Apple Music  Now with lossless high-res and spatial audio

[Luis Mad]

Apple Music 3.8.0 for Android is out. New function: search within playlists. You have to swipe down to find the search within a playlist. Very useful for me. I have some very long playlists downloaded in my Astell SR25, specially for the car.

 

[Scarpad]

I had Amazon Music for two years. I recently switched to Apple Music. I like Apple Music better in every way. The way music is organized and the UI is vastly improved. The sound quality is a lot better as well. I didn’t expect it to be as they are both hires. Comparing the two, everything is the same except Amazon Music was played in exclusive mode from my laptop USB out to my Schiit Modi and Apple Music is played through Apple TV by optical to my Schiit Modi.

What settings do you set on Apple TV for the best audio? I’ve recently gotten some crazy static chirping noises on some songs (no music at all, just static). I think these songs could be Dolby Atmos.

it must be an older aplenty the current ones do not have an optical output

 

[Nellie75]

it must be an older aplenty the current ones do not have an optical output

My Apple TV 4K is HDMI output only. However, I use a HDMI extractor to optical converter.

 

[StarFox132]

My review of Apple Lossless compared to Tidal and Apple Music AAC.
I've been a subscriber to Apple Music since I got the original HomePod, a subscriber to Tidal Premium (HiFi+ now) since last year.
First a brief review of HomePod with Apple Music. HomePod as a single speaker isn't bad, it plays music loudly with good bass, no distortion (as in bass bleed/bloom) and you can hear instrument separation. But otherwise it's a decent speaker for a mono speaker. As a stereo pair it does sound a lot better since it's stereo, but I haven't had a stereo pair in years so I can't say much more about it. As for Siri, it's terrible, but it works for my needs.

When Lossless came out for the HomePod a few months back, I tried a few songs to test it. And I have to say it does sound better in the treble and bass. I felt that cymbals on AAC track felt muddy, and overall presentation can sound like a wall of sound as a mono speaker, but with Lossless it now reminds me of CD playback where each instrument sounds clear (for what the HomePod can resolve), bass is a little bit clearer. Midrange I can't tell a difference (since AAC is optimized for good midrange) but overall I am lot more satisfied listening to the HomePod with lossless than with AAC. Mind you, AAC is a pretty good format. I've enjoyed my iTunes collection for many years without feeling like I am losing a lot of detail on my IEMs, but on the HomePod, lossless just feels like my old CD players with speakers, but better.

Tidal using the Topping D90SE/A90 stack, using Drop 6xx, Drop HfM 5xx, and HD Poseidon.
I've used Tidal on my 2019 MacBook Pro over the last year and I found that MQA sounds different from hi-res or CD masters of the same album. I was never amazed with it but it sounded ok. Using a program like Audirvana or the pi2aes Pi-Hat on Rpi4 did make the sound better for Tidal, but using Tidal by itself on a playlist that is mostly MQA wasn't that interesting when listening passively. Only when I used Audirvana or a pi-hat was I tapping my feet or rocking my body to the music.

When Apple Lossless came out, I did quick comparisons and I was amazed how much better Apple Lossless sounded compared to Tidal using exclusive mode, so I think there's a real problem with the Tidal software player.

Recently I got a HarmonicDyne Poseidon and have been listening to some songs on it. I've decided to listen to Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon on it the other day because that's an album I've been listening to since I was young teen which is roughly 30 years. Tidal recently updated DSotM to use MQA (192khz) instead of FLAC and I listened to the whole album at night. I found that Tidal master had quite a bit of soundstage for the instruments, especially for the choir in some songs, but the vocals sounded a bit thin. Separation of instruments was pretty decent, and overall it felt like listen to a fresh presentation of the CD.
Then I listen to the Hi-res version of DSotM on Apple Music lossless. It seems that Apple also has a new master as well, certified as an Apple Master (24 bit/96khz). I found that while it didn't have the soundstage of the Tidal master, vocals were a lot more richer, which made the songs that have choir singers (Brain Damage, Eclipse, etc) feel more impactful. Instruments had more presence, like the sax in some songs. I liked the Apple version a lot more.
Overall, the Apple Music master had the emphasis and emotion that I wanted compared to the more separate and analytical(?) Tidal master.

As for the UI of Apple Music vs Tidal, I like tidal more. Apple Music needs to make lossless outside of the iPhone/IPad/Music App and make it available via third parties so something like Roon/Audirvana/volumio can stream it but it's nice that Apple Music sounds good without locking the sound interface. Imagine how much better it can sound if it could...

Thanks for your review dudeX. I've come to some similar conclusions regarding ALAC.

