Putting Tidal in Perspective

[daverich4]

15 hours ago, TubeLover said:

Playing piano and violin may help to balance it out, but I'm not entirely sure that someone into top 40 pop qualifies as a "music" lover. Any more than someone who enjoys cartoons is an art lover!

 

JC

 

I’m curious what your definition of a “music lover” is? 

[Sonicularity]

19 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Interesting perspective. Thanks. Do you happen to remember where you first heard of Tidal?

 

For some reason I don't recall..it may have been from a Rolling Stone article.

 

 

 

I've tried all of the available streaming music services in the US going back to Rhapsody in 2005.  Though, I initially thought Rhapsody was called "Rap City", and I nearly brushed it aside since I was not the biggest fan of rap music.  Since then, I have always been routinely searching for new services with large libraries, good audio quality, and an interface that worked for me. 

 

What works for me is essentially having the ability to shuffle my entire library of tracks.  I add music by albums only, and the application should be intuitive enough to automatically add the artist and all of the songs from those albums to be displayed separately.  I also need the ability to add my own music to work perfectly with the streaming service with regards to similar artists or genres when playing various radios or genre specific plays.  Finally, I need to see how many times I have played a particular track.

 

Roon does all of this and more with Tidal.   Google is really good, too, but the music is lossy.  I can't hear a difference with any of the music I have ABX tested (over 100 songs with Foobar/SoX), but I know it is not lossless, and I would simply prefer Red Book for peace of mind.  I really like Roon's integration with Tidal, but I hope Qobuz is available soon as a replacement.   If it doesn't happen, and Tidal can manage to stay afloat as a business, I will continue to use it, despite my decidedly negative feelings toward MQA and my wish not to support it.

 

 

 

[AudioDoctor]

10 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

agree. but Apple Music is not free...

 

Right, but Spotify does.

[AudioDoctor]

Personally, I think the reason Apple Music, Spotify, etc... have the market cornered is they are the only services that mainstream people know about. I think hitting them with a marketing campaign as I suggested earlier in this thread would be a worthwhile idea for TIDAL and Qobuz. Apple may be able to compete on price, but double it and you get all the audio quality that is impossible with those streaming services right now. I doubt people even. know that.  Heck, even the lowest tier of TIDAL at $9.99 matches Apple and streams at 320kbps, which I think is more than Apple Music.

 

The problem I see with this approach is, do people have equipment that will let them notice the difference? I would have to guess no they do not, so that means they probably won't find the value in paying $19.99 versus $9.99. So, that leaves us with 2 options. Hope these companies survive or become Hi-Res streaming evangelists alongside David Solomon.

 

I personally have explained the difference in streaming qualities to a few friends of mine that like music and have convinced them the $19.99 tier of TIDAL is worthwhile. They had no idea why I pay for it when there is a cheaper option available, before I explained it to them.

[Ralf11]

4 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

 hitting them with a marketing campaign

 

hire Scroggie

[AudioDoctor]

4 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

hire Scroggie

 

The company that made the iconic Porsche ads I know you have seen, is based right here in Minneapolis...

 

such as this one.

[Ralf11]

but they charge money...

[buonassi]

33 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

do people have equipment that will let them notice the difference? I would have to guess no they do not

And even if they did, they probably just don't care enough about the best sound possible. Good enough is good enough for some people. If it doesnt distort when played loudly, has tight bass and sounds crisp and clear, that's the recipe sure to impress the non audiophile. 

[TubeLover]

9 hours ago, daverich4 said:

 

I’m curious what your definition of a “music lover” is? 

Well, to be fair, I was only half serious in my comments. Though, people who are limited to enjoyment of "Top 40" music, especially given how pathetic that generally has been, over the past couple decades, do raise some questions. And I mean this as far more of a condemnation of Top 40 music, than I do those people involved in listening to it.  My nieces (now in their mid-late twenties) both fill the bill, and I've never been able to consider them true "music lovers". I suppose I felt I was in the right area when I referred to someone who only listened to "Top 40" as akin to someone who only reads comics or magazines and has never actually read a book. Would they be considered people who love literature?

 

In another light, I do not think anyone who drove, and loved their Chevy Spark or Toyota Corolla would be viewed a "car aficianado". 

