What is the audiophile digital future? And how fast will it be here?

[Steve Williams]

That was what I thought as well

 

[RBFC]

Well, it correctly identifies DXD 24/352.8 when I choose one of those files, but I can't play them (DAC not able to play that res).

Lee

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

The gains from current hi-res offerings (not counting the gains from better mastering of current hi-res offerings) are so small that they are almost pointless in my view, leaving the future of audiophile digital right where the future of audiophile analog is: in better recordings, better masters, better speakers and better environmental acoustics.

Tim

 

[amirm]

Coming late into this thread . I think the future of innovation in this area is clear. It will follow the path of what consumers will do! Look at digital downloads. Consumers have been ripping and downloading music for more than a decade. It is only recently that the same has been offered to audiophiles. And music servers are just getting popular, whereas the same occurred in 1990s for consumers.

By the same token, the consumer is moving on to cloud storage and on-demand streaming of all music in the world (with ads or subscription fees). With so many connected devices and the hassle of syncing, the music is moving to centralized storage and streamed. Ultimately if this is all about music, then this is the model we all need to move to.

The ideal device then has a high quality DAC at one end (or part of a processor) and a cellular connection at the other end. Why cellular? Because it can be pre-provisioned when you buy the device with no configuration in the home. This is the key to success of Kindle with its built-in network that is transparent to users.

Barriers are many. For one, there is just not enough of a market for someone to do any of this. All we can hope is someone at an existing cloud service like google waking up and wanting to do this "just because." Cellular networks are too slow and too expensive for this kind of use. So land line will need to be used.

 

[JackD201]

How about Cable?

 

[microstrip]

(...) Consumers have been ripping and downloading music for more than a decade. It is only recently that the same has been offered to audiophiles. And music servers are just getting popular, whereas the same occurred in 1990s for consumers. (...)

Amir,
Do you know of any statistics on the sales of downloaded music versus CDs in 2010?

 

[mep]

The gains from current hi-res offerings (not counting the gains from better mastering of current hi-res offerings) are so small that they are almost pointless in my view, leaving the future of audiophile digital right where the future of audiophile analog is: in better recordings, better masters, better speakers and better environmental acoustics.

Tim

I don’t agree with you for a number of reasons. I think there is much room for improvement with digital and no reason to think that digital won’t continue to get better. What remains to be seen is what software will be made available to consumers. If all you can purchase is 24/192, I’m not sure how much it matters if you have software/hardware that does DSD (or pick your favorite) conversions and up-sampling. There seems to be an explosion of new high resolution DACS available to consumers and some new promising software to run the digits on the horizon (Emotion is now in Beta Testing). I think there is every reason to be excited and I think that someone like (if not) HD Tracks will exploit the opportunity and service the audiophile market with ever higher-resolution software. If someone doesn’t do this, the high-rez files will remain with recording studios and all we will hear is dumbed-down versions. I’d like to think that won’t happen so I choose to be optimistic.

For some people, redbook CD has already attained perfection and there is no need to expect any further improvements to perfection. Judging by what I just heard at the RMAF in room after room, digital still has a long way to go before it should run out of improvements to the so-called perfection it has already achieved. However, if you have already convinced yourself that digital simply can’t get any better, your future has indeed arrived. Enjoy it.

 

[microstrip]

(...) leaving the future of audiophile digital right where the future of audiophile analog is: in better recordings, better masters, better speakers and better environmental acoustics.

Tim

Better recordings, better masters ... What improvements do you expect in this area?

 

[audioguy]

I'll cast my vote for Tim on this issue. "Cloud" servers may be part of the equation but in my opinion, higher Rez than 192/24 won't happen on any reasonable scale. Our best hope, as Tim noted, is better recording, mixing, mastering.

 

[mep]

I'll cast my vote for Tim on this issue. "Cloud" servers may be part of the equation but in my opinion, higher Rez than 192/24 won't happen on any reasonable scale. Our best hope, as Tim noted, is better recording, mixing, mastering.

If better recording, mixing, and mastering is your "best hope" for digital, the future of digital is very dim. I think there will be big improvements in both software and hardware and there needs to be IMO. We have 1950s-1960s jazz music that was recorded, mixed, and mastered at an incredibly high level and I would love to hear digital be able to replicate the sound captured on those master tapes. I wouldn't sit around and wait for high-rez cloud music to come streaming my way. If it ever does, it will probably be "streaming for the masses" and probably won't be any better than the crap you get from your cable tv music channels.

