I suppose that it had to happen The Beatles are now available on Spotify and other streaming services. I sometimes use Spotify and at one time I subscribed to their full service which you can receive without adverts. Millions of tracks are available and Spotify caters for all musical tastes. Similar services are also available on-line.
The sound reproduction is very good if you feed the stream from your computer to an external DAC and use a decent amplifier and speakers. Listening through headphones on a tablet computer or a portable phone is not such a good experience. Amplifying the headphone output of a phone or tablet is also not perfect.
If you want really good sound reproduction you are better off listening to a decent hi-fi in a quiet room through speakers without the sound of traffic whooshing past or the "clickety clack" of a railway carriage.
With streaming services you don't need a hard drive or vinyl LPs and most of your favourite music is instantly at your disposal; and you are the DJ to play whatever music you like in any order that you like. The music is de-materialised and this is part of a hi-fi future that CDs and LPs will not be able to compete with. Of course, some people will hang onto their beloved hard copies and will sit down and enjoy their music in the living room without other distractions.
Wednesday, 23 December 2015
Wednesday, 21 October 2015
Listening to Hi-Fi through headphones
You can buy a decent pair of headphones for about £100. You do not need to to spend a fortune on a famous branded name which is marketed using the names of pop stars or rugby players; as you will be paying for the publicity rather than the quality of the sound reproduction.
Not so long ago I bought a cheap pair of Sennheiser 'phones for about £25 for use with Skype etc. when I plugged them into a combined DAC and headphone amplifier and listened to some CD quality music I was astonished at how good they sounded. I could hardly hear any difference between them and a pair of Audio Technica 'phones costing many times more.
The frequency response of the Sennheissers was limited to 15 KHz and those of the Audio Technica up to 45 KHz. Why could I hear very little difference in the upper range of the frequencies?
Here are some good reasons why.
My middle aged ears can no longer hear a 15 KHz tone.
There is very little music happening at 15 KHz. The primary harmonics of most musical instruments rarely climb above 4 KHz.
LPs are usually limited to a highest frequency of 15 KHz for production reasons.
CDs perform better as far as frequency response go but only some children can hear tones above 15KHz.
"HIRES" music files can reproduce tones much higher than a CD but nobody, not even the fittest 4 year old, can hear a tone above the CD limit of 22 KHz.
The £25 Sennheiser 'phones are able to reproduce all the musical frequencies that most people can hear without noticeable distortion. They are almost perfect at reproducing Hi-Fi sound with a linear response. The Audio Technica 'phones are almost perfect too and cannot be criticised in terms of value for money.
If you are prepared to put up with the plastic construction and feel of the £25 Sennheiser 'phones and their lack of street credibility then you have got yourself a very good buy.
Headphones have advantages over listening through speakers:
You have to pay a lot more for Speakers giving a similar sonic performance,
You hear the music unhindered by the echoes and sound absorption from your room and its furniture,
The music is closer to your ears and year can hear sonic imperfections better when you are making comparisons.
You do not disturb your neighbours when playing the music loud.
They also have disadvantages:
You could be tempted to play the music too loud and damage your ears,
They can be uncomfortable,
You never hear sounds in a natural environment so close to your ears so 'phones can feel unnatural. For this reason I rarely listen through 'phones.
Headphones can block out the sound of your surroundings and in certain situations this could be dangerous especially when crossing the road or driving - you have to be more visually aware of what is happening around you.
It is anti-social to listen to music with 'phones when you are surrounded by your family and friends.
Headphones are great for making musical comparisons , however.
The other day I was listening to some 180 and 200 gm brand new LPs and I thought it would be a great idea to make comparisons to their CD equivalents.
I heard these faults on the LPs through the headphones which I could not hear on the CD equivalent:
Noticeable rumble for the LP surface in the quiet bits of the album and in between tracks,
Noticeable hiss from the LP service on the quiet bits and between the tracks,
At elevated and uncomfortable listening levels I could hear the rumble of the turntable motor,
Clicks, pops and crackles in the quiet bits of the records,
On one of The Beatles tracks I could hear noticeable harmonic distortion possibly created by the original disc cutting or from an uneven pressing at the factory or both.
Listening through headphones demonstrates that LP sound reproduction has fundamental flaws which cannot be eliminated even with the highest quality turntables and cartridges.
