Michael Fremer podcast: Wow!!!!

[Andre Marc]

I think cultural aspirations in general are on a downswing at this time. It's not an exclusively American thing.

But I think we fail to pin the hopes and aspirations of the audio hobby on iTunes (and more importantly now, Spotify) at our peril. It's great that more people are taking up LP as a playback medium, but that group is a tiny subset of a tiny subset of today's music lovers. Simply rehashing the audiophile mantra - Anything But iTunes - is disenfranchising every person under the age of about 45 who has most of their music stored in file-based form. Telling them they are some form of idiot for buying the wrong kind of download is as bigoted as telling people they listen to the wrong kind of music, and it sends real people with real buying dollars screaming from our little world.

We can learn a lot from the headphone folk. Rather than driving away 95% of potential new business, work with what arrives... and then try to make things better. I know a few of the smarter dealers in the UK who hook up something like Arcam's rBlink bluetooth DAC module to an amp and speakers. When that casual person wanders in with a phone full of 'choons', they can play them through a system. In most cases, even if to our refined ears the resultant sound is close to someone tipping a sack of hammers down a glass fire escape, to that casual listener it sounds fantastic. Win them over there, and it's a short jump to "and if you thought that sounded good..."

Unfortunately most don't do that. Instead, you get the "come back with some real music!" or "I don't play that sort of file through this system" snobbery. Do you think that goes down well?

Alan, excellent points!!!!

We should "work" with what the potential initiated customer brings for their listening pleasure.

That being said...and you knew this was coming...low quality is low quality. All of the
politically correct, poetic discourses will not change that. Lossy compression as the defacto
form of listening is going to illicit the type of reactions you might imagine. Garbage in garbage out.

Apple told an unforgivable lie ten years ago when they claimed that 128 AAC was "CD Quality".

The amount of damage done is just about irreversible IMO.

(For portable purposes I have ZERO issues with lossy. I use AAC and MP3 for my iPod and my car,
and I am perfectly happy)

 

[Saturntube]

I agree with Alan, lets plug in those Ipods... I got into high end when a store opened close to my house, the default system they used was a Meishu with cabasse Catalan speakers, they sounded amazing with vocals, but they could never play Pink Floyd.. This was Cd era. But the owner was kind enough to let almost anyone in and play a nice demo and if you would insist, he would play your music. He did a social service. One point even Fremer made was that the new generations have been robbed from the experience of audio as we know it, with speakers and all.

Have you seen this video by Wison?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRezeGgg4pQrs

 

[Andre Marc]

I agree with Alan, lets plug in those Ipods... I got into high end when a store opened close to my house, the default system they used was a Meishu with cabasse Catalan speakers, they sounded amazing with vocals, but they could never play Pink Floyd.. This was Cd era. But the owner was kind enough to let almost anyone in and play a nice demo and if you would insist, he would play your music. He did a social service. One point even Fremer made was that the new generations have been robbed from the experience of audio as we know it, with speakers and all.

Have you seen this video by Wison?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRezeGgg4pQrs

I have no problem with iPods. Let the customer bring what ever they like. What ever music they like.

I DO have a problem with lossy files out side of a portable environment.

The video has good intentions, beyond being precious marketing fluff. But I don't see what
that has to do with lossy music.

I truly believe it is absolute idealistic fantasy to think that people are going to go from mp3 or low bit aac to
investing in a high quality system.

 

[FrantzM]

I think cultural aspirations in general are on a downswing at this time. It's not an exclusively American thing.

But I think we fail to pin the hopes and aspirations of the audio hobby on iTunes (and more importantly now, Spotify) at our peril. It's great that more people are taking up LP as a playback medium, but that group is a tiny subset of a tiny subset of today's music lovers. Simply rehashing the audiophile mantra - Anything But iTunes - is disenfranchising every person under the age of about 45 who has most of their music stored in file-based form. Telling them they are some form of idiot for buying the wrong kind of download is as bigoted as telling people they listen to the wrong kind of music, and it sends real people with real buying dollars screaming from our little world.

We can learn a lot from the headphone folk. Rather than driving away 95% of potential new business, work with what arrives... and then try to make things better. I know a few of the smarter dealers in the UK who hook up something like Arcam's rBlink bluetooth DAC module to an amp and speakers. When that casual person wanders in with a phone full of 'choons', they can play them through a system. In most cases, even if to our refined ears the resultant sound is close to someone tipping a sack of hammers down a glass fire escape, to that casual listener it sounds fantastic. Win them over there, and it's a short jump to "and if you thought that sounded good..."

