Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    The Future Of HiFi

    thumb.png

    I've been thinking quite a bit, over the last few months, about the future of high quality audio playback. In fact, I'm obsessed with this topic. I was born a music loving audiophile and I worked in enterprise information technology for a decade before starting CA. My passions for both music and technology are converging quickly to provide a better high quality experience. There has never been a better time to be a music aficionado who loves great sound quality and technology. I absolutely love the possibilities and can't wait for some of them to come to fruition. We are no longer limited by technology. The only limiting factor is our imaginations. If we can think it, we can do it.

     

    In the not to distant future we will be streaming lossless audio, in all relevant sample rates, directly to our main audio components from a Cloud music service provider such as WiMP or Qobuz. Music, playlists, ratings, and favorites will all be stored in the Cloud. Listeners will control playback with iOS and Android apps provided by their streaming service providers. Similar to a UPnP / DLNA control point, the apps will serve as a remote control and library curation and browsing tool. In the same fashion as Google's Cast functionality, no audio will be routed through the iOS or Android device. Music will stream directly to an audio component such as a music server, digital to digital interface converter, or digital to analog converter from the Cloud. Content not available from the streaming service providers can be uploaded, purchased elsewhere, and made available for streaming with simple in app authentication, or located on one's local network attached storage device. There are a couple products capable of very similar functionality right now, namely Sonos, Spotify Connect, and the Auralic Aries / Lightning platform, but there are major differences between where we are now and where we are headed. Only lossless CD quality streaming audio will be available in the short term. During this time, high resolution content will still be purchased through traditional outlets such as HDtracks, Acoustic Sounds, and the PonoMusic store.[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

    Past = Purchase | Present = Purchase / Subscription Hybrid | Future = Subscription

     

    Where We Are Now

     

    There's no need to discuss the traditional music purchasing model where consumers purchase a vinyl album or Compact Disc or download. That's the past. We all lived through it and understand the concept. I feel the same way about meteorologists discussing the weather on the 10/11 p.m. news. There's no need to cover the current day's weather. We all experienced it firsthand.

     

    Currently most computer audiophiles store their lossless music on a turnkey server such as an Aurender or Meridian Sooloos, or on internal hard drives, external USB / FireWire / Thunderbolt hard drives, and NAS devices. Audio is either sent over USB or Ethernet to a digital to analog converter (DAC) and on to the rest of the system. Music is purchased on physical disc and ripped or music is purchased and downloaded. Music playback and library curation is done with either a keyboard, mouse, and monitor combination or through an iOS / Android device. Some users rely on subscription services like Spotify or Beats to stream lossy 320 kbps music to iOS or Android devices for music discovery and convenience. This is a hybrid purchase / subscription model where the purchased music is lossless and the subscription music is lossy.

     

     

     

    Where We Are Going

     

    One thing that holds true for the future of HiFi playback is the number of options will continue to grow. There is no single solution to satisfy everyone all the time. My view of where we are going with the future of HiFi is based on a combination of my own research and my own wants / needs. The major changes coming to HiFi are all related to the declining lossless purchasing model in favor of a growing lossless subscription model. As subscription based listening expands, the need for local music storage contracts. In addition, when music storage is in the Cloud (subscription model) the apps used to control playback and curation of one's library may be provided by the Cloud music subscription service provider. Thus, where we store music and how we select music for playback will be dependent on a purchase or subscription model of music consumption.

     

    With the aforementioned ideas in mind, here is the future of high quality music playback.

     

    1. Music is obtained through the subscription model.
    2. All music is stored in the Cloud.

      1. This includes the user's music that's unavailable directly through a subscription service such as little Jonny's piano recital recorded with an iPhone from row thirty-five in the school gymnasium.
      2. Until all content can be stored in the Cloud a hybrid approach will be required. This will enable users to stream from the Cloud and a local NAS or USB drive.
      3.  

        [*]All music is lossless CD quality or better.

        [*]Most custom HiFi apps are out, subscription service provider apps are in.