All in all listening to CD was a more pleasant experience even though the LPs still sounded quite good. It really is not a good idea to listen to LPs through headphones especially when classical music is playing. I can't for the life of me appreciate some of Audiophile claims that LP sound quality is better than CD.
When I listen to an LP through speakers, the speakers themselves and the room acoustics seem to soften the sound of LP faults. However, even though I cannot hear the rumble and hiss at normal listening volumes, I can still hear the clicks, crackles and pops on the softer parts of the music and this is with a brand new LP.
If I ignore the faults of an LP then the music on a brand new album does not sound substantially different to its CD equivalent. However, if I were to be pedantic then I would opine that LP reproduction cannot claim to be of genuine Hi-Fi quality.
Comparing the sound quality of HIRES and CD quality music using headphones.
I have bought some 24/96 music from the internet and then down sampled it using DbPoweramp to CD quality. When I listen through headphones I cannot hear any difference no matter how hard I try.
When I have inverted the 16/44.1 using Audacity and then played this file back at the same time with its HIRES equivalent using a null test then I hear nothing; which proves to me that there is no audible difference between a HIRES file and a CD file - to my ears anyway.
hhttp://sdk.bongiovidps.com/2013/09/26/audio-null-test/
Headphones can be very useful tools and can expose many Hi-Fi myths.
Not so long ago I bought a cheap pair of Sennheiser 'phones for about £25 for use with Skype etc. when I plugged them into a combined DAC and headphone amplifier and listened to some CD quality music I was astonished at how good they sounded. I could hardly hear any difference between them and a pair of Audio Technica 'phones costing many times more.
The frequency response of the Sennheissers was limited to 15 KHz and those of the Audio Technica up to 45 KHz. Why could I hear very little difference in the upper range of the frequencies?
Here are some good reasons why.
My middle aged ears can no longer hear a 15 KHz tone.
There is very little music happening at 15 KHz. The primary harmonics of most musical instruments rarely climb above 4 KHz.
LPs are usually limited to a highest frequency of 15 KHz for production reasons.
CDs perform better as far as frequency response go but only some children can hear tones above 15KHz.
"HIRES" music files can reproduce tones much higher than a CD but nobody, not even the fittest 4 year old, can hear a tone above the CD limit of 22 KHz.
The £25 Sennheiser 'phones are able to reproduce all the musical frequencies that most people can hear without noticeable distortion. They are almost perfect at reproducing Hi-Fi sound with a linear response. The Audio Technica 'phones are almost perfect too and cannot be criticised in terms of value for money.
If you are prepared to put up with the plastic construction and feel of the £25 Sennheiser 'phones and their lack of street credibility then you have got yourself a very good buy.
Headphones have advantages over listening through speakers:
You have to pay a lot more for Speakers giving a similar sonic performance,
You hear the music unhindered by the echoes and sound absorption from your room and its furniture,
The music is closer to your ears and year can hear sonic imperfections better when you are making comparisons.
You do not disturb your neighbours when playing the music loud.
They also have disadvantages:
You could be tempted to play the music too loud and damage your ears,
They can be uncomfortable,
You never hear sounds in a natural environment so close to your ears so 'phones can feel unnatural. For this reason I rarely listen through 'phones.
Headphones can block out the sound of your surroundings and in certain situations this could be dangerous especially when crossing the road or driving - you have to be more visually aware of what is happening around you.
It is anti-social to listen to music with 'phones when you are surrounded by your family and friends.
Headphones are great for making musical comparisons , however.
The other day I was listening to some 180 and 200 gm brand new LPs and I thought it would be a great idea to make comparisons to their CD equivalents.
I heard these faults on the LPs through the headphones which I could not hear on the CD equivalent:
Noticeable rumble for the LP surface in the quiet bits of the album and in between tracks,
Noticeable hiss from the LP service on the quiet bits and between the tracks,
At elevated and uncomfortable listening levels I could hear the rumble of the turntable motor,
Clicks, pops and crackles in the quiet bits of the records,
On one of The Beatles tracks I could hear noticeable harmonic distortion possibly created by the original disc cutting or from an uneven pressing at the factory or both.
Listening through headphones demonstrates that LP sound reproduction has fundamental flaws which cannot be eliminated even with the highest quality turntables and cartridges.
