MP3 Purchases

I tried to download a free mp3 from LINN and it failed to arrive so have not bothered.

I don't find the quality to be acceptable - virtually everything available is less good than CD. That said, I have made some downloads. To clarify, they're okay for use on my iPod, but I don't just want to buy something for use on the go, and on my Hi-Fi I want at least CD quality.

However, I have bought some downloads, and for a variety of reasons. A couple of weeks ago I bought a number of tracks from the Philharmonia website - a series of live concert performances conducted by Charles Mackerras - including Mahler's 4th symphony which he hasn't otherwise recorded and Schubert's 9th (which he has, several times). The quality is not bad (320kbps), but if the performances could be had on CD, I would have bought them that way.

I also have a subscription to the eMusic site. £8 a month gets me 30 tracks which for classical music can represent very good value (e.g. you could fit in Mahler's first 6 symphonies for that). However the quality is only 192kbps and could be better. I only use it for buying things I'm curious to hear but don't want to splash out for the CD (for example Vanska's Minnesota cycle of the Beethoven symphonies).

My objections will lessen as quality improves, as it has been doing. Linn and Chandos both offer CD quality (though Chandos isn't mac compatible) and Linn even offers studio master levels.

regards, Tam

quote:

Originally posted by Tam:
I don't find the quality to be acceptable - virtually everything available is less good than CD. That said, I have made some downloads.

My objections will lessen as quality improves, as it has been doing. Linn and Chandos both offer CD quality (though Chandos isn't mac compatible) and Linn even offers studio master levels.

regards, Tam

Hi Tam,

are you able to quantify what you hear that is less than acceptable ?

classical music is much more complicated in composition and instrumentation than the pop/rock I listen to 85% of the time. perhaps that is a variable in our perceptions.

i respect your vast knowledge of classical music (have visited your site several times) and appreciate your perspective.

Jeff A

Jeff,

I have downloaded one song a few years ago and that is it. I have no plans to download. I think it is a cop out by the record company. I want a physical product with artwork and words for my money. I also want the best sound I can get whether CD or vinyl so I can then decide whether to play on my rig or on my ipod as a compressed file.

Adrian

quote:

Originally posted by Lontano:
Jeff,

I have no plans to download. I think it is a cop out by the record company. I want a physical product with artwork and words for my money.
Adrian

Hi Adrian

Perhaps related to what you are saying is that most of my downloads have tended to be of independent artists, so record "companies" are of minimal influence in that situation. Also, you are correct that the artwork, words, and physical package are sacrificed (though available in the data transferred/downloaded) but cost savings in my experience (the tradeoff) is 4-5 USD per disc plus shipping (though I must supply the cd-r and memory capacity).

If the sound quality is not acceptable to you, then my points above are probably irrelevant.

Jeff A

ps my compliments on your jazz collection and thank you for your input on PT comments, along with all the comments from others, I needed to hear PT and like the disc I have.

Jeff,

Thanks. There was a recent release from Dave Douglas of I think 12 CD's worth of a run of show - Live at the Jazz Standard.

http://musicstem.com/album/166

Being the completist I can be sometimes, if it had been released on CD I would have bought all 12. But it was released as a download so I did not buy. At the moment for me there is so much music and not enough time so this one did not get light of day with me. DD did release a 2CD version after a while so I got this instead.

I appreciate what you say on the independents and I wish them luck. But for now I will stick with CD - as I can get 99.9% of what I want on this format. Overtime I may have to change my approach.

Cheers

Jeff - my knowledge of classical music really isn't really all that vast (and I'm pretty surprised anyone reads the website).

Much like with audio equipment, I'm not always that good at describing the differences. In fairness to the data rate of the Philharmonia recordings I mentioned, it's made harder to judge by the fact that recordings aren't well done and I think the closed nature of the sound, the harsh tone to some of the instruments, is more down to the hall and the recording engineers than it is the encoding.

However, I think what tends to jump out most often for me is that instrumental tones tend to be a lot less rich. The sound can seem a little thin (almost akin to what happens when something is recorded in a less than ideal acoustic).

