MP3s is quickly becoming the primary way people listen to music

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

kach22i

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
1,865
Reaction score
12
Location
Michigan
MP3 music - it's better than it sounds
Joel Selvin, Chronicle Senior Pop Music Critic

Wednesday, August 8, 2007

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/08/DDEJR7KN11.DTL
Whether you know it or not, that compact disc you just copied to your MP3 player is only partially there.

With the CD on its way out and computer files taking over as the primary means of hearing recorded music, the artificial audio of MP3s is quickly becoming the primary way people listen to music. Apple already has sold 100 million iPods, and more than a billion MP3 files are traded every month through the Internet.

[ MP3: Just because it's digital, doesn't mean it sounds good.]

But the music contained in these computer files represents less than 10 percent of the original music on the CDs. In its journey from CD to MP3 player, the music has been compressed by eliminating data that computer analysis deems redundant, squeezed down until it fits through the Internet pipeline.

When even the full files on the CDs contain less than half the information stored to studio hard drives during recording, these compressed MP3s represent a minuscule fraction of the actual recording. For purists, it's the dark ages of recorded sound.

"You can get used to awful," says record producer Phil Ramone. "You can appreciate nothing. We've done it with fast food."

Ramone, who has recorded everyone from Frank Sinatra to the Rolling Stones, was a musical prodigy who graduated from Juilliard at 16. He won the first of his nine Grammys in 1965 for the classic album "Getz/Gilberto." He is not alone in the upper ranks of his profession in decrying the state of audio, even though millions of dollars have been spent building high-tech digital recording studios.

"We're pretty happy with what we send out," says engineer Al Schmitt, winner of 15 Grammys for records by artists from Henry Mancini to Diana Krall. "What happens after that, we have no control over that anymore."

These studio professionals bring their experience and expensive, modern technology to bear on their work; they're scrupulous and fastidious. Then they hear their work played back on an iPod through a pair of plastic earbuds. Ask Ramone how it feels to hear his work on MP3s, and he doesn't mince words.

"It's painful," he says.

MP3s have won the war of the formats because of technology, not because of their audio quality. "It's like hearing through a screen door," says neuroscientist Daniel Levitin of McGill University, author of "This Is Your Brain on Music." "There are lines between me and what I want to see."

But what is the price of inferior audio quality? Can poor audio touch the heart as deeply as better sound? John Meyer, who designs and builds some of the world's best speakers at his Meyer Sound Labs in Berkeley, doesn't think so.

"It turns you into an observer," Meyer says. "It forces the brain to work harder to solve it all the time. Any compression system is based on the idea you can throw data away, and that's proved tricky because we don't know how the brain works."

It could be that MP3s actually reach the receptors in our brains in entirely different ways than analog phonograph records. The difference could be as fundamental as which brain hemisphere the music engages.

"Poorer-fidelity music stimulates the brain in different ways," says Dr. Robert Sweetow, head of UCSF audiology department. "With different neurons, perhaps lesser neurons, stimulated, there are fewer cortical neurons connected back to the limbic system, where the emotions are stored."

But Sweetow also notes that music with lyrics may act entirely differently on a cerebral level than instrumental music. "The words trigger the emotion," he says. "But those words aren't necessarily affected by fidelity."

Certainly '50s and '60s teens got the message of the old rock 'n' roll records through cheap plastic transistor radios. Levitin remembers hearing Sly and the Family Stone's "Hot Fun in the Summertime" on just such a portable radio, an ancient ancestor of the iPod.

"It was crap, but it sounded great," he says. "All the essential stuff comes through that inch-and-a-half speaker."

Levitin also says that Enrico Caruso and Billie Holiday can probably move him more than Michael Bolton or Mariah Carey under any fidelity.

"If the power of the narrative of the movie isn't there," he says metaphorically, "there's only so far cinematography can take you."

Most of today's pop records are already compressed before they leave the studio in the first place, so the process may matter less to artists like Maroon 5 or Justin Timberlake. Other kinds of music, in which subtlety, detail and shaded tonalities are important, may suffer more harm at the hands of the algorithms.