All in all listening to CD was a more pleasant experience even though the LPs still sounded quite good. It really is not a good idea to listen to LPs through headphones especially when classical music is playing. I can't for the life of me appreciate some of Audiophile claims that LP sound quality is better than CD.
When I listen to an LP through speakers, the speakers themselves and the room acoustics seem to soften the sound of LP faults. However, even though I cannot hear the rumble and hiss at normal listening volumes, I can still hear the clicks, crackles and pops on the softer parts of the music and this is with a brand new LP.
If I ignore the faults of an LP then the music on a brand new album does not sound substantially different to its CD equivalent. However, if I were to be pedantic then I would opine that LP reproduction cannot claim to be of genuine Hi-Fi quality.
Comparing the sound quality of HIRES and CD quality music using headphones.
I have bought some 24/96 music from the internet and then down sampled it using DbPoweramp to CD quality. When I listen through headphones I cannot hear any difference no matter how hard I try.
When I have inverted the 16/44.1 using Audacity and then played this file back at the same time with its HIRES equivalent using a null test then I hear nothing; which proves to me that there is no audible difference between a HIRES file and a CD file - to my ears anyway.
hhttp://sdk.bongiovidps.com/2013/09/26/audio-null-test/
Headphones can be very useful tools and can expose many Hi-Fi myths.
Monday, 12 October 2015
Hi-Fi Forums and bunkum
I always find it amusing to read most of the Hi-Fi forums. Most of what you read is unmitigated tripe. One forum has even banned comment from a famous audio engineer who dares to challenge the opinions with reason and science.
It is my opinion that most Hi-Fi equipment should, in the modern era, sound very good if you play a well mastered CD or a well kept LP which is undamaged and not worn out.
In the analogue arena real improvements were made to consumer grade equipment in the early 1970s - from then on any improvement has been marginal. In my time, I have listened to dozens of turntable, amplifier and loudspeaker combinations. It was not often that I could hear a clear difference in the equipment no matter what the costs were. This, of course, has to be the case with analogue Hi-Fi equipment; once it reaches an acceptable standard each piece in the audio chain should sound similar. Any difference should be so marginal that either the listener hears a very subtle change or no change at all when making comparisons. All this stands to reason. If you claim to hear "a night and day difference" between two pieces of Hi-Fi quality equipment then you are either lying, fooling yourself or just trying to wind up your audience. Most of the participants in Hi-Fi forums never substantiate their exaggerated claims with the results of a double blind test.
The same reasoning applies to digital sound reproduction equipment. There are are now substantial discussions going on, on some of the forums, about which is better DSD or PCM digital musical files. Once again any difference is marginal - it has to be.
Time and time again double blind tests have been made to ascertain whether individuals can discern any difference between a CD file, DSD quality file at a 24/96 or 24/192 quality file when all other parameters are equal. So far no-one has been identified who can reliably tell the difference. All of this stands to reason because a CD can accurately reproduce all music which a human being can hear. Even though, in theory, a DSD music file can reproduce a greater frequency range than a CD, humans cannot perceive that extra range. A CD can reproduce the full dynamic range of all music and more. Any extra dynamic range which a DSD music file or a "HiRes" file can provide is simply redundant.
Here is one forum that is refreshingly objective and bucks the trend:
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?2505-The-last-words-on-audio-amplifiers-Jan-2015[/URL
It is my opinion that most Hi-Fi equipment should, in the modern era, sound very good if you play a well mastered CD or a well kept LP which is undamaged and not worn out.
In the analogue arena real improvements were made to consumer grade equipment in the early 1970s - from then on any improvement has been marginal. In my time, I have listened to dozens of turntable, amplifier and loudspeaker combinations. It was not often that I could hear a clear difference in the equipment no matter what the costs were. This, of course, has to be the case with analogue Hi-Fi equipment; once it reaches an acceptable standard each piece in the audio chain should sound similar. Any difference should be so marginal that either the listener hears a very subtle change or no change at all when making comparisons. All this stands to reason. If you claim to hear "a night and day difference" between two pieces of Hi-Fi quality equipment then you are either lying, fooling yourself or just trying to wind up your audience. Most of the participants in Hi-Fi forums never substantiate their exaggerated claims with the results of a double blind test.
