The future of lossless formats
Dec 3, 2014 at 6:59 PM Post #31 of 66
The consumer market has always cared about convenience over quality. Yet the hi-fi community continues to exist. There are plenty of recordings not affected by the loudness war, and even entire genres like classical and jazz manage to stay pretty good in overall quality. And whatever the status of DAPs two years ago, today any decent DAP with a line-out is a serviceable DAC.
 
Dec 3, 2014 at 7:07 PM Post #32 of 66
It hasn't all been convenience... There has been one major advance in sound quality in the past decade that has nothing to do with convenience... multichannel sound. 5.1 is as big of an advance over stereo as stereo was over mono. Digital audio was significant because it eliminated generation loss and made master quality sound reproduction available in the home for very little cost.
 
I was around in the hifi days of the 70s, and I can tell you that the system and music collection I have now are beyond anything I could have dreamed of back then. Audio reproduction technology has made huge leaps in the past thirty years.
 
Dec 3, 2014 at 7:16 PM Post #33 of 66
In fact, I just remembered a conversation I had with a fellow hifi nut back in Jr High School. We had just played with one of the first reel to reel B&W video tape recorders in a class, and we were talking about the future. I predicted that we would contain our entire record collection on a crystal cube the size of a softball and our stereos wouldn't need speaker wires because the sound would go straight through the air like radio. We could wear a wristwatch that could play our music or television wherever we were, and it would act as a video telephone too. I predicted that we would have television screens that covered an entire wall and we would be able to watch any program we wanted at any time we wanted, and record it and save it too.
 
All that was Buck Rogers talk when I was a kid. But now that I think about it, even though some of the details may be a bit different, I have just about all of this today... well everything except that doggone flying car I also predicted.
 
Dec 3, 2014 at 7:20 PM Post #34 of 66
  It hasn't all been convenience... There has been one major advance in sound quality in the past decade that has nothing to do with convenience... multichannel sound. 5.1 is as big of an advance over stereo as stereo was over mono. Digital audio was significant because it eliminated generation loss and made master quality sound reproduction available in the home for very little cost.
 
I was around in the hifi days of the 70s, and I can tell you that the system and music collection I have now are beyond anything I could have dreamed of back then. Audio reproduction technology has made huge leaps in the past thirty years.

 
I wouldn't an actual good 5.1 setup to be "consumer level", though. People just kinda throw a couple of mini speakers in the back and go 'ooooh' at Avatar. But yes, for audiophile purposes 5.1 can deliver a sound stage that stereo obviously cannot, at least not in a way that's as adaptable to any listening room.
 
On a side note, what would you say your favorite 2.0 to 5.1 DSPs do for realism?
 
Dec 3, 2014 at 7:30 PM Post #35 of 66
  On a side note, what would you say your favorite 2.0 to 5.1 DSPs do for realism?

 
I don't care much for the Dolby Pro Logic or DTS Neo ones. But I LOVE the Stereo to 7.1 DSP in my Yamaha AV receiver. It is absolutely perfect. It splits off the sub 80Hz to the sub, channels all the info common to both mains to the center, leaves the soundstage as clear as with stereo and adds a slight openness to the rears without being a mushy reverb. When I switch from 2 channel to matrix 5.1 using this DSP, the whole soundstage doubles in size and the room feels alive. As long as Yamaha incorporates this in their receivers, I am going to be a loyal customer. I can't imagine being without it.
 
I also use the Vienna Hall ambience, but only for a specific purpose. When they recorded Toscanini in the fifties, they crammed the whole NBC orchestra into Studio 8H, which was too small and dead for symphony recordings. It gave his records an unappealing dryness and boxiness that made them hard to listen to. I got the big Toscanini box set a couple of years ago and tried listening to it through the Vienna Hall DSP and it was a revelation. It sounded as good as any mono recording made in a first class concert hall, and even though the soundstage wasn't defined, the overall impression was as good as many stereo recordings.
 
Dec 3, 2014 at 9:39 PM Post #36 of 66
  The opinions of any of us on here, myself, Greenears, Rrob, Bigshot, stv04 have no bearing on what the main consumer market will actually do, because that market cares about convenience, then price, then a tiny bit about quality. It is still an interesting discussion though :>)
 
A typical vinyl HiFi setup from say 1984 owned by someone like me in their mid twenties with a half reasonable job and an interest in music (but not a HiFi obsessive) would sound far better than a cheapish DAP from a couple of years ago playing 16/44 files. Everything else being equal, and using high quality recordings, which is very difficult to achieve and I am not suggesting you try.
 