        1. Browsing one's library, selection of tracks for playback, and curating one's library is done through the music subscription service provider's iOS / Android app.
        2. HiFi companies can't keep up with the quality of subscription service provider's apps. WiMP has editorial teams in each country to deliver appropriate content via its app to end users. For example, one feature found in WiMP's Android app enables users to browse through its catalog and press & hold a track for additional information. This information includes metadata such as Composer, Lyricist, Producer, Mix Engineer, and Mastering Engineer, among others. The next version of WiMP's Android application will include an extension of this feature and enable users to select an item such as the Mastering Engineer's name. Once selected, all music in the WiMP catalog mastered by the Engineer will appear in the app. This functionality isn't too complex for HiFi companies to include within their own applications, but it's just a single example of a subscription service provider's constant improvement to stay ahead of the competition. Plus, WiMP is but one of the many companies offering streaming subscriptions to the HiFi market. Traditional HiFi companies can't keep updating their apps for every service provider's platform, let alone write the initial app for all the APIs (application programming interface). Every company has limited skill sets and resources. Most HiFi companies are better off sticking to HiFi components rather than iOS / Android design.

         

        [*]All music is sent directly from the Cloud to a HiFi component without traversing through the remote control iOS or Android device.

        1. AirPlay is dead. Streaming through one's iPhone eats up too much battery and depends on the state of the iPhone to continue playback.
        2. Using Google's Cast type functionality enables the remote control to be in any state, including turned off, and the music remains playing as instructed previously by the user.
        3. A small Raspberry Pi or similar device can be used to connect the Cloud with HiFi components.

         

        [*]The only computers involved will be the remote control running Apple's iOS or Google's Android operating systems and the audio component receiving the streaming content (likely running Linux).

        No solution exists today that addresses all of the aforementioned items. However, some of the items are available in limited form in a limited number of countries right now. The key to all of this is integration with HiFi companies and components. In the portable listening environment one can already stream and download lossless CD quality music to an iPhone or Android device. This is due to the simplicity of the environment. The music is, for all intents and purposes, meant to stay on the portable device. Integration with HiFi components is much trickier, but it's the key to lossless streaming adoption. Currently I can stream lossless CD quality with a computer running WiMP connected via USB to my main audio system or through a Sonos Connect wired to my main system. The problem with these partial solutions is that they have major weaknesses. I don't want a keyboard, mouse and monitor to play music because there's no remote for controlling the OS X WiMP app and there never will be such a remote, it doesn't make sense. Sonos can stream lossless music from WiMP but the Sonos iOS app isn't nearly as good as the native WiMP application. The hybrid solution that will take us to the next level will combine the local music library access of the Sonos app with the advanced features of the native WiMP app and Google Cast type functionality to stream music directly to the HiFi system. To a certain extent this would be like a Meridian Sooloos, which has had the most advanced metadata and navigation in the HiFi industry for many years, with music stored in the Cloud.

         

        Bridging the gap between the present and the future are products like the Auralic Aries. The term bridging the gap commonly refers to a temporary solution. However, the Aries will likely be the end game for many HiFi enthusiasts. The Aries and its Lightning iOS app enables access to a local UPnP / DLNA server content and the ability to browse & search Cloud content from WiMP and Qobuz. This concept is the reverse of my dream scenario of using the WiMP app with local access because the Lightning app focusses on local content with a Cloud content add-on. Even though the Lightning concept is reverse of my preference, this doesn't mean the app has problems. It's still terrific. Missing in the Lightning app are advanced metadata features for Cloud music, geo-targeted editorial content from WiMP, and a few other very minor items. The Sonos WiMP integration, as mentioned above, has more friction than I like. Meaning, it isn't a smooth experience because Sonos wants its users to create "Sonos Favorites & Playlists" and "Sonos Everything" rather than just creating favorites within WiMP that are available in any WiMP interface. Sonos must function the way it does due to its integration model and the fact it seeks to be the single interface for music playback. Enabling Sonos Playlists allows users to integrate WiMP content and local content into a single playlist. It's a really cool feature, but not a feature I use frequently. I much prefer my playlists be available everywhere through the WiMP app as that's my end game playback concept.

         

        Spotify Connect is the closest thing to my ideal concept in that it enables users to use the Spotify iOS app and send audio directly from the Cloud to an audio device without routing through the iOS device. Spotify playlists are all stored in the Cloud and available on all devices capable of Spotify playback. Some HiFi components like BlueSound are Spotify Connect enabled. However, the big show stopper is that Spotify is lossy. Spotify doesn't offer CD quality lossless streaming or downloads. Without the same, or better, quality as my local collection or WiMP, I'm not willing to use Spotify for this very convenient feature.

         

        iTunes users are likely interested in how AirPlay competes in this future of HiFi playback. In AirPlay's current state it just can’t compete. Routing music through a mobile device for playback on a HiFi system doesn't make sense, unless it's for casual group playback with friends. AirPlay diminishes battery life, requires the iOS device to be on or in a certain state, requires open source "hacked" software or Apple certification, and is as closed as any platform available today. AirPlay is dead without a serious overhaul.

