[DarwinOSX]

Paid Spotify uses 320k Ogg which is not a great codec. 256k AAC is at least as good.
I do like Tidal a lot. It has a fuller richer sound than anything else I have heard.
I used to use Spotify but now pay for Tidal, Apple Music, and Pandora.
Tidal via Roon to my Kef LS50W speakers is really great. On demand cd quality streaming
Some people are using Bluesound Nodes to the Kefs to get MQA and I am probably going to try this.

 

[d3vi0uz]

Just want to chime in and say my thoughts on this:

I've used Spotify or almost 10 years and been a paying premium member for 8. And that won't change. However, I gave Tidal a try since it was supposedly higher res. I immediately felt that the Tidal premium sound quality was better than spotify but a small margin. Enough to make me shell out for the HiFi membership.

To my ears, when I compare Spotify "high quality" vs Tidal Masters quality, it is obvious to my ears that the Masters tracks are deeper sounding, less digital glare and more space around instruments. A tad bit more detail may be present. But most importantly and most notably is the lack of digital glare in the recordings. I think Tidal Masters sound absolutely magnificent.

+1

I've been using Spotify for 7 years and have dozens upon dozens of playlists set up. I continue to pay the $10 for Premium because of their wide selection (every now and then Spotify has a track that Tidal doesn't) and my playlists (they got me locked in!) but as far as quality, I notice the difference between Spotify Preimum and Tidal HiFi / Masters in at least one third of the tracks in my playlists. This becomes even more apparent when I listen through my speaker and sub set up; the higher resolution HiFi / Masters tracks really shine in the low end. I can literally feel the difference.



Fortunately, I can afford to shell out $30 a month for both services to enjoy music but if I really had to cut back and choose one over the other, I would choose Tidal. Reason being is that it would put the rest of my audio gear to waste if I didn't have Hi-Res tracks to listen to.

 

[AudioThief]

+1

I've been using Spotify for 7 years and have dozens upon dozens of playlists set up. I continue to pay the $10 for Premium because of their wide selection and my playlists (they got me!) but as far as quality, I notice the difference between Spotify Preimum and Tidal HiFi / Masters in at least one third of the tracks in my playlists.

I can afford to shell out $30 a month for both services to enjoy music but if I really had to cut back and choose one over the other, I would choose Tidal. Reason being is that it would put the rest of my audio gear to waste if I didn't have Hi-Res tracks to listen to.

Yep. I am of the exact same camp.

I will keep paying for both - hopefully the rumoured Spotify HiFi membership will be a good addition and I might stop my Tidal subscription then. But until then I will pay for both. Spotify is clearly superior in every way for me except sound quality. Normally I would never ever recommend Tidal to anyone, but for people who have expensive gear or at least gear where they can appreciate the differences, I think its worth it. Listening to Tidal masters quality of some great albums like Diana Kralls "From This Moment On" is an event - whereas before I usually just listentened to music while doing other stuff - Now I just have to close my eyes and enjoy.

Tidal has many many issues for me. Obviously I have a lot of playlists in Spotify, my phone is synced with it, and I know it in and out. But Tidal has way worse selection, and the "discover" and "browse" features are laughable compared to Spotify. Also it seems Tidal has a bias towards more known artists and popular genres... While classical and more unknown artists gets the boot. And the desktop client is extremely slow and laggy for me. I will not be getting the mobile app, ever.

But again, to me it makes it worth it with the HiFi and especially Masters quality. When I got back to listening to Spotify it sounds almost shrill in comparison. Obviously Spotify sound great in its own right, but when directly compared with Tidal its not even close.

 

[d3vi0uz]

Yep. I am of the exact same camp.

I will keep paying for both - hopefully the rumoured Spotify HiFi membership will be a good addition and I might stop my Tidal subscription then. But until then I will pay for both. Spotify is clearly superior in every way for me except sound quality. Normally I would never ever recommend Tidal to anyone, but for people who have expensive gear or at least gear where they can appreciate the differences, I think its worth it. Listening to Tidal masters quality of some great albums like Diana Kralls "From This Moment On" is an event - whereas before I usually just listentened to music while doing other stuff - Now I just have to close my eyes and enjoy.

