Don’t real audiophiles own their own media?

Calvin said:
An Audiophile is a perfectionist - IMO, a person who is journeying towards perfection in audio reproduction. I wasn't aware I needed a degree in audio engineering to understand such.

What are my credentials in such topics? I want to learn. That's one reason I made the OP. I thought this was kind of obvious. I didn't know you owned this forum and didn't consider learning as a sufficient reason for posting a topic.

However, one thing I do know - you're not my teacher and never will be. That's why you are going back on "ignore."
Click to expand...

You want to learn? Seems to me you want to troll. You are learning by telling others how or what they should they listen to and that streaming is inferior and you are not an audiophile if you don’t collect physical media? I’ll ask again by what gauge or measure you have arrived at the fact that streaming is inferior? Have you consulted with the industry and labels embracing streaming to let them know they are fools? You should do so quick because streaming took off like Space X rocket and there is no turning back. Statistics speak for themselves.
 
Is a guy with a set of headphones listening to a 352.8 DXD one microphone recording done in an award winning studio in Europe with a vacuum tube microphone and captured on a Studer A80 reel to reel tape machine running at 15ips a music lover or an audiophile or neither because he doesn’t have a 44.1Khz version of this music on CD? Please school me. Perhaps headphones are not an audiophile tool either?
 
TheOctopus said:
You want to learn? Seems to me you want to troll. You are learning by telling others how or what they should they listen to and that streaming is inferior and you are not an audiophile if you don’t collect physical media? I’ll ask again by what gauge or measure you have arrived at the fact that streaming is inferior? Have you consulted with the industry and labels embracing streaming to let them know they are fools? You should do so quick because streaming took off like Space X rocket and there is no turning back. Statistics speak for themselves.
Click to expand...

Serge when someone places you on “ignore” on this forum they can’t see your posts. The only way I saw this one is that I signed out and then it became visible. It seems you have made quite a few posts I haven’t interacted with. Now you know why.

You keep insisting streaming is better quality than vinyl and tape or at least is equal to it. But you have not proven that. An assertion is not evidence.

So please interact word for word with Mike’s post below. Convince me that he’s wrong. Talk to us about the superior quality of A2D converters, compression, etc. over tape and vinyl.

Here’s his post so you can see it.

Ok, so I will take that as a yes, DAC’s do matter. Well here’s the problem:

EVERY SINGLE digital recording MUST go through an Analog to Digital conversion process. So when you click play on that track on Tidal or Qobuz, you are at the mercy of whatever piece of crap A2D converter was used at that time. Think about A2D converters in the 80’s, 90’s, etc.

A few summers ago, we toured recording studios. Their A2D converters are absolute junk. They said “$500 would be a huge expense on an A2D.” Many smaller studios are using the A2D built into their Mac computers and software.

They are not using high quality A2D converters like the ones from Merging Technologies. They are using very inexpensive A2D converters and up until about 2015, most were not even the equivalent of a Chord Mojo on the DAC side. I saw them with my own eyes and talked to a famous Mastering Engineer for confirmation.

When you add to that the obsession with compression, you now have a true double edged sword for many modern digital recordings.

Mastering Engineer Bob Katz is a friend of mine. I was introduced to Bob many years ago by our mutual friend Mike Chaffee who sadly passed away earlier this year from Covid. Bob has been to my house, I’ve been to his house, we’ve chatted many times. I’ve read his books on Mastering. I attended the seminar he gave to our audiophile society. Did you know that MOST recordings today are cut to 24/96, and those 24/192 files are usually just upsampled 24/96 done on not the best equipment in the world? That’s why the 24/96 often sounds better! I’ve talked to Bob at length to really understand what the hell is going on with digital today.

Here’s a little story: I have a local customer named Bill. His absolute favorite album in the world is “Sinatra and Strings”. Bill is a streaming/digital only guy. Every time Bill would come in the store, he would play the album and mumble wondering how Frank could allow such a terrible recording. “Listen! Listen!” he would say, “those strings are so harsh sounding. How could Frank approve of this?” I said “Bill, I have an original first pressing of this album at home and a MOFI repressing from the master tapes. I’ll bring them in.”

