Official Qobuz Issues Thread

[#Yoda#]

On 9/21/2018 at 5:32 PM, David Craff said:

 

Our product is good but not perfect and I think the American market is more demanding than the European market. So if it were up to me, I would postpone the release in the USA even more. But I only have the product vision and not business, so it won't depend on me alone.

It does not change the fact that the product is working and that everything necessary will be done to improve it further.

 

A good progress for Qobuz.com would be to eliminate the still existing HiRes fakes in the Qobuz catalog by establishing a stringent quality control for the existing catalog and any new albums.

 

Even proven customer complaints haven't had consequences for the catalog so far. The HiRes fakes, I complained about are largely still in the Qobuz catalog since 2015. 

 

As a download customer you're able to analyze the files with tools like e.g. MusicScope, may complain and usually get a compensation. Possibly you can purchase the album again in the correct resolution from a more reliable competitor. As Sublime + streaming subscriber, you are stranded and must rely on the correctly streamed resolution, even if the hearing conveys something different. 

 

Selling and streaming digital content like HiRes files is a matter of trust and a content provider like Qobuz.com should be responsible that their customers reliably get for what they have paid. To sell or stream consciously incorrect labeled digital files is customer deception, not only from my point of view.

[#Yoda#]

50 minutes ago, left channel said:

 

Thanks. And I hope my opinions, based on my experience with global product launches, will help Qobuz. If Qobuz does not succeed, my music listening hobby will be much less enjoyable, and the joy of Hi-Res music much more difficult to share.

I wouldn't be so much focused on one glorified redeemer. The business model of Qobuz is still dubious. There are other download stores for HiRes music and from what I've heard, HighResAudio.com is planning to expand their HiRes streaming service to the US as well.

Beside this, completely new HiRes music streaming services like Resonate.is with new ideas and formats, based on blockchain technology, will presumably be a game changing element. My concern is that DRM is inherent to this system, as far as I realize it.

[#Yoda#]

36 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Blockchain of course isn't magic. I looked at Resonate just very briefly but did not see specifically how they were making use of Blockchain, only a general mention.  Is there a link where they talk about it in some depth? 

 

I didn't find any artists I knew.  Are there any who are fairly widely known?

 

The idea of "stream to own" is intriguing, though I have no idea what the economics look like.

 

Lastly, I didn't explore deeply enough to learn what format(s) are offered. Do you know?

Currently, it seems as if a new format called RSong from Immersion Networks will be the future technology for the Resonate.is service. https://blog.rchain.coop/rsong-the-future-of-music/

RSong shall support lossless music streaming at least up to 24/192. A friend, who is very much into high end audio and HiRes music, attended the Berlin demo presentation, mentioned in the blog. He was very impressed about the sound quality. 

[#Yoda#]

I don't want to appear as a troll in this thread, but as a Qobuz download service customer for 4 years and a Sublime subscriber for nearly one year now, I've made my not always positive experiences with the Qobuz service.

 

Of course, a fortune of Qobuz is, that they are able to stream in real HiRes quality up to FLAC 24/192 instead a lossy pseudo HiRes format.

 

Anyway, as usual for all streaming services, not verifiable is the real quality of the source files. In the Qobuz catalog are still a number of simple upsampled HIRes fakes and they haven't removed or replaced many of them until today, even after proven and repeated customers complaints. The resolution of the source file cannot be guaranteed by Qobuz because of the still not really existing quality control and confirmation, in contrary to Highresaudio.com, for example.

 

For download customers, you shouldn't expect the same prices, Qobuz can offer in Europe. The price depends on what the labels charge their download retailers for each country and that can vary even within Europe more than 800 % for some HiRes collections. 

 

There was always a gap between Qobuz announcements and the final implementation but as lovers of high quality audio gear and services, we are used to this behavior. 

[#Yoda#]

3 hours ago, EuroChamp said:

And don‘t forget the very good implementation with BubbleUPnP Server and Linn Kazoo or Lumin as control app. 

