I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?

RE: I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?, posted on July 29, 2014 at 17:31:54
ahendler Audiophile Posts: 5151 Location: San Antonio, Texas Joined: January 24, 2003	I have $40,000 in my system and I never listen to Spotify. Does that make me sane? Alan

join me in the protest for DSD streaming human rights!, posted on July 29, 2014 at 17:44:32
bullethead	I will protest for it from my armchair. Kind of like the armchair generals ;). Say it with me DSD streaming service now or die!

Spotify, that's a music streaming service?, posted on July 29, 2014 at 17:58:32
StephenJK	Out here in the boonies we're lucky to have an Internet connection. I use something called a "Turbo Hub" from Bell Canada, it piggybacks on the digital phone system at $35 a month with a 4GB limit. We have it set up so that if we go over it cuts off automagically. You quikly learn to turn off automatic updates on your laptop.

"insane heretic?"..., posted on July 29, 2014 at 20:50:16

musetap
Audiophile

Posts: 31879
Location: San Francisco
Joined: July 8, 2003
Contributor
Since: January 28, 2004

If you're listening to what you WANT to listen to on Spotify on the system you WANT to hear it on, then naaaa.

Otherwise, maybe not an insane heretic, maybe just... sad?

Around here it seems one needs to be a Bose� user to qualify as an insane heretic,
especially if you've managed to use Monster� cable products along with it.

"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination"-Michael McClure

Spotify?, posted on July 29, 2014 at 21:09:15
genungo	Isn't that a carpet cleaning service?

RE: I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?, posted on July 29, 2014 at 23:23:03
Frihed89 Audiophile Posts: 15703 Location: Copenhagen Joined: March 21, 2005	My mother would tell you, you're just going through a phase. On the other hand, if you have a good, well-thought out, computer audio system, I can see how the convenience and features of Spotify would be enticing, especially if you are an apostate who isn't into "critical listening".

No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on July 30, 2014 at 03:36:53
morricab Distributor or Rep Posts: 9181 Location: switzerland Joined: April 1, 2005	A gear junkie, check A music junkie, check An audiophile, no check To an audiophile sound quality is one of the main parameters...spotify effectively nullifies this and therefore you cannot be an audiophile when this is your main listening source.

Seems like you miss good radio. , posted on July 30, 2014 at 06:05:47
jusbe Audiophile Posts: 5950 Location: North Island Joined: April 4, 2000	Don't we all? Big J "... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal* salvation is a contradiction in terms."*

RE: I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 06:26:57
michaelhigh Audiophile Posts: 839 Location: midwest Joined: August 18, 2010	The more LP's I listen to (and rip to 24/192), the less I listen to Spotify.

RE: I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 06:40:02
middleground	What is the magic in adding the woes of the LP record to that of digital? Whatever makes you happy, I can't stand in the way...

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on July 30, 2014 at 06:43:22
middleground	Who appointed you gatekeeper? Subjectively the man is happy with Spotify (whatever hell that is) so who are you to judge? Audio is totally subjective, like totally...

RE: Spotify, that's a music streaming service?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 06:49:00
middleground	North Bay is not the boonies, Rouyn-Noranda is. Ask my son, he drives to North Bay from Rouyn-Noranda whenever he has a chance to get nearer to civilization!

RE: Spotify, that's a music streaming service?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 07:17:34
StephenJK	He could always go to V'Al D'Or! I worked up in the gold mines in Quebec with a mining contractor for years, know that part of the country well.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on July 30, 2014 at 07:20:25

lord addleford
Audiophile

Posts: 1095
Location: new england
Joined: July 5, 2005

If the essence of being an audiophile is the acceptance and elevation the subjective sensibility regarding judgement of equipment and music, then it seems to be a contradiction to exclude Spotify listeners from the audiophile realm. After all, by implication, the OP both highly values the Spotify from both audio quality and content perspectives. Essentially, given the singularity of the audio experience, you have no 'standing' to issue a judgement on who may be admitted to the audiophile club. Of course the thorny issue remains: given the primacy of the 'subjective' evaluation, what generalizations, if any, can be made?

