Thanks for that explanation. It all makes sense. It is unfortunate that we are such a small crowd that appreciate well recorded music. It is amazing that we can listen to music recorded in the 50s on old Western Electric theater speakers and it sounds so much better than something produced by mainstream production in 2020 and played on consumer grade systems. Bless you for being one of the small companies that record actual music.
To my ears... say what you want about recording on tape... in the 60s and 70s the major labels actually cared about producing high quality recordings. When I listen to records like Pet Sounds, I realize how far we have drifted as an industry and we all wish this wasn't the case. Props to Paul for keeping the dream alive.
Ita different tho, Tapes were listenable and well recorded. It was the limitation of the format. Same with CD. Butnwith all the compression and limiting and clipping of thensignal it just makes modern musoc unlistenable.yes tapes wrre horrible, wow&flutter and limited high frequency, then again dbx tapes sounded pretty okay @@BennieWilll
Paul, I love Octave records albums. Bought twice from Spain, and have about a dozen titles. Great music, great sound. But also, different music and artists. Thanks for making this happen.
To my surprise, Amazon Music Ultimate does high-res streaming via FLAC. I've done side-by-side comparisons of the same tracks, I honestly prefer it vs Tidal.
“The Oracle”! This nickname has to stick!!! Preaching the truth despite reprisal from the Finance Dept or others. Always can count on coming here for unvarnished commentary from Paul. Keep it up
What you described is exactly what I heard on Qobuz with Clay Rose's Nightmares, kind of unpleasant. Compressed against the ceiling, ringing guitar solo. A single version of the song Nightmares (reqognizeable by a purple version of the album cover) is also on Qobuz. That is a lot better already. A more relaxed presentation. I just played some Shelby Lynne from the fantastic Album Just a Little Lovin' afterward to check if my filter was on. It wasn't.
One recording artist that always has amazing recordings is Joyce Cooling.I stream and listen to lots of stuff.There are some good recordings,but every time Joyce Cooling comes up it just sounds like "honey"to my ears.Lovely rich dense and non grainy sound.If all recordings were that good I would never watch tv.
Its a real hit or miss, Mark Knopflers 1st set of remasters were horrible, the second later years of remasters sounded much better. Still not great but better.
I listened to the audio clip Nightmares from Gasoline Lollipops on Octave Records and then to the version they use on CZcams. The Octave clip sounds like a live recording of a band playing in a medium sized club with just a clean sound and no effects. The CZcams version sounded like someone got ahold of the knobs and goosed everything up to 9. It sounds like just another overproduced studio recording, made for sounding loud and full at low volume. So if I turn it up to a "room filling" volume, it's way too loud and out of proportion. Like you'd want to grab the sliders and put them back to just a little above flat. Remember variable loudness controls? Yeah.
"Nightmares" is really nice album! Bought SACD version. It comes with accompanying DVD data disc with both PCM and DSD versions of files. Excellent production. Thank you! Listened to the same album on Spotify. Worse quality, audible distortion in bass.
Hey Paul, in thinking about your comment on the Adele recording, could you share with us your favorite pop or rock recordings of late/through the years???
Interesting insight that explains what goes on regarding the remixing of the master tapes by artists who "think they know better". I've recently bought a whole stack of Octave SACDs and have been impressed by the quality and diversity of musicianship and musical styles and of course the impressive sound quality. Oh how I wish more artists took as much care and pride in how the music sounds when played on a decent system. I also am impressed that you can sell discs to us folks here in the UK without the exorbitant import taxes that other US companies charge- often making a purchase non viable, don't know how you do it but thanks! I agree with your take on Adele. For me the worst example of an album that should've sounded spectacular is the Bruno Mars/Anderson Park Silksonic Album. It sounds horrendous, as if i't was recorded through an old sock. The recent live Queen & Adam Lambert album sounds like a bootleg recorded from eh public bathroom in the venue. I also abhor the dominant distorted bass that seems ubiquitous in most modern recordings WHY? Playing these discs at any volume is unbearable
About streaming quality: I have used Qobuz for a long time and love it. Before that I used Tidal and found Qobuz being so much more revealing. I stream it using a LUMIN u2 mini to my Hegel h120 amp and out to my JBL L100 Classic 75 Anniversary speakers. Last week I decided to give Apple Music a chance. I played the exact same HiRes music tracks through first Apple Music and then from Qobuz. OMG!! What a difference. The tracks using Apple Music were muffled and with no soundstage or clarity. With Qobuz everything opened up, filled the room, I could locate every instrument and the soundstage was huge again. What streaming service you use REALLY matters.
With the Adele albums, the dynamic range sounds way better on the vinyl format by quite a margin, and avoids the clipping distortion present on the CD The CD version sounds like there is clipping distortion in the loudest parts.