Just to add: Auralic Lightning DS, mConnect and many other hardware supplier specific apps that are supporting Qobuz. A Roon integration would be very nice.

[#Yoda#]

And now, that we know the discounts for many Qobuz HiRes albums think about how this business model can be sustainable. The gross margin for download reseller is usually around 20%. When Qobuz offers a discount of 40 - 60 % to Sublime subscribers like me, it means they subsidize their streaming service massively. See the numbers and draw your conclusions.

 

It's just a matter of time, Xandries financial strength and overall market position when Qobuz will reduce or stop this discount model. My tip: Take the discounts to download the albums you ever wanted to own in HiRes, get HiRes streaming quasi for free, be happy about your savings, even compared to CD quality download or many CDs on Amazon and enjoy the music.

[#Yoda#]

48 minutes ago, left channel said:

 

It could be a temporary loss leader to increase market share, but I doubt it. This is a common business model, and should include padding for outliers (and I mean that in a good way) like you. The challenge is to predict at what price people like me subsidize you, with the Sublime+ subscription I mostly use for streaming. I will be changing to Studio, but they should have built padding into that too.

Back in the day I helped launch a mobile internet dial-up service that had a similar structure. Most people paid monthly or annually for a flat rate subscription, but only used it when traveling. Some had only that service and no other way to get their email, but still only accessed it every few days. (Wow...remember that? Even Steve Jobs never imagined we wouldn't be able to put our mobile devices down). Others dialed in once or twice day, but that was not a problem.

 

The few outliers that used the service constantly were never a financial problem, and it was fun sport to watch just how much they did dial in. If you asked them about it they would have said we were fools, because obviously everyone would take advantage of us and we would go broke. But anecdotes are not averages, and our operations were profitable. I've since advised businesses on similar models for other products and services.

 

Maybe, you are correct with your general assumption, but you shouldn't forget that Qobuz hasn't been a profitable business in the resent years, if ever. Qobuz was insolvent not long ago.

The audio streaming market as such is not profitable for nearly all service providers and specifically the HiRes market, anyway if streaming or download is a very small niche with usually relatively old and hence more conservatively acting customers or user. I'm quite sure, Qobuz has in Europe a lot more HiRes download customers than streaming subscribers. 

[#Yoda#]

3 minutes ago, left channel said:

But how about I don't go on for hours? You can all thank me now. 🙂

I agree! 🍻

[#Yoda#]

6 hours ago, bobbmd said:

@David Craff @exdmd I read @exdmd above post and it peaked my interest.

There are four versions on Qobuz app of Slowhand 24/192 24/96 and 2 at 16/44 pretty much the same on ROON in Qobuz there is one version at 24/192 it plays with 3 white LED's through my ME2 DAC. And it sounds wonderful.

Maybe Qobuz streams a different version of the 24/192 as they are selling as download. If not, the sonic difference compared to the 16/44.1 shouldn't be significant, if any as you can see in this chart from the Qobuz download of Slowhand, Cocaine as example.

 

[#Yoda#]

43 minutes ago, David.. Qobuz, Hi-Res Music Evangelist said:

Hi everyone,

You’ll all find tracks and or labels being added as time passes. Some deals aren’t done, but this is, was the same for all streaming services. When I started w Tidal, we had 32 million cuts. Now they’re at 48.  If you expect everything to be here day one, you may be disappointed. 

We also have some tracks mislisted. These are being reviewed and corrected as well. 

All of these small hiccups are normal and expected. Good news: It only gets better from here. 

 

It would be nice to replace or retract the obviously upsampled HiRes albums in your catalog as well.😉

[#Yoda#]

Analyzing tools like e.g. MusicScope.

[#Yoda#]

1 minute ago, Jud said:

 

Time is precious, so let the people at Qobuz know which these are if you haven’t already.

I complained most of them in 2015 or 2016 at Qobuz with clear MusicScope charts, got a compensation in form of a free download of another album but most of this upsampled albums are still in their catalogue. It seems to be cheaper to compensate some observant customers than invest in a working quality control.