Unfortunately most don't do that. Instead, you get the "come back with some real music!" or "I don't play that sort of file through this system" snobbery. Do you think that goes down well?

Excellent !!

I know for a fact when a cousin of mine twenty-something moved from a Beat by Dr Dre to a Senheiser with FIFO amp when he went o a store and heard his mp3 through the Senheiser ... Btw I find mp3 320 perfectly listenable and like Andre that is what is on. My iPad/pod and my car .. for those who think it is crap I have some tests for them to fail ...

 

[egidius]

failing comparisons..

Excellent !!

I have some tests for them to fail ...

I don't doubt it, though I sometimes try to think I can hear mp3. But..can you really disguise 96/24 vs 192/24 all else being equal? I tried that several times whilst in studio session; no luck.
And then comes the fun with the mic positioning. You can hear that.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Alan, excellent points!!!!

We should "work" with what the potential initiated customer brings for their listening pleasure.

That being said...and you knew this was coming...low quality is low quality. All of the
politically correct, poetic discourses will not change that. Lossy compression as the defacto
form of listening is going to illicit the type of reactions you might imagine. Garbage in garbage out.

Apple told an unforgivable lie ten years ago when they claimed that 128 AAC was "CD Quality".

The amount of damage done is just about irreversible IMO.

(For portable purposes I have ZERO issues with lossy. I use AAC and MP3 for my iPod and my car,
and I am perfectly happy)

I don't remember them saying that, but I don't doubt it. Their's is a consumer mass market, not audiophiles, and at the dawn of iTunes, portable headphone amps and highly-resolving IEMs were certainly not in the consideration set for iPod listeners. Through a pair of earbuds, I doubt I could hear the difference between CD and 128kbps. And most of the market still doesn't care. Or hear. In spite of that, a couple of years ago, Apple upgraded their standard to 256, which is a LOT better. Did they do that because the iTunes market was fat with audiophiles demanding better quality in their pockets. No, they just did it because bandwidth had gotten high enough and storage prices had gotten low enough; They did it just because they could.

I expect they'll offer 320 soon. Can you hear the difference between CD and good 320? Between CD and a really good VBR? Are you sure? Have you tested that notion blind?

Tim

 

[Andre Marc]

I don't remember them saying that, but I don't doubt it. Their's is a consumer mass market, not audiophiles, and at the dawn of iTunes, portable headphone amps and highly-resolving IEMs were certainly not in the consideration set for iPod listeners. Through a pair of earbuds, I doubt I could hear the difference between CD and 128kbps. And most of the market still doesn't care. Or hear. In spite of that, a couple of years ago, Apple upgraded their standard to 256, which is a LOT better. Did they do that because the iTunes market was fat with audiophiles demanding better quality in their pockets. No, they just did it because bandwidth had gotten high enough and storage prices had gotten low enough; They did it just because they could.

I expect they'll offer 320 soon. Can you hear the difference between CD and good 320? Between CD and a really good VBR? Are you sure? Have you tested that notion blind?

Tim

Tim they certainly did say 128 was CD Quality when the iTunes store opened and for years after that.

You are correct, the dreaded $2 sad earbuds supplied with iPods nullified any differences in quality.

Can I tell the difference between a 320 file and a FLAC, WAV, or AIFF rip? Yes I can sir. On both my systems,

On the go? Absolutely not.

 

[Groucho]

Can I tell the difference between a 320 file and a FLAC, WAV, or AIFF rip? Yes I can sir. On both my systems,

What is it that you're hearing? With 128 kbps I'm very clear about what I can hear: it's 'sizzle' within orchestral strings for example, or 'splashy' cymbals. I figure it's simply a case of being able to hear the boundaries between the compressed segments when the spectral content is high and being shared too thinly across the available bits (even 128 kbps may be transparent to simple signals e.g. solo monophonic instruments). But up at 320 kbps Ogg Vorbis which is what I've listened carefully to, it's not nearly so obvious on typical music.