100% but then there was a high defect rate on the vinyl as they mass produced it through the nose. They're literally giving surplus vinyl copies away in the UK. But without a doubt it's far better on vinyl
Hi Paul, wouldn’t it be possible for Octave Records to to publish its music catalog (lossless) on Apple Music? Probably the audio quality is not as good as from de Octave Records CDs, but when I play music from Apple Music in my studio (which is not an audiophile setup) it sounds pretty good. That way, it’s maybe possible to reach a lot more “mere mortals”, letting them enjoy the music and generate some extra cash flow?
It would certainly be possible but that would defeat one of our main missions: to make sure artists get paid for their work. Apple doesn't pay the musicians, so it would be basically giving their music away for free. Though, I get that it would be great! (To be clear, Apople and others do "pay" their musicians but unless you're a big musician like Taylor Swift that means maybe one penny over time).
@@petersagi275 Thanks, but it's the same thing regardless of the service. To get any kind of revenue back to the musicians one has to have many thousands/millions of listens and that's just not going to happen on a small audiophile label. I have considered instead building an internet radio station with Octave Records....that way people could get a taste of what it's all about without depriving the musicians.
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio I've watched the video where you've talked about your plans on the internet radio for audiophiles and artists. It was a year ago, I guess?
I'm asking out of curiosity If you found an unknown artist With one hell of a back catalogue Original Master's, Multi-track recording, still got the gear to play it back on, MIDI files, you name it What would you recommend they do? Or would your record company be interested?
Hi Paul, I've been watching and very much appreciating your content for some time now. Keep it coming! To the point you made indirectly in your video, this is exactly where (some) musicians and the self-acclaimed audiophiles part ways... If a musician wants his own music to sound a certain way post-recording, that's a message and style he/she also wants to embed in the recording and released contents. An audiophile can't claim "artistic authenticity" simply by reproducing the original recording 100%. In the end that's only an audiophile's opinion and/or taste. We still need to give the musician's free rein on how they want their music to be reproduced and consumed. Ultimately they "own" it ;-).
I use Spotify. Honestly, most of my listening is in my vehicle and the difference between Spotify and Tidal is really slim. When you combine road noise with engine and AC noise (and my vehicle is fairly quiet) having a top notch streamer does not make sense (and also burning through a lot more data).
Many years ago , I purchased about 30 Maple shade high quality CDs… the quality of the sound was lights years ahead of red book but… listening was sometimes not great because of the artist music selection..
You've heard it before because you can't get around it -- "Everything Matters." There is big variation of record company mastering. There is variation between all formats, regardless of resolution -- CD/SACD, LP, streaming. Everything in the signal chain matters for any kind of system, particularly for streaming. How much would you have to spend on a turntable system, set up in your Listening Room that you were happy with the sound quality for the rest of your life? $5k? $10K? $50k? More? Whatever you decide on, you will have to spend half that amount for a comparable sounding streaming system (hi-rez files). Your amp and your speakers have to be up to handling all these differences above. However, you can set up a great desktop system using your computer, a USB "cleaner" by Sonore, a PSAudio Stellar Gain Cell DAC and Neumann KH120A powered speakers on isoAcoustic stands -- that will amaze you. That's a total of $2900 plus computer. Add a pair of Sennheiser HD-600 for about $400 and Qobuz/Tidal and you will have a "lifetime" desktop system. My Listening Room system (SACD/CD/Streaming) sounds as good as my desktop, but of course it has better dynamics, imaging, realism. I researched and did trial and error for 10 years and paid just under $28,000. Ten times more than my desktop system, which I think is a reasonable standard to go by. Forget a Turntable system -- too "warm," too pricey, unreliable SQ that degrades and you have to wash. Do you like pops and clicks? Here's a hint that will save you a lot of grief -- buy the best Tannoy speakers you can afford, and don't be afraid to give them a lot of SS watts, or some good tube watts. My takeaway -- (1) In a decent listening room, you can pay half for a streaming system and it will sound as good as a turntable system. (2) Take one-tenth the amount you just spent on your streaming system and you can have an "equal" sounding desktop system. (3) "Clean" AC power will improve sound quality. (4) A good Subwoofer will improve OVERALL sound quality.
And what about recordings sounding different in different platforms? For example, "Moreno Torroba Sonatina" in Lee Ritenour and Dave Grusin album "Two worlds". To me, Spotify version sound better than Tidal in HIFI quality one even it's loosy. I don't know why this happens, but it's not the only case, same with Diane Schuur's "You don't remember me". I hear "tremolo" in tidal versions. Perhaps I'm wrong or I don't have a good gear, but that¡s what I hear.
One of the things that makes your Q&A session so wonderful is your honesty. Honesty is so simple yet it seems to be far beyond the grasp of most people and business,
I think u ou’re so right when it comes to recording quality. I also was disappointed with the quality of Adele’s records. But there are so many artists and bands, icons such as Coldplay which suffer from ‘poot’ recording quality, I think.