 

I think to be truly considered a music lover, there needs to be some width and breadth and depth to what you listen to. Granted, its not as simple as saying, well, you must listen to, and enjoy, classical, or jazz, or whatever,  because that's not true. I do, however, think you need to have some significant variation, substance and depth to what you find compelling in music to be considered a true music lover.

 

 

 

JC

[TubeLover]

9 minutes ago, buonassi said:

And even if they did, they probably just don't care enough about the best sound possible. Good enough is good enough for some people. If it doesnt distort when played loudly, has tight bass and sounds crisp and clear, that's the recipe sure to impress the non audiophile. 

It's a great deal like fast food. The masses are constantly exposed to it, eat it regularly and feel that it represents actual, enjoyable food.

 

JC 

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

I think the reason Apple Music, Spotify, etc... have the market cornered is they are the only services that mainstream people know about.

 

The problem could well be that today's youth doesn't even know what a CD is. This may not count for everyone, but our 19y/o never has seen a CD used for real. The music is downloaded / streamed, and why would he have a reference in "CD" as such ? Is the quality of that different then, dad ? ... and then I'd first have to tell him.

 

I don't know whether it was in this thread that someone said to have tested himself with a 100 tracks and of all he failed to recognize the CD vs MP3. Well, that. Why would youngsters hop from Spotify to Tidal. Maybe if it was for free.

 

The model s*cks. But that has been on the table before ...

[Ajax]

I have two Auralic Minis, which I control via the Lighting DS software. One at home serving a Devialet 200 via USB and one at my beach house (which I own half with my brother in law) serving a Marantz PM 5005 via coaxial. The Mini in my opinion is underrated and a true HiFi bargain.

 

There have 3 sources of music on both Minis -

1. Internal SSD with ALAC files of ripped CDs and some "Hi res"

2. Tidal

3. Spotify Connect (premium)

 

From a sound quality perspective I don't notice a lot of different between the locally ripped CDs and Tidal - both IMO sound excellent. The Spotify Connect, however, is a distant third. 

 

My son (an accomplished musician), my wife, my brother and law and his 3 teenage kids have all shown absolutely no interest in either Tidal or the music stored on the local SSD. They all think the Auralic Mini is brilliant, as they can stream easily from their phones, but only use Spotify Connect because, as far as I can tell, they like - 

1. the interface and ease of use

2. the social aspect - the ability to follow their friends' playlists

3. the playlist feature that offers you "like" songs based on those already in the playlist

4. The huge range of available music 

5. They already have a "great" music streamer/player so why both learning another one and confuse their source of music

 

Therefore my experience with my family has been that "usability" and social interaction is more important to younger people, and those our age not afflicted by an obsessive personality, than sound quality. 

 

I also agree with the previous poster that Spotify was the "first" decent streamer / player and 320kbs is simply "good enough" to the layman.

[Brinkman Ship]

8 hours ago, TubeLover said:

It's a great deal like fast food. The masses are constantly exposed to it, eat it regularly and feel that it represents actual, enjoyable food.

 

JC 

Based on your posts above, and this one, I think there one MASSIVE point you are missing, and to be fair, is easy to overlook.

 

ALL Apple Music subscribers stream the music via APPLE devices..iPhones, iPads, Laptops etc...or probably even sending the audio bluetooth speakers.

 

Lossless quality is of ZERO consequence.

 

And as poster Ajax smartly pointed out, there is a strong social media aspect.

 

I think it is important to stop thinking like an audiophile when examining the marketplace.

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

2 hours ago, Ajax said:

I have two Auralic Minis, which I control via the Lighting DS software. One at home serving a Devialet 200 via USB and one at my beach house (which I own half with my brother in law) serving a Marantz PM 5005 via coaxial. The Mini in my opinion is underrated and a true HiFi bargain.

 

There have 3 sources of music on both Minis -

1. Internal SSD with ALAC files of ripped CDs and some "Hi res"

2. Tidal

3. Spotify Connect (premium)

 

From a sound quality perspective I don't notice a lot of different between the locally ripped CDs and Tidal - both IMO sound excellent. The Spotify Connect, however, is a distant third. 

 

My son (an accomplished musician), my wife, my brother and law and his 3 teenage kids have all shown absolutely no interest in either Tidal or the music stored on the local SSD. They all think the Auralic Mini is brilliant, as they can stream easily from their phones, but only use Spotify Connect because, as far as I can tell, they like - 

1. the interface and ease of use

2. the social aspect - the ability to follow their friends' playlists

3. the playlist feature that offers you "like" songs based on those already in the playlist

4. The huge range of available music 

5. They already have a "great" music streamer/player so why both learning another one and confuse their source of music

 

Therefore my experience with my family has been that "usability" and social interaction is more important to younger people, and those our age not afflicted by an obsessive personality, than sound quality. 