You can't be serious, posted on July 30, 2014 at 08:24:35
Jeffrey Lee Audiophile Posts: 708 Location: Louisville Joined: September 24, 2002	Really? You, of all people, taking someone to task for being judgmental? You crapped on a guy in this very thread because he likes ripping his LPs to digital. Unbelievable.

If that what gets you off go for it, posted on July 30, 2014 at 08:54:22

Goober58

Not sure but doesn't spotify deliver lossy content? IME lossy content pretty much sounds the same from disk to disk and song to song. Kind of like the criticism I have for CDs compared to vinyl but only much worse. And the better the system (granted based on my value system) the more obvious this should become. Now I admit I haven't tried higher quality lossy formats.

Regardless if you spend $75 or $1,000,000 or more it's your system and you can do whatever you want with it.

I disagree and your comment is why so many deny being audiophiles, posted on July 30, 2014 at 09:04:01

Goober58

Your definition of sound quality is your own and if I recall correctly it defines your choice of source material as well as equipment.

If one choses to use Spotify (or Judas Priest records) as source material and builds a system that delivers great sound quality I see no reason to exclude him from being an audiophile.

One is not different than the other - in both cases you end up with systems biased/colored based one's subjective preferences.

RE: Spotify, that's a music streaming service?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 09:08:10
middleground	Val d'Or being nearer civilization is debatable!

Oh, he IS serious - you better believe that., posted on July 30, 2014 at 09:08:24
carcass93 Audiophile Posts: 7181 Location: NJ Joined: September 20, 2006	I have a feeling that moderators, on the other hand, are not - otherwise, it's difficult to explain why an aggressive anti-audiophile is allowed to disrupt discussions in this forum, time after time.

Wait a minute... , posted on July 30, 2014 at 09:14:32
spindoctor Audiophile Posts: 1663 Location: Virginia Joined: December 31, 2002	My rebuilt Bose 501's sound mighty good!!!! A simple definition of audiophile IMHO is someone who listens to and enjoys music. It's not about the equipment or the technology. There are many paths to enlightenment. Sim

RE: Spotify, that's a music streaming service?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 09:31:33

Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17306
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002

"Audio is totally subjective, like totally..."

It's not intended to be.

If you owned a recording studio and had some great players in the studio and could walk between the studio and the control room, comparing the real sound with the mic feed through the monitors the goal would be for the monitors to sound as much like the real sound as possible.

Why do you insist that this hobby is "totally subjective"?

Tre'

Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

RE: I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 09:39:22

onemug
Audiophile

Posts: 1276
Location: So. California
Joined: April 19, 2003

I took your post as someone lightheartedly asking the "insane" question...someone who is just genuinely surprised at how much they are enjoying it, otherwise you need to work on your self-esteem and be less in need of validation from others. Let's assume the first part is what it is and I will say, "me too".

Years ago, I really liked the "radio" aspect of Pandora. I set it up to be "one" of my sources. Then came MOG with a noticeable improvement in SQ. Lost MOG (RIP) a few months ago and tried out Spotify and think it's SQ is about the same as MOG's was.

Through trial, and no real error, I have tweaked it to where I use a dock that routes the pure digital to a DAC and then onto/into my main system. GIGO of course, but a good recording on Spotify sounds very good to me. Enjoy.

RE: Spotify, that's a music streaming service?, posted on July 30, 2014 at 09:53:32
middleground	I don't actually. I guess my terrible reputation here has not yet reached you! Some would say on that basis alone that you are the luckiest poster here. Irony is a tough gig you know.

"There are many paths to enlightenment....", posted on July 30, 2014 at 10:20:31
musetap Audiophile Posts: 31879 Location: San Francisco Joined: July 8, 2003 Contributor Since: January 28, 2004	I agree, that is truth, I have no beef with Bose (unlike many around here). In their eyes (or ears) anything Bose must seem heretical judging by the vehement responses to any Bose posts. My take is: whatever gets you through the night is alright. Thanks - continue to enjoy! "Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination"-Michael McClure

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on July 30, 2014 at 12:35:47

morricab
Distributor or Rep

Posts: 9181
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005

I disagree. You can have the best gear in the world and ruin it with poor quality recordings from Spotify.

