• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

David Chesky on Streaming Convenience vs Sound Quality

Okay, put away the torches and pitch forks a moment. I'm just asking a question. Is it just remotely possible he's experiencing re-clocking problems in his streaming set-up which he does not experience with local files? As for the two being identical, is it also possible the manner in which he made the comparison might remove (i.e., ignore) re-clocking errors? Filling a bucket from a well is not the same as filling it from a firehose, but once in the bucket, water is water.

I'm very likely wrong granting absolution, but I prefer not jumping the gun (and shark) just because something activates my BS detector.

Except that if its what you said then his gear is fundamentally broken.
 
Except that if its what you said then his gear is fundamentally broken.
If I understand you, I'd say that is a bit of an overstatement and not what I was saying. What I suggested is that it might be subtly impaired. Fundamentally would imply gross, or difficult to ignore, which doesn't line up with DC's description.
 
This brings up an aesthetic question as well—do people prefer the "etched" sound of streaming (like canned peas) or the natural, fuller sound of a local file (fresh peas)?
I like frozen peas... they have the most nutrients, unless you grow your own. So I do wonder what sound frozen peas have. Should I put some on top of my streamer?


JSmith
 
Yes you are. I have a few Chesky SACDs… never liked the sound on any of them.
Because of the recording technique? Or a dislike for the artistic content?

I have found plain redbook Chesky CDs to offer superb technical qualities, on par with Telarc, etc.
 
Because of the recording technique? Or a dislike for the artistic content?
Both. But mostly because bad mixing choices. He’s no Elliot Scheiner, Steven Wilson or Hugh Padgham to put it like that.
 
If I understand you, I'd say that is a bit of an overstatement and not what I was saying. What I suggested is that it might be subtly impaired. Fundamentally would imply gross, or difficult to ignore, which doesn't line up with DC's description.
So I tried looking into this "reclocking" thing. Appears to be another audiophile superstition with zero evidence behind it. Can you please point out some kind of technical explanation for how a system might be "subtly impaired" by a "reclocking problem"?
 
Wherever DC is his Audiophooliac in charge can’t be far away. Steve’s theories could be the icing on this cake. Cancel culture isn’t always bad …
 
Oh; he is co-founder of HDtracks, that explains all. shameless.
Otherwise known in these parts as "not available in your country". In these days of worldwide streaming, you still can't buy 99.9% of what HDTracks has to offer if you live outside the US. I just took a couple of free samplers and went no further, while I know of a few people who in 2008 or so went to the bother of getting a VPN, a pay-in-the-US debit card, and gave their address as 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500, United States (an in joke of course but it worked!), just to buy a couple of downloads for the amazing quality. Funny thing is, within six months they were either just grabbing pirate downloads or became early returners to vinyl.

Recently reminded of the company when a rumour was reported that they were talking to Lenbrook about a streaming service - presumably using MQA - I dropped back there, mainly to see what traces of MQA were on the site if any. There, I even found an album I might have bought as it's not available on a streaming service. Still, fifteen years on, "not available in your country". Still, pretty much everything, "not available in your country", and prices for things I can't buy are often higher than equivalents on Qobuz that I can actually purchase as downloads.

Including "The Audiophile Society" releases, in fact. Yes, the only way I can buy at least some of this guy's recent releases is on someone else's streaming service!

I presume that the subject writing for this thread means either that another streaming deal has fallen through, or is the first stage of a marketing strategy... "and now HDTracks presents better streaming, to the same quality that has only been available up to now from locally stored music". I won't hold my breath, it'll probably be "not available in your country" for most of us anyway.
 
The speaker that his son is selling

Thank you for sharing this link.

I just read the same type of nonsense here:

"tessellation diffraction control technology"
"High-end audiophile internal wiring"
"Hardwired silver soldered precision crossover"
"Solen film capacitors"

No solid technical data, no measurements.
 
Lol, so the guy even performs a null test and see that they are identical yet he claims that there's an audible difference? Also he's the CEO of HDtracks? Yeah another so called expert on my no go list!
 
Typical scenario where bit-identical stuff is said to sound different. Hence, if true it can only be a secondary mechanism depending on the source medium / playback situation, and the only realistic contender would be EMI issues.

So #1 rule for any audiophile would be to make your DAC connection, and your HiFi setup in general, EMI-proof with an USB isolator and additionally placing tons of clamp-on ferrites on any cables (sans speaker and optical ones ;-)

Once you've done that, all the potential differences from different digital sources / setups playing the same bit-identical stuff go away, 100%.
 
Well that's the thing: no one's hearing is actually at audiophile level. And you don't want it to be, since that level of hearing generally involves hearing things that aren't actually there. It's quite handy for selling heavily marked up gear and reselling people their music over again.
That's the paradox of being an audiophile.

When you are young with hearing that can hear to ~20khz you cant afford to be one and by the time you can afford to be one, you cant hear above ~14khz (or worse) AND YET.... the old audiophile needs super tweeters, 192/24 PCM file, expensive devices/cables/ancillaries that (supposedly) reveal hidden micro details etc cause they are sure it will make a difference even though their ears aren't up to it.

I am not saying an older person shouldn't attempt to achieve sonic "perfection" by spending large, they shouldnt fool themselves that it really makes a difference compared to using well made/well performing but cheaper alternatives.

And its well documented that much high end gear is over built with features (chassis milled from a single slab of alloy, massive power supplies for line level devices etc) that dont contribute anything to the overall sound reproduction

Peter
 
Last edited:
I read the sentence below and thought it’s a cynical marketing ploy (as well as the obvious one to sell more HD Tracks)

“Here’s how I arrived at this observation.
My son, Lucca, is starting a speaker company…”

I’m astonished that someone as intelligent as DC could write the article.
 
I just read it as well. Very surprised and disappointed to see David write such things.
I'm pretty sure he took the same position with physical media vs downloads years ago (IIRC)
 
Agreed! I stumbled across a difference between streaming high res and physical media based with the watermarking on the streaming…

If you follow the links you will find UMG were watermarking downloads, negating DC's assertion that downloads are better. Similar audible watermarking was proposed for DVD-Audio so I don't think it's safe to assume they wouldn't do it to physical media too. Putting an audible watermark on a format whose selling point is supposed higher fidelity makes no more sense now that it did then, but here we are.
 
If you follow the links you will find UMG were watermarking downloads, negating DC's assertion that downloads are better. Similar audible watermarking was proposed for DVD-Audio so I don't think it's safe to assume they wouldn't do it to physical media too. Putting an audible watermark on a format whose selling point is supposed higher fidelity makes no more sense now that it did then, but here we are.
Watermarking was (is?) on Tidal as well, I thought they were going to stop doing it, but that seems unlikely.
 
I admit I have spent close to $1000 on HDtracks, I did multiple comparative testing to CD versions, after many months of trying (volume level matching was challenging) I could not tell a clear difference at the end; I conclude my hearing is not at audiophile level, so I stop buying HD tracks. haha

They'll only sound different if you are comparing two different masterings.

What floored me was discovering that in some cases on HDTracks you get one mastering at one price tier, and another at a higher price tier. And I don't just mean the sample rates. The mastering itself is different. The case I found was the Roth-era Van Halen catalog -- dynamic range compressed at lower tier, full-range at pricier tier.

They do not tell you this on the site, the only way to know is to buy both.
 
Back
Top Bottom