NOT a poll but thought I'd ask the question anyway.

I'm basicaly asking why are we buying expensive equipment with superb sound and then playing poor quality sources through them?

Can you tell a difference? Is it just convenience? Do you for instance put a CD or record on when you want to listen to music properly?

Feel free to ask other questions too!

BTW I find that even high bitrate music looses something and while convenient I would rather put a record or cd on. 

It's a mystery, Kevin. It's a mystery ...

But there are quite a few who buy Michelin standard kitchens and then spend most of their time working the microwave and toaster - could be an expression of the same impulse.

I listen to MP3 music at a variety of bitrates while in my car or when using my iPod.

At home I listen to either lossless or uncompressed digital files, or to CDs/records. To my ears there's a big difference in "weight" to the musical information - low bitrate mp3 is too tinny. 

There's a trend afoot - people are noticing what they have been missing out on, in the name of convenience, but you'll still find a lot who prefer the microwave's convenience to firing up the oven!  

I have to say I stay far away from MP3's. Have no idea where my MP3 player is actually. I'd much rather listen to a CD. Strangely enough I find the whole mp3 thing inconvenient for home. Too much effort. I suppose its convenient for listening on Ipods, but I hate listening to music through headphones so thats another strike in my books!!

I listen to mp3 (192+) for background. Much the same way that I listen to radio or even podcasts now.

 

When listening to classical music seriously, I always use CD. There is a big difference in my mind. 

Interesting point about headphones.... I think Lee was testing some and noticed immediately the difference which he hadn't noticed on his laptop for instance.

 

Yeah, I have iPod only headunit in the car & when I've got just background music on at home, I run iTunes on my PC through the BM6500. When I actually want to listen to something, though & have time to appreciate the music, it has to be CD.

On the same tack I've never understood why people spend a fotune on in-car "hifi" (not just the kids with the ridiculous boom boxes etc) and I would include the Audi A8 in this group. Firstly there will always be engine, tyre and wind noise to raise lower the signal to noise ratio to way below what would be acceptable for "hifi" listening and then there is the environment - surrounded on all four sides with glass (probably the most reflective of surfaces) and multiple speaker feeds for a stereo signal (compare against the often run thread comparing four speaker vs two speaker music playback).

 Just how "hifi" can it be. I'm sure its just the Marketing bods stealing our money in yet another underhanded fashion

It sounds like you haven't sat in an S8 yet.

I've got both mine and my wife's iPods connected to the BC9500. When listening seriously to music, I put on a CD.

Honestly, though, I can't hear the difference between a CD and an MP3 at a bitrate exceeding 192kbps. It's just so much more convenient with the iPod if you want to use the shuffle function. (Perhaps I ought to get a Beosound 9000.)

When (if) I get a pair of Beolab 5s, I'll probably use the CD player even more.

I don't even own a vinyl player... 

philipsmz333:

I struggle to be able to hear the difference between 128bit AAC versus something such as apple lossless. 

Obviously cd's are ALOT better for listening... aren't they? Somebody please prove this!

Huge difference between 128kbps AAC and Apple Lossless/CD.
I've tested this, repeatedly, to my own and others' satisfaction.

Here's a way of doing it, if you're interested:

1. Get a CD you know well - preferably with acoustic performances (i.e. vocals, acoustic instruments, recorded straight without processing).

2. Select a few tracks and compress these to your iTunes software (or similar music organizing software).

3. In Preferences>Advanced>Importing use different rates/compression formats:

a) AAC standard
b) Apple Lossless 

to transfer the tracks to your harddisk. Mark them according to their bitrate (and you can try other formats, if you want. Try mp3 at 128/160 which is what most peoples' music is in if they compressed a few years ago and haven't changed since).

4. Now put your CD in your stereo system.

5. Connect your computer either directly to the music system or pipe the music using Airport Extreme or similar solutions. Set the volume from CD and iTunes to similar level.

6. You can now easily switch between CD as source on your chosen track and playback through AUX or TAPE from your computer. In iTunes you pick the compression/bitrate version you wish to listen to.

Go back and forth between versions and start evaluating. You'll be surprised at the difference.

(Depending upon the quality of one's hearing, test results may vary! )

For background music I don't think it matters - though I don't go under 192. For "serious" listening it does matter - a lot.
 

Maybe this very much depends on ones hearing abilities. My experience;

1) First I loaded up my beomedia 1 with 128k/bit tracks, then I listened and it didnt sound good.

2) Then I loaded it up with 192k/bit tracks and it was quite good but not as good as cd

3) Then I loaded it up with lossless tracks, and now I find no difference to the CD.

The main thing I have noticed is that I now listen to far more of a range of my music than I did when I just had cds,  I can easily find what I want, and I have come across many albums I forgot I owned.

Cheers

Peter

soundproof:

philipsmz333:

I struggle to be able to hear the difference between 128bit AAC versus something such as apple lossless. 

Obviously cd's are ALOT better for listening... aren't they? Somebody please prove this!

Huge difference between 128kbps AAC and Apple Lossless/CD.
I've tested this, repeatedly, to my own and others' satisfaction.

Here's a way of doing it, if you're interested:

1. Get a CD you know well - preferably with acoustic performances (i.e. vocals, acoustic instruments, recorded straight without processing).

2. Select a few tracks and compress these to your iTunes software (or similar music organizing software).

3. In Preferences>Advanced>Importing use different rates/compression formats:

a) AAC standard
b) Apple Lossless 

to transfer the tracks to your harddisk. Mark them according to their bitrate (and you can try other formats, if you want. Try mp3 at 128/160 which is what most peoples' music is in if they compressed a few years ago and haven't changed since).

