ESSAY: HAVE WE BEEN WASTING OUR MONEY ON STREAMING?

[sachinchavan 15865]

A good quality recording is more important than lossless or lossy files in playback
If it sounds good that’s all t

That’s like saying ‘if you have a good quality recording, you can have any amp/speaker and still it’d sound good’. No, you still need a decent amp/speaker.

Actually recordings are what they are. If the audio engineers have done a bad job, but you like the musicians/the music, you’d still want to listen to it. And it’d still sound better lossless than lossy (provided one can sense the difference like one of the above comments say). And so also for a good quality recording.

When C = A x B, if you can’t control A, you can still improve C by improving B.

 

[Analogous]

you still need a decent amp/speaker.

Yes. I did not mention this but I agree

On the recording quality: Sadly many Kishore Kumar and Led Zeppelin albums don’t sound as good in my set up as they did in my younger years

 

[keith_correa]

Most people equate lossy with MP3 which is doing other lossy formats an injustice. Listen to a lossy vorbis file or an AAC file vs it's lossless counterpart and they are aurally indistinguishable. What most folks don't realize is that there are various algorithms used by convertors for converting lossless -> lossy, and some are MUCH MUCH better than others.

 

[Analogous]

Most people equate lossy with MP3 which is doing other lossy formats an injustice. Listen to a lossy vorbis file or an AAC file vs it's lossless counterpart and they are aurally indistinguishable. What most folks don't realize is that there are various algorithms used by convertors for converting lossless -> lossy, and some are MUCH MUCH better than others.

I did not know this!

 

[sachinchavan 15865]

Most people equate lossy with MP3 which is doing other lossy formats an injustice. Listen to a lossy vorbis file or an AAC file vs it's lossless counterpart and they are aurally indistinguishable. What most folks don't realize is that there are various algorithms used by convertors for converting lossless -> lossy, and some are MUCH MUCH better than others.

True. The compression algorithms differ on what they keep and what they cut. Some coding formats are smarter at preserving content that our ears are more sensitive to and hence feel closer to lossless.

However, with broadbands, even mobile internet now available at speeds of hundreds of Mbps, compression is getting increasingly irrelevant. Most of us can stream all the lossless music we want (in CD resolution… maxing at 1.4 Mbps averaging but averaging around 1 Mbps of content, or even higher res than that) with our monthly unlimited data plans. Given that the streaming companies already have the lossless formats, it doesn’t make much sense for them to compress them, whether as mp3 or AAC or anything anymore except what they have to pay for storage capacity of and download bandwidths from their servers, which I imagine must also be getting cheaper as we go.

This is why I appreciate Apple who went lossless without charging a penny more than what they did earlier for lossy streaming (unlike Tidal, Qobuz or Amazon Music).

 

[Analogous]

there are various algorithms used by convertors for converting lossless -> lossy, and some are MUCH MUCH better than others.

@keith_correa, any opinions on the better ones?

 

[amit11]

For MP3s, i have observed in my experience.

- mp3s created out of analog media (vinyls, tapes) for some reason sound better compared those which are created out of CDs.

And for that reason i could observe that mp3s of lata, kishore era etc sounded better than those of CDs era.

 

[keith_correa]

@keith_correa, any opinions on the better ones?

Try converting a lossless format to vorbis, AAC, alac lossy files vs MP3 and you will know. MP3 is dated and that is a fact! As for my opinion, it shouldn't really count for much, given the fact that we can try these formats ourselves for near zero cost/effort and form one's own opinion.

For MP3s, i have observed in my experience.

- mp3s created out of analog media (vinyls, tapes) for some reason sound better compared those which are created out of CDs.

Apples, oranges! When the source itself is different, the result of conversion will be different. I'm not sure about "better" but they WILL sound different.

 

[Saiganesh]

Remeber those days when stereo streaming itself was a luxury or for the niche!