         

         

         

        Conclusion

         

         

        We've been through the worst of times with the transition of mainstream playback from lossless CD quality to lossy MP3 quality. It's finally time to bring back lossless CD quality and move studio master quality from the class market to the mass market. Technology is no longer a barrier to great HiFi playback. Access to more music than Joe Sixpack could ever store at home, all in CD quality or better, is a HiFI and music aficionado's dream. Much of this dream is either a reality now or will soon be a reality for many listeners around the world. Services such as WiMP and Qobuz are strongly rumored to be coming to America and other countries this fall (2014). A few years ago listeners switching from physical Compact Discs to file based playback were overjoyed with access to their complete music collections at their fingertips. In a few months these listeners should be blown away with access to over 20 million lossless tracks for the price of purchasing a couple albums. Soon the traditional HiFi manufacturers and audio engineers can get back to what they do best, design the best performing audio gear in the world, rather than attempt to enter the realm of Apple and mobile app designers. Everyone has a speciality. Letting software developers employed by companies like WiMP lead the application charge while HiFi legends stick to bringing us better sound quality will spring our wonderful hobby into the future sooner rather than later. There has never been a more exciting time to love great music and great sound quality.

         

         

         

         

         

         

        Links

         

        WiMP

        Qobuz

        Sonos

        Spotify

        Aurender

        Meridian Sooloos

        Auralic

        HDtracks

        Acoustic Sounds

        PonoMusic

        Beats

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

        1-Pixel.png

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

        1-Pixel.png




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    LOL! Just like disk space, any communications channel tends to fill up to it's maximum capacity. :)

     

    We need a lot more bandwidth and a lot more efficient way to use that bandwidth before most of the issues go away here. In the US, a very large percentage of people cannot get reasonably priced high speed service, unless you could 786K DSL as "high speed." And where one can, it is often expensive. Gigabit service is available only to a minute fraction of the population, unless one wishes to pay ruinous rates. ($60,000/month anyone?)

     

    What we need are technologies that take effective use of older speeds - 2-6mbs downloads and < 1mbs uploads. Very high speed 1000:1 compression fits the bill for that. And as traffic grows, the available (virtual) bandwidth is much better utilized and distributed. ;)

     

    Just my two cents. This is a field I struggle with constantly. :)

     

     

    Technology is fine.

    Just move to a tech hub in the US and you can have it as well.

     

    I am on a 4G router, and I just tested my bandwidth:

     

    28024 kbit/s down

    12733 kbit/s up

    Ping 27 ms

     

    That means that I can stream:

     

    25 / 192 in 5.1 surround without breaking a sweat.

     

    My iPhone will easily stream 24/192 as it clocked 18/10 right here in my living room.

     

     

    I do propose wired service for streaming ;-)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    One interesting theme in the comments is just how far behind the US is in its Internet infrastructure. The decision to allow Internet provider monopolies by geography will continue to haunt us.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    One interesting theme in the comments is just how far behind the US is in its Internet infrastructure. The decision to allow Internet provider monopolies by geography will continue to haunt us.

    Big time.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris, spin the black circle.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Caps are in place because ISP's sell internet with the assumption that not everyone will max out the allocated bandwidth all the time. The network infrastructure they use only has so much bandwidth which must be shared around, and to be honest if the server is overseas there is even more of a potential bottleneck. Until we all have super-internet (as well as better distribution) this kind of streaming will remain sci-fi.

     

    Saying this (once the limitations of internet bandwidth are taken out of the equation) there is nothing wrong with streaming in principle as even with downloads the music has to come off the internet and somehow into your hi-fi.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Caps are in place because ISP's sell internet with the assumption that not everyone will max out the allocated bandwidth all the time. The network infrastructure they use only has so much bandwidth which must be shared around, and to be honest if the server is overseas there is even more of a potential bottleneck. Until we all have super-internet (as well as better distribution) this kind of streaming will remain sci-fi.

     

    Saying this (once the limitations of internet bandwidth are taken out of the equation) there is nothing wrong with streaming in principle as even with downloads the music has to come off the internet and somehow into your hi-fi.

     

    Well, yes, and no. There is far more available bandwidth available than is being utilized. Think dark fibre. At lest in part, caps are being used as a way to squeeze more money out of the consumer, protect the antiquated but very profitable cable tv subscriptions, and of course, as a negotiating tool.

