format...according to Steve

Randy Myers said:
I still will purchase a CD if I cannot find a high resolution download version of an album I want. I immediately rip the disk and that is probably the only time the CD will be in a spinner. The same with SACDs, which I really like, but the ripped version almost always sounds better (no physical spinning and upsampled to 512 <shurg>). I never stream... simply do not like it... I prefer to have the album on my server, that simple.
Click to expand...

Randy, it is interesting that you find ripped versions almost always sounding better than spinning. Strangely, I find the opposite. What is it that you find more compelling with the ripped version?

I have tried using a variety of forms to play the digital content and almost 100% of the time still prefer using the hard media via a transport connected to the DAC (even the connections from the transport to the DAC make a difference IMHO). To my ears, when using the transport (over direct playing or streaming the bits) in our system there is a clear improvement in musicality, micro-dynamics, and even timbre to some extent.

I don't doubt your experiences, but would like to know more about what you are hearing.

On paper (especially with caching and re-clocking) you would think it should not matter at all. You might even argue that direct playing or stream is better than the potential jitter and glitchiness from spinning a disc; but for whatever reason spinning almost always sounds better in our system.
 
Randy Myers said:
I would not know, but it sort of seems to be a setting, maybe in youtube?
Click to expand...

The funny thing is that I have no problem getting sound out of the majority of videos I click on youtube. I bat zero for Mike's videos.
 
mep said:
The funny thing is that I have no problem getting sound out of the majority of videos I click on youtube. I bat zero for Mike's videos.
Click to expand...

You need a DAC for my videos. [emoji6]. Doesn’t work on a turntable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
CPP said:
I still buy CD's, ( and LP's) why not own your music instead renting it [emoji3], rip away
Click to expand...

For me is Simple: Because for the price of 2CDs ($20) I can have 30 million at my disposal.
 
laynesaddiction said:
Randy, it is interesting that you find ripped versions almost always sounding better than spinning. Strangely, I find the opposite. What is it that you find more compelling with the ripped version?

I have tried using a variety of forms to play the digital content and almost 100% of the time still prefer using the hard media via a transport connected to the DAC (even the connections from the transport to the DAC make a difference IMHO). To my ears, when using the transport (over direct playing or streaming the bits) in our system there is a clear improvement in musicality, micro-dynamics, and even timbre to some extent.

I don't doubt your experiences, but would like to know more about what you are hearing.

On paper (especially with caching and re-clocking) you would think it should not matter at all. You might even argue that direct playing or stream is better than the potential jitter and glitchiness from spinning a disc; but for whatever reason spinning almost always sounds better in our system.
Click to expand...

I find it strange too which is why I asked how he is playing back his CDs. If he is not using his DAC with his CD spinner and is using the analog outputs from his CD player I can see where he might prefer streaming assuming his DAC is much better than the DAC built into his CD player.
 
laynesaddiction said:
Randy, it is interesting that you find ripped versions almost always sounding better than spinning. Strangely, I find the opposite. What is it that you find more compelling with the ripped version?

I have tried using a variety of forms to play the digital content and almost 100% of the time still prefer using the hard media via a transport connected to the DAC (even the connections from the transport to the DAC make a difference IMHO). To my ears, when using the transport (over direct playing or streaming the bits) in our system there is a clear improvement in musicality, micro-dynamics, and even timbre to some extent.

I don't doubt your experiences, but would like to know more about what you are hearing.

On paper (especially with caching and re-clocking) you would think it should not matter at all. You might even argue that direct playing or stream is better than the potential jitter and glitchiness from spinning a disc; but for whatever reason spinning almost always sounds better in our system.
Click to expand...

IMO there is no way to get into a one topology is better than the other. CD vs NAS stored vs Tidal. There are a million different cables and accessories not to mention components that come into play recreating digital playback. Your getting into a one upmanship show.
 
mep said:
Really? Are you connecting the analog outputs of your CD player straight into your preamp or are you going from the digital output from the CD player into the same DAC you are using for streaming music?
Click to expand...

My CD player is connected to my Bryston Preamp three ways: 2-channel analog output via XLR, 7-channel analog output via Analog RCA, and digital via HDMI. I compared Tidal HiFi and physical CDs (both playing at 16/44) using the same DAC and felt that they sounded the same.

I am now streaming Tidal and my own ripped CDs via Roon/HQPlayer. HQPlayer upsamples everything to 512DSD and sends it to my new DAC (T+A) via USB. I do not bother with physical CDs because a) I already ripped all my CDs, b) I feel that they sound the same as the ripped files, and (most importantly) c) I much prefer 512DSD playback which is not possible using physical CDs.

