Why MP3's Won't Kill High Fidelity

[3db]

3db says: "Nothing beats live be it in a venue or in a recording stereo. The best home systems can do is to match live. It can never do better than the source."

He obviously hasn't been listening to live music in the same dives I have (Lincoln Center, they're not). As I don't live in a large metro, most "live venues" accessible to me on a regular basis are restaurants and bars that convert themselves to after-dinner "music venue" to snag the late night crowd. Staging and acoustics are generally afterthoughts, if there's any thought at all. Lousy mixing, echoes, reverb, feedback, loud drunks, bored chatter at the next table...all conspire to utterly deafen 3db's live venue fantasy. If by "live venue" he means music halls and auditoriums designed specifically for musical performance, he is correct. By real world standards, live venue can mean anything from motor speedways to pizza & beer joints.

If a recording took place in a non ideal environement, the recording engineer would have wanted to capture the ambience of this. Sure it may sound liek crap with bloated bass or the treble is alittle excessive but its live. Is it supposed to sound smooth? I highly doubt that or else it would have been recorded in a proper acouticaly treated room. This is what I'm getting at. And if a megabuck homne system cannot reproduce the ambinace venue, then its not better than the source.

 

[3db]

past 256kbps mp3 vs. cd is not really an argument, the information removed from 256kbps mp3's is not even musical information, which you will notice when listening to out of phase tests, it sounds like rhythmless white noise that occasionally pops up. almost all music download services offer encodings above this bit-rate. i will say mp3 has had its run and its time to move on, AAC is about 2x more transparent then mp3's, you can get the same quality sound at 128k AAC that you get with 256 mp3. at 320k, AAC becomes nearly transparent. the problem with mp3's is they have a tendency to brutally beat transients to death, AAC does not. the real issue is that one, Ipod DAC's are good, but no match for you 32-bit 196khz oversampling of your receiver, since ipods do not have sampling rates above 44.1khz. the idea would be to create a CD player that plays back AAC since to me the biggest issue with files is that you don't actually have physical copies of the music, unless you burn them of course.



this is true only because most live performances are done in large, echo chambers with uneven response, terrible transient smearing, etc. recordings are recorded in an acoustically dead room, if people were to treat the live places, it would be awesome. secondly, live speakers are made to do one thing, produce sound, and ALOT of it. they are no match for you high end HT speakers. of course were talking about amplified music, like rock. classical is a different story, ive heard classical music played in a good acoustic room before, sounds great, i doubt we will ever be able to reproduce it exactly that way.

Like I said earlier, if the system cannot reproduce the ambiance of the venue, then its not better than the source of the venu. Again, people are missing the analogy of peoplel who claim that a cassette recording of a vinyl record sounds better than the record itself. It simply cannot be better than the source.

 

[lsiberian]

MP3s are already dying and nearly dead. AAC 256kbps has taken over and is more than adequate for over 90 percent of music according to the ABX tests conducted(see hydrogen audio) Compression isn't always a bad thing and unless you are listening to classical or jazz your ability to tell the difference is suspect at best. I know Rock and Pop have a much high tolerance for bad speakers and recording practices than Orchestral or Jazz music does. This is why many kids don't realize how awesome the old stuff is. If they have the chance to hear it on a good system I think many will realized the difference.

 

[lsiberian]

they are no match for you high end HT speakers.

Not true. There are many excellent pro-audio speakers and some would be a huge upgrade for your system. JTRs can hold their own with most of the high end speakers.

Now if you are thinking of TLS Guy's system then you are spot on.

 

[yepimonfire]

i was talking about the sound quality of PA speakers and i know most PA speakers do not sound near as good as some of the stuff people like us have (ok not as much me but) because they are not built to reproduce incredibly accurate sound, they are made to produce ALOT of sound. many of the sound very harsh and in your face.

 

[skizzerflake]

MP3s are already dying and nearly dead. AAC 256kbps has taken over and is more than adequate for over 90 percent of music according to the ABX tests conducted(see hydrogen audio) Compression isn't always a bad thing and unless you are listening to classical or jazz your ability to tell the difference is suspect at best. I know Rock and Pop have a much high tolerance for bad speakers and recording practices than Orchestral or Jazz music does. This is why many kids don't realize how awesome the old stuff is. If they have the chance to hear it on a good system I think many will realized the difference.

