Forget MP3/iTunes!

[realtrance]

I've given it a few years' chance; I really have. And I've been listening to CDs more recently.

And I just have to say - not going to get into any arguments about equipment, recording, whatever - all this compressed iTunes music, I don't care what, sounds absolutely lifeless.

There's I don't know....... shimmer. Spirit. Urgency. Presence. Clarity. Excitement. All present on any good CD or LP recording. All, all of it, absent on any music on iTunes.

You're missing it ALL if you're going to this compressed online crap for your music enjoyment, I'm telling you. Might as well just be listening to elevator music while you're munching on a stick of celery.

Blech. I'm never going back. Forget iTunes, it's convenient for when you're stuck in the cattle car on an airplane, and that's about it.

[sonicsilk]

I could not agree more.

About a month ago, I attended a gathering of musicians talking about the industry. There were about 30 of us at this meeting. The question of MP3's came up. Out of 30 serious musicians, I was one of 3 who raised their hands that we were still buying CD's. Unbelievably, 27 out of the 30 said they no longer buy CDs . . . and instead buy MP3's on itunes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will not buy MP3's. I am still buying CD's of major label releases while I still can. However, due to the limited selection now at most retailers, I have to order my CD's online.

I absolutely detest MP3's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! An MP3 can often be as little as 1/10 of the file size of the same song in CD format.

Listening to an MP3 is like eating a freeze dried steak that has been re-hydrated and warmed up in a microwave!!!!!! Sure it's a steak but do you really want to eat it?

I only send out samples of my audio in higher quality .wav or CD form. However, I am often forced by specifications of my clients to release MP3's . . . but I won't go down without a fight!!!

[realtrance]

It's tough because I've read everything I can about how to get the "best" mp3 or aac or whatever format sound, seen all the charts and graphs saying see? You're not missing much, and pretty much said for awhile, oh well, ok.

But then I pulled out my old LP version (which I got when it came out, mind you) of "Get Yer Ya Ya's Out" and I came away from listening to it stunned; excited; just amazed at how good it sounded! And I felt like listening more. It's a very subtle thing, but it's a lot like the difference between listening to a recording with full dynamic range, versus one that's had the hell compressed out of it, I don't care whether you're using Manley tube compression or whatever.

It's like, each note MATTERS. There's emotion in a vocal. A snare hit's like a gunshot. A brush cymbal is pure silk. A violin section in an orchestral performance has life and movement and isn't just this muddy wall of sound.

I honestly believe people are completely forgetting how viscerally exciting music can really be. If serious musicians have thrown in the towel, too..... no wonder all the stuff these days sounds like amateur, lazy, incompetent half-hearted crap!! No wonder I feel like turning it off after five minutes!

It's like so much else over the past decade, really. I picked up a bottle of lemon juice the other day and the bottle wouldn't even frigging pour without spilling. It was like it had been engineered to waste. I imagined someone from the 18th century looking at the thing and commenting, "my, people are stupid in your world, aren't they?" Just amazing.

Everything's really gone to total crap, I don't even check the news any more.

Wake me when it's all over; meanwhile I'll be under my headphones listening to my wonderful collection of real music, on CD and LP, until the electricity is gone.

[synthoid]

I don't know why they (Apple) aren't offering lossless versions of the music at a premium price at this point. It's not as if no one downloads big files over the internet these days...

-synthoid

[tribeofenki]

...to sell their ipod ipad ish*t whatever comes next.

Lossless = audiophile = 1% market = NO-NO (Apple point of view)

Good posts. Keep the vinyl alive.

[aleatoric]

My whole library is FLAC (lossless), ripped direct from my CD collection. I buy CD's often but rip them to FLAC to add to my library. I use sbooth software's "Play" as an iTunes alternative (iTunes will not play FLAC files). Works for me.

[Llitsor]

Originally Posted by realtrance

I've given it a few years' chance; I really have. And I've been listening to CDs more recently.

