Question for the boomers: what was it like to live through major improvements in audio fidelity?

[Soniclife]

That and the little lugs the disc clips onto breaking if the case has ever been dropped with a disc in - so can be the case for "new" sealed discs.

That was my biggest problem, it always felt like the wrong plastic was chosen. The cases are not that bad if you learnt the correct way to open them from the start, but it's not the intuitive way to open them.

 

[Frank Dernie]

That was my biggest problem, it always felt like the wrong plastic was chosen. The cases are not that bad if you learnt the correct way to open them from the start, but it's not the intuitive way to open them.

Most are polystyrene so the cheapest you can get but low strength brittle and high friction against itself.
I have gone back to CD as my principle source and bought new cases to replace broken ones.

 

[Bwaslo]

It might vary depending on income when things happened. If you weren't able to afford reel to reel, then Dolby B coming to cassettes was a big deal. Class D made it so that it costs little to have hundreds of watts of power available, which makes loudspeaker efficiency much less of an issue. DSP EQ is a big deal if you aren't in position to buy speakers with balanced response. Quasi-anechoic speaker measurement (gated pulse, fft, log sweep, windowing) made it so even small scale speaker designers without anechoic chambers could have a clue about what they were doing.

 

[Peterinvan]

In one way at least, jewel cases are worse: I have never had an LP cardboard sleeve fall apart in my hands while I am using it. Had that happen MANY times with those CD devil cases.

My “ah-ha” moment was when I first heard a CD of a record I owned, being played in a Hi-fi store. No more “rice crispies”

I kept a roll of heavy duty Scotch packing tape to make a “hinge” on broken CD cases. Very durable.

Then, when we downsized, I ripped all my CDs to FLAC and disposed of the lot. With my subscription to Tidal, I dont’t miss them at all.

 

[egellings]

When CD came out, with the exception of the rather low sample rate of 44.1kHz, it was revolutionary in its specifications for domestic listening.

BUT it didn't sound wildly better in high-end systems (with the exception of clicks and pops on bad vinyl). This was because good LP playback was pretty good, especially in the areas where the ear is sensitive. Also, most high-end systems were "tuned" around the limitations of vinyl.

Also very little popular music can exploit CD's vastly superior SNR.

This meant that on high-end systems, CD sounded not much better. For highly-tuned LP systems it often sounded worse to the owners, being described as shrill or lacking atmosphere.

A lot of LPs were cut from master tapes that didn't have the capabilities of digital formats, and the vinyl LP was able to pretty much capture most of the sound without audible distortion. With digital recording techniques, the LP was left far behind in its ability to capture all of what was on a digital master recording.

 

[pablolie]

I heard a marked difference between CD and vinyl. On classical and jazz and everything, pretty much. We're idealizing the past, which is ok from a nostalgia point of view, but I wouldn't at all agree that a great LP (that's what we called them) sounded pretty much just as good as a CD on a good system. I had a good system with both vinyl and CDs as sources, and experienced that difference for at least a decade as I still listened to both. I wouldn't say vinyl sounded bad, it did sound pretty good - but the difference in background noise was immediately audible. No need for blind tests there.

 

[JohnnyAudio]

Hearing Van Halen play live thru their sound system set the bar. You can't do this at home.
Also the Baby Dolls dance club in Beijing where there was no SPL limit was inspiring.

 

[Multicore]

Were there any moments that stood out to you? Anything that blew you away the first time you heard it?

Yes the dynamic range blew me away but that's not the story I want to tell you.

I was resistant to the transition to CDs because I was, relative to my total lifetime earnings at that point, somewhere on the transition from my second to third decade, deeply invested in LPs, over-invested, really. I had a lots of them and lots of opinions about music and a TT playback system. I resented CDs and felt badly towards them for disrupting my life. So I was a refusenik for some years.

Then Incus released Cyro and Han on CD only. I wanted them but had no CD player. I had a gf in London at the time and I went there some weekends and a few times I went to see Derek (manager of Incus label) play at the Oasis Wine Bar in Hackney. I grumbled to him about the CD only and he dismissed me with a breezy reply that he far prefers moving cartons of CDs to moving cartons of LPs.