     

    We cut the cable years ago, and regularly run into data caps now from our ISP on the consumer side. It is a real bit of a problem.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    One interesting theme in the comments is just how far behind the US is in its Internet infrastructure. The decision to allow Internet provider monopolies by geography will continue to haunt us.

     

    As well as other countries where coverage is spotty at best. I live in a semi-rural area in the UK, and I can get a 2 Mbps DSL connection. That's pretty much the norm in this country, and even people in cities - outside of the center - often get such speeds.

     

    Kirk

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris,

     

    Interesting article as always. I've commented on several of your points here:

     

    Kirkville | Is This the Future of Hi-Fi?

     

    Best,

     

    Kirk

    Hi Kirk - Thanks for pointing out some items you disagree with in this article. Perhaps I could have clarified the following point better.

     

    "But Chris is wrong when he suggests:"

    All music is sent directly from the Cloud to a HiFi component without traversing through the remote control iOS or Android device.

    "Oh, my, this is the last thing we need. In fact, if this were the case, it would kill music streaming."

     

     

    What I tried to explain in the article is that HiFi companies are bad software and interface designers. Thus, using apps from WiMP, Qobuz, and Spotify enable HiFi manufacturers to stay out of the app business. The iOS app sees the HiFi device just like an AirPlay device, but once selected the audio flows between the Cloud and the HiFi device. The iOS apps are the current apps in use by Spotify (lossy), WiMP, Qobuz, Beats (lossy), etc...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Good column Chris, Streaming Music to me equals "radio". I use Pandora One ($4.99 a month) and Spotify ($10.00 a month) at home if it will stay up, I also have Sirius xm radio which I pay $75.00 a year. With Siriusxm I get dedicated channels of Jazz, Classical, Blues, Classic Rock, Bluegrass and the content is there for my music taste and it works both in my home and my car not to mention realtime coverages of sporting events like soccer, football, racing, golf and I don't have to worry about sorry internet service with dropped connections, slow response from Pandora or Spotify or using up my data in my "plan".

     

    To me, Streaming is the future if the cost are comparable to other services and if the US internet providers can fix their sorry networks and if the content and my chosen artist are there to support my music taste and if these streaming companies add unlimited skip per hour.

     

    But I still at my old age love to hold that jacket and set back and listen to LP's/CD, but I also like to get in my car and drive or walk down to the beach and set and listen to music which means I like to be in control and that means I can chose downloads vs Streaming . To me it's all about the music, any way I can get it.

     

    Regarding CAPS, what I find interesting is in the US many of the cable companies in the next 5 years are going to CAP data. ""Comcast executive VP David Cohen revealed the cable and Internet service provider would start capping data usage within the next five years ""http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/05/comcast_cap_data_usage_limit_time_warner_cable.html

     

    And even with DISH Network's best satellite Internet plan, you still only get 15 GB of data that you can use at any time for anything and their Off-peak Bonus Data may only be used between 2 am and 8 am. So until all of these possible providers of data build out their networks and if streaming does take off, I see slow and packed networks that will limit users of all services.

     

    I see streaming related to that faucet on your sink, you can only get so much water out of that faucet unless to add a larger faucet and adding a larger faucet is going to cost someone.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    [/i]What I tried to explain in the article is that HiFi companies are bad software and interface designers. Thus, using apps from WiMP, Qobuz, and Spotify enable HiFi manufacturers to stay out of the app business. The iOS app sees the HiFi device just like an AirPlay device, but once selected the audio flows between the Cloud and the HiFi device. The iOS apps are the current apps in use by Spotify (lossy), WiMP, Qobuz, Beats (lossy), etc...[/font][/color]

     

    So how is the music streaming then? Are you advocating Bluetooth? I don't think that has the bandwidth for what you want (high-res).

     

    Or are you suggesting that these apps actually act as remotes for the hi-fi devices? If so, they still need the actual apps on the device, and there still needs to be a standardized platform, and, if you take "smart" TVs as an example, it's pretty clear that will never happen.

     

    Kirk

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So how is the music streaming then? Are you advocating Bluetooth? I don't think that has the bandwidth for what you want (high-res).

     

    Or are you suggesting that these apps actually act as remotes for the hi-fi devices? If so, they still need the actual apps on the device, and there still needs to be a standardized platform, and, if you take "smart" TVs as an example, it's pretty clear that will never happen.

     

    Kirk

    Not advocating bluetooth.

     

    Not advocating smart TV style software.

