[pedalhead]

Are you serious? You're accusing those of us criticising Tidal for turning to streaming a boxing match as being racist? It would be hilarious if it wasn't actually quite offensive.

Well, if you can be so intelligent as to quote me claiming anyone "racist", please do so. 

Your comment examples my point  in a quite broad sense. You see something and allude whatever you will from your own prejudicial view.

Anyway, putting the above aside, why don't YOU step up and articulate all the anti Jay-Z rhetoric. What is all the venom about? What is Jay Z representing? Whatever is it?  What is so reprehensible?

Jay Z represents *something*, to a good many in this forum, which is unacceptable.

Also, why aren't these people articulating precisely what it is?  Something to hide?

In addition, let's consider that virtually, if not literally, all such anti Jay Z posters are some variety of *Caucasian* (or non-black).

What does it add up to?  Listening....listening....

In any event, it is unlikely that anything I can say will convince you of anything you aren't already prejudiced to believe, as your comments evidence.  Racist or not, isn't really the point for you. What you and others really want, is the freedom to wailer in your prejudices without being called upon to succumb to reason and logic! 

Your bizarre aggression towards me couldn't be more misplaced, but then it does sound like you have some kind of agenda going on here, or at least an enormous chip on your shoulder. I'm sure there's a forum out there where blindly and baselessly accusing people of having racist motivations is acceptable, but personally I'm here to talk about music.

In 10 years on Head-Fi I have never felt the need to block anyone. Clearly there is a first time for everything.

 

[dazzerfong]

   
[forgive the typos, can't be bothered]
 
Truth is never complicated. Truth is blatant and obvious.  
 
Denial, the exercise in "denial" is what is complicated and difficult.  Why are we talking about "racism" in the first place?  Who brought that up?  Was it the racist?  Stepping to deny his racism?
 
Take yourself.  With the best of intentions, I am sure, engage in "denial", rather than confront reality.  Yet, in doing so, you feel the hypocrisy, which is why you find it all so "curious"!
 
I wonder why you are so ready to rule out a certain possibility, while aware that *something* "curious" exists?
 
Again, Truth is blatant and obvious!  Acceptance is complicated.... 
 
Just providing food for thought.  No need for a great debate.
 
 
*********
 
Btw, gave that article a quick  read.  Two things to note: a) the article doesn't mention nor distinguish between the *paid* tier  from the *free* tier. I strongly suspect that the 3 and 4 spots are in regard to the *free* tier, which is a significant point! b) the article also alludes that Tidal's rivals are "...they’re all minting money...."  Untrue, as NO service is making a profit, specifically not those providing a "free" tier.
 
Additionally, to complete the point, it is the FREE tier which is the issue of contest between the streaming services and the "artists" (**cough, cough**). Simply put it is the record companies and labels that the streaming services are paying (with  regard to the *free* tier) and not the "artists"!!  The "artists" obviously feel this is unfair, BUT what is truly at issue is that the artists believe that the "free" tier of streaming service is **cannibalizing** CD sales. There is a documented corresponding drop in sales versus the rise in streaming, specifically FREE streaming!!!
 
Hence, Tidal!!  Which has no *free* service!!  Therefore, in "artists" point of view, will not (they hope) be cannibalizing CD sales.  In addition, doubling the "fee" for service may allow for the "artists" to be equitably compensated (unlike Spotify and the others).
 
*****
 
Now, all that aside, what I personally find interesting and matters to me:
 
Why are the streaming services not streaming the high quality MASTERS which the record companies have provided and they have paid for????  Why is Spotify charging $9.99 for "Premium" for less than "premium"???  Shouldn't they like Tidal be streaming for the $9.99 tier FLAC lossless MASTERS???
 
What's the deal with that??  What is the animosity toward JayZ and company??  Why not for something more legitimate, like the above??  Hate JayZ and Tidal so much???  Why aren't YOU (you know who "you" are) screaming at SPOTIFY??  Why aren't you demanding FLAC for $9.99????
 
How do we say....r..a...c....opps!
 
jcoltrane smacks himself in the face for such uncompleted vile thoughts...
 