The next time Bill was in the store, I put on both albums, his jaw hit the floor. “It wasn’t the recording at all!!!!!” he shouted. Yup, it was the horrible A2D conversion process.

There are great digital recordings where they’ve taken the time and care to do things right. Listening to the recordings of say Rumer are a perfect example of outstanding digital.

But when you look at the Doors album above, that’s coming from the master tapes, using proper equipment and it will NEVER EVER see an A2D process, at least for the vinyl pressing.

So yes, quality matters, provenance of the recording version you are listening to really matters. Everything matters. And this is why audiophiles seeking the best of their favorite albums do their homework and buy media.
Click to expand...
 
TheOctopus said:
Is a guy with a set of headphones listening to a 352.8 DXD one microphone recording done in an award winning studio in Europe with a vacuum tube microphone and captured on a Studer A80 reel to reel tape machine running at 15ips a music lover or an audiophile or neither because he doesn’t have a 44.1Khz version of this music on CD? Please school me. Perhaps headphones are not an audiophile tool either?
Click to expand...

Serge,

Tape is physical media. It beats steaming. PERIOD.
 
Calvin said:
Serge when someone places you on “ignore” on this forum they can’t see your posts. The only way I saw this one is that I signed out and then it became visible. It seems you have made quite a few posts I haven’t interacted with. Now you know why.

You keep insisting streaming is better quality than vinyl and tape or at least is equal to it. But you have not proven that. An assertion is not evidence.

So please interact word for word with Mike’s post below. Convince me that he’s wrong. Talk to us about the superior quality of A2D converters, compression, etc. over tape and vinyl.

Here’s his post so you can see it.
Click to expand...
It is actually you Calvin that keeps implying that streaming is inferior. Technically speaking, digital is vastly superior to analog be it tape or vinyl by the dynamic range, resolution and noise floor. It was developed to propel the music industry forward. So there is that. If you don’t know the specs of digital vs tape vs vinyl, look it up. How digital is implemented and what filter is used is up to the people from both the equipment/gear and music mastering and production. Digital can sound absolutely gorgeous. Download some high resolution music that was natively recorded in high resolution and mastered with care and then tell me if you still prefer vinyl or digital.

Until you have done that personally, there is nothing else to discuss. Yes, I know the selection of such boutique native high res is very limited but it is still a very valid point.

One can enjoy vinyl, one can enjoy tape, one can enjoy CD, SACD, XRCD, HDCD as well as the widely accepted and newest trend that has revolutionized music consumption for the audiophile as well as the masses, which is streaming. 192/24 files on Qobuz sounds damn fine to my ears. Very analog and smooth so I don’t need convincing. The 352.8 DXD is jaw dropping when I listen so I don’t need convincing. Vinyl and CD I have listened for over 30 years to, so I know what they sound like. Nothing against any media or source, whatever turns you on.

Calling people out as something less than an audiophile because they prefer to listen to high resolution files or 192/24 over Qobuz or even MQA which has been developed vs 44.1 CD or a used vinyl record is silly and only irritates those of us who have been into the hobby for decades.
 
TheOctopus said:
It is actually you Calvin that keeps implying that streaming is inferior. Technically speaking, digital is vastly superior to analog be it tape or vinyl by the dynamic range, resolution and noise floor. It was developed to propel the music industry forward. So there is that. If you don’t know the specs of digital vs tape vs vinyl, look it up. How digital is implemented and what filter is used is up to the people from both the equipment/gear and music mastering and production. Digital can sound absolutely gorgeous. Download some high resolution music that was natively recorded in high resolution and mastered with care and then tell me if you still prefer vinyl or digital.

Until you have done that personally, there is nothing else to discuss. Yes, I know the selection of such boutique native high res is very limited but it is still a very valid point.

