CDs made from 2020 onwards should surely be audiophile only...

"CDs made from 2020 onwards should surely be audiophile only..."

I disagree with this proposition. When CDs were first released they had publicity that they could deliver "perfect sound", with claims of greater dynamic ranger, greater frequency response, lower noise, etc. compared to records. At the time, I expected that all record companies would go to the original master tapes (not the master for cutting the record), and deliver the highest-possible sound possible for each recording. Therefore, it has been my expactation that "CDs made from 1982 onwards should surely be audiophile only...". I have been disappointed since 1982 that this has not been so.

 

I had a conversation with one of my favorite musicians about this recently. His stuff is almost uniformly brickwalled; only a few songs from his 1994 debut and some ambient interludes on his experimental 2007 double album escape the compressor with only minor injuries. On his Patreon, however, he's been posting instrumental mixes of his songs with no compression whatsoever, and it's been a revelation to hear these songs sound so good (albeit without vocals). We discussed production and eventually turned to mastering, where I stated my opinion - and to my surprise, he agreed with me that the loud mastering sounded bad. Then he fell back on the tired old cliché: "Well, it has to be mastered that way, otherwise, it won't get played on the radio."

I can't say I took much joy in yelling "Horses**t!" at one of my heroes - but I did. First of all, radio stations use their own compressors to squish the music to the same volume anyway, so there's no point in pre-squishing it. Also, when was the last time the radio was relevant? You can argue Spotify and the like, but those all measure the RMS of each track beforehand and match them accordingly - meaning the dynamic mastering appears louder. And even if it didn't - man, I love ya, but what radio station or Spotify playlist is going to have your music in it? You make catchy, melodic, three-minute rock and roll songs with thought-provoking lyrics and tinges of psychedelic and experimental music. Too smart to headbang to, too simple to dissect in a lab. A recipe for fantastic music, no doubt, but in the age of focus-group playlists, the only way people are going to find your music is through sheer dumb luck.

At the end, I basically said "It's your art, and if you want it mastered like that, that's fine - but none of those arguments are holding any water". To his credit, he agreed with me on just about every point, and when I offered to do a dynamic mastering of his music, he was genuinely interested*. A few weeks later, he uploaded a new song to his Patreon - which was a new vocal and guitar track on a previously released song. It's by far the most dynamic thing he's officially released since the ambient pieces on the aforementioned 2007 album. He told me later that when he got the first master sent to him, he sent it back and asked for it to be 2 dB quieter. Now, I have the instrumental mix of that song, and this new one is 7 dB louder than that - but considering the CD version was more than 10 dB louder, I'd still call it progress.

My point? I honestly think the problem with compressed mastering stems 100% from the artist and producer. There's no big-wig sitting at the end of a long table, chomping a cigar, saying "This isn't loud enough!" Bad mastering is coming directly from the source. If a band hires Rick Rubin to produce their album, that's the sound they want. If a self-produced artist wants it loud - or, in my example, makes it loud because "it's supposed to be loud" - that's what you're going to get. Producers and artists need to be educated about the effect this has on their music - and if they still insist on doing it this way... well, they're dumb. Wish there was a nicer way to say it!

*He needs to dig out his old hard drive and I need to mail him an external flash drive before this begins, but he told me he'd love to hear it the way I want to hear it. I've also offered to do free dynamic mastering for his future projects - if he insists on keeping the digital versions compressed, then I'll do a separate mastering for the vinyl edition.

 

I’d like to know everyone’s thoughts on the physical product. One reason I got out of vinyl was because of my frustration over hit or miss pressings. I was paying a lot of money for vinyl albums only to find dust on them, sometimes scuffing on the groves, extra wax hanging off the edges, the hole in the center too tight to fit on my turntable. I didn’t like these surprises. It became a pain to try to return defective albums if I bought them from my local shop.

On the other hand, cd’s have a much higher consistency of being clean and ready to play, free from physical defect. The occasional jewel case may be cracked, and I once bought a brand new cd with the liners missing, but such examples are rare. Even when cd’s started appearing with the Made in Mexico sticker on the back, which I assumed meant cheaper manufacturing costs, I still haven’t noticed a drop in quality. On the other hand, read the reviews of this Carpenters boxed set... and the price

https://www.amazon.com/Vinyl-Collection-12-LP/dp/B076BWQY9H

 

The record companies need to listen to what CD buyers want from the product.

 

Any evidence supporting this statement?

 

I think that CDs are indeed far more likely to be free of blemishes but I also think that they have less to offer as a physical product, so it’s kind of a wash.

I totally get why people still buy CDs as far as the actual audio goes, but if I want to engage with an album as something tangible, I find it a lot more gratifying to look at a big album cover and read through liner notes that are printed in a font that I can read.

 

The basic problem is that CDs are an anachronism. The kids don't want them. Audiophiles demand more than 16 bit resolution. I don't see any market at all for new CDs. And I own a ton of them.

For me personally, they only get played in my car, and only because it's dangerous to futz with my phone while driving. The moment I can navigate my google drive as safely as playing a CD in my car, I'll hardly ever play a CD again.

In my home, vinyl and 96/24 digital rule.

 

Most CDs are being purchased in places like Walmart and target, whose customer base could care less about anything audiophile - they don’t even know what the word means. Not to mention the labels are totally focused on streaming formats.

