[bhanja_trinanjan]

Hello!!

Quick question folks, can you differentiate between Apple Music @ 256 kbps AAC and FLAC lossless 24 bit offered by Primephonic, in terms of sound quality?

I am from India and Tidal is not available here.

 

[Sterling2]

I'm an Apple Music subscriber. I was an HDtracks customer, as well as an Acoustic Sounds customer for hi-res stereo downloads; but, not being able to distinguish the hi-res downloads from those purveyors as being better than Apple Music AAC downloads, in any manner better can be discerned, I saw no need to buy stereo hi-res and now the only thing I buy from Acoustic Sounds are 5.1 FLAC downloads, which so far have not disappointed. My chain to enjoy iTunes is computer>usb DAC (OPPO-205) up sampling AAC to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES Pre-Pro. My chain to enjoy 5.1 downloads is thumb drive>OPPO-205>Sony TA-P9000ES Multi-channel Analog Preamplifier.

 

[bhanja_trinanjan]

I'm an Apple Music subscriber. I was an HDtracks customer, as well as an Acoustic Sounds customer for hi-res stereo downloads; but, not being able to distinguish the hi-res downloads from those purveyors as being better than Apple Music AAC downloads, in any manner better can be discerned, I saw no need to buy stereo hi-res and now the only thing I buy from Acoustic Sounds are 5.1 FLAC downloads, which so far have not disappointed. My chain to enjoy iTunes is computer>usb DAC (OPPO-205) up sampling AAC to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES Pre-Pro. My chain to enjoy 5.1 downloads is thumb drive>OPPO-205>Sony TA-P9000ES Multi-channel Analog Preamplifier.

I listen to classical music.I have subscriptions for Apple Music, Primephonic and IDAGIO. I have been comparing these on the same track over and over again with my Dali IO-6.ForApple Digital Master Albums,I haven't noticed much difference between the three. Apple Music seems to sound a touch warmer...

 

[Sterling2]

I listen to classical music.I have subscriptions for Apple Music, Primephonic and IDAGIO. I have been comparing these on the same track over and over again with my Dali IO-6.ForApple Digital Master Albums,I haven't noticed much difference between the three. Apple Music seems to sound a touch warmer...

Yeah, seems to me Apple Music is on par with SACD. The 5.1 FLAC downloads from Acoustic Sounds seem better to me than 5.1 SACD; but, it might have something to do with the recording. My favorite 5.1 from Acoustic Sounds is the Seattle Symphony’s performance of The Firebird, it’s just dazzling.

 

[iffy0620]

I've tried going through several lossless streaming services and have returned to Apple Music. Although I haven't tried Primephonic, to my ears there is no difference between Apple Music offerings compared to those of Tidal, Qobuz, Amazon HD. The biggest difference is the original master used. In my opinion, ever since Apple dedicated themself to improving their Apple Digital Masters collection, the quality has become superb. In fact, Apple seems to have better masters for many albums that aren't available on Tidal or Qobuz, which funnily enough makes Apple sound better than the lossless competitors.

If Apple Music fits best into your ecosystem and has a user experience that you enjoy, then stick with it and appreciate the music!

 

[sajunky]

Apple music sounds good, as source is undergoing ridiculous tests against clipping. Intersample overloads which happen during encoding and during oversampling (most of DACs) are less likely to happen.

Hi-res downloads have generally two problems in my book:
1. Poor mastering and "loudness war" intended to sound good on poor quality players (mass market mastering)
2. Watermarking which applies to the most of digital downloads and all streaming services.

It is why I still enjoy old CD rips and a good R2R NOS DAC with exception of few audiophile labels like ECM, Fone, Linn, (couple more) where hi-res download sound good and natural.

 

[hmscott]

The problem I have with Apple Music is you have to pay for all the tracks you want to listen to in their entirety.

When I stream on Tidal there isn't even an option to purchase music, that's the best in my view. I have hundreds of playlists with my favorite music all for a low monthly fee. Then I discovered Tidal Hfifi memberships discounted to $89/year on sale, $119 renewing, which is far less than the 12 x $19.99 = $239.99 normal cost. For all the music I can listen to all day long, all month long, all year long - for the cost of a few albums of files.

I don't need to be pushed to spend more money. I'm there to listen to music.

