[GreenBow]

  Bitperfect?  Can you explain a littlebit?  Im going to use it with pioneer xdp 100r for most of the time.I think the ipod touch 6 gen will be connected to the oppo ha2 (if im nott going to sell it though)

 
Get it googled.

 

[canali]

I would rather that there be more weight heard in my music with the added bulk of effortless transparency.......the added space and weight added to what I carry by Mojo is of no significance. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

i understand the not wanting any weight... in a few more yrs as refinements come along, no doubt we'll get to an even smaller and lightweight mojo-like (or better) sounding gizmo by Chord (or other)
 
you all might laugh at this: but my favourite portable device, strictly talking weight and footprint, and what I'd ideally like the mojo to arrive at, is the apple nano 

... it's lightweight, small..fabulous (of course for great sound it's a different gig..). however, it's only mostly used during walking when i'm lazy and want no bulk/weight at all, or at the gym.
 
on another note, tomorrow is when i will start to listen exclusively to the mojo for a few weeks....will be tucking away my dragonfly red...then i'll return to it, as per xrelicx's helpful suggestion.
 
going to also start investigating flac downloads  (using tidal  hifi right now)...might as well try one or two albums to see if I notice a diff...am sure the mojo will only enhance things....came from checking out steve hoffman's forums.

 

[markus94103]

 
going to also start investigating flac downloads  (using tidal  hifi right now)...might as well try one or two albums to see if I notice a diff...am sure the mojo will only enhance things....came from checking out steve hoffman's forums.

 
I recently did some extensive comparative listening with my Mojo on Spotify, Tidal Hifi, Google Play Music, and Apple Music, and to my ears the ranking was Apple Music > Tidal Hifi > Google/Spotify. The conclusion caught me by surprise because I assumed Tidal's lossless streaming would be as good or better than the competition. A perfect example: listen to Eric Clapton Unplugged on Tidal Hifi (sounds like the life was sucked out of it) and on Apple Music (sounds superb). YMMV.
 
My theory is that maybe Apple is the most conscientious in terms of starting with a high-quality master before compressing it. Another interesting difference, of course, is that they're using their proprietary AAC encoding for compression.

 

[canali]

   
I recently did some extensive comparative listening with my Mojo on Spotify, Tidal Hifi, Google Play Music, and Apple Music, and to my ears the ranking was Apple Music > Tidal Hifi > Google/Spotify. The conclusion caught me by surprise because I assumed Tidal's lossless streaming would be as good or better than the competition. A perfect example: listen to Eric Clapton Unplugged on Tidal Hifi (sounds like the life was sucked out of it) and on Apple Music (sounds superb). YMMV.
 
My theory is that maybe Apple is the most conscientious in terms of starting with a high-quality master before compressing it. Another interesting difference, of course, is that they're using their proprietary AAC encoding for compression.

 
yes who knows...but it's a bit subjective, isn't it?
please see the verge article and video from summer last yr...it has people blind testing
tidal hifi, spotify and apple (same headphones, songs, etc)...interesting study.
 
and despite tidal hifi being 'cd quality' (and i subscribe to it) who is to say the albums they offer are the better ones in DR etc vs some of the better remasterings etc....when I questioned Tidal on this, a rep replied with 'we're always updating our material'...yeah...well how do I know?...you can see the details of the recording at least, ie date, etc.

What sounds better: Apple Music, Tidal, or Spotify

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/7/8872115/apple-music-tidal-spotify-audio-quality-test

 

[TheTrace]

I recently did some extensive comparative listening with my Mojo on Spotify, Tidal Hifi, Google Play Music, and Apple Music, and to my ears the ranking was Apple Music > Tidal Hifi > Google/Spotify. The conclusion caught me by surprise because I assumed Tidal's lossless streaming would be as good or better than the competition. A perfect example: listen to Eric Clapton Unplugged on Tidal Hifi (sounds like the life was sucked out of it) and on Apple Music (sounds superb). YMMV.

My theory is that maybe Apple is the most conscientious in terms of starting with a high-quality master before compressing it. Another interesting difference, of course, is that they're using their proprietary AAC encoding for compression.

Very interested in this. I have tidal and for any master I deem inferior I use my own files and tidal for the rest.

 

[Mython]

Quit the newfangled streaming malarky, and go back to buying CDs - at least that way, you know more about the recordings you're paying for

 

 

[Deftone]

I recently did some extensive comparative listening with my Mojo on Spotify, Tidal Hifi, Google Play Music, and Apple Music, and to my ears the ranking was Apple Music > Tidal Hifi > Google/Spotify. The conclusion caught me by surprise because I assumed Tidal's lossless streaming would be as good or better than the competition. A perfect example: listen to Eric Clapton Unplugged on Tidal Hifi (sounds like the life was sucked out of it) and on Apple Music (sounds superb). YMMV.

My theory is that maybe Apple is the most conscientious in terms of starting with a high-quality master before compressing it. Another interesting difference, of course, is that they're using their proprietary AAC encoding for compression.

I'm sure that in this case apple was using the better master.

Master always comes first before anything like 24bit, redbook, AAC.

