Quality of music accessible to the average consumer

Posted by: Consciousmess on 02 May 2012

Hi all,

 

This is a rant and let me tell you why.  I look through the internet and for some bizarre reasons, all the high definition tracks are on genres of music that I think are selective.  This is primarily jazz and opera.  Now I know there are many forum members who love jazz.  I am afraid I am not one of them and I cannot stand that genre of music!!

 

But what winds me up, is that clearly for ALL sorts of music there are high quality studio recordings and we are just filtered down compressed or reduced quality samples be it on MP3 or 16bit 441.kHz.

 

Yes I know there is some on 24bit, but this is the minority.  Why??!!  I know technology keeps getting better in reproducing what is recorded, but we are kept from accessing this music and it winds me up no end.

 

For instance, would you agree that someone could play a compressed recording on a system higher up in the Naim chain and it will sound worse than a fantastic recording uncompressed at entry level??

 

This access to music winds me up, because surely someone has the music in e.g. 16bit 44.1kHz that consumers can make their own playlists at the same quality as the original they bought.

 

In other words, what have the record industries gained from retaining the 24bit 196kHz versions if they never get released to consumers???!!!!!!!!!!

 

Jon

Posted on: 02 May 2012 by james n

Hi Jon - the average consumer it would appear is not interested in hi-res material. Look at the demand for MP3 / iTunes downloads. I wouldn't get too hung about about the availability of hi-res material. 16/44.1 done properly can sound excellent.

 

Linn records seems to tread a good line between classical, jazz (ugh!) and the more interesting stuff. Naimlabel are getting there...

 

James

 

 

 

Posted on: 02 May 2012 by Guido Fawkes

I guess it is supply and demand .... just buy the vinyl copies of Shirley Collins, Sandy Denny and other great music and you'll have it in super high resolution - c'mon Fledg'ling, we need Anthems in Eden on vinyl. The superb Dutch label Music on Vinyl has released ELO's masterpiece Eldorado on vinyl (sounds superb) and a lot of other stuff.

 

I have seen very few high resolution that I'd buy - I have some Elvis and Beatles stuff in high resolution. I think Elvis is releasing his new albums in hi-res, but not sure about the back catalogue as Armed Forces would sound great (Oliver's Army is the famous song from it). 

 

I have SACDs of some Kinks and CCR stuff, but no SACD player so only listen to the Red Book layer - again I prefer the vinyl. 

 

But what I wonder is will they ever bring back Elcasset? 

Posted on: 04 May 2012 by Briz Vegas
What is your taste in music? What types do you want to hear. Classic rock and pop are represented these days. Modern pop is there a little too, well I have Gotye and Ani difranco for example. I will say however that a good balanced system will make the best of whatever digital music that you have. 16 44.1 can sound great in my experience. I don't bother with less than that as you can still get the cd if required.
Posted on: 05 May 2012 by Consciousmess
Hi guys, Well I like a lot of classical but cannot stand opera nor jazz. If something is serene then I love it. I also enjoy rock but not heavy rock..... But my issue is why do they not make all tracks released in 24bit 196kHz? This isn't a glib issue as surely if a track is only presently available in 16bit 44.1kHz that is what people are going to use to make their own compilations - should they desire. And if that is the benchmark of audio the following analogy illustrates my frustration.... We all know trees in a forest are competing with each other to get the most light from the sun, and that is why they grow tall - out of competition. But if the trees worked as a team then they could still get the same amount of light on their leaves, but not be as tall. The final result is the same and there is less energy required to make a tall trunk. The same goes with an outdoors concert. Everyone could see the band just as well if they sat down, but someone has to stand up so all the others do in order to compete. That is my issue, if it was universally agreed that everyone used 24bit 196kHz and I mean record companies and consumers then everyone benefits!! Or am I missing something??? Regards, Jon
Posted on: 05 May 2012 by james n

Distribution ? - download a 24/192 album. It's a big file. 

