The Future Of HiFi

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.

Um, no. Streaming audio could only be a target for hackers if streaming apps - or browsers - have specific vulnerabilities. Unless you mean someone accessing your listening history, something that is probably not a big deal, unless you don't want people to know how many times you listen to that Alvin and the Chipmunks record.

Kirk

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...

You're talking about cloud storage of files, not of media content.

An aside; in the discussion of bandwidth, people tend to forget that Spotify uses a peer-to-peer system, so, on a desktop computer, when you're downloading music, some or all of it is cached on your computer, and you may upload some of that music to others. If you have a data cap, you may not realize that this can take a big hit, if the music you listen to is popular enough that others want to hear it.

Kirk

Um, no. Streaming audio could only be a target for hackers if streaming apps - or browsers - have specific vulnerabilities. Unless you mean someone accessing your listening history, something that is probably not a big deal, unless you don't want people to know how many times you listen to that Alvin and the Chipmunks record.

 

Kirk

Am citing the Sony Playstation & Qriocity streaming service that was hacked and thousands of users details were stolen in 2011. The attack was on a server system wholesale, with cover ups and delays in admitting the security was breached.

Um yes.

Hi Chris,

Interesting to hear so many CA members espousing their need for ownership of the physical medium.

I recently sold my house in Sydney, packed up my 500 odd CD collection, and moved to a small village on the coast about 3 hours south of the city. After much soul searching I contacted the local marine rescue and today gave them the lot for their fund raising fete. They will fetch about $3-5 each. Guess I have adopted the Linn model (they stopped manufacturing CD players several years ago) in as much that I haven't spun a CD for many years except to rip them.

I've made 3 separate back ups of my lossless CD rips, so I am comfortable i won't loose them, and just couldn't see the point of ownership as I always play them via Audirvana / iTunes. However, giving away my LPs will require much greater will though .... too many wonderful memories.

I'm curious how Chris sees this article fitting in with his previous article "High Resolution Audio Isn't Coming Soon From Apple"?

It appears to me that some of the comments here are mutually exclusive to those made in that previous article.

Eloise

You're talking about cloud storage of files, not of media content.

 

An aside; in the discussion of bandwidth, people tend to forget that Spotify uses a peer-to-peer system, so, on a desktop computer, when you're downloading music, some or all of it is cached on your computer, and you may upload some of that music to others. If you have a data cap, you may not realize that this can take a big hit, if the music you listen to is popular enough that others want to hear it.

 

Kirk

Maybe I'm out of the loop but I've never heard of an upload bandwidth cap.

Maybe I'm out of the loop but I've never heard of an upload bandwidth cap.

That would be because most cable ISP combine both download and upload traffic when calculating the cap. Since connections for non-commercial services are usually asynch the download part is almost always the greater contribution.

Paul

An aside; in the discussion of bandwidth, people tend to forget that Spotify uses a peer-to-peer system, so, on a desktop computer, when you're downloading music, some or all of it is cached on your computer, and you may upload some of that music to others.

It was announced in April Spotify were shutting down the P2P portion of the network...

You're talking about cloud storage of files, not of media content.

 

Kirk

My point was that just because there was a problem in the past doesn't mean the future is doomed to repeat it over and over.

I believe that providers recognize they need better security solutions and that simple, effective solutions are already being developed and in play that give clear models for such security (i.e. disaggregated off-site media storage and local, unique encryption keys). Regardless of if this is the exact solution, the point is there are better security systems being developed that both make it harder to hack and reduce the exposure both locally and globally if hacked.

Therefore, to me, talking about security as an overall reason not to go this direction is as rational as someone arguing that they shouldn't stay in the physical world and citing an example of a house burning down and all the physical media being lost. Even though it is true that it could (and has) happen, it isn't a rational reason to avoid physical copies.

I think there are many reasons to stay in the ownership realm (and also to go to a streaming model), some of which have already been discussed. Security isn't a huge concern to me.

John

Right now I subscribe to Beats, mainly to try out music I might purchase. My biggest issues with subscription/cloud services are the following:

What happens to your music if the service you pay for goes out of business?

What happens if the song or album you like is not that popular, is it eliminated from that service?

I don't like the idea that everything I listen to is tracked.

