Is listening to lossy via wireless sacrilege?

Folsom · « **Reply #20 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 01:02 am »

I sure hope it improves...

When I was at a shop they had a bunch of McIntosh gear being fed over Sonos (digital out), and whatever the subscription was, CD quality or a bit higher. It sounded pretty bad.

Odal3 · « **Reply #21 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 01:49 am »

Over wifi can mean a couple of different things, so let me know if I'm off track here. Using the phone as a client (remote) to control the music doesn't at least in my experience really have any impact on sound regardless if spotify or high rez streamer solutions from a local server/nas.

The only difference versus ethernet would be if the wifi signal is poor or if a lot of bandwidth is used up by other people in the house playing games and/or streaming HD movies.

Or do you mean streaming directly to the iphone over local wifi and using the iphone audio out? I don't know about the dacs in iphones, but perhaps this can give some technical info as a comparison: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8554/the-iphone-6-review/11

Instead of using the iphone directly hooked up to the amp, one option is to look into the raspberry pi2 with one of the matching i2S or usb dac. This will allow playing both local files as well as stream anything via dlna or airplay protocol. Moode audio is a good pre-made software image to use. http://moodeaudio.org/. Volumio is another. Here are some instructions to get started: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/638-geek-speak-raspberry-pi-hifi-here/

JLM · « **Reply #22 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 11:51 am »

My friend was using his iPhone to wirelessly transmit Spotify (lossy, 320 kbps) audio signal via Bluetooth to a tiny unknown receiver/DAC that plugged into his pre-amp via 3.5 mm captured cable.

mcgsxr · « **Reply #23 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 11:59 am »

Fully agree that streaming does not equate poor quality. Lots of folks streaming FLAC or hi rez around here for many years.

I think what JLM experienced is just another stripe in the music lover vs audiophile continuum.

Not many of us here love gear to the exclusion of music, and few of us love music to the exclusion of good gear!

I would say it would be more satisfying to hear good music via lossy streaming vs no music. I would also say that if I could, I would prefer lossless, which is what the main question seems to come down to.

In my mid 40's, so I think I likely align more with the curmudgeonly elders vs the hip youth, but my love of music and good reproduction is a tie.

Odal3 · « **Reply #24 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 01:30 pm »

Bluetooth is a different thing than streaming over the wifI router. Bluetooth used to be barely listenable but it has come along way. Read up on aptx. I read a review on a different site that said it's not bad for everyday listening but couldn't do hi rez files. I havent explored the aptx based bluetooth solutions since I'm happy with my wifi via router solution and only use bluetooth in the car.

JLM · « **Reply #25 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 01:46 pm »

Maybe we have a communication/terminology issue here.

By streaming I mean music via internet (in various formats).

By wireless I mean music transmitted by Bluetooth/etc. (not wires).

What I experienced was streamed lossy files transmitted from an iPhone by Bluetooth and converted via a very cheap DAC at an audiophile meeting. While I stream lossy formats for casual listening on my main system and stream lossy formats via a $99 Logitech UE smart radio (again for background listening) I was dumbfounded as I'd never considered any of these as "audiophile approved". Note that I'm currently committed to Redbook (CD, 16/44.1 format), so not even considering any high resolution formats.

So again: Is it the consensus that lossy formats, wireless signal transmission, and/or streaming via a phone is/are worthwhile tradeoff(s) (as the only source) for C&C systems?

RDavidson · « **Reply #26 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 03:19 pm »

Well, being that C&C rather implies that large tradeoffs are inevitable, I'd say "yes." We have to keep in mind that it's all about music enjoyment, which differs a bit from music appreciation. While one with a C&C system may not be able to fully appreciate the music they're listening to (due to loss in fidelity), they can certainly still enjoy it.

To me, that's what C&C is about : Building a setup that is musically enjoyable, on a budget.

rajacat · « **Reply #27 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 03:50 pm »

I find mp3s flat sounding and lacking the emotion of lossless files therefore don't rise as high on the pleasure scale for me. Storage is cheap nowadays so why not use lossless whenever possible? The only streaming service I'd be interested in is something like Tidal with its lossless format. I don't think that a C&C system has to use mp3s to be inexpensive.

