[3Putter]

If you listen through a phone you may as well use the least expensive streaming service that has the catalog you are looking for. Differences in sound quality really show up when you are using a laptop with a very good external DAC.

Oh, I don't know about that. My LGV30 is my primary source for convenient listening. It sounds as good as most external DAC's that I've tried. I don't have the budget for an expensive rig and found the LG phone a great resource. I've tried Qubuz and loved the sound quality. Found some really cool artists, too. But that ran out quickly and their catalog was pretty limited on what I prefer to listen to so I cancelled. Their customer support was rude when cancelling when I ran into a problem. They double billed me - long story - but directly responded to me with 'that's too bad, we're closing the ticket'. So, they better include back rubs if I'm to return to them ever. Amazon HD was exciting but when I compare to Tidal there's a difference in quality. Some people say I'm nuts, and they're probably right, but my ears don't lie.

 

[McCol]

IMO if you do your listening through a phone you may as well use the least expensive streaming service that has the catalog you are looking for. Differences in sound quality become quite noticeable when you are using a laptop with a very good external DAC.

Not listening directly through the phone, using a very good DAC in the Cobalt.

 

[Gus141]

The problem with external DACs connected to mobile devices is that Amazon’s app upsamples *everything* to the max capable sampling rate of the connected DAC. For example, connect to an iPad (using the Camera Connection Kit) a DAC with a display (or an LED) that tells you what sampling rate it is receiving, play a 16/44.1 “HD” song through the Amazon Music app and the DAC will tell you it is receiving it’s max capable rate (e.g., 192kHz for my two external DACs with displays).

Two problems with this:
1. Some DACs don’t apply any DA reconstruction filters with anything upsampled beyond a certain point, and the redbook quality file might sound better with the inbuilt filters versus the upsampled stream.
2. Even though we can chose the stream quality (e.g., “Best Available”, “HD/Ultra HD”, “Standard”, etc) I think Amazon is delivering the audio stream at a lower quality if it determines your network connection is too slow (rather than just buffering more of the song). But since the app upsamples everything to the max capability of the external DAC, you think you’re getting 16/44.1 or higher, but may be getting 320kbps MP3 upsampled to 192kHz FLAC.

Maybe this lack of exclusive mode on all apps is a way to hide the actual quality being delivered. Folks who are measuring network traffic may be on the right track and are seeing throughput at rates lower than expected (i.e., lower than Qobuz for the same song at the same supposed quality).

 

[Left Channel]

I think Amazon is competing with whoever is in the music market place.

At £129 for a year subscription they are going for the jugular of all the services.
To my ears there is not a great deal of difference sound quality wise between Tidal HiFi and Amazon HD through my S10+/Dragonfly Cobalt. However there is a £100 difference over the year.
I tried Qobus for a while and yes it was very good quality but at almost double the price it becomes difficult to justify.

If Amazon over the next few months believe they can mop up a few hundred thousand premium customers from Tidal/Qobus by adding some extra features I think they may well do so.

"A few hundred thousand premium customers" is probably more than the total number of Tidal and Qobuz premium customers in the countries Amazon Music HD now operates. Not likely. However, they are probably already peeling off price-sensitive customers from among Tidal's many non-premium customers, and a few of the relatively rare non-premium Qobuz subscribers as well.

 

[Left Channel]

Maybe this lack of exclusive mode on all apps is a way to hide the actual quality being delivered.

You clearly have more respect for Amazon than most of us! I believe that would have required far more intelligence and intent than Amazon actually applied to this launch.

 

[McCol]

"A few hundred thousand premium customers" is probably more than the total number of Tidal and Qobuz premium customers in the countries Amazon Music HD now operates. Not likely. However, they are probably already peeling off price-sensitive customers from among Tidal's many non-premium customers, and a few of the relatively rare non-premium Qobuz subscribers as well.

To be honest I have absolutely no idea how many subscribers are using qobuz/tidal's highest tier service, I was only quoting a figure that I'm sure was in this thread!

I do think that there many like myself who will switch to Amazon for the price/quality ratio.
I will give until my free 3 months finished but so far I'm likely to switch from Tidal to Amazon, hopefully with a few extra features added by Amazon

 

[mixman]

Eventually this might all be a moot point since I think inevitably all the services will go HD. When that will occur will be a matter of how hot the streaming race gets. For instance I just read Apple is planning on now bundling their services soon.....Apple TV, Apple Music and other products. I am sure soon thereafter they will be looking to maximize their music service and offer an HD service also. Spotify will then have no choice but follow.

 

[rkw]

Regarding prices I see no convincing rationale for there to be a 100% price increase for lossless streaming. 70% or more of subscription revenue goes to copyright holders. About 30% covers distribution costs for CDNs, server storage, and employee ect. Anything left over is profit.

The prices are to cover the higher licensing fees charged by the music labels for lossless. And profit? There is none. All of the streaming services are losing money.

Qobuz and Tidal need to lower prices or neither will last.

Qobuz and Tidal are in a tough position, not having a profitable parent (like Apple, Google, and Amazon) to subsidize losses. If they need to cut prices to retain customers, they'll lose even more money.