Used to have mp3s ripped in 128kbps (for portability since memory was also a luxury those days) and 320kbps and then have my favorites backed in wav.

observed many songs dintt matter much with 128kbps or wav.

And then the scratches, hard drives and memory getting corrupt or misplaced or stolen. Lost my library now.

After all these headaches quit physical and streaming is a breeze.

Recently downloaded flac files of some new songs and got bitten by FOMO.

Surely need a streaming service that can do flac like quality (and not a mp3 expanded into flac).

Few albums i find better in spotify where as few albums not good in spotify but good somewhere else (like gana). Recently finding gaana to have good dynamics and love gaana recomendations better than spotify.

Surely would love to try apple lossless provided there is a reliable consistent way to listen them with appropriate benefits.

Many youtube channels have started uploading audio (old remastered) with good dynamics and video with it is very engaging. I doubt if i m home i would watch pure audio when with video is available with a little trade in the audio.
And now the question is - what we listen most with audio streaming service -old classic or the new...!!

 

[Analogous]

Remeber those days when stereo streaming itself was a luxury or for the niche!

Used to have mp3s ripped in 128kbps (for portability since memory was also a luxury those days) and 320kbps and then have my favorites backed in wav.

observed many songs dintt matter much with 128kbps or wav.

And then the scratches, hard drives and memory getting corrupt or misplaced or stolen. Lost my library now.

After all these headaches quit physical and streaming is a breeze.

Recently downloaded flac files of some new songs and got bitten by FOMO.

Surely need a streaming service that can do flac like quality (and not a mp3 expanded into flac).

Few albums i find better in spotify where as few albums not good in spotify but good somewhere else (like gana). Recently finding gaana to have good dynamics and love gaana recomendations better than spotify.

Surely would love to try apple lossless provided there is a reliable consistent way to listen them with appropriate benefits.

Many youtube channels have started uploading audio (old remastered) with good dynamics and video with it is very engaging. I doubt if i m home i would watch pure audio when with video is available with a little trade in the audio.
And now the question is - what we listen most with audio streaming service -old classic or the new...!!

If you can, find a way to subscribe or join a family plan try Qobuz for CD quality and Hi Res streaming
But for wider selection of Indian music there are better options

 

[Saiganesh]

If you can, find a way to subscribe or join a family plan try Qobuz for CD quality and Hi Res streaming
But for wider selection of Indian music there are better options

Which bettwr options you are suggesting?

 

[sachinchavan 15865]

For MP3s, i have observed in my experience.

- mp3s created out of analog media (vinyls, tapes) for some reason sound better compared those which are created out of CDs.

And for that reason i could observe that mp3s of lata, kishore era etc sounded better than those of CDs era.

Depends on the master. Older analog were made from better masters. In comparison, the CDs made later of the same albums had their dynamic range cut for extra loudness.

In fact, have you noticed that many YouTube videos of the old Hindi songs also sound better (not resolution, but the musicality) than newer CD collections of the same? I guess it’s for the same reason.

It’s this reason why I prefer the original HMV CDs (HMV India/UK ) of old films than the reprints/collections by Universal.The older HMV CDs sound fuller.

 

[Analogous]

Which bettwr options you are suggesting?

Amazon music
Gaana (which you have mentioned)
YouTube music

Note: This is not about the quality of streams; only wider choices compared to Qobuz for Indian music.

 

[COOLDUDE7808]

From a Business point of view , if they don't get new subscribers regularly , then they will increase the cost for existing ones . So how much is one willing to pay every month will decide this as time goes by . Right now by what our forum members have mentioned , it seems very less in India.

 

[Analogous]

From a Business point of view , if they don't get new subscribers regularly , then they will increase the cost for existing ones . So how much is one willing to pay every month will decide this as time goes by . Right now by what our forum members have mentioned , it seems very less in India.

