How To Cope If Tidal Does Go Under?

[Snowmonkey]

18 minutes ago, left channel said:

 

Hence the Qobuz Sublime and Sublime+ tiers. They are indeed substantially more.

 

Though you can stream CD quality music for the equivalent of $US 23.42 per month.

[left channel]

Just now, Snowmonkey said:

 

Though you can stream CD quality music for the equivalent of $US 23.42 per month.

 

Yes. I wonder if they make enough money on that tier though.

[Musicophile]

1 hour ago, left channel said:

 

Yes. I wonder if they make enough money on that tier though.

Clearly not yet. But when I wrote on my blog some weeks ago about Tidal and Qobuz being in financial trouble I received an email from Qobuz telling me that while they are not yet profitable but are on track to getting there. 

 

He didn’t specify if this getting to profitability would involve future price hikes.  

[mansr]

2 hours ago, Musicophile said:

while they are not yet profitable but are on track to getting there

That's what they all say, right up to the moment they go under. In fairness, though, Qobuz did recover from the brink of closing down, so maybe they really are heading in the right direction.

[PeterSt]

On 5/23/2018 at 1:22 AM, wushuliu said:

Look. Metallica is not on Tidal. So I can't listen to Metallica lossless there.

 

No ? there's enough for me ! ☠️

 

[TubeLover]

On 5/22/2018 at 6:55 PM, speavler said:

yeah, this streaming thing prolly just a fad.

One could wish.........at least as far as video streaming, which is gradually destroying high quality video, and any access to it.

 

JC

[TubeLover]

On 5/25/2018 at 1:15 AM, left channel said:

 

Hence the Qobuz Sublime and Sublime+ tiers. They are indeed substantially more.

How much do those tiers run, and what exactly do they offer?

 

JC

[Snowmonkey]

2 hours ago, TubeLover said:

How much do those tiers run, and what exactly do they offer?

 

JC

 

 Sublime and Sublime+ are annual, rather than monthly subscriptions.

 

Sublime works out to $US 21.37 per month and offers CD quality streaming plus you can purchase hi-res (up to 24/192 kHz) downloads for the price of mp3, which is a substantial discount.

 

Sublime+ works out to  $US 34 per month and offers the same deal on hi-res downloads, plus streaming at up to 24/192 kHz (PCM, not MQA).

 

As to the different hi-res streaming format, that probably explains the critic who felt Tidal hi-res streaming sounded better - he is probably one of those who prefers the sound of MQA.

[left channel]

7 hours ago, Snowmonkey said:

As to the different hi-res streaming format, that probably explains the critic who felt Tidal hi-res streaming sounded better - he is probably one of those who prefers the sound of MQA.

 

When comparing different formats and resolutions It is usually impossible to know if you're actually comparing music made from the same master. The differences you hear may be the result of other factors.

 

The provenance of Hi-Res albums is notoriously murky, and MQA is making the problem a thousand times worse by providing no documentation in their rush to MQA-ify everything. DSD is usually much better documented, but you pay even more for it and not everyone likes the sound of that format either.

 

Thanks for offering a pricing breakdown. I have a Sublime+ plus subscription, and the sound is indeed sublime. Plus.

[rando]

There was a truism molded back in the formative days of modern air travel that still rings true today.  No airline has ever shown a profit.  Tell me how many pilots, including the Dutch King, and executives do you think have found themselves destitute as their company bottom line?  

 

If Tidal is too good to be true I doubt many people at the top went broke perpetrating lies about growth, expansion, and service.  This thread might be denying the reality of how many services are vying for supremacy in the NA market today.  How quickly an audience left wanting will be courted.  Similarities to ordering a fleet of jets years in advance, with theoretical profits and contracts in pocket, before said jets have proved airworthy can be uncanny at times.

 

Panic stations must be getting to be old hat for streaming subscribers by now, no?  Volatile marketplace. 

[vmartell22]

On 5/17/2018 at 9:33 AM, Indydan said:

 

I gather you don't have a Netflix account?

 

Does not matter, we are not talking about movies here... different market... 

v

 

[rickca]

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal has invested 1 billion Saudi riyal ($267 million) in Deezer.

[hineni]

I don't see how any of the streaming services can survive, apart from perhaps Apple Music which can absorb losses as part of an ecosystem. The problem is that streaming was an industry solution to losing everything through torrenting, not a replacement for buying music. Streaming is ludicrously under-priced compared to buying music, but way overpriced compared to getting it for free. 

 

I fear we are going to a TV model, where different services develop their own exclusive artists and content. No one service will be comprehensive. 