That's what got me out of my refusal.

Not a boomer.

 

[Hal_01]

Even for me back in the 70s it was always expensive. With new <improved> equipment coming out every year it was kind of depressing for me.

 

[FletchAZ]

As a millennial, I feel like there hasn't really been any massive improvements in fidelity in my lifetime.

CDs had already been invented when I was born, so unless you're an audiophile, redbook has been as good as it gets for as long as I've been alive.
In fact, at some point, mainstream audio quality got worse, when CDs gave way to 128kbps mp3s etc. Thankfully, we recovered when Internet speeds got faster and storage got cheaper.

Before anyone jumps on me for my first sentence: I don't want to diminish how great it is that you can buy excellent IEMs from Amazon for $25. I do appreciate that audio equipment has gotten better and generally cheaper in my lifetime, but:

I'm fascinated to know what it like to go from 78s to 45s and 33 1/3s, mono to stereo, tubes to solid state, analogue to digital.
The improvements to fidelity in my 36 years have seemed comparatively iterative.

Were there any moments that stood out to you? Anything that blew you away the first time you heard it?

It was a bit like the jump from the rotary phone to the smart cell phone, dramatic and sometimes iterative but still dramatic. From a baked potato in 90 minutes in the oven to how ever few minutes in a microwave, as dramatic as the jump from a delicate and easily damaged vinyl album to a CD, or getting only 3, black and white TV stations on a "giant" screen of 14 inches, and having to getting up to turn the channel selector, versus a remote control with many more channels, followed by color TV, then high definition, and being able to binge watch was impressive but iterative. From the old to the new is usually a process of iterations and breakthroughs. But no one goes back to rotary phones or black and white TV, yet many people denigrate CDs and high res streaming while claiming that vinyl records are the only way to go. That part I do not get! Call me an old codger, it does not bother me as I have been called much worse many times. ;-) So, my young friend, I commend you for your observations and your open mind, and I look forward to you and your generation improving the world in many marvelous ways, iterations and breakthroughs!

 

[levimax]

It was a bit like the jump from the rotary phone to the smart cell phone, dramatic and sometimes iterative but still dramatic. From a baked potato in 90 minutes in the oven to how ever few minutes in a microwave, as dramatic as the jump from a delicate and easily damaged vinyl album to a CD, or getting only 3, black and white TV stations on a "giant" screen of 14 inches, and having to getting up to turn the channel selector, versus a remote control with many more channels, followed by color TV, then high definition, and being able to binge watch was impressive but iterative. From the old to the new is usually a process of iterations and breakthroughs. But no one goes back to rotary phones or black and white TV, yet many people denigrate CDs and high res streaming while claiming that vinyl records are the only way to go. That part I do not get! Call me an old codger, it does not bother me as I have been called much worse many times. ;-) So, my young friend, I commend you for your observations and your open mind, and I look forward to you and your generation improving the world in many marvelous ways, iterations and breakthroughs!

While good quality audio has certainly become much cheaper and easier than it was in the past, the actual improvement in sound quality is not nearly as dramatic as the changes in video quality. In 1958 a 21" black and white TV's was SOTA and absolutely terrible in every way compared to today's standards of 80"+ reasonably priced TV's. A well recorded LP played on a SOTA system of the day in 1958 sounded pretty good, I still play LP's from the late 1950's and am always surprised by how good they can sound (I do NOT think LP's are better than digital, but they do sound better than you would think looking at the technical specs). For me the changes in audio over the decades is that it is mostly cheaper (both the hardware and the recordings) and easier but sound quality improvements (mostly reduced noise of digital) have been incremental and not always better i.e. "loudness war recordings". Video on the other hand is where the massive quality and cost improvements have taken place.