Streaming all depends on where the streaming service got the music from be it an album or song. Example, one album may have five different versions released from one or more music labels. The recording’s are not necessarily the same with all 5 album versions. Get use to it, it’s the way it is with streaming music services. You are free to start your own music streaming service the way you want.
@@ZeusTheTornado Streaming services don’t have out of print songs or albums either. You have to buy those used on the Internet. Some music stores may have some in stock but that is very rare. There was a out of print CD out of print that was deleted. A music store in Vegas named the Great Wall, of Anita Mui CD, only had 5 CD’s in stock. They sold out quickly. Maybe some day someone will upload it on CZcams..👍 I check from time to time. 👍
There is absolutely ZERO reason why streaming can not match or even exceed any other digital media source. With streaming you can easily beat the data bandwidth data integrity you can get from CD or SACD media, for example. This doesn't mean streaming service providers won't mess up their stream quality, but that's not about technical limitations. Personally I use Amazon Music HD which can stream flawlessly in lossless 192kHz 24 bits. Anything higher than that doesn't actually make much sene.
How the material is mastered is the real kicker. A lot of modern material has been butchered with compression, for example. Spotify 320 cbr Ogg (I believe they use) is transparent, nobody's going to hear a difference between that and the original lossless. But the source of the recording, the craft used to make the recording and so on has massive effects on the end result. It's an absolute cultural tragedy to me that for 50 years now most recordings have been annihilated with compression. Not classical, or some things classical-adjacent; with classical I think the struggle is more the opposite, it's hard to keep the dynamic range down enough. But for more mainstream music, pop, rock... wild compression, and often godawful sound quality. Just depressing to even think about.
@@dilshodtojiddinzoda One, no it hasn't because when you nuke the dynamic range, it's gone, and cannot be restored, and two, MQA is pure snake oil that does nothing but harm the material, which is why they're going out of business.
Why can’t audiophiles seem to get that modern recordings sound the way they do, not because the engineer is stupid or can’t hear, they sound that way to meet the needs of the audience. People are listening on their phone over earbuds in a noisy environment, or over a Bluetooth speaker with very limited dynamics and range. In the best case scenario they’re listening to a soundbar or car stereo. They also generally listen as background while doing something else. They don’t want big dynamic swings that make them turn the volume up and down constantly. The records aren’t mixed to please the tiny number of audiophiles who sit down in front of a big system and listen intently. The engineers are actually doing the right thing to sell a lot of records. Simply insulting them shows a lack of understanding of how the music industry works.
With streaming services, and the plethora of mixes that get released of most songs, it would be very easy to release an Audiophile mix. They could even charge a premium for it. We'd happily pay it.
I'd also tend to agree with you more if there weren't a large number of commercial releases that sound pretty good on a high-end hi-fi system, as well as acceptable on blue tooth, etc. Not audiophile, but close enough. Most engineers just don't care.
@@RacingAnt You missed my point. The engineer's goal is to make the record sound "good" to the millions of people who want to buy that record, when played on the equipment they have. They don't give a damn about the 500 audiophiles who might complain that it sounds "compressed".
@@gotham61 yep, but there are 1000s of records that sound awesome everywhere. Try Michael Jackson - Bad album, hell, even Scream and Shout with Will I Am and Britney Spears sounds pretty impressive. No need for digital clipping, zero bass depth and massive compression. Plus, what's wrong with an Audiophile version?
@@gotham61 also, no need for vocals that don't sound human anymore - tiny voices, zero bandwidth on the vocals. Again, plenty of mainstream albums where the vocals sound realistic.
Do Adele, et al, and their producers approve their final masters prior to publishing? You bet. A lot of the sonic problems that arise are due to the densities in the arrangements and mixes, or hyped high treble pushed into sample rate conversions and lossy codecs, complete with intermodulation distortion. The key aspect is: hi-res music via hardware than can't support high sample rates, or via lossy codecs, or lossy default import settings, lossy streaming services (s*tify) AND bluetooth headphones / earbuds/ speakers, and any playback processing (including digital volume control), and broadcast (most microwave links are lossy), are all *compounding* that lossy quality. Here's another: even Atmos is lossy. ie: never before in history has it required so much care and attention to hear music without it being avoidably further modified. 24 bit native sample rate ought to be more than adequate. Just don't mess up the playback! Bandcamp is another that offers 24 bit downloads with a better return to artists than the other services.
Don't trust streaming for critical listening. Not only can the the source they get be inferior, additionally all manner of trans coding and DSP can be applied before it reaches your DAC.