[Ralf11]

the industry will consolidate - Apple Music just bought some body but I forget who

 

YouTube will survive and many 'videos' are only audio and one or several stills

 

the cost to run a streaming service is quite low and I expect there will be a choice of Ford or Chevy, plus various Lexi

[Sonicularity]

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

the industry will consolidate - Apple Music just bought some body but I forget who

 

YouTube will survive and many 'videos' are only audio and one or several stills

 

the cost to run a streaming service is quite low and I expect there will be a choice of Ford or Chevy, plus various Lexi

 

Apple Music replaced Beats Music in late 2015.   Beats Music replaced MOG Music the year before in April 2014.  MOG was partnered with Rhapsody Music for a short period when Rhapsody was under the control of RealNetworks, and Rhapsody eventually split and then became Napster, which was Listen.com before taking on the Napster nomenclature.

 

It's all so complicated.

 

I wish there were an answer for easily obtaining music at a fair price that was lossless, open source, and free of watermarking or DRM that would not instigate potential wholesale copyright violations.   Streaming services are excellent, if only as an interim solution until a better business model can be established that would help the artists and not ruin the customer experience.

[Ralf11]

It'll happen.  I was talking about an acquisition that just happened or was just approved above.

[Albrecht]

On 5/16/2018 at 10:58 PM, TubeLover said:

If you combine this article https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/16/tidal-reportedly-months-behind-on-royalty-payments/ with other recently concerning reports, it truly looks like the end is really near for Tidal. I cannot tell you how much I wish those words had never emanated from me, but it is what it is. 

 

I have been with Tidal since near the beginning. It literally has changed a major part of how I listen to music. If they do, in fact, fail and disappear, at least 50% of my music listening enjoyment will be lost, which is personally crushing. At present, I am not aware of any available replacement, at least not here in the United States. And honestly, if I had seen this article about the failure to be able to pay the royalties, sooner, it "might" even have made me at least reconsider buying the new speakers that I did yesterday. That is how much losing Tidal would affect me. To even attempt to recover just what I've already experienced musically on Tidal (and is important to me) would cost me many thousands. And not only that, it would only catch me up to where I am at this point in time. There would be no means of continuing forward in the same way. 

 

It has always been thought, and commented on here, that there would be alternatives to Tidal if they one day went away. I'm not aware of any! Am I wrong? And I would not even throw Qbuzz out there as a possibility. From my perspective, they can't be trusted, and may not even know what they are doing. They have repeatedly said they would be available in the US, and have not only been unable to meet those projected timeframes, but have also been able to offer no explanation as to why. Now they are saying "in 2018", well, I will believe it when I see it. It is also much more expensive than Tidal,  and does not sound as good as Tidal (read here in a recent review)

 

https://www.whathifi.com/qobuz/review

 

And then there is the fact that no service remotely offers the total availability of music selections that Tidal does, at least to my knowledge. And, especially in my case, and that of friends and others, are likely to offer far, far less of  the genre's and and vintages of music that we would be listening to on Tidal. 

 

Any offers of hope, of another service coming to the rescue, or anything else positive in this space would be greatly appreciated and possibly hold me off from turning to massive drug use, leaving society as a whole, or devoting myself solely to breeding prize winning hedgehogs! 

 

JC

I hope that it goes down and out this afternoon..........

[AudioDoctor]

@TubeLover All is not doom and gloom my friend.  I am most definitely in the US and listening to Qobuz, and I am not sure what the person at What HiFi was hearing, but to my ears Qobuz sounds exponentially better than Tidal. Sure, I have identified some gaps in their album coverage compared to Tidal, but I am confident after some conversations with David that it is only a matter of time until we have those, and we as customers can recommend albums/artists/labels/etc and the people at Qobuz have always been responsive and good to work with.

 

Keep your fancy new speakers, and look forward to a bright future with Qobuz and much better sound quality, as well as true 24/192 streaming with no MQA.

 

Tidal HiFi is $240 a year.  Right now, Qobuz is 349.99 Euro for Sublime+ / year. 405USD a year, at current exchange rates.  I was paying more than that for 2 Tidal accounts because I was paying for mine and my Dads, now I am paying only for his. I don't see it as too big a price hike, and who knows, they may decide not to do a straight conversion from Euro to USD and instead price it differently here in the US.

[Jud]

On 5/26/2018 at 1:42 AM, Snowmonkey said:

As to the different hi-res streaming format, that probably explains the critic who felt Tidal hi-res streaming sounded better - he is probably one of those who prefers the sound of MQA.

 

I personally don't understand how.

 

I listened to both MQA and non-MQA music on Tidal, and saw no particular reason to continue after the trial was over.

