[mixman]

Looks like this thread has some competition: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/amazon-launches-music-hd-with-lossless-streaming.905493/

I'm going to hang out here though, because we have the better people here

I'm seeing issues on the LG quad DAC phones too. Getting information like this from the Amazon music app:



audio_flinger shows that it is indeed only playing at 48 kHz. Hmmm. The V40 is definitely capable of 96 kHz playback.



audio_flinger shows this one's 48 kHz, but DIRECT, not through Android's mixer, which strongly suggests that Amazon intentionally decided to screw this up.

Come on Amazon. Get your act together. What's the point of a service like this if there are no clients capable of taking advantage of these audio bit streams?

Hopefully Amazon is going to flesh out their App. I am sure if enough review sites mention it they will.

 

[Devodonaldson]

Exactly. You need a fairly clunky setup with at least a cck. The dongle (or anything mfi-certified) won't work.

All lightning Dongles are limited to 24/48. Yes you need a cck, but you can connect a capable dongle to cck for higher bitrates

 

[Left Channel]

I wonder if UAPP developer can work some magic?

Not until Amazon shares the API more widely. Currently access is limited to a small circle of hardware partners.

 

[judson_w]

Not until Amazon shares the API more widely. Currently access is limited to a small circle of hardware partners.

I am hoping that this new service will push them to open up a bit more, but I doubt it. I really want this on LMS.

 

[SilverEars]

Tried Amazon's web player on the browser and there is no HD tag or sign like the desktop app, which means the FLAC or above quality is through desktop app only.

With the desktop or web player, my dac recognizes sampling rate as always 192khz which set for sound device under Windows OS. If it was bit-perfect, the sampling rate should change according to the original music file sampling rate. Hopefully they impliment bit-perfect. I don't like oversampling.

I'm surprised how sound differs depending on streaming service. How to explain this?

 

[Scarpad]

Exactly. You need a fairly clunky setup with at least a cck. The dongle (or anything mfi-certified) won't work.

yeah this didn’t work

 

[waynes world]

Looking forward to when this is available to amazon.ca (Canadian) users.

 

[abvolt]

I'll be giving a try but I think the bar is set high with Qobuz Hi Res that sure does sound great ..

 

[Peter Hyatt]

I'll be giving a try but I think the bar is set high with Qobuz Hi Res that sure does sound great ..

If Amazon is successful, it may force Qobuz to lower price.

 

[tomwoo]

If Amazon is successful, it may force Qobuz to lower price.

No other similar service can survive if Amazon is successful
Not a single music streaming service is profitable now...

 

[mixman]

If Amazon is successful, it may force Qobuz to lower price.

I doubt they can lower prices and remain profitable. They don't have the subscription numbers to make money with less revenue. I have Tidal, Qobuz, Spotify and now Amazon. Qobuz would be the first I would drop, higher price and lack of content for me, even though via Roon it sounds great.

 

[SilverEars]

It would be interesting for me to compare 320 kbps stream in exclusive mode to 16/44 FLAC streams in exclusive mode. Because if I play 320 kbps via Foobar in WASAPI direct stream to DAC, bypassing the Windows OS, I think it sounds good. Because I think the difference we are likely hearing is when we stream the music data through the OS (and comparing it to a stream playing in exclusive mode). What I'm thinking is the 320 kbps will be comparable to FLAC if both were streamed in exclusive mode or if the actual files were playing on Foobar instead of a stream through a Windows app (like the crappy Amazon music app).

 

[abvolt]

Their's not much to compare, 320 to Hi Res for me is like night & day the only thing spotify has going for it self is a better catalog & desk top app sound quality goes to Qobuz and I've listened to all of them except Amazon but will soon..

 

[Left Channel]

It would be interesting for me to compare 320 kbps stream in exclusive mode to 16/44 FLAC streams in exclusive mode. Because if I play 320 kbps via Foobar in WASAPI direct stream to DAC, bypassing the Windows OS, I think it sounds good. Because I think the difference we are likely hearing is when we stream the music data through the OS (and comparing it to a stream playing in exclusive mode). What I'm thinking is the 320 kbps will be comparable to FLAC if both were streamed in exclusive mode or if the actual files were playing on Foobar instead of a stream through a Windows app (like the crappy Amazon music app).

Their's not much to compare, 320 to Hi Res for me is like night & day the only thing spotify has going for it self is a better catalog & desk top app sound quality goes to Qobuz and I've listened to all of them except Amazon but will soon..

Many people cannot hear any difference. I'm jealous of how much money they save.

I recommend this interesting study (PDF): http://www.doc.gold.ac.uk/~mas03dm...

 

[mixman]

Many people cannot hear any difference. I'm jealous of how much money they save.

I recommend this interesting study (PDF): http://www.doc.gold.ac.uk/~mas03dm...

I agree, I do hear the differences, but I know many cannot and if you cannot I would say don't spend the extra money, but conversely, don't try to convince others that they cannot hear the difference too.