It may or may not sound better than a top end modern DAP playing well recorded and mastered 24/192 files. Though I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 1984 vinyl setup up lost that competition.
 
You haven't quite got my point about deterioration in quality because you are probably a lot younger than me and don't remember all this.
 
It started with Vinyl pressing quality. It started to deteriorate in about 1973 and within 5 years the QC had gone completely.
 
Many more steps followed along the way in many areas, There were of course some improvements as well, but the general trend was always downwards.
 
Compression of loud music on CDs and Radio is just one of the more recent events, in a long chain of many events, which all have one thing in common. A reduction in quality at another point in the Audio chain.
 
I really do hope, and indeed believe, that has now stopped and is going to go rapidly into reverse over the next few years, and those of us with the time and the money will get the quality that we used to take for granted. In fact maybe considerably better quality than that. But it has taken a long time.

 
Interesting take on history.  My belief is a little different.  My experience is that music recording and playback technology has benefitted from Moore's law and gradually gotten better and cheaper over 30 years.  Not as fast as video and communications, but nevertheless better.  Content is another question.   No question that large segments of the content industry have been slow to adapt to new technology.  I want consumers to have more choice, and I hope the pendulum will shift.  Note that the Beats acquisition runs counter to the $5 earbuds concept that would be consistent with not caring about quality.  There are signs but we will see.  Dispelling myths, sound science and transparency would help the industry immensely IMO.
 
Dec 4, 2014 at 6:58 AM Post #37 of 66
Originally Posted by BackToAnalogue /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
A typical vinyl HiFi setup from say 1984 owned by someone like me in their mid twenties with a half reasonable job and an interest in music (but not a HiFi obsessive) would sound far better than a cheapish DAP from a couple of years ago playing 16/44 files.

 
I would not be so sure about that. For example, here you can find some measurements of the DAC on the iPod Touch 4G, and while it might not be the cheapest DAP, it is not an exotic audiophile model either (in fact it is/was widely used by non-audiophile consumers), nor is it exactly new. I doubt you would easily find vinyl setups capable of flat frequency response within 0.1 dB error from 20 Hz to 20 kHz, 94 dB signal to noise ratio, and about 0.01% distortion. The DAP very likely also has more accurate and stable pitch, no low frequency "rumble", better channel separation, full dynamic range over the audio band (i.e. it is capable of playing any frequency at full scale level, also on only one channel), and obviously records do not degrade over multiple playbacks. The only thing it definitely does worse (while playing CD quality audio) is not being able to reproduce ultrasound above 22 kHz, for those who think it matters.

 
Now the hifi vinyl setup would of course sound better than the DAP does with the stock ear buds, but that is hardly a fair comparison, and I already specifically excluded transducers from the "cheap is now good enough" category. The quality of the recording matters as well, heavily compressed and distorted pop music will not sound really good on anything. However, once you connect the DAP to high quality speakers/headphones (using an external amplifier when needed) and play suitable tracks, it can indeed sound great, but maybe not to those who know what they are listening to and expect it to sound bad.
 
Dec 4, 2014 at 12:31 PM Post #38 of 66
CDs best vinyl on every aspect you can measure.
 
Dec 4, 2014 at 6:58 PM Post #40 of 66
You can take the best LP in the world, capture it to PCM and play it back alongside the original LP and won't hear any difference. Everything that can be contained on an LP can be contained on a CD. You can't necessarily say that of the reverse.
 
Dec 4, 2014 at 7:48 PM Post #41 of 66
just to be pedantic - CD-4 Quadraphonic records  would require 192k not just Redbook CD 44.1 to capture the 30 kHz subcarrier and its modulation
 
http://www.obsoletemedia.org/tag/quadraphonic/
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatible_Discrete_4
 
 
vinyl does draw the corners of the box differently, few were ever cut with >5 kHz power bandwidth, but if you don't mind limiting the amplitude much higher frequencies can be recorded
 
but Redbook CD today are often audibly "hotter" since full amplitude can be recorded up to 20 kHz
 
Dec 4, 2014 at 7:56 PM Post #42 of 66
thank you for helping to... uh... clarify?
 
Dec 4, 2014 at 9:26 PM Post #43 of 66
anytime
 
 CD-4 was certainly a coding format, on vinyl, that requires more than 2 channel Redbook CD to capture, playback
 
 
another helpful thought -  we may want to disallow vinyl altogether in a "lossless formats" thread with the expected wearout with play clearly being a loss
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top