Highres audio to take over CD

[manicm]

To LHC, would you say a buyer of a Marantz 400 quid component has a passing interest in hifi? I would say yes, that's why Marantz has released the NA6005 network player, and such buyers would become naturally curious about hires. Anyone in this 400 quid component is going to be curious. The Marantz 610 and 510 are affordable all in ones and they do hires. Genuinely well recorded hires material at reasonable prices will find a market inevitably.

 

[The_Lhc]

To LHC, would you say a buyer of a Marantz 400 quid component has a passing interest in hifi? I would say yes, that's why Marantz has released the NA6005 network player, and such buyers would become naturally curious about hires. Anyone in this 400 quid component is going to be curious. The Marantz 610 and 510 are affordable all in ones and they do hires. Genuinely well recorded hires material at reasonable prices will find a market inevitably.

What's your point? How many people buy those sort of devices? I don't know anyone that owns any of those sort of things. I know one person that has anything approaching hi-fi and he doesn't believe 24-bit is anything other than a scam. The person I know with the biggest CD collection I've ever seen plays it from an iPad plugged into a £100 docking station boom box, which is about as useless as it sounds. He's a genuine music enthusiast who couldn't give a toss about hi-fi. Most people are the same.

 

[The_Lhc]

Also wav is my preference, I have no meta data or storage issues so I chose wav.

How do you know what tracks to choose then? WAV is pointless.

I don't get that comment all my music is ripped I don't stream anything presently. I rip it as wav and store as is

Well, yes, I got that much, but without tags how do you identify the tracks you want to play?

That's what I said I have no problems metadata rips to wav the same

No it doesn't, unless you're using some kind of third party add-on.

 

[manicm]

To LHC, would you say a buyer of a Marantz 400 quid component has a passing interest in hifi? I would say yes, that's why Marantz has released the NA6005 network player, and such buyers would become naturally curious about hires. Anyone in this 400 quid component is going to be curious. The Marantz 610 and 510 are affordable all in ones and they do hires. Genuinely well recorded hires material at reasonable prices will find a market inevitably.

What's your point? How many people buy those sort of devices? I don't know anyone that owns any of those sort of things. I know one person that has anything approaching hi-fi and he doesn't believe 24-bit is anything other than a scam. The person I know with the biggest CD collection I've ever seen plays it from an iPad plugged into a £100 docking station boom box, which is about as useless as it sounds. He's a genuine music enthusiast who couldn't give a toss about hi-fi. Most people are the same.

no LHC most people are not the same, you are after all on a hifi forum, so anyone here does have a passing interest, according to your logic nobody would be interested in a Sonos system either. There is a market for this, there will always be a market for higher quality audio. I would agree teenagers are the same.

 

[manicm]

It's that negativity that will stop it happening proves my point.

Whether cd can be better is past the point - lots of cds do already sound excellent but sometimes you buy one and it's below a standard that should be acceptable and yet it sadens me because I like the music on the album.

If the same cd we're released in high Def the obvious compression, or poor mastering or whatever it is would not pass to be sold I don't believe. I believe it would have to be better to pass approval

I would happily pay more for a guarantee of good sound quality.
Presently it's a roulette with very little option

Also wav is my preference, I have no meta data or storage issues so I chose wav.

When CD was released many were sceptical of it too, and like hires, it was exorbitantly priced when compared to vinyl at the time.

 

[TrevC]

Also the flip side for those producing knock out music the compression required for cd isn't crippling it. I still think it will increase the average quality standard of music for sale which is great.

I hope they stick to wav not flac.

No compression is required for redbook CD. It's far better than your ears.

 

[ellisdj]

Also wav is my preference, I have no meta data or storage issues so I chose wav.

How do you know what tracks to choose then? WAV is pointless.

I don't get that comment all my music is ripped I don't stream anything presently. I rip it as wav and store as is

Well, yes, I got that much, but without tags how do you identify the tracks you want to play?

That's what I said I have no problems metadata rips to wav the same

No it doesn't, unless you're using some kind of third party add-on.

Yes it does, I rip using db power amp and all the info is there same as flac

Currently using bubbleds next on phone to control the library but other pnp software works with album covers track details etc all I need

 

[jcbrum]

24bit audio files are utterly pointless for domestic replay systems. It's as simple as that.

JC

Curious. Guess I'll just have to stick with vinyl then.

By all means, if you wish. But 16 bit digital will provide fidelity of which vinyl is incapable, and is much more convenient for library and streaming use.

JC

I am not sure what you mean by 'fidelity' can you explain . Do you mean frequency range?