Bye!
 
Truth, Logic and Reason

??????????????????????????????????????????????????
 
Tidal streams 320 kbps MP3 for $10/month. Same as Spotify. Hence why people are suggesting if Tidal wants to undercut the audiophile world from Spotify, the lossless streaming should be cheaper.
 
Also, truth is never simple. The moment you have a 'why' question, it's immediately complicated. You brought this on yourself the moment you claimed people were racist in your first post:
 
Re the boxing match, what is with all the prejudice and/or is it racism?
 
People don't like Jay-Z. That doesn't necessarily mean they hate black people.
 
Also, people, including me, don't appreciate the approach of Tidal's marketing: celebrity endorsements without the actual muscle to back it up. I'd much rather they spend the money on fixing the damn problems with streaming even lossy music, or make a UI which isn't a blatant mimicry of Spotify.

 

[zilch0md]

One of the best features of a high-quality streaming music service is the ability to explore and compare different masterings of favorite songs.
 
This is about the most dramatic evidence I think I've ever seen of why Greatest Hits albums should be considered with caution:
 
Al Green's I'm Tired of Being Alone
 
First, listen to the Greatest Hits version...
 
http://tidalhifi.com/track/5173075
 
...  which Tidal doesn't even offer in "HiFi" mode - and no doubt has a little something to do with the difference in quality, but still, MP3 vs. FLAC would not explain so dramatic a difference.  It almost sounds mono, but it's not.
 
Now listen to the original release, from his album of the same name:  I'm Tired of Being Alone:
 
http://tidalhifi.com/track/32874040
 
You can tell it's not re-recorded, because the arrangement, instruments, his voice, timing, pitch, everything is identical.  It simply hasn't been butchered by the idiot who remastered the Greatest Hits album.
 
Neither of them are state-of-the-art recordings, but still.
 

 
Mike

 

[pedalhead]

  One of the best features of a high-quality streaming music service is the ability to explore and compare different masterings of favorite songs.
 
This is about the most dramatic evidence I think I've ever seen of why Greatest Hits albums should be considered with caution:
 
Al Green's I'm Tired of Being Alone
 
First, listen to the Greatest Hits version...
 
http://tidalhifi.com/track/5173075
 
...  which Tidal doesn't even offer in "HiFi" mode - and no doubt has a little something to do with the difference in quality, but still, MP3 vs. FLAC would not explain so dramatic a difference.  It almost sounds mono, but it's not.
 
Now listen to the original release, from his album of the same name:  I'm Tired of Being Alone:
 
http://tidalhifi.com/track/32874040
 
You can tell it's not re-recorded, because the arrangement, instruments, his voice, timing, pitch, everything is identical.  It simply hasn't been butchered by the idiot who remastered the Greatest Hits album.
 
Neither of them are state-of-the-art recordings, but still.
 
 
Mike

 
An excellent point, and something I've played around with as well. Streaming services are a great way to check out re-releases of old albums.  I've avoided awful, compressed modern remasters of more than one album I own after trying them out on Tidal/Spotify/Qobuz.

 

[sonitus mirus]

  Tidal streams 320 kbps MP3 for $10/month. Same as Spotify. Hence why people are suggesting if Tidal wants to undercut the audiophile world from Spotify, the lossless streaming should be cheaper.

 
Just to clarify, neither Tidal nor Spotify use the mp3 format.
 
Tidal uses 320 kbps AAC:  https://tidalsupport.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/202569662-What-Is-The-Difference-Between-Normal-High-And-HiFI-
 
Spotify uses 320 kbps Ogg Vorbis:  https://support.spotify.com/us/learn-more/faq/#!/article/What-bitrate-does-Spotify-use-for-streaming

 

[swab]

Me, I'm a bit partial to lossless music on the interwebs, unlike this fella :
 
http://thequietus.com/articles/17547-tidal-pop-streaming-bellends-mr-agreeable
 
Fair to say that he has got a point though...

 

[Cornan]

One of the best features of a high-quality streaming music service is the ability to explore and compare different masterings of favorite songs.

