is the hifi music av world now to complicated

[6th.replicant]

Perhaps we aficionados are a tad harsh when criticising the "general public" for not "wanting" higher quality downloads - arguably the average consumer is actually enjoying, and embracing, better quality sound?

How so?

Consider an average teen's music player pre-iPod Nano: an Alba-type one-box CD/tuner/cassette with resonating sugar-packet-sized speakers linked by bell-wire cable - a type of device that delivered distinctly muffled playback and an alarming ability to self-disassemble. Enter the Nano, and I bet most found that even a humble 192kbps AAC sounded infinitely superior compared to their Alba-type player's cloth-eared CD playback?

And how many times have you demo'd your BDP and 1080p/24fps TV to a friend who's a Blu-ray sceptic/non-'AV anorak', and after they see a BD in action they say, "Hang on, I really can see a difference - damn, I want one now!"? Similarly, I'd wager the response would be similar if they were played music via a format that displayed a tangible advance over the CD's SQ and, in turn, perhaps the "general public" would then want/'demand' hi-res downloads from iTunes et al?

the_lhc:Mr Morph:
6th.replicant:For many, life's too short for such 'demanding' gear - they just want plug -'n'-play, not to come home from working all day with a computer and then have to engage with a similar device to simply listen to their music. In short, the digital music world is becoming more complex, without offering any tangible advances in SQ.

Yeah, I have to agree with this! At the end of the day I just want to come home and relax, and the last thing I want to see is a computer in my hi-fi.

And you don't need one, I don't have a computer in my streaming set up.
How lovely for you, but have you ever considered that not everyone wants, nor can justify the cost of, a Sonus setup?

the_lhc:6th.replicant:The hi-fi world also seems preoccupied with wifi/streaming, internet radio and downloads (DLs) but not really offering any major advances on the humble old CD's sound quality (SQ).

Err, have you seen the sales figures for CD players? Why would anyone attempt to squeeze the last fraction of a percents performance from a 20 year old mature technology when, effectively, no-one is buying it anymore? ...
Perhaps my phrasing lacked clarity, but that's my point: it's time for a significant advance over the Red Book CD - ie Blu-ray audio-only discs - not myriad and ever more complex means of listening to a compressed 44.1kHz source.

ESP2009:Coming at the subject from a slightly different angle, the complication for me is the overwhelming choice on offer. We are increasingly bombarded with 'new and improved' versions of components, or variations on a theme. It becomes so difficult and time-consuming to sort the wheat from the chaff.

It's always nice to have a choice, but these days (it may be churlish of me to say it) there is simply too much!

Indeed, well said.

 

[The_Lhc]

6th.replicant:Perhaps we aficionados are a tad harsh when criticising the "general public" for not "wanting" higher quality downloads - arguably the average consumer is actually enjoying, and embracing, better quality sound?

How so?

Consider an average teen's music player pre-iPod Nano: an Alba-type one-box CD/tuner/cassette with resonating sugar-packet-sized speakers linked by bell-wire cable - a type of device that delivered distinctly muffled playback and an alarming ability to self-disassemble. Enter the Nano, and I bet most found that even a humble 192kbps AAC sounded infinitely superior compared to their Alba-type player's cloth-eared CD playback?

You might be right but that doesn't mean any of them are interested in going any further, if they've even noticed an improvement they'll probably just put it down to being "digital" and assume that's as far as it can go.

And how many times have you demo'd your BDP and 1080p/24fps TV to a friend who's a Blu-ray sceptic/non-'AV anorak', and after they see a BD in action they say, "Hang on, I really can see a difference - damn, I want one now!"?

I can answer this one. Never. My mum and Dad have a 37" Panasonic plasma and only watch SD, they've seen my setup numerous times and have never asked how they can make theirs look as good, similarly my missus' daughter and son-in-law have a 42" Samsung on their wall, watch DVDs and normal Sky and never even notice the difference between my setup and theirs, why? Because they're not interested, so they don't look at it. They're also quite pleased to have compressed his entire CD collection of thousands of CDs onto a 160Gb iPod (I think at 128kbps) which they stick in the top of a small system tucked under the stairs and don't give a second thought to what it sounds like because they don't care, convenience is more important than performance to them.

Similarly, I'd wager the response would be similar if they were played music via a format that displayed a tangible advance over the CD's SQ and, in turn, perhaps the "general public" would then want/'demand' hi-res downloads from iTunes et al?

