|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.190.191.49
In Reply to: RE: Digital music posted by disgustipated on June 03, 2015 at 14:42:19
"Can someone explain to me or direct me to a page or post that would describe a great digital system?"
That would be very difficult to do.... Great digital to me sounds like vinyl without the surface noise.... The problem is so few digital sources achieve that, to my ears.... And the ones that do, it's almost always a CD player or transport/DAC. (But I've never heard a CD source that to me didn't lose some top-end resolution relative to a good vinyl source.)
Or in other words, if it "sounds digital" (or if produces a "feeling of discomfort" which is absent with analog playback), it's probably not "great digital"..... You should be able to focus on the music and "forget that it's digital"...... (Most high-resolution digital sources make me marvel at the sound, but I can't focus on the music/performance. I then have to shut it down after 10 to 15 minutes.)
"Can it be done via an iPod?"
In my experiences, I'd be inclined to say "no". I've never heard a portable system that I thought was comparable to a good CD based source. (Most portable sources to me don't do "microdynamics" well.) But that doesn't mean they don't exist, I just haven't found one.
Same goes for PC audio for that matter. Whenever I hear a really good CD based source, I hear comments like "You can't get sound like this from a computer"......
"I assume streaming is still not of high quality? I am clueless, I apologize in advance."
No need to apologize.... Streaming is all over the map.... I don't ever use it for absolute sonics, just enjoying music (YouTube) off the computer.
"I would like to find out what equipment I need to listen to digital music so that it can 'wow' me. Thank you."
The "wow" factor is so hard to attain... This is a big reason why high-quality audio has become a relic of the past from the mainstream perspective. I think the main problem is it has become excruciatingly difficult to produce and obtain decent recordings. I think there has been so much "gimmickry" in recording and sound reproduction over the past 20 years, there have been too many moving targets in regard to choices in recording practices and choices in playback. And too many "format conversions" as well. I would only use classical, acoustic jazz, and old-school rock in choosing evaluation recordings. Avoid any English-language mainstream pop produced after 1995. I would also avoid most remastered releases put out after the year 2005. I believe the studio equipment to produce recordings has gotten worse over the past 25 years.
Follow Ups:
CD isn't even close to Hi Rez, either from a computer/Dac, or an HAP Z1- type File Player.
I'll continue to collect vinyl and CDs because mastering matters to me. I'll choose the best master (or remaster) version over the highest rez version any day o' the week. Hi Rez is only worth pursuing when it's coupled with the version that I want most.
Red book CDs (16/44.1K) with proper Recording / Mastering can still sounds very good.
I've some red book CDs which still out perform some of mine SACD / Hi-Rez file collections.
YMMV.....
Regards
PS
There was a time where I personally thought the CD was a hopelessly inadequate source medium for high-quality audio playback..... I came ever so close to giving up, thinking it just couldn't cut it.....
I was in Cleveland during the early 1990s. I visited a high-end audio store (now defunct) called Sound Resource. There was a large listening room that had a Wadia 7 CD transport and Wadia 9 DAC. When I listened to that, I couldn't believe I was listening to a CD source. I thought maybe it was a superlative recording I was listening to. Stravinsky's "Petrushka" by Pierre Boulez and the Cleveland Orchestra, on Deutsche Grammophon label. (There were other recordings played, but that one really stood out.)
I promptly bought the CD and played it in my CD rig.... And came to the realization that what I've been using for sources up to that time didn't come close to what CD playback was capable of.
Since that moment, for a long time, I was obsessed in replicating it.... (Remember that 14-DAC shootout I once conducted.) I don't know if I actually did fully replicate it, but the Prism DA-1 and DA-2 DACs came close. (I just couldn't afford a Wadia 7/9 combo. I would have just gotten that if I could.) Then with a modified Philips CDC-935 changer, of all things. (Unless the output stage is upgraded, one wouldn't realize how great the DAC section is in this particular unit.) I've never heard another Wadia 7/9 rig since that moment in Cleveland, which I still think was the best digitized source I've ever experienced.
But in attending audio shows, up to last year (missed this year), I still hear the same deficiencies in CD playback today. I thought over time, the Wadia 7/9 sound would trickle down to common inexpensive gear, but I don't think this has happened. Not even in other expensive units. It's frustrating to no end. (This was why I was bashing gimmick technologies like "24/192 upsampling".) And is why many of us give up and try high-rez or server based audio. Or just stick to vinyl.
So I wouldn't blame anybody for not understanding my infatuation with CD players..... For I might have had a similar sentiment had that "Wadia 7/9 moment" never occurred. (I've been hoping for a similar moment with high-rez playback. But this hasn't happened yet. And don't know if it will happen.)
After many years of being 100% analogue, I've had to admit CD was given an unfairly hard time. It can sound fabulous. As Todd says great CD sounds like vinyl without the noise and it IS hard to find. But you can get amazing results.As for high-rez I personally cannot hear any significant differences. I was a very early adopter of SACD and found it too colored. Even high-rez files seem like a marginal improvement to me, at best. Could just be my ears, but in any case, I've now made peace with Redbook and actually love it.