[#Yoda#]

2 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Since it's a new launch, it might be an opportune time to raise this again.

Indeed, because when you download an album, it is quite easy to analyze the real quality with an appropriate tool. As a "Sublime +" subscriber you usually cannot check the received quality if it is upsampled.

[#Yoda#]

44 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Were you saying sample rate of downloads differed from what’s shown for streaming? Wondering if that might be due to rights issues for some.

I don't think so. Qobuz is only forwarding the files they get from the labels to their customers without any quality control, as we can see with the MQA CD issue.

I do not want to defame Qobuz, my intention is to indicate them to a better customer care, to meet the expectations and trust of their customers to get the "real" quality they've payed for. 

[#Yoda#]

26 minutes ago, Peter Hyatt said:

I’ve purchased a dozen downloads thus far. 

 

Is musicscope difficuct to use?

 

i almost don’t want to ask but...

 

the genre of upsampled  wasn’t classical, was it!

No, it wasn't! Most, but not all upsampled albums are Classic Rock albums, reissued in HiRes between 2012 and 2016, primarily from the label Universal Music and their subsidiaries.

Today the problem of upsampled albums has been solved in general by publishing most new albums in minimum HiRes requirement 24/44.1 or /48 🤫

[#Yoda#]

5 hours ago, David Craff said:

We check the upsampling, upscaling and transcoding on all products delivered. The products are checked manually. If you have any product that you think are not correct, please provide me with the link.

Hi David,

thank you for your commitment and I wonder if there will be some consequences this time. 

 

Checking all new incoming files manually cannot be efficient, there are server based audio analyzing tools available who are doing a reliable preselection automatically and some competitors are using this tools successfully. I've download a lot of HiRes albums from Qobuz and as I already stated, it is not an issue with new albums. The problem is primarily the existing inventory of older files and zero response in the Qobuz catalog and customer information, based on proven and repeated customers complaints.

 

Not all of the following few examples of obvious upsampled albums are available in the US as HiRes files, hence I use the link for Qobuz Germany. If you need charts to proof my concerns, I can forward them to you as PM:

Eric Clapton - Slowhand;  24/192 https://www.qobuz.com/de-de/album/slowhand-eric-clapton/0060253780355

Nick Drake - Five Leave Left; 24/96 https://www.qobuz.com/de-de/album/five-leaves-left-nick-drake/0060253759948

Boris Blank - Electrified ; 24/88.2 https://www.qobuz.com/de-de/album/electrified-boris-blank/0060254711520

The Gaslight Anthem - Get Hurt ; 24/96 https://www.qobuz.com/de-de/album/get-hurt-the-gaslight-anthem/0060253792455

 

Originally there was one more: Simon & Garfunkel - Bridge Over Troubled Water ; 24/96 https://www.qobuz.com/de-de/album/bridge-over-troubled-water-simon-garfunkel/5099749521421, the only one that has been replaced by a version that shows some significant content beyond 22 kHz.

 

There are some more albums that are dubious but not clearly upsampled because many Pop/Rock reissues from albums originally recorded between 1980 and 2014 had been digitally recorded at best in 24/48 and for the HiRes or DSD version remastered to 24/96, 24/192 or DSD 64/128. Anyway, their significant content is only max. 24/48 in a higher resolution container. 

 

I'm looking forward to any progress in the Qobuz catalog this time. Even if it is a small note for the customers like HDtracks is doing it for their upsampled albums. 

[#Yoda#]

8 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Qobuz does ask that if anyone finds content the labels have sent them as hi res that is instead not truly 24-bit, or upsampled, that they bring this to the attention of Qobuz.

What for? I've been pointing Qobuz repeatedly to several obvious upsampled "HiRes" albums in their catalog since 2015, quite recently again in my post to @David Craff 

Of course the mentioned incorrect labeled albums are still in their catalog. It seems to me as if Qobuz don't care about correct content quality and is simply selling the files the labels have sent, even if they know, it is a bluff package. 