This is about the most dramatic evidence I think I've ever seen of why Greatest Hits albums should be considered with caution:

Al Green's I'm Tired of Being Alone

First, listen to the Greatest Hits version...

http://tidalhifi.com/track/5173075

...  which Tidal doesn't even offer in "HiFi" mode - and no doubt has a little something to do with the difference in quality, but still, MP3 vs. FLAC would not explain so dramatic a difference.  It almost sounds mono, but it's not.

Now listen to the original release, from his album of the same name:  I'm Tired of Being Alone:

http://tidalhifi.com/track/32874040

You can tell it's not re-recorded, because the arrangement, instruments, his voice, timing, pitch, everything is identical.  It simply hasn't been butchered by the idiot who remastered the Greatest Hits album.

Neither of them are state-of-the-art recordings, but still.




Mike

Great post Mike!
I love to read posts from genuine music lovers. I have listened to numerous CD's, LP's, MP3's, Lossless files etc. in the past with studio butchered sound. Especially "Best of's" or "Greatest hits"...even digital mastered ones....have the tendancy to kill the joy of music. I am a true supporter of vinyl as well as proper computer audio and use Tidal/Wimp for evaluate good quality recordings as well as for finding new music. The albums with best sound and with "future proof music" will end up in my vinyl collection, were I usually get a free download in digital form as well. The remaining ones I enjoy through Tidal/Wimp...that after a great number of improvements (both hardware, software and tweaks) are almost head to head with my vinyl setup. However, the butchered ones never end up anywere!

/Micael

 

[Steve Wilcox]

 
Re the boxing match, what is with all the prejudice and/or is it racism? Tidal streaming boxing or anything else has ZERO effect on my consuming and enjoying the MUSIC streaming. So, what really are your issues?? It seems to me the issue is that MANY people appear to prefer a service which caters to their PREJUDICES, musically, racially, culturally or otherwise. That is the true issue!

Who killed Davey Moore?
Why an' what's the reason for?
 
"Not I", said the referee
"Don't point your finger at me
I could've stopped it in the eighth
An' maybe kept him from his fate
But the crowd would've booed, I'm sure
At not gettin' their money's worth
It's too bad that he had to go
But there was a pressure on me too, you know
It wasn't me that made him fall
No, you can't blame me at all"
 
Who killed Davey Moore?
Why an' what's the reason for?
 
"Not us", said the angry crowd
Whose screams filled the arena loud
"It's too bad he died that night
But we just like to see a fight
We didn't mean for him to meet his death
We just meant to see some sweat
There ain't nothing wrong in that
It wasn't us that made him fall
No, you can't blame us at all"
 
Who killed Davey Moore?
Why an' what's the reason for?
 
"Not me", said his manager
Puffing on a big cigar
"It's hard to say, it's hard to tell
I always thought that he was well
It's too bad for his wife an' kids he's dead
But if he was sick he should've said
It wasn't me that made him fall
No, you can't blame me at all"
 
Who killed Davey Moore
Why an' what's the reason for?
 
"Not me", says the gambling man
With his ticket stub still in his hand
"My wasn't me that knocked him down
My hands never touched him none
I didn't commit no ugly sin
Anyway, I put money on him to win
It wasn't me that made him fall
No, you can't blame me at all"
 
Who killed Davey Moore
Why an' what's the reason for?
 
"Not me", says the boxing writer
Pounding print on his old typewriter
Sayin', "Boxing ain't to blame
There's just as much danger in a football game"
Sayin', "Fist fighting is here to stay
It's just the old American way
It wasn't me that made him fall
No, you can't blame me at all"
 
Who killed Davey Moore?
Why an' what's the reason for?
 
"Not me", says the man whose fists
Laid him low in a cloud of mist
Who came here from Cuba's door
Where boxing ain't allowed no more
"I hit him, I hit him, yes, it's true
But that's what I am paid to do
Don't say 'murder,' don't say 'kill'
It was destiny, it was God's will"
 
Who killed Davey Moore
Why an' what's the reason for?
 