Will obscure/hard to find music be available?

For the 10% of the music market that listens to classical music, today's streaming services are a joke. Some estimates of the size of the market segment run higher, but even if the size were only 5%, we would still be talking about a lot of people who listen to classical music. Chris, apparently, is not one of them because his vision of the future of audio says little about the egregious problems with the metadata provided by streaming services. I can't comment on Chris' favorite, WiMP, because I don't live in Denmark, Germany, Norway, Poland, or Sweden. However, I have looked at Spotify. Their metadata are a horror. Try searching for Mahler Symphony No. 8. I get a list of 30 recordings. The assortment is surprisingly good, although one of the recordings in the list is actually Schubert Symphony No. 8 and two are Mahler Symphony No. 2. Now suppose I want to browse the list to find a performance by a conductor I admire. That information is not consistently available. I see one conducted by Sir Simon Rattle, but the same field contains “Gustav Mahler” for another. I'm pretty sure that he is not the conductor. A third presents “Royal Concertgebou”, the name of the orchestra (misspelled), and a fourth says “Heather Harper”, the name of one of the soloists. I can make out the conductor on some of the recordings by examining the cover art, but not all covers provide that information. Ditto if I am interested in knowing the orchestra, the chorus, or any of the eight soloists. A new feature of WiMP that Chris describes would allow me to select each recording in turn and then “press & hold” a track to get additional information, which might include the conductor. If the recording I selected has as conductor someone whose performance I do not want to hear, then I have to return to the search results and repeat the procedure up to 29 additional times. Unacceptable. Select the recording conducted by Michael Tilson Thomas (you will have to be able to recognize his picture on the cover). The first movement has four tracks. They play with gaps! Unacceptable.

Maybe Chris is postulating that streaming companies will fix these problems. If they do, great! Is there any evidence that they are working on the problems? Addressing the needs of 90% of a big market satisfies most companies, so I doubt that they even care. It sucks to be in a minority, but at least I have options now – options that Chris predicts will vanish. I might have to do a little typing, but some existing programs make it possible to correct the errors and omissions of the metadata provided with downloads. With subscription services, we are completely beholden to the services for metadata. Are the WiMP editorial teams gearing up to provide the information that they are ignoring now? Is WiMP planning to go through their entire existing catalog to add the missing information? Even if Chris is able to answer both questions in the affirmative, can we be sure that any streaming company will devise a good solution to the metadata problem? Just getting the information doesn't mean that we can use it in helpful ways (ref. comments above on the press & hold feature). And then there is the problem of librettos. If I am listening to a stream of an opera sung in a foreign language, will I be able to view a translation of the words in the application provided by the subscription service? Will translations be available for users who speak languages other than English? The technology for such a service might be feasible, but expecting subscription services to expend the effort to satisfy only a portion of the 10% is fantasy. A handful of subscription services all chasing the lowest common denominator won't give a hoot about me. People who listen only to pop or who seek only background music may embrace Chris' future, but those of us who are computer audiophiles – especially the ones who listen to classical music – will ignore subscription services like we ignore cheap Radio Shack speakers.

For the 10% of the music market that listens to classical music, today's streaming services are a joke. Some estimates of the size of the market segment run higher, but even if the size were only 5%, we would still be talking about a lot of people who listen to classical music. Chris, apparently, is not one of them because his vision of the future of audio says little about the egregious problems with the metadata provided by streaming services. I can't comment on Chris' favorite, WiMP, because I don't live in Denmark, Germany, Norway, Poland, or Sweden. However, I have looked at Spotify. Their metadata are a horror. Try searching for Mahler Symphony No. 8. I get a list of 30 recordings. The assortment is surprisingly good, although one of the recordings in the list is actually Schubert Symphony No. 8 and two are Mahler Symphony No. 2. Now suppose I want to browse the list to find a performance by a conductor I admire. That information is not consistently available. I see one conducted by Sir Simon Rattle, but the same field contains “Gustav Mahler” for another. I'm pretty sure that he is not the conductor. A third presents “Royal Concertgebou”, the name of the orchestra (misspelled), and a fourth says “Heather Harper”, the name of one of the soloists. I can make out the conductor on some of the recordings by examining the cover art, but not all covers provide that information. Ditto if I am interested in knowing the orchestra, the chorus, or any of the eight soloists. A new feature of WiMP that Chris describes would allow me to select each recording in turn and then “press & hold” a track to get additional information, which might include the conductor. If the recording I selected has as conductor someone whose performance I do not want to hear, then I have to return to the search results and repeat the procedure up to 29 additional times. Unacceptable. Select the recording conducted by Michael Tilson Thomas (you will have to be able to recognize his picture on the cover). The first movement has four tracks. They play with gaps! Unacceptable.