Fidelity means 'sounds like the original acoustic event'.

Vinyl LPs on replay are the equivalent of about 10 or 11 bit digital files. They lack the dynamic range available from digital. This is not opinion ,btw, it's a mathematical proof. They can sound very good, but 16bit is better because it fulfils the entire range of human audibility. Any more is wasted because it's inaudible

Vinyl records were invented as a cheap mass market product for consumer sales. They can't even record the original event without very heavy eq being applied to the 'master'. The limitations are still present today.

24 bit recording is desirable because it greatly facilitates the mixing and production process in terms of digital mathematics.

None of that is necessary for replay only, so 16 bit is completely adequate and produces smaller files which needs less bandwidth.

JC

 

[manicm]

24bit audio files are utterly pointless for domestic replay systems. It's as simple as that.

JC

Curious. Guess I'll just have to stick with vinyl then.

By all means, if you wish. But 16 bit digital will provide fidelity of which vinyl is incapable, and is much more convenient for library and streaming use.

JC

I am not sure what you mean by 'fidelity' can you explain . Do you mean frequency range?

Fidelity means 'sounds like the original acoustic event'.

Vinyl LPs on replay are the equivalent of about 10 or 11 bit digital files. They lack the dynamic range available from digital. This is not opinion ,btw, it's a mathematical proof. They can sound very good, but 16bit is better because it fulfils the entire range of human audibility. Any more is wasted because it's inaudible

Vinyl records were invented as a cheap mass market product for consumer sales. They can't even record the original event without very heavy eq being applied to the 'master'. The limitations are still present today.

24 bit recording is desirable because it greatly facilitates the mixing and production process in terms of digital mathematics.

None of that is necessary for replay only, so 16 bit is completely adequate and produces smaller files which needs less bandwidth.

JC

CD was also 'invented as a cheap mass market product for consumer sales', and like hires was exorbitantly priced when released when at the time it was well known it was cheaper to produce than vinyl. And a well set up midrange vinyl system sounded just as good as cd in the 80s, cos even some budget Japanese CD players really didn't sound that great at the time.

And record companies were still thugs 33 years ago. So you can carry on worshipping the cd format, just don't delude yourself.

 

[jcbrum]

In general, CDs always did sound better than vinyl, that's why they were so massively popular. But I don't worship CDs and never have done. Personally I used to use magnetic tape a lot, which was also much better than vinyl. As soon as cheap computers could handle digital audio files I changed over. That was in about 1995 irrc. Then iPods came along and here we are today with digital libraries and streaming. Rightly so, imo.

JC

 

[manicm]

As I recall they did not always, not when in 1989 my cousin brought home a Sony player and I was nonplussed, although two years later when I bought my first one a technics I was impressed. And yes early iPods sounded great and then progressively worse. The last Classic is a really mediocre sounding device as Apple started using cheaper and inferior dacs. Right to the late 80s it was not given that cd sounded superior to a good vinyl setup. That's a fact.

 

[FennerMachine]

I haven't read most of the posts, but these are my thoughts.

CD as a physical medium should stay the test of time. Technically they are the best humans need.

Some people like physical over intangible. What happens when you lose your download collection and cannot download them again as the company has gone bust? CD's and vinyl can be lost in a disaster but you should be able to rebuild if your insurance company is good.

CD is technically superior to vinyl in every way, but not all CD's are created equal. Vinyl CAN sound better because CD's are not always mastered properly. Vinyl is making a comeback. CD's will likely stay for similar reasons.

I work with computers, but I have very little music on my PC. I still prefer the ritual of putting on a CD. Many CD's I own are worth playing most of the way through, maybe skipping the odd track. Many albums follow a theme with the order of tracks chosen for a reason. With them all stored electronically and played via a streamer I would find myself going mad skipping from classical to jazz to pop to classical to rock to SID tunes to classical to SID tunes to rock to pop to weird stuff to..... get the idea?

I know you can buy album downloads but its not the same.

 

[Covenanter]

As a classical music fan I can't yet see I need anything other than CDs. I'm in no way against new technology but can't see what streaming at whatever resolution would do for me.

Chris

 

[jcbrum]

With them all stored electronically and played via a streamer I would find myself going mad skipping from classical to jazz to pop to classical to rock to SID tunes to classical to SID tunes to rock to pop to weird stuff to..... get the idea?

I know you can buy album downloads but its not the same.

You don't have to use random selections

Compiling your own playlists is quick and easy. So is selecting a queue list.

