# Youtube vs CD sound quality



## ginsan

Is there a difference? Is it worth spending some money on? I'm mostly talking about symphoic and orchestral music, I know Youtube's quality isn't awful because I've shed many tears on them  But if enough people tell me that you really notice the difference I'm going to build a physical collection of music, starting with the big fat Toscanini Collection 

I do notice and greatly appreciate changes in sound quality, but I just don't complain if there is nothing better. I could always just buy 1 cd, compare it to Youtube and then see, but I thought it would be easier to ask it on a forum first.


----------



## Andreas

I understand they use AAC compression and at least 128 kbit/s. Which should be CD quality to most people. Maybe older uploads used different formats. And of course it depends on how good the source file was.


----------



## ginsan

The recordings I listen to are pretty old, at most around the 50's.


----------



## Andreas

ginsan said:


> The recordings I listen to are pretty old, at most around the 50's.


I think it's particularly unlikely that you will notice much improvement with CDs of lo-fi mono recordings.


----------



## Selby

Absolutely a difference. Then again I'm one who can tell the difference between lossy and lossless bit rates. Having said that, don't go and buy everything, you don't need everything. I have a *very* modest cd collection; only music that I want to experience in perfection, music that is to become a part of my soul. The library and youtube work splendidly for browsing and experiencing new pieces/performances.


----------



## Bulldog

I also think there's a major difference. If all/most of your listening is on youtube, you're missing a lot.


----------



## Couchie

Anything recorded by Toscanini is going to be from such an old and poor quality source that I can only laugh that you are going to concern yourself with the playback bitrate. This is like asking whether you should buy a 4K TV to replace your 1080P HDTV in order to watch 1920's black and white silent films.


----------



## DeepR

Bulldog said:


> I also think there's a major difference. If all/most of your listening is on youtube, you're missing a lot.


All depends on the quality of the source material, unless youtube somehow makes crappy old recordings even worse!


----------



## ginsan

Lol it's mainly about Toscanini's crappy recordings. A funny story you might like: When Toscanini heard his radio broadcast he said that the climax was too soft, make the climax louder. The sound guy said that it's not possible the microphones would break. To which he replied "then break the microphones!!".

I'm thinking about just buying 1 cd and then seeing from there..


----------



## Chrythes

Why not Spotify?


----------



## ginsan

I can't listen to that in my bedroom


----------



## Chrythes

Then buy a house!


----------



## Heliogabo

In my experience there is a great difference, I prefer always to listen a cd (or Vinyl), but it must be said that the youtube quality improves significantly with the help of a Hi Fi amplifier.


----------



## ginsan

Could be, but they are way too expensive


----------



## Wood

If you are just listening through headphones or computers, I wouldn't have thought CDs would make a great deal of difference, particularly if your budget is not high.

However, there are other benefits beyond sound quality of building up a collection of CD and vinyl.


----------



## ginsan

What are those benefits?


----------



## Wood

ginsan said:


> I can't listen to that in my bedroom


This might be a stupid question, and I may regret asking it, but why can you listen to YouTube in your bedroom but not Spotify?


----------



## ginsan

lol the computer is downstairs in the living room, I often sit here and then I often listen from Youtube through my headphones. But sometimes I want to chill on my bed and blast Beethoven through my cheap cd player out into the room and the streets


----------



## Wood

ginsan said:


> What are those benefits?


1. The packaging which provides details of the recording, artist, composer etc. I find it easier to look at the pamphlet / record cover than to trawl the internet for the information.

2. A few pence drip through to the artist when you buy a CD (not relevant for your proposed Toscanini purchase of course).

3. The tactile pleasure and ritual of putting on a record.

4. Building up a physical collection, and perusing it periodically is a pleasure in itself.

5. Security in case the copyright fascists ever block free / cheap music on the internet.

That is all I can think of for now, but of course there are downsides too.


----------



## Wood

ginsan said:


> lol the computer is downstairs in the living room, I often sit here and then I often listen from Youtube through my headphones. But sometimes I want to chill on my bed and blast Beethoven through my cheap cd player out into the room and the streets


I see!

I'm not sure of the legality, but it isn't difficult to make mp3 files from Youtube, which could then be burned onto a CD for your bedroom listening. (or perhaps you do that already).


----------



## ginsan

I agree with all those benefits, and that last one is a great source of fear for me. I always download everything from Youtube in case it gets lost some day. Enescu's Kreutzer sonata was removed a few weeks ago, about 2 weeks after I had found and downloaded it. One of the most beautiful recordings I know of and I almost lost it!

And the thing that makes me want the Toscanini collection is also the sheer pleasure of having something big and musical in my room  I have borrowed about 30 music cds of the great old violinists for a few euro's each from the library, copied them and send them back. But when I only had a copy, I would always miss looking through the little booklet or even watching the pictures on the cd case while listening to the music. But I'm short on money so I want to justify it by the sound quality.

I do burn cd's, I burned 20 cds from Youtube music just a few weeks ago.

Btw, if you want the Enescu Kreutzer sonata, I'll either upload it back to Youtube or send it to you via e-mail, it's a really beautiful recording.


----------



## BillT

As far as the difference between CDs and YouTube, I couldn't day, but there is a HUGE difference is you get a really great stereo system to lay it back on. 

I play CDs on a very expensive system and I'm very happy with my stereo. It has given me many many hours of pleasurable listening for decades.