The same reasoning applies to digital sound reproduction equipment. There are are now substantial discussions going on, on some of the forums, about which is better DSD or PCM digital musical files. Once again any difference is marginal - it has to be.
Time and time again double blind tests have been made to ascertain whether individuals can discern any difference between a CD file, DSD quality file at a 24/96 or 24/192 quality file when all other parameters are equal. So far no-one has been identified who can reliably tell the difference. All of this stands to reason because a CD can accurately reproduce all music which a human being can hear. Even though, in theory, a DSD music file can reproduce a greater frequency range than a CD, humans cannot perceive that extra range. A CD can reproduce the full dynamic range of all music and more. Any extra dynamic range which a DSD music file or a "HiRes" file can provide is simply redundant.
Here is one forum that is refreshingly objective and bucks the trend:
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?2505-The-last-words-on-audio-amplifiers-Jan-2015[/URL
Wednesday, 30 September 2015
You can't have your vinyl cake and eat it - new buyers be warned
I love playing LPs but I am under no illusions that they perform better sonically than a CD. Measurements prove that CDs have greater potential to perform better than LPs, However it is possible for a sound engineer to ruin the performance of a CD so that it sounds worse than an LP.
It is my opinion that a well recorded CD always sounds better than a well recorded LP no matter what type of music is being played. But, pop and rock music LPs sound almost as good their CD equivalents, because the continuous loud sound masks any rumble and low level noise from scratches and the crackle and pop of dust and static.
The LP has to be brand new when making comparisons and it must be dust free.
The other day I put on a brand new remastered version of Errol Garner's " Concert By The Sea". Half way through one of the tracks I heard a tremendous popping noise and I thought the record had been scratched. When the record was finished I examined it. There were no scratches or marks on the record which could have produced a popping noise. The record was covered in more dust than usual and the needle was also covered with dust. Static electricity was the culprit.
Before I play any LP record I always clean it with a carbon brush and I always clean the stylus. Normally, I do not hear any popping noise caused by static electricity or dust and when the record finishes there is usually very little dust sticking to the surface of the record.
On this particular day the atmospheric pressure was high and the air was very dry, this meant that the conditions were perfect for static electricity to be generated on the surface of the LP, some of which was discharging and creating a popping noise which was picked up by the stylus. The dust which was unavoidably collecting on the record and stylus was also causing a slight hissing noise.
Advocates of vinyl records who claim that LPs sound better than CD are allowing emotion to get the better of them. Any noise which should not be there degrades the performance and prevents the reproduction being genuinely of high fidelity.
No matter how much money you spend, and how well designed and built the play back equipment is, static and dust will always be a problem. If you drag a diamond stylus across a plastic disc on a day with a very dry atmosphere then you will generate static electricity.
The more sensitive the equipment is then the more clearly you will hear the noise. You cannot have your vinyl cake and eat it.
This is why I prefer to listen to CD as a matter of preference and only listen to LPs when I am in the mood. I never listen to classical music on an LP as I simply cannot stand the crackles and pops.
If you are contemplating "getting into vinyl" and spending thousands on a turntable then be warned. Do not take too much notice of the forums and HI-FI magazines which say vinyl is wonderful and it is the only way to listen to music. Listen before you buy and decide for yourself. Try out a pristine new 200 gm vinyl classical album with headphones and compare it to the same album recorded on CD: and then you will see what I mean.
It is my opinion that a well recorded CD always sounds better than a well recorded LP no matter what type of music is being played. But, pop and rock music LPs sound almost as good their CD equivalents, because the continuous loud sound masks any rumble and low level noise from scratches and the crackle and pop of dust and static.
The LP has to be brand new when making comparisons and it must be dust free.
The other day I put on a brand new remastered version of Errol Garner's " Concert By The Sea". Half way through one of the tracks I heard a tremendous popping noise and I thought the record had been scratched. When the record was finished I examined it. There were no scratches or marks on the record which could have produced a popping noise. The record was covered in more dust than usual and the needle was also covered with dust. Static electricity was the culprit.
Before I play any LP record I always clean it with a carbon brush and I always clean the stylus. Normally, I do not hear any popping noise caused by static electricity or dust and when the record finishes there is usually very little dust sticking to the surface of the record.
On this particular day the atmospheric pressure was high and the air was very dry, this meant that the conditions were perfect for static electricity to be generated on the surface of the LP, some of which was discharging and creating a popping noise which was picked up by the stylus. The dust which was unavoidably collecting on the record and stylus was also causing a slight hissing noise.