I suspect that it doesn't help that capturing 100 instruments is harder than four, but even just now doing a spot of listening with some mp3s, the digital files seem to bring a flattening of the dynamic range (which is arguably no bad thing when on the move) as well what would best be described as a deadening of the acoustic - or at least that's what it sounds like.


To some extent it's splitting hairs, the sound on most downloads is okay. But then, given this is a hi-fi forum, if there are an extra few per cent to be had, we tend to want them. Indeed, when I tape things off the radio, I now use a digital radio rather than FM. This is because while FM is better if you have great reception and a great aerial, if you don't, the more limited response of digital is a price worth paying (in my view) for the lack of interference.


The other thread (on downloading) has prompted me to wonder how I'd feel if downloads were regularly available in equivalent to CD (or better). As with others here, I like the tactile thing of having discs, I also like having booklets (when, and I'll admit this doesn't happen all the time, they are well written).


regards, Tam

quote:

Originally posted by Tam:

The other thread (on downloading) has prompted me to wonder how I'd feel if downloads were regularly available in equivalent to CD (or better). As with others here, I like the tactile thing of having discs, I also like having booklets (when, and I'll admit this doesn't happen all the time, they are well written).


regards, Tam

Oddly, relative to my comments above, one of the things I love most about the "listening right now" thread is a near "tactile" sensation when posting the cover pictures/art - it does bring back the satisfaction of 35 years ago in little record shops for hours on end looking at the albums and wanting to know what was on the vinyl.

good listenin'
Jeff A

You know, I'd never really thought of the listing to right now thread in that way, but you're quite right.

regards, Tam

Jeff - thought I would give downloading a try so I have just bought a few Porcupine Tree downloads from the Burning Shed site. (Extras that not have been officially released on CD). I have chosen the FLAC versions and I am now sitting here watching the downloads of the first album in progress.

It is a slow process as the files are very large. I am then going to have to convert the FLAC files to some kind of format that works on itunes as well as work out how to make a high quality CD. I am then going to have to print the artwork and try to fit in a CD case. My computer is groaning with the strain of it all.

In the time it is going to take to complete this one double CD, I could have had a nice browse round the local CD stores and come away with many more professionally made CD's in my hands and had a pleasurable browsing experience.

I then have another two downloads to go.

Downloading may not be for me.

Adrian

quote:

Originally posted by Lontano:
Jeff -
Downloading may not be for me.

Adrian

FLAC should sound as good as most downloads get currently (not counting what LINN is doing), convert to AIFF or Apple Lossless. I burn at 8X. The file on my "Blank Planet" from yesterday (not FLAC) is 93mb, pretty small compared to an equivalent lossless, probably 500mb or more.

Regardless of file size, 8x burning takes about 5 minutes on my MacBook Pro - I don't do the whole text/notes thing.

In the last ten years I know very few song titles unless I pick it up from the music - at some time I started referring to track # and the habit has stuck.

Jeff A

I really hate MP3s. The bass drum is woolly and the cymbals fizz (drummer response).

The few things I have bought as MP3 downloads have only been bought because they were not available in any other format, and they have been decoded and burned onto CDRs.

I do buy Flac downloads quite a bit, and also badger sellers who only do MP3s to also do Flacs. This worked with the Pearl Jam live downloads, and I know King Crimson offer both options as well. I do wish Underworld would do it for the 'Riverrun Project' releases.

Most of these sales include printable artwork, so that is not a consideration.

I would NEVER pay for a MP3 of something that can be bought on CD, no matter the cost difference.

I have bought some MP3 downloads from the bands websites. Only stuff that is not available elesewhere. Sounds fine. The only thing is I kiss the artwork that goes along with a CD release. I also have some MP3 CD releases. It's a great idea - 5 CD's for the price of 1. Unfortunately I can't expand them to normal CD files and I can't play them on my CD5. Instead I have to use my DVD player or my Squeezebox which means they don't get played very often.

quote:

Originally posted by jcs_smith:
I have bought some MP3 downloads from the bands websites. Only stuff that is not available elesewhere. Sounds fine. The only thing is I kiss the artwork that goes along with a CD release. I also have some MP3 CD releases. It's a great idea - 5 CD's for the price of 1. Unfortunately I can't expand them to normal CD files and I can't play them on my CD5. Instead I have to use my DVD player or my Squeezebox which means they don't get played very often.