And I just have to say - not going to get into any arguments about equipment, recording, whatever - all this compressed iTunes music, I don't care what, sounds absolutely lifeless.

There's I don't know....... shimmer. Spirit. Urgency. Presence. Clarity. Excitement. All present on any good CD or LP recording. All, all of it, absent on any music on iTunes.

You're missing it ALL if you're going to this compressed online crap for your music enjoyment, I'm telling you. Might as well just be listening to elevator music while you're munching on a stick of celery.

Blech. I'm never going back. Forget iTunes, it's convenient for when you're stuck in the cattle car on an airplane, and that's about it.

1, This isn't really a whole lot to do with mastering at all?

2, iTunes is as good as what you put into it. Put shit in, and you'll get shit out. Thats not iTunes fault. Any other media player will be the same. Just like any other media player can also play uncompressed audio formats, like wav and aiff etc.

3, Although iTunes will play MP3's, it's default format is AAC, which is a damn site better than MP3 for the same given bit rate.

[RayK]

What do you mean by "iTunes music"? 128kbps AAC or 256kbps AAC? Yes, 128kbps AAC obviously sucks, though through iPod earbuds you might not be able to tell the difference. 256kbps AAC in the other hand is pretty much indistinguishable, at least on any low end equipment. If you disagree, then do a blind test where you burn a cd of songs you've not heard before, half @ 256kbps aac and half lossless. Don't A/B, it's not relevant.

Most other download stores nowadays provide only 320kbps MP3s. That's roughly half the size a losslessly compressed file usually is. And while "an MP3 can often be as little as 1/10 of the file size of the same song in CD format" might be true sometimes (though with purchased mp3s usually isn't), it doesn't mean there's only 1/10 left of the information.

[realtrance]

RayK, I'm talking about high enough bitrate (more than 256kbps) to not make any difference, and, as Llitsor mentions, AAC rather than just MP3. None of all that makes a difference. The life is gone from the music.

Only reason I bring this up in the mastering forum is to remind any of the professional mastering engineers with good ears out there that there are at least a few of us left who care about quality results. You might be happy with playing to an audience that doesn't really listen to or care about music, but if you're not..... I'm still out here paying attention to what you're doing, and it very much does matter to me. That's all.

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by realtrance

But then I pulled out my old LP version (which I got when it came out, mind you) of "Get Yer Ya Ya's Out" and I came away from listening to it stunned; excited; just amazed at how good it sounded! And I felt like listening more.

That would be pre-digital vinyl!

It simply sounds incredible. Especially on a properly set-up turntable.

Analog rules!

btw- I've got the same LP, any many others, bought new back in the day.

JT

p.s. interesting article on Doug Sax initial opposition to CD:

http://www.stereophile.com/interview...teel_doug_sax/

[soundgeezer]

They really should provide lossless formats for download.
I'm still buying CDs and would start downloading right away, but no mp3s.

Even car radios nowadays only play compressed formats. A couple of weeks ago I couldn't find a single car radio that could read aif or wav files from a usb-stick.

Funny, first we thought that 44.1, 16 bit was a degradation ... now it's those compressed formats, what will be next ?

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

That would be pre-digital vinyl!

The real deal: no dsp!

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

p.s. interesting article on Doug Sax initial opposition to CD

Great article, thanks for posting that (also hence the reason why we at least always used a modified 1630 system, played the tape once for QC/DTA error check, then stored tail out & sent straight to glass mastering).

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by soundgeezer

Even car radios nowadays only play compressed formats. A couple of weeks ago I couldn't find a single car radio that could read aif or wav files from a usb-stick.

If the car is built around an iPod (as new car ads practically use as their #2 selling point) then you do have the option of uncompressed wavs/aifs – if the music is imported from CD that way.

[soundgeezer]

Might be, but I don't have an Ipod and would prefer a car radio, that is able to read wav or aif directly from my stick ...