PS#1: In the past I also had my CD player connected to the Bryston preamp via coaxial and digital too.

PS#2: I have three DACs. One in the Bryston SP3, one in the Oppo 205, and a stand-alone T+A DAC 8. The T+A is the best of the three and the one I now use with the HQPlayer. The DAC in the Oppo 205 is better than the one in the SP3.
 
We have quite a few classical musician friends. Almost none of them will ever get a contract with a major label, although one string quartet (see below) used to have a contract with Decca when major companies used to have a fair number of artists under contract. Most of them release their own CD's on their own labels which you can typically buy on Amazon. They rent a studio and engineer/producer to record what they want (sometimes with other artists) and then hire a mastering engineer to create a CD file which they send to a CD duplicator. They have artists and templates to use to produce CD's which look and sound like the major companies - at quantities they can afford (unlike vinyl or SACD's). They take copies of their CD's with them to sell at concerts they give (typically they charge $20 for a CD at the concert, usually autographing the CD's after the concert).

One group is the Alexander String Quartet whom we have known for 20 years. Their label is Foghorn Classics. You can search the Foghorn Classics website and the Amazon Website for their CD's and also streaming, mp3's etc. The group owns the material (unlike typical artists) and they make any profit from the sales of the CD's, etc.

Bottom line from the artist's perspective: CD's allow them control, costs are not expensive, any profits go directly to them, they can sell at their concerts or on line.

Larry
 
CPP said:
I pay $20 a month as well, But if the service went down, that $20 buys you nothing.
Click to expand...

I am paying/buying a service. If my current service goes down, I can pay/buy another service. I'm perfectly ok that way.
 
Projectman said:
Tidal HiFi is $11.95 a month for veterans
Click to expand...
I swear I cannot understand this, but I hear better audio quality on my v30+, and all previous phones, from Amazon Unlimited Music than from Tidal.

The V30 is MQA capable, for sure, but I'm not sure if it is really triggering MQA even though in settings it shows Master quality has a check next to it.

I have subscriptions to Spotify (my favorite for discovery), Tidal and Amazing Music a d for a long time.e anything g I've found in either app I listen to later in Amazon.

Anyway sorry to derail, I've purchased about 20 CD's in the last year from artists I've discovered on streaming apps.

It's interesting to me that I use streaming and CD playback nearly equally these days.

Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk
 
I looked it up and the explanation mentioned using MP3 so I think it is compressed.

Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk
 
At first I so loved streaming from Tidal, however after I upgraded my system, I found that I stream from Tidal less and less because it just doesn't sound as good as streaming from my library. Why is that ?
 
mintakax said:
At first I so loved streaming from Tidal, however after I upgraded my system, I found that I stream from Tidal less and less because it just doesn't sound as good as streaming from my library. Why is that ?
Click to expand...

That is way to broad a question. Digital is all about implementation. A detailed description of all componants including cabling is required to better understand the performance differences.
 
laynesaddiction said:
Randy, it is interesting that you find ripped versions almost always sounding better than spinning. Strangely, I find the opposite. What is it that you find more compelling with the ripped version?

I have tried using a variety of forms to play the digital content and almost 100% of the time still prefer using the hard media via a transport connected to the DAC (even the connections from the transport to the DAC make a difference IMHO). To my ears, when using the transport (over direct playing or streaming the bits) in our system there is a clear improvement in musicality, micro-dynamics, and even timbre to some extent.

I don't doubt your experiences, but would like to know more about what you are hearing.

On paper (especially with caching and re-clocking) you would think it should not matter at all. You might even argue that direct playing or stream is better than the potential jitter and glitchiness from spinning a disc; but for whatever reason spinning almost always sounds better in our system.
Click to expand...

+1

So far, I have no heard computer audio that makes me want to embrace it; there's also far too much drama until you get it working properly -- beyond half-assed quality --, I've seen this in my friends' experiences. My transport either beat computer audio in shootouts (less grain, better instrument separation) or was at least equal. I still spin CDs, and CDs only. It's the format for all my music. For enjoying vinyl, I do that on my friends' systems.

Talking about connection from the transport to the DAC making a difference: My MIT AES/EBU cable is as expensive as my transport, and only a bit cheaper than my DAC. I've heard a shootout of that cable with others in a friend's system, the MIT won.
 
mintakax said:
At first I so loved streaming from Tidal, however after I upgraded my system, I found that I stream from Tidal less and less because it just doesn't sound as good as streaming from my library. Why is that ?
Click to expand...

Watermarking is one possibility:

http://www.mattmontag.com/music/universals-audible-watermark

I've heard from others too that Tidal is worse than local library. I've never been interested in streaming other than YouTube for getting to know some music.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top