Submitted by dpalma9 t3_124zej2 in headphones
Well, I'm about to jump into the whole world of HiFi music and I'm curious what you PRO guys use. Do you use Tidal or Qobuz? Maybe other? Or do you just purchate/download all the music you like from other places?
I'll like you heard all your experiencies. Help for the answers in advance.
Wow o0 Where do you from to have that many problems? :(
Eastern Europe. If you want to buy music here, you really have to fight for it and sometimes, it's just impossible. Ironically, I'm often told that we can't purchase music here because there's a lot of piracy in this region... I wonder why that is.
Wow, sorry to hear that. I hope some day that problem was fixed.
Qobuz is the best audiophile-oriented streaming service I've used, but their library is unfortunately a bit lacking for me - but this is a matter of your music taste, so definitely give them a shot.
Spotify has comfortably the best music recommendation engine, but no lossless. Probably not a big deal, but I'm a paranoid enough audiophile that I just don't want to pay for that.
Apple Music is reasonably nice on iOS, but kind of half-assed if you want to use it on Windows, and not really designed for anal-retentive audiophiles who want their bits perfect.
Amazon Music is very low-rent as a service, but it's affordable (I already used Prime) and does the job I need it to do, so that's what I use.
I also buy stuff from Bandcamp a bunch. This is by far the most profitable avenue for the artist, these streaming apps pay nothing.
Fuck MQA, ergo, fuck Tidal.
It takes careful attention and excellent equipment (and pretty good hearing) to hear the difference between lossless and 320kps Ogg Vorbis. Spotify is $11/mo and includes Hulu (with ads). I'm pleased with it.
Interesting that you mention Amazon Music. I didn't think on it at all haha But I'll keep it in mind.
Bandcamp
Spotify - great recommendations, huge library, convenient.
Waiting for them to rollout lossless service. Aaany day now....
At this point I find it hard to believe that Spotify Lossless is anything more than false promises to users who are dissatisfied with Spotify's audio quality and considering jumping ship. If you care about audio quality at all, Spotify is one of the worst options.
Spotify 320kps Ogg Vorbis is damn good enough. The interface is unbeaten, the selection is larger than I'll ever need it to be. The volume normalization alone puts it above all the others.
I'm been using Spotify since forever but never with the 'proper equipment'. Since they don't have HiFi audio I started thinking on a change.
Their audio is as hi-fi as anyone's, to my ears. Hi-res is a scam.
Hahahaha thanks for your clarity and honesty :D
Volume normalization reduces dynamic range, which can only be a detriment to sound quality. I can't think of a reason to use normalization on any device which provides fine-grained volume control (although, Android is still lacking in this department). It's also not a Spotify-exclusive feature, AFAIK any streaming service I've tried had the option to turn on normalization (not that I've used it).
Spotify used to be king when it comes to catalog size and UI but at this point I find that the competition has very much caught up to them, and there's also the matter that they're one of the worst when it comes to artist payouts. Even if you don't care about audio quality, I find it hard to justify using Spotify in this day and age.
Patently false. It does not reduce dynamic range in normal or quiet mode. https://artists.spotify.com/help/article/loudness-normalization
I wasn't aware that Spotify had some sort of "smart" normalization going on but my point still stands. Normalization can only reduce audio quality by reducing dynamic range, not enhance quality, so there's little reason to use it if you have a functioning volume control.
I could also go on a tangent about how using normalization at a low volume level (which is essentially the same as reducing the volume in the Spotify app) is worse than keeping Spotify volume at max and controlling the volume via the OS mixer or an analog knob, but that's beside the point.
[deleted]
In most cases, normalization doesn't affect dynamic range at all; all it does is adjust the volume to a pre-defined level (measured in LUFS).
Spotify is different from other streaming services because Premium users can select different normalisation levels - quiet, normal, and loud.
The funny thing is that "Loud" here doesn't always mean that normalization turns the perceived volume up. If a track was mastered fairly loud already, enabling normalization and setting it to Loud may even drop the volume. You can see this on Daft Punk's Give Life Back to Music. Notice also how the shape of the waveform stays the same, since no dynamic range compression is being applied.