The same two have heard my system and the only comment they make is "it's too loud for our room", beyond that, they don't care.

the_lhc:Mr Morph:
6th.replicant:For many, life's too short for such 'demanding' gear - they just want plug -'n'-play, not to come home from working all day with a computer and then have to engage with a similar device to simply listen to their music. In short, the digital music world is becoming more complex, without offering any tangible advances in SQ.

Yeah, I have to agree with this! At the end of the day I just want to come home and relax, and the last thing I want to see is a computer in my hi-fi.

And you don't need one, I don't have a computer in my streaming set up.
How lovely for you, but have you ever considered that not everyone wants, nor can justify the cost of, a Sonus setup?

SonOs. No I haven't, because it's not the only option, Squeezebox will do the job to name but one, but that's not the point, the point is I don't care what you use but you don't HAVE to have a computer involved, it isn't a prerequisite, a lot of people really don't seem to understand that but will then complain that "it's too complicated" because they think you MUST have a PC involved. You don't. Anyway, cost has nothing to do with it, people have been spending far more on CD players than a Sonos ZP costs for 20 years and nobody thought that was in anyway unusual. One ZP90 is £279, that would be considered a budget CD player by most people here.

the_lhc:6th.replicant:The hi-fi world also seems preoccupied with wifi/streaming, internet radio and downloads (DLs) but not really offering any major advances on the humble old CD's sound quality (SQ).

Err, have you seen the sales figures for CD players? Why would anyone attempt to squeeze the last fraction of a percents performance from a 20 year old mature technology when, effectively, no-one is buying it anymore? ...
Perhaps my phrasing lacked clarity, but that's my point: it's time for a significant advance over the Red Book CD - ie Blu-ray audio-only discs - not myriad and ever more complex means of listening to a compressed 44.1kHz source.

I'd like to see more music on higher bit-rates and sample rates but it doesn't require a physical medium, it just requires a simplified way of playing the files back. Eventually we'll get there but SACD and DVD-A has proved that the general public (them again) aren't interested in another format, even if it is higher quality than CD AND backward compatible. Blu-ray audio hasn't been tried because the manufacturers already know it'll never sell. Twice bitten, thrice shy I'd suggest.

 

[DavieCee]

Re expense and hassle - since I already had a wireless networked computer and an iPhone, for the princely sum of £120 I got a first gen 160Gb Apple TV. Once synched there is no need for the computer to be on, my phone is the remote control, it was not expensive and it sounds great.

Much easier than faffing around with mutliple CDs or records!

Edit:- I sold my CD player as the new system sounds exactly the same. £120 ATV, £200 DAC + £15 cables = £335. CD player sold for £400 after fees were subtracted so I am now with a system that sounds as good, more convenient and £65 to the good!

 

[bigblue235]

I don't think it's too complicated. I think it's like most hobbies, it's only as complicated as you want to make it.

I think that If you really want to 'work' something, it's fair that you have to learn how to do it

IMO, you have to put some time and effort into getting the most out of things.

Similar arguments to this crop up on most forums which involve enthusiasts of a particular hobby. I'm far more techie and tinker far, far more with my golf gear than my hi-fi. This sometimes leads to complaints from some people that I play golf with, as they suggest that I've got an advantage because of my equipment. My opinion is that (much like hi-fi) if someone doesn't have the knowledge to sort out their equipment themselves, they can either put a bit of time into learning how to do it, or they can pay someone more knowledgeable to do it for them. If they can't be bothered to learn, and won't pay, then they shouldn't really moan, IMO.

I don't think people should expect things to be so simple that their Granny can use it. My Gran can't play the piano, but that doesn't mean the piano is at fault

 

[6th.replicant]

the_lhc:6th.replicant:...And how many times have you demo'd your BDP and 1080p/24fps TV to a friend who's a Blu-ray sceptic/non-'AV anorak', and after they see a BD in action they say, "Hang on, I really can see a difference - damn, I want one now!"?

I can answer this one. Never...
Well, perhaps my friends and relatives are more 'conditioned'?! Lately, I seem to have influenced the purchase of a fair few Sony BDP-S370s and KDL-37EX503s. (Perhaps I ought to claim commission from Sony?)

...Squeezebox will do the job to name but one...
Tried one of those: it was a monumental pain in the Aris' to setup; turning it on/changing radio stations/selecting iTunes was tedious; its wifi signal was always gasping because of my house's 3ft-thick internal walls; it was also a frequent victim of my broadband/network's random drop outs.