Over 20 years I sat in literally thousands of marketing meetings at major record companies and not one single time did anyone ever mention the word audiophile or discuss sound quality. And that’s when the CD was the entire business.

It’s a nice thought, but if you’re gonna wish for something impossible, why not make it world peace?

 

Let's see what percentage CD's are of overall music in 2020. Then you'll have your answer about how much priority this is to the record companies.

 

This is why I go back to my original comment, Blu-ray audio. Same size as a CD, but holds much more information. If blu-ray isn't an option, there's still SACD. People obviously like the size of a cd, since minidisc never caught on, so why not just produce something cd size, with audiophile sound quality, like the OP is asking?

 

Record companies priorities are making no physical media, everything compressed streaming with no liner notes, and paying their artists as little as possible. I sometimes wonder how many record label execs actually listen to music.

 

Out of my friend group, the only people who still listen to CDs buy them because their car stereo doesn't have Bluetooth/3.5mm audio input. And they're so oblivious to sound quality it's almost laughable.

I remember a recent car trip where the driver was blasting Night Visions by Imagine Dragons with the bass control set to the maximum. I'm not exactly an audiophile myself, but still...

That gives you an idea of what we're up against.

 

I like the convenience of playing a cd in my car instead of waiting for the bluetooth to connect. Bluetooth is kind of buggy in my car. Besides, who needs audiophile quality in a car with road noise all around them. It's not the ideal listening environment, IMO

 

You don't exactly have to 'look' for it. We all know that most, if not the bulk of new vinyl, is sourced from digital files. That's before you even look at picture discs, coloured vinyl and other 'hip' packaging novelties.

The non-digital vinyl is a miniscule part of modern production and even then people like me who have purchased some of the boutique audiophile label releases, know that we're only doing so because of the lack of a better sounding commercial alternative and not because we necessarily believe the analogue system is always better.

A UK forum like What HiFi gives a much broader consensus and indication of what most self confessed audiophiles really think of vinyl records. Vinyl champions are often confronted with comments suggesting that, whilst their preferences are perfectably valid, they are solely down to their ears preferring analogue distortion and not about it having anything to do with accuracy or faithfulness of reproduction.

 

... and if I want analogue distortion it's much cheaper for my ears to play an album on Qobuz and then have this going at the same time

Dust & Scratches • The Ultimate Vinyl Noise Machine

 

Thankfully I'm not into remasters/reissues. Ok, I'm lying, I buy every new Beatles CD reissue out there.

That's all I can compare to, since the awesome 2009 CD releases. And ya, I keep going back to those 11 year old CDs.

 

There's another one.

It depends on what you buy, and if digital, what kind of digital source. I don't waste my time on shiny "remastered, 180g" reissues. I make choices. We've got Intervention Records, Analogue Productions and others making great AAA sourced vinyl. And, if the digital source is 96/24, I would suggest that the vinyl product is still superior to CD.

One does need to avoid scourges like 4 Men With Beards and others making a killing mastering from CDs.

Edit: I'm not into the "analog distortion" thing. I'm into accurate reproduction of the master tape. Our host has written here about his own A/B studies how vinyl bests CD in providing that accuracy. Let's not generalize these things. It's sometimes true, sometimes not, sometimes dramatically not.

 

Maybe you should read my post again.

NOBODY cares about audiophile formats, except maybe us inmates here.

 

same as it ever wud

 

Were more than halfway through 2020 and a competent audiophile label need to reissue CD twofers containing the albums of Freddy Fender.

 

There's a very good reason why SACD / DVD-Audio never took off. It's because 95% of the population can't hear any difference (with two channel material), and of the remainder, 4% are being fooled by mastering decisions and not the inherent benefits of the format

 

That’s absolutely untrue. I agree that anyone buying a CD at Walmart is unlikely to care, but what would lead you to believe that most CDs are purchased there?

 

If many of you are the audiophiles that you claim to be, well cared for hi rez discs (SACD, Blu Ray audio & DVD-A) are available through this forum's Classified section. A quick browse through profile trading stats shows that most of you have never done this even once. Those, who have, tend to be below 5 transactions.

 

Nobody??

 

I disagree. While certain audiophiles would prefer 24 bit, if they know a standard CD is well mastered then they will buy it. I had a member of this board recently ask if I had any plans to release a 24 bit version of one of my releases, and when I said I wasn't he went ahead and bought the CD and was very enthusiastic about the sound. I'm sure he would still prefer 24 bit but if you know you are getting a CD that was carefully mastered dynamically and with care, you're in for a rare treat.

As far as the car and music, I take the opportunity to play CD's in the car because I find it easier than shuffling through my phone to see what I'm in the mood for, and I don't have to wait for the Bluetooth to connect when I just want to get in and go.

The market for CD will remain niche but will remain nonetheless. When I started my label I was aware of the format's lessening demand and took a very cautious approach. But after two years I find that I keep making my investments back so I'm doing what I can with the limited options available to increase my output. People have tagged me an 'audiophile' reissue label, and I've taken that response and use it in my label's description.

And while I love vinyl for various reasons, I would never consider it an 'audiophile' format because of how many limitations exist between the actual record and any possible turntable set up.