Hello! This is probably stupid.
So I have recently gotten rid off my streaming services to save money and I have been into transferring my new and old CDs into MP3 form (320 kbps) and listening to those either on my Sony Walkman (NWZ-B162F or something) or on my PC with the Windows Legacy Media Player/VLC and now the music sounds so, so different than the same songs sounded from Spotify or YouTube Music. (Official apps on Android, iOS and PC or the web version on PC while having the “HD Settings” on.) Headphones and the soundbar is the same as before, no changes there.
Like the MP3 form, that should be much more poorer quality and inferior in all the ways, but it sounds “deeper”? The streaming services have sounded so… flat? Sorry, English isn’t my native language but yeah, flat or shallow? Empty even? Hollow?
Is this because of I now “own” the music and possibly respect it more and that makes it sound better? Am I turning into an audiophile, which I have never had any interest in before? Or is there something real in this? Not complaining really, just been pondering this a while and my fiancé agrees on this as he’s been doing the same on his old iPod…
Thanks in advance or anyways. :)
I think the question is what audio settings did you have on the streaming services? Did you have normalization turned off? Did you have it set to the highest audio quality?
Many factors at work here.
First off, mp3 at 320 kbps (or 256 for that matter) encoded with modern algorithms will be nearly idrntical to the original source. I defy you to reliably tell it apart from a FLAC in an A/B test. Where it usually fails is in stereo imaging, not obvious distortion or frequency limitations.
Secondly, many people have mentioned normalization (actually compression) in streaming services. When applied after the mix, i.e. exactly what they do, it ruins music. If you can turn off every ‘feature’ in these services that modifies the sound, you’ll find improvements.
Thirdly, you’re not necessarily getting great sound from them anyway. Spotify defaults to 96kbps Vorbis which is comparable to 128kbps mp3. And if your network speeds are low or laggy, it may well drop the quality dynamically to keep playing without glitches.
Fourth, there’s the issue of mastering. You may have a differently-mastered release than what is on the streaming site. This can make a HUGE difference in some cases. If you can, try listening to Dark Side of the Moon releases from 2003 (Doug Sax) vs. the 2023 blu-ray.
And those are only the most likely candidates. There could well be other factors at play.
Great answer! Thank you. :)
I do know that some of the albums I like have been not even remastered, but remade when the band changed record studios, so the album has been quietly “swapped” from the crunchy original to the clean and safe new version, so yeah, I’m careful when hunting the CDs. So with some bands (/recording studios) that can be huge and tbh, gross, factor too. (I personally prefer the first few albums and ditch the bands once they learn to play with each other…)
Another factor might be that you may be listening over cable headsets now instead of Bluetooth?
With the MP3 player yes, there is aux. But on PC it’s the same Bluetooth earphones or soundbar. // Edited for grammar lol
FWIW my ears aren’t trained enough to tell the difference b/w bluetooth and cable for my headphones.
Depends a bit on headphones too! Mine can be turned on while they’re also connected by the aux so the ANC and such can be on, or they can be used off with the aux which still does sound great, but obviously doesn’t actively cancel any noises.
320kbps mp3 is practically indistinguishable from lossless audio, so it is going to sound amazing compared to more compressed audio that streaming services tend to use by default. Also the hardware in the mp3 player is likely much better than anything in your phone or PC, if you never invested in anything audio specific. I always recommend to purchase a DAC/AMP for PC.
I’m getting good tips for my next PC build here, thanks!
When you’re ready about the sound part of your build, take a look at JDS labs atom 2 amp, I use it (don’t have a DAC because my motherboard onboard audio is surprisingly clean) and have paired this amp ($129) with Sennheiser HD600 headphones. I play lots of games and listen to music. This pairing is really good at giving you the sound nearly exactly how it was meant to be heard. There’s a reason HD600s are used in many recording studios. JDS labs also has a DAC+Amp combo which many like. I was using a $60 altoids tin cmoybb amp from them for 13 years prior to this for hd5xx series Sennheiser headphones before this, just wanted a bit more.
You can’t really use good headphones without an amp, they should really be thought of as a package deal.
I’m a huge Sennheiser fan, there are many other great options out there too, but just wanted to share my own setup. There have been some great deals on the HD600 lately, around the $250 mark.
Atom Amp 2 - Shop JDS Labs https://share.google/jwmHJ9MJXTKgxaRk7
Sennheiser HD 600 Wired Open-Back Headphones – Sennheiser US - Sonova Consumer Hearing USA LLC https://share.google/gqrl9ngR9Dih8uV3U
the hur dur shix hunjos!