RDavidson · « **Reply #28 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 04:16 pm »

Definitely agree. That's true, but doesn't really answer JLM's question.

I think the tradeoffs might be OK for one person, but not another. Ideally we wouldn't have these lossy formats at all. It just isn't necessary anymore, as you state. But for some, the difference between paying $10 a month for a lossy service with a huge library vs paying $20 a month for a lossless service with a smaller library is a hard pill to swallow. It just boils down to priorities and what people value...which is going to vary. I don't think it's our place to necessarily judge what is worthy or not for another person to listen to, but I think it is a worthy cause to help others find better ways to enjoy music.

HsvHeelFan · « **Reply #29 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 04:29 pm »

JLM asked:

"So again: Is it the consensus that lossy formats, wireless signal transmission, and/or streaming via a phone is/are worthwhile tradeoff(s) (as the only source) for Cheap & Cheerful systems?"

I'm not a fan of lossy formats. However, if it's a C&C system, one may not be able to tell the difference. I'd recommend that someone would have to test the C&C system that's being evaluated.

On my rig, which isn't C&C, It's pretty easy to hear the difference between lossless and lossy files. The lossy files do have less detail and generally sound overall a bit thinner than the lossless.

If the system they're being played on can't discern that, then there is no issue and lossy would be fine.

As far as wireless goes, once again, you'd have to test it. Can you get a reliable stream from the source to the playback system? If it works for you, that's great! However, I'd be looking for a dock or something to take the wireless out of the loop.

As always, trust your ears!

HsvHeelFan

charmerci · « **Reply #30 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 04:56 pm »

With most people having access to cheap storage - I just bought a 32GB micro-SD disc for $13.00 - plus decent/small DAC's under 40 bucks - Fiio and HiFiMe DIY (used to be the Medfly company) - there's no reason for listening to that crappy sound except as background music.

I think you should discourage this person's use of the word audiophile - because it simply isn't.

rockadanny · « **Reply #31 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 09:02 pm »

Answer to original question: "Is listening to lossy via wireless sacrilege?"

For me, I'd only try it for quiet background music or social gatherings with louder music emanating from an adjacent room. Otherwise for me I'd not be able to tolerate without bringing on a headache.

Devil Doc · « **Reply #32 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 09:33 pm »

What's an MP3?
Vinyl Lover,

Doc

David C · « **Reply #33 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 09:40 pm »

I agree in principle but I him some MP3's that sound better than my 2 GB of flac. One is Lou Reed .... "Walk on the wild side" there other is an old Pete Fountain track.

JLM · « **Reply #34 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 10:17 pm »

So it's questionable whether or not lossy files are acceptable even for C&C. Note that many such owners are inexperienced, so they may simply not know. Or they may be listening to music that is very poorly recorded (even full of distortion).

So next issue: Can an iPhone make sense versus a computer/DAC in a C&C system? My friend believes strongly in the quality of his iPhone (hopefully we can compare at our next meeting). I'm thinking that it might compare well versus other phones and would probably serve well with earbuds or BT speakers. I've suggested that the iPhone might rank a 3 on a 1 - 10 audiophile scale, while a cheap laptop/Dragonfly (typical C&C fair) could be a 6.

Final issue: Is wireless signal transmission good enough for C&C? I really don't know. I know there are some high-end wireless solutions, but don't know if/what cheaper viable solution(s) exist. I've avoided this by going with 3.0m long USB and 35 ft long optical cables (which I know are not recommended).

srb · « **Reply #35 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 10:38 pm »

Quote from: JLM on 20 Oct 2015, 10:17 pm

So next issue: Can an iPhone make sense versus a computer/DAC in a C&C system?

Final issue: Is wireless signal transmission good enough for C&C? I really don't know.

Bluetooth aptX is the best of the Bluetooth wireless transmission protocols. iPhones don't have BT aptX, but a number of midrange to high-end Asus, HTC, LG, Motorola, Samsung, etc. phones do.