 

Maybe Chris is postulating that streaming companies will fix these problems. If they do, great! Is there any evidence that they are working on the problems? Addressing the needs of 90% of a big market satisfies most companies, so I doubt that they even care. It sucks to be in a minority, but at least I have options now – options that Chris predicts will vanish. I might have to do a little typing, but some existing programs make it possible to correct the errors and omissions of the metadata provided with downloads. With subscription services, we are completely beholden to the services for metadata. Are the WiMP editorial teams gearing up to provide the information that they are ignoring now? Is WiMP planning to go through their entire existing catalog to add the missing information? Even if Chris is able to answer both questions in the affirmative, can we be sure that any streaming company will devise a good solution to the metadata problem? Just getting the information doesn't mean that we can use it in helpful ways (ref. comments above on the press & hold feature). And then there is the problem of librettos. If I am listening to a stream of an opera sung in a foreign language, will I be able to view a translation of the words in the application provided by the subscription service? Will translations be available for users who speak languages other than English? The technology for such a service might be feasible, but expecting subscription services to expend the effort to satisfy only a portion of the 10% is fantasy. A handful of subscription services all chasing the lowest common denominator won't give a hoot about me. People who listen only to pop or who seek only background music may embrace Chris' future, but those of us who are computer audiophiles – especially the ones who listen to classical music – will ignore subscription services like we ignore cheap Radio Shack speakers.

Not me! I listen to classical at least 80% of the time (i.e., 2-3 hours / day), and I use Qobuz streaming all the time. I haven't had the problem of finding a particular performance, and the recording I want is usually there.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I still buy recordings I particularly enjoy, but if I just want to hear a particular conductor's / orchestra's view of a particular work, I usually can

I do agree the metadata is usually incomplete as to soloists, etc., but I often have that problem with my own music as well, as I generally don't spend more than a couple of minutes "fixing" tags on the music I download (hangs head in shame).

Interesting to see much of the content of the article written in the future tense, i.e. "this will happen". Much of it is happening now, among those of us with a software development bent.

I can pull pretty much any digital stream from a variety of sources (private Cloud, streaming services, etc.) onto my Linux platform and route it to my DAC. I can control the music using CLI commands, or optionally use a web server interface to this (which is OS agnostic - it'll run on your iPhone or your PC). I can even control all this remotely - though i have yet to find a particularly good reason to play my hifi when I am many miles away. :-)

Premium Spotify now does a pretty good impression of lossless, and I have subscribed for that reason. I have written an app that will capture the stream and save it as PCM (purely, ahem, for testing purposes only), and I have found people who struggle to identify the Spot-rip when ABX'ed with an EAC Redbook rip of the same music. Lossless streaming quality is not far away at all.

As the article mentions, if you have the imagination and the technical wherewithal to implement your ideas, you can get quite far.

The quality I get from lossless piped through mpd into my DAC is absolutely blowing me away. I had one of those first Philips CD players in the mid-80's and I really didn't think digital could get to where it is now. I also bought a 1st gen SACD player when the medium appeared, and what I get from Redbook seems comfortably in excess of that now - although memories can play tricks.

Anyway, in short, technology is fun and the possibilities are almost limitless these days. All the operating systems offer up APIs to hackers like me, and it's amazing what you can do - even on Windows platforms. iOS is a lot more locked down, which is a shame, but maybe OSX will replace it one day and then the possibilities will be truly endless...

My issue with Hi-res streaming is that often the "Hi-res" version sounds little or no better than the 16/44.1 version for at least 2 reasons:

1. The recording was poor quality: either poorly captured or mixed.

2. The record was mastered too loud/compressed dynamic range.

Therefore whether it is 16 or 24bit, it sounds terrible anyway. I'm sure there are thousands of examples but I recently listened to Amy Winehouse's Back to Black on a really good system and it was a terrible recording. Making this available in 24bit/192kHz from the masters isn't going to change this.