 

[dufferdan]

All points of discussion here are well thought out and interesting. The key is what we can hear given the associated equipment. At home, with a decent DAC, USB connection and amp/speaker setup, maybe hi-res makes sense.
at the cabin, with a Russound whole home audio system, XStream streamer or BT streamer, 12” in ceiling speakers powering a room 20’x30’ x 25’ at the peak, Lossless is the least of my worries. But streaming 320 Kbps ALAC files via Airplay sounds pretty damn good, given the 12“ coax speakers have 18 foot dead air space to play with.

I think it is more the chain. If you are playing in a system highly enclosed and tight, yeah, the sound is highly influenced. If open, noisy and loose, the parameters for sounding good are wider. And equally pleasurable, as many have alluded to.

 

[gregorio]

The key is what we can hear given the associated equipment. At home, with a decent DAC, USB connection and amp/speaker setup, maybe hi-res makes sense.

Given the best equipment and conditions, for example a top class commercial studio or laboratory conditions, and listening at reasonable levels, then no one can hear a difference. Thousands of controlled tests have been done, over more than 2 decades, involving pretty much every demographic, from mastering engineers to average members of the public, teenage students, professional musicians and of course audiophiles. The results are consistent and the is matter settled.

There are some valid uses for hi-res but only in the studio, more than 16bits when recording to provide extra headroom, higher sampling rates for sound design and/or when applying specific processes (such as pitch-shifting) for example but none of this is applicable to consumer playback.

Of course audiophile marketers like to misrepresent this fact and falsely state/imply it is applicable to playback (and is audible) because they can charge more for hi-res equipment and content. To that end, it’s quite common for the standard res version/master to be doctored in some way (typically with additional audio compression) in order to create an actual audible difference with the hi-res version/master and justify a price difference.

If open, noisy and loose, the parameters for sounding good are wider.

I think I get what you’re trying to say. It’s been known (and applied) for many decades that different listening conditions require different “parameters”. When listening to music while driving, exercising, doing the chores, travelling, etc., there’s going to be a far higher environmental noise floor and if listening to masters with a high dynamic range, the quieter sections are going to be inaudible, so a smaller dynamic range (by applying audio compression) is preferable. In a good/better listening environment, when critically listening, the opposite is preferable.

G

 

[Nellie75]

Given the best equipment and conditions, for example a top class commercial studio or laboratory conditions, and listening at reasonable levels, then no one can hear a difference. Thousands of controlled tests have been done, over more than 2 decades, involving pretty much every demographic, from mastering engineers to average members of the public, teenage students, professional musicians and of course audiophiles. The results are consistent and the is matter settled.

There are some valid uses for hi-res but only in the studio, more than 16bits when recording to provide extra headroom, higher sampling rates for sound design and/or when applying specific processes (such as pitch-shifting) for example but none of this is applicable to consumer playback.

Of course audiophile marketers like to misrepresent this fact and falsely state/imply it is applicable to playback (and is audible) because they can charge more for hi-res equipment and content. To that end, it’s quite common for the standard res version/master to be doctored in some way (typically with additional audio compression) in order to create an actual audible difference with the hi-res version/master and justify a price difference.



I think I get what you’re trying to say. It’s been known (and applied) for many decades that different listening conditions require different “parameters”. When listening to music while driving, exercising, doing the chores, travelling, etc., there’s going to be a far higher environmental noise floor and if listening to masters with a high dynamic range, the quieter sections are going to be inaudible, so a smaller dynamic range (by applying audio compression) is preferable. In a good/better listening environment, when critically listening, the opposite is preferable.

G

Take the hires “you can’t hear the difference” debate to a different thread. Thanks.

 

[dufferdan]

Last week I also did a very rudimentary test of Apple Music hi-res (24/92) iPad via USB camera adapter to USB in on my older Beresford Caiman DAC . I compared to 16/44.1 rip of the same DSOTM tracks I had on my computer, streamed to my Squeezebox Touch, coax toslink to same Beresford DAC. I used my AKG 701 headphones out of my Cambridge receiver. I was surprised the CD rip version felt way more alive, more range, snap and pop. Dynamics were huge. The Apple Lossless version, lifeless, more compressed. So I think the different masters impact the relative experience.

One thing I haven’t controlled for is the older technology of the Caiman’s USB implementation. At the time the DAC was built, USB was the lowest quality input on any DAC. I have ordered a Topping D70S MQA which will be home when I get back tomorrow. I will re-run the same tracks to see what they sound like via a more modern USB implementation.

