What is your ideal music listening 'set-up'?

[Mahesh]

I recently started the habit of avoiding mp3's and moving to lossless audio. I was given a very mainstream pop album in FLAC and without anyone mentioning it, I could tell the difference in how I perceived it. The harmonies were much clearer and the sense of dynamics that my ears could perceive was much more. Only then did I found out that they were in FLAC.

 

That sparked the question, as musicians, do we really listen to the music that we love as truly intended by the artist? Reading a lot made me understand how much the fidelity of the music is compromised due to MP3 understandably for it to be made more portable. But if an mp3 version of your favorite song by your favorite artist has so much impact on you, how much more would you be affected/inspired by listening to it as the artist intended it? Maybe by loading a lossless version of that song onto a DAC HiFi music player that supports its playback with a pair of good flat(debatable) headphones. Way to sound ideal, but hey, as a musician, the listening experience I feel is heavily overlooked.

 

Which sparked another curious question, what is your 'super-car' experience of listening to music? Listening in the shower? Huge ass music system in your car? Maybe on a nice hammock over-looking the hillside with a book in your hand while Chet Baker Sings goes on in the background?

 

Looking forward to what you've to say.

[Rudi]

Hi Mahesh,

 

I have not heard of FLAC or DAC.

I was one of those who thought CDs sounded the same or better than vinyl. MP3s do sound a bit thin sometimes, but it does the job.

 

I prefer not to use headphones, but will sometimes.

Super-Car? Your not old enough to remember that. Mike Mercury never had any music in Supercar and I've seen all the episodes.

 

I cant listen & read. Thats multi-tasking.

I have no prefered listening method-environment. I'm aware thats boring. Maybe I should.

It certainly aint the shower or in the car. I'm open to suggestions though.

 

[Guest Rob Ash]

They actually call the format used for CD's - PCM, which means Pulse Code Modulation. This is actually the name initially given to the file format we call a WAV. I differentiate what is on a CD from a modern WAV file only because CD's use LINEAR Pulse Code Modulation, or LPCM, which forces the incoming signal to conform to a predetermined limited number of audio levels, which implies that some change occurs during encoding from the original source. If you save to WAV, no change, and thus no potential loss occurs.

 

FLAC stands for Free Lossless Audio Codec. It is a compression algorithm that, unlike MP3, does not destroy any of the information it encodes and compresses. So when you "open" the file on the play back, or end user side, no data has been lost. Sometimes also known as FreeRIP, it is a new, and increasingly popular audio encoding format.

 

WAV remains the standard throughout the music industry, with FLAC being the only real contender to replace it. I feel FLAC will soon become the standard, because compression is not built into the WAV file format. Obviously, storage is not the main issue. But speed is, in commercial production. A compressed file transfers from digital location to digital location faster. This fact alone will cause FLAC to come to replace WAV, as long as the quality of the final audio presentation is proved to be identical.

 

Typically today, however, the audio files a recording studio will send to the CD manufacturer will be WAV files, at a resolution of 44,100 Hz, at bit depth rate of 16 bits. This rate was determined to be the one all manufacturers would use in the 70's by mutual agreement, owing to the fact that it allows for 78 minutes of audio playback at the given data encoding rate, which meant they could load as much information on a CD as could be stored on a single long playing record, at the highest possible rate of lossless retention.

 

The reason this is important to know when you buy a CD is because you need to understand that the data loss, or the total complete loss of fidelity to the original recording has already occurred... BEFORE the CD is even produced. Typically, professional recording studios record audio at a rate of 96,000 Hz, at a bit depth rate of 24. This is more than TWICE the amount of data that can be preserved at 44.1KHz, 16 bits. The only people who EVER hear the music the way the artist(s) meant it to sound are the artist(s), their producers, and their engineering team. Before they even send the files to have CD's made, they reduce the quality by nearly 60%, to bring it DOWN to the level acceptable for encoding onto a CD disk.