I'd like to see more music on higher bit-rates and sample rates but it doesn't require a physical medium, it just requires a simplified way of playing the files back. Eventually we'll get there but SACD and DVD-A has proved that the general public (them again) aren't interested in another format, even if it is higher quality than CD AND backward compatible. Blu-ray audio hasn't been tried because the manufacturers already know it'll never sell. Twice bitten, thrice shy I'd suggest.
Agree, in principle. But perhaps SACD and DVD-A weren't a sufficiently significant leap nor given enough PR/advertising? Plus, there were various so-called 'expert audiophile' hacks claiming they couldn't hear any difference 'tween SACD and CD. (FWIW, I think SACDs sound lush.)

But what of Blu-ray audio - it could be the future? The other week I played some of the tracks from a visiting friend's Blu-ray version of Neil Young's Archives, Vol. 1, comparing the BDs back-to-back with the CD versions. Significantly, also present were some friends who are, mercifully, not vaguely audiophile-ish. The difference 'tween CD and BD versions was startling and even the luddites were gobsmacked, coming out with all the old clich‚s such as, "I'm hearing things from the Blu-ray that simply aren't there on the CD... the Blu-ray sounds so 'alive'... it's as if they're actually playing/signing in the room... etc." Now, if they can hear a marked difference, then...

Adopting Blu-ray audio could be simple: hybrid CD/Blu-ray discs with CDPs that have a Blu-ray/CD chip-set. In one fell swoop, we'd have uncompressed music that doesn't need a 100% reliable wifi network, resets, tedious 'front-end' setup etc - and we could finally say "ta, ta" to vinyl/TTs? Oh, and hybrid CD/Blu-ray discs should cost no more than £11 on initial release, which seems fair considering the cost of 'triple play' Blu-ray movies?

All we need is a hi-fi mag to start the campaign...

 

[shooter]

6th.replicant:and we could finally say "ta, ta" to vinyl/TTs?

I can't see anything in the future prising me away from vinyl. In the last 30 odd years i've had a deck of some guise i've watched the audio format disappear to nothing but an algorithm, i love big chunks of plastic.

 

[6th.replicant]

shooter69:6th.replicant:and we could finally say "ta, ta" to vinyl/TTs?

I can't see anything in the future prising me away from vinyl. In the last 30 odd years i've had a deck of some guise i've watched the audio format disappear to nothing but an algorithm, i love big chunks of plastic.
Out of interest, what do you value most re vinyl - its tactility or uncompressed sound?

 

[shooter]

6th.replicant:shooter69:6th.replicant:and we could finally say "ta, ta" to vinyl/TTs?

I can't see anything in the future prising me away from vinyl. In the last 30 odd years i've had a deck of some guise i've watched the audio format disappear to nothing but an algorithm, i love big chunks of plastic.
Out of interest, what do you value most re vinyl - its tactility or uncompressed sound?

Hmm, toughie that. What puts a smile on my face and sometimes a chuckle and shake of the head of disbelief is the sound, a well pressed record wins hand over fist compared to other format's it has to be that over tactility at the moment but in the past it would have been the other way round for sure, looking after the vinyl and the todo of the record player, it's enjoyable, i love it.

 

[6th.replicant]

shooter69:6th.replicant:shooter69:6th.replicant:and we could finally say "ta, ta" to vinyl/TTs?

I can't see anything in the future prising me away from vinyl. In the last 30 odd years i've had a deck of some guise i've watched the audio format disappear to nothing but an algorithm, i love big chunks of plastic.
Out of interest, what do you value most re vinyl - its tactility or uncompressed sound?

Hmm, toughie that. What puts a smile on my face and sometimes a chuckle and shake of the head of disbelief is the sound, a well pressed record wins hand over fist compared to other format's it has to be that over tactility at the moment but in the past it would have been the other way round for sure, looking after the vinyl and the todo of the record player, it's enjoyable, i love it.
So you'd appreciate Blu-ray audio's uncompressed sound, then?

 

[shooter]

I'd like to hear it and compare to SACD which is good but you don't get the holographic's as you do with vinyl. If BR audio done that i would consider retiring the vinyl.

 

[6th.replicant]

Holographics? Yep, was very evident with Blu-ray audio, a very pleasing sense that the sound was't coming out of the speakers, more 'in the room' (well, at least that was the case with Neil Young's Archives, Vol. 1).

 

[shooter]

6th.replicant:Holographics?

