[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Internet audio: What do you expect of it ?



I agree with Marcos, and the original premise that web-based audio can't be good is wrong. We're getting near 80% broadband in this country (about 60% cable modem and now about 20% FIOS and other phone-company services). Bandwidth is cheap, storage is cheap. There's no excuse for digi-swishies in the audio anymore. If that's how you like your audio, then enjoy, but I for one find it unlistenable and avoid it like the plague. You can stream 128k Windows Media like, for instance, Riverwalk Jazz does (www.riverwalk.org), and get audio that is "good enough for jazz" as the old expression goes (not CD quality but about akin to OK FM). If you go up to 192k streaming WinMedia or AAC/MP4, you get very much akin to good FM quality. MP3 gets to that quality around 256kbps. Over computer speakers, as long as the digi-swishies aren't there in the background, streaming audio can sound quite good and somewhat natural. The higher the bitrate, the closer to excellent quality it gets. Almost every over-internet streaming "radio" (be it an actual radio station or not) is of such poor audio quality that I can't see why anyone would waste their time -- stereo music streaming at 64 or 32kbps is missing so much and is so filled with digital artifacts, I'm surprised the music companies haven't demanded a lowest-common-denominator standard or 128 or at least 96kbps streaming, for all formats. Talk content can be better at whimpy bitrates, for instance some BBC and NPR content at relatively low bitrates still sounds OK but not good or great that is, unless you have background hiss turned to digi-swishies or they go to a music interlude or there's a female with a high voice and sibillent (sp?) "s"'s talking. In those cases, the whole thing breaks down into a cascade of flanging-type artifacts and digi-swishies.

No "phat toob" ipod cradle is going to fix this. "Phatter" servers streaming more bits per second is the only solution.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- From: "Marcos Sueiro Bal" <mls2137@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Internet audio: What do you expect of it ?



Roger,

I hope you audition the iTube before you spend 700 bones on it. The claims in its description seem unfounded (see below). As with many things tube, they make it sound like black magic. One thing is for sure: the tubes will NOT restore the fidelity lost on an MP3 (although it could conceivably make it more pleasant to listen to). I know that you want to use it with a sound card, but companies that make such claims make me very suspicious.

Remember, a tube preamp does not a better preamp make. It all boils down to the design. There are certainly better sounding solid state (pre)amplifiers than valve ones, and vice versa. I have heard tube microphone preamps that sound crappy, as well as some wonderful ones.

There are many used tube preamps (Macintosh or the surprisingly affordable Dynacos come to mind) out there that could probably get you better results.

(My dos pesos)

Marcos

From the description:

A common complaint in the age of digitized music is that compression kills audio quality. Audiophiles found it difficult enough to cope with 16-bit CDs, let alone a 192 kbps MP3 file. The iTube Valve Dock sets out to restore that quality in your signal chain through time-tested valve technology. Featuring two 6N1 (ECC85) tubes and a single 6E2 (EM87) tube, the Valve Dock marries the warmth of classic audio reproduction with the ease of digital technology. Utilizing a hybrid-tube design platform, the iTube provides superb audio reproduction and attractive design at an affordable price.

marcos

Roger and Allison Kulp wrote:
Which is why I applaud a product like the Fatman iTube.I view it as an important step,towards such a product that can work independently of an iPod,and will connect directly to the computer/sound card.I plan to contact the manufacturer,to see if the thing can be run this way.





[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]