More Consensus That Streaming Is An Inferior Format & Not High End?

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike, you pride yourself on not just having *the very best*, but a *whole range of the very best options*.
How many permutations of tt/arm/cart do you run? And tape alongside.
Surely like your meta choices on analog, where one combo or machine will sound better on one album, the same *potentially* (I would say definitely) should apply to certain albums on streamed v silver disc.
Of the 0000s of CDs you own, surely if we meet even in the middle, that would mean a few hundred CDs being superior, maybe very superior to streamed.
You're in a prime position to tell us, Wadax Ref Server and Dac in situ.

yes.....I could do that. but the problem here for me is the end game question. meaning let's say I find a different result than Roy Gregory, that discs are much more clearly superior. what is in it for me?

honestly nothing. not going back to discs.....I simply find that streaming compliments my analog as an overall experience much better. being able to explore new music and layers and layers of information is just too valuable, to invest in having to buy new discs. and I already have almost 100% of my discs ripped. the elegance of streaming as an experience is just too good.

and a much more attractive alternative is adding many more super high rez files; dxd (352/24) and 4xdsd files. discs can't touch those. I'm now waiting for Samsung to bring out 16tb drives that work in my Wadax Reference Server so I can switch from my 4 x 8tb drives equalling 34tb's of storage to 4 x 16tb = 66tb and have much more room to add those files. I love how those files sound.

note; the Wadax server has resident 2tb of storage which is why the math is off.

if I'm offered the opportunity to have a Wadax transport to play around with I will do it. I have the interest if it's otherwise easy for me. certainly I am curious and do think about it.

but investing in it?......not in the cards for me.

as a final thought; I wonder if anyone has recently, with top level streaming gear such as the Taiko Extreme or Wadax with a quality network set-up, gone deep into ultimate streaming, spent the time with it, and then backed away from it and did only discs? where the overall streaming equation was not strong enough to justify it's use as the main digital focus? this is who might shed some light on things.....not the disc lover who looks on from afar leaning in marginal streaming exposure for justification. the pull of thousands of familiar silver discs is powerful.....I get it. not any different than loving your records. I still look at my CD's and have a strong bond to so many of them.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Sure Mike, tbh I didn't expect another answer from you. But as someone who has maxxed out on every "format", because the euphoric end result justifies it over the practicalities of sticking with (albeit still a fantastic) "second best" eg stereo and mono carts, multiple TTs and arms (and phonos?) PLUS tape for those by definition fewer titles in 15 ips, PLUS mega streaming.
So, you run over a dozen permutations of ability to play the same LP, multiple pressings of said LP, mono and stereo setups (you even ran two mono cart stylus profiles once), more than one tape deck (despite having 20x the number of LPs than you have tapes), plus streaming.
You are the perfect person to see if a selection of your RBCDs sound "better" thru a dedicated CDP than the same albums streamed.
We've given up spending your cash, but your whole personality on this forum is leave no stone unturned taken to the nth degree of multiple analog rigs, yet the nth degree on CD playback is not so much not sought, but not even bothered about.
To me, this seems like the zero comparisons we'll ever see on top Taiko v top Wadax, any a/b comparisons on the $100k plus uber TTs, Wamm v M9 etc.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Sure Mike, tbh I didn't expect another answer from you. But as someone who has maxxed out on every "format", because the euphoric end result justifies it over the practicalities of sticking with (albeit still a fantastic) "second best" eg stereo and mono carts, multiple TTs and arms (and phonos?) PLUS tape for those by definition fewer titles in 15 ips, PLUS mega streaming.
So, you run over a dozen permutations of ability to play the same LP, multiple pressings of said LP, mono and stereo setups (you even ran two mono cart stylus profiles once), more than one tape deck (despite having 20x the number of LPs than you have tapes), plus streaming.
You are the perfect person to see if a selection of your RBCDs sound "better" thru a dedicated CDP than the same albums streamed.
We've given up spending your cash, but your whole personality on this forum is leave no stone unturned taken to the nth degree of multiple analog rigs, yet the nth degree on CD playback is not so much not sought, but not even bothered about.
To me, this seems like the zero comparisons we'll ever see on top Taiko v top Wadax, any a/b comparisons on the $100k plus uber TTs, Wamm v M9 etc.

I appreciate the thoughts.

 

[bonzo75]

any a/b comparisons on the $100k plus uber TTs, Wamm v M9 etc.

most TTs are 100k plus these days, whether Uber or public transport. It is better to not have one than try to post with a 90k TT and 9k cart. You just won’t get noticed with the latter.

regarding WAMM Vs M9, at Rhapsody you can compare other speakers with M9, not WAMM.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

most TTs are 100k plus these days, whether Uber or public transport. It is better to not have one than try to post with a 90k TT and 9k cart. You just won’t get noticed with the latter.

which is why I had to add the $27k clock to my $75K Esoteric T1, otherwise you would not have paid attention to it.

and you know that cartridges don't really count.