I'm not sure what the correct terminology would be for it, it's not sound staging, both CD and SACD do that with ease, the music envelops you and you can here the performance all around , like surround but without the surround system, only vinyl has ever done that. If Blu-ray audio done that it would be something special.

Again i feel though Blu-ray audio will be another SACD and the like and it wont fully take off if at all, unless the "industry"* standard move's from CD to BRA then the general public won't buy them. I don't think you can rest it on the public shoulder regarding the demise of high resolution audio, it can only be tackled at source level and let's be honest here, CD quality isn't bad enough to warrant a change IMO, i never rushed out and bought a SACD when i heard it, maybe Blu-ray audio can and i wonder if it will be demo'ed at Bristol, anyone know?

* bit of generalising at 7am.

 

[Anonymous]

6th.replicant:Holographics? Yep, was very evident with Blu-ray audio, a very pleasing sense that the sound was't coming out of the speakers, more 'in the room' (well, at least that was the case with Neil Young's Archives, Vol. 1).yes blu-ray audio in both stereo and surround i would like it to take off as music carrier of hd music, that is what should be a replacement
for cds so maybe this forum could start a blu ray audio alert on all things blu ray audio it may help kick start for more hd music discs
to be released.

 

[manicm]

Blu-ray audio, as appealing as it is, will remain a niche disc format like SACD and DVD-A before it.

Yes people like Neil Young might give it some momentum, and to quote Nick Mason 'as my manager succinctly put it, I am in the recycling business', so you'll see sporadic re-releases of your old favourites but your big labels are wary of burning their fingers again.

Yet another disc-based medium is not the next logical step for me.

 

[6th.replicant]

Appreciate what you're all saying re Blu-ray audio.

However, arguably, neither SACD or DVD-A were that much of an advance compared to CD? (FWIW, I love SACD, it's why I grabbed a CD37.) And SACD's cause wasn't helped by various 'respected' h-fi hacks who wrote that they couldn't actually hear any difference 'tween CD and SACD. Oops.

But, IME, Blu-ray audio's total lack of compression seems to make a heeeooge difference - IMHO, it really does offer the benefits of vinyl without the 'snap, crackle 'n' pop' and 'hassle'. In short, this time the upgrade really is tangible/audible.

And when SACD and DVD-A were launched, CD sales weren't in free-fall, as now.

Perhaps the industry needs to consider that it has an opportunity to kick-start the sales of its profitable-ish discs/players to non-tech savvy luddites who also happen to love their music? Just think of all those folks in the 45+ age group - ie the supposed/alleged non-iPod users - who'd be ready to support Mason et al's "recycling", again.

And if your CD/BD-audio player were to crash, you'd not lose your music. Oh, I know, one should always back-up, but it is another faff, especially if you're at a 'certain age'. And not a geek. And lazy. And just want to listen to your music in the best format possible.

 

[The_Lhc]

6th.replicant:And when SACD and DVD-A were launched, CD sales weren't in free-fall, as now.

CD sales aren't in free-fall because people want better quality, they're in free-fall because people don't want a physical format any more, blu-ray audio can't overcome that. Superior sound quality means nothing to people listening to their music on an 80 quid piece of tat and when they ask "can I rip is to my phone?" and get told either no or "yes but you can only fit one album on there" they aren't going to be interested.

Your over-45's market clearly isn't big enough to warrant the outlay from the manufacturers, if it was they'd have gone down that route already and they've done a hell of a lot more market research than you have, so if they don't think it's worth doing, it's because it's not worth doing. There is no market for it.

 

[shooter]

I like where your coming from 6th but alas i feel the_lhc has nailed it.

I do think though the uncompressed form of Blu-Ray audio should be the benchmark for "file" music. This must be the way to go in the future, i can't see where else it can...

 

[jiggyjoe]

Streamed from the cloud!

 

[Trefor Patten]

Complicated? Lack of sound quality? I had 1500 CDs. I now have 1500 CD rips at full bitrate AIFF with error correction, plus a few 24/192 high-bitrate downloads from B&W, Naim etc all stored on a 2TB hard drive with room to spare. This is plugged in to my iMac. I have an airport express connected to my amplifier and speakers. When I want to play, I can scroll through a load of album covers, find the one I want, click and it plays. When I have a party, I can put together a playlist, without the bother of taping or burning a cd, I can make it last 8 hours or more without compression or a carousel player and it just works.