One can enjoy vinyl, one can enjoy tape, one can enjoy CD, SACD, XRCD, HDCD as well as the widely accepted and newest trend that has revolutionized music consumption for the audiophile as well as the masses, which is streaming. 192/24 files on Qobuz sounds damn fine to my ears. Very analog and smooth so I don’t need convincing. The 352.8 DXD is jaw dropping when I listen so I don’t need convincing. Vinyl and CD I have listened for over 30 years to, so I know what they sound like. Nothing against any media or source, whatever turns you on.

Calling people out as something less than an audiophile because they prefer to listen to high resolution files or 192/24 over Qobuz or even MQA which has been developed vs 44.1 CD or a used vinyl record is silly and only irritates those of us who have been into the hobby for decades.
Click to expand...

What about Mike’s post Serge? Provide evidence that Mike is incorrect? Make me a believer (if you can). Interact with Mike’s posts paragraph by paragraph Serge.
 
What about Mike’s post? It’s all true. There is a sea of music out there. You will find complete garbage that was loudness mastered, dynamic range compressed and abused on CD because the labels wanted the louder CD to sell. Back when people would go to Tower Records and such and listen before buying, the loud CD would sound better to the average consumer and the industry knew that.

How about vinyl? You honestly think all vinyl is created equal? Ha! That’s a joke. How about the industry cutting your new shiny vinyl from a crap digital source only to make a buck on you? Sure, some pressings are legendary, go seek them out and pay up. Big $.. Let’s see how many you can collect.

I still have cassettes from the 80’s. Virtually unlistenable now. Time killed the tape.

New R2R tapes? $300 to $600 each. Knock yourself out. How many will you buy or are you going to listen to the same few dozen over and over? How about an R2R machine? Do you have a nicely restored version? Any idea what a serious R2R machine goes for?

I really enjoy music and I obviously enjoy it in high fidelity but I will take it in any media if that is the only way. So what’s wrong with enjoying music in the car if that’s where I am enjoying it while driving?

By the way what do you think happened to Tower Records? Music piracy that preceded streaming killed that model. Other than small record stores enjoying a vinyl resurgence and selling a whole bunch of worn out and beat up records to the millennials who think it’s HIP right now, they’d be closed too. There are not enough audiophiles out there for every record store to survive. Where there were 10 in a geographical area before, there is 1 now... believe me, I grew up in NYC...

So in a nutshell, don’t knock any source of music. Enjoy your music any way you like. Like vinyl and tape? Buy them!

The physical media has seen a dramatic drop in sales over the decade.
 
Calvin said:
Serge,

Tape is physical media. It beats steaming. PERIOD.
Click to expand...

Well, this tells me you have very little understanding of anything related to how or in what ways music is recorded, mixed and mastered. The only way to get that boutique file that was natively captured in high resolution is to download it to your computer. The source of the recording I used as an example does not offer that R2R master tape for sale nor are they in the business of duplicating the masters. You can’t use the master for many copies as you wear it out and every copy of a copy of a tape gets progressively less in quality. So download and enjoy it is.
 
The reality of things is such that digital can and does sound phenomenal. Streamed or on CD. I still have my Tacet CD’s. The German label often made classical recordings with tube microphones and virtually no transistors in the chain. Obviously it still has to be transferred to a CD... but they sound very smooth and analog without any digital glare or hardness of tone. Tube warmth and glow, even on CD.

Yes, they will sound different depending on your DAC. I have three different filters on my DAC... Are they vinyl records not going to sound different with a different cartridge/analog rig? Are they not going to sound different on a different tape machine with different heads?

But... when I compare the Tacet CD to the identical versions streamed over Roon, while there is a tiny difference at best, it’s nothing to even meaningfully discuss because I cannot tell which is closer to the truth. Perhaps my sacd player is playing it different or maybe the USB interface and my internal DAC when I stream? Bottom line, I don’t care. Both are great sound.
‘With many other CD to streaming, no difference that I can appreciate enough to be concerned.
 
TheOctopus said:
What about Mike’s post? It’s all true. There is a sea of music out there. You will find complete garbage that was loudness mastered, dynamic range compressed and abused on CD because the labels wanted the louder CD to sell. Back when people would go to Tower Records and such and listen before buying, the loud CD would sound better to the average consumer and the industry knew that.

