1. Home
  2. digital
  3. 168295-163583

CD Quality Versus Streaming Quality

I realize this will be a contentious subject, and far be it from me to challenge any of the many expert opinions on this forum, but if I may offer my feedback vis-a-vis what I am hearing, and gain some knowledge in the process.

i will begin saying that my digital front end setup is not state of the art, but i have had the good fortune to listen to a number of really high-end systems. I guess the number one deficit in my digital front end is a streamer server, and no question about it that will improve the sound.

My CD player is a universal player; Pioneer BDP-09fd. It uses Wolfson DACs. It has been modified to a degree. I have bought and sold other players, but kept this one, because it has a beautiful sound that serves the music well.

Recently, i ventured over to my son’s place and we hooked up my player (he doesn’t have one and rely’s on streaming only) We compared tracks / albums of CD quality and master quality streamed on Tidal with ‘redbook’ CDs I have. For example, some Lee Ritenaur CDs and some Indian classical and the wonderful Mozart and Chopin.
His system is highly resolving.

we were both very surprised to find the CDs played on the player to be the better sound. And not just by a little. The sound was clearly superior, with higher resolution and definition, spatial ques, much better and clearer imaging. Very surprising indeed. Shouldn’t there be no difference? This would suggest the streaming service is throttling the bandwidth or compressing the signal?

i am most interested to hear others’ observations, and suggestions as to why this might be? I do love the convenience aspect of streaming, but it IS expensive for a chap like me of fairly modest means. The Tidal HiFi topline service is $30 per month I believe, something the good lady is not too thrilled about. God forbid I should suggest Roon on top of that I may likely get my walking papers. I jest, but only partially LoL. My point is, if I pay this sort of money, isn’t it fair to expect sound to equal the digital stream from the CD player and silver disc?
Thoughts?

AK





4afsanakhan
riaa_award_collectors_on_facebook's avatar
riaa_award_collectors_on_facebook
1,020 posts
 

OP,

If you think an OPPO 205 has a good dac (I have one) your mind would be blown by a Really good dac (Esoteric/MSB/Luxman/DCS/Mola Mola). An Oppo should only be used as a Transport.


Markmoskow,

For Pretzel Logic you need to get the Japan SHM SACD in the little White Box OR the Japan MQA CD if you have the capability to play that. If you aint got the coin to spend on those the Best USA made CD is the Original MCA pressing which has the PLAID Design on the back of the case. Those early MCA pressings from the 80’s destroy anything your ever gonna get on Tidal/Qobuz....the Japan ones are a step above but your gonna pay for them.

markmoskow
63 posts
 
Riaa, just to follow-up on source quality, for a moment so as not to hijack thread, for decades like most people I just accepted LP and CD differences, sometimes one better than the other. But it took hearing various pressings of the same LP to understand how much better one could be than another. So I realized that was the case with CDs. Oh well, I already had  mass quantities of each and wasn't going to obsess over replacing or analyzing each. good enough would have to be good enough. same with systems. But back to George's point, and others', there is now the business opp for someone to go root out the various DR ranges among versions, and offer that to us. I'd pay a serious premium for uncompressed, or less mixes that exist, if they do anywhere anymore. That might justify me buying better gear. Meanwhile this probably answers my wonderment that about 50 jazz albums played to a high-end DAT 20 or more years ago (I work in film/tv so long ago we had very expensive A-D converters, for the time) sound fantastic to me. I either have to replace CDs as you suggest, search databases, or forgot i ever joined this thread, and chalk up to an anxiety dream. Thanks.
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 


George's point, and others', there is now the business opp for someone to go root out the various DR ranges among versions, and offer that to us. I'd pay a serious premium for uncompressed, or less mixes that exist


Our hi-end needs more statements like this if it is to survive, otherwise we'll all end up downgrading to compressed streaming, listening on low/midfi systems, (because it suits this compressed stuff better), along with sadly the majority that don't give a **** about listening to compression. 

Make this site https://dr.loudness-war.info/ massively popular by visiting it at every opportunity posting results of what you find here, like I have been doing https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/what-s-in-your-cdp-tonight-the-minority-report  
And getting the best issue/version of what you want, and tell others about it.

Cheers George
sd40
40 posts
 
I already had mass quantities of each and wasn't going to obsess over replacing or analyzing each. good enough would have to be good enough. same with systems...

I either have to replace CDs as you suggest, search databases, or forgot i ever joined this thread, and chalk up to an anxiety dream.

I became motivated to tackle the project of overhauling my CD collection when I realized that I wasn't listening to a lot of it anymore.  As I dived into it, I realized that this was due to fatigue caused by overly-compressed releases. 

A good example: I bought all the 1994 Genesis remasters but never warmed to them because they had been dumbed-down with too much compression.  I eventually replaced them all with mid-1980s releases.  Genesis has shown bad judgment with their remasters--chasing modern consumer expectations, perhaps, but sucking the dynamic range out of their music.
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 


And there it is, I wish more would discover what you found about later releases being compressed and just sounding "loud" as there are no quite parts anymore.

Cheers George 
More to discover