I've never been impressed with streaming. It just lacks presence to me. Maybe I'll find a better sound quality provider. I wouldn't want to buy any stock with FM. Lots of commercials. I stream mostly around Christmas. There's a group that does Christmas songs imitating The Beatles. Very interesting. I will try some Octave records or cds. Has any artist ever started on an audiophile label and become a big star?
I don't know of any streaming services that provide good sound quality. It is almost impossible to get good sound quality music if you don't go to the store and buy a CD. I've tested spotify free and youtube, which always sound worse than the same music ripped from a CD to flac. we have better and better sound equipment and enough storage space, but the sound quality of music is getting worse and worse.
I think it depends on your broadband service no matter what format you use. Coaxial cable is 19th Century technology requiring slicing/dicing/reassembly in milliseconds. Fiber optic signals do a lot less work to transmit the same data. Anything wireless is a sphincter on data compared to hardwired fiber optic. Microwaves are surrogates but they are not safe in your living space.
Adele happens be my neighbour's favourite artist... at least I hope so 😂 Tbo she sounds pretty good coming out of my sonus Faber speakers (tida)l boosted by an arcam amp... czcams.com/video/e-B3kjyLvwA/video.html
Such a shame and I agree with Paul, 99% of the stuff that comes out soumds horrible, compressed. Likw Bob Dylan said best, its a wall of static noise. Playinf a modern day CD simply gives me headache and just want to turn it off
The problem with PS Audio is that the company appears to focus only on digital audio and ignores anything associated with analogue audio systems. The philosophy of the company is that analogue audio is "old" technology and must be discarded. I find this attitude arrogant and unpleasant. Music reproduction in all its formats should be accepted by the audio industry as part and parcel of disseminating information. Audio is all subjective. Many people do not love music reproduced by computers and gadgetries
Didn't they recently produce a new phono preamp? I recall the engineer (Darren) describing how they threw away the first design and started over because it did not reach their mark in listening tests.
Yeah they butchered that song. So sad. I wish they cared more than just playing it in a car. But I can't blame them. 90 % of people will listen to in from a small bluetooth speaker or a car.
Oooooh somebody is mad because the artists didn't like the results they got from Octave Records and went and had their music professionally masterd somewhere else. Now their music sounds as horrible as Adler's, LOL That's what happens when a record company is only interested in making an artist's music sound good on a certain tyoe of speaker such as the FR 30s
I think the point would be for Adele *not* to bring her producer or mastering engineer. :)
Yeh, they F’d it up in the first place.
Thanks for that explanation. It all makes sense. It is unfortunate that we are such a small crowd that appreciate well recorded music. It is amazing that we can listen to music recorded in the 50s on old Western Electric theater speakers and it sounds so much better than something produced by mainstream production in 2020 and played on consumer grade systems.
Bless you for being one of the small companies that record actual music.
To my ears... say what you want about recording on tape... in the 60s and 70s the major labels actually cared about producing high quality recordings. When I listen to records like Pet Sounds, I realize how far we have drifted as an industry and we all wish this wasn't the case. Props to Paul for keeping the dream alive.
Ita different tho, Tapes were listenable and well recorded. It was the limitation of the format. Same with CD. Butnwith all the compression and limiting and clipping of thensignal it just makes modern musoc unlistenable.yes tapes wrre horrible, wow&flutter and limited high frequency, then again dbx tapes sounded pretty okay @@BennieWilll
Paul, I love Octave records albums. Bought twice from Spain, and have about a dozen titles. Great music, great sound. But also, different music and artists. Thanks for making this happen.
To my surprise, Amazon Music Ultimate does high-res streaming via FLAC. I've done side-by-side comparisons of the same tracks, I honestly prefer it vs Tidal.
Really! 😮
Qobuz over all other streaming services.
“The Oracle”! This nickname has to stick!!!
Preaching the truth despite reprisal from the Finance Dept or others. Always can count on coming here for unvarnished commentary from Paul. Keep it up
Bring in Nora Jones to do a recording, i belive she would love it.
Thank you Paul
What you described is exactly what I heard on Qobuz with Clay Rose's Nightmares, kind of unpleasant. Compressed against the ceiling, ringing guitar solo. A single version of the song Nightmares (reqognizeable by a purple version of the album cover) is also on Qobuz. That is a lot better already. A more relaxed presentation. I just played some Shelby Lynne from the fantastic Album Just a Little Lovin' afterward to check if my filter was on. It wasn't.
One recording artist that always has amazing recordings is Joyce Cooling.I stream and listen to lots of stuff.There are some good recordings,but every time Joyce Cooling comes up it just sounds like "honey"to my ears.Lovely rich dense and non grainy sound.If all recordings were that good I would never watch tv.
Its a real hit or miss, Mark Knopflers 1st set of remasters were horrible, the second later years of remasters sounded much better. Still not great but better.
Love the new outro music!