 

There are services online which offer, incidentally, high res audio files for download. A common file format is SUPER AUDIO CD, or SACD. Although the absolute audio quality in this format is the same as a normal CD (ie: 44.1 KHZ, 16 bits), it allows for more audio channels (ie: surround sound), and longer playback time. Other formats include FLAC and WAV, at 96 KHz, 24 bits. Such sites are not mainstream yet, and the price for such files is high compared to a typical downloaded file at ITunes or Amazon. At those sites, unless you stipulate otherwise, the file downloaded is an MP3 at a mere 256 kilobits per second, from a source file that, as has been previously pointed out, is already a ghost of the original recording. So not only are you listening to a stinky track, but if you buy 6 copies of the track and analyze the track in a WAV editor, no two tracks will be exactly the same, due to the compression algorithm handling each compression slightly differently. Your ear may not hear the difference, but still. Once you download those high res audio files, you still need a superior sound system to play them on in order to get even a fraction of the full quality and range of sound they can deliver.

I record and produce my music at 48 KHz, 24 bits. This is higher than CD, which means that when I convert down to 44.1 KHz, 16 bits, I am still holding onto the maximum amount of data possible at the lowest level of information retention my files would have to face before publishing. I have a powerful PC, and it still chokes on 96K sessions in my DAW, when I get more than 6 or 7 audio tracks playing back at once. So 48 K, 24 bits is a nice middle road for me that still keeps my original work above the CD low water mark. When I send MP3's to either the musicians I work with, for review, or to friends who want copies of the final versions of my songs, I try to send them MP3's at the highest possible rate which does not produce an unwieldy file size for email. Usually this will be a 320 KBS MP3, which, while still "lossy" at least attempts to mitigate the damage to your audio experience as much as possible within the bounds set by the encoding parameters.

 

The bottom line, and the reason I wrote all of this is because what we simple consumers think of as "AUDIO QUALITY" is totally and completely relative. Yes, you can maximize the quality of your experience, and for audiophiles I am sure no recommendation to do this is required. Even for not a lot of money, relatively speaking, you can improve your audio experience, by ensuring you listen to files on a reasonably high end play back system, and listening to files with a guaranteed level of fidelity. But, for the average listener, playing their music on a laptop, a  desktop with typical speakers, the living room audio system or in their car, the audio experience is actually rather badly limited. And for most people, and this includes damn near everyone who does not record seriously at home, or work with audio files for a living, it makes little to no difference at all, because our ears KNOW NO BETTER.

 

 

 

Edited July 1, 2016 by Rob Ash
edited to correct typos and for clarity.

[Rudi]

very useful Rob. Thanks

[Guest Rob Ash]

1 hour ago, Rudi said:

very useful Rob. Thanks

 

Only trying to help. I didn't even get into the whole LP versus tape (reel to reel, as opposed to the cassette variety) versus CD thing. Lots of people hold out that an LP is still far superior to a CD recording.

 

And that's not even addressing the whole debate between analog versus digital recording. In both cases (LP and analog vs. digital), some people still to this day claim that digitally recorded music (ie: CD's) comes across as "soulless", expressly for one of the prime reasons it is supposed to be superior... that being the fact that it is "blemish", or imperfection free. Such is not true... digital recordings still retain any imperfections in performance that occur, and tend to magnify things like imperfect timing and such... but I guess I can understand how someone could have a hard time letting go of all that lovely static and hiss.

 

Yeah, that last bit was just a tad sarcastic.

 

I actually know a little about the why's and where fore's of LP technology. Truth be known, it has it's good AND bad points. For my part, I'd rather sink my credits into a better desktop and better monitors than into a high end turntable and high quality speakers.

 

You can't play video games on a turntable.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Rob Ash

[Mahesh]

On 06/30/2016 at 11:42 AM, Rudi said:

Hi Mahesh,

 

I have not heard of FLAC or DAC.

I was one of those who thought CDs sounded the same or better than vinyl. MP3s do sound a bit thin sometimes, but it does the job.

 

I prefer not to use headphones, but will sometimes.

Super-Car? Your not old enough to remember that. Mike Mercury never had any music in Supercar and I've seen all the episodes.

 

I cant listen & read. Thats multi-tasking.

I have no prefered listening method-environment. I'm aware thats boring. Maybe I should.

It certainly aint the shower or in the car. I'm open to suggestions though.

 

Hey Rudi,

 

One thing is for sure, I am too young indeed to know the reference of the Super car you're talking about lol

 

I was simply referring to the experience driving a super car as opposed to driving a normal one. The experience is much different. The same would apply to music, at least for me.