How about vinyl? You honestly think all vinyl is created equal? Ha! That’s a joke. How about the industry cutting your new shiny vinyl from a crap digital source only to make a buck on you? Sure, some pressings are legendary, go seek them out and pay up. Big $.. Let’s see how many you can collect.

I still have cassettes from the 80’s. Virtually unlistenable now. Time killed the tape.

New R2R tapes? $300 to $600 each. Knock yourself out. How many will you buy or are you going to listen to the same few dozen over and over? How about an R2R machine? Do you have a nicely restored version? Any idea what a serious R2R machine goes for?

I really enjoy music and I obviously enjoy it in high fidelity but I will take it in any media if that is the only way. So what’s wrong with enjoying music in the car if that’s where I am enjoying it while driving?

By the way what do you think happened to Tower Records? Music piracy that preceded streaming killed that model. Other than small record stores enjoying a vinyl resurgence and selling a whole bunch of worn out and beat up records to the millennials who think it’s HIP right now, they’d be closed too. There are not enough audiophiles out there for every record store to survive. Where there were 10 in a geographical area before, there is 1 now... believe me, I grew up in NYC...

So in a nutshell, don’t knock any source of music. Enjoy your music any way you like. Like vinyl and tape? Buy them!

The physical media has seen a dramatic drop in sales over the decade.
Click to expand...

I’m glad you agree with Mike. But since Mike is correct and your streaming content is done with a cheap A2D Converter then I don’t understand how streaming could sound better than vinyl or CD. And then there’s the compression issue. My experience has been that streaming is not superior to physical media.

Mike ended his comments by saying, “So yes, quality matters, provenance of the recording version you are listening to really matters. Everything matters. And this is why audiophiles seeking the best of their favorite albums do their homework and buy media.” This is speaking of the quality of physical media over streaming. Unless I’m reading this incorrectly, he’s saying physical media matters and is better than streaming. And I agree with this.

One of my non-COVID friends brought his SME Synergy over to my house. We compared the same songs on vinyl, CD and streaming. The SME won hands down. For me snare drums and cymbal splashes had much greater punch. The sound stage was wider and fuller. Everything was better. I loved that little SME. The CDs finished 2nd.

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy streaming too. I use a N100 to stream and rip CDs with a ACS10. Qobuz is great for convenience and casual listening, but not critical listening. When I put on ripped files (technically streaming) everything gets better. Maybe I just have a poor DAC for streaming Qobuz - a Luxman D08-u - but I can tell the difference between streaming Qobuz and my ripped files. But on good days when my back is well, I’m using physical CDs as the quality difference is even larger than ripped files or Qobuz (but Qobuz is better than Tidal).

Quality for me is ranked:

Physical Media
Ripped Media
Streaming
 
Calvin said:
I’m glad you agree with Mike. But since Mike is correct and your streaming content is done with a cheap A2D Converter then I don’t understand how streaming could sound better than vinyl or CD. And then there’s the compression issue. My experience has been that streaming is not superior to physical media.

Mike ended his comments by saying, “So yes, quality matters, provenance of the recording version you are listening to really matters. Everything matters. And this is why audiophiles seeking the best of their favorite albums do their homework and buy media.” This is speaking of the quality of physical media over streaming. Unless I’m reading this incorrectly, he’s saying physical media matters and is better than streaming. And I agree with this.

One of my non-COVID friends brought his SME Synergy over to my house. We compared the same songs on vinyl, CD and streaming. The SME won hands down. For me snare drums and cymbal splashes had much greater punch. The sound stage was wider and fuller. Everything was better. I loved that little SME. The CDs finished 2nd.

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy streaming too. I use a N100 to stream and rip CDs with a ACS10. Qobuz is great for convenience and casual listening, but not critical listening. When I put on ripped files (technically streaming) everything gets better. Maybe I just have a poor DAC for streaming Qobuz - a Luxman D08-u - but I can tell the difference between streaming Qobuz and my ripped files. But on good days when my back is well, I’m using physical CDs as the quality difference is even larger than ripped files or Qobuz (but Qobuz is better than Tidal).