"When you listen to a world-class symphony or a good jazz record," says Schmitt, "and you hear all the nuance in the voices, the fingers touching the string on the bass, the key striking the string on the piano, that's just a wonderful sensation."

How much the audio quality is affected by the MP3 process depends on the compression strategy, the encoder used, the playback equipment, computer speed and many other steps along the way. Experts agree, however, that the audio quality of most MP3s is somewhere around FM radio. The best digital audio, even with increased sampling rates and higher bit rates, still falls short of the natural quality of now-obsolete analog tape recording.

EMI Records announced earlier this year the introduction of higher-priced downloads at a slightly higher bit rate, although the difference will be difficult to detect. "It's probably indistinguishable to even a great set of ears," says Levitin.

How good MP3s sound obviously also depends greatly on the playback system. But most MP3s are heard through cheap computer speakers, plastic iPod docking stations or, worse yet, those audio abominations called earbuds.

The ease of distribution means that MP3s are turning up everywhere, even places where they probably shouldn't. Schmitt, who has won the award more times than anyone else, is incredulous that the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences posts MP3s of nominees for the best engineering Grammy. "As if you could tell anything from that," he sneers.

For digital audio to substantially improve, several major technological hurdles will have to be cleared. The files will have to be stored at higher sampling rates and higher bit rates. Computing power will have to grow. New playback machines will have to be introduced ( Ramone thinks high-definition television is the model for something that could be "HD audio"). If the Internet is going to be the main delivery system for music in the future, as appears to be the case, Internet bandwidth will also be a factor.

"The Internet is in charge now," says Ramone, "and it has all kinds of wobbles. You have wires hanging out of windows and things like that. That's just the way things have to be because the Internet is in transition."

Meanwhile, most music listeners don't know what they're missing. They listen to MP3s on shiny chrome machines and plastic earpieces, and what they hear is what they get. But what's being lost is not replaced by the convenience.

In effect, sound reproduction is caught in a technological wrinkle that may take years to straighten out. "This is a transition phase," says McGill's Levitin. "It's having an effect on the culture, no question, but it's temporary. ... (But) it may be around for a while."
A glossary of digital audio terms

A glossary of terms that describe different types of digital audio :

MP3: What has become a generic name for compressed audio files was originally taken from a set of video and audio compression standards known as MPEG (Moving Pictures Experts Group). . There are many codecs, or compression programs (Apple converts CDs to an AAC file on iPods), but most reduce the file to about 6 percent of its original size.

WAV: The standard computer audio file stores data at 44,100 samples per second, 16 bits per sample (although recording studios are commonly equipped with 24-bit technology). WAV files are uncompressed and written to compact discs in Red Book audio, which adapts the file for compact disc players.

AIFF: Most professional audio is saved in these large files that use about 10 megabytes for every minute of stereo audio.

FLAC: This codec, favored by Grateful Dead tape traders, stands for Free Lossless Audio Code. It reduces storage space by 30 to 50 percent, but without compression. A full audio CD can be burned from the file, unlike from MP3s.

- Joel Selvin

E-mail Joel Selvin at [email protected].
 
Great article! It talks about many of the reasons I refuse to buy an I-pod. It goes beyond my comprehension why someone would prefer to listen to music on a crappy little pair of portable speakers or earbuds. I agree with the author, music has a lot of emotion tied to the sounds. MP3 doesn't capture this for me.
IMHO, Apple is doing a disservice to the music artists and producers that spent a lot time to make a quality sounding CD (a lot of recordings are crap though). The record moguls couldn't care less because they found a vastly more profitable way to distribute the music. I do support FLAC however. Will we ever see a big company like Apple supporting this format? Probably not. Since it is open-source they can't make money off the licensing.
 
So if I'm using a 320kbps MP3 I'm still only getting a fraction of what was there?

Shit, I need to start using FLAC.

JOOOOOEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYYY! :D
 
Great article! It talks about many of the reasons I refuse to buy an I-pod. It goes beyond my comprehension why someone would prefer to listen to music on a crappy little pair of portable speakers or earbuds. I agree with the author, music has a lot of emotion tied to the sounds. MP3 doesn't capture this for me.
IMHO, Apple is doing a disservice to the music artists and producers that spent a lot time to make a quality sounding CD (a lot of recordings are crap though). The record moguls couldn't care less because they found a vastly more profitable way to distribute the music. I do support FLAC however. Will we ever see a big company like Apple supporting this format? Probably not. Since it is open-source they can't make money off the licensing.

I don't know, I rip all my music in Apple Loss Less and it sounds pretty good. Much better than MP3! I wouldn't want the IPOD to replace my main system but I sure do like it on the train and when flying. Everything in it's proper place. I just hope that eventually you can download in a FLAC format. Once that happens CD's are toast. We'll be left with vinyl and downloadable music. :D
 
Great article! It talks about many of the reasons I refuse to buy an I-pod. It goes beyond my comprehension why someone would prefer to listen to music on a crappy little pair of portable speakers or earbuds. I agree with the author, music has a lot of emotion tied to the sounds. MP3 doesn't capture this for me.
IMHO, Apple is doing a disservice to the music artists and producers that spent a lot time to make a quality sounding CD (a lot of recordings are crap though). The record moguls couldn't care less because they found a vastly more profitable way to distribute the music. I do support FLAC however. Will we ever see a big company like Apple supporting this format? Probably not. Since it is open-source they can't make money off the licensing.

iPods will play FLAC with the installation of the Rockbox firmware. An iPod playing FLAC through some good headphones like Shure e4 doesn't sound all that bad for a portable player. Nobody's suggesting you replace your main kit with this crap, but for use on the train / plane / etc you can't beat it.
 
Great article! It talks about many of the reasons I refuse to buy an I-pod. It goes beyond my comprehension why someone would prefer to listen to music on a crappy little pair of portable speakers or earbuds. I agree with the author, music has a lot of emotion tied to the sounds. MP3 doesn't capture this for me.
IMHO, Apple is doing a disservice to the music artists and producers that spent a lot time to make a quality sounding CD (a lot of recordings are crap though). The record moguls couldn't care less because they found a vastly more profitable way to distribute the music. I do support FLAC however. Will we ever see a big company like Apple supporting this format? Probably not. Since it is open-source they can't make money off the licensing.

The ipod really isn't to blame here. The infancy of storage media technology is the real issue. As that technology advances, and you can store more information on a smaller, faster chip, we will be able store all of our music uncompressed and listen to it at any time in a more convenient manner than has ever existed. I mean, imagine this: for the first time ever, I can take my entire music collection (thousands of cds) with me wherever I go, and play the songs I want to hear on quality headphones of my choosing, or on my car stereo system, or on anyone else's stereo system for that matter. For those of us who remember carrying a case full of cassette tapes around, or relying on crappy f.m. radio to hear music, this is truly an amazing revolution.

So don't decry the ipod as the slayer of quality music. Herald it as the first generation of a product that will finally free us from the shackles of radio and c.d./l.p./tape. Just remember that technology takes a little while to mature and there are always growing pains. I can remember the not-too-distant past when no computer came with more than a 20 or 40 gigabyte hard drive and internet speeds were 2400 baud. Now 500 gig is becoming the minimum and a terabyte is not unheard of for internal hard drives and we have broadband internet.

I think sometimes we are so spoiled by our own technology that we will find just about anything to complain about. At this moment, anyone can download at least some of their music onto an ipod at full fidelity and listen to it on a pair of quality earbuds or headphones of their choosing, and they will get probably 90% or more of the same enjoyment they get when listening at home. (Don't forget that the majority of people out there do not have the kind of quality music listening systems that the folks on this forum have anyway.)

This is a huge leap forward in convenience and music enjoyment that was unheard of just a few years ago. That is why I own an ipod, a shuffle, and an iphone. And as Apple continues to design and produce remarkable products that make my life more enjoyable, I will continue to buy their goods.
 