Wouldn't that be great ? You download your music at least in cd quality and uncompressed. Then put it on a 16 GB stick and connect it to your car radio.

But thanks Adam for the ipod hint, it might be the only way at the moment to listen to uncompressed music in the car without having to burn tons of cds.

[LeMauce]

I still don't get it. With highspeed internet all over the place, harddisk drives bigger then the *ss of JLO.... WHY are we offering still mp3 formats? Give the peeps no choice then rather download full AIFF/WAV files or even higher in MusicStores like Itunes/Amazon etc etc for the same price of mp3.

[paulo m]

Well, I do understand the concerns expressed here. I too try to convince clients that mp3 is not giving them their music in full. The problem is that this industry is all about making money when it comes to delivery and although we have more faster online connections, cheaper storage and all, most companies still see compressed formats way more convenient for distribution. As recording engineers, mastering engineers, mixers, whatever, I guess that we have to concentrate more on the process of making music and bring the final product into the most high quality as possible. From there I´m afraid that is not in our hands really.
On the lossless side of compression, I guess that FLAC is the way to go, is just a shame that is not streamable(yet). On the lossy side of things, I usually encode(when asked) to mp4/AAC at the highest bit rate possible(500 kbps) and I have to say that the results are far superior to mp3 at 320 kbps. In most cases, people find it harder to distinguish from the original uncompressed files. And as the latest online players stream it with no problems, although not perfect, is a compromise in my opinion. I really hope that in the future, niche markets online shops that offer uncompressed files for download at higher sample rates will become the standard, but I wouldn´t bet on that for the near future.

[madtheory]

iTunes has Apple Lossless, I too don't understand why they don't sell them that way. No reason why they shouldn'tLots of artists make that format available in direct selling, e.g. NIN.

However, I think poor production values are a far bigger problem than mp3.

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

p.s. interesting article on Doug Sax initial opposition to CD:

Stereophile: Sheffield Steel? Doug Sax

Love it, he actually knows what he's talking about:

Is there is anything intrinsically wrong sonically with storing music as ones and zeros, or do you think the problems are in the implementation of current technology?

Sax: The latter. [Note- this was 1989]

Harley: Do you think digital will one day sound better than analog?

Sax: It should. Digital is analog.

[Llitsor]

Originally Posted by madtheory

However, I think poor production values are a far bigger problem than mp3.

Exactly. Although im not generally a fan of MP3's etc, I think it's the least of my worries when I hear how badly produced a lot of music is these days. Mostly due to the whole 'loudness' shambles..

[Jerry Tubb]

Digital is so convenient, mp3 is so portable, both very affordable, and pretty reliable. Hence the digital revolution.

Admittedly digital has made great sonic strides in the recent years, in both directions.

If you grew up with digital, but not analog, you owe it to yourself to hear analog done properly.

Nick recently restored our early '80s Audiophile turntable, went to great pains to set it up to perfection.

Connected directly to an analog preamp and power amp, with no digital processing whatsoever.

Sounds like liquid magic, big fat warm, naturally pleasing to the ear.

Beckons you to flip the record over and listen to the B side as well.

There's a reason audiophiles are fanatical about this stuff.

As a result we've been getting lots of 1940's era 16" 33rpm transcription discs to transfer to digital.

Cheers, JT

[madtheory]

Have you tried a blind AB with an ADA in the path? :p

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by madtheory

Have you tried a blind AB with an ADA in the path? :p

With today's modern conversion I'm sure it would be very very close, the difference of a nuance.

But blind testing bores me!

JT

[realtrance]

Part of my concern is that in this totally corrupt, mass-market-mindless thoughtless heartless world we're living in now, we're all going to be seduced into accepting crap as the norm.

Then the marketeers can show up with their magic wands and release "re-mastered" versions (which aren't, just lossless digital) of the existing catalogue for a higher price with, "listen to how much BETTER it sounds!!" propaganda..... and then everyone's sucked into re-buying the back catalogue for the EIGHTH time in their lives. It's brilliant! Cough up the bucks, everyone!!!

