Sound Quality of red book CDs vs.streaming


I’ve found that the SQ of my red book CDs exceeds that of streaming using the identical recordings for comparison. (I’m not including hi res technology here.)
I would like to stop buying CDs, save money, and just stream, but I really find I enjoy the CDs more because of the better overall sonic performance.
 I stream with Chromecast Audio using  the same DAC (Schiit Gumby) as I play CDs through.
I’m wondering if others have had the same experience
128x128rvpiano
fleschler:  I might have stated it wrong.  What I meant is that most classical and jazz recordings are not highly compressed.  I did not mean that highly compressed jazz and classical recordings are in any way preferable when listening through a resolving system.

Compression is always used in any kind of close miking situation (there are some very rare exceptions using discreet two-mic recording techniques, but that doesn't necessarily make the recordings better, just that the emphasis is on different sounds such as ambience, natural room reflections etc.).  Without judicial compression mixing close-miked signals, mastering would be practically impossible and the result would be a sonic mess.

Compression is also a good thing when listening to music casually.  If you are not sitting in your listening chair and concentrating on the music, compression can help even out the sound dynamics and create a less tedious listening experience.  Fortunately for those of us who sit glued into listening positions, the compression is usually light when applied to classical, jazz and "less mass-consumer oriented" music.  Pop music is usually heavily compressed, but the consumer is generally listening while moving around the room or as background music, through a low resolution system or cheap earbuds or headphones, or in their car.

It is delightful, sometimes, to hear the old classic rock albums that have been re-mastered with less compression.  I've already pointed out the example of recently released Grateful Dead recordings (some of those older CDs sound muffled in comparison).  It is worth looking into some of these newer releases, but be aware they may not sound just like you remembered.  The Jimmy Page authorized (he was involved in the re-mastering) Led Zeppelin releases almost sound like new music!

A lot of recordings from the '50s and '60s have very little compression.  They were designed for the new high-end stereos that were coming out. We consumed music differently back then;  the fidelity of most radios and cheap record players was so low that compression levels didn't matter.
Compression is also a good thing when listening to music casually.
Yes this is so true, the only times are when:
1: dinner parties
2: background music
3: in lifts
4: when your on the phone
5: not to blow up ear buds or your ears
6: and to stop the wife from saying turn it down during crescendo’s
7: also in the car so the road noise doesn’t mask the low level parts.

Think of it this way, what sounds in real natural life are compressed? NONE!
So why do it to our music when we want to listen to it seriously in all it’s dynamic wonder???

Cheers George
My LPs, 78s and CDs are permanent items as long as there are adequate playback devices for them.  I can access them only limited by electrical power, not by internet frailties.
@fleschler 
Any particular new GD release you can recommend (not a die hard fan yet - like their acoustics most).

Georgehifi:  the thing is we want to listen to recordings that are not compressed.  The other 99% of music consumers benefit from some amount of compression, for all the reasons you listed and more.  The big record companies know where their bread is buttered.  That's why I appreciate the serious efforts of all the small independent companies that bother with releasing remastered material for us hifi nuts.  And it makes it worthwhile digging up vintage recordings at thrift stores and vinyl shops.