AUDIOphile means AUDIO, not music choice. A person who loves music regardless of the quality is a MUSICOphile but not necessarily an Audiophile.

The love of gear alone is also not a person who is an audiophile. Probably they are just addicted to blingy toys.

Being an audiophile is the pursuit of getting the ultimate sound quality. That person may or may not love a wide range of music but they know that to get ultimate sound quality requires also at least decent quality recordings. Heavily compressed recordings on Spotify are the antithesis of this pursuit.

Death to compressed sources of music!!, posted on July 30, 2014 at 12:39:50
morricab Distributor or Rep Posts: 9181 Location: switzerland Joined: April 1, 2005	Lossy music should be damned to the lowest depths of hell.

Your posts, time, and time again, have shown you to be insane! NT, posted on July 30, 2014 at 12:42:04
Potzrebie	NT

yes, the music aspect, I was thinking about quality concerns, posted on July 30, 2014 at 16:22:40
bullethead	yes it sounds pretty good. I also have high res sources, but for day to day spotify does it pretty darn good.

Heretic? Nope!, posted on July 30, 2014 at 18:00:35
Bromo33333 Audiophile Posts: 3502 Location: Ipswich, MA Joined: May 4, 2004	I listen to AM and FM radio, too. Main system ... I dare not compute the amount of money spent but probably similar. Spotify is fun for music discovery. Though I would be a liar if I didn't admit to listening to music (LP, CD, SACD, FLAC) every night as the main entertainment. ==== "You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile...well-argued [n.t.a.], posted on July 30, 2014 at 23:29:13
wangmr Audiophile Posts: 2410 Location: Downtown Joined: November 29, 2012	.

RE: I disagree and your comment is why so many deny being audiophiles, posted on July 31, 2014 at 15:34:01
bjh Audiophile Posts: 18614 Location: Ontario Joined: November 22, 2003	Darn right, and the one-legged marathon runner is still a marathon runner. ;) but btw I listen to a lot of great music via FM, more time logged than in front of my main system (that also has FM so FM hours there too). What is the resolution of Spotify?

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on July 31, 2014 at 20:27:39

Brendan
Audiophile

Posts: 84
Joined: July 30, 2001

I agree with your statement and am reminded of an early "audiophile" experience from my past.

In my younger days when I was only a "musicophile", one of my more listened to sources was an early remastered Jethro Tull "Best Of" CD.

I clearly remember enjoying it on my gettoblaster.

Years later after some audiophile influence in my travels and a better system was built up I took out that old CD for a spin.......totally unlistenable from that crappy remastered source. The better equipment demonstrated all the faults of the "quicky" remastering that was occurring in the early days of the CD source media.

After finding some better source CD's, my enjoyment of Jethro Tull returned and of course was even better due to the sound quality bringing out details unheard on the old getto.

Now I consider myself both music and audio phile.

Brendan

From the Spotify website, posted on August 1, 2014 at 08:57:55
Goober58	What bitrate does Spotify use for streaming? Spotify uses 3 quality ratings for streaming, all in the Ogg Vorbis format. ~96 kbps Normal quality on mobile. ~160 kbps Desktop and web player standard quality. High quality on mobile. ~320 kbps (only available to Premium subscribers) Desktop high quality. Extreme quality on mobile.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 1, 2014 at 10:01:07

Goober58

"Being an audiophile is the pursuit of getting the ultimate sound quality. That person may or may not love a wide range of music but they know that to get ultimate sound quality requires also at least decent quality recordings. Heavily compressed recordings on Spotify are the antithesis of this pursuit."

Nice but no cigar. Sound quality is defined by the source material and is not independent of it. Source material first then sound quality - not vice versa as you suggest.

There's no reason to neglect the vast majority of recordings when building a system. All recordings of interest should be well served by the final system not just some of them. That's the Ultimate Sound Quality.

RE: I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?, posted on August 1, 2014 at 10:40:07
TubeDriver Audiophile Posts: 794 Location: East Coast Joined: February 16, 2007	Me too! I have about 750 LPs, about the same number of CDs, fair number of HiRez downloads on my PC but I probably listen most to Spotify. I'll take millions of decent sounding recording over a thousand+ great sounding recordings anyday.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 1, 2014 at 11:19:44

morricab
Distributor or Rep

Posts: 9181
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005

"sound quality is defined by the source material and is not independent of it."