You wait 'n see. Sigh.

[realtrance]

Also, and sorry, I'll lay back after this comment, there are a lot of great people here whose opinions I respect more than my own..... maybe it's hyperbole to say this, but maybe not: maybe the reason the music industry's dying is because people are being taught by this subtle-degradation-for-the-sake-of-convenience NOT to listen closely. Like with everything else in this Twitteridiot ADD tech environment, the emphasis is all on NOT paying attention. Hell, if you're not paying attention, the sleazeballs can get away with anything they want, right? That's how it works now. And music has no influence on your soul if all it is, is background noise. It won't matter, and soon, neither will you, either, if you stop paying attention.

And yes, it's in the mastering forum, in one of the last disciplines where people are rewarded for doing the opposite, for paying in-depth attention, that some thought should be given to all this.

Ok rant done now, I think.

[Teddy Ray]

Originally Posted by aleatoric

My whole library is FLAC (lossless), ripped direct from my CD collection. I buy CD's often but rip them to FLAC to add to my library. I use sbooth software's "Play" as an iTunes alternative (iTunes will not play FLAC files). Works for me.

I use foobar. amazing player...ASIO output(WASAPI for VISTA)

and can customize to look however you want..

mine is here



I also had this one
Click this bar to view the full image.

Originally Posted by realtrance

I've given it a few years' chance; I really have. And I've been listening to CDs more recently.

And I just have to say - not going to get into any arguments about equipment, recording, whatever - all this compressed iTunes music, I don't care what, sounds absolutely lifeless.

There's I don't know....... shimmer. Spirit. Urgency. Presence. Clarity. Excitement. All present on any good CD or LP recording. All, all of it, absent on any music on iTunes.

You're missing it ALL if you're going to this compressed online crap for your music enjoyment, I'm telling you. Might as well just be listening to elevator music while you're munching on a stick of celery.

Blech. I'm never going back. Forget iTunes, it's convenient for when you're stuck in the cattle car on an airplane, and that's about it.

If you're lumping itunes and MP3's together, you've already ****ed up.
Itunes has a terrible encoder, and a terrible decoder, ditto all mac products.
If you're using lame as an encoder @ 320kbps, and apollo as a decoder, the sound is comparable to lossless, albiet without an incredibly small amount of high frequency detail.
AAC, while*technically* a better specification - is only as good as the encoder it's made through, and lame-encoded MP3's are a mile ahead of any AAC's.

Don't get me wrong, I run lossless most of the time, but to say MP3s are rubbish, have no sound quality, is just laughable.

[boojum]

Compressed and MP3 are two different things. And bad music does not sound better as an MP3. Bad music does not sound better compressed. It may sound louder. MP3 in itself is quite serviceable. One master recording engineer has posted that AAC at 320 is indistinguishable form CD's per large scale testing by the developer.

LP's have less dynamic range and a narrower frequency range than CD's. But, they do have wow, flutter, rumble, surface noise and off center discs. What's not to like in that trade-off?

[ysmgj]

Originally Posted by realtrance

it's convenient for when you're stuck in the cattle car on an airplane, and that's about it.

which is where and when 90% of the music listening population listen to music.

betamaxFTWgoddammit!

[Beyersound]

Originally Posted by soulstudios

If you're lumping itunes and MP3's together, you've already ****ed up.
Itunes has a terrible encoder, and a terrible decoder, ditto all mac products.
If you're using lame as an encoder @ 320kbps, and apollo as a decoder, the sound is comparable to lossless, albiet without an incredibly small amount of high frequency detail.
AAC, while*technically* a better specification - is only as good as the encoder it's made through, and lame-encoded MP3's are a mile ahead of any AAC's.

Don't get me wrong, I run lossless most of the time, but to say MP3s are rubbish, have no sound quality, is just laughable.