 

[Andre Marc]

What is it that you're hearing? With 128 kbps I'm very clear about what I can hear: it's 'sizzle' within orchestral strings for example, or 'splashy' cymbals. I figure it's simply a case of being able to hear the boundaries between the compressed segments when the spectral content is high and being shared too thinly across the available bits (even 128 kbps may be transparent to simple signals e.g. solo monophonic instruments). But up at 320 kbps Ogg Vorbis which is what I've listened carefully to, it's not nearly so obvious on typical music.

Groucho I agree with you 100%. I hear the same. There is a metallic sheen to low bit rate lossy.

320 is way more difficult to hear differences with, ESPECIALLY on newer, super compressed pop recordings.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Alan, excellent points!!!!

We should "work" with what the potential initiated customer brings for their listening pleasure.

That being said...and you knew this was coming...low quality is low quality. All of the
politically correct, poetic discourses will not change that. Lossy compression as the defacto
form of listening is going to illicit the type of reactions you might imagine. Garbage in garbage out.

Apple told an unforgivable lie ten years ago when they claimed that 128 AAC was "CD Quality".

The amount of damage done is just about irreversible IMO.

(For portable purposes I have ZERO issues with lossy. I use AAC and MP3 for my iPod and my car,
and I am perfectly happy)

I agree, and I think people have been consistently and repeatedly sold a pup by being continually driven to lowest common denominator sound quality. Or more specifically, that music formats ideal for portable use are 'good enough' for home use, and if that's not the case, home use is systematically rendered unfashionable by the on-trend brigade.

However, I'm not convinced someone who uses lossy compressed files is a lost cause, or even that lossy compressed files are the evil they are portrayed within the audiophile community. Things are a lot better on the lossy side today. Remember the de facto standard is now 256kbps VBR AAC from iTunes (Amazon is more variable, with 320kbps MP3 seemingly more honoured in the breach than the observance). I have run demonstrations where I've played ALAC files and compared them to 256kbps VBR AAC versions of the same through a fairly good high-end system and while there are differences, the latter is not necessarily a system killer. I think we are more opposed to the idea of lossy compression as much as the effects of lossy compression, and i suspect there's a lot of people who have been talked out of buying a good system because they have been told their files aren't good enough, irrespective of just how true that statement is in reality.

Yes, I use a lossless (in fact, currently uncompressed, at least until my UnitiServe is upgraded to accept FLAC) file-based system for home use, but if someone hasn't got lossless or hi-res files yet, the world of high-end is not as closed as we often imply. The key word there though is 'yet'; someone with a good system will likely upgrade their files to suit the system, in the same way we end up re-buying the same albums over and over again whenever the Music Business comes up with a new format it can sucker us into. But if we stop them dead by being haughty and dismissive about their files, they will just spend that money on something that isn't audio.

It's often perplexing to the outsider that we reject out of hand high-rate lossy compression files that don't appear to lose much when compared to the original file, but seem unconcerned by a worn LP that sounds like it's spent the last 20 years being used as a farm implement. Yes, you can listen past the pops and scratches, but that's a learned skill.

 

[Andre Marc]

I agree, and I think people have been consistently and repeatedly sold a pup by being continually driven to lowest common denominator sound quality. Or more specifically, that music formats ideal for portable use are 'good enough' for home use, and if that's not the case, home use is systematically rendered unfashionable by the on-trend brigade.

However, I'm not convinced someone who uses lossy compressed files is a lost cause, or even that lossy compressed files are the evil they are portrayed within the audiophile community. Things are a lot better on the lossy side today. Remember the de facto standard is now 256kbps VBR AAC from iTunes (Amazon is more variable, with 320kbps MP3 seemingly more honoured in the breach than the observance). I have run demonstrations where I've played ALAC files and compared them to 256kbps VBR AAC versions of the same through a fairly good high-end system and while there are differences, the latter is not necessarily a system killer. I think we are more opposed to the idea of lossy compression as much as the effects of lossy compression, and i suspect there's a lot of people who have been talked out of buying a good system because they have been told their files aren't good enough, irrespective of just how true that statement is in reality.

Yes, I use a lossless (in fact, currently uncompressed, at least until my UnitiServe is upgraded to accept FLAC) file-based system for home use, but if someone hasn't got lossless or hi-res files yet, the world of high-end is not as closed as we often imply. The key word there though is 'yet'; someone with a good system will likely upgrade their files to suit the system, in the same way we end up re-buying the same albums over and over again whenever the Music Business comes up with a new format it can sucker us into. But if we stop them dead by being haughty and dismissive about their files, they will just spend that money on something that isn't audio.