Advocates of vinyl records who claim that LPs sound better than CD are allowing emotion to get the better of them. Any noise which should not be there degrades the performance and prevents the reproduction being genuinely of high fidelity.
No matter how much money you spend, and how well designed and built the play back equipment is, static and dust will always be a problem. If you drag a diamond stylus across a plastic disc on a day with a very dry atmosphere then you will generate static electricity.
The more sensitive the equipment is then the more clearly you will hear the noise. You cannot have your vinyl cake and eat it.
This is why I prefer to listen to CD as a matter of preference and only listen to LPs when I am in the mood. I never listen to classical music on an LP as I simply cannot stand the crackles and pops.
If you are contemplating "getting into vinyl" and spending thousands on a turntable then be warned. Do not take too much notice of the forums and HI-FI magazines which say vinyl is wonderful and it is the only way to listen to music. Listen before you buy and decide for yourself. Try out a pristine new 200 gm vinyl classical album with headphones and compare it to the same album recorded on CD: and then you will see what I mean.
Tuesday, 25 August 2015
Record players
I sometimes wonder whether the desire for younger people to buy turntables and record players could be the desire to go back to a simpler life. High technology music solutions are not fulfilling their promise of improved sound quality over CDs and the marketing hype for High Definition music might be falling on unresponsive ears.
Many young people do not have the time to research the different forms of music files which we are now being treated to. Who cares about music files over and above Standard CD ones - viz. DSD, 24/96, 24/192? None of the High Resolution files sound any better.
When I go into a Hi-Fi shop I find that most of the time I know more about the performance of the the different file types than the sales people who are probably suffering from information overload. The sales staff do not have the time to research everything as they are not semi-retired like me.
I have got a 1970's Supertramp album which sounds almost as good as a 24/96 HiRes file. The album is just as easy to play but, of course, the frequency response is not the same and there is a little extra harmonic distortion. Also there are a couple of clicks and pops but the LP sounds almost as good. And there is no need to boot up a computer or streamer for playback. Some youngsters are looking for an easier audio life and who can blame them?
Many young people do not have the time to research the different forms of music files which we are now being treated to. Who cares about music files over and above Standard CD ones - viz. DSD, 24/96, 24/192? None of the High Resolution files sound any better.
When I go into a Hi-Fi shop I find that most of the time I know more about the performance of the the different file types than the sales people who are probably suffering from information overload. The sales staff do not have the time to research everything as they are not semi-retired like me.
I have got a 1970's Supertramp album which sounds almost as good as a 24/96 HiRes file. The album is just as easy to play but, of course, the frequency response is not the same and there is a little extra harmonic distortion. Also there are a couple of clicks and pops but the LP sounds almost as good. And there is no need to boot up a computer or streamer for playback. Some youngsters are looking for an easier audio life and who can blame them?
Tuesday, 28 July 2015
Hi-Fi Fashion
I wonder when Audio Cassettes will come back into fashion. I still use them in one of my older cars. I can't be bothered to plug in a MP3 adapter. The cassettes sound perfectly all right in the car. I no longer play original pre-recorded cassettes because they have all deteriorated so much that they they are unplayable. All of my music is in digital format, except for a small number of 45 rpm records, so I have converted everything on LP, Audio Cassette and CD to a WAV file on a hard disk. It is then easy to make cassettes for the car.
In their hey day every one used cassettes to create party tape mixes especially during the 70s, 80s and 90s. It was a way of making sure that your LPs did not get scratched at a party. An Audio Cassette can sound very good if you use good equipment but from a technical point of view it cannot compete with a CD. The Audio Cassette is a very convenient method of play back and ,of course, the Walkman was the forerunner of the MP3 player.
The other day I was rummaging through some old cassettes which I had stored in the garage and found an 80s recording of Van Morrison with the Chieftains; it still played almost perfectly so I digitised it straight away. How did it survive all that time? This is the wonder of cassettes sometimes they last for years and sometimes they break the second time you play them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Heartbeat
Some people love them but when I retire my older car I shall ditch all of them; they hold no sentimental value for me. However it is quite likely that like vinyl LPs Audio Cassettes will make a comeback when the fashion for turntables fades. There will be people who prefer the sound of a cassette and I must admit it is rather easy to distinguish between they sound of a cassette from the sound of its CD or LP equivalent. When they do come back into fashion some people will claim that their analogue sound will be of higher technical quality than a CD. The forums will be full of discussions about all this.
