Tidal or Qobuz - which sounds better

[MarkS]

I spent 15 minutes doing this preliminary test, but playing Elton John's "Your Song" from Tidal (MQA 24.96), Qobuz (24.96) and my local HD Tracks download (24.96) yielded the following results:

 

Best: I don't think I could distinguish between Qobuz and my local version except my local version was louder for some reason.  Both sounded good.

Worst: Tidal version (MQA 24.96) - less air, less detail, less bass.  It doesn't sound bad, but it doesn't sound as good, and it was very easy to tell the difference.

 

Will be doing more testing as I am sure others are right now.

[agladstone]

I’ve been testing Qobuz this past week and comparing some albums between my locally stored copies on my Aurender Server, Tidal MQA (with a Mytek MQA DAC), and Qobuz hi-res and overall, I’ve actually decided that Tidal MQA sounds better than the Qobuz hi-res version. 

Most of the time, my own personal and locally stored version sounds better by a little bit than either the Tidal MQA or Qobuz Hi-res versions, but almost always Tidal MQA sounds considerably better than the Qobuz version. 

As all things, I’m certain this is entirely system and set up specific and will vary from system to system. 

But with my combination of Aurender Music Server / Streamer -> Mytek Brooklyn MQA DAC, 

Tidal is definitely the clear winner! 

I was really excited to try Qobuz and couldn’t wait to start my free beta trial, but I definitely will not be extending it past my 30 day trial, I’m glad to be keeping Tidal at the lower cost and superior sound quality! 

[MarkS]

2 hours ago, agladstone said:

I’ve been testing Qobuz this past week and comparing some albums between my locally stored copies on my Aurender Server, Tidal MQA (with a Mytek MQA DAC), and Qobuz hi-res and overall, I’ve actually decided that Tidal MQA sounds better than the Qobuz hi-res version. 

Most of the time, my own personal and locally stored version sounds better by a little bit than either the Tidal MQA or Qobuz Hi-res versions, but almost always Tidal MQA sounds considerably better than the Qobuz version. 

As all things, I’m certain this is entirely system and set up specific and will vary from system to system. 

But with my combination of Aurender Music Server / Streamer -> Mytek Brooklyn MQA DAC, 

Tidal is definitely the clear winner! 

I was really excited to try Qobuz and couldn’t wait to start my free beta trial, but I definitely will not be extending it past my 30 day trial, I’m glad to be keeping Tidal at the lower cost and superior sound quality! 

 

Inferesting. Would you please identify some material you compared.  I would like to try some of the tracks too.   Thx. 

[agladstone]

I know I tried a few of the recent releases by Naxos 2xHD (Buddy Holly and London Symphony Orchestra, The Carpenters and LSO, etc. since I own these from HDTracks and they’re in Tidal as MQA and Qobuz), also (don’t laugh!!), the Grease OMP Soundtrack ( this one I actually felt like the two diff 16/44 CD quality Tidal versions actually sounded better than my own original CD rip and the Tidal MQA, with Tidal MQA still sounding better than the Qobuz Hi-Res version). 

I also tested several newly released classical albums (one I recall was Yo-Yo Ma solo Cello playing Bach ), once again the Tidal MQA sounded much better to me. 

What DAC are you using? I have a Mytek Brooklyn DAC with very good MQA unfolding capabilities and I’m using an Aurender Music Server feeding the Mytek DAC and doing all these tests via Aurender’s own Conductor app. 

I definitely believe that which service will sound better is going to be system dependent. 

If someone doesn’t have a good MQA DAC for example, I doubt Tidal Masters / MQA are going to sound as good as Qobuz. 

Also, playing Tidal MQA and Qobuz Hi-Res through the Aurender vs. using a PC or MacBook, etc. also going to affect the sound quality. 

 

[MarkS]

10 hours ago, agladstone said:

I know I tried a few of the recent releases by Naxos 2xHD (Buddy Holly and London Symphony Orchestra, The Carpenters and LSO, etc. since I own these from HDTracks and they’re in Tidal as MQA and Qobuz), also (don’t laugh!!), the Grease OMP Soundtrack ( this one I actually felt like the two diff 16/44 CD quality Tidal versions actually sounded better than my own original CD rip and the Tidal MQA, with Tidal MQA still sounding better than the Qobuz Hi-Res version). 

I also tested several newly released classical albums (one I recall was Yo-Yo Ma solo Cello playing Bach ), once again the Tidal MQA sounded much better to me. 

What DAC are you using? I have a Mytek Brooklyn DAC with very good MQA unfolding capabilities and I’m using an Aurender Music Server feeding the Mytek DAC and doing all these tests via Aurender’s own Conductor app. 