     

    Think of it as an AirPort Express type of HiFi product that talks directly with streaming services. No user interface is available on the HiFi product. The WiMP app is only a control much like the Television remote control.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Good column Chris, Streaming Music to me equals "radio". I use Pandora One ($4.99 a month) and Spotify ($10.00 a month) at home if it will stay up, I also have Sirius xm radio which I pay $75.00 a year. With Siriusxm I get dedicated channels of Jazz, Classical, Blues, Classic Rock, Bluegrass and the content is there for my music taste and it works both in my home and my car not to mention realtime coverages of sporting events like soccer, football, racing, golf and I don't have to worry about sorry internet service with dropped connections, slow response from Pandora or Spotify or using up my data in my "plan".

     

    To me, Streaming is the future if the cost are comparable to other services and if the US internet providers can fix their sorry networks and if the content and my chosen artist are there to support my music taste and if these streaming companies add unlimited skip per hour.

     

    Skips are only an issue with radio-like services, such as Pandora and iTunes Radio; on-demand services, like Spotify, don't have skip limits.

     

    It's too bad Sirius XM isn't available outside the US, as they do have a lot of interesting channels; I'd pay for them, in part because you don't, as you say, have to worry about data. However, you can only listen on more expensive radios.

     

    Kirk

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Not advocating bluetooth.

     

    Not advocating smart TV style software.

     

    Think of it as an AirPort Express type of HiFi product that talks directly with streaming services. No user interface is available on the HiFi product. The WiMP app is only a control much like the Television remote control.

     

    I see. So an Apple TV, with channels, that connects to an amp or receiver.

     

    The Apple TV doesn't use AirPlay, except when you stream from a device through it; it can connect directly via WiFi or Ethernet. I think that's a more serious contender, if and when Apple opens the platform. Also, it gives you the option of using the TV as the interface, which is a good thing; you can see a lot more information there than you can on a smartphone.

     

    Kirk

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm somewhere in the middle on this. I think the general direction is as Chris sees it. I'm older than many of you but streaming Redbook or higher quality appeals to me - if it ever becomes available. However, I'd see it as a supplement to music downloads that I buy.

     

    Music I especially like I prefer to own and have a local copy so that it is always available. In the past couple of years I've bought about an album a week - mostly hi-res downloads. I only buy discs these days when they are the only legal alternative. I prefer saving the space, and disc packaging doesn't do much for me anyway.... The only thing I miss about LPs (I own a few hundred but don't play them) are the covers. They are nice to hold and read while listening, unlike disc packaging/booklets.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm somewhere in the middle on this. I think the general direction is as Chris sees it. I'm older than many of you but streaming Redbook or higher quality appeals to me - if it ever becomes available. However, I'd see it as a supplement to music downloads that I buy.

     

    Music I especially like I prefer to own and have a local copy so that it is always available. In the past couple of years I've bought about an album a week - mostly hi-res downloads. I only buy discs these days when they are the only legal alternative. I prefer saving the space, and disc packaging doesn't do much for me anyway.... The only thing I miss about LPs (I own a few hundred but don't play them) are the covers. They are nice to hold and read while listening, unlike disc packaging/booklets.

     

    About the same here - I tend to purchase 2-3 albums / week, all lossless downloads, many hi-res (PCM or DSD). I only buy physical discs when a lossless download is not available.

     

    I use Qobuz's lossless streaming service, but I tend to download / cache all content to my hard drive (at least temporarily) to avoid any buffering issues. Even though I have an 85MB download service (so downloading a whole 16/44 album takes just a few seconds), I prefer that "security".

     

    When / if I find a release I really like, I'll go ahead and buy it, but listening to a lot of new releases via Qobuz scratches my "itch" and often confirms I'm actually *not* interested in it ;)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    While streaming can be amazing, I don't like it that particular recordings may cease to be available at the whims of the rights holder. What good is a streaming service when your favorite recording of Bach's B Minor Mass is no longer available to you? You simply have no control over this -- as you would if you own the physical file. That's my biggest concern.

     

    If any performance suits you as well as any other performance, then perhaps streaming is just the right thing.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    While streaming can be amazing, I don't like it that particular recordings may cease to be available at the whims of the rights holder. What good is a streaming service when your favorite recording of Bach's B Minor Mass is no longer available to you? You simply have no control over this -- as you would if you own the physical file. That's my biggest concern.

     

    If any performance suits you as well as any other performance, then perhaps streaming is just the right thing.