[#Yoda#]

38 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

 

Should I understand this album as an example on Qobuz is different as the one available on HD tracks ?

I don't have the album from HDtracks, so I cannot compare. Perhaps you should let judge your ear by comparing the HDtracks version with the CD. Back in 2015, I hadn't heard a difference between the 24/196 album available on Qobuz and my old ripped CD version. For this reason, I purchased the analysis tool Xivero MusicScope to verify my suspicion. The charts of the tracks showed that I can trust my ears; at least, sometimes 😉.

[#Yoda#]

On 2/21/2019 at 9:46 AM, David Craff said:

 

Hi

 

Of course we do not upsamble albums. We get all albums from supplier and try to check is there was upsambled.

 

Regards

Hi David,

 

to simply try this is not sufficient and usually without consequences. It is the job of Qobuz and other download stores or streaming provider to sell their customers the promised contend in the quality they've paid for. It should not be the job of your customers to verify the quality!

To show how effective the trying is, I've attached a chart of the current Qobuz top album for download and streaming J.S. Odara - Tales Of America. It is labeled as 24/192 but there is no audible content above 28kHz. 24/96 would have been an absolutely adequate resolution. Only Highresaudio.com indicated this as upsampled and is selling and streaming it correctly as 24/96 album. 

 

[#Yoda#]

7 hours ago, BrokeLinuxPhile said:

 

 

I'm not so sure that this falls on Qobuz, and more on the label supplying the files.  The labels are the ones committing fraud if they aren't providing product as labelled to a distributor.  If someone sold fake budweiser to your liquor store, it's not the liquor store's fault. 

 

Qobuz will be at fault here, IMO, if they don't refund money after you complain of mislabelled downloads.  If they refund the your money, but leave the album available mislabelled for others to be duped, that's when they have a problem on their hands.

 

What is the policy?  If I buy a mislabelled album do i get my money back?

 

 

I'm pretty sure that the labels are the origin of this issues, but your bud comparison isn't quite correct. The bottles that the liquor store is selling are closed with a cap and they cannot analyze the content.

 

Except MQA files, it is quite easy for a download store or streaming service to check the real quality of the audio files, delivered by the labels. There are server based analysis tools that can do this automatically and quite reliable.

 

It is necessary that the provider recognize that selling or streaming HiRes audio files is a matter of trust because the audible advantages of HiRes music are perceivable but slight, IMO. Without the Sublime or other discount options, Qobuz customers are paying a premium price for this pleasure, customers of most other download stores anyway and they can expect to get what they have payed for.

 

Usually Qobuz offers a compensation when you send a qualified complain to the customer service, but that is not the point for me. I expect that the download store either replace the mislabelled album or, if the label is not willing or able to send a suitable version, delete it from the catalog, respectively publish a comment on the album page that it is e.g. "Recorded in 44.1kHz, mastered to 88.2kHz" like HDtracks is doing it sometimes after complaints. In fact it means, it has been upsampled, but the customer is informed.

 

In the special case that I indicated yesterday "J.S. Odara - Tales Of America", I abstained from complaining officially at the customer service because it is a very nice album, the audible differences from 96kHz to 192kHz are in general very slight and I've purchased the album with the Sublime discount to a very fair price, cheaper than CD quality download. I think it is rude to expect a compensation for this and hope that @David Craff will forward the issue, Qobuz will draw the obvious conclusion for this specific case and other examples of mislabeled albums I've mentioned in earlier posts. Establishing a reliable quality control to prevent such issues would be appreciated and should be standard for all HiRes download and streaming services.

 

Again, it is not my intention to defame Qobuz, this issue applies to the whole music industry with the labels in the first instance. 

 

 

[#Yoda#]

6 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Besides ultrasonics at various frequencies, is there anything else that signifies to you what the original resolution of a musical piece was?