My advice to young person who is tempted is to buy a good quality cassette deck is to digitise any cassette that you buy immediately. You can buy cheap USB converters that will do this for you. Just connect the USB stage to the line outputs of your cassette deck (or at a push you can use the headphone output- but not too loud). Audacity is reasonable software to use on your laptop or PC to convert the USB input into a WAV file. Audacity can also be used to remove noise and hiss from the tape. Audacity cannot correct distortion caused by a stretched tape, some second hand tapes may suffer from this so buyer beware. Some tapes also get tangled up when you play them and you may have to re-wind them manually by using a pencil inserted into the sprockets. If you digitise your tapes the music will be preserved almost for ever and it is easy to make a tape from music stored on a hard drive. You can use the line outputs from your PC or Laptop to make a tape recording.
The fashion for LPs and turntables is still growing even though it never went out of fashion for me. The convenience of Audio Cassettes is missing and it is difficult to run around from place to place with your album collection and a portable record player. The one advantage of listening to LPs is that you have to sit down to listen and must get physically involved in changing the music. LPs can also sound almost as good as their CD equivalent unless you are listening to classical music recordings. Perhaps, they have become more fashionable with people that want to slow down a little bit and appreciate being in one place to enjoy their music. You can do all of this with a CD or other forms of digital music files provided you sit down and relax. When I listen to an album I like to play the whole of the work in the sequence that the producers intended. The LP system more or less forces you to do this; but if you chop and change tracks a lot then you risk damaging your LP from excess handling. My advice to choppers and changers is to digitise your LP as soon as you buy it, then you can chop and change as much as you like. With a digital version and you can easily carry your music around so you get the both of both worlds.
Even though I do most of my listening from digital sources I shall not get rid of my LPs in a hurry. I like the art work and putting on an LP on a special occasion even though an LP sounds slightly inferior - even with a pristine copy.
I can see a day coming when the CD player will become obsolete, as most of us will be listening via computers, solid state drives and such like. Some people, exclusively, will use Spotify and other forms of streaming service. A CD is after all just a means of storing a digital media file; there is nothing special about this compared to a hard drive or thumb drive.
A decade or so after the demise of the CD player this old form of technology will come back into fashion. Some people will start buying players again. There will be some who believe that a CD will sound better than a 24/96 music file even when all other factors are equal. They will be wrong of course, as it is not possible for a CD to sound better even if it does not sound worse. Mathematics, physics and biology mitigate against this. But not psychology: some people will believe that a CD sounds better and therefore it will sound better - to them. Rationality will not convince them: so good luck to them for it is their prerogative not to believe the evidence.
Digital music is not going to go away unless someone can invent a completely analogue system which offers the flexibility and quality of digital media. To achieve this an economic system of using analogue computers will need to be invented and deployed. In the near future this will not happen. We will have to be content to use turntables and cassette decks - modern music recording equipment is digital based, however.
In their hey day every one used cassettes to create party tape mixes especially during the 70s, 80s and 90s. It was a way of making sure that your LPs did not get scratched at a party. An Audio Cassette can sound very good if you use good equipment but from a technical point of view it cannot compete with a CD. The Audio Cassette is a very convenient method of play back and ,of course, the Walkman was the forerunner of the MP3 player.
The other day I was rummaging through some old cassettes which I had stored in the garage and found an 80s recording of Van Morrison with the Chieftains; it still played almost perfectly so I digitised it straight away. How did it survive all that time? This is the wonder of cassettes sometimes they last for years and sometimes they break the second time you play them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Heartbeat
Some people love them but when I retire my older car I shall ditch all of them; they hold no sentimental value for me. However it is quite likely that like vinyl LPs Audio Cassettes will make a comeback when the fashion for turntables fades. There will be people who prefer the sound of a cassette and I must admit it is rather easy to distinguish between they sound of a cassette from the sound of its CD or LP equivalent. When they do come back into fashion some people will claim that their analogue sound will be of higher technical quality than a CD. The forums will be full of discussions about all this.