 

[iamoneagain]

I have that user blocked now but I wish what he was saying was true. I have Tidal, Apple Music and Spotify currently on trial. I prefer Apple and Spotify app on the iPhone over Tidal and roon. I like Apple’s interface the best just because it fits in with the rest of iPhone’s built in apps.

Anyway I was testing the same 44.1/16 tracks from Tidal (thru roon) vs Apple Music (using Airplay 2 at 256k) and Spotify Connect (320 ogg) and Tidal sounds best followed by Apple and finally Spotify. It’s not big differences. Just less smearing with lossless so edges are clearer and more open sounding. I want Apple to sound the same because I would prefer use that as my main app. Tidal has too many MQA tracks and Qobuz library is lacking. Also, roon on iPhone is just ok as far as functionality.

I’m still holding out hope that Apple will come out with a lossless wireless solution soon. I’ve sort of given up hope on Spotify at this point. Just the fact that reports of airpods getting lossless later this year gives me hope. Spotify hasn’t had any updates since last February.

 

[gregorio]

Take the hires “you can’t hear the difference” debate to a different thread.

There is no (rational) “debate”.

So I think the different masters impact the relative experience.

Which of course is entirely rational if you think about it. What would be the point of paying a mastering engineer to create a new master which sounds exactly the same as a master they’ve already paid for?

I have that user blocked now but I wish what he was saying was true.

You wish it were true that the same song/track in different formats sometimes sound different because they’ve been doctored/changed?

You seem to be saying the opposite: ”I want Apple to sound the same because I would prefer use that as my main app.”

G

 

[Andrew_WOT]

 

[kumar402]

Any chance of Apple coming out with feature like Spotify connect for Apple Music ?

 

[AxelCloris]

Given that Apple Music can't seem to prevent my computer notifying me that I need to pause playback on my phone to resume on my computer when there was no music playing on the computer, I have doubts about their ability to pull off an Apple Connect.

 

[kumar402]

Given that Apple Music can't seem to prevent my computer notifying me that I need to pause playback on my phone to resume on my computer when there was no music playing on the computer, I have doubts about their ability to pull off an Apple Connect.

Well Apple Music has good catalogue of Indian regional language music but alas there is no way to stream it bit perfect and I don’t want to strangle my phone or iPad to USB duties. I just wish they come up with some solution

 

[dufferdan]

OK so stage two. Topping D70S MQA arrived on the weekend. Set it up tonight, pulling the Beresford Caiman.

My 5 disk Rotel CD player has RCA out to Cambridge 640 integrated amp, and Coax digital audio out to the Topping.

Squeezebox Touch Toslink Audio out to Topping

iPad Air 2 via card reader/camera adapter out to USB. While the Camera adapter I have will take a lightning in for power, I did not hook this up for this test.

I set up the Topping as RCA out only, Filter 3. Everything else was essentially default I think

Listening was with AKG 704 headphones via the headphone out on the Cambridge 640.

Test 1. CD player RCA out to receiver vs coax digital audio out to Topping and into amp via RCS. Zero difference whatsoever. The switching between the two inputs was virtually silent. Without the click of the switch, I thought it had been stuck on one of the inputs. Levels perfectly matched and details/punch/range identical. I can test later with more exacting CD recording, but I was frankly surprised. CD wasn’t necessarily the cleanest most technical recording, Bruce Springsteens 4 disk Songs collection. Forget the exact title.

Test 2. Squeezebox Touch, Ethernet connection to iMac storing files on external USB 2.0 12TB drive. IPad Air 2 via the lightning to USB connector to USB in. The Touch was pulling Doors LA WOman I had ripped from DVD Audio, 24/88.2. The iPad, Apple Music, hi res copy of same record. That source was 24/96. After listening, I was positive they were the same masters. I teed up LA WOman, synched the start and started to flip between USB and Opt inputs. Virtually indistinguishable To my ear. The USB feed may have been ever ever so very slightly less loud, but the dynamics, detail, punch, everything sounded the same. Riders on the storm, the rain in the intro, no difference. Snap of the thunderclaps, and then the organ starting to come in and crescendo. Spectacular. And the Topping showed the bitrates on all sources, which was nice. Never had that before.

Once the Aussi open is done I’ll have more time to keep testing. Try different headphones. My speakers are little Royd Minstrels c. 1997. A nice little speaker, but I may see if I can sneak some PMC Fact 2.somethings in the door. That will take some time. In the meantime, the DROP 789 THX balanced headphone amp arrived. Will likely order a Bifrost 2 and Magnius Balanced headphone amp for the computer system with my Valhalla 2 tube amp….compare tube with sterile. The 789 may end up in the main system for headphones.

So far, no post purchase cognitive dissonance.