Unfortunately, a lot of this is due to how awful most recordings are now. With loudness pushed to the maximum, compressed dynamics and a lot of obvious distortion, it only takes a reasonably OK codec to reproduce sonic junk. It's sad that unless you seek out elite classical or jazz recordings, you get such ratty sound. Even music I like is usually recorded badly.

 

[3db]

Unfortunately, a lot of this is due to how awful most recordings are now. With loudness pushed to the maximum, compressed dynamics and a lot of obvious distortion, it only takes a reasonably OK codec to reproduce sonic junk. It's sad that unless you seek out elite classical or jazz recordings, you get such ratty sound. Even music I like is usually recorded badly.

The Indie label suffer from far less compression. They know music sells, not loudness. Vinyl is the other alternative

 

[3db]

i was talking about the sound quality of PA speakers and i know most PA speakers do not sound near as good as some of the stuff people like us have (ok not as much me but) because they are not built to reproduce incredibly accurate sound, they are made to produce ALOT of sound. many of the sound very harsh and in your face.

Don't confuse PA speakers with a bands sound system. Two totally different animals. And if the home system cannot reproduce the sound from even a PA system, then the sound cannot be as good as the original.

 

[yepimonfire]

last concert i went to sounded like sh!t though.

and vinyl is and would be great, but most of the time the vinyls are just recorded from the same master a CD is, many of my favorite bands produce vinyls as well as CDs, the vinyls sound no different from them. of course DRC isnt overused in the recordings either (mostly) i mean its used on some but theres certainly alot more then 3 or 6db of dynamic range. most of them you can hear the full attack sound of a snare drum or the thunder of a kick drum, its all very clear. i notice alot of pop songs sound loud and the drums sound "weak"

 

[yepimonfire]

im also someone who will say DRC can be good if done correctly, but there is a difference between that and making a recording as loud as possible so that all the instruments blare eachother out.

 

[3db]

last concert i went to sounded like sh!t though.

and vinyl is and would be great, but most of the time the vinyls are just recorded from the same master a CD is, many of my favorite bands produce vinyls as well as CDs, the vinyls sound no different from them. of course DRC isnt overused in the recordings either (mostly) i mean its used on some but theres certainly alot more then 3 or 6db of dynamic range. most of them you can hear the full attack sound of a snare drum or the thunder of a kick drum, its all very clear. i notice alot of pop songs sound loud and the drums sound "weak"

Vinyl has totally different requirements then CD because of physical limitations of the medium itself. From that standpoint, I don't know if one master can be used for both medium types. Unfortunately, not all recordings on either media type are stellar. I have the latest Von Bondies ...on both vinyl and CD and the CD does sound better. the vinyl version sounded liek they've overdriven the levels

 

[TLS Guy]

Vinyl has totally different requirements then CD because of physical limitations of the medium itself. From that standpoint, I don't know if one master can be used for both medium types. Unfortunately, not all recordings on either media type are stellar. I have the latest Von Bondies ...on both vinyl and CD and the CD does sound better. the vinyl version sounded liek they've overdriven the levels

Can I just say I'm really glad I don't like all this music you are talking about.

This discussion goes on endlessly about this genre of music, and yet after more than 50 years of collecting the number of poorly engineered disc I have encountered is very few.

May be there is a tip here for you.

 

[yepimonfire]

Vinyl has totally different requirements then CD because of physical limitations of the medium itself. From that standpoint, I don't know if one master can be used for both medium types. Unfortunately, not all recordings on either media type are stellar. I have the latest Von Bondies ...on both vinyl and CD and the CD does sound better. the vinyl version sounded liek they've overdriven the levels

this is true, i have a few CD's by Dio that sound like they came off of vinyl, they don't sound too good and even though there is no DRC applied, the dynamic range is very limited. they obviously did not apply RIAA EQ either when putting them on a cd, this is obvious because the low end is lacking from 70hz down. Vinyls that are correctly mastered sound great, they eventually wear out though. CDs also sound great, and they will give the same playback quality with hardly no noise for the life of the CD. digital audio has the ability to surpass even the greatest vinyls, but unfortunately no one is taking advantage of it. ive heard an album once that was 96khz at 24-bit LPCM and it sounded so AMAZING. unfortunately i dont see recording industry steadily taking advantage of that technology for atleast 5 years.

 

[3db]

Can I just say I'm really glad I don't like all this music you are talking about.

This discussion goes on endlessly about this genre of music, and yet after more than 50 years of collecting the number of poorly engineered disc I have encountered is very few.

