[All Platforms][Music] HiFi Quality - Lossless Streaming 16bit 44.1khz

[timiambeing]

I've just started a trial of Qobuz - they offer the standard 320kbps as well as lossless FLAC streaming (and high res downloads if you purchase them) the sound quality is noticeably better and on classical it's just wonderful to get all that resolution through your hi-fi or headphones! The catalogue has a way to go to get to Spotify's level, but they are getting there. The iPad app isn't' too bad (the desktop app is in need of an upgrade but I hear they are putting all their efforts into mobile apps right now).

So - lossless streaming - if Qobuz can do it then so can Spotify, they must have the same source - and obviously if you are asking £20 a month then those record labels and distributors take enough notice to make the high res tracks available for streaming. What this all means is soon, very soon, we will get lossless streaming and closely followed by high res downloads - but if Spotify aren't careful it will be Apple who get there first with an audiophile premium offering, and when they do it will be a much harder market place to make money in!

** please don't lump this suggestion with the main one on lossless downloads, that's a different idea entirely guys!

[timiambeing]

I've just started a trial of Qobuz - they offer the standard 320kbps as well as lossless FLAC streaming (and high res downloads if you purchase them) the sound quality is noticeably better and on classical it's just wonderful to get all that resolution through your hi-fi or headphones! The catalogue has a way to go to get to Spotify's level, but they are getting there. The iPad app isn't' too bad (the desktop app is in need of an upgrade but I hear they are putting all their efforts into mobile apps right now).

[timiambeing]

So - lossless streaming - if Qobuz can do it then so can Spotify, they must have the same source - and obviously if you are asking £20 a month then those record labels and distributors take enough notice to make the high res tracks available for streaming. What this all means is soon, very soon, we will get lossless streaming and closely followed by high res downloads - but if Spotify aren't careful it will be Apple who get there first with an audiophile premium offering, and when they do it will be a much harder market place to make money in!

[N4TNF_CW]

Strange, but appreciate the tip. Will try it! Thanks.

[ajmarini]

@N4TNF_CW

Tidal may be doing this with much of the "Master" quality stuff. If you create a playlist with a mix of Master quality and regular Hi-Fi, you may notice that the volume is greater for the master tracks. I have several such playlists, and it's conspicuously common that the master tracks are louder.

Volume is not a quality component in the music, but it is to us listeners, hence why we want to "turn it up" when our favourite songs come up.

I'm not a fan of MQA/Master. I find it bogus. Other than the mentioned volume difference, I have never been able to tell the difference. Also, a FLAC file should have the same fidelity as the source, and if the source is the master, the FLAC should also be of master quality (depending on sample rate, etc, etc). Other than file size, MQA should not have any advantage over FLAC.

[N4TNF_CW]

It is apparent certain songs jump up with volume, then the next drops back down.  Frequently on our public radio system, listeners complain of many things and there's no benefit in explaining "our" problems getting a signal to them. We listen, and often find they're listening on a Bose tabletop set with a dangling wire antenna.  Had a case of wire dipoles we'd mail them if they wanted to get a better signal.  I'm glad Spotify's problems are subtle compared to broadcasting.  I enjoy the music and do not miss the five minute "chewing out" by the listener.

[N4TNF_CW]

I appreciate what Spotify can do with archival recordings. It's great
hearing legends, but what a difference. Also, run into problems with many
recordings 60's thru 80's, with producers or artists cluttering up their
"art". Jazz, acoustic and chamber music works better for me. Regardless,
it's wonderful to have the resource at a fingertip.

[runaron]

@ajmarini

Thanks for the hint, but I am always listening via Spotify Connect. In that case neither the levelling/volume options nor any sound quality options are available. Always the best possible quality is streamed to my Kitsound WLAN audio adaptor (I hope so - at least that's what Spotify claims)

[runaron]

@Dutch-Elvis

Sorry to contradict you, but there is ALWAYS a perceptible difference between Spotify and Tidal. With a really good CD-Player (beyond 1k $) you may reach Tidal quality. Meanwhile I dropped my CD-Player completely. I still buy CDs but the first thing I do after they arrive is rip them to flac and store them onto my server. I compared/tested CD/Spotify/Tidal thoroughly on my 10k$ system in the living room (NAIM+Dynaudio) but even with the 500$  equipment that I am operating in my dining area (120$ China amp + small Dali speakers + sub) the difference between Spotify and Tidal was painfully apparent.

I agree with you that it depends on the source material - the better the quality is the easier you can her the difference.

[Dutch-Elvis]

Thanks, but I knew this already.
Always put the gain to 0dB (max. level) and each time you (re)install the
Spotify app the quality is set on automatic.

But remember HiFi Quality - Lossless Streaming is only better when, you
have a very high quality hifi set.
How I notice? Have electrostatic loudspeakers, but when you use them with a
low end Marantz M CR611, you aren't able to hear any difference between the
CD or the same record streamed by Spotify

Yeah Tidal sounds great, but remember they only have track's from extreme
high quality, Spotify has also recordings from extremely poor quality.

[bzero]

@meahtenoha : Hi Meredith, dear Spotify, it's nearly a year where you officially commented on this. Is lossless coming or not? WE NEED TO KNOW.

[Dutch-Elvis]

I completely agree with your point of view.
When someone things differently after reading mine writing, then it must be
mine poor knowledge from English.
And we have also the same thoughts concerning the products from China they
are 👍

[ajmarini]

@runaron

I take exception to this comment

You wrote - "Sorry to contradict you, but there is ALWAYS a perceptible difference between Spotify and Tidal. With a really good CD-Player (beyond 1k $) you may reach Tidal quality."

Tidal quality is only as good as a CD, not better. It's a digital file no matter how you slice it. To achieve a better than CD quality, the analog source would have to be sampled at an ever higher rate than 44.1/16, such as 192/24. That's not the norm. I was listening to Supertramp's Crime of the century at 192...which is pretty amazing.

Now, if everything were at that rate, a proper studio sample rate, this debate wouldn't be a debate. I don't know if all the MQA stuff is of this quality.