Well that was exactly my point. You cannot call yourself an audiophile if all you listen to is a compromised (read: lossy) sound source. I did not suggest anything else...I suggest you reread the quote you took from my post.

"they know that to get ultimate sound quality requires also at least decent quality recordings. Heavily compressed recordings on Spotify are the antithesis of this pursuit."

"All recordings of interest should be well served by the final system not just some of them. That's the Ultimate Sound Quality."

I disagree strongly with this statement. Some recordings will never sound good, regardless of the system but they can be used for listening pleasure...just not for determining sound quality or for building a system

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 1, 2014 at 12:17:22

TubeDriver
Audiophile

Posts: 794
Location: East Coast
Joined: February 16, 2007

What if you listen to both "compromised" 320 mp3 and also LPs, Hirez and 16/44 digital? Can that person be an "audiophile"?

I always though that to be an audiophile required you to pay extra attention to the audio system so that a recording (regardless of quality or origin), would sound as realistic/accurate as possible?

To answer my first question, I no longer consider myself an audiophile (despite having systems that ranged from $10k to $50k, with my current system in the $25k range). I am a music lover.

This explains why I really enjoy streaming services like Spotify (formally used MOG), having literally millions of recordings at my fingertips is wonderful.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 1, 2014 at 13:10:16

Goober58

I suggest anyone attempting to get the better sound from their audio system is an audiophile - period. What difference could their choice of source material make???

You said - "Well that was exactly my point. You cannot call yourself an audiophile if all you listen to is a compromised (read: lossy) sound source. I did not suggest anything else...I suggest you reread the quote you took from my post."

I said "Sound quality is defined by the source material and is not independent of it." And I submit this is not your point - what difference does the quality of a recording make as long as the desired result is to get the best sound from it?

You want to hinge your component/system purchases based on it's performance on recordings of particular qualities. Fine that's your choice. But just because others use recordings of different qualities to judge hardly makes them less of an audiophile than you.

Other than when surfing I use 0 lossy formats. That said even my lossless recordings are compromised in one way or another. Knowing and admitting that I find it hard to think people who enjoy lossy formats shouldn't be considered audiophiles if they are in pursuit of better sound.

same here, posted on August 1, 2014 at 19:35:09
bullethead	same here, there's so much different stuff to listen to, would take so long to get the music physically delivered. I also use Google Music unlimited, because sometimes Spotify has the censored albums only (hip hop, rock, etc...) I don't understand the fascination with editing albums because of a disagreement about what language is appropriate.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 2, 2014 at 02:57:07
morricab Distributor or Rep Posts: 9181 Location: switzerland Joined: April 1, 2005	I was responding to the OP's comment that he listens almost exclusively to Spotify and therefore only lossy recordings. It is impossible to judge where you hifi system is listening only to heavily compromised recordings. Obviously, if you listen to other higher rez sources and good quality recordings you can be an audiophile.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 2, 2014 at 03:01:44

morricab
Distributor or Rep

Posts: 9181
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005

My point is that if you are using heavily compromised recordings you are not attempting to get good sound.

You are just plain wrong and twisting things in a bizarre way.
"What difference could their choice of source material make???"

THen later in the post you say:

"Sound quality is defined by the source material and is not independent of it."

So, which is it? Is or is not the source material important to sound quality?

I said it was and it is necessary to have really good quality recordings to ultimately judge the quality of a sound system.

" But just because others use recordings of different qualities to judge hardly makes them less of an audiophile than you. "

Actually it does. If someone is using compromised quality recordings then it is not possible to accurately judge the sound...period.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 2, 2014 at 11:43:48

Goober58

"My point is that if you are using heavily compromised recordings you are not attempting to get good sound."

I don't disagree but I'm not sure what your point is. One can be an audiophile building systems to get the best sound from his "compromised" recordings. This is rather a simple concept.

"So, which is it? Is or is not the source material important to sound quality?"