My advice to young person who is tempted is to buy a good quality cassette deck is to digitise any cassette that you buy immediately. You can buy cheap USB converters that will do this for you. Just connect the USB stage to the line outputs of your cassette deck (or at a push you can use the headphone output- but not too loud). Audacity is reasonable software to use on your laptop or PC to convert the USB input into a WAV file. Audacity can also be used to remove noise and hiss from the tape. Audacity cannot correct distortion caused by a stretched tape, some second hand tapes may suffer from this so buyer beware. Some tapes also get tangled up when you play them and you may have to re-wind them manually by using a pencil inserted into the sprockets. If you digitise your tapes the music will be preserved almost for ever and it is easy to make a tape from music stored on a hard drive. You can use the line outputs from your PC or Laptop to make a tape recording.
The fashion for LPs and turntables is still growing even though it never went out of fashion for me. The convenience of Audio Cassettes is missing and it is difficult to run around from place to place with your album collection and a portable record player. The one advantage of listening to LPs is that you have to sit down to listen and must get physically involved in changing the music. LPs can also sound almost as good as their CD equivalent unless you are listening to classical music recordings. Perhaps, they have become more fashionable with people that want to slow down a little bit and appreciate being in one place to enjoy their music. You can do all of this with a CD or other forms of digital music files provided you sit down and relax. When I listen to an album I like to play the whole of the work in the sequence that the producers intended. The LP system more or less forces you to do this; but if you chop and change tracks a lot then you risk damaging your LP from excess handling. My advice to choppers and changers is to digitise your LP as soon as you buy it, then you can chop and change as much as you like. With a digital version and you can easily carry your music around so you get the both of both worlds.
Even though I do most of my listening from digital sources I shall not get rid of my LPs in a hurry. I like the art work and putting on an LP on a special occasion even though an LP sounds slightly inferior - even with a pristine copy.
I can see a day coming when the CD player will become obsolete, as most of us will be listening via computers, solid state drives and such like. Some people, exclusively, will use Spotify and other forms of streaming service. A CD is after all just a means of storing a digital media file; there is nothing special about this compared to a hard drive or thumb drive.
A decade or so after the demise of the CD player this old form of technology will come back into fashion. Some people will start buying players again. There will be some who believe that a CD will sound better than a 24/96 music file even when all other factors are equal. They will be wrong of course, as it is not possible for a CD to sound better even if it does not sound worse. Mathematics, physics and biology mitigate against this. But not psychology: some people will believe that a CD sounds better and therefore it will sound better - to them. Rationality will not convince them: so good luck to them for it is their prerogative not to believe the evidence.
Digital music is not going to go away unless someone can invent a completely analogue system which offers the flexibility and quality of digital media. To achieve this an economic system of using analogue computers will need to be invented and deployed. In the near future this will not happen. We will have to be content to use turntables and cassette decks - modern music recording equipment is digital based, however.
Tuesday, 21 July 2015
Running in or breaking in new cables etc
I recently read an article in a Hi-Fi magazine advocating that enthusiasts should run in or break in their new cables for hours using pink noise or such like. This idea is implausible. The magazine offered no "before and after " measurements to help prove their assertion. Also they did not publish the results of double blind listening tests probably because they did not do any. Not only do they suggest that an audio enthusiast should spend hundreds of pounds per metre for cables that do not perform any better than standard cables costing tens of pounds, they also try to fool you that running the cable in will improve the sound when it will not.
I have never heard a difference in any Hi-Fi equipment after playing it for many hours not even in electro-mechanical devices such as turntables and speakers.
I can only think that the idea of running in Hi-Fi equipment came from the era of valve amplifiers. When you first switched on a 1950s radio or amplifier you heard nothing because you had to wait for the valves to warm up before they worked. After they had warmed up no improvement in audio efficiency was discernible.
Running in cables is just another myth and a case of the "Kings New Clothes".
I have never heard a difference in any Hi-Fi equipment after playing it for many hours not even in electro-mechanical devices such as turntables and speakers.
I can only think that the idea of running in Hi-Fi equipment came from the era of valve amplifiers. When you first switched on a 1950s radio or amplifier you heard nothing because you had to wait for the valves to warm up before they worked. After they had warmed up no improvement in audio efficiency was discernible.
Running in cables is just another myth and a case of the "Kings New Clothes".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)