 

[Blue58]

If you’re experience of streamed music is one only of “raw resolution of detail,” then you haven’t been hearing a good system. As, Mike L. has been saying it’s a mistake to generalize.

He’s been listening to my system evolve, currently at XDMS NSM level,
I’ve heard the Eera Tentation, I reserve my comments.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Barry, my comments are not (just) about my home system, but everywhere I've heard a streamer, especially where a CDP has been at hand at the same demo.
I know you don't like my Eera, you've been pretty frank right to my face. That's fine. Y'know, the lack of consensus in this hobby that's been mentioned, lol.
And I really quite liked your SGM/Dac8, and your previous Audio Aero CDP.
I've attended demos using a bespoke server and custom code. And one using four switches in addition to a ton of other network upgrades.

 

[spiritofmusic]

UK only Ked, I'm a home body.

 

[PeterA]

To me, this seems like the zero comparisons we'll ever see on top Taiko v top Wadax, any a/b comparisons on the $100k plus uber TTs, Wamm v M9 etc.

Marc, David Karmeli has clients with multiple uber $100k turntables. They do direct comparisons and David does them during set ups. Direct comparisons are being done, but they are rare and difficult. I did one with three top tables in my system. I learned a lot. Fremer just did one too, with video evidence.

 

[spiritofmusic]

I'm sure, but they're few and far. I get the impracticalities. But top server versus another top server, must be possible. And server v CDP, even more possible.
Indeed it is, as I've been witness too.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Audio forums ....

80 % of the time its whining and complaining about whats best .
Having a system to which you enjoy listening to is what counts , who give a *** as to what format it is
However its something you rarely read

 

[Kingrex]

as a final thought; I wonder if anyone has recently, with top level streaming gear such as the Taiko Extreme or Wadax with a quality network set-up, gone deep into ultimate streaming, spent the time with it, and then backed away from it and did only discs? where the overall streaming equation was not strong enough to justify it's use as the main digital focus? this is who might shed some light on things.....not the disc lover who looks on from afar leaning in marginal streaming exposure for justification. the pull of thousands of familiar silver discs is powerful.....I get it. not any different than loving your records. I still look at my CD's and have a strong bond to so many of them

Kind of a hollow statement. If someone were to love their records and tapes, would they back away from streaming? No. So why would they with a CD. They would simply play their favorite CD on a transport, their favorite record on a TT and stream their favorite digital file or Qobuz title.

I have been told a CD burned from a file is still better than playing it off the drive. Some might then rip themselves playlist to listen too. Who knows what a boored audiophile is apt to do sitting alone in his cave.

And to my point of who is the thread focused at. I see it focused at a guy with a $20k to $70k DAC using a server to stream and feeling the itch to get a little better. That person owes it to themself to try a transport. That is the person who provides valuable feedback. And in truth it would set a more firm benchmark on where streaming is as a source.

I am also wondering if anyone is conflating "streaming" with a file off the drive. I would want to know if the transport bettered the file off the drive. If it did not, then the point of a transport is mute to me as I would just burn my disc to a drive. And I would still stream as I looked for and enjoyed new music.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Kind of a hollow statement.

huh?

streaming deniers are claiming the performance high road. but have they actually lived with high performance streaming and then rejected it for silver discs? or just kept it at arms length? or maybe go back and forth?

not read about anyone doing streaming right, but mostly focused on silver discs. if there are please speak up about it.

If someone were to love their records and tapes, would they back away from streaming? No. So why would they with a CD. They would simply play their favorite CD on a transport, their favorite record on a TT and stream their favorite digital file or Qobuz title.

not everyone streaming has ditched their transport. never claimed that. but simply asked whether a serious streamer has decided to give up streaming for only discs? or not?

I have been told a CD burned from a file is still better than playing it off the drive. Some might then rip themselves playlist to listen too. Who knows what a boored audiophile is apt to do sitting alone in his cave.

And to my point of who is the thread focused at. I see it focused at a guy with a $20k to $70k DAC using a server to stream and feeling the itch to get a little better. That person owes it to themself to try a transport.

agree.

That is the person who provides valuable feedback. And in truth it would set a more firm benchmark on where streaming is as a source.

yes.

I am also wondering if anyone is conflating "streaming" with a file off the drive. I would want to know if the transport bettered the file off the drive. If it did not, then the point of a transport is mute to me as I would just burn my disc to a drive. And I would still stream as I looked for and enjoyed new music.

streaming and files are different, but mostly I see them as the same thing as doing one at a high level requires gear that mostly gets you the other too. you need a high quality network and high quality server for both streaming and files.

 

[thedudeabides]

As always, I try to be a KISS kind of person. Streaming is typically lower quality but offers something no other format does. Any kind of music from anywhere in the world with a few clicks on your tablet. If music is your Number One priority versus your gear, nuff said.