 

I was in different to these things as well despite knowing what FLAC, WAV and Mp3 is. Things have changed lately. I look for the finer things in life. I guess maybe it's the compensation my mind seeks for the oncoming quarter life crisis? Lol

[Mahesh]

On 06/30/2016 at 6:34 PM, HoboSage said:

When I was a lot younger, I spent more than I could afford buying albums and then CD's.  I was crazy about music and bands.  But, here is my current truth: I don't buy or download music, and I don't really listen to music just to listen to it for pleasure - not anymore, and I haven't for a long time.  I don't have a stereo system, CD player or MP3 player at home other than my computer.  I have no music on my phone, and I don't own a portable MP3 player.  I never listen to music in the car unless I'm on a long road trip and need a break from a book on CD - then I might turn on the radio for a bit.  I hear lots music when I watch t.v./movies.  I especially enjoy a good band/artist performing live on some show - and I will seek out those live performances on shows (I do have a decent sound system for my t.v.).  I listen to my music when I'm working on it, and of course, I listen to the music posted here and posted elsewhere by members here - lots of music that I always listen to in headphones - but good headphones.  But anyway, I can't remember the last time I intentionally took time to just listen to an audio-only recording of music "for pleasure."  Honestly.  I don't know why I've changed and I guess have become less of a "fan" of music in general.  Maybe between t.v., movies, doing my own music and listening to all the music here and on the web, I get my fill, and/or maybe it's simply because I've gotten older and my "romance" with all things music has just run its course.

Understandable David. Time can change things sometimes and it makes no sense to force things unless you really want it.

 

My regular intake of music and its nature has changed much as well over time. I guess maybe that's why I'm searching for and learning about ideal set ups used by others as well.

[Mahesh]

On 07/01/2016 at 2:54 AM, tunesmithth said:

• We've got a pair of Pioneer 3-ways upstairs & another downstairs, but I don't find myself cranking up the home system as much in recent years. Still own some vinyl, but really have a preference these days for CDs. Given the option, I'll always pick wav over mp3 format...even on a lesser system.
• I've got a decent pair of Bose monitor speakers on my PC these days, so I do some listening there.
• Until recently, much of my career involved field work. Hence much of my time was spent alone in my vehicle. For the past couple decades, I've done more casual listening on the road than anywhere else. My 2009's got a pretty decent stock system....good, crisp frequency response, CD player....just what the doctor ordered.

BTW your question made me think of a short blog article I did a few years back. I'll leave the link for anyone who's interested - 

Demonstrating once again, that many of these trends aren't really new. More like upgraded versions of past trends.  

Very interesting blog article Tom. I have to agree that the end consumers these days do not really give much heed to how they aquire their music. I find myself believing that's the mind set giving rise to increased piracy as well.

 

My area of interest though is pointed to musicians in specific. Maybe even we've resorted to the "whatever works" attitude in general. I wonder if the quality of musicians produced is somehow related to this attitude as well. (Disclaimer:I'm purely talking about the current generation of aspiring musicians, my generation and newer. Most of you had such great musicians playing on the radio all the time, you don't count. I hope I'm clear with that so I don't offend anyone.) Maybe I'm way over my head, even wrong. But something to think about.

[Just1L]

I don't care about quality* of sound. Never have ... never will. †he only thing I require is time. Actual time to lay around and listen to music. The only time I get to really listen to music is when I'm driving to Florida on our annual vacation. Once a year. I live less than a mile from work. Our vacation coincides with sirius' free trial. Love listening and playing who wrote it - title of the song. Sadly, it can't be a drinking game because I'm driving. If I wasn't driving, it'd be a drinking game. That's how I like to listen music.

 

* Quality = Set up = ... Set up = whatever system is playing

Edited July 2, 2016 by Just1L

[Guest Rob Ash]

I guess for me it's a choice of two different listening situations.

 

My wife and I hate flying. We love to drive, so it works out. We often go to Texas once or twice a year for a week... seeing family and old friends. That means 22-24 hours on the road with nothing to do and Sirius, lovely Sirius radio to keep us entertained all the way. The two qualities that make Sirius special are 1: having something like 250 channels to choose from, and 2: PERFECT reception.