Thank you for your tips, I’ll look into these. :)
Good luck, lets hope RAM and storage prices come down sooner rather than later.
It could be that your MP3 player is applying some level of equalisation where your streaming services aren’t. It’s amazing what just alittle bit of EQ can do.
I’ve found that my rips do sound better than the standard Spotify quality but are about the same as Spitifies High or Lossless options. I’m listening to both through my phone and same headphones.
Could be the opposite as well, youtube a while ago rolled out a “normalization” thing by default that absolutely ruins all audio on the platform and needs to be disabled on every device you have. Supposedly it was set to automatically disable for music but that depends on the uploader
Spotify streams have always been garbage in my experience, but I haven’t had a subscription in about a decade now so no idea if that’s still true
Normalisation is pretty good if you need to keep your computer quiet
Normalization is a legitimate, effective, and popular technique employed across the entire entertainment industry. Most well produced audio will have degrees of the effect applied tastefully.
I have no idea what youtube’s “normalization” is doing that ruins the quality of their audio to such a noticeable extent. It’s also totally indiscriminate of the video’s existing audio production. It sucks for someone to work hard and produce a good mix only for youtube to ruin it without your consent, possibly years after release
Very possible, very possible… Thanks for your input!
320kbps mp3 is actually very good.
Most steaming services will use much worse than 320kbps mp3. Some of the premium plans have options to do lossless but even then, it won’t be much better unless they’re encoding it from a higher-quality master.
Also, most phones have okay-at-best DACs. Devices designed specifically for music (like mp3 players), even very old ones, could realistically have better DACs.
Afaik Spotify normalizes the tracks by default and from what I gather that means it boosts the volume across the track and applies a limiter to roll off the loudest parts, which I guess should make them sound much flatter.
You’re not alone though, my gf reported the same thing so we’ve spent an afternoon comparing the same albums on Spotify and my Jellyfin collection. Same phone, same headphones, the differences listening to some albums were huge.
Yeah, I was suspecting some “normalization” trickery from the streaming services… I absolutely wouldn’t have noticed this if I had just continued using them.
Nice to know other couples spend quality time the same way we do! :)
Is it a.bitrate thing?
Thank you! I did some searching and it could be because of this. I have used YouTube music most recently and it has, depending a bit on the source and the app and the settings, “only” 256 kbps at best so I guess that could be it. Weird if 64 bits make that big difference! Maybe I am an audiophile, or at least turning into one.
That’s 64 kbits, or about a 25% boost in bitrate.
If you’re ripping the music yourself, you’re going to be hard pressed to be able to tell the difference between 256kbps and 320kbps. Both are essentially indistinguishable from lossless.
If the streaming service is actually using 256kbps, then they must be transcoding them or using a really shitty method for encoding.
… Welp, that’s a whole lot more! Thanks for this correction!
Just to not sound like a complete asshole… ofc the 25% boost does not depend on bits/kbits, the difference is still 256 vs 320, but I just wanted to emphasize that the expected result is 25% bigger in all terms.
If it helps to imagine, the space needed to store a 256k 5 minutes song will store a 320k 4 minutes song. Then, you are already relying on a quite decent quality beforehand so it’s all extra quality and details.
I usually hear the difference in the high frequency sounds, which is exactly what is otherwise sacrificed in low bitrate compression formats.
FLAC will produce an even better sound, as it’s lossless, but for most songs I couldn’t justify the file size difference.
Not asshole-y at all, I’m real grateful and learning a lot today! :) I have never really even thought about these things.
I haven’t really listened to my songs in FLAC, but the MP3 already sounds very, very good and it takes such a tiny space, so it could be enough for me. For now…?
In reality, the bitrate doesn’t make all that much difference past a certain point. If you blind test it, you’re hardly going to be able to hear any difference between a 160, 256, 320, or even a 1,000 kbps MP3/FLAC whatever. That’s just not how it works.
The things that do have a big, noticeable effect on sound quality are primarily:
-
different master recordings – this is often what people mistake for “better quality” when comparing digital copies versus streams, or this streaming platform versus that streaming platform. In fact, it’s because version A is based on a different master/remaster than version B.
-
loudness. A difference in volume can have a big impact, even if the tracks and sources are identical.
-
psychology. The placebo effect cannot be understated stated in terms of its impact on audio enjoyment. If your brain is expecting, either consciously or unconsciously, there to be a difference or an improvement in some area when comparing two sources, then you will most likely hear one (whether it actually exists or not).