Amazon Music HD is great too - but you need the top tier subscription, pay an extra fee over the monthly fee to get HD. Then you can listen to anything in their Store too - but you don't need to use the Store interface, you can click a tab to add "everything" beyond your own library of music. That works too, but still there is the temptation for some to needlessly blow money on music that they can listen to for free.

Both Tidal and Amazon Music HD apps allow local storage of music so if you are going out turn on the player and start playing music, once you loose connection you can keep playing. It is also nice to use Wifi from the phone to stream music and download new music, so I got an unlimited tethered data option for $5/mo (ATT).

For me the services that try to sell me files are a huge waste of money if I can listen to exactly the same music 24/7/365 for $89/$119 a year.

 

[The Jester]

That’s fine for listening to favourites but what happens to any potential new music ...
can‘t see many performers booking expensive studio time with top quality engineers doing the recording and mastering without the income from sales,
wonder how much (or little) the artist gets when their music is included in a streaming service ?

 

[sajunky]

That’s fine for listening to favourites but what happens to any potential new music ...
can‘t see many performers booking expensive studio time with top quality engineers doing the recording and mastering without the income from sales,
wonder how much (or little) the artist gets when their music is included in a streaming service ?

Some streaming services are owned by the popular artists. Conflict of interest. There were cases of complains that stats were manipulated in favour of those. What do you think, who was stealing income from whom?

 

[hmscott]

That’s fine for listening to favourites but what happens to any potential new music ...
can‘t see many performers booking expensive studio time with top quality engineers doing the recording and mastering without the income from sales,
wonder how much (or little) the artist gets when their music is included in a streaming service ?

As far as new popular music, I'm seeing more and more come out with a Masters MQA version at the same time - or only a Masters MQA version - which anyone can listen to without full 8x unfolding of the MQA payload. It should sound better than the non-MQA mastered FLAC as the MQA mastering also preserves the time domain - which anyone listening via Tidal can benefit from because Tidal does the first MQA Master unfold themselves. That's why some say they prefer the playback from Tidal than other FLAC only services, ofrFLAC file recordings.

I have both Tidal and Amazon for comparison and tomake sure I have my playlists backed up on 2 services, and both have had new releases when they come out - often before I hear of them elsewhere. Both services also curate playlists and "radio stations" of their own, which is nice.

No service will have everything, but before judging give a trial of each and see if there's anything you would miss by switching...

Also, you could certainly still pay for tracks that aren't being streamed, and at the extreme is nothing in streaming tickles your fancy - and only tracks not streaming are your thing, then what are you doing here?

Apple has lots of stuff, but there's a pricey paywall for everything. I've got a free year of AppleTV with my Macbook Pro M1, and there is some free stuff, but I can find it free elsewhere too.

I have lots of streaming services subscribed during the pandemic, most all offer crazy low prices for annual subscriptions. IDK if I will renew half of them - definitely renewing Tidal / AMHD - but for now there's lots of great stuff out there that I can stream for free. I don't think I'm going to need AppleTV - except to watch my library of purchased media from long ago

 

[sajunky]

As far as new popular music, I'm seeing more and more come out with a Masters MQA version at the same time - or only a Masters MQA version - which anyone can listen to without full 8x unfolding of the MQA payload. It should sound better than the non-MQA mastered FLAC as the MQA mastering also preserves the time domain - which anyone listening via Tidal can benefit from because Tidal does the first MQA Master unfold themselves. That's why some say they prefer the playback from Tidal than other FLAC only services, ofrFLAC file recordings.

This is a bull. The only things they are preserving is their income, ripping everyone. From the artists, recording studios, distribution channel, to the end users. With an alternative path of a hardware: chip manufacturers, developers to the end users. It became possible, as the entire music industry is a scam. A typical example is remastering. Do you know that remastering is a dirty trick to acquire property rights to the music?

 

[The Jester]

Until a US court in late 2018 overturned the decision regarding pre 1972 analogue master tapes ..

 

[Sterling2]

The problem I have with Apple Music is you have to pay for all the tracks you want to listen to in their entirety.

When I stream on Tidal there isn't even an option to purchase music, that's the best in my view. I have hundreds of playlists with my favorite music all for a low monthly fee. Then I discovered Tidal Hfifi memberships discounted to $89/year on sale, $119 renewing, which is far less than the 12 x $19.99 = $239.99 normal cost. For all the music I can listen to all day long, all month long, all year long - for the cost of a few albums of files.