However, the one situation where the normalization setting does affect dynamic range is when we have a track with high dynamic range that was mastered relatively quietly and we set the normalization to Loud. The problem now is that the loud parts of the track might be pushed too high and cause clipping, so a limiter has to be applied to ensure that we don't get distortion. This applies to most classical music, such as this recording of Mahler's 5th Symphony.
Notice how the Normal setting looks the same as having normalization switched off but the Loud setting has compressed the track significantly, going from a DR (dynamic range) value of 12 to around 6.
For Spotify users who want to avoid any dynamic range compression, leaving normalization enabled and set to the Quiet or Normal settings is fine - they just need to be careful when having it set to Loud when listening to certain types of music.
I use Spotify and Bandcamp for the library and and if a song is available on tidal, I listen to it there. You might find everything you need on tidal - some of my favorite bands are just a little bit too obscure.
I don't use or pay for master quality though. MQA is a hoax.
I am very surprised that a lot of comments here say that Spotifys Sound Quality is enough. I can tell the difference as long as I am listening on my better gear...
I couldn't tested yet but, on paper, Spotify shouldn't listen like Tidal or Quboz or even Apple Music.
"On paper", sure, but to our ears? The vast majority of people, u/CertainlySomeGuy included (most likely), can't tell high bitrate lossy from lossless in a blind test.
It's relatively easy to set one up for yourself - check this out if you're interested and have ten minutes to spare.
Or, if you can't be bothered to select your own tracks, convert them etc., check out this online test instead.
Thanks for the answer. I'll check those links.
I understand what you say but, it that was so, how are there that many expensive headphones (and it's accesorios) aside the music? I guess you have to tell some difference, right? Even if there aren't "that much".
Again it comes down to there being a difference on paper but not to our ears. Human hearing has numerous blind spots that lossy codecs can use to cleverly remove audio data that is either 1) outside of the audible range to begin with, or 2) too quiet or drowned out by other sounds in the mix. As such, it doesn't really matter if you have very expensive gear or not, your ears will always be the bottleneck.
Expensive gear exists simply because it generally does make music sound better, regardless of whether it's lossless or lossy. What matters far more to our enjoyment of that music is how well it was recorded, mixed, and mastered. File formats and bitrates/samples rates etc, have nearly no impact past a certain point.
I can't tell the difference if the time of comparison is reasonable far apart. In tests like you mentioned, there are songs where I notice the difference and some where I don't. I guess what makes it even more confusing to some people is bit perfect playback, that can actually make a (small) difference.
>I can't tell the difference if the time of comparison is reasonable far apart.
What do you mean, sorry?
>In tests like you mentioned, there are songs where I notice the difference and some where I don't.
So in which songs did you notice the difference and how many times were you able to correctly identify them?
Sorry, English is not my first language. I meant that a direct comparison is easier when listening to the song in higher and lower def without a longer pause in-between. It should be obvious, but I just meant it to show how close of a gap it is between high and low def.
I listened to a wide variety of genres and have not testet it with specific songs.
I agree that the difference between lossy and lossless does not exist/matter to most people.
I disagree with your pretentious pointing at a person and claiming that the person in question is full of BS because they don't agree with everything you said.
>I disagree with your pretentious pointing at a person and claiming that the person in question is full of BS because they don't agree with everything you said.
Huh?
They never agreed/or disagreed with anything I said to begin with, plus I ever accused them of talking BS.
Many people don't realize just how powerful perecption bias is until they try a blind test for themselves. That was just my way of responding to OP but also including CertainlySomeGuy so I didn't have to write two comments instead of one.
Maybe it wasn't intended that way, but I thought your comment was just rude. If CertainlySomeGuy says they can hear the difference between lossy and lossless, who are we to argue? Anyone who has spent some time in this sub knows about the deal with blind testing and the placebo effect, and you don't have to remind them every goddamned time.
Well, he seemed confused as to why people were recommending Spotify, despite the common perception that it's not "Hi-fi". Perhaps I came off as a little brusque, but my intention was just to indirectly let him know why.