Quality for me is ranked:

Physical Media
Ripped Media
Streaming
Click to expand...

I compared my SACD’s to streaming both over speakers and my headphones to eliminate as many variables. Slight difference at best and nothing to strongly prefer. I have not found any cases where streaming was clearly superior to any XRCD or SACD. Qobuz in some cases sounded better to Tidal and especially MQA to my ears. Very audible difference on some recordings. I don’t have an MQA dac and it punishes you if you listen to MQA that way. So I compare non MQA tidal to Qobuz. Again, some may prefer the more forward and dynamic sounding Tidal versions. They obviously tweak their files differently. Qobuz seems to be geared more towards the ears of audiophiles that enjoy classical and Jazz while Tidal as we know is heavy into RAP, POP, R&B, etc.. they may be catering to the younger generation with a different taste and preference. But Qobuz sounds noticeably more laid back, relaxed and less forward. So yes, digital conversions and whatever the Roon may be doing.

FPGA DACs get new updates. Today it’s the version Mt.Fuji, tomorrow Kilimanjaro and it sounds different. People seem to like that. Roon, Tidal, Qobuz may also change and tweak their sound.

We still cannot gauge or measure which is closer to what happened in the studio 50 years ago or even last month... The recording engineer may know.

So why even worry about it? If it sounds good, roll with it.


I’ve owned an SME20/2/V arm and I also have a Luxman but it’s the D-06 version. Try the various filters in the Luxman...
 
Hi all,

this is the first thread I've contributed to and I feel I want to cheer the community
for their decency in communication and their focus on the hobby,
so free of trolls and posers.

Thank you :-)
 
Calvin said:
You're assuming that someone who spends megabucks on a high end system is automatically an Audiophile and you are further assuming that someone who only spends 5k on a system can't be an Audiophile. You're wrong on both counts. -- read see post 134 again, and understand the limitations of a streaming only system. Audiophile are more concerned about SQ than Music Lovers are, to summarize post 134:
Click to expand...

So true. Is Bill Gates with a $500 audio system who never listens to it an audiophile? I threw the name out. The point is, the same type guy with a Ferrari he never drives because he prefers the Mercedes and Auto Aficionado.
$5,000 can make a decent system. Especialy if the owner has a nice JVC direct drive TT with self modded dampening and power supply upgrades. Maybe he has a home made record vacuum (like me) and collects the best used vinyl he can find.

I call the $5,000 guy an audiophile. The $500k guy is just a rich dude who was introduced to a happy audio dealer through a friend.
 
Kingrex said:
So true. Is Bill Gates with a $500 audio system who never listens to it an audiophile? I threw the name out. The point is, the same type guy with a Ferrari he never drives because he prefers the Mercedes and Auto Aficionado.
$5,000 can make a decent system. Especialy if the owner has a nice JVC direct drive TT with self modded dampening and power supply upgrades. Maybe he has a home made record vacuum (like me) and collects the best used vinyl he can find.

I call the $5,000 guy an audiophile. The $500k guy is just a rich dude who was introduced to a happy audio dealer through a friend.
Click to expand...

There are a number of people on this forum that have made significant investments in their equipment, room, and setup. I would imagine we consider all of these people audiophiles. My point was that if streaming is used as the primary source, we should still consider these people audiophiles. By the way, I think that anyone that cares about the reproduction of music to be an audiophile so, yes, the guy that is enjoying his $5k system is part of the club as well. Again, inclusion vs exclusion.
 
Point taken MPW. I have meet people online who have spent a significant amount of time building out an excellent digital foundation with attention paid to streaming. Good routers, modems and switches with proper cables and PS to maximize performance. Heck yea they are audiophiles. Maybe you call that, owning the source.

But I start to waffle on the term audiophile if someone invested in a decent something or another but never spent any time optimizing their system. They spent $8K or so. Set it on a shelf. Turn it on and listen. Little more though went into cabling, isolation, optimizing the digital backbone or power supply. They just play music. I call that more a music lover.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top