All I need now is an SACD player (probably the Cambridge blu-ray player) for my relatively small collection of SACDs and DVDAs, plug that into the amplifier and all bases are covered. I have NEVER had the airport express give up and the quality (via TCI Coral, Dacmagic, Chord) is superior to the £500 CD player they replaced. Instead of taking a load of plastic boxes to friends I load up the iPod touch, or a memory stick, if necessary burn a DVD,they load it to their systems and we listen to music. If their equipment prefers WAV, FLAC or any other worthwhile lossless format that comes along, I just convert it.

All of which I find a lot less bother, and worry (about damage to my collection) than cleaning styli, de-magging tape heads, cleaning vinyl etc, etc. I know some people find brushing a stylus or cleaning a tape head all part of the enjoyment, but me, I like listening to music and when 24-bit or bitstream, or 32-bit become the norm, I am sure I will adopt that too - just by getting another, or a larger hard drive.

 

[Anonymous]

I think it all boils down to what you actually need to know and what you want to know. If you are like my late father, who was a complete Ludite, he didn't want to know how it worked as long as it worked the way he wanted it too.

The danger is with information overload. You can start off researching for let's say a new TV and before you know it you are reading about the various versions of HDMI implementation and Plane Switching vs Twisted Nematic and before you know it you find yourself needing to go to night school just to understand what it all means. Retail salesman are renowned for this and inevitably get most of it wrong.

I think by-enlarge, this is the main reason that even larger and more respected manufacturers offer the all-in-one package deal. You buy a product from a someone you can trust and it does what it says on the tin. If that's what you want, then that's what you'll get.

 

[6th.replicant]

the_lhc:6th.replicant:And when SACD and DVD-A were launched, CD sales weren't in free-fall, as now.

CD sales aren't in free-fall because people want better quality, they're in free-fall because people don't want a physical format any more, blu-ray audio can't overcome that. Superior sound quality means nothing to people listening to their music on an 80 quid piece of tat and when they ask "can I rip is to my phone?" and get told either no or "yes but you can only fit one album on there" they aren't going to be interested.

Your over-45's market clearly isn't big enough to warrant the outlay from the manufacturers, if it was they'd have gone down that route already and they've done a hell of a lot more market research than you have, so if they don't think it's worth doing, it's because it's not worth doing. There is no market for it.
CD/CDP sales are in free-fall because, obviously, the format is stagnant: the iPod-generation thinks, "What's the point, a CD doesn't really offer me anything more than a download?" Meanwhile, the non-iPod generation, who is still actually buying the CDs but thinks, "What's the point in buying a new CD player, it won't really offer anything new?"

Let's not dismiss the over-45s, traditionally they're the early-adopters with disposable income who get the ball rolling; they're the mums/dads who buy a new grown-ups' 'toy' that their children then show to their mates who, in turn, think: "Cor I want one of those!" Trouble is, it's not 1985, so no son or daughter is going to bother showing their mates their parents' latest CDP. But a Blu-ray audio player that makes Lady GaGa sound so life-like it as if she's 'singing' in your living-room - who knows?

And yes, you're quite correct, the manufacturers have "done a hell of a lot more market research than" I, which is why, for example, they thought 3D TV would be the next must-have. And we all know what a wise man said about research and statistics, which is why 3D TV is proving as popular as fireworks' sales on Nov 6.

LHC, if memory serves, like me you're also a denizen of the South West, so I assume you too might be considering visiting the Bristol show? If so, we must agree to visit on different days - heaven forfend we might meet!

 

[laserman16]

6th.replicant: LHC, if memory serves, like me you're also a denizen of the South West, so I assume you too might be considering visiting the Bristol show? If so, we must agree to visit on different days - heaven forfend we might meet!

If you meet up you might actually enjoy each others company.

 

[The_Lhc]

6th.replicant:LHC, if memory serves, like me you're also a denizen of the South West, so I assume you too might be considering visiting the Bristol show? If so, we must agree to visit on different days - heaven forfend we might meet!

Hardly matters does it? It's not like we know what the other looks like, so neither of us would know if we were in the same room. While you're there perhaps you could ask the manufacturer's representatives why they won't make blu-ray audio players, perhaps you might believe them, as you clearly don't think the rest of us have any idea.

 

[Helmut80]

'you audiophiles' really are a strange breed

 

[The_Lhc]

Helmut80:
'you audiophiles' really are a strange breed

To whom do you refer? I'm not an audiophile.