 

[Old Listener]

Do you know of any statistics on the sales of downloaded music versus CDs in 2010?

For the US, see the RIAA site at

http://www.riaa.com/keystatistics.php?content_selector=2008-2009-U.S-Shipment-Numbers

Some numbers from the 2010 shipments report:

dollar value of downloads - $ 2,238.1 Million, up 10% from 2009.

dollar value of physical media - $ 3,518.5 Million, down 19.6% from 2009.

dollar value of digital performance royalties - $ 249.2 Million, up 60.3%
(note that this value is royalties rather than sales or subscription fees.)

Bill

 

[mep]

Bill-Very interesting statistics. It shows where the future of digital music is.

 

[Old Listener]

I'll cast my vote for Tim on this issue. "Cloud" servers may be part of the equation but in my opinion, higher Rez than 192/24 won't happen on any reasonable scale. Our best hope, as Tim noted, is better recording, mixing, mastering.

The questions that matter to me are

"Can I buy the music I want at CD or better quality or better or do I have to buy mp3 or AAC quality versions?"

"Can I ever get the music I want on streaming from the cloud services?"

Much of the audiophile label music is not of interest to me. For example, I have a Reference Recordings CD with the Rimsky-Korsakov Dance of the Tumblers from the Snow Maiden. Good sound but rather distant perspective with a thoroughly boring performance. I listen to the energetic and entertaining Bernstein performance on a poorly recorded and mastered Sony CD. I don't care how wonderful the sound is on the 192/24 version of the Reference Recordings material. It is a great candidate for an MP3 version.

I doubt that the Bernstein performance will ever appear at greater than CD quality. I'm glad to have it in CD quality.

On the other hand, some of the George Szell / Cleveland orchestra performances that I love have been remastered with care from original sources in recent years. The result has been to make classic performances more enjoyable. If a 192/24 download becomes available at a reasonable price, I'll buy that too.

Bill

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

If better recording, mixing, and mastering is your "best hope" for digital, the future of digital is very dim. I think there will be big improvements in both software and hardware and there needs to be IMO. We have 1950s-1960s jazz music that was recorded, mixed, and mastered at an incredibly high level and I would love to hear digital be able to replicate the sound captured on those master tapes. I wouldn't sit around and wait for high-rez cloud music to come streaming my way. If it ever does, it will probably be "streaming for the masses" and probably won't be any better than the crap you get from your cable tv music channels.

This is where we disagree, Mark, and where my optimism comes into play. I think digital is capable of replicating the sound of those masters right now. I'll take it a step further -- I think Redbook is capable of exceeding the sound of those masters right now and I have examples in my collection that do it. They are, however, exceedingly rare, which is why I believe the key is better recording and mastering. Does that mean that digital can't get better? Not at all. But it means that currently, digital's capabilities are rarely being used, so....back to recording and mastering. YMMV.

Tim

 

[microstrip]

For the US, see the RIAA site at

http://www.riaa.com/keystatistics.php?content_selector=2008-2009-U.S-Shipment-Numbers

Some numbers from the 2010 shipments report:

dollar value of downloads - $ 2,238.1 Million, up 10% from 2009.

dollar value of physical media - $ 3,518.5 Million, down 19.6% from 2009.

dollar value of digital performance royalties - $ 249.2 Million, up 60.3%
(note that this value is royalties rather than sales or subscription fees.)

Bill

Thanks Bill, it was what I wanted to see.

But the full numbers also show another sad aspect - the increase in number of total units downloaded was very small - 2.3%, the big growth seems to be obtained just rising the prices.

Another important aspects in that the revenues due to the download of single musics exceeds the amount due to the download of albums.

And the main conclusion is not nice - the total number of music units decreased by 6.8% .

 

[mep]

This is where we disagree, Mark, and where my optimism comes into play. I think digital is capable of replicating the sound of those masters right now. I'll take it a step further -- I think Redbook is capable of exceeding the sound of those masters right now and I have examples in my collection that do it. They are, however, exceedingly rare, which is why I believe the key is better recording and mastering. Does that mean that digital can't get better? Not at all. But it means that currently, digital's capabilities are rarely being used, so....back to recording and mastering. YMMV.