 

[FletchAZ]

While good quality audio has certainly become much cheaper and easier than it was in the past, the actual improvement in sound quality is not nearly as dramatic as the changes in video quality. In 1958 a 21" black and white TV's was SOTA and absolutely terrible in every way compared to today's standards of 80"+ reasonably priced TV's. A well recorded LP played on a SOTA system of the day in 1958 sounded pretty good, I still play LP's from the late 1950's and am always surprised by how good they can sound (I do NOT think LP's are better than digital, but they do sound better than you would think looking at the technical specs). For me the changes in audio over the decades is that it is mostly cheaper (both the hardware and the recordings) and easier but sound quality improvements (mostly reduced noise of digital) have been incremental and not always better i.e. "loudness war recordings". Video on the other hand is where the massive quality and cost improvements have taken place.

Valid points on the gargantuan improvements on video. But I find the difference in audio quality to be quite substantial. I agree that it is not as substantial as video, as video was absolutely terrible in the 50s and early 60s.

 

[Mr. Swordfish]

I turn 65 in a few days, and I've seen a lot.

My first record player had no electronics. It plugged into the wall, but the only electric part was the motor. The sound came from a diaphragm on the tonearm that vibrated sort of like a kazoo. The player came with two sets of styli (or needles as we called them) "soft" and "loud" which was the only way to change the volume. My parents never let me use the "loud" needles.

Records were all 78 rpm, except the "story" records were 16rpm.

Since then, 45rpm singles, then 33rpm albums, cassettes for trading music with friends or taping off the radio, then CDs, now digital files without physical media. I never did the 8-track thing, and missed some formats that never caught on e.g. the el-cassette, the mini-disc, the DCC, etc. Tubes were never a thing for me.

For pro use, open reel 1/4" two track, followed by a brief period of VHS HiFi along with an even briefer flirtation with the Sony F1, eventually settling on DAT for live recording until retiring from the pro audio world.

Were there any moments that stood out to you? Anything that blew you away the first time you heard it?

It was all pretty incremental, no real "aha" moments. Buying my first real stereo at 16 was a big deal, moving to DAT from the previous analog formats was a giant step forward, and so was the move from razor blades to DAWs, but as I say, basically incremental.

From a historical perspective, the invention of electrical recording just about 100 years ago was the single biggest step forward in audio quality. Take a listen to a 1924 recording vs a 1927 recording and the difference is remarkable. Everything else is basically just a footnote.

 

[Snarfie]

I turn 65 in a few days, and I've seen a lot.

My first record player had no electronics. It plugged into the wall, but the only electric part was the motor. The sound came from a diaphragm on the tonearm that vibrated sort of like a kazoo. The player came with two sets of styli (or needles as we called them) "soft" and "loud" which was the only way to change the volume. My parents never let me use the "loud" needles.

Records were all 78 rpm, except the "story" records were 16rpm.

Since then, 45rpm singles, then 33rpm albums, cassettes for trading music with friends or taping off the radio, then CDs, now digital files without physical media. I never did the 8-track thing, and missed some formats that never caught on e.g. the el-cassette, the mini-disc, the DCC, etc. Tubes were never a thing for me.

For pro use, open reel 1/4" two track, followed by a brief period of VHS HiFi along with an even briefer flirtation with the Sony F1, eventually settling on DAT for live recording until retiring from the pro audio world.

Were there any moments that stood out to you? Anything that blew you away the first time you heard it?

It was all pretty incremental, no real "aha" moments. Buying my first real stereo at 16 was a big deal, moving to DAT from the previous analog formats was a giant step forward, and so was the move from razor blades to DAWs, but as I say, basically incremental.

From a historical perspective, the invention of electrical recording just about 100 years ago was the single biggest step forward in audio quality. Take a listen to a 1924 recording vs a 1927 recording and the difference is remarkable. Everything else is basically just a footnote.

I think it’s relative to label a DAW as purely incremental it very much depends on how you use it. When a DAW is approached as an instrument rather than just a recording tool, its possibilities can fundamentally change how music is experienced. By creating an instrumental version, highlighting specific parts, and subjectively removing elements that feel distracting, (since musical taste is inherently subjective) a completely different listening experience that resonate more can emerge for example in my re-edit of Peg for my subjective taste.