 

I listened to hi res and CD files on Qobuz Sublime+.  I don't know how they are doing it, but the best way to describe my feelings after listening to just 10 seconds (Cassandra Wilson was the first artist I tried) is the English expression "gobsmacked."  I can't tell a difference from local file playback.

 

All completely subjective, so take it for whatever it's worth.

[Jud]

On 6/1/2018 at 10:43 PM, vmartell22 said:

 

Does not matter, we are not talking about movies here... different market... 

v

 

 

Well yes - but Qobuz (at least at the Sublime+ level, and possibly at the Sublime level as well) is the first service that has made me think it might appeal to its target market the way Netflix obviously does. 

[AudioDoctor]

4 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

@TubeLover All is not doom and gloom my friend.  I am most definitely in the US and listening to Qobuz, and I am not sure what the person at What HiFi was hearing, but to my ears Qobuz sounds exponentially better than Tidal. Sure, I have identified some gaps in their album coverage compared to Tidal, but I am confident after some conversations with David that it is only a matter of time until we have those, and we as customers can recommend albums/artists/labels/etc and the people at Qobuz have always been responsive and good to work with.

 

Keep your fancy new speakers, and look forward to a bright future with Qobuz and much better sound quality, as well as true 24/192 streaming with no MQA.

 

Tidal HiFi is $240 a year.  Right now, Qobuz is 349.99 Euro for Sublime+ / year. 405USD a year, at current exchange rates.  I was paying more than that for 2 Tidal accounts because I was paying for mine and my Dads, now I am paying only for his. I don't see it as too big a price hike, and who knows, they may decide not to do a straight conversion from Euro to USD and instead price it differently here in the US.

 

 

I am quoting myself to correct a mistake here, I used Euro instead of Pound Sterling.  The USD equivalent to 349.99 GBP is 455.95USD.  Still less than 2 TIDAL accounts.  1 Family HiFI account on TIDAL is 359.88.

Qobuz allows for offline listening in their app, as well as at the Sublime and Sublime+ levels the purchasing of Hi-Res music at deep discounts compared to standard plans and other Hi-Res providers.

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, Jud said:

I listened to both MQA and non-MQA music on Tidal, and saw no particular reason to continue after the trial was over.

 

Hey Jud, I recall that you unsubscribed from Tidal when Tidal was rather new and MQA did not exist yet.

haha

[vl]

When Tidal first started I had a trial subscription.  I was excited about the vast library.  When I listened to the tracks I noticed what I called the Tidal house sound - golden, big, fat, slightly compressed sound, on every track.  That made Tidal useless for my purpose, which was to listen to new recordings and performances.  Does Tidal still have this house sound?  If so I shall not shed any tears.

[flkin]

In my experience Tidal HiFi sound great so long as the data path from your router to the streamer is carefully managed and only very slightly less than local files. Also I can hear good things from Tidal MQA in my system, to me it sounds slightly better than 44.1 files similar to what you get with high res playback.

 

I hope Tidal will survive as it's a great way to discover new music. The downside is being too invested into their ecosystem and should they ever go under, a great number of links to albums in Roon will be lost. 

[TubeLover]

Doc, and Jud,

 

I feel a bit better after both of your inputs on this. I would be thrilled if Qobuz does offer better sound than Tidal. However, I have to say, that in "my specific system" using an Aurender N100H with it's Tidal implementation, through a near world class DAC, and the outstanding Mutec MC3+USB,  (and not listening to MQA versions) Tidal has sounded "almost" indistinguishable  from my NAS Flac files. A good audiophile friend who lives nearby has had the same experience and I've noted it when listening to his system. Now, to be fair, I have heard systems (and very decent ones) playing Tidal that did sound distinctly lacking, but I have no idea what the secret of maximal Tidal playback quality is. I can also add that I've been to two very high end brick and mortar stores that used Tidal feeds to audition some pretty pricey gear. They thought it was adequate for that purpose.

 

Lastly, my biggest concern about Qobuz has been (at least based on what I've been told) that their library is so heavily classical oriented (which I care almost nothing about), and jazz, and euro music oriented. My listening involves a lot of 60's rock, 70's rock, folk, ambient, prog rock, singer songwriter, and even occasionally things like Arvo Part or even  a bit of Gregorian Chants late at night. As you can see, I use Tidal to listen to a very eclectic music palette.

 

As an example, earlier tonight, I spent a good four hours in serious listening. I started with early Joan Baez and Judy Collins, moved through Van Morrison, to pieces of several live Yes concerts, to Kate Bush and Steven Wilson, and finished up with a duet album by Emmylou Harris and Rodney Crowell and finally, two albums by at least somewhat obscure American female singer songwriters. All via Tidal. Everything I hear tells me that lineup wouldnt be remotely possible with Qobuz's library? Am I wrong?

 

JC