The music industry should sponsorize the HiFi industry instead of sponsorizing this kind of articles. There is no way of telling a 320 MP3 from an original unless you have equipment costing many thousands. And the kids don't have that much money to spend. Unless they can understand the difference by listening they won't drop the convenience of this lossy format. Next thing to do is sponsorize the artists, helping more quality music to be born. As long as one is listening to rap, mp3 is perfect...GIGO is the name of the game.
 
I agree with taylode and amey01, the iPod is great, but in the right place. I briefly used my 60GB iPod in my main system using both Apple Lossless and WAV. With the Lossless and the uncompressed WAV, it still sounded flat when compared to CD's played on my Sony CD-XA20ES.

I personally think that the iPod is an awesome invention. And in it's right place is very convenient. I used to have to change CD's out in my car's CD changer (which was a pain in the....), but now I use the iPod and I think it's the coolest thing. No more having to swap out CD's, now all my music library is on this small device.

So for music listening on the go, you just can't beat what the iPod can do. But for serious music listening at home, the iPod just doesn't cut it. I still do believe that streaming audio and downloaded music is the wave of the future. Products like Slim Devices Squeezebox, Transporter, and Olive Audio's Opus systems are way cool. And I was ever so tempted to get a Transporter, but now the product that has me intrigued is Denon's upcoming AVP-A1HD AV processor.

According to what I've been reading on it, this thing will stream FLAC, Apple Lossless, WMA, and WAV. For me this is what I have been waiting for, an AV processor that will do this. This way I can send all the music from my iTunes library directly into the AV processor. I am really chomping at the bit for the Denon to become available. I want one bad.:)



Seth
 
Last edited:
Next thing to do is sponsorize the artists, helping more quality music to be born. As long as one is listening to rap, mp3 is perfect...GIGO is the name of the game.

Have you actually listened to some well produced rap such as Dr. Dre, Eminem, Queen Latifah or more old skool KRS-One or Public Enemy. If yes, then you should know that not all rap is garbage, though some certainly is, and wouldn't make such a blanket statement.
 
IMHO, Apple is doing a disservice to the music artists and producers that spent a lot time to make a quality sounding CD (a lot of recordings are crap though). The record moguls couldn't care less because they found a vastly more profitable way to distribute the music. I do support FLAC however. Will we ever see a big company like Apple supporting this format? Probably not. Since it is open-source they can't make money off the licensing.

So to prove my audiophileness I should carry my ML's and amps and transports around with me while I am running. Or others who travel by mass transit should bring along their Summit's instead of an iPod or other MP3 player. Give me a break, sometimes you want to have music to listen to and you are not interested in a CRITICAL listening session. They are PERFECT for exercise and travel. And with lossless they are every bit as good as a GOOD CD player...
 
I think CDs will die a quick death. I think you will start to see good quality and poor quality audio on memory cards. The industry just need to pick and standardize on the style of card. Think about it next generation players with no moving parts.
 
I think CDs will die a quick death. I think you will start to see good quality and poor quality audio on memory cards. The industry just need to pick and standardize on the style of card. Think about it next generation players with no moving parts.

Unfortunately, but yes, CDs will die a quick death I think.

It is not so unfortunate because who wants to deal with those big bulky things that play for a maximum of 80 minutes and need players with moving parts. They're also sensitive to dust, scratching, etc - so good riddance to them!

Probelm is, they're being replaced by something from the computer industry. Up until now, we've had standardised formats specifically designed for music, and they've worked BRILLIANTLY!

What I object to is having these cheaply made computer formats thrust upon us which work nowhere nearly as well, are exceptionally unreliable, have planned obsolesence built in and have a whole tyrade of idiots fighting over what is best and developing their own solutions!

Music is a relaxing passtime (as opposed to a productive one) and the last thing we need is 20 different codecs (incompatible of course) on 20 different styles of card (incompatible of course).

Then the planned obsolesence kicks in - a new codec is developed and suddenly your hardware is obsolete. A new rave card is developed and suddenly you need more hardware.

So the music industry needs to get itslef together and develop a format / standard that is going to suits its needs rather than poaching stuff from the computer industry (along with their products that suit them).
 
Back
Top