 

James

Posted on: 05 May 2012 by Briz Vegas
Continuing you natural world analogy, nature only ever expends enough energy to get the job done. If low bit rate files sell and are good enough to compete then they will become numerous. They require less bandwidth, less fancy gear to play and you can either save resources or use those resources elsewhere. We are the dinosaurs expending too much energy to get the job done in amongst a growing range of other demands on limited resources, iTunes is our asteroid of destruction, our harbinger of doom, our.......... well, you get the point. Having said that, there are still people sufficiently obsessed and adequately resourced to keep our little niche running for a while yet. Saw a program on MR Jobs last night. They commented that he did not have market share, what he had was human friendly and desirable In one high markup product. That is a similar space to the one occupied by hifi. That may make us crocodiles rather than the T Rex, just maybe.
Posted on: 05 May 2012 by Consciousmess
Actually those last two posts are good points made! Jon
Posted on: 05 May 2012 by Consciousmess
But surely there are artists out there who value high fidelity?? So by logic, why aren't such musicians not insisting their tracks are released in high definition? For instance I know Roger Waters has a couple of his albums releases in Q Sound, so by definition shouldn't all his tracks be released in high definition?? Jon
Posted on: 06 May 2012 by HuwJ

I often ask myself the same question about the availability of HD or even CD level downloads.

 

It is obviously possible and there is a market. HD Tracks is going from strength to strength in the USA. There are obviously IP issues going on there as they don't seem to be able to get a licence to export to Europe, Africa & Asia.  It would be great to see a similar outlet over here.

 

There are a few artists making their recordings available in HD on their own sites (or B&W) like Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel. It would be nice to see others joining in.

 

As pointed out earlier, a good 16/44.1 recording will stand out. I think the question is more to do with getting hold of vanilla recordings (that is before compression is carried out) of what are often messed up CDs rather than the actual CD itself.

 

Regards

Huw

Posted on: 06 May 2012 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Huw, I agree CD can sound fantastic, but you do need quality replay equipment, and I guess the average consumer doesn't. It appears the average consumer is happy with mp3 / AAC and high end means AirPlay through a Bose  system .  Therefore the additional resolution of CD is wasted. Effectively CD is high definition to those lossy formats

As fas as processing on CDs, fortunately in my expierience it tends to be most pronounced with some notable exceptions to very commercial chart type releases. As I don't tend to buy such CDs, the ones I buy, which on average is about 3 a week, usually sound fantastic and unmessed with, and every so often I get a pleasant surprise and find the tracks are HDCD encoded and expand to 20 bit, even though there is no mention of it the CD cover. Most often happens with US releases.

Simon

Posted on: 06 May 2012 by HuwJ

Hi Simon. I agree that most SQ evil is actually enacted on chart type music and I do get many reasonable recordings of less commercial albums. Mind you some chart music is pretty well done too.

 

Rock music often seems to get the worst compression, especially on newer small bands, which is a pity as it puts me of buying their music - a genre I used to really enjoy. I think they must aim for that live raunchy sound and just end up with a spoilt CD - as well as the loudness issue.

 

While I also agree that many people just want low bit rate music or don't know any better, apart from the cost of more storage and a wider pipe, there doesn't seem any reason not to make HD copies of tracks available alongside the compressed track - for those who want it.

 

My next door neighbour has gone from listening to music on:

1. his laptop

2. buying a £80 dock for his iphone

3. borrowing my old Apple Drick dock for his iphone,

4. buying a B&W Zepplin and full Spotify subscription with 320kbs

5. Moving his Zepplin from the corner where there was too much bass and hanging it on his wall to improve the sound.

6. Watch this space - Uniti & speakers!!!!?????

 

All this in about 2 years. Once people hear the good stuff it's hard to go back...

 

Regards

Huw 

Posted on: 06 May 2012 by Consciousmess
Keep encouraging, Huw!! Jon