What do you all use to play music/cd's???

[jvoorhees]

Im starting to be a real stuck up guy only wanting FLAC now instead of MP3's. I originally just had my iPod hooked up to our amp and played it through there... but am now getting back into my CD's and listening to uncompressed stuff Curious what you all use???? Ive got most of my music back on my PC now in FLAC format... just the good stuff mind you

Cheers!

[donaldheil]

It's funny, but as I've spent my life making my music bigger (not only by acquiring a 5,1 sound system, but adopting technologies like DVD audio and Super Audio CD) the world around me was making the music smaller. So I never got into mp3 as my primary source of music. I rather play CD's and as I said, multi channel discs. Nothing that is compressed.

For many people mp3 is the greatest thing, and they don't find any difference with uncompressed sources. But not for me. I feel paranoic sometimes... I always seem to find the difference, no matter how well the mp3 archive sounds.

But that depends on personal taste.

What I use then is a OPPO dvd player do-it-all: it plays DVD audio, SACD. It can play mp3's, but as I said, I WON'T use it for that. And moreover, it upgrades dvd movies and plays all kinds of dvd's, no matter the region or if they are PAL.

I'm happy a dvd player helps me keep my music bigger.

[jvoorhees]

Yeah I hear ya... Im a total freak when it comes to my music... and listening to stuff on my ipod as opposed to an actual CD is insane I want uncompressed stuff... my only thing is that Im lazy I dont want to get up every once in awhile to change the CD... Id like to stream my stuff from my PC to my PS3... but I know the PS3 cant play FLAC I know it can do WAV but dunno if you can stream that???

Anyone stream their music???

[Meathead]

4 GB Ipod Nano
I hate switching out CDs and all that crap plus at least to my ears I can't tell the difference between CDs and the Ipod

[DeathByAsh'aman]

i use the x button on my PS3 to play my music. . Im lazy and not into music enough to care about the compression. Im so lazy that i only got through about 20 of my CDs when i was transferring them to the PS3.

Where i work i get to listen to my iPod 8 hours a day and after 2 weeks listening to music was making me fall asleep. Now i only do audiobooks at work.

[Durentis]

This might come as a shock, but CDs are lossy compressed audio.

FLAC and other lossless compression formats are often described as uncompressed audio in the same manner as CDs. These compression formats are guaranteed to be bit for bit identical to the source - listening to a FLAC rip of an Imogen Heap CD will sound exactly the same as listening to the original CD.

MP3's and similar lossy compression formats naturally sound somewhat worse than a CD if you can detect the difference. And the compression formats try to make that as difficult as possible by cutting out hard to hear aspects of sound. These compression formats are not bit for bit identical to the source.

'Uncompressed' is a marketing buzzword. In fact, there are (at least) two stages of compression. The first stage is the interval at which you measure real environmental sound (what would generally end up on a CD if it's not squished further to fit), and the second is the file compression format you choose (such as MP3 or FLAC) to reduce the digital storage and playback requirements. If you were to record someone singing at one measurement per second and store it to CD, that would be a pretty significant compression and yet you consider the CD to be uncompressed audio.

But back to my original statement.. CD audio is not the true source of the audio. The musical instruments, voices, and other audible natural events are the true source. In order to capture sound truly uncompressed, you would have to store a continuous data stream (infinite amount of information) - any less and you have just compressed the source.

You can put a reasonable limit on compression though using human hearing thresholds since it won't make any difference storing more information than you can interpret. But if you can tell the difference between a CD and an SACD, a CD is obviously not at that threshold - and arguably far from it.

So given that both MP3s and CDs consist of lossy compressed audio, both are pretty close in quality, and neither are near ideal, is a FLAC of a CD really so important? Is it worth the lack of convenience of an MP3?

I think not so much.

[Beta Man]

I have a sony 400 disc SACD player, and an Arcam CD33 that is in need to be sent in for repair soon (it's finicky right now) Not sure, but I might sell it "as is" or just deal with it, with it's quirks and hope it doesn't die...... the estimate I got for repair was around $250, and I got it for a song-and-dance a few years ago... so I don't want to invest too much into it.

[Sith]

Always use the cd if your at home, but if you want to have a big supply
in your ipod at least burn import them in a high bit rate....

I use the 192 for mp3 i beleive...And i never download from there site...I
always buy the cd original....

[mx2004]

Originally Posted by Durentis

This might come as a shock, but CDs are lossy compressed audio.

Incorrect. CDs contain uncompressed Linear PCM at 16 bits / 44.1 kHz. It is not lossless (like the lossless compression used on DVD-Audio or the Blu-ray HD codecs like DTS-HD Master Audio or Dolby True HD), nor is it lossy (like DTS, Dolby Digital or MP3).

Arguments about it's quality, due to decisions about sampling frequency and word length made during the development of compact disc are another matter. CD is uncompressed. Higher sampling frequencies and longer word lengths (24/48 or 24/96) will capture more information from the recording venue, naturally but this doesn not change the fact that CDs are not compressed. (So much about sound quality depends on the recording engineer - microphone placement, sensitive editing and mixing and quality studio equipment will have much more impact than a few bits here or there in general).

CD has proved to be something of a survivor - even its replacements flatter it with copying its dimensions and outer appearance. The best CD replay systems rival the highest-end vinyl and SACD systems.

Back to the topic: I do my 'proper' CD listening on a Meridian 506.20 CD player, SACDs on my Philips DVP720SA. When I'm out and about I use a Sony Walkman (the 20GB hard disk one from a couple of years back) which occasionally gets used through the home system as a jukebox for parties or background music. for which purposes it stands up rather well.

[Giyomu]

at home : CDs mostly on dvdplayer, sometimes from PC but I just have a 2.1 audio
outside : Ipod touch with new philips earphones for hdsound (a lot lot better than original apple standard earphones)

[bhampton]

Hi,

I listen to CDs and SACDs on my PS3 (via HDMI output.)

I have another player (Sony NC-650V) that I used to use for CDs and SACD but the PS3 does CDs better. After comparing the 2 the PS3 was clearly better so the other player waits in the corner in case I set it up somewhere else in the house someday.


-Brian

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by bhampton

Hi,

I listen to CDs and SACDs on my PS3 (via HDMI output.)

I have another player (Sony NC-650V) that I used to use for CDs and SACD but the PS3 does CDs better. After comparing the 2 the PS3 was clearly better so the other player waits in the corner in case I set it up somewhere else in the house someday.


-Brian

Mines the total opposite.... when I compare play-back from the Arcam, the PS3 has NOTHING on it.... and that Arcam is probably 6 years old if it's a day ......

[prerich]

I listen to music via my PC for casual listening (files are all .wav files - I know FLAC is smaller - I've been experimenting with FLAC for a few months now but I can't mix in Adobe with FLAC so I tend to stay with wav - or do the original mix in .wav and convert the final .wav to FLAC). I listen to my CD's in a older Sony ES 5 disc changer. I'm in the market for a tube based CD player.

[mx2004]

Originally Posted by prerich

I listen to music via my PC for casual listening (files are all .wav files - I know FLAC is smaller - I've been experimenting with FLAC for a few months now but I can't mix in Adobe with FLAC so I tend to stay with wav - or do the original mix in .wav and convert the final .wav to FLAC). I listen to my CD's in a older Sony ES 5 disc changer. I'm in the market for a tube based CD player.

I'm quite interested in the idea of FLAC on the PC for jukebox purposes - although I would keep what I call my 'critical' listening to the CD player, but I dont' know how to do it - what software do I need to convert and play back? (I should probably google it, but the benefit of others' experience is nice.)

Anyone recommend a USB soundcard with optical digital out (or S/PDIF)?

[prerich]

Originally Posted by mx2004

I'm quite interested in the idea of FLAC on the PC for jukebox purposes - although I would keep what I call my 'critical' listening to the CD player, but I dont' know how to do it - what software do I need to convert and play back? (I should probably google it, but the benefit of others' experience is nice.)

Anyone recommend a USB soundcard with optical digital out (or S/PDIF)?

Here's a site that will tell you everything you need to know about FLAC and how to impliment it - http://flac.sourceforge.net/documentation_tasks.html
The best solution is just to buy WinAmp full version (not the free download - thats the lite version). It has full FLAC support out the box.

The only "usb soundcards" that I have used are actually triggers for virtual turntables for mixing purposes. Had some latency problems with a few but with just a regular usb soundcard to play music via SPDIF here's one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16829132004
There's always the creative solutions but they are CPU hogs!

[jdc115]

Originally Posted by jvoorhees

Yeah I hear ya... Im a total freak when it comes to my music... and listening to stuff on my ipod as opposed to an actual CD is insane I want uncompressed stuff... my only thing is that Im lazy I dont want to get up every once in awhile to change the CD... Id like to stream my stuff from my PC to my PS3... but I know the PS3 cant play FLAC I know it can do WAV but dunno if you can stream that???

Anyone stream their music???

I ripped all my CD's as WMA Lossless format and stream them using TVersity. Though I believe it is transcoding it to PCM for the PS3. the sound is good, better then MP3 by far and I have not been able to tell the difference from the CD.

If the PS3 supports FLAC at any point, I think I will go back and rip all 400 CDs over again.

It was nice to do this as I can store away most of my CDs

I do have about 40 SACDs as well in which case I have to play the disk

[Durentis]

Originally Posted by mx2004

Incorrect. CDs contain uncompressed Linear PCM at 16 bits / 44.1 kHz.

You can argue semantics until you're blue in the face, but the fact remains - sample rate is a first stage compression. More accurate would be for you to say that CDs contain un-recompressed Linear PCM at 16 bits / 44.1 kHz, but that's kinda trivial given that anything is an un-recompressed form of itself.

But I suspect that recordings are often done at higher than CD spec and later altered to CD spec (say, by pulling out every other frame to cut the sample rate in half). It would be like retaining a 4K master but cutting it back to 1080p for distribution. This subsampling is again a compression.

There are many ways to compress audio and removing entire frames (samples) is one of them. Whether it happens in the second stage compression or right from the initial recording, it is still compression.

[MieDan4ever]

Im using a Sony DVP-S9000ES player. Cost me $1500 at the time. It was first used as a dvd plyer but now its being used as a CD player. I watch my movies with my sony blu ray player.

[mx2004]

Originally Posted by Durentis

You can argue semantics until you're blue in the face, but the fact remains - sample rate is a first stage compression. More accurate would be for you to say that CDs contain un-recompressed Linear PCM at 16 bits / 44.1 kHz, but that's kinda trivial given that anything is an un-recompressed form of itself.

But I suspect that recordings are often done at higher than CD spec and later altered to CD spec (say, by pulling out every other frame to cut the sample rate in half). It would be like retaining a 4K master but cutting it back to 1080p for distribution. This subsampling is again a compression.

There are many ways to compress audio and removing entire frames (samples) is one of them. Whether it happens in the second stage compression or right from the initial recording, it is still compression.

Fair enough - although I think you were a little naughty using the term 'lossy' (which is generally taken to signify a codec that removes data, that can never be restored) to try and equate CD audio with codecs like Dolby Digital AC-3. There is simply no comparison in fidelity terms, although a well recorded music programme in Dolby Digital or DTS can be utterly beguiling. ('DVD Space Spectacular from Delos Records, probably long-deleted, has DD 5.1 recordings of Strauss' Also Sprach Zarathustra and Holst's The Planets with the Dallas Symphony - the spectacular engineering, when reproduced through a good processor/amplification and speakers is state-of-the-art surround music, no matter what anyone says about the quality or otherwise of original Dolby Digital)

You have of course hit on the root problem for purist (analogue) audiophiles in that any digital - be it 24/192 or 16/44.1 or DSD whether using lossy or lossless compression merely approximates the original analogue waveform - even this as you say is only a representation of the original event.

I suppose a dream high end source might be some sort of laser-read optical disc carrying analogue audio, so there's no compression or sampling involved. LP-meets-CD perhaps? Maybe in the rush to digital in the 1970s, there wasn't enough research into a more robust analogue disc system than the wonderful but often fragile old Lp.

On the subject of CD, the 'approximation'/compression/sampling of 16/44.1 seems to be enough to satisfy the most discerning audiophiles, with the exception of those vynil purists of course. It would have been nice if SACD took off - a bit like moving from 720 to 1080 I guess - but apart from some rather lovely classical it seems that it was not to be.

[richteer]

Originally Posted by prerich

I listen to music via my PC for casual listening (files are all .wav files - I know FLAC is smaller - I've been experimenting with FLAC for a few months now but I can't mix in Adobe with FLAC so I tend to stay with wav - or do the original mix in .wav and convert the final .wav to FLAC). I listen to my CD's in a older Sony ES 5 disc changer. I'm in the market for a tube based CD player.

Here's a (relatively) affordable tube-based CD player: the PrimaLuna ProLogue 8. I've no direct experience with it, but judging by their other stuff, it should be pretty good.

To answer the OP's question: I listen to 95%+ of my music via my Forsell Air Force One Signature turntable and Lyra Parnassus cartridge. I listen to the few (~50) CDs I have via my Pioneer PD-7100 CD, which I bought from my neighbour a couple of years ago for $10.

Talking of listen to music, today I received a package from the good people at Acoustic Sounds, containing 3 of Mark Knopfler's albums and the MFSL pressing of Marc Cohn's eponymously titled first album. Weekend listening fun!