Edits: 06/06/15 06/07/15
I understand your infatuation with so called 'hi rez'.
It's called 'The Emperor's new clothes'.
"A lie is half-way around the world before the truth can get its boots on."
-Mark Twain
I love Hi Rez, made direct comparisons.
CDs are OK.
Skeptics are in love with their Ideas.
No reason to check out anything else.
Enjoy your Box.
You know, the one you live in to avoid anything new.
I've tried a few SACD sources in my systems, but nothing recently.... But I have listened to quite a few over the years on other systems.... But it's always the same story: In the first five minutes, I think "It sounds fabulous, why am I choosing to miss out on this?".... In the next five minutes, I think "Why am I losing interest in the performance?"..... In the next five minutes, I think "No mas! I must shut it down." .... I feel as if my ears have undergone a root canal.....
This isn't just SACD, but any high-rez source I've listened to. (I also react this way listening to switching amplifiers. I also reacted this way once at a live gig, which used mainly digitized gear.)
I get this reaction listening to a lot of CD rigs too.... But oddly, not so much with MP3 or lower resolution sources. (I think this could be why people in the mainstream have gravitated to MP3 and other low-rez formats.)
I think RFI emissions is to blame, but I don't know unequivocally.
for audio playback of discs. I believe this is the difference. My last CD/DVD-A player was Muse's best and it sounded natural, dynamic and musical. The Muse player even beat Ayre's top player on providing a natural, musical presentation when I owned both. I finally replaced the Muse with a tricked out Mac mini that matched/exceeded the Muse in many areas but still had a sort of subliminal electronic quality that even a good DAC couldn't completely eradicate. All that changed when I added an Antipodes server in place of the Mac mini. The design/construction of the Antipodes prioritizes the elimination of noise throughout every step of the process and, even into even a modest DAC (Metrum Hex) exceeds what I have found CD to offer.
/
.
"In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, in the expert's mind there are few." Shunryo Suzuki
Thank you for the information everyone. I am still very unsure what to do now. For a while I was thinking of going with a PS directstream and use my computer, but now I am not sure. If playing via a computer compromises sound quality, then I have to rethink my plan. I thought that going digital would simplify my life, but it seems to be just as complicated.
The quality of "ripping" is affected by computer hardware, software, degragmentation, etc??
"Going Digital" is, by any definition, complicated.
If you're looking to "simplify things" look elsewhere.That said: I'm a music lover/audiophile with over 40 very active years of participation. I've been on the same road you are contemplating for nearly a year - following a few false starts over the past several years.
I've read this entire thread and have come up with this:
***Carefully read and consider everything "Sordidman" has offered. It is very straightforward info w/o much personal bias or misinfo. You can start small/less complicated and expand.***
What you end up with is up to you and what best meets YOUR needs. What mine looks like is a "transport" in the form of an Auralic Aries, then a DAC/preamp feeding my amplifier(s) which drives the speakers. For now I have a USB drive plugged directly into the Aries. I control the whole show via an app on an iPad, including streaming Tidal via Wi-Fi. Amazingly effective and addictive. I'm listening to more and more varied music than ever. I'm getting great sound and am seriously contemplating letting go of my analog front end and records - shear heresy just a few months ago.
I very well may go the NAS route in the future. It has it's advantages, but I'll do it when I'm ready and have good reason to.
This is, no doubt, "The Future." Best of luck to you on your journey. What you're doing now is same as what I do when I start a project - go into "research mode" and soak up and process as much as I can on the given topic, a very good way to start.
ps: The SACD player route is a blind corner/dead end - already antiquated/very limited.
Enjoy!
Edits: 06/22/15 06/22/15 06/22/15 06/22/15
Thank you for the advice. I appreciate the input and I appreciate you taking the time to make your recommendation, doak. But after much contemplation and research, I have decided to go the SACD route. I want something simple, I don't want to download and go between formats, etc. I HATE computers and I know that I will end up being even more frustrated than I am now. Again, thank you everyone for your participation in this discussion.
I can very honestly state: "I understand completely."I have a love/hate thing going with computers, though it's mostly hate.
The Auralic Aries has helped in this respect. However, it remains a small, dedicated computer and computers are still involved with downloading, processing, ripping, etc.Enjoy!
Edits: 06/23/15
Wow, thank you. You went right into my next question which was if it makes any sense to even own a cd player or if everything should simple be ripped. I should plan on still purchasing cds and playing them on a cd player rather than ripping or downloading hi rez in order to obtain the best sound quality?
I personally think the most-satisfying digitized audio source is still the old-fashioned CD player.... If you can find one that makes you not long to play analog tape or vinyl, you'll be set.
I believe the reason why people go the server or high-rez route is because they never encountered really good CD playback.... It's great if someone has it, but it's not as common as I wished it was..... Otherwise most audiophiles would still be using CD as their primary digitized audio source.
I happen to like the Schiit Audio Bifrost Uber DAC for computer playback.... I might try this DAC with a CD transport.... It might be a good budget option, with a used CD transport. Otherwise look for used Don Allen CD changers on Audiogon. The latter is what I use personally for my main audio systems. In spite of being modified 5-disc Philips carousel changers, which seem to be sacrilege in audiophile-dom, these players are as good as any I've experienced aside from the super-expensive Wadia or Prism DACs.