 

So, on long drives, we really appreciate the quality of the sound experience Sirius provides. And since we have continuously kept our subscription to Sirius active since we first signed up for it more than 6 years ago, I guess you could say that, like Mahesh, we are coming to appreciate the finer experiences life has to offer. I am well past the quarter life crisis, but still. On the other hand, however, I can't remember the last time I bought a CD. Honestly can't recall. Has to be at least 6 or 7 years. We have an okay sound system in the living room. Not super high end, but okay. The only thing we ever listen to through it is TV or Blue Ray. Never radio or CD's.

 

But then there's my music making experience. I have a quad core PC with 12 gigs RAM. It has an oversized fan and power box, and a high end video card. When I do my music, I record at 48 KHZ, 24 bit depth. That's not as good as a major studio, but still better than CD. I save all my work tracks as WAV files. If I save down to an MP3, say to send a track to a fellow musician for review, I try to send the biggest MP3 I can without it getting ridiculous. I try to hit 320 KBS, but never go below 224 KBS.

 

Getting the best mix, and therefor one would suppose, the best "sound" I can achieve is very important to me with my music, so I have as good a pair of monitors, and as good an interface (the device that lets me plug all my guitars, keyboard, and stuff into my computer for recording) as I can afford. I have quality instruments to play on. Nothing is the best, but is the best I can afford. So I've made more than a passing investment in order to insure that my audio experience when I am making songs is as good as I can afford.

 

So, two sides of a coin. But in general, I have to admit to caring less about the quality of my consumer experience as a music listener than used to. In my 20's and early 30's, if I had to choose between a great tv and a lousy stereo system or a great system and a so-so tv, my choice was clear. I had 150 watt RCA speakers sitting on hand crafted stands above a set of 200 watt Bose speakers for my living room stereo, plus a set of 100 watt remotes behind the sofa. Now all of that is gone. Haven't had a serious stereo in more than 20 years.

Edited July 2, 2016 by Rob Ash

[MonoStone]

My listening has changed a lot in some ways over the years, and in some ways remained the same.

 

I've always preferred to listen with headphones (proper headphones not those cheap tinny earbuds). As a kid I'd sit for hours every day with giant headphones on listening to my parents vinyl...which was largely a bit crap but had some gems.

 

As a young teen I'd sit for hours every day with headphones on listening to my own albums and singles on vinyl and CD. 

 

Now I sit for hours every day listening to music on headphones... but a fair bit of that...sorry...is my own music (I do like listening to my own music...I make music that I enjoy, that I can't get elsewhere). And I'm content to listen to MP3s. If I'm not listening to my own stuff then I'm listening to music by people here or on Soundcloud.... and also most days I'll enjoy listening to and watching bands I like on YouTube, either videos or just audio (loads with just some home made lyrics video, or live performances). MP3 or YouTube video formats don't bother me much...they generally sound better than my old vinyl because when I used to play vinyl there was usually some noise from it or the needle... I've not listened to one of my own CDs in ages (Car journey's are taken over by my daughter's CDs... pop collections that I just can't get into).

 

When I go from listening to one of my recordings on the DAW or Wav to listening to it as MP3, I don't often hear enough difference to bug me...although occasionally I think the MP3s noticeably lose some depth.

 

What I've never done (and cannot understand why people do it) is 'listened' to music as a kind of back drop to something else I'm doing. I mean a lot of people like to just have music 'on'... I don't get that... I like to listen fully or not at all...and headphones are the best way to cut out the rest of the world and hear everything in a track.

 

MP3's don't bother me much, it's not perfect but has a lot of good points for amateur music makers... but people only half paying attention to music, or listening with some cheap nasty earbuds that lose half the sounds, or even worse ...listening to music out of a phone speaker or laptop built-in speakers... THAT reeeaaallly bugs me. And unfortunately, I think a lot of people hear music in one of those ways.

[GocartMoz]

My ideal musical "listening set-up"?..

 

In my living room with Bruce Springsteen & The E-Street Band providing me a personal concert live!  That is definately my ideal "listening set-up."  Havn't been able to make it happen though.    You asked Mahesh!

 

Dave

Edited July 13, 2016 by GocartMoz