Another recent example was The National's "Trouble Will Find Me": I bought the vinyl and the CD, and with the vinyl came a free 24bit/44.1kHz FLAC download. I could not discern a difference between it and the ripped CD. Same with Dirty Projectors "Swing Lo Magellan". I just don't think a lot of contemporary artists care enough about sound quality, or maybe their engineers don't.

In particular, my favourite band Radiohead has had a decline in mastering since Kid A/Amnesiac. Hail to the Thief was not too bad but In Rainbows and The King Of Limbs are inferior to their earlier recordings. From what I know about the band I'm not sure they are interested in releasing Hi-Res versions of their back catalogue, or does that belong to Capitol/Parlophone (they became independent after Hail To The Thief)?

My issue with Hi-res streaming is that often the "Hi-res" version sounds little or no better than the 16/44.1 version for at least 2 reasons:

1. The recording was poor quality: either poorly captured or mixed.

2. The record was mastered too loud/compressed dynamic range.

Therefore whether it is 16 or 24bit, it sounds terrible anyway. I'm sure there are thousands of examples but I recently listened to Amy Winehouse's Back to Black on a really good system and it was a terrible recording. Making this available in 24bit/192kHz from the masters isn't going to change this.

I agree. I remember buying Zeynatta Mondatta by The Police in hi res many moons ago, and it just sounded really flat.

I read somewhere that there is a fight back against the current 'loudness war', where producers compressing the hell out of new recordings in order to make them stand out. Good for the kids in clubs, but not so good for audiophiles.

Out of curiosity, do any 16 bit (ADC) recordings ever make it to hi res - or is full remastering always carried out? I'm assuming the latter, given the dearth of 24 bit material available.

I didn't read everything in this thread but this could be of interest :

What I notice over here (Holland) is that 4G services for at least streaming video trends to NOT consume data as in "pay per MB". So, the first subscriptions for this are being offered today with the focus on Hi Definition TV and it is part of the flat rate (not for normal data like browsing the internet).

But if you think about it, it can't go otherwise; it just would be totally too expensive if this (HiDef) streaming was to be paid for by the MB.

It was announced in April Spotify were shutting down the P2P portion of the network...

Ah, good to know. Did they shut it down in April, or just announce that they were doing it at a later date?

Kirk

Averages about $50/month here for 350gb/month at something like 107mbs down and 5mbs up.

It is often cheaper to buy two $50/month subscriptions than to increase the bandwidth on one subscription.

Speaking about home use, of course. That's enough to stream well over 100HD shows or so in a month.

-Paul

-Paul

I didn't read everything in this thread but this could be of interest :

 

What I notice over here (Holland) is that 4G services for at least streaming video trends to NOT consume data as in "pay per MB". So, the first subscriptions for this are being offered today with the focus on Hi Definition TV and it is part of the flat rate (not for normal data like browsing the internet).

 

But if you think about it, it can't go otherwise; it just would be totally too expensive if this (HiDef) streaming was to be paid for by the MB.

How depressing!

Maybe it's an age related mind-set. I'm no technophobe though. I'd rather give up listening to music or kill myself, than pay for a subscription service or have anything to do with "The Cloud"

WiMP sounds good though, easily accessible via the Zenmate extension for Chrome and a bit of guessing. They currently offer a 24hr free trial of the HiFi version. Sounds much better than Spotify. A bogus Facebook ID comes in handy as well.

Chris, if any version of your future arrives in my lifetime I shall go back to listening to vinyl exclusively (existing or secondhand) as a protest.

Interesting comments about the database aspects of music access. what are your thought on recording quality, tracking and mastering quality, and the economies/demand that would support improvements?

How depressing!

 

Maybe it's an age related mind-set. I'm no technophobe though. I'd rather give up listening to music or kill myself, than pay for a subscription service or have anything to do with "The Cloud"

 

WiMP sounds good though, easily accessible via the Zenmate extension for Chrome and a bit of guessing. They currently offer a 24hr free trial of the HiFi version. Sounds much better than Spotify. A bogus Facebook ID comes in handy as well.