I understand that not everyone owns a DAW or knows how to work with one. That said, I’m 66 myself, and a DAW like Pro Tools, Ableton has significantly changed the way I experience music.

Chuck Rainey Bass Peg highlighted (Snarfie edit)

Stream Chuck Rainey Bass Peg highlighted (Snarfie edit) by Snarfie on desktop and mobile. Play over 320 million tracks for free on SoundCloud.

m.soundcloud.com

Beyond that, I’m currently exploring newer developments such as prompt engineering: using AI at the level of musical arrangement chord progressions, styles, hooks, mood, keys, and even recombinations of keys. In essence, this means using AI as an instrument as well, which I find a fascinating development just like DSP even at 66

 

[JohnnyAudio]

I had a crystal radio kit as a youngster.

 

[Mr. Swordfish]

I had a crystal radio kit as a youngster.

I remember making an AM radio receiver using a razor blade and a safety pin, but it was a curiosity rather than something to listen to regularly.

 

[tineared]

The only leaps I've had in my audio journey were caused by economics rather than available technology.
When I was a kid I took radios apart and saved the guts for later use
I had speakers surrounding my bed driven by a cheap FM radio long before surround sound
I then got an old Magnavox record player as a hand-me-down and happily lived with that for a few years.
I saved my money from my part-time job in high school and bought a Dual 1228 turntable, a good Shure cartridge, a Pioneer SA8500 int amp and a pair of Pioneer HPM-60 speakers. That was true hifi. Of course I had to replace all my records since the Magnavox's needle resembled a rusty nail and reamed the grooves.
I played around with an Akai cassette cassette tape deck and Maxell tapes, but that was only for convenience.
When CDs came out, I didn't buy them for the improved sound, I bought them because records were a pain in the ass to clean and would wear out no matter how lightly I tracked my cartridge on them and so would need to be replaced due to the Rice Crispy invasion
So for me, the tech was already there, I just needed the money to obtain it

 

[Mr. Swordfish]

I think it’s relative to label a DAW as purely incremental it very much depends on how you use it.

I see your point, but the thread is about "major improvements in audio fidelity", and DAWs are not really an improvement in audio fidelity. Some would argue that the way they allow people to make changes to the way things sound is the opposite of fidelity, but I am not so tightly wound. Yes, DAWs represent a big step forward in what you can do with recorded audio, and unlike vinyl and tubes, the DAW "revolution" has obsoleted prior technology almost completely - is anybody anywhere cutting tape with razor blades anymore?

For me, the biggest improvement in fidelity was the introduction of electrical amplification of the audio signal, i.e. going from my kazoo-like mechanical record player to something with an RIAA phono preamp and a power amplifier driving speakers. The record industry as a whole beat me to it by ~40 years, but I'm hardly the last person to have used 40 year old obsolete technology.

An example in the wild of ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny.

​

 

[Snarfie]

I see your point, but the thread is about "major improvements in audio fidelity", and DAWs are not really an improvement in audio fidelity. Some would argue that the way they allow people to make changes to the way things sound is the opposite of fidelity, but I am not so tightly wound. Yes, DAWs represent a big step forward in what you can do with recorded audio, and unlike vinyl and tubes, the DAW "revolution" has obsoleted prior technology almost completely - is anybody anywhere cutting tape with razor blades anymore?

For me, the biggest improvement in fidelity was the introduction of electrical amplification of the audio signal, i.e. going from my kazoo-like mechanical record player to something with an RIAA phono preamp and a power amplifier driving speakers. The record industry as a whole beat me to it by ~40 years, but I'm hardly the last person to have used 40 year old obsolete technology.

An example in the wild of ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny.

​

‘Live through’ suggests lived experience, not only historically defined milestones and yes, that can differ from person to person.

 

[Mr. Swordfish]

I forgot to mention the transition from AM to FM. In 1970, only hippies and dentists offices had FM. Once the FM radios started being standard equipment in cars, it was remarkable how quickly everyone moved from AM to FM. By 1975, almost everyone was listening to FM instead of AM. Less noise, frequency response to 15k, and stereo, were the big changes in fidelity. This was a big one.