Streaming audio can be a wonderful thing. Having instantaneous access to millions of songs and albums is something that, if you really think about it, seems like a science fiction dream, and is frankly incredible. If you would have told me 10 years ago that I could call up anything from the Beatles to Stravinsky to Tuvan throat singing on my high-end audio system from my phone without getting up from the couch, I would have shaken my head.
Streaming has opened up universes of favorite and undiscovered music, more than anyone can listen to in a lifetime.
But there are two aspects of streaming I find really troubling.
The first, of course, are the low royalty rates paid to artists.
The other problem is something that no one really seems to be talking about much:
There’s no way to readily tell which versions of a recording sound good, and which ones sound bad.
You can’t know which ones sound good just by looking at what resolution they’re in.
I still make the same mistake over and over: I look at a playlist or have a Pavlovian response to that yellow-and-black Hi-Res Audio logo and think that just because a song or album shows up in high resolution, it’s going to sound good. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve streamed hi-res versions of songs that sounded amazing, and other versions of the same songs that sounded terrible. The same goes for “standard resolution” CD-quality audio.
Here's the reality:
The quality of the mastering is what matters.
Before I go further, let me note that this is not the fault of the streaming services! They simply have to go with whatever the record companies give them.
The best-of album Substance 1987 by New Order sounds incredible on the original vinyl, with powerful bass and extraordinary presence and clarity. But one of the reissues on streaming audio is a pale shadow of it, with no bass and a harsh, irritating, gritty, spatially flat sound. Looking at the three versions available on Qobuz (I’m not singling Qobuz or any other service out here, just using them as an example), there’s no way to tell which is which.
The Substance 1987 version is the bad one. The Substance (2023 Reissue) and Substance (2023 Expanded Reissue) versions trounce it, with much better dynamic impact and spatiality and tremendous bass (goosed up from the vinyl original). All are the same CD-quality resolution. (Audiophiles take note: “Blue Monday,” “The Perfect Kiss” and “Bizarre Love Triangle” are showstopper demo tracks.)
A streaming screenshot: which one sounds the best?
“The Girl From Ipanema” from the 1964 Getz/Gilberto album is of course a lovely recording of a sublime song. Wanna listen to it via streaming? I counted more than 50 versions on Qobuz and more than 50 on Tidal. (I didn’t even bother looking at Spotify or Apple Music.) Some of them are in stereo, some in stereo with the channels reversed (and no one knows which version is the “correct” one; see our article in Issue 205), some in mono, some Hi-Res Audio, some not. How can anyone possibly keep track of which ones are the best-sounding? (I can tell you a version to avoid – the one on the Brasil Batucada various artists collection, which is just bad-sounding and way too low in volume.)
Yes, I would give my heart gladly...to find the best-sounding version of this song.
I’ve become a big fan of K-pop. One of my favorite bands is Fifty Fifty, and their international smash hit “Cupid” is an irresistible earworm. There are around 15 versions of it on Qobuz including remixes, instrumentals, sped up and slowed down tracks, and one with Sabrina Carpenter and different vocals. The one I like is only available in two versions, both simply titled “Cupid,” not “Cupid (Twin Version)” or “Cupid – Twin Ver (Snack),” or some other variation.
I spent more time than I’d like to admit in going through them in order to find The One, which has really great sound, with impactful bass, vocals and spacey synthesizer effects placed all over the soundstage, a fast-vocal breakdown in the middle that ratchets up the already high energy level, and a modulation before the last verse that takes the adrenaline rush even higher. That said, the variation with Sabrina Carpenter has even superior audio quality – and it's the only version in Hi-Res Audio. But the “standard” version is the one I want to sing in a karaoke bar the next time I’m in Koreatown.
China Crisis has released many great songs, and “Arizona Sky” is brilliant. While the recording has that 1980s production brightness about it, the bass and spaciousness are good. Of the two versions on Qobuz, the one from the album What Price Paradise utterly destroys the version on the China Greatness compilation. On the What Price Paradise version, when the bass drum comes in at about 0:38, it’s loud and it pounds and it’s frankly a little shocking if you’re not expecting it, a thrilling audio moment. With the China Greatness version, the impact is just…not there. Compared to the original, the overall sound is completely lacking in that low-end wallop, and grainy and flat. Pathetic, really.
The good version is CD-quality. The awful version is in Hi-Res Audio.
But when the mastering and the hi-res format come together, it’s wonderful. Like the 2022 Craft Recordings Hi-Res Audio remastering of You Must Believe in Spring album by Bill Evans, done with Plangent Processes tape-speed correction. The hi-res version wonderfully conveys the beautiful touch, harmonic conception and melodic invention of Evans and the sympathetic accompaniment of Eddie Gomez on bass, and Eliot Zigmund playing drums. It’s captivating. Thanks to the Plangent Processes treatment, I think it bests the original vinyl when it comes to the solidity and definition of the instruments. A sonic dream.
The low-res version? It’s boomy and loses much of the musical subtleties. It’s not worth bothering with when you can listen to the magical Craft reissue.
This one's a no brainer. Qobuz has two choices for Bill Evans's You Must Believe in Spring album, and the Hi-Res Audio version is the only choice.
What does this all boil down to? If you want to hear streamed music at its best, you have to go through the process of investigation and either either remember what version to play when choosing to stream a recording, or take actual notes. (So far, I’ve been too lazy.) If you are a reviewer, it behooves you to explicitly state which version you’ve written about if you’ve done a review based on streaming. Exhibitors at audio shows need to pay attention. They would not want to have a lousy streamed track make their system sound bad. (But I have a feeling few if any of them make this mistake.)
Ah, the irony. Who would have thought that listening to streaming audio tracks had the potential to be like audiophiles and record collecting fanatics poring over variations in record pressings? Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Header image courtesy of Pexels.com/Gustavo Fring.
0 comments