 

Chris, if any version of your future arrives in my lifetime I shall go back to listening to vinyl exclusively (existing or secondhand) as a protest.

How can almost free access to virtually any recording ever released at the drop of a hat be considered "depressing"? I just don't get it

I read somewhere that there is a fight back against the current 'loudness war', where producers compressing the hell out of new recordings in order to make them stand out. Good for the kids in clubs, but not so good for audiophiles.

The fight is here: Turn Me Up! | Bringing Dynamics Back To Music

Plus Pono music and others

How can almost free access to virtually any recording ever released at the drop of a hat be considered "depressing"? I just don't get it

I can only answer for myself, but I can tell you why I find it depressing. It's not free. And saying it's almost free is disingenuous. And honestly, I'm not asking for it to be free. It's *another* monthly bill. Everything seems to be moving towards the subscription model. Add your monthly streaming fee to your monthly cable bill, your monthly cell phone bill, your monthly internet access bill, your monthly Netflix bill, your Hulu bill, , your Beer of the Month Club bill, your monthly Adobe Creative Cloud bill, and it goes on and on. And as soon as you stop paying, that access to virtually any recording ever released is gone and you've got nothing left. On top of that, I value and appreciate my local music stores. Bull Moose, Enterprise Records, Moody Lords, Electric Buddha; I either know the owners or know the employees. I appreciate that they are there and what they do. Music is a social thing for me. I enjoy talking to other people in the store about music. I appreciate walking into a store, and the owner or whomever knowing me and my musical interests. Hey Tim, I just got in this album you may be interested in. I'd rather have a person recommend music to me than an algorithm.

That is not meant as a knock on anyone who values and enjoys streaming services. I understand why someone would value it. For a time I was a subscriber to MOG before it became Beats. It was nice to be able to listen to and album for me when trying to decide what I thought about an artist I wasn't familiar with, or a particular album. I've discovered new music through Pandora or whatever, and appreciate that. And I'm not a Luddite. I enjoy and appreciate technology. What I am looking for is balance. And a future in which music ownership goes away, where all music is stored in the cloud and streamed, where my "music provider" knows every track I play, or have ever played, etc... is a future I have zero interest in participating in. *That* is depressing.

Averages about $50/month here for 350gb/month at something like 107mbs down and 5mbs up.

It is often cheaper to buy two $50/month subscriptions than to increase the bandwidth on one subscription.

 

Speaking about home use, of course. That's enough to stream well over 100HD shows or so in a month.

 

-Paul

 

 

-Paul

Paul 'who' are you getting this service from ?

I can only answer for myself, but I can tell you why I find it depressing. It's not free. And saying it's almost free is disingenuous. And honestly, I'm not asking for it to be free. It's *another* monthly bill. Everything seems to be moving towards the subscription model. Add your monthly streaming fee to your monthly cable bill, your monthly cell phone bill, your monthly internet access bill, your monthly Netflix bill, your Hulu bill, , your Beer of the Month Club bill, your monthly Adobe Creative Cloud bill, and it goes on and on. And as soon as you stop paying, that access to virtually any recording ever released is gone and you've got nothing left. On top of that, I value and appreciate my local music stores. Bull Moose, Enterprise Records, Moody Lords, Electric Buddha; I either know the owners or know the employees. I appreciate that they are there and what they do. Music is a social thing for me. I enjoy talking to other people in the store about music. I appreciate walking into a store, and the owner or whomever knowing me and my musical interests. Hey Tim, I just got in this album you may be interested in. I'd rather have a person recommend music to me than an algorithm.

 

That is not meant as a knock on anyone who values and enjoys streaming services. I understand why someone would value it. For a time I was a subscriber to MOG before it became Beats. It was nice to be able to listen to and album for me when trying to decide what I thought about an artist I wasn't familiar with, or a particular album. I've discovered new music through Pandora or whatever, and appreciate that. And I'm not a Luddite. I enjoy and appreciate technology. What I am looking for is balance. And a future in which music ownership goes away, where all music is stored in the cloud and streamed, where my "music provider" knows every track I play, or have ever played, etc... is a future I have zero interest in participating in. *That* is depressing.

+1. 100% agree with you. Well put.