I listened to the audio clip Nightmares from Gasoline Lollipops on Octave Records and then to the version they use on CZcams. The Octave clip sounds like a live recording of a band playing in a medium sized club with just a clean sound and no effects. The CZcams version sounded like someone got ahold of the knobs and goosed everything up to 9. It sounds like just another overproduced studio recording, made for sounding loud and full at low volume. So if I turn it up to a "room filling" volume, it's way too loud and out of proportion. Like you'd want to grab the sliders and put them back to just a little above flat. Remember variable loudness controls? Yeah.
"Nightmares" is really nice album! Bought SACD version. It comes with accompanying DVD data disc with both PCM and DSD versions of files. Excellent production. Thank you!
Listened to the same album on Spotify. Worse quality, audible distortion in bass.
I was a Tidalholic but I’m okay now. Qobuz is light years ahead and better when comparing the same recordings. Glad it came to Canada. So long MQA!
God I love you for this Paul!!!! Thank you for not being economically driven with producing music and their/productions art!
I use stellar amp and gain cell dac with klipsch forte iv’s .. stream Qobuz with audirvana thanks to you!
Hey Paul, in thinking about your comment on the Adele recording, could you share with us your favorite pop or rock recordings of late/through the years???
Interesting insight that explains what goes on regarding the remixing of the master tapes by artists who "think they know better". I've recently bought a whole stack of Octave SACDs and have been impressed by the quality and diversity of musicianship and musical styles and of course the impressive sound quality. Oh how I wish more artists took as much care and pride in how the music sounds when played on a decent system. I also am impressed that you can sell discs to us folks here in the UK without the exorbitant import taxes that other US companies charge- often making a purchase non viable, don't know how you do it but thanks! I agree with your take on Adele. For me the worst example of an album that should've sounded spectacular is the Bruno Mars/Anderson Park Silksonic Album. It sounds horrendous, as if i't was recorded through an old sock. The recent live Queen & Adam Lambert album sounds like a bootleg recorded from eh public bathroom in the venue. I also abhor the dominant distorted bass that seems ubiquitous in most modern recordings WHY? Playing these discs at any volume is unbearable
Exactly what I thought when I saw that the album cover art on Qobuz didn‘t have the Octave Records logo in the bottom right…
About streaming quality: I have used Qobuz for a long time and love it. Before that I used Tidal and found Qobuz being so much more revealing. I stream it using a LUMIN u2 mini to my Hegel h120 amp and out to my JBL L100
Classic 75 Anniversary speakers. Last week I decided to give Apple Music a chance. I played the exact same HiRes music tracks through first Apple Music and then from Qobuz. OMG!! What a difference. The tracks using Apple Music were muffled and with no soundstage or clarity. With Qobuz everything opened up, filled the room, I could locate every instrument and the soundstage was huge again. What streaming service you use REALLY matters.
Get lady Gaga with just a piano in your studio 🙏
With the Adele albums, the dynamic range sounds way better on the vinyl format by quite a margin, and avoids the clipping distortion present on the CD The CD version sounds like there is clipping distortion in the loudest parts.
100% but then there was a high defect rate on the vinyl as they mass produced it through the nose. They're literally giving surplus vinyl copies away in the UK. But without a doubt it's far better on vinyl
Apple and Amazon also have lossless high-res music, and both have much higher market share than Tidal or Qobuz.
The Oracle has spoken!
cant think why anyone would want to remaster such a great recording... people are strange as one Jim Morisson said ...
London Grammar 1st album sounded great, their 2nd album sounded like $h&T.
Paul, any updates on the release of the Air Lens? May has come and gone.
I run the Wiim Pro feeding by Topping E50 DAC ….and I’m impressed with what’s available.
Amazon HD /Ultra 👍
Take care 👍☕️🍕
Oh boy, maybe better talk about the weather
Hi Paul, wouldn’t it be possible for Octave Records to to publish its music catalog (lossless) on Apple Music? Probably the audio quality is not as good as from de Octave Records CDs, but when I play music from Apple Music in my studio (which is not an audiophile setup) it sounds pretty good. That way, it’s maybe possible to reach a lot more “mere mortals”, letting them enjoy the music and generate some extra cash flow?
It would certainly be possible but that would defeat one of our main missions: to make sure artists get paid for their work. Apple doesn't pay the musicians, so it would be basically giving their music away for free. Though, I get that it would be great! (To be clear, Apople and others do "pay" their musicians but unless you're a big musician like Taylor Swift that means maybe one penny over time).
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio Hello Paul, so maybe Tidal instead? I think they pay a bigger portion and also the MQA plague is soon over there!
@@petersagi275 Thanks, but it's the same thing regardless of the service. To get any kind of revenue back to the musicians one has to have many thousands/millions of listens and that's just not going to happen on a small audiophile label. I have considered instead building an internet radio station with Octave Records....that way people could get a taste of what it's all about without depriving the musicians.