I definitely believe that which service will sound better is going to be system dependent. 

If someone doesn’t have a good MQA DAC for example, I doubt Tidal Masters / MQA are going to sound as good as Qobuz. 

Also, playing Tidal MQA and Qobuz Hi-Res through the Aurender vs. using a PC or MacBook, etc. also going to affect the sound quality. 

 

 

Thanks, I will listen to some of this material.  Even the Grease Soundtrack :)

 

Using dCS Vivaldi system.

[juanitox]

after spending the weeks compairing , TIDAL streaming and quobuz there is no debate as all the 16/44 stuff sounds way better with Quobuz, no match for me.  i will keep Tidal as some alternativ tracks can't be find on Quobuz.   as for the TIDal MQA vs Quobuz High Res

i have mixed feelings,  Some MQa sounds really different than the CD version like it is a new mix and for The Quobuz i prefer the 24/96 than the 24/192 ones .   but at the end i prefer the the Quobuz High res to the MQA sound effect.

 

anyway it's good to finally have more choice 😉

[R1200CL]

@juanitox what render/streamer and DAC ?

 

 

[juanitox]

56 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

@juanitox what render/streamer and DAC ?

 

 

 

no streamer or render, just a dedicated powerfull PC with linear supply to Intona usb filter to T+A DAC8 DSD using  Roon player with HQPLAYER

[tomjtx]

On 1/22/2019 at 10:11 PM, agladstone said:

I’ve been testing Qobuz this past week and comparing some albums between my locally stored copies on my Aurender Server, Tidal MQA (with a Mytek MQA DAC), and Qobuz hi-res and overall, I’ve actually decided that Tidal MQA sounds better than the Qobuz hi-res version. 

Most of the time, my own personal and locally stored version sounds better by a little bit than either the Tidal MQA or Qobuz Hi-res versions, but almost always Tidal MQA sounds considerably better than the Qobuz version. 

As all things, I’m certain this is entirely system and set up specific and will vary from system to system. 

But with my combination of Aurender Music Server / Streamer -> Mytek Brooklyn MQA DAC, 

Tidal is definitely the clear winner! 

I was really excited to try Qobuz and couldn’t wait to start my free beta trial, but I definitely will not be extending it past my 30 day trial, I’m glad to be keeping Tidal at the lower cost and superior sound quality! 

 

Did you make sure that all versions were at the same volume? Tests show that we generally perceive louder as better

[Doak]

2 hours ago, tomjtx said:

 

Did you make sure that all versions were at the same volume? Tests show that we generally perceive louder as better

Good and important point.

On my system TIDAL always sounds louder.

[miguelito]

I have TIDAL, Qobuz, and a full decoding DAC (dCS Rossini). 

 

A few observations after a few weeks:

1- I have not found any MQA release not available in Qobuz at the same true resolution (no exhaustive checks)

2- I have found a lot of true high res on Qobuz that does not have MQA versions on TIDAL

3- Qobuz redbook and true high res sounds amazing - as good as TIDAL at least

 

[firedog]

On 1/23/2019 at 10:05 AM, agladstone said:

I know I tried a few of the recent releases by Naxos 2xHD (Buddy Holly and London Symphony Orchestra, The Carpenters and LSO, etc. since I own these from HDTracks and they’re in Tidal as MQA and Qobuz), also (don’t laugh!!), the Grease OMP Soundtrack ( this one I actually felt like the two diff 16/44 CD quality Tidal versions actually sounded better than my own original CD rip and the Tidal MQA, with Tidal MQA still sounding better than the Qobuz Hi-Res version). 

I also tested several newly released classical albums (one I recall was Yo-Yo Ma solo Cello playing Bach ), once again the Tidal MQA sounded much better to me. 

What DAC are you using? I have a Mytek Brooklyn DAC with very good MQA unfolding capabilities and I’m using an Aurender Music Server feeding the Mytek DAC and doing all these tests via Aurender’s own Conductor app. 

I definitely believe that which service will sound better is going to be system dependent. 

If someone doesn’t have a good MQA DAC for example, I doubt Tidal Masters / MQA are going to sound as good as Qobuz. 

Also, playing Tidal MQA and Qobuz Hi-Res through the Aurender vs. using a PC or MacBook, etc. also going to affect the sound quality. 

 

If you are listening on an Aurender and a Brooklyn, then ALL the files are getting played back with MQA filters-even the non MQA files. This is going to skew your test results in favor of MQA, as only the MQA files are being played back as intended. 