The long and the short of it is: just enjoy the music in the way that feels most enjoyable! Once you start fussing over audio formats and bitrates, the whole thing can easily descend into silliness very quickly.
-
As you already noticed.
Same effect is even more noticable in video streaming services. Amazon/Netflix/etc full HD(1080p) video, even downloaded is visibly of worse quality than same video and same quality from lets say pirates sources. Difference is noticable even on something as small as a phone screen.
It’s important to note that bit rate is only part of the story. Spotify uses the Ogg Vorbis file format which is a lossy compression algorithm (just like MP3). 256 kb/s .ogg vs 320 kb/s .mp3 both offer about the same sound quality, it’s not likely one could differentiate between them in a blind test.
Spotify and YouTube music are known in the audiophile world for their not-so-great audio quality. I.e. the audio files that you stream via those services are very compressed.
An mp3 file 320 kbps is not a huge jump in quality, but it’s definitely noticeable without being an audiophile! You’re definitely experiencing that
Thanks to you too! This seems to be a combination of so many factors, but the most important thing is that my tunes are banging. :) I didn’t plan on learning this much today hah!
Adding to all other good info here (mastering, compression rates) one thing old mp3 players had was often a very good DAC!
Digital to Analogue Converter. It is what generates enough “punch” to make your headphones vibrate exactly this or that much, and it makes a world of difference. People buy soundcards and stuff like that because computer and phone DACs are almost always abysmal.
Seconding this. A perfect audio rip will only sound as good as the hardware that is playing it.
Very good add, thank you! And possibly an idea for my next PC build…
My absolute favourite is the Music Streamer II, because it doesn’t need an extra power source, just plug it in a USB port (windows, linux, no drivers needed) and it sounds Fantastic.
I got mine for around 50€ on the second hand market.
Ugly photo:
Uh-huh, uh-huh, taking some notes…
Codecs are psycho acoustics in practice, maybe there’s your answer.
I am learning a lot today! Thanks! :)
Have you done and blind testing? I’d be curious if you can really tell or if it is the ownership thing.
What a claim for ownership it would be!
Not yet, but I’m very interested into trying this out! I am happy and proud with my collection so far, so yeah, I’m absolutely biased.
Others have covered the subtleties of how the sound could be reproduced on older players in a different way. But there may a psychological component as well? And I don’t just mean a nostalgia factor, though that could certainly be part of it.
One thing I miss is having a dedicated music player that will never interrupt my listening experience with a notification or anything like that. It’s the same reason I still prefer going to a theatre to watch movies. Zero distractions compared to a home screening and I feel like I can get far more immersed in it.
Absolutely, there is an psychological factor in this too. I’m listening way more carefully and listening the whole album in one go which is good because I’m enjoying the same tunes a whole lot more. And I agree on both the dedicated players and theatres… My attention span will do it’s tricks unless I keep in a short leash.
Yeah the effect is most noticeable to me for thematic albums or something classical like a symphony. I really don’t want those interrupted!
And I feel like fewer bands are making thematic albums now because they don’t translate well to the phone experience. That’s a shame.
I think fewer bands/artists are making even full length albums these days, thematic or not… At least in my country. The one big recording studio also owns the radio channels, tv channels and news sites, so they got the whole package. No point in wasting money doing an album… Singles here and there. It’s changed a lot, the whole culture.
In the audio world, psychology plays a huge role in everything. It’s far more likely to be this than the difference in bitrate, imo.
Songs on my cds sound much better. Always have.
Of course, but shouldn’t transferring them into MP3 form still hurt the quality? It’s such a tiny format. Apparently not that much.
It does technically hurt the quality, but 320 kbps mp3s are largely indistinguishable from lossless to most people.
On a side note, why mp3 instead of a lossless format?
Oh, alright! Makes sense.
I “chose” MP3 because I had my old MP3 Walkman around and wanted to quickly test if I could have a few songs on that stick. Then the test grew into a bigger project and now I’m here with a about 20 hours of MP3 form music. So no real reason, just a quick, thoughtless decision while goofing around. :D
If you grew up listening on mp3s it might be a nostalgia thing.
I didn’t, but I am biased with how much I love my “own” collection.
Songs are often mastered differently for different media. Streaming services often do this automatically. Mastering is why vinyl often sounds better than CD even though CD should be better, CDs enabled the loudness wars which vinyl couldn’t handle so vinyl got a more musical content.