You need an MP3 to WAV converter - or for OS X there is a program from micocosoft

I have tried a couple of converters but they wouldn't let me. I'll give them a go, thanks. If they work it will save me a fortune on ebay getting the originals. Although I probably will anyway to get a complete collection

I've been buying music (classical, jazz, folk, rock, etc, etc) from eMusic.com for some time now, and am happy with the quality - which is 192K VBR MP3.

Whilst some people may well be able to detect (and be irritated by) the difference between even high bit-rate MP3s & CDs, or CDs & vinyl, I find that it's not a crucial issue for me, whether because of increasing age, or simply because of a lack of the auditory discrimination skills required.

In addition, the inexpensiveness of MP3 tracks allows me to listen to a significantly greater range of music than I would be able to if I only bought CDs or vinyl, including things (re)issued as MP3 only.

Jon

The only thing I have in mp3 format only is "In Rainbows" which has convinced me to buy the CD for a much better sound experience.

Like many others I would only consider a FLAC/Apple lossless for purchase.

Jono

I don't buy mp3 format songs or indeed any other compressed format prefering to buy the CD and encode it to a player myself. I wouldn't want to be without my ipod, which at 320kbps Apple AAC is more that sufficient for "on the move" sounds or indeed through a Bose or similar sound dock. The "shuffle" feature of the ipod is wonderful, if not entirely random. Encoding with Apple lossless in my opinion isn't neccessary, and if you do, be prepared for shorter battery life as the hard drive spins up far more frequently to buffer the sound, which no one ever mentions.

Chris

quote:

Whilst some people may well be able to detect (and be irritated by) the difference between even high bit-rate MP3s & CDs, or CDs & vinyl,...

Jon

When doing some audio editing in Soundforge to patch out missing sections in a live recording, I used an MP3 source.

Trying to match the sound quality involved listening to the same piece of a track over and over from different sources. Through doing this I learned to recognise some of the sound characteristics of MP3, and unfortunately once you learn to recognise such qualities, it stays with you.

320Kbps MP3s are very hard to distinguish from lossless media, but once you make the files sizes that big (unless it is specifically for a MP3 player), you may as well use Flac, or other lossless sources. Surely it would be better to distribute recordings as Flac, etc. and allow people to make their own MP3s.

I have probably been a member of 'Dime' for so long that I have become indoctrinated by their philosophy on digital media.

quote:

Originally posted by jcs_smith:
Unfortunately I can't expand them to normal CD files and I can't play them on my CD5.

You should be able to convert MP3 files to audio files using iTunes or Windows Media Player. I run Windows but use iTunes to manage my MP3 music, and it's what I use to convert MP3s to audio. However, note that the quality of a MP3-originated CD is not the same as an original audio CD.
Regards,
Ale

quote:

Originally posted by Tam:
I don't find the quality to be acceptable - virtually everything available is less good than CD. That said, I have made some downloads. To clarify, they're okay for use on my iPod, but I don't just want to buy something for use on the go, and on my Hi-Fi I want at least CD quality.

You might want to check out HDtracks. Founded by Norman Chesky (of Chesky Records), they offer MP3 320kbps, AIFF, or FLAC download. And their collection isn't half bad either, especially for jazz. The selection is not limited to Chesky Records, they're from many independent labels.

Unfortunately, at least for the time being, it's for US residents only

quote:

Originally posted by ale:
You should be able to convert MP3 files to audio files using iTunes or Windows Media Player.

I haven't tried i-tunes but Windows Media Player doesn't work. There must be some form of encoding within the file to prevent it being converted. Interesting you canb't compress it further either.