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio I've watched the video where you've talked about your plans on the internet radio for audiophiles and artists. It was a year ago, I guess?
@@dilshodtojiddinzodaocatve radio is live look it up
I'm asking out of curiosity
If you found an unknown artist
With one hell of a back catalogue
Original Master's, Multi-track recording, still got the gear to play it back on, MIDI files, you name it
What would you recommend they do?
Or would your record company be interested?
Hi Paul, I've been watching and very much appreciating your content for some time now. Keep it coming! To the point you made indirectly in your video, this is exactly where (some) musicians and the self-acclaimed audiophiles part ways... If a musician wants his own music to sound a certain way post-recording, that's a message and style he/she also wants to embed in the recording and released contents. An audiophile can't claim "artistic authenticity" simply by reproducing the original recording 100%. In the end that's only an audiophile's opinion and/or taste. We still need to give the musician's free rein on how they want their music to be reproduced and consumed. Ultimately they "own" it ;-).
I totally agree. The artists choosing a producer is like a painter choosing his canvas
You mean appreciating not " depreciating."
@@BartholomewSmutz Thanks
I use Spotify. Honestly, most of my listening is in my vehicle and the difference between Spotify and Tidal is really slim. When you combine road noise with engine and AC noise (and my vehicle is fairly quiet) having a top notch streamer does not make sense (and also burning through a lot more data).
Many years ago , I purchased about 30 Maple shade high quality CDs… the quality of the sound was lights years ahead of red book but… listening was sometimes not great because of the artist music selection..
Interesting...I didn't really have a lot of issues with Adele's 30. Cry Your Heart Out might be the exception.
Just like in life... Stay true to yourself...
Amazon Music melts my mango!
I wish we had quobuz here in Canada. I’d switch off Tidal in a heartbeat
Qobuz is in Canada…check it out
Another one from Norway 👍🏻🙂🎉
AppleMusic can now be high-resolution, if it was uploaded that way.
Amazon and Apple Music both offer lossless streaming. Anything on Tidal listed as “Master” is MQA.
I am surprised Paul doesn’t realize that Tidal uses MQA
We saw this one already
I notice Amazon music streaming of a Kurt Elling album is of less quality than my mp3s on my computer
I`ve yet to hear a stream from my Tidal/Node 2i sound even remotely as good as my CD`s.
Wow. You're quite generous to give them all the unmixed tracks to remix.
You've heard it before because you can't get around it -- "Everything Matters." There is big variation of record company mastering. There is variation between all formats, regardless of resolution -- CD/SACD, LP, streaming. Everything in the signal chain matters for any kind of system, particularly for streaming. How much would you have to spend on a turntable system, set up in your Listening Room that you were happy with the sound quality for the rest of your life? $5k? $10K? $50k? More? Whatever you decide on, you will have to spend half that amount for a comparable sounding streaming system (hi-rez files). Your amp and your speakers have to be up to handling all these differences above.
However, you can set up a great desktop system using your computer, a USB "cleaner" by Sonore, a PSAudio Stellar Gain Cell DAC and Neumann KH120A powered speakers on isoAcoustic stands -- that will amaze you. That's a total of $2900 plus computer. Add a pair of Sennheiser HD-600 for about $400 and Qobuz/Tidal and you will have a "lifetime" desktop system.
My Listening Room system (SACD/CD/Streaming) sounds as good as my desktop, but of course it has better dynamics, imaging, realism. I researched and did trial and error for 10 years and paid just under $28,000. Ten times more than my desktop system, which I think is a reasonable standard to go by. Forget a Turntable system -- too "warm," too pricey, unreliable SQ that degrades and you have to wash. Do you like pops and clicks? Here's a hint that will save you a lot of grief -- buy the best Tannoy speakers you can afford, and don't be afraid to give them a lot of SS watts, or some good tube watts.
My takeaway -- (1) In a decent listening room, you can pay half for a streaming system and it will sound as good as a turntable system. (2) Take one-tenth the amount you just spent on your streaming system and you can have an "equal" sounding desktop system. (3) "Clean" AC power will improve sound quality. (4) A good Subwoofer will improve OVERALL sound quality.
And what about recordings sounding different in different platforms? For example, "Moreno Torroba Sonatina" in Lee Ritenour and Dave Grusin album "Two worlds". To me, Spotify version sound better than Tidal in HIFI quality one even it's loosy. I don't know why this happens, but it's not the only case, same with Diane Schuur's "You don't remember me". I hear "tremolo" in tidal versions. Perhaps I'm wrong or I don't have a good gear, but that¡s what I hear.