 

I also agree with the previous poster that Spotify was the "first" decent streamer / player and 320kbs is simply "good enough" to the layman.

Eye opening, and very instructive post..you make points many are missing.

[rodrigaj]

 

2 hours ago, Ajax said:

The Spotify Connect, however, is a distant third. 

 

My son (an accomplished musician), my wife, my brother and law and his 3 teenage kids have all shown absolutely no interest in either Tidal or the music stored on the local SSD. They all think the Auralic Mini is brilliant, as they can stream easily from their phones, but only use Spotify Connect because, as far as I can tell, they like - 

1. the interface and ease of use

2. the social aspect - the ability to follow their friends' playlists

3. the playlist feature that offers you "like" songs based on those already in the playlist

4. The huge range of available music 

5. They already have a "great" music streamer/player so why both learning another one and confuse their source of music

 

Therefore my experience with my family has been that "usability" and social interaction is more important to younger people, and those our age not afflicted by an obsessive personality, than sound quality. 

 

I also agree with the previous poster that Spotify was the "first" decent streamer / player and 320kbs is simply "good enough" to the layman.

 

Spotify Connect has been a true eye opener for me. As a classical music lover, it has been a revelation to discover that some of my favorite artists will share their own playlists with me.

 

For new music discovery, this feature alone is worth the 10 bucks per months. The ability to send the music to my uR or my Bridge II makes it a no brainer.

 

If I want HiRes, I simply buy it. I don't miss Tidal at all.

 

In the future, I see myself subscribing to Qobuz while assessing its benefits, but always having a Spotify Premium / Connect account.

[shadowlight]

2 hours ago, Ajax said:

 

3. the playlist feature that offers you "like" songs based on those already in the playlist

4. The huge range of available music 

 

For me personally, the above two are huge.  I miss the play music similar to to what I like or artist that you have marked as favorite.  Both Tidal and Qobuz currently expect you to either know what you want or play the complete album, which is not how I listen to music.  So what I end up doing is I use Deezer or Spotify to listen to music on the go and create playlist of tracks that I enjoyed.  I convert that playlist to Qobuz and use that for listening at home.

[Musicophile]

30 minutes ago, rodrigaj said:

 

 

Spotify Connect has been a true eye opener for me. As a classical music lover, it has been a revelation to discover that some of my favorite artists will share their own playlists with me.

 

For new music discovery, this feature alone is worth the 10 bucks per months. The ability to send the music to my uR or my Bridge II makes it a no brainer.

 

If I want HiRes, I simply buy it. I don't miss Tidal at all.

 

In the future, I see myself subscribing to Qobuz while assessing its benefits, but always having a Spotify Premium / Connect account.

Qobuz also has a playlist feature curated by musicians, called XXX listens to. They also have curated playlists around certain artists, or music festivals. 

 

It is a feature I don't use often enough, typically I end up checking out mostly the latest releases. Maybe I should have a closer look at this. I'm a typical album listener, so playlists aren't top of mind for me. 

[Blake]

Just a few observations:

 

I suspect the most popular “music streaming” site in the world is YouTube, and not by a small margin.

 

Setting aside headphones for a moment, the percentage of the general public consuming music in the traditional audiophile manner, sitting in a sweet spot is minuscule and getting smaller every day. Music is consumed while doing other things and the sound is likely to be from a single smart speaker so sound quality differences in streaming services won’t be very noticeable, if at all.

 

With respect to the popularity of Tidal, they were simply too late to the game compared to Spotify (comparing Tidal to Apple Music, etc is not fair) and Tidal marketing to the general public has been abysmal both in terms of frequency and content, so it is no wonder people are largely unaware of Tidal.

 

i use Tidal and I enjoy it very much.  I tried Qobuz a while back using the USA work around and I was not impressed with the music catalogue, as the focus was not on the music I like.  However I can see how classical/jazz lovers would prefer it.

 

 

 

 

 

[Ajax]

1 hour ago, rodrigaj said:

 

 

Spotify Connect has been a true eye opener for me. As a classical music lover, it has been a revelation to discover that some of my favorite artists will share their own playlists with me.