FYI, I am selling my entire system and buying an IFI Aurora. Anyone interested? Great smaller room system. Very motivated. If interested, send me a PM.

 

[Kingrex]

The possible problem as seen by people who fight the concept of streaming is the notion of what it supposidly takes to do it right. Does that mean they need a $60k or more server. And if that does not due the trick, are they told they also need special attention to the network with an additional $15k of investment there. Or do they need the full Wadax for $200k. I really don't think that type equipment is a good metric to base streaming vs CD.

The guy similar to me with a $10K to $25k server should be the focus. The guy running a Antipodes,Aurender, Inuos. The Whatsbest gets into a very gray area when stratosphere priced equipment get included in the conversation. . I think its easier to compare a good general across the board system optimized for streaming to a CD. What is the guy with a Aurender N20 and a good network switch all sitting on good stands with good power and decent cables going to hear when you compare the two. I think there are a few people on this thread saying they have listened to the compare as its out there.

I still don't expect anyone to say they are dissatisfied with streaming if CD is better with some material. I more expect them to say they find 10% to 20% of their disc library sounds outstanding. The remainder are just as good on streaming. And then they may seek out favorite albums they have streamed on CD to see if its better. Sort of like we do with vinyl. Sort of I say as I don't really find digitally mastered vinyl better than what I stream. So I only look for older classical, jazz and rock that is AAA on vinyl. Otherwise I am satisfied to a degree with my streaming. Can it be better. Yes. By a magnitude?? Doubt it. Would my system change by a magnitude with subs and better room setup. Most likely. It has to. My bass falls hard at 50 hertz. I know where to focus my $$$.

 

[wil]

Sorry your feelings have been hurt. Not everyone will share others' objectives and preferences in life - not sure why you consider this "ignorant".

Considering your comments, you will be much happier seeking confirmation bias in the orgiastic taiko thread.

if you ever compare your taiko to a CD transport, please come back here and share your experiences

My feelings are just fine, but thank you for your concern!

Yes, I consider comments that Taiko gets “blown away” or “obliterated” by (whatever) to be ignorant. And other comments (like the Bugatti in a parking in a parking lot) seem to come from an attitude of just wanting to stir things up. I don’t sense any honest curiosity in these comments.

I appreciate opinions that don’t align with my own experiences when the’re stated with intelligence.

I think cd/ vinyl / tape / streaming can all be excellent ways to experience recorded music. My experience Is that any big differences reside in the original recording/mastering and the efficacy of the system set up.

And I don’t feel the urge to promote ideas of superiority of any one method with ridiculous flame throwing. Maybe for some, it’s a psychological necessity to put down other methods to prop up their own choices?

 

[RCanelas]

It doesn’t. I only use Qobuz to audition new music. If I find something I’m interested in I buy it.

There is literally an official Qobuz downloader app on their website. And you can use plenty of others to download their files in high-res, bit-perfect flavor, complete with artwork, just like the labels send to Qobuz.

I use Qobuz to audition new music and to assemble a library with thousands of high-res albums, that would take me thousands of dollars to assemble buying separately.

 

[Kingrex]

There is literally an official Qobuz downloader app on their website. And you can use plenty of others to download their files in high-res, bit-perfect flavor, complete with artwork, just like the labels send to Qobuz.

I use Qobuz to audition new music and to assemble a library with thousands of high-res albums, that would take me thousands of dollars to assemble buying separately.

Remember, high rez with Qobus may be nothing other than a 16/44 that has been upsampled. I believe its more important to get the native resolution. I have not found a way to know what the original master format is on Qobuz.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Remember, high rez with Qobus may be nothing other than a 16/44 that has been upsampled. I believe its more important to get the native resolution. I have not found a way to know what the original master format is on Qobuz.

there is a program where you can observe the upper frequency content limit of the file which will identify it's source sampling rate (assuming it's been up sampled). obviously 16/44 recordings only have content up to 22khz. higher native sampling rates have more extended upper frequencies.

never used it myself.

 

[RCanelas]

Remember, high rez with Qobus may be nothing other than a 16/44 that has been upsampled. I believe its more important to get the native resolution. I have not found a way to know what the original master format is on Qobuz.

Qobuz doesn't upsample anything. You either get the files that where served to them by the labels or downsampled files depending on your settings. Most of the catalog is 44/16 as that is the cd quality that was provided by the distributers. You can't get those in higher figures from Qobuz.

Of course the label could have upsampled the source material themselves. Very common. You can check with a spectrogram analyzer app if there is actually data above 22kHz. Bit depth is also possible but trickier to see, if dithering was used.

I'm curious about your native resolution remark. Is that what you call the highest resolution format from the mastering step? How do you know you got something in native resolution? If you believe the (any) label, you are in the same situation as Qobuz themselves.