One of the things that makes your Q&A session so wonderful is your honesty. Honesty is so simple yet it seems to be far beyond the grasp of most people and business,
I think u ou’re so right when it comes to recording quality. I also was disappointed with the quality of Adele’s records. But there are so many artists and bands, icons such as Coldplay which suffer from ‘poot’ recording quality, I think.
‘poor recording quality’ in my opinion. But if we speak of Mark Knopfler / Dire Straits, we van enjoy great recording qualities.
The same is true for Oasis and U2. Man, how the recording engineers totally screwed up some great music. Tina Turner, and Amy Winehouse as well.
Sounds horrible on Tidal trough my Aurender N20 and Luxman D-10x. Definitely sad that yhey screwed this up. I'm purchasing the sacd
Streaming all depends on where the streaming service got the music from be it an album or song.
Example, one album may have five different versions released from one or more music labels. The recording’s are not necessarily the same with all 5 album versions.
Get use to it, it’s the way it is with streaming music services. You are free to start your own music streaming service the way you want.
That’s what I found also.
Exactly
@@ZeusTheTornado
Streaming services don’t have out of print songs or albums either. You have to buy those used on the Internet.
Some music stores may have some in stock but that is very rare. There was a out of print CD out of print that was deleted. A music store in Vegas named the Great Wall, of Anita Mui CD, only had 5 CD’s in stock. They sold out quickly. Maybe some day someone will upload it on CZcams..👍 I check from time to time. 👍
So the answer to his question is buy your stuff?
What’s with the red outlet? Thanks 😊
It should maintain power in the event of a grid outage, either generator or UPS.
@@G3rain1 thanks, I was thinking either backup power or 240v 😅
@@G3rain1 why ups?....what about fedex
my friend, Jim Adkins (RIP) and i used to want to break the engineer's hands most of the time. lol
There is absolutely ZERO reason why streaming can not match or even exceed any other digital media source. With streaming you can easily beat the data bandwidth data integrity you can get from CD or SACD media, for example. This doesn't mean streaming service providers won't mess up their stream quality, but that's not about technical limitations. Personally I use Amazon Music HD which can stream flawlessly in lossless 192kHz 24 bits. Anything higher than that doesn't actually make much sene.
Adele music for the masses, get Lada Gaga in for some recordings
How the material is mastered is the real kicker. A lot of modern material has been butchered with compression, for example. Spotify 320 cbr Ogg (I believe they use) is transparent, nobody's going to hear a difference between that and the original lossless. But the source of the recording, the craft used to make the recording and so on has massive effects on the end result. It's an absolute cultural tragedy to me that for 50 years now most recordings have been annihilated with compression. Not classical, or some things classical-adjacent; with classical I think the struggle is more the opposite, it's hard to keep the dynamic range down enough. But for more mainstream music, pop, rock... wild compression, and often godawful sound quality. Just depressing to even think about.
MQA has solved that problem you're writing about.
@@dilshodtojiddinzoda One, no it hasn't because when you nuke the dynamic range, it's gone, and cannot be restored, and two, MQA is pure snake oil that does nothing but harm the material, which is why they're going out of business.
Why can’t audiophiles seem to get that modern recordings sound the way they do, not because the engineer is stupid or can’t hear, they sound that way to meet the needs of the audience. People are listening on their phone over earbuds in a noisy environment, or over a Bluetooth speaker with very limited dynamics and range. In the best case scenario they’re listening to a soundbar or car stereo. They also generally listen as background while doing something else. They don’t want big dynamic swings that make them turn the volume up and down constantly. The records aren’t mixed to please the tiny number of audiophiles who sit down in front of a big system and listen intently. The engineers are actually doing the right thing to sell a lot of records. Simply insulting them shows a lack of understanding of how the music industry works.
With streaming services, and the plethora of mixes that get released of most songs, it would be very easy to release an Audiophile mix. They could even charge a premium for it. We'd happily pay it.
I'd also tend to agree with you more if there weren't a large number of commercial releases that sound pretty good on a high-end hi-fi system, as well as acceptable on blue tooth, etc. Not audiophile, but close enough. Most engineers just don't care.
@@RacingAnt You missed my point. The engineer's goal is to make the record sound "good" to the millions of people who want to buy that record, when played on the equipment they have. They don't give a damn about the 500 audiophiles who might complain that it sounds "compressed".
@@gotham61 yep, but there are 1000s of records that sound awesome everywhere. Try Michael Jackson - Bad album, hell, even Scream and Shout with Will I Am and Britney Spears sounds pretty impressive. No need for digital clipping, zero bass depth and massive compression. Plus, what's wrong with an Audiophile version?
@@gotham61 also, no need for vocals that don't sound human anymore - tiny voices, zero bandwidth on the vocals. Again, plenty of mainstream albums where the vocals sound realistic.
Do Adele, et al, and their producers approve their final masters prior to publishing? You bet.