Price increases over time are inevitable.
Price wars are raging all around us with companies large and small fighting to hook paying customers and keep them.
Once we enroll and create our playlists (we don’t want to lose some of these) we are often hooked!
Many start with “free” services to begin with to enroll customers and then gradually start charging.
It’s obviously impractical and unsustainable to not have any revenue while providing a service. Companies with deep pockets can do this longer.
Others start introducing Advertisements (often pesky and irritating) with free service and charge for a Ad free experience (YouTube)
Some like Spotify provide basic services free and charge for a premium service that include downloads and Ad free listening.
Apple Music offers a three month free trial for the addiction to set in.
Others offer exclusively paid services (Tidal, Qobuz etc). Qobuz offers CD quality and High Res streams only while Tidal does these mixed with compressed formats. Both offer downloads as well.
All major streaming platforms have curated playlists that cater to a wide variety of tastes in music. Some are surprisingly good (Spotify, Apple)
Some, like HD tracks and others only sell individual albums (and tracks?) for downloads
A rare breed is Radio Paradise which streams lossless, Ad free and depends on voluntary donations. They depend on excellent human curated playlists (as opposed to algorithms) to get their listeners, some of whom donate. Obviously this is a “love of music” first endeavour and not a traditional “get rich” model.
It’s a cutthroat world with several companies fighting for our attention and ears with various tempting wares.

 

[Saiganesh]

Recently subscribed to gaana yearly. Love their recommendations and really helps finding the new ones that i would love faster than spotify.

And this time I find gaana quality a lot better than before. Anybody noticed?

 

[Saiganesh]

Price increases over time are inevitable.
Price wars are raging all around us with companies large and small fighting to hook paying customers and keep them.
Once we enroll and create our playlists (we don’t want to lose some of these) we are often hooked!
Many start with “free” services to begin with to enroll customers and then gradually start charging.
It’s obviously impractical and unsustainable to not have any revenue while providing a service. Companies with deep pockets can do this longer.
Others start introducing Advertisements (often pesky and irritating) with free service and charge for a Ad free experience (YouTube)
Some like Spotify provide basic services free and charge for a premium service that include downloads and Ad free listening.
Apple Music offers a three month free trial for the addiction to set in.
Others offer exclusively paid services (Tidal, Qobuz etc). Qobuz offers CD quality and High Res streams only while Tidal does these mixed with compressed formats. Both offer downloads as well.
All major streaming platforms have curated playlists that cater to a wide variety of tastes in music. Some are surprisingly good (Spotify, Apple)
Some, like HD tracks and others only sell individual albums (and tracks?) for downloads
A rare breed is Radio Paradise which streams lossless, Ad free and depends on voluntary donations. They depend on excellent human curated playlists (as opposed to algorithms) to get their listeners, some of whom donate. Obviously this is a “love of music” first endeavour and not a traditional “get rich” model.
It’s a cutthroat world with several companies fighting for our attention and ears with various tempting wares.

Tryong radio paradise from playstore now.

 

[Donivlapog]

Collecting stuff is like snob value. Niche segment.

 

[Analogous]

Collecting stuff is like snob value. Niche segment.

But with streaming we have access to almost all commercially recorded music to listen without owning it.
Would this fall under “collecting stuff” too?
Since everyone with access to internet is streaming videos or music at some time or other, this definition makes everyone a snob. That’s truly democratic. The niche is now widened to 180*

 

[Barun7]

I had Gaana Plus subscription for three consecutive years. Sometime last year, most of the regional songs(Bengali) were gone all of a sudden. Even some popular Hindi movies were not available. My playlists hardly made any sense. Unsubscribed. However, they have some very good podcasts - specially stories.
Subscribed to Wynk. Personally, found a much larger library in regional music. Some songs are still missing though. Quality of both Gaana and Wynk seems similar to me. Is ok for casual and on the go listening.
My point is - one can't get it all in any one streaming app. There's always some trade off like quality/cost/variety/convenience of subscription.