I don't need to be pushed to spend more money. I'm there to listen to music.

Amazon Music HD is great too - but you need the top tier subscription, pay an extra fee over the monthly fee to get HD. Then you can listen to anything in their Store too - but you don't need to use the Store interface, you can click a tab to add "everything" beyond your own library of music. That works too, but still there is the temptation for some to needlessly blow money on music that they can listen to for free.

Both Tidal and Amazon Music HD apps allow local storage of music so if you are going out turn on the player and start playing music, once you loose connection you can keep playing. It is also nice to use Wifi from the phone to stream music and download new music, so I got an unlimited tethered data option for $5/mo (ATT).

For me the services that try to sell me files are a huge waste of money if I can listen to exactly the same music 24/7/365 for $89/$119 a year.

You do not need to purchase music from Apple Music to enjoy entire tracks or albums. Just retrieve the song or album in iTunes and click ADD. You can download until you wear your fingers to the bone.

 

[Sterling2]

Here's an experiment I made recently which suggested Apple Music is BEST in all manner that best can be discerned: music selection, recording quality, convenience, browser, library, ripping, store, radio, playlists, and much more.

A few weekends ago I purchased Classic Hauser, a high dynamic range recording, on LP, CD, 24/96 FLAC Download, and Apple Music Download. Playing these, nine ways to Sunday as listed below, I had hoped the experimentation would determine what medium sounded best.

• LP>Technics SL-1210GR/Shure V15V (SAS)>Sony TA-E9000ES Pre-Pro Phono Preamplifier input
• 24/96 FLAC Download>Foobar2000>OPPO-205 DAC up sampling to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• 24/96 FLAC Download>Foobar2000>Creative Sound Blaster X-FI HD (for usb to S/PDIF conversion at 24/96)>TA-E9000ES optical S/PDIF input
• Apple Music Download>iTunes>Airport Express (wi-fi to S/PDIF 16/44.1 output)>Sony TA-E9000ES optical S/PDIF input
• Apple Music Download>iTunes>OPPO-205 DAC up sampling to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• Apple Music Download>iTunes>Creative Sound Blaster X-FI HD (for usb to S/PDIF conversion at 24/96)>TA-E9000ES optical S/PDIF input
• Apple Music Download>Network connection to OPPO-205 DAC up sampling to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• 24/96 FLAC Download>Thumb Drive>OPPO-205 DAC up sampling to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• 24/96 FLAC Download>Network connection to OPPO-205 DAC up sampling to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• CD>OPPO-205>Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• CD>Rip to iTunes in ALAC>OPPO-205 DAC up sampling to 24/192>Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• CD>Rip to iTunes in ALAC>Airport Express (wi-fi to S/PDIF 16/44.1 output) Sony TA-E9000ES analog input
• CD>Rip to iTunes in ALAC>Creative Sound Blaster X-FI HD (for usb to S/PDIF conversion at 24/96)>Sony TA-E9000ES optical S/PDIF input

Conclusion: all processes yielded a satisfying listening experience, whereby tone, sound stage, and detail seemed so similar as to preclude any revelation to what process delivered the most compelling sound; however, three things did stand out: first, the presence of pops distracted LP pleasure, second, play of downloads via OPPO usb DAC, Thumb Drive, or non-gapless alphabetical order Network connection is inconvenient, and finally, the iTunes play of the Apple Music AAC download via Airport Express 16/44.1 S/PDIF output to the Sony TA-E9000ES was most convenient, and sounded on par with the CD, ALAC and FLAC media. This makes me question any need for a means to music other than APPLE MUSIC. At any rate, the exercise was a fun activity on a cold and dreary weekend which has kept me indoors. Note, Apple Music to thumb drive was not tested, since I perceived it would have required purchase of the album to permit copy to thumb drive.

 

[sajunky]

Until a US court in late 2018 overturned the decision regarding pre 1972 analogue master tapes ..

I wasn't aware, but the attempt to hijack property rights was made, isn't? During the last decade market was flooded with poor quality remasters, perhaps made in a sole purpose of greed. I noticed better quality Blue Note transfers of Dexter Gordon quite recently, better times may come...