 

[a-LeXx]

The problem with external DACs connected to mobile devices is that Amazon’s app upsamples *everything* to the max capable sampling rate of the connected DAC. For example, connect to an iPad (using the Camera Connection Kit) a DAC with a display (or an LED) that tells you what sampling rate it is receiving, play a 16/44.1 “HD” song through the Amazon Music app and the DAC will tell you it is receiving it’s max capable rate (e.g., 192kHz for my two external DACs with displays).

Two problems with this:
1. Some DACs don’t apply any DA reconstruction filters with anything upsampled beyond a certain point, and the redbook quality file might sound better with the inbuilt filters versus the upsampled stream.
2. Even though we can chose the stream quality (e.g., “Best Available”, “HD/Ultra HD”, “Standard”, etc) I think Amazon is delivering the audio stream at a lower quality if it determines your network connection is too slow (rather than just buffering more of the song). But since the app upsamples everything to the max capability of the external DAC, you think you’re getting 16/44.1 or higher, but may be getting 320kbps MP3 upsampled to 192kHz FLAC.

Maybe this lack of exclusive mode on all apps is a way to hide the actual quality being delivered. Folks who are measuring network traffic may be on the right track and are seeing throughput at rates lower than expected (i.e., lower than Qobuz for the same song at the same supposed quality).

Upsampling as such is not a big deal. Almost every DAC is oversampling anyway. And the upsampling is done properly, I don‘t prrceive any upsampling artifacts. The only issue with upsampling - it‘s causing additional battery drain, for both upsampling and sending more data via USB...

The point with datarate is true though. At a first network glitch (can happen with a best wifi connection) amazon would fall back to heavily compressed playback. My simple solution for that - always download the whole record/playlist. You can start playback after the first track is completely downloaded, it will ensure the quality is always a highest possible...

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Not quick and dirty resampler that designed for speed, not quality.
https://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/11/measurements-windows-10-audio-stack.html

 

[a-LeXx]

Not quick and dirty resampler that designed for speed, not quality.
https://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/11/measurements-windows-10-audio-stack.html

Well, that’s Windows. There is no upsampling in iOS, it always works with native sampling rates. The upsampling is done by amazon‘s app itself, and seems to be good, at least to my ears. No way to measure it though, you can‘t force your content through an amazon‘s app...

 

[runssical]

Oh, I don't know about that. My LGV30 is my primary source for convenient listening. It sounds as good as most external DAC's that I've tried. I don't have the budget for an expensive rig and found the LG phone a great resource. I've tried Qubuz and loved the sound quality. Found some really cool artists, too. But that ran out quickly and their catalog was pretty limited on what I prefer to listen to so I cancelled. Their customer support was rude when cancelling when I ran into a problem. They double billed me - long story - but directly responded to me with 'that's too bad, we're closing the ticket'. So, they better include back rubs if I'm to return to them ever. Amazon HD was exciting but when I compare to Tidal there's a difference in quality. Some people say I'm nuts, and they're probably right, but my ears don't lie.

The LG phones have formidable DACs. Audiosciencereveiw puts the Quad DAC on par with the new Modi. So an LG phone makes for a good DAP.

I have the V20. I've tried all three major lossless services and I would rank them exactly as you have. Qobuz has the best SQ, Amazon the worst, and Tidal is in the middle but closer to Amazon (bad) then Qobuz.

It's really unfortunate that streaming music services are so poorly managed. Currently, there is no substitute for local playback or using your own home network.

 

[runssical]

Well, that’s Windows. There is no upsampling in iOS, it always works with native sampling rates. The upsampling is done by amazon‘s app itself, and seems to be good, at least to my ears. No way to measure it though, you can‘t force your content through an amazon‘s app...

I would be surprised if the Amazon app did upsampling correctly. Resampling in general is a very bad idea. Better for it to be done within the DAC then by the Amazon app.

Android resampled 16bit 44.1k to 48k and that had a negative impact on the sound. So I doubt some clunky cookie cutter music app from Amazon would be any different.

 

[runssical]

The prices are to cover the higher licensing fees charged by the music labels for lossless. And profit? There is none. All of the streaming services are losing money.
Qobuz and Tidal are in a tough position, not having a profitable parent (like Apple, Google, and Amazon) to subsidize losses. If they need to cut prices to retain customers, they'll lose even more money.

I agree and wonder how Spotify has been propped up by venture capital for so long. I'm guessing those investors are hoping a company like Google or Facebook acquires Spotify.

 

[a-LeXx]

I would be surprised if the Amazon app did upsampling correctly. Resampling in general is a very bad idea. Better for it to be done within the DAC then by the Amazon app.

Android resampled 16bit 44.1k to 48k and that had a negative impact on the sound. So I doubt some clunky cookie cutter music app from Amazon would be any different.

Well, there will be no objective answer to this, as I said, you can't source your content through the app to measure. But subjectively I don't perceive any sound degradation. Sometimes, when upsampling is involved (with other setups) there is an unnatural sense of air added, accompanied by dimensional cues getting smeared a bit. I do not hear this with amazon. And all that computing power wasted should be good for something, hopefully, as the amazon app is a power-hungriest streaming client across all the available platforms. Of course I would much more prefer no upsampling paired with decent battery life. But at least the SQ doesn't suffer with a current implementation. I'm using a DFR as a DAC on my ipod touch 6th gen (that can now barely play 3 16/44.1 records pre-downloaded into the flash memory with a fully loaded battery on Amazon Music HD ). That extreme battery drain is a real problem though.