Streaming vs Apple Lossless vs CD

[ID.]

ふ

I prefer Streaming to CDPs and a Streamer over a Laptop and DAC...but that's me.

As usual things have gotten messy.

I think the OP is referring to internet streaming services like Tidal while you are talking about streaming over your home network etc. from a NAS

Edit: now I'm not sure Having brain malfunction issues

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Everyone (mostly) may well have a computer but using one as a source in your hifi usually means buying one especially for that task, so suddenly it's not just a case of a decent USB DAC and boom you're sorted. Also if you have a large existing CD collection the pain and heartache of ripping it to a computer or NAS cannot be underestimated, especially if you own a lot of classical music that requires a lot of tagging; part way through you may come to wish you'd started a task slightly less brain-numbingly tedious such as counting the grains of sand in the Sahara desert.

But accepting those caveats, once it's all done there's no going back to a CDP really. Every album you own, instantly accessible, and if you choose the computer route, potentially across multiple devices and platforms because of services like iTunes Match and Google Play Music. Ignore anyone who tells you CD players will inherrently sound better than computer-based systems or streamers; it's not subjective or just a matter of one person's opinion vs another, they're just wrong, plus it shows their understanding of how music has been recorded and mastered by-and-large for at least 30 years is worryingly lacking.

Empty kettles and all that Major?

I'm sorry, but it is subjective and nobody's wrong - while alot depends on the quality of the source material the kit matters.

You'll read far more 'my soft device don't sound right' threads around the internet than 'my cdplayer sounds rubbish'.

Then get the plethora of advice telling the complainet what to download or adjust on their soft device.

I understand the convenience of soft music but there is a reason why so many are dissatisfied.

Understand how music has been recorded?...... my eye.....prrrrft!

I confess I don't really understand why one digital stream sounds different to another beyond the bandwidth argument it genuinely baffles me - like how the combustion engine works, but there are differences some more subtle than others - May even be age related.

 

[chebby]

I'll say that through my system you have to be listening very carefully to differentiate between my Amazon fire tv streaming 320 kbs Spotify to the arcam ir dac and the naim cd 5i mk2,which is quite an accomplished cd player . it's very close and I can't say with confidence that I'd pick the cd player in a blind test ...

It was the same here. Six months before I sold my Naim Nait 5i-2, NAT05 and CD5i-2 I sent the CD player off (through my dealer) to Naim to have it's display panel replaced (the LCD was 'bleeding'). When it got back - repaired and serviced - I couldn't be bothered to get it out of the box again because i'd been having too much fun with ripped CDs playing through a DAC and BBC iPlayer Radio and the optical connection from the TV/PVR/Blu-ray.

Setting up the CD player again seemed a bore no matter how 'good' it was supposed to be.

If I miss anything from that old system it was the NAT05 tuner.

I sold my last turntable a year before that after almost three decades of pretty continuous ownership of the format. It's a very pleasing way to play music but very 'needy' and very expensive in terms of time, room and money.

I'll take up vinyl again if I ever become rich and 'leisured' enough to enjoy it properly in it's own purpose built system and room. (Or maybe when I eventually retire.)

 

[MajorFubar]

I'm sorry, but it is subjective and nobody's wrong - while alot depends on the quality of the source material the kit matters.

You'll read far more 'my soft device don't sound right' threads around the internet than 'my cdplayer sounds rubbish'.

Then get the plethora of advice telling the complainet what to download or adjust on their soft device.

I understand the convenience of soft music but there is a reason why so many are dissatisfied.

Understand how music has been recorded?...... my eye.....prrrrft!

I confess I don't really understand why one digital stream sounds different to another beyond the bandwidth argument it genuinely baffles me - like how the combustion engine works, but there are differences some more subtle than others - May even be age related.

I think I lost the point of what you're saying. If you're saying different kit sounds different, and that getting the optimum from streaming (your own ripped CDs) poses different challenges to playing a CD, I can't disagree with that. I can't see where I have said or implied otherwise.

But the notion that streaming (your own ripped CDs) will inherrently always sound worse than playing them on a CD player is simply just wrong. You may or may not have been saying that.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I'm sorry, but it is subjective and nobody's wrong - while alot depends on the quality of the source material the kit matters.

You'll read far more 'my soft device don't sound right' threads around the internet than 'my cdplayer sounds rubbish'.