[MarkS]

3 hours ago, firedog said:

If you are listening on an Aurender and a Brooklyn, then ALL the files are getting played back with MQA filters-even the non MQA files. This is going to skew your test results in favor of MQA, as only the MQA files are being played back as intended. 

 

Huh??  I am about to buy a Mytek Brooklyn Bridge for my office system. Are you saying the Mytek dac somehow taints non-MQA files (true hi res or dsd) with MQA filters?  Please clarify this. 

[left channel]

7 hours ago, firedog said:

If you are listening on an Aurender and a Brooklyn, then ALL the files are getting played back with MQA filters-even the non MQA files. This is going to skew your test results in favor of MQA, as only the MQA files are being played back as intended. 

 

3 hours ago, MarkS said:

 

Huh??  I am about to buy a Mytek Brooklyn Bridge for my office system. Are you saying the Mytek dac somehow taints non-MQA files (true hi res or dsd) with MQA filters?  Please clarify this. 

 

I read somewhere that was a problem with the early Brooklyn firmware, but it was fixed a long time ago. You should confirm directly with Mytek of course. I don't know anything about Aurender.

[firedog]

6 hours ago, MarkS said:

 

Huh??  I am about to buy a Mytek Brooklyn Bridge for my office system. Are you saying the Mytek dac somehow taints non-MQA files (true hi res or dsd) with MQA filters?  Please clarify this. 

AFAIK, the MQA implementation of both Mytek and Aurender  is set up so that once it goes on and implements MQA filters, they stay on. You have to manually intervene to turn them off. In other words, once they start playing an MQA file even non MQA files are played back using MQA filters unless you manually change the filtering in settings. I believe that this isn't true for DSD that arrives at the Mytek as DSD. There are no MQA filters for DSD.

 

This, BTW, is a "feature" of almost all MQA DACs, except for a few where the manufacturer has gone thru an apparently expensive and time consuming development process that involves writing specialized software just for MQA. dCS and iFI (but only on the iFi DSD Pro model) have done this.  I think there is one other manufacturer that has also done it, but I can't remember who they are at the moment. The rest have taken the easy way out and let you playback all your files with MQA filters without letting you know.

[Blake]

22 hours ago, miguelito said:

 

3- Qobuz redbook and true high res sounds amazing - as good as TIDAL at least

 

 

Am I correct in interpreting your comment to mean you determined that Qobuz redbook and Tidal redbook are roughly equivalent in terms of sound quality?

 

[exdmd]

Don't forget the watermarks that are common on non MQA files on Tidal. I have yet to hear a watermarked track on Qobuz. There may be some, anyone who has heard a watermarked track on Qobuz please point it out. The watermarks are most noticeable on solo piano tracks. The watermark distortion can be heard on Yuja Wang's Sonatas & Etudes album, compare the album on Tidal and Qobuz:

 

https://listen.tidal.com/album/5387443
https://play.qobuz.com/album/0002894778264

[miguelito]

2 hours ago, Blake said:

Am I correct in interpreting your comment to mean you determined that Qobuz redbook and Tidal redbook are roughly equivalent in terms of sound quality?

 

Yes. To be clear, I am listening to both via Roon, and my impression so far of Qobuz is that redbook sounds at least as good as Tidal. My impression is also that high res sounds better than MQA on average, so far (btw I have a full-decoding MQA DAC, dCS Rossini).

[firedog]

3 minutes ago, exdmd said:

Don't forget the watermarks that are common on non MQA files on Tidal. I have yet to hear a watermarked track on Qobuz. There may be some, anyone who has heard a watermarked track on Qobuz please point it out. The watermarks are most noticeable on solo piano tracks. The watermark distortion can be heard on Yuja Wang's Sonatas & Etudes album, compare the album on Tidal and Qobuz:

 

https://listen.tidal.com/album/5387443
https://play.qobuz.com/album/0002894778264

As far as I know, their is no category of “non MQA” being watermarked on Tidal. There is an issue of the Universal tracks released to streaming being  watermarked, and this is label related, not MQA or Tidal related.It’s a label decision of what is released for streaming, not a decision of the streaming company.

[Paul R]

14 minutes ago, firedog said:

As far as I know, their is no category of “non MQA” being watermarked on Tidal. There is an issue of the Universal tracks released to streaming being  watermarked, and this is label related, not MQA or Tidal related.It’s a label decision of what is released for streaming, not a decision of the streaming company.