Songwriters
Bob Dylan


Read more: Bob Dylan - Who Killed Davey Moore? Lyrics | MetroLyrics 

 

[cuiter23]

One of the best features of a high-quality streaming music service is the ability to explore and compare different masterings of favorite songs.

This is about the most dramatic evidence I think I've ever seen of why Greatest Hits albums should be considered with caution:

Al Green's I'm Tired of Being Alone

First, listen to the Greatest Hits version...

http://tidalhifi.com/track/5173075

...  which Tidal doesn't even offer in "HiFi" mode - and no doubt has a little something to do with the difference in quality, but still, MP3 vs. FLAC would not explain so dramatic a difference.  It almost sounds mono, but it's not.

Now listen to the original release, from his album of the same name:  I'm Tired of Being Alone:

http://tidalhifi.com/track/32874040

You can tell it's not re-recorded, because the arrangement, instruments, his voice, timing, pitch, everything is identical.  It simply hasn't been butchered by the idiot who remastered the Greatest Hits album.

Neither of them are state-of-the-art recordings, but still.




Mike

What a coincidence! I was just listening to his songs while reading your post haha.

 

[zilch0md]

   
Just to clarify, neither Tidal nor Spotify use the mp3 format.
 
Tidal uses 320 kbps AAC:  https://tidalsupport.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/202569662-What-Is-The-Difference-Between-Normal-High-And-HiFI-
 
Spotify uses 320 kbps Ogg Vorbis:  https://support.spotify.com/us/learn-more/faq/#!/article/What-bitrate-does-Spotify-use-for-streaming

 
Oh, thanks sonitus mirus.  
 
In truth, I couldn't remember what the non-HiFi format is and I was too lazy to look it up. 

 
 

What a coincidence! I was just listening to his songs while reading your post haha.

 
Wow!  25 million titles and you were listening to an Al Green song...  We must have good taste!   

 

[toolio]

great.  Thanks everyone.  I'll pass the info to my friend.

Also, don't forget you don't have to sign up for Tidal through Apple. You can sign up on their site. You actually save money this way. Once you have a subscription you download the iOS app and use it just as if you had purchased through Apple.

 

[LeeroyDaBoy]

I've been successfully playing back Tidal on a Raspberry Pi 2 flashed to Volumio and using BubbleUPNP on a Nexus &, HTC M7, and A Project Tango tablet. I've been using the on-board analog output on the Pi 2, which is a sucky PWM output for testing, but I can imagine the sound quality will be outstanding once I add a Hifiberry Digi board to the unit.

 

[mattykam]

I signed up for the Tidal trial earlier today and have to say I am disappointed at the sound quality. Listening on either my Mac or Linux computers with a good DAC & amp, the sound coming from my desktop music player with LAME V0 encoded MP3s sound much better vs HiFi Tidal in Chrome. I don't think this problem is specific to Tidal, but any browser based music player as I've had the same experience with Google Music. My guess is Chrome and other browsers do their own crappy audio re-sampling.

 

[cuiter23]

  I signed up for the Tidal trial earlier today and have to say I am disappointed at the sound quality. Listening on either my Mac or Linux computers with a good DAC & amp, the sound coming from my desktop music player with LAME V0 encoded MP3s sound much better vs HiFi Tidal in Chrome. I don't think this problem is specific to Tidal, but any browser based music player as I've had the same experience with Google Music. My guess is Chrome and other browsers do their own crappy audio re-sampling.

 
My .exe and chrome sound the same.

 

[mattykam]

  My .exe and chrome sound the same.

 
So on my Linux box, I did some testing and removed the dmix layer. Tidal HiFi gets close to Clementine MP3 V0, but every song still has noticeably more depth with Clementine. Not sure what else I can do with the Mac.
 
Here's my setup if you're curious: 
Mac: [Music] > USB Schiit Modi > Schiit Vali > Beyerdynamic T90
Linux: [Music] > Optical Schiit Modi > Mackie MR6mk3
Where [Music] is either Clementine playing FLAC/MP3V0, or Chrome playing Tidal HiFi.