Then get the plethora of advice telling the complainet what to download or adjust on their soft device.

I understand the convenience of soft music but there is a reason why so many are dissatisfied.

Understand how music has been recorded?...... my eye.....prrrrft!

I confess I don't really understand why one digital stream sounds different to another beyond the bandwidth argument it genuinely baffles me - like how the combustion engine works, but there are differences some more subtle than others - May even be age related.

I think I lost the point of what you're saying. If you're saying different kit sounds different, and that getting the optimum from streaming (your own ripped CDs) poses different challenges to playing a CD, I can't disagree with that. I can't see where I have said or implied otherwise.

But the notion that streaming (your own ripped CDs) will inherrently always sound worse than playing them on a CD player is simply just wrong. You may or may not have been saying that.

I'm sure we have touched on this topic before and it usually decends into originals v copies....

'worse than....' is subjective 'as good as' too.

But from my experience CD's trump 'copies' be it 'lossless' or otherwise. Well that's the point I'm trying to make. (clever usage of language/marketing).

Unlike vinyl to CD there is no improvement from CD to 'soft' only the 'equaling' at the premium level to what's current.

That is not wrong - I'd accept subjective though.

 

[MajorFubar]

I'm sure we have touched on this topic before and it usually decends into originals v copies....

'worse than....' is subjective 'as good as' too.

But from my experience CD's trump 'copies' be it 'lossless' or otherwise. Well that's the point I'm trying to make. (clever usage of language/marketing).

Oh yeah now I remember. Your opinion was rubbish then and still is, because just like then, you still can't grasp that computers, the internet, digital distribution and the world as we know it could not exist if you were right. But it's one of those things where we could all spend the rest of our lives trying get you to understand why you're wrong, and still not succeed; there was about ten of us over about 14 pages trying to get you to understand back then, so I doubt it's worth the effort now.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I'm sure we have touched on this topic before and it usually decends into originals v copies....

'worse than....' is subjective 'as good as' too.

But from my experience CD's trump 'copies' be it 'lossless' or otherwise. Well that's the point I'm trying to make. (clever usage of language/marketing).

Oh yeah now I remember. Your opinion was rubbish then and still is, because just like then, you still can't grasp that computers, the internet, digital distribution and the world as we know it could not exist if you were right. But it's one of those things where we could all spend the rest of our lives trying get you to understand why you're wrong, and still not succeed; there was about ten of us over about 14 pages trying to get you to understand back then, so I doubt it's worth the effort now.

From where I was standing it was the other way around..... you lot had the rubbish argument and I as is usually the way with these things was right.....

Ah well Major....... ;-)

 

[Blacksabbath25]

for me cd is king i have stopped buying albums of itunes

 

[Al ears]

From where I was standing it was the other way around..... you lot had the rubbish argument and I as is usually the way with these things was right.....

Ah well Major....... ;-)

You're whole argument revolves around a total misunderstanding of how digital storage, retrieval, and copying works. Your mind still thinks in terms of recording LPs to a cassettes. Ultimately your theory states that I could burn an audio file to a CD, rip it, and the ripped file will be different somehow from the original file, even though I can demonstratably prove it to be completely identical.

When you can't see for yourself how fundamentally stupid that is, and see what the widespread implications would be if it was true, in terms of music / apps / games / films / data / everything else that's stored and distributed on CD and DVD, I can't help you. No one can.

I am afraid I have to agree. There's a train of thought that anything copied has to be substandard to the original, this is normally down to the number of extra steps involved in the process.

Is the copy on my USB stick of that document I have stored on my computer inferior? I very much doubt it.

I will stick to my opinion that playback of any lo-def file format, on an 'average' Hi-Fi set-up will sound no different, no matter how many times it has been 'ripped'.

Apologies to the OP but hope this, in some ways, helps with his question as opposed to those opinionated individuals that have nothing better to do than quote from their high horses.

 

[chebby]

Apologies to the OP but hope this, in some ways, helps with his question as opposed to those opinionated individuals that have nothing better to do than quote from their high horses.

Hopefully. Sometimes I feel that half the [time] I contribute to an existing thread it ends up off-topic and confrontational, but what do you do? The OP needed advice, how can I not say something if there's a possibility he might go away thinking ripped CDs are going to sound inferior because someone with a twisted understanding of the subject says they are? It's not in my nature to STFU, unfortunately or otherwise, when someone's spouting misleading gobbledegook.