Tim

Tim-What examples do you have in your CD collection that replicate what the analog masters sound like? And further, how would you know since you have no analog playback gear in your system to compare the formats?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Coming late into this thread . I think the future of innovation in this area is clear. It will follow the path of what consumers will do! Look at digital downloads. Consumers have been ripping and downloading music for more than a decade. It is only recently that the same has been offered to audiophiles. And music servers are just getting popular, whereas the same occurred in 1990s for consumers.

By the same token, the consumer is moving on to cloud storage and on-demand streaming of all music in the world (with ads or subscription fees). With so many connected devices and the hassle of syncing, the music is moving to centralized storage and streamed. Ultimately if this is all about music, then this is the model we all need to move to.

The ideal device then has a high quality DAC at one end (or part of a processor) and a cellular connection at the other end. Why cellular? Because it can be pre-provisioned when you buy the device with no configuration in the home. This is the key to success of Kindle with its built-in network that is transparent to users.

Barriers are many. For one, there is just not enough of a market for someone to do any of this. All we can hope is someone at an existing cloud service like google waking up and wanting to do this "just because." Cellular networks are too slow and too expensive for this kind of use. So land line will need to be used.

I'd just like to add that Amir is dead-right about this. This is the future of digital music. But it's a future few audiophile hobbyists will embrace. My guess is we'll be collecting rare redbook CDs, SACDs and hi-res files like so many of us now collect old albums. The most progressive (the least demanding? A matter of opinion, I suppose) of our breed are just now getting around to music servers; our kids have been carrying them around in their pockets for years. Personally, I fallen hard for Spotify.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim-What examples do you have in your CD collection that replicate what the analog masters sound like? And further, how would you know since you have no analog playback gear in your system to compare the formats?

How would i know? I've recorded, Mark, and listened to the playback for hours on end, as critically as you only can when it's your own work and every flaw digs in under your skin and itches. I know you won't believe this...such is life...but I know exactly what really good, fresh, analog tape sounds like -- not a second or third generation copy, or the copy's vinyl shadow -- and I know it playing back my own voice and my own instruments.

And I know what really good redbook digital sounds like, because I have some of it. Examples of redbook cds that sound as good as any classic analog recording? Give Gershwin's World a try. Play "Sex Kils" off of Joni Mitchell's Travelogue . Crank it up. Hold on to your hat.

Do they replicate analog? I doubt either were ever "analog" in the first place. Replicate? Get yourself a really good converter and ripping software, rip some of your best vinyl to digital. AB it blind. Get back to me. It'll even "replicate" the noise.

Tim

 

[microstrip]

How would i know? I've recorded, Mark, and listened to the playback for hours on end, as critically as you only can when it's your own work and every flaw digs in under your skin and itches. I know you won't believe this...such is life...but I know exactly what really good, fresh, analog tape sounds like -- not a second or third generation copy, or the copy's vinyl shadow -- and I know it playing back my own voice and my own instruments.

And I know what really good redbook digital sounds like, because I have some of it. Examples of redbook cds that sound as good as any classic analog recording? Give Gershwin's World a try. Play "Sex Kils" off of Joni Mitchell's Travelogue . Crank it up. Hold on to your hat.

Do they replicate analog? I doubt either were ever "analog" in the first place. Replicate? Get yourself a really good converter and ripping software, rip some of your best vinyl to digital. AB it blind. Get back to me. It'll even "replicate" the noise.

Tim

It is curious that you refer the wonderful Joni Mitchell "Travelogue" - the positions of Larry Klein, the producer of this recording, about analog, digital and SACD are widely spread in the net:

" from an 2001 eGear Magazine interview with Klein "...the music actually sounds better, warmer, more detailed on SACD.." and "..it's the only digital format I've ever heard that sounds better in the studio than the analog 15 ips tape recorders with Dolby SR we've used up 'til now."

BTW, I did not have access to the original magazine, but many people seem to confirm it.

 

[FrantzM]

AMirm

I mostly agree with you. I simply don't think that the network need to be cellular it could be landline . not POTS, landline. There have been false starts and ubiquitous to the curb is not entirely with us but it will come, then a no-provisioning is entirely feasible ...
I believe that the future of music reproduction is digital. Heck! its present is already that. Some of us audiophiles will bitch and moan ... It won't stop progress. The music will get back to the clouds and it can only be there in digital format .. As for analog vs digital .. This is another debate