     

    Also, as streaming becomes more prevalent, there will be fewer CDs available. So if that Mass in B Minor is no longer streamable, it may be out of print on CD. It might still be available for sale by download, but it might not.

     

    So, if you really, really like a specific performance, it's better to own it.

     

    Kirk

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Count me in the minority: ownership is the only way to go. In my case, I've actually had Amazon erase an ebook off my iPad and had Sony CDs put a virus on my PC when I ripped 'em (yes, I OWNED those CDs). Ergo, I simply don't hold the music and tech folks in such high esteem as CA denizens apparently do.

     

    Moreover, why is paying forever for the privilege of renting music that the industry decides you can/cannot hear at its whim considered a desirable or even benign development? My 40-something mind just can't understand--or accept--that concept.

     

    I want all the convenience of music-as-universal-data-files, but I want to own my music and know that it is mine--even if in storage bins in the basement. It's the same reason I refuse to pay Sirius every month to listen to the radio in my car--instead, I loaded up my 160GB iPod Classic, connected it via USB invisibly in the storage bin between the front seat, and never looked back. Think about it: Can you pass on your cloud music subscription "collection" to your kids?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Keeping physical ownership but with the expanded horizon of streaming/cloud capabilities seems like it will be the most reasonable option for me. Here in China, the internet speed and stability is truly horrid (for several reasons, some of them not being technical ones). If I needed to rely on streaming for my music, I would truly be one deprived MF.

     

    In addition to personal preferences and circumstances, the new horizon that you describe will enhance our music experience, but we can also maintain the formats that we listen to music now. Many options is clearly a good thing.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris, Very well said. How do YOU have access to WiMP? it seems a lot like Qobuz which I subscribe to here in upstate central ny but only after jumping through considerable hoops to get them to accept me. Between you and me i'll never go back to lossy/320kbps reproduction but i still TRY to listen to my 250+ playlists from MOG that are now on BM(an apt acronym for BeatsMusic) but it takes forever to load songs to play and sounds really pretty good through amarra's sQ app( as does Qobuz lossless) then to my gungnir DAC to my system. I still have my 1000+ cd's in aiff on my mac mini hdd and use amarra plus amarra sQ to improve the lossless quality even more. Your visionary thoughts seem to have already happened in some respects and for my 1960's ears i have sound nirvanna unbelievable sound quality and access to almost any genre I have ever wanted to listen to( as long as my CFO doesn't mind the 20 euros/ month for Qobuz) bobbmd

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Cloud services, whether it be an office suite, movies, books, and music is all about control and how much money from subscriptions can be raked in by the huge pool. Money is then calculated as a steady revenue stream despite the content being poor or not to your taste, either way, you pay.

     

    Streaming data, cures the ancient distribution of physical media, and messy, costly warehousing of real estate. No staff to employ either, databases spew out how much users listen per second, so the revenue stream keeps continuing to the labels. Internet connections raised by many here are not optimum, with outages and slow speeds typical which creates another problem. YOU, the music lover, still keep paying per month, not OUR fault YOUR internet connection went down or is slow, how are WE to know?

     

    Another thing with cloud services, all those millions of users on a database is a very tempting target for hackers, like the Terminator, they won't stop, ever.

     

    No thanks, not today, or in the 'near future'.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It's interesting some of the security features being implemented for the cloud. For example, breaking files into multiple parts with each part located on a separate server and a locally stored encryption key...a much more robust solution that assumes the servers will be hacked someday or if someone hacks the local key, it only opens one file, not all files. Very nice thinking...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris, Very well said. How do YOU have access to WiMP? it seems a lot like Qobuz which I subscribe to here in upstate central ny but only after jumping through considerable hoops to get them to accept me. Between you and me i'll never go back to lossy/320kbps reproduction but i still TRY to listen to my 250+ playlists from MOG that are now on BM(an apt acronym for BeatsMusic) but it takes forever to load songs to play and sounds really pretty good through amarra's sQ app( as does Qobuz lossless) then to my gungnir DAC to my system. I still have my 1000+ cd's in aiff on my mac mini hdd and use amarra plus amarra sQ to improve the lossless quality even more. Your visionary thoughts seem to have already happened in some respects and for my 1960's ears i have sound nirvanna unbelievable sound quality and access to almost any genre I have ever wanted to listen to( as long as my CFO doesn't mind the 20 euros/ month for Qobuz) bobbmd

    Thanks Bob. This truly is a great time for music lovers.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments




×
×
  • Create New...