May be there is a tip here for you.

My musical interests are far broader than yours and it emcompasses your interest as well. May that be a tip for you TLS . Instead of being narrow minded in your taste, I would encourage you to explore other genres of music. You really are missing the boat on just sticking with classical.

Even classsical music is not imune to bad recordings. I have enough of a classical collection to warrant that previous statement...

The Von Bondies was an example where the vinyl version sounded much poorer than the CD version. I have many rock and blues albums which sound far better than their CD counterparts.

 

[3db]

this is true, i have a few CD's by Dio that sound like they came off of vinyl, they don't sound too good and even though there is no DRC applied, the dynamic range is very limited. they obviously did not apply RIAA EQ either when putting them on a cd, this is obvious because the low end is lacking from 70hz down. Vinyls that are correctly mastered sound great, they eventually wear out though. CDs also sound great, and they will give the same playback quality with hardly no noise for the life of the CD. digital audio has the ability to surpass even the greatest vinyls, but unfortunately no one is taking advantage of it. ive heard an album once that was 96khz at 24-bit LPCM and it sounded so AMAZING. unfortunately i dont see recording industry steadily taking advantage of that technology for atleast 5 years.

I'm not worried about record wear. I had my first real turntable back in teh early 80s and although not the greatest in qwuality, it did not wear the records outs. This was confirmed by playing the same albums on my new setup and it sounded just great with lots of seperation, smooth highs and nice deep bass.

 

[yepimonfire]

hmm, all i know is the stuff my grandparents have laying around sounds like hell

 

[TLS Guy]

hmm, all i know is the stuff my grandparents have laying around sounds like hell

Then they bought the wrong gear!

 

[yepimonfire]

no i have played new vinyl records on the system and it sounds good, the old records they have specifically lack severely in the highs.

 

[MidnightSensi]

I have been following this thread with interest.

I really doubt good equipment and media will die.

The main reason is classical music. While that is a small market in most of the US, not here in Minnesota, it is certainly not true world wide. In the UK is is 30 to 40% of the market. The UK is one of the few regions where attendance at Opera is increasing.

I think this is due to two reasons, Sir Henry Wood who founded the Proms in 1895, which continue to this day, and the BBC.

This year these Proms will run from July 16 through September 11. They will be a major concert seven days a week, and many associated side concerts. All will be sold out long in advance and all will be broadcast live by the BBC. There is nothing anywhere near comparable in the rest of the world.

There will also be major music Festivals throughout the British Isles all summer.

This will continue to create a demand for accurate reproducers, as it always has.

Among classical music fans there is downloading, but in the US the physical media is cheaper than the Downloads. Also classical music purchasers generally prefer the whole production complete with printed inserts.

There has always been poor equipment for the mass market, but I would say the gap in quality has narrowed on the whole. Mass market equipment in the fifties and sixties was really dreadful.

However I could put a rig together with equipment circa 1959, that would surpass in audio quality probably most forum members systems.

The fact is that the LP at its best can give digital media a run for their money.

Good open reel machines with actual speed copies or masters is every bit the equal of CD.

The problem was high speed copies. However at the end of the tape era there were reel to reel tapes with Dolby B noise reduction and some with dbx II that really give digital media a chase.

I think the big step forward is in multichannel audio. However one big problem will remain. The fact that many listening rooms are not suitable for surround reproduction, this is especially true in Europe.

The recent Blue Ray offerings of Operas I have purchased are astonishing. I think they are significantly superior to SACD. The main reason I think is the ability to use seven channels and above all set delay.

Converting to PCM makes a nonsense of SACDs mastered in Europe, so you have to listen from the DSD decoder.

The only benefit I have got from Audyssey is the delay settings, and it is a big benefit. The perspective and sense of space achieved if phenomenal.

So with the results now possible and the vast selection of fine music on offer, I think there will always be a place for the sensible high end. We will continue on the Peter Walker's quest for the Closest Approach to the Original Sound.

On the flip side, electronic club goers have realized the downsides of mp3s. Over the big sound systems, the differences in the bass especially of compressed media are readily apparent. What gets by on a home stereo, doesn't on a big soundsystem... and going from track to track, if a bad quality track is mixed with a good one, its really easy to spot even if you don't have trained ears. 320s are about all any decent DJ will play, if not CD or vinyl...unless in a pinch.

 

[yepimonfire]

not to mention mp3 literally destroy transients, which even electronic music is full of.