One release, so many formats

Life used to be easy. One just put a CD (or other type of disc) in a player connected to an amplifier, which was in turn connected to some speakers.  I would still like to do this but Gramophone has put the cat amongst the pigeons by making us listen to music on the internet.  This was done without any consultation with the readers and without any notice period.  Had I known I would probably have gone down a totally different track when I replaced my PC based computer system some months back.

Andrew Everard also seemed to be in favour of CDs and similar media and somewhat averse to MP3, iPods and the like.

Now all of a sudden down-loading, streaming, storage systems, wireless solutions and numerous other wonderful things are in vogue.  Some readers are becoming hot under the collar about what is the best solution for this and that.  Meanwhile certain readers like myself are becoming more and more confused.

Is it possible for Gramophone to provide a really useful, simple to understand, and reasonably comprehensive, article or series of articles on all of these issues.  It would be very helpful if this contained a series of comparison tables giving the merits or otherwise of different formats, different wireless solutions, and different storage solutions available on the market.  I come from a reasonably technical background but have been retired for some 8 years now and have found most of your articles about these subjects totally  inadequate.

I am sure that Andrew Everard and colleagues could do a wonderful job in educating us given the scope and space; Gramophone readers have always put listening  to music above all else, so please help us to do so in the 21st century!

Dear TRUrwin,

Let me see if I can shed some light on the topic.  Most of us listening to music use the cd format, which consists of digital music delivered in a physical disc.  We can purchase any number of disc players, both portable or not to play the disc.  However, there are any number of other ways to play back the same music.  Namely, portable music players such as the iPod and more recently-digital music servers.  iPods are todays Walkman.  You may or may not have a use for one- I happen to like mine wallking the dog.  

Cds contain a large amount of information (some 500-750 mb.)  iPods are wonderful for allowing you to listen to a large amount of music while being mobile, but have a more limited ability to store information than your computer.  Fortunately, there are all sorts of nifty ways to put your music files that go on your computer on a diet in order to not hog so much space.  

Here are your two options:

1.  Lossy Compression-  file formats such as mp3 and aac make the songs on your cd much smaller by throwing away information that psychoacoustic models believe you cannot readily hear.  Upside= files 50-70% smaller than equivalent cd songs.  Downside= sound quality that ranges from horrible to acceptable.  Additionally, once you convert your music to these file types, that additional quality that you threw out is permanently gone.  Application= iPod.

2.  Lossless Compression- file formats like Apple Lossless and FLAC use mathematical origami to slim your music files. Upside= files 20-40% smaller than cd songs.  Downside= there is none.  The sound is exactly the same as a cd.  Application= digital music library on your computer.  Additional benefit- these can be unfolded into the original cd .wav file, burned onto a cd and then played in any cd or dvd player.

What to buy.  Avoid buying mp3 or aac files.  You are paying full price for 1/2 the hamburger.  Some companies sell FLAC versions of digital releases.  These sound identical to a cd and allow you to avoid waiting to receive hot new releases.

Digital Music Servers are what I believe are the future for how we will listen to music at home.  Using your computer, a music player like iTunes and a quality digital to analog converter you can have all the quality of top rate cd players with the convenience of having your entire music collection at your fingertips.

In my home I take my cds and carefully remove my music to iTunes using the Apple Lossless format.  Same quality as my cds.  This then becomes my repository for all of my music.  When I want to put music on my iPod, I can easily take a cd or song and make a condensed version of the Apple Lossless track(s) using the AAC compression format at a higher bit rate, such as 320 kbps.  The fidelity is more than adequate for walking the dog.  However, the fidelity of that same 320 kbps music sounds noticeably inferior to the Apple Lossless version on a proper HiFi. 

Best wishes,

Patrick 

Patrick,

Great answer.  I do the same as you.  I download FLAC's and convert to Apple Lossless, keep the FLACS as archive somewhere and listen to everything in the iTunes Jukebox (Playlists by composer and work). The sound is fed through good hifi (Naim) and provides a simple, engaging,  musical (above all) experience. 

Please, Mr. Everard (and Mr Jolly), focus comments in Gramophone on the issues which really matter to those of us who use this (now pretty mainstream) method of getting our music:

1. Shambolic problems of metadata at DG:  tracks downloaded at (almost) CD prices have to be manually named and ordered because the FLAC encoding DG use simply does not transfer from FLAC to Apple Lossless.

2. No (or relatively few) sleeve notes or cover art:  easily fixed, as the absolutely impeccable website of Hyperion demonstrates.

3. Shambolic "Release Dates": Universal/DG again: weeks after the so-called "release date" for an Album, still no sign of the download (try the Batiashvili Shostakovitch)

4. Non-availability of some albums for download months after they are released, if at all (Diana Damrau, Strauss Lieder) on Passionato (only outlet for EMI Lossless).  

In short the marketing of Linn, Hyperion, Chandos and other small labels (let's hope Harmonia Mundi joins them soon) has been excellent: top quality products, widely available etc.  The marketing of the 'Big Labels" has been absolutely dreadful.

Next time your readers hear a senior executive of a big label whinging about decreasing business opportunities in the digital age, they may care to remember this note and the frustration with their ham fisted incompetence which lies behind it.

If, as rumoured, iTunes were to upgrade the tracks offered online to cd-equivalent or better (again, the rumour is that this is partly what the server farm in North Carolina may be for), they would wipe the floor with Sony (not available directly in the UK at all ), DG (pretty but incompetent), EMI (completely random as to whether or even if the sell online).

Thanks for reading this rant.  I thought Patricks' note so good on the downstream part of our much-loved music collecting that felt I could vent on the upstream bit!