It's often perplexing to the outsider that we reject out of hand high-rate lossy compression files that don't appear to lose much when compared to the original file, but seem unconcerned by a worn LP that sounds like it's spent the last 20 years being used as a farm implement. Yes, you can listen past the pops and scratches, but that's a learned skill.

Alan, love your response! I think you nailed it. I agree on just about all points.

"However, I'm not convinced someone who uses lossy compressed files is a lost cause, or even that lossy compressed files are the evil they are portrayed within the audiophile community."

Maybe not. But I also see no reason to use lossy codecs with hard drives being as cheap as they are and prices falling weekly.

I think we are more opposed to the idea of lossy compression as much as the effects of lossy compression, and i suspect there's a lot of people who have been talked out of buying a good system because they have been told their files aren't good enough, irrespective of just how true that statement is in reality."

Well said.. I do admit, the IDEA of lossy just bugs me for critical listening. Regardless of how little is lost,

"It's often perplexing to the outsider that we reject out of hand high-rate lossy compression files that don't appear to lose much when compared to the original file, but seem unconcerned by a worn LP that sounds like it's spent the last 20 years being used as a farm implement. Yes, you can listen past the pops and scratches, but that's a learned skill."

Well, I can tell you I know droves of audiophiles who ditched their Lps precisely because they had it the deficiencies and the wear and tear. So for the someone to compare their acceptance of lossy formats to the Lp lovers to me is a false equivalent.

 

[AMP]

Well said.. I do admit, the IDEA of lossy just bugs me for critical listening. Regardless of how little is lost,

I think that this is a jump that we all often make which may be part of the confusion for those outside the hobby looking in. I agree that the idea of lossy compression doesn't sit well with me for critical listening, but to the uninitiated the idea of critical listening is completely foreign.

From my perspective the key to growth of our ranks is pulling in people who are ready to graduate to better sound regardless of the format they are using right now. We don't need to make them into audiophiles overnight and the first step is just getting them to appreciate what a better system can do for them. In this case the format isn't totally critical as a compressed file will likely sound better on a better system. Demonstrating this improvement and developing a value proposition that allows them to transition into the hobby will likely draw people in. Once hooked the idea of exploring different equipment and setup choices along with different formats won't seem like such a leap to them.

The key is to get them listening to THEIR music first and foremost... then get them started on critical listening.

 

[puroagave]

"America is exceptionally backward and stupid, in many ways" 11:45

i'm a Mikey fan but his from the hip comment was a bit much. i think the term "parochial" fits better, similar meaning but way more dignified.

 

[Andre Marc]

I think that this is a jump that we all often make which may be part of the confusion for those outside the hobby looking in. I agree that the idea of lossy compression doesn't sit well with me for critical listening, but to the uninitiated the idea of critical listening is completely foreign.

From my perspective the key to growth of our ranks is pulling in people who are ready to graduate to better sound regardless of the format they are using right now. We don't need to make them into audiophiles overnight and the first step is just getting them to appreciate what a better system can do for them. In this case the format isn't totally critical as a compressed file will likely sound better on a better system. Demonstrating this improvement and developing a value proposition that allows them to transition into the hobby will likely draw people in. Once hooked the idea of exploring different equipment and setup choices along with different formats won't seem like such a leap to them.

The key is to get them listening to THEIR music first and foremost... then get them started on critical listening.

I am in agreement. However I am not sure why there is this notion that audiophiles won't let the "uninitiated" listen to their music. I can't imagine telling someone their music is not "good enough" for a high end system.

(The only form of music I despise is rap. I have no problem saying that.)

 

[Groucho]

They have heard my system, the sound of lp, big speakers, SET, high power solid state, etc, and while impressed, its not "their" music delivery system. Alan touched on this some, and in effect, why would they "upgrade" any more than us who are used to listening first to music via speakers listen to one of them younguns telling us "upgrade" to phones?.....ahem..actually I thoroughly enjoy my various headphones and their flavors.

Is it not the case, however, that live pop performances are more popular than ever? So the young people are drawn to big sound they can feel, despite listening on headphones most of the time. Maybe they know something we don't!

 

[Alan Sircom]

But I also see no reason to use lossy codecs with hard drives being as cheap as they are and prices falling weekly.