I'm with you Major.

 

[MajorFubar]

From where I was standing it was the other way around..... you lot had the rubbish argument and I as is usually the way with these things was right.....

Ah well Major....... ;-)

Your whole argument revolves around a total misunderstanding of how digital storage, retrieval, copying and distribution works. Your mind still thinks in terms of recording LPs to a cassettes. Ultimately your theory states that I could burn an audio file to a CD, rip it, and the ripped file will be different somehow from the original file, even though I can demonstratably prove it to be completely identical.

When you can't see for yourself how fundamentally stupid that is, and see what the widespread implications would be if it was true, in terms of music / apps / games / films / data / everything else that's stored and distributed on CD and DVD, I can't help you. No one can.

 

[MajorFubar]

Apologies to the OP but hope this, in some ways, helps with his question as opposed to those opinionated individuals that have nothing better to do than quote from their high horses.

Hopefully. Sometimes I feel that half the time I contribute to an existing thread it ends up off-topic and confrontational, but what do you do? The OP needed advice, how can I not say something if there's a possibility he might go away thinking ripped CDs are going to sound inferior because someone with a twisted understanding of the subject says they do? It's not in my nature to STFU, unfortunately or otherwise, when someone's spouting misleading gobbledegook.

 

[MajorFubar]

(NB edited my earlier posts for grammar...I'm still not great at typing on tablets...)

 

[chebby]

(NB edited my earlier posts for grammar...I'm still not great at typing on tablets...)

Which tablets are you on?

 

[Al ears]

(NB edited my earlier posts for grammar...I'm still not great at typing on tablets...)

Which tablets are you on?

I am no good at typing on anything when under the influence.

 

[Boomer]

I see a fight coming on! Lol I didn't mean to start an argument but if I am copying a CD then making another copy of the copy and so on are you saying there will still be no difference from the original quality? This is quite interesting and I believe it is still on topic.

Thanks

 

[MajorFubar]

Which tablets are you on?

Prozac, helps me cope with Mr UXB *wacko* :-D

If I am copying a CD then making another copy of the copy and so on are you saying there will still be no difference from the original quality? This is quite interesting and I believe it is still on topic.

Thanks

Yep. Once you rip it's just like any other computer file, unless you open it in some kind of editing program and change it. Email it to someone and they've got an exact copy of your file. They can send it to another person, and that person can send it to another, and so on, million times or more. The millionth person to receive it still has an exact copy of your original file, as long as it hasn't got corrupt in transit at some point (does happen now and again!), or been altered and re-saved. There's nothing mysterious about it really. It's the basic fundamentals about how computers work and transmit data between each other, and if it didn't happen, the whole IT infrastructure the world over, including the internet, would break down.

 

[Boomer]

Thanks Major, it makes sence.

All in all I'm going to stick with CD for a little while I think. Maybe I will review it in a year or two but for now CD is the best option.

I want to buy a new CD player and was thinking Saturn R.

 

[MajorFubar]

Nothing wrong with that choice at all. CDs are excellent. So long as you're absolutely clear in your mind that ripping them and using a computer or streamer to play them has not some how compromised them. When you really properly think about it, to believe otherwise is just lunacy.

 

[Boomer]

Nothing wrong with that choice at all. CDs are excellent. So long as you're absolutely clear in your mind that ripping them and using a computer or streamer to play them has not some how compromised them. When you really properly think about it, to believe otherwise is just lunacy.

Thanks Major, I completely understand your point, no compromise.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

 
Which tablets are you on?
 

 
Prozac, helps me cope with Mr UXB *wacko* :-D

If I am copying a CD then making another copy of the copy and so on are you saying there will still be no difference from the original quality? This is quite interesting and I believe it is still on topic.

Thanks

Yep. Once you rip it's just like any other computer file, unless you open it in some kind of editing program and change it. Email it to someone and they've got an exact copy of your file. They can send it to another person, and that person can send it to another, and so on, million times or more. The millionth person to receive it still has an exact copy of your original file, as long as it hasn't got corrupt in transit at some point (does happen now and again!), or been altered and re-saved. There's nothing mysterious about it really. It's the basic fundamentals about how computers work and transmit data between each other, and if it didn't happen, the whole IT infrastructure the world over, including the internet, would break down.