 

[iQ Speakers]

I'm a streaming guy with Spotify through the up sampling CA Stream Magic 6 it sounded excellent. Through my Sonos its OK. Having said all that every system at the Bristol show with vinyl sounded fantastic. The format that will survive will be the one that delivers a acceptable sound at a acceptable price with the best marketing and backing but necessarily the best. Hopefully the best will survive by filling the gaps.

 

[daveh75]

. What happens when you lose your download collection and cannot download them again as the company has gone bust?

That's incredibly ignorant. That's what backups are for.

My music collection is stored online in several places, stored on my NAS plus on HDDs both on and off site, not to mention I have the original CDs in storage.

So short of an apocalyptic event I think its fairly safe.

CD's and vinyl can be lost in a disaster but you should be able to rebuild if your insurance company is good.

What if they're rare recordings or out of print...

 

[Vladimir]

Listening music on bits of plastic? How archaic!

 

[FennerMachine]

Not ignorant, I know how to backup files. But many poeple who know how to backup files do not. I've seen it happen many times as customers have lost years of personal data such as pictures and music. They meant to backup but just never got around to it. I also know some items cannot be replaced such as rare vinyl.

Downloads have other issues such as not being able to pass on to relatives. CD's and vinyl can be.

 

[jcbrum]

Downloads have other issues such as not being able to pass on to relatives. CD's and vinyl can be.

HaHa, most people took Grandad's record collection to the tip, or dumped it at Oxfam

At least with digital files you can store them in the cloud.

JC

 

[FennerMachine]

Good point!

I wanted to keep the James Last vinyl collection but won't have the room plus I would need to spend around £1000.00 on a decent record player. My one was not good enough to do them justice.

 

[matthewpiano]

It doesn't cost £1,000 to get a decent turntable. Plenty of good choices out there on the 2nd hand market for all sorts of prices below £200-£300.

 

[Blackdawn]

I can't really comment on vinyl much as I only have cds. I'm listening to Haydn,'s Cello Concertos 1 and 2 as i'm typing and the sound is excellent on cd through the hifi. If there was a significant jump up in performance I may decide to go for hi-res audio - in what format i'm unsure. I tend to listen to a whole album in one go rather than skip through songs between artists. I can't imagine not having a physical music format like cd. As long as you don't scratch cds they last ages and sound the same everytime they are played. I've never tried Sacd either but like the idea of a hi-res physical format.

 

[lpv]

vinyl is technically inferior and measure worst than CD and definitely sounds different.

camera film is technically inferior to cmos but definitely looks different

pipe tobacco taste completely different then fags

and old jaguar got terrible performance and drives beautifly.

 

[luckylion100]

vinyl is technically inferior and measure worst than CD and definitely sounds different.

But vinyl can sound magical. Inferior it may be but to my ears it's much more enjoyable than half of my hi res digital recordings.

 

[The_Lhc]

To LHC, would you say a buyer of a Marantz 400 quid component has a passing interest in hifi? I would say yes, that's why Marantz has released the NA6005 network player, and such buyers would become naturally curious about hires. Anyone in this 400 quid component is going to be curious. The Marantz 610 and 510 are affordable all in ones and they do hires. Genuinely well recorded hires material at reasonable prices will find a market inevitably.

What's your point? How many people buy those sort of devices? I don't know anyone that owns any of those sort of things. I know one person that has anything approaching hi-fi and he doesn't believe 24-bit is anything other than a scam. The person I know with the biggest CD collection I've ever seen plays it from an iPad plugged into a £100 docking station boom box, which is about as useless as it sounds. He's a genuine music enthusiast who couldn't give a toss about hi-fi. Most people are the same.

no LHC most people are not the same, you are after all on a hifi forum, so anyone here does have a passing interest,

I'm not talking about anyone here, I'm talking about the general public, the majority of the music buying public, who are distinctly NOT represented by the people on these forums, those are the people that are needed to make any format "the next big thing" and in a vast majority they aren't not interested in hi-res music.

according to your logic nobody would be interested in a Sonos system either.

Relatively speaking nobody is, last year Sonos claimed to be in "a million rooms", if you assume an average of 1.5 units per household that own Sonos then you're only looking at approximately 700,000 households worldwide, out of a population of close to 7 billion people, and that's still enough to make Sonos the second biggest speaker manufacturer in the world (note, speakers, actual speakers, not streaming systems or the like, speakers, bigger than KEF and any of the mainstream speaker manufacturers). Either way, this hobby of ours is barely noticed, let alone understood, by the overwhelming majority of the "general public" (whoever they are).

There is a market for this, there will always be a market for higher quality audio.

Yes, a very small market. Everyone else just wants convenience.