- Bill


----------



## ginsan

I read somewhere that a decent headset around 30 bucks is great for high quality music and if you want a stereo to outperform that kind of quality you need to go a lot higher. I can think of very few things that would be as awesome as a beautiful stereo set blasting beautiful music all over my room, I really hope I can get something nice in the future


----------



## Triplets

ginsan said:


> Is there a difference? Is it worth spending some money on? I'm mostly talking about symphoic and orchestral music, I know Youtube's quality isn't awful because I've shed many tears on them  But if enough people tell me that you really notice the difference I'm going to build a physical collection of music, starting with the big fat Toscanini Collection
> 
> I do notice and greatly appreciate changes in sound quality, but I just don't complain if there is nothing better. I could always just buy 1 cd, compare it to Youtube and then see, but I thought it would be easier to ask it on a forum first.


At the risk of sounding like an arrogant snot...do you mean you really can't tell the difference between youtube and the standard cd? what are you using for playback equipment?


----------



## ginsan

I am using a cheap 15 euro headset, but I don't have any symphonic cd recording to compare to Youtube recording. I think I would be able to tell the difference, I might be delusional, but I think I have become pretty good at noticing subtlee differences in sound.


----------



## Triplets

ginsan said:


> I am using a cheap 15 euro headset, but I don't have any symphonic cd recording to compare to Youtube recording. I think I would be able to tell the difference, I might be delusional, but I think I have become pretty good at noticing subtlee differences in sound.


On any decent playback equipment (and excuse the snobbery,but your current setup doesn't qualify) the difference should be immediately obvious. The flip side is that given the limitations of your present system, youtube may sound as good as a cd, and it's free.


----------



## ginsan

The day has come where experts feel the need to excuse their snobbery, what's becoming of this world??! I appreciate your help  I could go up to 200 euro right now to invest in a proper set-up. I would think headphones would be best at this price, do you agree? What should I look for? High range of frequencies? There aren't many reviews aimed at headphones for orchestral music.


----------



## ArtMusic

It has more to do with your speakers and CD player, whether you have a high-fidelity sound system to listen to music with properly, or just the computer desk speakers.


----------



## ginsan

Alright! I'm very excited  After some looking around I decided to buy the Sennheiser HD 598 headphones, don't they look awesome?  It'll take a week to be delivered, but I can't wait to try them out on Spotify or Grooveshark = D


----------



## Becca

Triplets said:


> On any decent playback equipment (and excuse the snobbery,but your current setup doesn't qualify) the difference should be immediately obvious. The flip side is that given the limitations of your present system, youtube may sound as good as a cd, and it's free.


YouTube probably sounds about the same as the average MP3 recording, i.e. probably not that great ... but then I have always felt that while MP3 was a step forwards in - well I am not quite sure what - but it certainly is a great leap backwards in sound technology


----------



## ginsan

Ofcourse, Becca, if it wasn't for these crappy Youtube recordings I wouldn't have tens of thousands of euro's worth of rare and old recordings available practically for free


----------



## Delicious Manager

Why on earth not? There are apps for most devices, plus an online browser version.


----------



## Delicious Manager

ginsan said:


> I can't listen to that in my bedroom


Why on earth not? There are apps for most devices, plus an online browser version.


----------



## ginsan

Delicious Manager said:


> Why on earth not? There are apps for most devices, plus an online browser version.


I don't have a smartphone, and broke my laptop so I'm downstairs on the computer.


----------



## ginsan

What seems to be the conclusion is that it doesn't matter if I have low quality sound production, but I should hear a difference if I have something better. I hope the headphones will qualify, which will arrive next week at the latest, so I hope I'll hear something. If not, it's alright, I've done dumber things to waste my money, and the headphones look fancy xD.


----------



## rspader

ginsan said:


> Alright! I'm very excited  After some looking around I decided to buy the Sennheiser HD 598 headphones, don't they look awesome?  It'll take a week to be delivered, but I can't wait to try them out on Spotify or Grooveshark = D


If you are not happy with the 598s, you are just not destined to be happy. I bought a pair about a year ago and, of the thousands of $$$ I have spent over the last 40 years on music and hi fi gear, dollar for dollar, the 598s were the best investment I made.


----------



## ginsan

Wow that´s very comforting. Perhaps decision making is one skill I can be proud of


----------



## febo

ginsan said:


> What seems to be the conclusion is that it doesn't matter if I have low quality sound production, but I should hear a difference if I have something better. I hope the headphones will qualify, which will arrive next week at the latest, so I hope I'll hear something. If not, it's alright, I've done dumber things to waste my money, and the headphones look fancy xD.


If you are using them with your computer: Watch out your audio card might actually be the weak link here. It might very well make a bigger difference than youtube to CD. Maybe you want to try out a USB audio interface, just order it online. if it does not make things better send it back.
But also be aware that the more you spend on audio equipment, the sooner you will stay away from youtube rips and only accept lossless formats, and even then some CDs will just sound bad and actually spoil the musical joy. So don't throw your 15 euro headphones away, you might just need them...


----------



## KenOC

febo said:


> If you are using them with your computer: Watch out your audio card might actually be the weak link here. It might very well make a bigger difference than youtube to CD. Maybe you want to try out a USB audio interface, just order it online. if it does not make things better send it back...


True for me. I got a Behringer UCA202 USB DAC and it made a huge difference in sound ($30 on Amazon). YMMV of course!


----------



## Triplets

Triplets said:


> On any decent playback equipment (and excuse the snobbery,but your current setup doesn't qualify) the difference should be immediately obvious. The flip side is that given the limitations of your present system, youtube may sound as good as a cd, and it's free.


 I believe that you later told me on another thread that most of the recordings that you listen to are historic in nature. There may not be much of a difference in transcribed 78s from you tube to a CD or download. I have been happily listening to a you tube version of Jascha Horenstein conducting the BPO in Mahler 5 from 1960. I just bought the download from Pristine Audio and not sure why I bothered. Given the limitations of the original source, you tube was just fine.


----------