Fair enough, and for the record I disagree with the Spotify recommendation, even without regard to audio quality. As a fan of a number of lesser-known musical artists, I consider Spotify's low payout to artists as a major reason to avoid it (at least Tidal and Apple Music pay better according to this account from last year). And while Spotify used to have other advantages over the competition (catalog size, interface, cross-platform compatibility, price), the competition has very much caught up to those by this point.
I did not get that level of hostility in his post. Are you responding to the right person?
I've been using Deezer Hifi for 2yrs. Very happy with it. Had Spotify before that. Much prefer Deezer, good SQ, nice interface, huge library.
I do both - purchase music that I want to keep (usually on Bandcamp or CD) and stream otherwise. It means I support the artists, I don't have to worry about network/regional/copyright availability when listening to my favourites, but I also don't miss out on high-quality audio in cases where storage is an issue, streaming exclusives, or long shipping delays when ordering albums on CD.
For streaming, I use Tidal, as it is the highest-paying option to artists available to me while also being lossless (or close enough in case of MQA). I tried a few others but found no real benefit to switching. I wish I had access to Qobuz though.
I can tell when a Tidal MQA comes on my car Hifi .( I attribute that to the remix remaster) that's with a cheap Boss car stereo and road noise. So don't say people can't hear the difference. You mean you can't hear. The difference between Spotify and Qobuz is quite apparent with even something like Truthears Crinacle Zero.
Mainly Amazon due to its catalog and price, though software isn't perfect and some of their tracks are off (e.g., OG Taylor Swift albums have a lot of tracks replaced with her newer ones).
I'd say Qobuz was the best in terms of sound quality, but catalog was lacking some foreign music I listen to.
Tidal had a decent catalog, but I was a little turned off by all of the different "versions" of albums they had. Supposedly different masters, some versions sometimes sounded better than others, sometimes I couldn't tell. Interesting though, if nothing else.
Spotify and Youtube are probably the most accessible with the best catalog and a good recommendation engine.
Never tried Apple music, but I am very curious about the classical music version they recently announced/released.
Oh, and buy/download what I can if it's not on one of these services, I guess.
I use tidal (can't pass up for 5 bucks a month with military discount) I use roon for my personal al collection at home.
Qobuz. Sounds the best imo. I stream but I also buy from them too.
Thanks for the answer. And the music you buy on Qobuz, could you move to other device in other to use another app to play it? Or maybe store it on a hard drive¿?
Yeah. Once you buy the .flac files, they're yours.
This. It’s not done via the main Qobuz desktop app. But the instructions are simple and very straight forward.
Good Old Spotify... OGG Vorbis is undefeated, u/dpalma9
I've done a lot of comparing different streaming platforms and I've come to the conclusion that none of them are enough to completely replace my local FLAC library.
A quick summary, from my personal experience:
Apple Music - good quality master recordings (for the most part), and affordable. Let down by the fact that Apple are Apple and purposefully make things difficult if you are not already inside their little walled garden.
Amazon - terrible apps and search functionality
Spotify - good cross platform support, great music discovery, but little attention given to master recording quality. Their new TikTok style UI has me worried, as well.
Tidal - MQA, overpriced for what it is
Deezer - basically Spotify but with less functionality and same lack of attention to master recording quality
Qobuz - Nice apps, good attention to master recording quality but terrible search functionality and music discovery
YouTube Music - huge library, nice clean apps, but music quality is a mixed bag
As far as sound quality goes, the differences between different services are often grossly exaggerated. Essentially, if they use the same master recordings, and they generally do, then they will all sound the same (all other things, like volume, being equal).
Ultimately, the fact that you don't have any control over what master recordings are being used (in some cases, only crappy, dynamically compressed remasters are available instead of the original CD) is a big problem for me, and the other is that you are basically just renting the music you listen to.
So for now I use Spotify for music discovery and mobile/social listening but still continue to buy and download local files through Qobuz and Bandcamp.
I use Spotify currently. I cannot tell a difference between the “very high quality” audio setting and a service that offers lossless audio. However, some people swear by it. it can’t hurt for you to try a free trial or something and just cancel it if you end up not hearing that difference
That's my plan! I use Spotify since the beginning and now I want to try if I can tell the difference on the other premium services.