+1, excellent post! You have hit the nail on the head. The Apple format encoders are really lacking. It is amazing how good things sound with Lame encoding at or above 256kbps. I of course, prefer lossless formats, bit this is a viable compromise. It would be great if there were more competition for Itunes, and good encoding was the rule, not the exception.

[dethroxxmeowserz]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

That would be pre-digital vinyl!

It simply sounds incredible. Especially on a properly set-up turntable.

Analog rules!

btw- I've got the same LP, any many others, bought new back in the day.

JT

p.s. interesting article on Doug Sax initial opposition to CD:

Stereophile: Sheffield Steel? Doug Sax

vinyl does rule. i don't have a turntable, i sold all my records, but it's only becuz it's such a pain these days. i record my own stuff more than listen, but if i was a bigger listener, i'd be one of those cats with 3 turntables, a power amp, weird european speakers and a vivid record collection.

and i have no sympathy for complaints about mp3's or AACs. if these are encoded well, i don't hear much difference between them and the cd's. there's a difference, yeah, but it's negligible. where there's a HUGE difference between a cd and vinyl.

i know it's unrealistic to argue that the industry reverts back to vinyl, but i feel like it's silly to moan about mp3s when the best they're gonna sound is cd anyway.

maybe it's only worth it now to try to push for a better standard format than 44.1/16 bit. cuz cds suck.

(good music doesn't suck no matter what format you put it on. (barring some ridiculous extreme).
good music sounds just fine on a low grade mp3 playing thru crap speakers, it really does. but i think we're arguing about how good things could be, and cds have never cut it. they sounded like crap back when they came out and they still do now. we only know this becuz such things as records and turntables still exist for us to compare them to. otherwise everyone would say we were crazy and imagining things. that we were romanticizing the past. go listen, right now. records sound way better. even ones that aren't in the best shape sound better.)

i don't know what is reasonable for a new format. but at least 24bit and i'd vote for 96k. i still don't think that'd capture the feeling of a tough vinyl record though. vinyl added something to the music so i understand it's subjective. but don't blame mp3s for cds sucking.

[dethroxxmeowserz]

Originally Posted by boojum

Compressed and MP3 are two different things. And bad music does not sound better as an MP3. Bad music does not sound better compressed. It may sound louder. MP3 in itself is quite serviceable. One master recording engineer has posted that AAC at 320 is indistinguishable form CD's per large scale testing by the developer.

LP's have less dynamic range and a narrower frequency range than CD's. But, they do have wow, flutter, rumble, surface noise and off center discs. What's not to like in that trade-off?

wow, flutter, rumble and all that don't matter to me.
less dynamic range and narrower frequency either. does not matter, becuz vinyl hits you more in the chest, it doesn't seem scattered or weak. everything about what a record is supposed to be is better captured in vinyl versus current standard of cd.

but especially when i talk like this, it's obvious how subjective my argument is. for whatever reason, and it's not always age, i associate what music is supposed to sound like with how things sound recorded up to the early 80's and transferred to vinyl.

i know there's something else about the modern process that is messed up, becuz if my friend gets her record pressed on vinyl, it usually sounds worse than the cd she gives me of the same master. vinyl adds nothing, i'll take the cd home to listen to, thank you. and that is beyond me, i don't understand that. so i'm not saying that vinyl is magic or nothing.

but it's more when looking at the Rolling Stones. if they are transferring from the same master tapes, then why do old Rolling Stones records sound so much better than the cd's that came out 5 years ago.

actually, maybe it's more of a change in mastering technique than the cd format. i don't know. cd's don't even suck. i like my own music on cds, i like a lot of stuff on cds just fine.

i guess i wrote more becuz i don't see mp3/aac compression or encoding as being that bad if it's done ok. (i just use LAME, i like it fine). it's just not the horror that the original post was making it seem. we've lost a lot more that's way more worth it to fight about.