Sound quality is relative. If someone is using Spotify or other lossy formats their choice of equipment can make a great difference in Ultimate Sound Quality. And within context of course source material is important to sound quality. But the fact that some minimalist acoustic performance sounds almost like live hardly means something to someone trying to build the best sounding mp3 player.

There's no reason why any audiophile needs to consider the big picture when they are perfectly happy with lossy MP3.

The fact that my system or yours doesn't sound good playing lossy recordings means nothing. Someone who wants to use MP3s shouldn't have to care about lossless formats and should be able to buy equipment that makes his music sound the best.

I don't need or want equipment that sounds best on some subset of recorded works - I want a stereo that sound Fing great on just about every LP or CD I play on it - including recordings you build your systems around. And I want those recordings that sound like "dog poop" on your systems to make musical sense on mine.

And the guy who wants the best sound from mp3 or cassettes or FM really is no different than you or me.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 3, 2014 at 04:26:12
morricab Distributor or Rep Posts: 9181 Location: switzerland Joined: April 1, 2005	"And the guy who wants the best sound from mp3 or cassettes or FM really is no different than you or me. " No, they are completely different from me at least.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 3, 2014 at 10:36:52
Goober58	Yes you are so much more special than him!

It's all about listening to music. How you choose to do so is up to you., posted on August 3, 2014 at 16:13:57
ppopp Audiophile Posts: 2994 Location: OR Joined: October 10, 2002	Who cares what other's think. If you thought there was a better way to do it, no doubt you would. Do you qualify as an audiophile? Who cares? labeling is disabling.

RE: No, you are just not really an audiophile..., posted on August 4, 2014 at 01:58:07
morricab Distributor or Rep Posts: 9181 Location: switzerland Joined: April 1, 2005	I said different, not special...you can put words into your own mouth DonT.

No I said we are all different but we are all audiophiles., posted on August 4, 2014 at 16:50:59

Goober58

You're the only who's putting himself above the crowd because of how much money you are willing to spend.

What's funny here is I don't recall you being someone who felt big bucks were required to build great audio systems. I'm really not so sure how those who've bought the affordable gear you've recommended over the years would feel to not be someone you consider an audiophile.

I mean really morricab get a clue...

RE: No I said we are all different but we are all audiophiles., posted on August 5, 2014 at 03:11:00

morricab
Distributor or Rep

Posts: 9181
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005

I am not one who thinks one HAS to spend big bucks but there is a definite correlation up to a certain point with the cost and the performance.

Where it stops is when people start charging 10X or 20X on their cost for a product. If one knows something about how these things are made, a reasonable estimate can be achieved as to who is doing this and who is not.

Therefore, there is lower priced (but not low priced) gear out there that will deliver the goods.

As to the "willing to spend" there are limits of course and its those limits that probably limit the ultimate potential of my system. I have heard gear that I know to be better than what I have that I cannot comfortably afford...so I don't own it. If I could comfortably afford it I would for sure see if it is a significant step up for my system and if it proves so then purchase said equipment. The other way of course is to find good used bargains on things that were regarded as SOTA many years ago. Often they still are but in the name of "progress" and reviews they have been pushed aside. I have a DAC that is like this and a turntable as well (over 30 years old but still SOTA in all the important ways).

Nice post!, posted on August 5, 2014 at 11:06:29

Goober58

"Therefore, there is lower priced (but not low priced) gear out there that will deliver the goods."

Yes I would agree 100% if you had said there is low priced gear out there that CAN deliver the goods. And I also think one could almost always spend more and do better but someone could also spend more and do worse.

Ultimately source material, purpose and playback environment may be the limiting factors not money.

RE: I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?, posted on August 6, 2014 at 08:52:38
geezerrocket	Well if it's nothing but, then yes you may be insane. If it's mostly Spotify, then you just like the convienence of it and save the really good stuff for the 10% to 15% of the time when you require a serious fix.

Finally, a response that I agree with. -nt-, posted on August 6, 2014 at 09:41:11
jsm71 Audiophile Posts: 1123 Location: Cincinnati OH Joined: June 16, 2011	-

General Asylum

I listen to nothing but Spotify anymore, am I insane?

173.68.54.85