Quote:
|
Originally Posted by choc e-Claire
Not everyone's as much of an audiophile as you, Soup. So long as I enjoy the music, I really don't care that much about what I'm listening to it on.
|
I saw this coming a mile away.
I sincerely don't consider myself an audiophile. If I were, I would stop paying the rent (altogether; I'm on my way there anyway
), I would even stop
eating, I would beg, steal, cheat and lie and use ALL of those coins to get a veritable motherfucker of a stereo system built from scratch by a truly audiophile monk in the Himalayas or summat. Now, some artists wanted their music to be perfect when coming out of a regular transistor radio (John Fogerty, at least during his CCR days) or a Dansette or a tape deck (Mark E. Smith). I think that's awesome. Lester Bangs also mentioned in 1980 that on a so-called state-of-the-art audio equipment which back then cost a thousand dollars Jackson Browne sounded great while the Ramones' records felt completely lost.
But here's the thing: there are no contradictions between caring about sonic quality and what people like Fogerty, Smith and the Ramones wanted their art to sound/feel like, because I can for shit fucking sure tell you that none of them wanted LARGE CHUNKS OF WHAT THEY CREATED CLIPPED OFF OF THE FINAL PRODUCT. So I simply listen to the best quality audio I can afford on the best audio equipment I can afford, and pretty much hope that whoever was in charge of mastering/remastering the tunes didn't fuck up.
As for Spotify's 24kbps bitrate, that's not even a bad joke. Consider that
32kbps is "generally acceptable only for speech". And they have the nerve to
charge you for that bullcrap? Come on.