It's surprising how many people don't know about mastering quality and they just look for highest bit rate.

 

[canali]

  Quit the newfangled streaming malarky, and go back to buying CDs - at least that way, you know more about the recordings you're paying for

 

 
I hear you...but neither approach is perfect is it?
i mean at least with quality streaming (and it's only only growing vs buying flac which is dying**)
i've explored new music i normally wouldn't have due to costs.
vs if you buy your own stuff it costs alot of money esp with the same exposure to streaming
...then with buying one's own music, I'm finding that many are still upgrading every few yrs as some
newly remastered album comes out (or so i'm learning from the steve hoffman forums).
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/hi-res-download-news-hdtracks-prostudiomasters-pono-etc-software-mastering-part-12.434884/page-245
 
** Music downloads could be no more by 2020
http://www.whathifi.com/news/music-downloads-could-be-no-more-2020
 
so i'm trying to do both...

 

[Deftone]

Used Cds are extremely cheap and 9 times out 10 remasters sound worse than the original pressings so you don't need to keep buying them over and over like you say.

You also don't have to rely on an Internet connection to listen to music.

 

[markus94103]

What sounds better: Apple Music, Tidal, or Spotify

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/7/8872115/apple-music-tidal-spotify-audio-quality-test

 
Interesting article, but I wish they'd use professional musicians, audio engineers, or experienced audiophiles for these blind tests! Those results would be much more interesting.

 

[LouisArmstrong]

Does anyone know if MOJO has any problem with MOOV? It's a music app like Spotify and Tidal and is available on both iOS and Android. Thanks dudes.

 

[Mython]

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek with my remark, but I do feel that streaming is nothing like as wonderful as it is being made out to be.
 
People invariably point to streaming being good for discovering new music, and I happen to agree with that - but it's at that point where I step off the bandwagon before it goes any further, rather than believing it is also wonderful in other respects, as its fans seem to believe.
 
I refuse to rely on an RF signal to play my music, especially when my device is a few millimeters from my body. I also refuse to have some private company profiling my daily music listening, and using that for any nefarious purpose they feel inclined to, at any point of their choosing. Youtube and Google are bad enough, logging every damn thing I manually search for. I'm not going to have literally every thing I ever listen to, logged, as well, by the likes of Tidal, Deezer, or Spotify, etc.
 
Both Mojo and myself have a right to enjoy music without being bombarded with totally-unnecessary RF during the process!

 
Streaming is NOT the best thing since sliced bread.  It has its uses, but it is not the be-all and end-all of music distribution, as some people (including journalists) seem to think it is.
 
How long ago did most of the music industry declare that vinyl would be dead..? It's not only still with us - it's currently experiencing growth!
 
But I shouldn't complain too much about streaming fans abandoning their CD collections - it just makes secondhand discs even cheaper for me to buy, including some of Steve Hoffman's excellent masters (like Bob Marley's 'Legend')
 
Downloads, I'm also OK with - as long as they're played offline, and not streamed, and I don't think they'll have disappeared by 2020

 

[Deftone]

Great post mython, nothing truly beats the feeling of owning your personal collection

Once purchasing cd or vinyl it is yours but when streaming it feels like your borrowing.

 

[Dexter Morgan]

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek with my remark, but I do feel that streaming is nothing like as wonderful as it is being made out to be.

People invariably point to streaming being good for discovering new music, and I happen to agree with that - but it's at that point where I step off the bandwagon before it goes any further, rather than believing it is also wonderful in other respects, as its fans seem to believe.

I refuse to rely on an RF signal to play my music, especially when my device is a few millimeters from my body. I also refuse to have some private company profiling my daily music listening, and using that for any nefarious purpose they feel inclined to, at any point of their choosing. Youtube and Google are bad enough, logging every damn thing I manually search for. I'm not going to have literally every thing I ever listen to, logged, as well, by the likes of Tidal, Deezer, or Spotify, etc.

Both Mojo and myself have a right to enjoy music without being bombarded with totally-unnecessary RF during the process! :wink_face:

Streaming is NOT the best thing since sliced bread.  It has its uses, but it is not the be-all and end-all of music distribution, as some people (including journalists) seem to think it is.

How long ago did most of the music industry declare that vinyl would be dead..? It's not only still with us - it's currently experiencing growth!

But I shouldn't complain too much about streaming fans abandoning their CD collections - it just makes secondhand discs even cheaper for me to buy, including some of Steve Hoffman's excellent masters (like Bob Marley's 'Legend')

Downloads, I'm also OK with - as long as they're played offline, and not streamed, and I don't think they'll have disappeared by 2020

All the streaming programs allow you to download music to your device for offline listening. Thus, no RF. There's really no downside. All options are available. But if you're paranoid about data collection, well, I've got no answer for you other than to say... Good luck over the next decade!!

 

[rcoleman1]

  Quit the newfangled streaming malarky, and go back to buying CDs - at least that way, you know more about the recordings you're paying for

 

+1. Totally agreed...which is why I continue to buy CDs and rip them to FLAC. Most of the recordings sound phenomenal out of the Mojo.