 

I thought that was a specific condition in some distribution agreements, though that probably would be label specific.  -Paul 

[Johnseye]

I finally got my invite to Quobuz.  After the first moment I liked what I heard.  Then I did a side by side with Tidal.  Everything I've listened to so far (today) sounds better in Quobuz.  I'm sitting at work with headphone amp and phones.  I'll have a listen with speakers tonight.  This is good and bad.  Good because I'm in for much better SQ from a streamer, bad because I had been paying half with Tidal through a deal.  Now I'm in for $250 a year.

[bobbmd]

AFAIK/AFAIConcerned: I think it depends on the recording you are listening to and with ROON (if you have it gives a choice of versions to try for both Qobuz and TIDAL plus your embedded library) so can do a/b/c/ comparisons

At times TIDAL sounds ‘better’ especially MQA(just my subjective opinion I am not advocating it and don’t understand ‘watermarks’) other times more often than not Qobuz sounds a lot better especially ANY albums marked HiRes BUT my hundreds of playlists that I transferred from TIDAL to Qobuz via Soundiiz some MQA albums play in HiRes ie 24/88 96 or 192!!?? And sound great.

The game changer is using ROON or better yet Audirvana +3 and that also to my ears improves the SQ more than anything especially A+3-also it depends on your DAC I switch between ME E2 and first generation Gungnir the Schiit at times sounds a lot better than than ME E2- but all of this is totally subjective to one’s ears-ie ‘what ever floats your boat’

On the other hand I have many DVD-A and SACD albums that I USED to listen to via 2005 yamaha dvd dvd-a sacd  cd changer with Outlaw ICBM-1 bass manager that blow away anything you can get streamed especially GD studio albums(dvd-a) and the Stones(sacd) but too much trouble digging them out and putting them back! 

[Johnseye]

41 minutes ago, bobbmd said:

AFAIK/AFAIConcerned: I think it depends on the recording you are listening to and with ROON (if you have it gives a choice of versions to try for both Qobuz and TIDAL plus your embedded library) so can do a/b/c/ comparisons

At times TIDAL sounds ‘better’ especially MQA(just my subjective opinion I am not advocating it and don’t understand ‘watermarks’) other times more often than not Qobuz sounds a lot better especially ANY albums marked HiRes BUT my hundreds of playlists that I transferred from TIDAL to Qobuz via Soundiiz some MQA albums play in HiRes ie 24/88 96 or 192!!?? And sound great.

The game changer is using ROON or better yet Audirvana +3 and that also to my ears improves the SQ more than anything especially A+3-also it depends on your DAC I switch between ME E2 and first generation Gungnir the Schiit at times sounds a lot better than than ME E2- but all of this is totally subjective to one’s ears-ie ‘what ever floats your boat’

On the other hand I have many DVD-A and SACD albums that I USED to listen to via 2005 yamaha dvd dvd-a sacd  cd changer with Outlaw ICBM-1 bass manager that blow away anything you can get streamed especially GD studio albums(dvd-a) and the Stones(sacd) but too much trouble digging them out and putting them back! 

 

I briefly compared the two at home last night.  Both going into Roon then using HQPlayer as the NAA.  The difference in sounds was much less noticeable.  I'm guessing that's due to HQPlayer applying filters and upsampling.  While I expect to notice a big difference where I'm not using Roon or HQPlayer, like work, the car, or anywhere from the phone, home listening won't be impacted as much.

 

MQA for me is much heavier in the mids and bass.  By comparison a 96k MQA track from Tidal can sounds a bit muddier than a 96k Quobuz track.  It can vary by album, no question.

 

Thanks for the tip on Soundiiz.  Exactly what I needed.  An unfortunate finding when converting my playlists is that there are quite a few albums not in Quobuz that are in Tidal.  I would expect that to change over time, but find it limiting in the interim.

[bobbmd]

@Johnseye you are welcome but get the Premium version of Soundiiz makes it a piece of cake

[erniejade]

I have been playing around with Qobuz and Tidal as well. Small rid is:. Lumin D1, Sbooster, Wireworld Eclipse Silver RCA,   Kef LS50W with Cullen power cables, Velodyne SPL1200 sub.

 

Tidal MAQ seems to have more bass to me vs the high rez on Qobuz. On Tidal MQA, I feel during complicated music or music that has a lot going on within the song, it seems more meshed together where Qobuz, the instruments have more separation. On some stuff the extra bass on Tidal helps on poor mastered recordings but, with that Velo sub, I don't need the extra help on bass.   The MQA versions to me have a bit smoother presentation on top and is usually very pleasant sounding vs Qobuz high rez has a bit more extension on top. Both sound good but, to me, its personal preference on the top end.

 

Tidal seems to have a better selection. They have stuff in the rock department that Qobuz does not.  It's a toss up.