Just to be clear, ripping to a computer and connecting to a dac is not the best option for sound quality?
"Just to be clear, ripping to a computer and connecting to a dac is not the best option for sound quality? "No it's not. It doesn't mean you can't achieve good sound that way too. It's a question of choice.
Personally I find the whole circus of ripping CDs, storing the rips, backing them up and playing them through interfaces not designed for audio a waste of my life. I'm not even talking about buying downloads... I would definitely stay away from any solution that has the word "NAS" in it. It's so 2010.
The only thing I can understand is streaming from Deezer,Tidal, Qobuz, in CD quality. That's definitely the future. And at least you're not giving up CD for something MORE complicated.
If you don't need/miss the ritual of playing CDs, then go for the solution above. You can start small by plugging your computer into a DAC or be more ambitious and use a streamer like the Auralic Aries or an Antipodes, which seem to be all the rage.
It's NOT going to be better than playing a CD on a good CDP. But I'm sure it can be as good. You'll have instant access to an enormous library of music and make the most of current technology.
It is a very personal choice, one you have to make. Anybody telling you one way is better than the other soundwise doesn't know what they're talking about - at least for CD playback. For high-rez it might be different. As mentioned, I can't hear a significant difference, which might mean I'm deaf. So take everything I just said with a pinch of salt.
Edits: 06/07/15
Where internet access is fast, cheap, and never dies.
Here in the land of monopolies, internet access is going up in price, and down in bandwidth.
IME, streaming quality is much worse than AIFF delivered via NAS. NAS, is becoming more and more prevalent on this side of the planet because people are loading up a central server to deliver photos, movies, and music to 3 to 5 different types of transports/systems.
I would never put a Squeezebox in my main rig, but I have 3 of them scattered around our building. My downstairs neighbor & I share Internet access and he also accesses the NAS.
IMO, - it's unwise to put any music on any one computer, - that is gonna die, or be replaced. Or for those who don't want to go with the lower quality of a computer, or have a DB that simply won't fit.....
I've had a NAS since 2003, - I guess I'm so 2003.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
True, we're spoilt, we do benefit from great internet speed - and health care. But you have HBO :)What I don't understand is why bother with a computer-based solution if you can't stream. To me it's so much more hassle than CDs. I'm sure it can sound great too, it's just a practical issue.
Edits: 06/09/15 06/09/15
Hiya,
By computer based system, do you mean digital file playback in general, or specifically a PC or MAC?
You are asking an excellent question, (and I have said this many times), - are you comparing digital file playback to a good to great high-end CD spinner?
Digital file playback or a multiple device accessible digital file database can yield high quality if you've got a good system set up, AND, that DB is available for many devices. On my NAS drive, - my GF can watch a movie in the living room that has been dumped to the NAS, while I listen to music in the bedroom from the squeezebox. My downstairs neighbor and I can sync the squeezeboxes for a party that plays the same music throughout both apartments.
Sometimes, it's super convenient to just let the music go for many hours, - when you're on a long house construction project.
Cheers,
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Hey,Yes I mean digital playback via computer in general, regardless of the computer used.
As you noted, we have excellent internet access/speed in France. I live in the boonies, yet I have very high quality connection. As a result I stream everything - my movies via Netflix, background music via Deezer through a little Sonos Play 1. I think I could watch a movie in high resolution and listen to CD-quality via Deezer without any problem (not that I've tried to do both at the same time).
For serious listening I still use my CDP. Streaming is an option which I'm going to explore just out of curiosity, if only because of the amount of music one has access to.
Cheers
JB
Edits: 06/09/15
Yes,
I am totally with you. In my experience, streaming from the internet is significantly lower in quality than streaming (wired via CAT7 cable)from a home NAS drive. But I still like to stream from the Internet to get exposed to new and/or different music, or just listen to the news.
There are people who assert that they have streaming from a NAS as good as CDs.
For my main system, I do not care about streaming from the Internet, but it is nice to have if it doesn't compromise NAS playback. I am likely going to buy a Bryston BDP-2 for this.
Cheers,
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"Just to be clear, ripping to a computer and connecting to a dac is not the best option for sound quality?"
In my experiences, no. It's not the best option..... Although others might disagree.....
I find playback of ripped files to a hard drive to be a "crapshoot" in regard to sonic results. The sonics vary with ripping software, playback software, hard drive manufacturer, computer processor type, computer processor speed, ancillary hardware (motherboard, power supply, memory chips, etc.), operating system, system drivers, and even OS "service pack". (I abandoned ripping audio when I came to the realization that what worked well with Windows XP was awful with Windows 7.) I've yet to experience sound comparable to the CD itself. And after running defragmentation of a hard drive, the sound becomes worse.
(I would characterize the sound of ripped audio on a drive that was later defragmented as "dull". And consistently so.)
Agreed on that last one...
http://mindseyemusic.blogspot.com/
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: