Spotify to offer Lossless Streaming

[philippe_44]

actually, everything about cd format was kind of arbitrary in order to fit Beethoven's 9th in one single portable cd. (https://www.classicfm.com/discover-m...cd-74-minutes/). it could have been 14 or 20 bits depending on how much fit in one cd. i am sure all the engineers from sony and philips from those days are surprised that whatever they came up with 40 years ago are still the high watermark of audio technology today. i am, for sure.

more of every thing in technology from cpu power to screen resolution is good, whether you need it or not. but when it comes to audio resolution, less is good. how can this be true?

I can ensure you that 44.1 is enough to mathematically perfectly cover 20kHz on BW which is above humans perception. 16 bits is enough to ensure a SNR and range well inside the 120 dB of human hearing (now I include pain levels).

Now, could it be 43 or 48 kHz instead? Yes. That piece is arbitrary but the point is that more does not give you anything. 18 bits? Maybe but computers use bytes and the 16 is enough, so 20 bits will not give you more.

Again, everybody is perfectly entitled to have fun building or buying complex and expensive gears. But it’s about aesthetic and hobbies, what is incorrect is to claim it is better from a signal theory’s point if view.

[pablolie]

I
Again, everybody is perfectly entitled to have fun building or buying complex and expensive gears. But itÂ’s about aesthetic and hobbies, what is incorrect is to claim it is better from a signal theoryÂ’s point if view.

Perfectly put.

The valid analogy is not a 360x240 computer screen (ewww!) but the pixel wars that went on in digital photography for a long time, and which -among many things- contributed to the demise of digital compact cameras by forcing silly upgrade cycles based on a 64mp or more sensor when the fact was the lens didn't provide anywhere near that resolution. Silly marketing. It kind of has started again with some smartphones, but that because of available CPU power and big data algorithms to *mask* the limitations of the original picture... while in audio, with 16/44 there is nothing to mask, an it's actually overkill unless the best recording equipment and know-how was applied to begin with.Now that digital cameras -even full frame- have to compete with smartphones, the megapixel was died and instead the focus is on stuff like dynamic range etc -the stuff that matters. Camera makers know even us ambitioned consumers don't really need more than 12-24mp - you can make a billboard with that, really. Pushing beyond that is cumbersome - just makes it take more time to copy and edit and process with - kinda like 24/192 or beyond audio.The key is to keep real balance between technology capabilities as a source to destination delivery mechanism. Someone mentioned a Ferrari vs a Prius... the relevant question in that scenario is whether you care if your Amazon order is delivered by either. Maybe some prefer the "Ferrari delivery" that in the end is completely irrelevant to the outcome...

Disclaimer: I *do* own some 24/192 albums, but I most certainly don't fool myself I can hear the difference, and couldn't and wouldn't care to even with a million dollar music system. At the height of my audiophile powers, I owned a system that was prolly around $80k. It sounded glorious in that room. But honestly, my current system is more "true" and accurate and gives me 200% audio satisfaction at a fraction of that cost (and those big towers sounded weird in my new place)
. When I really want to obsess I use headphones anyhow (mandatory if you want to truly reliably hear a difference between 320k and CD, but pick your tracks well and use something like a Shure SE535 - strictly neutral stuff).

[pablolie]

No shouting on this forum. My favorite forum for getting along with everyone! Regarding transparency of different codecs, In the distant past, I did some ABX (double blind) tests of lossless vs various flavors of mp3 (320kbps down to 64kbps I recall). I found most things transparent down to 192kbps (for most normal music). Certain known problem samples where one could focus on harpsichord, piano, etc. I could detect. Otherwise my choices turned out to be random guesses. But getting lower than about 160kbps I could more often tell the lossless vs the lossy. But even at 128kbps, certain "rock/pop" music was not reliably different from lossless for me. Below 128, I found it easier and easier, not unexpectedly.

I rip all my CDs to FLAC, because why not. I purchase hi-res files when that's all that's available, but not because I think they are better. I hate the fact that the Neil Young download store only seems to offer 24/192. Just bought the new "Down in the Rust Bucket" album today, and would have gladly purchased 16/44.1 if it had been available.

Amen, btw.

[RonM]

Amen, btw.

+1

[bernt]

I've seen people reporting that they get 1411 kbps in there DAC:s then streaming from Spotify (Connect?).

Anyone else noticing it?

[slartibartfast]

I've seen people reporting that they get 1411 kbps in there DAC:s then streaming from Spotify (Connect?).

Anyone else noticing it?

Spotify tracks are transcoded to PCM or FLAC by LMS. Yours must be set to PCM.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[bernt]

Spotify tracks are transcoded to PCM or FLAC by LMS. Yours must be set to PCM.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Yes, but this is from people that don’t use LMS.


Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk

[slartibartfast]

Yes, but this is from people that don’t use LMS.


Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk

Ah OK. Which DACs display bitrate then? Most just display sample rate.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[bernt]

Ah OK. Which DACs display bitrate then? Most just display sample rate.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Don’t know. It’s a discussion about it on two different swedish hifi forums right now.


Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk

[slartibartfast]

Don’t know. It’s a discussion about it on two different swedish hifi forums right now.


Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk

Maybe Spotify are testing lossless streaming in Sweden. Don't the discussions say how they know the bitrate?

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk