Tag Archives: audio

audio, music industry

First encounter with Spotify sixth play bar – but what is the reason?

When I fired up Spotify today I was greeted by this large banner:

image

Free listening has gone, unless you are happy not to have repeat listens. After five times, that’s it.

I sacrificially endured playing Winchester Cathedral by The New Vaudeville band five times over. I discovered that simply starting a track does not seem to count. On the sixth attempt to play the full track though, I got a slightly modified version of the above banner, and then a message along the top of the Spotify app:

image

As a point of interest, this particular track is on a large number of different compilations of 60’s compilations. Spotify seems to consider each appearance a different track. So I was able to endure a sixth play of the track by picking a different compilation.

Why has Spotify made this unpopular change? The suggestion in the official blog post is that it was forced upon the company, either by financial necessity or the insistence of the music industry:

It’s vital that we continue offering an on-demand free service to you and millions more like you, but to make that possible we have to put some limits in place going forward.

There are over 9000 (mostly negative) comments post, but as far as I can tell no further official comment there.

Spotify’s chief content officer Ken Parks was available for interview and quoted by various sources; for example he told the Reg:

We’ve shown that the model is doing extremely well, but as things stand we need to tweak the service to ensure everyone has access to legal music in the long term.

Similar tone, but still no hard information. As for CEO and founder Daniel Ek he tweeted:

Things are not always what they seem…

which if it means anything means “watch this space” I guess.

The affect of the change is easy to predict. There will be more subscribers, but fewer users. Spotify will be less attractive to advertisers, but will get additional subscription income. Since it is still a good deal with the basic subscription, I would expect income to increase overall, but that is only a hunch.

I like Spotify’s performance and usability. The one thing I have against it is the annoying tendency of tracks to disappear suddenly. I played Paul Simon’s latest, So Beautiful or So What, on the service and enjoyed it. Then the next day it had disappeared. Even subscribers to the unlimited service do not get everything, only those tracks which the various rights holders permit.

audio

Does HDCD make CDs sound worse?

HDCD stands for High Definition Compatible Digital and was developed by Pacific Microsonics, a company acquired by Microsoft in 2000. HDCD encodes the signal on a standard CD in such a way that when decoded it has extended dynamic range and supposedly lower distortion – it is claimed to provide the near-equivalent to 20 bit audio despite the fact that CD is 16-bit.

The snag with HDCD is that not all players decode it. The idea is that HDCD is relatively benign in this respect, and HDCD-encoded CDs still sound good when played back without decoding.

Now audio engineer Steve Hoffman, who specialises in remastering classic CDs for maximum fidelity, says that HDCD actually makes CDs sound worse:

It degrades the sound and it bugs me. I’ve tried everything, every way and it just diminishes the fidelity.

Stephen Marsh, of Stephen Marsh Mastering, who works with Hoffman, adds:

In the interest of giving the HDCD system the fairest of all shakes, I again today ran our completed Bad Co. master through it D to D in 2 additional configurations. First I took our fully prepped, edited 24 bit/44.1 out of converter aes through the HDCD box, outputting 16/44.1 HDCD. Second – I took our 24/88.2 captures and ran those through the box to 16/44.1 HDCD. In both instances we found the HDCD box to be at least as detrimental to the sound as we heard while A to D’ing with it Friday – if not more! In particular – I listened to the HDCD encoded material in un-decoded fashion so I could get a sense of what most consumers are going to hear. Even through the best converters in the room the results were very unsettling: Namely – there was a dip at around 8K the took all the snap and sparkle out of the snare and deflated the air out of the tracks. Engaging the decoding circuits and monitoring through the HDCD D to A’s lent an overall ‘generic’ feel to the sound – it sounded fine, don’t get me wrong – but it didn’t sound special and was certainly not an improvement.

The HDCD concept has always bothered me as well. It is fixing a problem that does not need fixing: neither distortion, nor dynamic range is an issue with standard 16/44 CDs. The fact that not all CDs will be decoded correctly is a worry. Finally, any processing risks degrading the sound, and other things being equal the straightest path is the best.

I recall discovering back in the days of compact cassette that recording and playback with Dolby switched off generally sounded best, even though tape hiss on a cassette was a real problem that did need fixing.

Even if Hoffman and Marsh are wrong, and HDCD does sound better when properly decoded, the fact that it often is not properly decoded is good reason to steer clear.

Now that CDs are commonly ripped to a music server HDCD encoding is still problematic. Illustrate’s dBpoweramp has a decoder that creates a 24-bit file from HDCD-encoded CDs.

image

apple, audio, mobile, reviews

Review: Lenco iPD-4500 portable iPod dock–zip up your sounds

Today’s gadget is an iPod travel dock with a few distinctive features. The Lenco iPD-4500 zips up to look like a sturdy travel bag; though at 250 x 180 x 80mm it is on the bulky side.

image

It is not really a bag, but unzips to form an iPod dock in the base with speakers in the top.

image

Although  it looks as if there are four speaker drivers it seems only the lower pair are active. The top panel is ported for better bass extension.

The unit has a built-in rechargeable NiMH battery which claims up to 8 hours of playback from a full charge. A mains adaptor is supplied. If mains power is on, then when seated in the dock, the iPod or iPhone charges, but not when on battery.

Along with the iPod dock there is a standard mini-jack input for non-Apple devices or smaller iPods. Controls on the device itself are limited to on-off and volume, but a compartment on the base unit opens to reveal a tiny remote, secured in a clip, with on-off, play-pause, track forward and back, and volume.

image

Lenco also supplies a short mini-jack cable. I would have preferred a longer cable, since the short one will be awkward if you want to connect, say, a laptop for playing a movie; but of course you can use your own cable.

Sound quality

So how does it sound? Contrary to what I had expected from the advertised “bass boost”, this is not a particularly bass-heavy or boomy unit but has a pleasantly balanced sound. It is important to set your expectations. No, the iPD-4500 does not sound as good as docks geared more for home use, that are heavier, larger and more expensive. Compare it to the tiny speaker in an iPhone though, and it is a massive improvement. I rate it one of the better-sounding travel docks I have tried. It is worth experimenting with position too; you can get a weightier sound by positioning the dock near a wall or in a corner. As with any audio device, I recommend hearing it before purchase if possible.

According to the rather uninformative specifications there are 2 x 3W speakers, though without qualification 3W does not mean much. What you really want to know is how loud it goes; and the answer is loud enough for enjoying music in a hotel room or a small tent; but not loud enough if you really want to rock out or drown out significant background noise.

Design and appearance

It has to be said, this is not a beautiful device. A colleague said it looks like a toasted sandwich maker; and I see her point. It does not bother me because I care more about the convenience and the sound, but it is a factor.

I also noticed that the hinged panel which gives access to the front compartment tends to catch when you try to close it so needs to be operated with care.

On the plus side, when zipped up the iPD-4500 does feel securely protected from knocks and bumps, and I would be more confident about subjecting this to the rough and tumble of travel luggage than with most portable speakers.

A flaw is that the mains adaptor does not fit in the pouch, but has to be carried separately. Further, if you were camping rather than in a hotel, it might not be easy to recharge. A car adaptor would be worth considering.

Value for money

The iPD-4500 is on offer for around £75.00 which is at the upper end of the price range for a portable iPod dock. Then again, it sounds good, includes a rechargeable battery and a remote, and has a particularly robust integrated case.

It still strikes me as a premium price; and bear in mind that the Logitech Rechargeable Speaker S315i, for example, claims up to 20 hours playback, though with no remote, and plays somewhat louder. The S315i is nominally more expensive, but seems widely discounted to below the price of the iPD-4500.

What might swing it is if you particularly like the sound quality, or if the strong packaging suits your travelling lifestyle.

 

audio, music industry

Straining to hear: the benefits of SACD audio

1 Comment

A discussion on a music forum led me to this SACD, on which pianist George-Emmanual Lazaridis plays the Grandes études de Paganini. It was recommended as a superb performance and a superb recording.

image

I bought it and have to agree. The music is beautiful and the recording astonishingly realistic. Close your eyes and you can almost see the piano hammers striking the strings.

Since this sounds so good, I took the opportunity to explore one of my interests: the audible benefits of SACD or other high-resolution audio formats versus the 16/44 resolution of CD.

I have set up a simple comparison test. While it is imperfect and would not pass scientific scrutiny, I report it as of anecdotal interest.

First I set my Denon SACD to its best quality, without any bass management or other interference with the sound.

Then I wired the analog output from Front Left and Front Right to one input on my amplifier, and the analog Stereo output to an external analog to digital converter (ADC). The ADC is set to 16/44. When played in SACD stereo mode, these two sets of analog outputs should be the same.

The output from the ADC is then connected to a digital input on the amplifier.

Now I can use the amplifier remote to switch between pure SACD, and SACD via an additional conversion to and from 16/44 sound, which in theory could be encoded on a CD.

At first I could just about tell which was which. The SACD sounded a little more open, with more depth to the sound. It was more involving. I could not describe it as a huge difference, but perhaps one that would be hard to do without once you had heard it. A win for SACD?

Then I realised that the output on the ADC was slightly too low; the SACD was slightly louder. I increased the volume slightly.

Having matched the volume more exactly, I could no longer tell the difference. Both sounded equally good.

I enlisted some volunteers with younger and sharper hearing than mine, but without positive results.

I am not going to claim that nobody could tell the difference. I also recognise that a better SACD player, or a better audio system, might reveal differences that my system disguises.

Still, the test is evidence that on a working system of reasonable quality, the difference is subtle at most. Which is also what science would predict.

The SACD still sounds wonderful of course; and has a surround sound option which a CD cannot deliver. I also believe that SACDs tend to be engineered with more attention to the demands of high-end audio systems than CDs, tailored for the mass market.

Against that, CDs are more convenient because you can rip them to a music server. Personally I rarely play an actual CD these days.

blogging

Gadget Writing – iPhone docks, 5.1 headphones, mobile, gaming and more

I have started a new blog over at gadgets.itwriting.com which is for reporting on mobile, audio, gaming and other such enthusiasms. The main reason is to have somewhere to cover these subjects without diluting the focus of itwriting.com itself.

Currently on Gadget Writing:

AVI preparing a successor to the ADM 9.1 – the floorstanding ADM 40

Surround sound 5.1 headphones–why and why not. Roccat Kave reviewed

How to get better sound: higher resolution, or something else?

Review: Audyssey iPhone Audio Dock South of Market Edition

and a few more bits and pieces.

audio, gaming, reviews

Surround sound 5.1 headphones–why and why not. Roccat Kave reviewed

There is something counter-intuitive about 5.1 headphones. Headphones just look so stereo. Can you really create the surround sound illusion with the speakers so close to the ears?

It turns out you can, or at least sufficiently so to make these Kave 5.1 headphones from Roccat a satisfying product. They are intended primarily as gaming headphones, which explains the attached microphone, though it could be handy for Skype calls and other such uses as well. Another common use is for movies, where surround sound adds to the drama and sense of immersion. They are not really intended for music; but I found them pretty good for that as well.

image_thumb1

What you get is a set of closed-back headphones with a relatively fat cable and an inline control box. The cable has four two-channel mini-jacks, one each for front pair, center and subwoofer, read pair, and microphone input, as well as a USB connector which supplies power and enables communication between the control box and the PC. You can flip open a panel on the control box to reveal channel sliders and to switch between “game” and “movies”.

image_thumb2

Installation is a matter of plugging the cables into your sound card and a USB port. You need a 5.1 sound card, since there is no decoder in the Kave. Another point of interest: the volume control and mute on the control box directly control the volume and mute on the PC, but the 5.1 balance controls operate on the signal after it is received from the sound care; at least, that is what I observed on my test system.

The plugs are colour-coded; I also found the Windows 7 5.1 configuration utility handy for checking that I had the connections right.

image

There is a CD in the box but it does not contain any drivers as none is necessary. It does have a 5.1 demo video and a manual.

I tried the Kave with a variety of game, movie and music DVDs. In general I was impressed; but it is important to set expectations. I am a fan of Sennheiser headphones and use the high-end HD600 as well as a variety of cheaper sets. In comparison with the Sennheiser models the Kave is enjoyable but unrefined, and for listening in stereo a traditional set of headphones is probably what you want.

Equally, if you have a full home cinema setup and sit in the sweet spot with carefully-positioned loudspeakers and a proper sub, the Kave cannot compete favourably.

The point though is that such a setup is both expensive and often impractical; sometimes you need to listen privately or in another room.

In this context, and given a 5.1 mix, the Kave has real advantages, even for music. It is curious. I played with the sliders to compare the sound of the front and rear channels, and found that the positional difference is subtle and hard to detect. If you play a 5.1 mix with the Kave though, and then play the same downmixed to stereo, the sound is flat in comparison, in ways that even the purer hi-fi sound of something like the HD600 cannot altogether compensate for.

The benefit of true 5.1 sound is sometimes apparent in details that you can more easily hear, and sometimes a matter of a more three-dimensional sound.

The sub in the Kave is puny compared to a real one, but does add some grunt to games and movies. Confusingly, Rokkat also calls this a “Vibration unit” which lets them say that the Kave has “adjustable vibration” – all this means is that you can vary the level of the sub channel as you would expect. There is no additional vibration unit.

It is a compromise, and if possible you should try to hear the Kave in comparison with a high quality stereo set before making a decision; or ideally have both so that you can choose the best option for a particular title.

The Kave is on the heavy side but comfortable to wear. It has a blue neon light at the headphone end of the microphone stalk, and another which lights up when the microphone is muted; this is meant to look stylish and futuristic though will not appeal if your tastes are more towards the understated.

The Kave folds for convenience though it is hardly worth it as they are still somewhat bulky. The multiple connections and awkward control box make the Kave best suited for semi-permanent installation in a desktop PC, rather than something you would use on your travels.

Given its suitability for gaming, it is a shame that the Kave cannot be used easily with an Xbox 360 or PS3, though with adaptors you should be able to get it working, remote volume aside. It should work fine with a Mac though, if you have a suitable soundcard.

I do not mean to be negative. I was pleased with the Kave, which offers an excellent listening experience, recommended for games for movies and enjoyable for music as well.

Summary

Good points: Comfortable headphones that offer a taste of real 5.1 sound; well made and high quality.

Bad points: Multiple connections and floating control box can be inconvenient.

Summary: Real 5.1 sound headphones and most enjoyable, though less refined than stereo sets at a similar price level.

audio

How to get better sound: higher resolution, or something else?

A topic of enduring interest for me is the audible benefit (or otherwise) of high-resolution audio such as SACD, the near-obsolete DVD Audio, or increasingly downloads offered in 24-bit/96 kHz or better resolution, versus the 16/44 resolution of CD, also known as “redbook” because this part of the CD’s specification was defined in a red book.

I wrote a piece on this last year, which is still among the most-read articles on this web site, so I am not the only one.

Today I came across some old articles by Dave Moulton which I enjoyed. He is an audio engineer who has also worked on the subjective measurement of audio systems – in other words, if you are a maker of audio equipment you can go to him and say, “this new feature of ours, does it really make a difference or sound better?”

Moulton wrote a series of pieces starting here which examine the human aspect of audio technology. One of them explains why we exaggerate small differences. He is also, as I suppose I am, sceptical about the benefits of high resolution audio:

… the resolution benefits of 20-bit and 24-bit signals are not only hard to hear, they’re, well, inaudible as we currently do it. Uh-oh!

and I like his awareness of the “system” – not just the equipment in our living rooms, but the entire chain:

When we have a SYSTEM with really smooth response (say, +/- .5 dB) from 30 Hz. to 17 kHz., from microphone diaphragm to eardrum, well, then we really have something to brag about. And UNTIL we can do this, it doesn’t do a lot of good to invest a lot of bucks in dramatically extending the response of a single stage.

Another series of articles is specifically on high resolution audio.

Of course high-resolution is valuable for mixing, mastering and audio processing, where there is a danger of cumulative error; and I accept that there could be cases where there is some small benefit in high-resolution playback equipment. That said, this is a much-misunderstood area; and audio vendors are happy to exploit our natural instinct to believe that bigger numbers must mean better sound.

I still see people drawing sound curves with steps in them to show that increasing the sample rate must improve the accuracy of the curves – when it has been shown that this is not the way digital audio works. There are some excellent papers here (click the link for Support) by Dan Lavry of Lavry Engineering, makers of high-end digital audio converters, which explain the mathematics:

Let us review Nyquist Sampling Theory: A sampled waveforms contains ALL the information without any distortions, when the sampling rate exceeds twice the highest frequency contained by the sampled waveform. Note that once we agree on what constitutes audio bandwidth, we need not sample much faster than twice that bandwidth to have the ability to retrieve 100% of the original signal.

Despite my high-res scepticism, I am still keen on getting the best sound I can afford at home. In fact, this is why it is important to have this debate. We need to know what it is worth spending money on.

In the end, it makes sense to invest in differences that you can easily hear, such as those between loudspeakers, rather than in differences that are subtle to the point where you can debate whether they are audible at all.

audio, general

Peter Gabriel’s high-res music bargain with scratch my back

Peter Gabriel’s Scratch my Back is an intriguing release – an album of cover versions of pop and rock songs, but with an orchestral backing. It actually works, once you set your expectations accordingly.

The thing I want to draw attention though is a remarkable offer that comes with the deluxe version of the CD (worth it anyway for Waterloo Sunset, otherwise unavailable). You get a code with it that buys a three month trial of membership at the Bower & Wilkins Society of Sound site. The details are here:

The stunning super-high quality version of Peter Gabriel’s new album ‘Scratch My Back’ is available now from Society of Sound as a 24-bit FLAC download.

If you have bought an enhanced CD you will have a voucher code entitling you to download the album from us as well as giving you three months full membership. If you don’t own the album you can subscribe for six or twelve months to access it.

This means you get not only the high-res version of Scratch my Back (without Waterloo Sunset, unfortunately), but also “any past albums of the month” on Society of Sound, many of which are also in 24-bit FLAC. I counted 19 albums in all, with artists including David Rhodes, Ennio Morricone, Speed Caravan, Brett Anderson, Charlie Winston, Gwyneth Herbert, Tom Kerstens, Skip McDonald, and the Portico Quartet.

I’ve been working through them and enjoying what I hear.

This still begs the question, of course, of whether hi-res is audibly any different from standard CD quality. If this is a question that interests you, as it does me, then you get plenty of material to experiment with. In addition, the overall standard of the recording quality found here seems excellent.