I'll add this (looks like the OP is happy with the advice given.)....

I have no problem with soft options but it's top end is no more than CDquality it's standard level may be slightly below though.

I own a NAD C660 CDplayer - it's a decent player and does 'identical' copies CD to CD being its prime function.

But when asked to dub a second generation copied CD it will not do high speed dubbing (x2 x4 etc) it will only dub it at normal speed to achieve an 'exact'

It'll record everything on a disc including text info on a CD still.

A 4th generation copy is also an issue for it. And the quality does suffer slightly.

This suggest to me the software sees differences in the 'digital' data between the original and a copy.

Is it audible?....who knows but the software recognises differences.

One has to make of that what you will. Like I've said there are enough post on t'internet to suggest Major is blowing hot air.

But hey, I also say trust your ears and enjoy your music regardless.

But its a good experiment for anyone who enjoys recording.

We all remember how analog recordings deteriorated quality wise from 1st generation onwards so maybe all the hype of the lossless sell is just that a sell.

And the laws of diminishing returns still stands true when copying.

I'm just saying.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Please, no-one bite. Hold it in Major

Use your imaginary "ignore" button and reply to one of the other contributors instead.

It's just descended to the level of 'baiting' now.

Lol..... Stop it.

 

[chebby]

I'm not going to quote that bilge (but if I did quote and requote and so on etc. it would still be the same bilge even after a million requotes. It would never improve).

Please, no-one bite. Hold it in Major

Use your imaginary "ignore" button and reply to one of the other contributors instead.

It's just descended to the level of 'baiting' now.

 

[Boomer]

There's only one way to find out, I will make a copy of a disc tomorrow and try the original to the copy.

I will put my thoughts here tomorrow.

 

[ID.]

Which tablets are you on?

Prozac, helps me cope with Mr UXB *wacko* :-D

If I am copying a CD then making another copy of the copy and so on are you saying there will still be no difference from the original quality? This is quite interesting and I believe it is still on topic.

Thanks

Yep. Once you rip it's just like any other computer file, unless you open it in some kind of editing program and change it. Email it to someone and they've got an exact copy of your file. They can send it to another person, and that person can send it to another, and so on, million times or more. The millionth person to receive it still has an exact copy of your original file, as long as it hasn't got corrupt in transit at some point (does happen now and again!), or been altered and re-saved. There's nothing mysterious about it really. It's the basic fundamentals about how computers work and transmit data between each other, and if it didn't happen, the whole IT infrastructure the world over, including the internet, would break down.

I'll add this (looks like the OP is happy with the advice given.)....

I have no problem with soft options but it's top end is no more than CDquality it's standard level may be slightly below though.

I own a NAD C660 CDplayer - it's a decent player and does 'identical' copies CD to CD being its prime function.

But when asked to dub a second generation copied CD it will not do high speed dubbing (x2 x4 etc) it will only dub it at normal speed to achieve an 'exact'

It'll record everything on a disc including text info on a CD still.

A 4th generation copy is also an issue for it. And the quality does suffer slightly.

This suggest to me the software sees differences in the 'digital' data between the original and a copy.

Is it audible?....who knows but the software recognises differences.

One has to make of that what you will. Like I've said there are enough post on t'internet to suggest Major is blowing hot air.

But hey, I also say trust your ears and enjoy your music regardless.

But its a good experiment for anyone who enjoys recording.

We all remember how analog recordings deteriorated quality wise from 1st generation onwards so maybe all the hype of the lossless sell is just that a sell.

And the laws of diminishing returns still stands true when copying.

I'm just saying.

That suggests to me, rather, that there is an issue with the way the NAD C660 CD player works rather than with how digital copies normally work. I notice it has an ADC (analogue to digital converter) in it, so I wonder whether it is converting the CD to analogue using the DAC chip before converting it back to digital using the ADC chip. The manual states "conversion from analogue to digital is done without any noticeable loss of quality. "

Bolded by me. This suggests to me that there is some deterioration each time and going through the process multiple times may exacerbate this until it becomes audible. This is not how digital copies are usually made.

It would be interesting to null test files ripped from the original copies and copies of copies made by this NAD against a lossless copy taken by a computer. It may well show up these changes.

Normally, when I rip to my computer, I could take a lossless copy, then make several generations (theoretically unlimited generations) of lossless copies and a null test should show any of those copies to be exactly the same as the others.