As you can see in the chart, there is absolutely no signal above 27.7kHz, in this case, not even distortions. I seems as if the quality is slightly better than 24/48, but not very much and presumably not really audible. Anyway, there is content above 24kHz and dependent on the recording and mastering method a 88.2kHz or 96kHz container is justifiable, but not 192kHz, IMO.

 

I'm not an expert in audio recording or mastering, perhaps this somehow special chart is caused by a faulty use of filters. 

[#Yoda#]

2 hours ago, BrokeLinuxPhile said:

 

There is one clue that can be used to find what you describe.

 

Some player applications allow deeper inspection into a stream's metadata than others.  The Qobuz web player doesn't really show much information about the stream, just telling you simple things like "cd quality" or "24/96khz", etc.

 

LMS shows decompressed flac codec bitrate while the file is playing, that's a metric that doesn't hide anything.  If the bitrate appears low there,  files will show the analysis behaviour you are describing.

 

For "J.S. Odara - Tales Of America"....I played this via the Qobuz web player, and the app showed an audio stream of 24/192, just like the album is tagged.  I then then played it via LMS.  First track "American Dream"  is showing the stream playing back at a codec data rate of 4632kbps.  That's low for 24/192.  For 24/96 I should see 3200-3400ish kbps, for 24/192 I should see around 5500-6000ish kbps.   "American Dream" falls right in the middle of the two.  If this is a new release, and it was recorded 24/192, flac compression was high during mastering.  Or it was upsampled from a lower resolution source.

 

This is not limited to hi-res files.  Take the Doobie Brother's album "Toulouse Street".  If played back from the web player, it shows the album playing back at cd quality, 16/44.1.  If played back via LMS, track one "Listen to the Music" is showing a codec data rate of only 863kbps.  For TRUE cd quality, I'd expect to see at least 1000-1100kbps there.  But considering when this album was originally recorded, you won't see a high data rate, media was 'data rate' limited back then.  Album sounds really good when streamed BTW.

 

So sampling rate is one metric, but it's really just a container.  How much stuff is inside the container is the codec data rate.   That should be right next to each individual track file in the Qobuz app/web player IMO.  A new release showing 24/192 and a low data rate is a red flag for data compression in use or upsampling.

I know this numbers from JRiver MC but doubt that the data rate is a reliable indicator for the final resolution of a track and that there is a stringent correlation to bitrate and resolution. I think, beside this two factors it is very much dependent on the complexity of the music as such.

[#Yoda#]

3 hours ago, rando said:

The rational action here would be to compile a single list of faulty music listings and then bring your findings to notice.  

I've tried this in several forums since 2015 but the participation was not really awesome. It seems to me that not many audiophiles care about the reliability of the content quality they purchase or stream. As @Musicophile already mentioned, upsampling is usually not an issue for Classical or Jazz aficionados and they are a significant part of HiRes download or streaming customers.

I'm afraid as long as due diligence and provenance is a not a significant factor for most labels, download stores and streaming services, nothing will change and it is up to the customers to check the quality of their purchased music with proper analyzing tools and point the resellers and public to mislabeled albums. 

[#Yoda#]

9 hours ago, David Craff said:

 

 

We have a dedicated department to check the content delivered by the labels. I'm transferring your example to this department. Thank you. Thank you.

I'm wondering a little bit what this people are doing all day long.🤔

Come on, this album is top of Qobuz charts for download and streaming and your "department" hasn't noticed so far that there is anything strange with the resolution?

Anyway, thank you for transferring! I hope you've done the same with the other obviously upsampled albums in the Qobuz catalog I've posted here recently because I still cannot see any progress.

 

I do not wonder that it is an UMG album.

[#Yoda#]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I think you're shooting the messenger (Qobuz) when you should really be shooting the label that uploaded the files to Qobuz. Sure,  Qobuz says it vets the releases etc... but the real issue is the labels.

Totally agree, but it is the job of the provider to check the quality of the content they're selling to their customers. What would you tell your Porsche dealer when he's selling you a Carrera with a VW Beetle engine?