A lot of the sonic problems that arise are due to the densities in the arrangements and mixes, or hyped high treble pushed into sample rate conversions and lossy codecs, complete with intermodulation distortion.
The key aspect is: hi-res music via hardware than can't support high sample rates, or via lossy codecs, or lossy default import settings, lossy streaming services (s*tify) AND bluetooth headphones / earbuds/ speakers, and any playback processing (including digital volume control), and broadcast (most microwave links are lossy), are all *compounding* that lossy quality. Here's another: even Atmos is lossy.
ie: never before in history has it required so much care and attention to hear music without it being avoidably further modified. 24 bit native sample rate ought to be more than adequate. Just don't mess up the playback!
Bandcamp is another that offers 24 bit downloads with a better return to artists than the other services.
In time all recordings will be 192khz dsd. But will Jo public care on his Bluetooth speaker not really.Thats what your battling here
Don't trust streaming for critical listening. Not only can the the source they get be inferior, additionally all manner of trans coding and DSP can be applied before it reaches your DAC.
How about downloaded Hi-Res files from streaming?
@@dilshodtojiddinzoda All my critical listening is done via verified downloaded music.😏
I vote for Adele to go to Octave!
I've never been impressed with streaming. It just lacks presence to me. Maybe I'll find a better sound quality provider. I wouldn't want to buy any stock with FM. Lots of commercials. I stream mostly around Christmas. There's a group that does Christmas songs imitating The Beatles. Very interesting. I will try some Octave records or cds. Has any artist ever started on an audiophile label and become a big star?
So-called "remix version" usually sucks, some even push the headroom to clipping.
I don't know of any streaming services that provide good sound quality.
It is almost impossible to get good sound quality music if you don't go to the store and buy a CD.
I've tested spotify free and youtube, which always sound worse than the same music ripped from a CD to flac.
we have better and better sound equipment and enough storage space, but the sound quality of music is getting worse and worse.
192khz is a waste.
Amazon Music HD is lossless streaming
I think it depends on your broadband service no matter what format you use. Coaxial cable is 19th Century technology requiring slicing/dicing/reassembly in milliseconds. Fiber optic signals do a lot less work to transmit the same data. Anything wireless is a sphincter on data compared to hardwired fiber optic. Microwaves are surrogates but they are not safe in your living space.
You're shown this video before about a week ago must be going senile Paul 😆
I wouldn't worry about remastering or artist because it's all AI now
That's an ouch, make a great sounding recording and some meatheads muck it up !
Adele happens be my neighbour's favourite artist...
at least I hope so 😂
Tbo she sounds pretty good coming out of my sonus Faber speakers (tida)l boosted by an arcam amp...
czcams.com/video/e-B3kjyLvwA/video.html
Such a shame and I agree with Paul, 99% of the stuff that comes out soumds horrible, compressed. Likw Bob Dylan said best, its a wall of static noise. Playinf a modern day CD simply gives me headache and just want to turn it off
Why spoil something that you’ve gone to so much effort to record exactly as you would hear it live?… I don’t get it… Scratching my head.
Like he said, they want it louder and with more bass.
That’s commercialism for you.
Who is actually listening to radio nowadays?
Why remaster a track for such an inferior medium?
Itunes lossless is perfectly suitable. Anyone saying it isn’t is talking bull excrement
The problem with PS Audio is that the company appears to focus only on digital audio and ignores anything associated with analogue audio systems. The philosophy of the company is that analogue audio is "old" technology and must be discarded. I find this attitude arrogant and unpleasant. Music reproduction in all its formats should be accepted by the audio industry as part and parcel of disseminating information. Audio is all subjective. Many people do not love music reproduced by computers and gadgetries
Didn't they recently produce a new phono preamp? I recall the engineer (Darren) describing how they threw away the first design and started over because it did not reach their mark in listening tests.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w News to me
@@user-od9iz9cv1w Darren is gone. No longer at PS Audio.
@@ryanschipp8513 PS Audio loss is someone else's gain. He seemed like a really good guy. Talented and passionate about audio.
Great comment on Adele. Awful productions.
Wow , how disappointing it is to take great mastering and then go and botch it . SHAME SHAME SHAME 😠
Yeah they butchered that song. So sad. I wish they cared more than just playing it in a car. But I can't blame them. 90 % of people will listen to in from a small bluetooth speaker or a car.
Oooooh somebody is mad because the artists didn't like the results they got from Octave Records and went and had their music professionally masterd somewhere else.
Now their music sounds as horrible as Adler's, LOL
That's what happens when a record company is only interested in making an artist's music sound good on a certain tyoe of speaker such as the FR 30s
I don't think it has anything to do with the FR30. It is sound good on audiophile system vs in the car or on ear buds in a noisy gym.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w The OP (Jon Anderhub) is a troll who spends his time trying to sound superior to audiophiles.