Sadly, there are two significant commercial mitigating factors in the wider music-delivery space:

1. 'Veruca Salt' consumers
2. Content providers who hate dual inventory

This means a lot of the music biz defines itself by the whim of a notional teenager armed with the Shazam app, who insists the music is capable of being purchased and downloaded to their smartphone instantaneously. Unless this is performed through iTunes - which can automatically replicate the purchase at higher-resolution on desktop and laptop computers with the same iTunes account - the chances are that download is at 'good enuf' quality for a smartphone (for speed of download on 3G and 4G networks), and the user will play the track a few times on that phone and delete it.

As I said earlier, we are frequently sold a lowest common denominator solution.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Sadly, there are two significant commercial mitigating factors in the wider music-delivery space:

1. 'Veruca Salt' consumers
2. Content providers who hate dual inventory

This means a lot of the music biz defines itself by the whim of a notional teenager armed with the Shazam app, who insists the music is capable of being purchased and downloaded to their smartphone instantaneously. Unless this is performed through iTunes - which can automatically replicate the purchase at higher-resolution on desktop and laptop computers with the same iTunes account - the chances are that download is at 'good enuf' quality for a smartphone (for speed of download on 3G and 4G networks), and the user will play the track a few times on that phone and delete it.

As I said earlier, we are frequently sold a lowest common denominator solution.

I don't disagree with the statement, but I think, as we all tend to do, you have grossly overestimated the power of marketing and gotten the motivation backwards. The young have not been "sold the lowest common denominator solution," they have bought the most convenient one. The MP3 and it's successors were not sold to the last couple of generations by a manipulative music industry; the industry would, of course, be much better off if everyone were still buying CDs or albums. Those generations willingly, happily walked away from our music-listening traditions, our notions of quality, and embraced purchasing a song at a time, never walking into a store, carrying entire music libraries in their pockets, listening everywhere to a personal playlist, in the personal space of headphones. We think they don't know what they're missing. Fine. We may as well sit on the porch and yell at them to get off of our lawns.

Tim

 

[Groucho]

"America is exceptionally backward and stupid, in many ways"

i'm a Mikey fan but his from the hip comment was a bit much. i think the term "parochial" fits better, similar meaning but way more dignified.

It's a definite difference between the US and UK, I think. In the UK if someone makes such a comment, most people chuckle, inwardly assuming that it doesn't apply to them personally. We certainly wouldn't feel wounded on behalf of our country.

I'm a northerner, and there's often a few comments from southerners suggesting they have innate superiority, but we in the north find such references very amusing because we know it's not like that, but at the same time we know that it is - a bit.

This is what southerners think the north of England is like. Did any single northerner take offence when this was shown? I really doubt it - in our house we laughed our heads off.

 

[AMP]

I am in agreement. However I am not sure why there is this notion that audiophiles won't let the "uninitiated" listen to their music. I can't imagine telling someone their music is not "good enough" for a high end system.

(The only form of music I despise is rap. I have no problem saying that.)

Just for the sake of clarification, I wasn't referring to their music in terms of artist or genre. Instead I was referring to format.

If all someone knows is a smartphone full of MP3 or AAC files then the starting point is demonstrating how much better the musical experience can be even given the constraints of the format. Unfortunately, I've witnessed a tendency for the die-hard audiophiles to immediately criticize the limitations of compressed music and insist that one would be crazy to listen to anything but wav or lossless files generated from an incredibly time-consuming and complex process. Of course those files must be played through a dedicated and specially tweaked computer that can't do anything else except stream music files.....and then this all starts looking like more trouble than its worth to the uninitiated.

 

[mep]

I don't disagree with the statement, but I think, as we all tend to do, you have grossly overestimated the power of marketing and gotten the motivation backwards. The young have not been "sold the lowest common denominator solution," they have bought the most convenient one. The MP3 and it's successors were not sold to the last couple of generations by a manipulative music industry; the industry would, of course, be much better off if everyone were still buying CDs or albums. Those generations willingly, happily walked away from our music-listening traditions, our notions of quality, and embraced purchasing a song at a time, never walking into a store, carrying entire music libraries in their pockets, listening everywhere to a personal playlist, in the personal space of headphones. We think they don't know what they're missing. Fine. We may as well sit on the porch and yell at them to get off of our lawns.

Tim

Now that's funny Tim!