 

For new music discovery, this feature alone is worth the 10 bucks per months. The ability to send the music to my uR or my Bridge II makes it a no brainer.

 

If I want HiRes, I simply buy it. I don't miss Tidal at all.

 

In the future, I see myself subscribing to Qobuz while assessing its benefits, but always having a Spotify Premium / Connect account.

 

I too have a premium Spotify account (as well as Tidal) and use it to follow my 19 year old son who introduces me to new music - some such as electronic I don't like but there is much that I do. FYI here is a link that compares Spotify to Apple Music with Spotify in his opinion coming out on top (for now). He makes some good points.

 

https://www.techradar.com/au/news/audio/apple-music-vs-spotify-vs-play-music-vs-tidal-vs-deezer-1296240

 

I'm not as obsessive as some here about sound quality and will happily use Spotify when searching for new music, or for making a party playlist, or when listening to background music while doing jobs around the house, or exercising etc. but I will ALWAYS favour Tidal or my own ripped CDs or a hi res download when I still down for a listening session.

 

FWIW those that want the very best recordings, the best sound that I have ever heard are the 24/48 and 24/96 downloads from the Society of Sound, a joint venture between Peter Gabriel and B&W speakers. Beautiful recordings of new artists in their own studio. Cost is around US$50 per annum for 30 albums. Their catalogue changes every month, with two albums added and two taken away. The Society of Sound album line-up is curated by Peter Gabriel and the London Symphony Orchestra, the selection is split so half the albums on offer are classical and the others are picked from Gabriel’s eclectic Real World Studios.

 

There is some great stuff here and IMO well worth the punt as you own the actual download i.e. it is not a streaming service. Many of the albums are of exquisite quality and for me produce an "in room experience", with incredible resolution with the texture and individuality of each instrument clearly identifiable, through my Benchmark DAC and Adam A7 active speakers. This takes a little bit more work than simply streaming a pre-packaged playlist but there are some real gems here and the rewards are well worth the effort for those that have the time.

 

Barry Diament (mastering engineer and a terrific fellow) was a CA member some years back and he would always say that 95% of the quality of a recoding was already determined by the time the signal left the microphone. i.e. it is all about the studio's acoustics, the quality of the microphones and their positioning. Barry was responsible for a wonderful remastering of Bob Marley's classic album "Legend" one of my all time favourites. Barry's web site is in the link below:

 

http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

 

 

 

[rodrigaj]

@Ajax Do you have a link for the Society of Sound website. A Google search leads to B&W USA which has no references to Society of Sound - although the Google search itself does. Trying a back door approach through the LSO portal prevented access. Curious.

 

 

[Ajax]

here you go

 

https://www.bowers-wilkins.net/Society_of_Sound/Society_of_Sound/Music/Subscribe.html

 

 

[Ajax]

6 minutes ago, rodrigaj said:

@Ajax Do you have a link for the Society of Sound website. A Google search leads to B&W USA which has no references to Society of Sound - although the Google search itself does. Trying a back door approach through the LSO portal prevented access. Curious.

 

 

here you go

 

https://www.bowers-wilkins.net/Society_of_Sound/Society_of_Sound/Music/Subscribe.html

 

[Ralf11]

13 hours ago, TubeLover said:

It's a great deal like fast food. The masses are constantly exposed to it, eat it regularly and feel that it represents actual, enjoyable food.

 

JC 

 

McDonalds 2nd biggest market is France, IIRC

 

KFC is huge in China

 

I do not have any info on how many car owners have hotrodded their Chevy Spark.  However, a ture car aficionado does not just buy a sports car out of the box....

 

@AudioDoctor Alert System activated!

George, accwai, sphinxsix...

[Ralf11]

Streaming:  Entities that actually own the music catalogs can easily force all streaming companies (sensu strictu) out of business (if they don't buy them)

 

I suspect that Apple & Google (maybe via YouTube) will eventually form a giant duopoly - maybe add Sony Music & TenCent

[AudioDoctor]

15 hours ago, buonassi said:

And even if they did, they probably just don't care enough about the best sound possible. Good enough is good enough for some people. If it doesnt distort when played loudly, has tight bass and sounds crisp and clear, that's the recipe sure to impress the non audiophile. 

 

I don't disagree with you. 

 

edit: I think that's exactly the market Best Buy is in.