4. Now put your CD in your stereo system.

5. Connect your computer either directly to the music system or pipe the music using Airport Extreme or similar solutions. Set the volume from CD and iTunes to similar level.

6. You can now easily switch between CD as source on your chosen track and playback through AUX or TAPE from your computer. In iTunes you pick the compression/bitrate version you wish to listen to.

Go back and forth between versions and start evaluating. You'll be surprised at the difference.

(Depending upon the quality of one's hearing, test results may vary! )

For background music I don't think it matters - though I don't go under 192. For "serious" listening it does matter - a lot.
 

It is a mystery.

I have, however, tried it in various settings, in proper listening rooms and with a variety of listeners (also from one CD - though I have wanted to emulate how people actually listen, which is often from computers/iPods). Simply because I wanted to be "certain" before I began making extravagant claims. The quality of and placement of your speakers matters quite a lot, by the way, as do the reflective properties of the room you are listening in.

And that is an important point. If your listening environment and speakers aren't right, then it really doesn't matter to coax more out of your source. But there's more there, if you are willing to savour it.
 

Well said, and i used A8 Earphones to test... that in my opinion was the best way to test this.

philipsmz333:

Well said, and i used A8 Earphones to test... that in my opinion was the best way to test this.

I would say, essentially what really matters is that we are satisfied, however we may listen to our music.

Agreed on the satisfaction point. Don't know whether I'm with you on the A8s as the best way to test this, though. They're good earphones, but they're kind of scaled down to a reduced musical experience, nonetheless.
The benefits of full resolution music become apparent when you are able to experience the details and weight of the soundstage, and that requires speakers. Full resolution music creates a better, more threedimensional soundstage - height, width, depth. It's extremely noticeable.

Here's my simple take on this. You can buy Tiramisu in a plastic cup out of the freezer at the supermarket - and you can have it served to you in a good Italian restaurant, made there. If you have eaten good Tiramisu, then the supermarket one will benefit from your memory of that good experience; if you haven't, then you don't know what you've been missing out on and you'll think you're eating Tiramisu.  

There's something about living with something as well, eventually you don't miss the difference as you get used to a lower quality - until you hear it properly!!

Ah. Wish you were here right now. I put Pandora on, sent it to the speakers, and one of my favourite tracks of Tord Gustavsen Trio came up. Listened to it for a while, then I switched to the Lossless I have on my computer. Laughably big difference between the two. Pandora is OK for background listening I guess, when you're moving about - but all the details, nuances, phrasing of the tones was gone from the track. And the music grew from coming out of a box (Pandora's?) to being created by three musicians in a room.

I only use MP3s on my BS3, but at least at 256 kbs, as I listen to it a lot using my A8s. I could imagine playing MP3s via a BS4 in the living room, but then only as background music.

I will always buy an album I like, because I think that you have to own an album you love, not just have it as an MP3!!! (Nietzsche: You have to own a book you love)

I'll shut my mouth now. You are right, and i have not tested the difference on beolab 5's for instance.

Justin:

There's something about living with something as well, eventually you don't miss the difference as you get used to a lower quality - until you hear it properly!!

Good point.

With the number of ipods etc around, with the emphasis on how many tracks you can cram into it I think we'll need to start a Real Music campaign soon!

Or should we all just go back to viynl which we all know is far superior a listening experience 

When I started riping all my CD's to my PC, I did a back to back test of a track at 128mbps and the original CD. Both played through my Beocenter9000. There was a slight difference. Now as most others seem to do, I use mp3's for background listening. CD's and Vinyl for more serious listening.

 

Craig

Great post.

I only go for original CD's, the same way I always bought vinil albums rather than recording them on tapes. When I bought my BS9000 back in 2001 this philosofy was even more enphasized. I cannot bear the sight of a non-original CD through the immaculate cristal of the BS. So my ears are only used to CDs. I really enjoy the act of openning the CD case and reading the booklet, in original printing. I understand some people may not notice big difference between sources. Even myself I'm not sure I could find a big difference. But I'm happy with the way I enjoy music. I'm planning to upgrade my beolabs to BL9's so I guess I won't change my mind in the near future.

IMHO having expensive music gear and listening extensively from poor sources it's like eating a Too Bacon burger with large fries and then drinking Coca Cola light and pretending to loose weight. Which, by the way, many people do.

I record at 320kbps and in a blind trial, cannot tell the difference. Probably down to cloth ears but it has the advantage that I listen to music on anything. Quite happy with my Sony cassette CD and also my Pentas! Off to the Sage tonight to listen to something live though! A little Bach , I believe followed by dinner on the Quayside!

Listening to music properly is always through my CD7000 or Planar 3, MP3 or other compressed audio does not come close to lossless in a direct comparison, unless you start to get up to 320 kbps.

Puncher:

On the same tack I've never understood why people spend a fotune on in-car "hifi" (not just the kids with the ridiculous boom boxes etc) and I would include the Audi A8 in this group. Firstly there will always be engine, tyre and wind noise to raise lower the signal to noise ratio to way below what would be acceptable for "hifi" listening and then there is the environment - surrounded on all four sides with glass (probably the most reflective of surfaces) and multiple speaker feeds for a stereo signal (compare against the often run thread comparing four speaker vs two speaker music playback).

 Just how "hifi" can it be. I'm sure its just the Marketing bods stealing our money in yet another underhanded fashion

In connection with the Struer trip, we all had a chance to hear the Audi A8, and I must say, the design of the soundstage was just unbeliveable. The sound was superiour to anything I have ever head, and I mus say, that I am convinced that the 6000 €s is well spend, especially if you use alot of time in you car everyday commuting.

Anyway, the car is just anoter Link Room