I’ve tried Apple, tidal and Qobuz. I think Qobuz is the best bang for the buck. Offers tons of hi-res music for streaming. Even their cd quality music sounds amazing. Very large Catalog of music. The price is fair compared to tidals Mqa service and only a couple bucks more than Apple (btw just realized Apple was charging me 4$ more for subscribing through Apple Store at $17 where as from Qobuz website it’s only 13$.) And you can also purchase the hi res music from them. You can also purchase single tracks which I don’t believe other sites offer like hdtracks. And if you think you will be purchasing a lot of music they have a great Sublime plan for the year and you get even bigger discounts on purchased music that regular subscribers don’t get. I am a regular subscriber and I buy some music here n there from them.
Usually youtube music to stream the album first, as I can avoid the ads with [that adblocker], if I like them I'll try to find the album on Bandcamp. I'm willing to purchase the copy if it meant the artist will get the share, but yt premium to avoid the ads.. yea no.
Though if there's no copy of the album on Bandcamp I have to stick with YT music in the end as they have such a large library.
Good system :)
Qobuz. Hi-res streaming + download store to purchase hi-res album I want to keep.
Yarrrr
Amazon music. For the price it’s heard to beat and I’m 47. My hearing isn’t what it used to be.
[deleted]
Apple Music. Comes with my Verizon plan, and it’s solid.
[deleted]
Qobuz for Lossless streaming and Youtube Music for on the go listening and on my region, it offers more music selection than Spotify
Sounds a good combo.
Amazon Prime "free" music is ok for background music but sounds bad on any decent system.You have to go to the HD to really reach the level of Tidal or Spotify.
I am my music service. Logitech Media Server. I do not pay monthly fees for nothing if I can help it. I buy from Bandcamp and Qobuz. I have 22,000 songs woop woop /r/musichoarder
Apple Music for me.
[removed]
MyLocalLibrary.com, and sometimes Spotify.
Tidal + Apple Music and a little bit of YouTube Music.
Which sounds better to you?
Tidal MQA seems to clean up the vocalists echoes around the mic. It also brings up sub-bass giving off the general “bass boost” effect. I prefer this most of the time 👌.
Apple Music makes live music sound more natural, but if you’ll notice 90% of the time the echoes are left in the track, which also makes some vocalists sound more airy. You get the sense of the stage and the distance from the mic.
I mainly use YouTube/music to discover some new artists not popular enough to be suggested by Tidal or Apple.
Thank you very much for such a detailed answer ☺️
Im a huge deezer fan
YouTube Music. I can't find stuff to listen to without the algorithm.
Youtube music since I already have youtube premium.
Amazon Music HD Unlimited - I tried Tidal for a while but opted for the Amazon HD family plan. My listening is split fairly evenly between desktop use (Schiit Stack), car (Android Auto) and home stereo (Bluesound Node thru amp & full range speakers), quality is good on all 3 platforms.
I use Tidal for discovery and I buy music that I want to keep in my collection from both Bandcamp and Bleep. I also occasionally use YouTube music, they have some stuff that I can't find anywhere else.
Qobuz + Roon (or Musicbee) for local files.
I use my own personally curated library of 10k tracks sync'ed to my phone or streamed via Plex. Grown by CD purchases, or FLAC purchases from Bandcamp or else the best quality I can get from other download sources like iTunes or Amazon.
Revanced/, YouTube music.
Innertune
Viimusic
Depending on where you live, you can get the entire YouTube music catalog for free with the ability to download as well. Not if you're on an iPhone, of course though.
Spotify and Youtube.
I use Tidal. I tried Amazon HD and it just sounds kinda cold and lifeless compared to Tidal. I rather pay more for what sounds good to my ears. Try them both and compare for yourself. There is a noticeable difference.
StanGenchev t1_je1pkkd wrote
Mainly Bandcamp. I used to use Tidal before it shut down.
Sometimes I have to use Apple Music because not everything is on Bandcamp.
Amazon Music told me I live in the wrong county.
Qobuz took my money, didn't allow me to download what I had purchased and then told me I live in the wrong county.