Even so, I believe better fidelity can be had with Wi-Fi/AirPlay to an Apple Airport Express. This is probably best accomplished with an iPhone although it can also be done a little less elegantly with an Android phone and third party Android AirPlay apps.

The Airport Express is of course limited to 16/48, but it works very well and although it has an optical S/PDIF output, the internal DAC is surprisingly good quality, particularly for a $100 device. As with so many things, it is most often pooh-poohed by those that have never used it.

Steve

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #36 on:** 20 Oct 2015, 10:39 pm »

In response to the original question, I think listening to bad music on a $200,000 system is sacrilege, but listening to great music from any reasonable source through a cheap amp and speakers is much cooler.

And no, I'm not going to define "bad".

Odal3 · « **Reply #37 on:** 21 Oct 2015, 03:02 am »

No need to only pick one option when there are so many good C&C solutions that do both streaming and local files. Storage is cheap (I have a server with 12 TB hd space), but buying songs are expensive so I do both.

I really recommend swapping out the bluetooth option for a wifi based solution in your scenario where the phone, laptop, tablet is the client and there is a receiving box (which could be a second low-power computer, raspberry pi, apple express or even the new chromecast audio) connected to a DAC. It will likely sound better, but more importantly, it will make it easier to scale since you can easily load different software and connect different DACs when it comes time to upgrade, etc.

BTW: Remind me again about the software player and set-up in your system - do you use a laptop with itunes with the long cable to your emotiva dac? If so, you can alway test wifi (not bluetooth) vs cable if you have a wifi router at home. If itunes (or other remote controlled players), you can put the computer next to the DAC and control it via an app on your phone. In this type of set-up, I can't tell any difference at all in at least in my system. However, if I play directly from my older Samsung Galaxy 4 phone with bluetooth or even worse via the 1/8 audio output, it sounds really 'muddy' - the only way I can get decent sound directly out of my older phone other than using it as a client is if I connect the microusb to an external dac such as the C&C hifimediy android DAC.

JLM · « **Reply #38 on:** 21 Oct 2015, 11:56 am »

Quote from: Odal3 on 21 Oct 2015, 03:02 am

BTW: Remind me again about the software player and set-up in your system - do you use a laptop with itunes with the long cable to your emotiva dac? If so, you can alway test wifi (not bluetooth) vs cable if you have a wifi router at home. If itunes (or other remote controlled players), you can put the computer next to the DAC and control it via an app on your phone. In this type of set-up, I can't tell any difference at all in at least in my system. However, if I play directly from my older Samsung Galaxy 4 phone with bluetooth or even worse via the 1/8 audio output, it sounds really 'muddy' - the only way I can get decent sound directly out of my older phone other than using it as a client is if I connect the microusb to an external dac such as the C&C hifimediy android DAC.

I have both an iMac connected to the Emotiva DC-1 via 35 ft optical and a MacBook Air connected via 3.0m USB. So far I've got identical music loaded onto iTunes on both, but am considering alternate software options.

RDavidson · « **Reply #39 on:** 22 Oct 2015, 03:38 pm »

Here's a very interesting bit of info that brings quite a bit of perspective to this discussion.

http://www.audiostream.com/content/home-invasion-rough-market-analysis#P00HYPLUOzKOWXoE.97

JLM, I think your friend is treading a line that most (younger people especially) aren't. My guess is that guys like him, who are in our hobby vs those who aren't (ie the casual listening / Sonos crowd), will continue to evolve to listening to better quality formats and will pursue better quality gear to enjoy it with as funds permit. Meanwhile, most "casual listeners" will pursue better (ie more convenient) ways to listen, as technology evolves to fit their needs.

I think the key to benefitting all, as stated earlier, is that companies need to stop with lossy formats. Unfortunately, they have to want to do that, or the market has to prove that people want it. That's the cool thing about Tidal. They're definitely going against the grain. Thinking about it this way kind of makes me feel guilty for using Spotify.