Tidal has many many issues for me. Obviously I have a lot of playlists in Spotify, my phone is synced with it, and I know it in and out. But Tidal has way worse selection, and the "discover" and "browse" features are laughable compared to Spotify. Also it seems Tidal has a bias towards more known artists and popular genres... While classical and more unknown artists gets the boot. And the desktop client is extremely slow and laggy for me. I will not be getting the mobile app, ever.

But again, to me it makes it worth it with the HiFi and especially Masters quality. When I got back to listening to Spotify it sounds almost shrill in comparison. Obviously Spotify sound great in its own right, but when directly compared with Tidal its not even close.

Now if Tidal or some other service ever streams studio master .wav files and I can get vinyl quality sound, I'd pay up to $50/month for that! Listening to records on my speaker+sub set up is unreal when it comes to low end. If I can instantly stream and create playlists of all my favorite tracks and get vinyl quality, that would be a game changer!

 

[AudioThief]

Now if Tidal or some other service ever streams studio master .wav files and I can get vinyl quality sound, I'd pay up to $50/month for that! Listening to records on my speaker+sub set up is unreal when it comes to low end. If I can instantly stream and create playlists of all my favorite tracks and get vinyl quality, that would be a game changer!

Indeed! Did you edit your post by the way? I didn't see the .wav part before after I posted my reply

I think streaming .wav would be problematic and extremely costly, but it should be possible as long as there is demand for it. It would seem a lot of the audiophile community do not "believe" in the sonic differences, and the masses obviously does not care. So I hope Tidal are doing well with their HiFi membership so they could try out truly lossless audio.

 

[d3vi0uz]

Indeed! Did you edit your post by the way? I didn't see the .wav part before after I posted my reply

I think streaming .wav would be problematic and extremely costly, but it should be possible as long as there is demand for it. It would seem a lot of the audiophile community do not "believe" in the sonic differences, and the masses obviously does not care. So I hope Tidal are doing well with their HiFi membership so they could try out truly lossless audio.

Yes I edited my post, then I re-edited and removed the part about .wav files, and then posted that as it's own reply. LOL

I think there may be more demand than we realize. I mean, who would've thought there was room for Spotify when iTunes dominated? And who would've thought there was room for Tidal when Spotify who pioneered music streaming already took on most of the market share...

I think there's enough room for .wav music streaming, especially at $50/month. Also, very high speed internet is becoming more common place (100+ mbps) and can easily handle .wav streaming; and high speed (50+ mbps) is becoming the norm.

 

[DarwinOSX]

+1

I've been using Spotify for 7 years and have dozens upon dozens of playlists set up. I continue to pay the $10 for Premium because of their wide selection (every now and then Spotify has a track that Tidal doesn't) and my playlists (they got me locked in!) but as far as quality, I notice the difference between Spotify Preimum and Tidal HiFi / Masters in at least one third of the tracks in my playlists. This becomes even more apparent when I listen through my speaker and sub set up; the higher resolution HiFi / Masters tracks really shine in the low end. I can literally feel the difference.
Fortunately, I can afford to shell out $30 a month for both services to enjoy music but if I really had to cut back and choose one over the other, I would choose Tidal. Reason being is that it would put the rest of my audio gear to waste if I didn't have Hi-Res tracks to listen to.

If you are active duty or a veteran Tidal is $11 a month...in case that fits anyone here...deal of the century. I pay a year at a time for Apple Music in which case it's $100 a year and Pandora is $4 and something month. That is an amazing amount of music for the money.

 

[DarwinOSX]

Yes I edited my post, then I re-edited and removed the part about .wav files, and then posted that as it's own reply. LOL
I think there may be more demand than we realize. I mean, who would've thought there was room for Spotify when iTunes dominated? And who would've thought there was room for Tidal when Spotify who pioneered music streaming already took on most of the market share...
I think there's enough room for .wav music streaming, especially at $50/month. Also, very high speed internet is becoming more common place (100+ mbps) and can easily handle .wav streaming; and high speed (50+ mbps) is becoming the norm.

Spotify did streaming years before Apple Music existed especially in Europe but even in the U.S. iTunes was only sales of music not streaming. I don't care for Spotify myself and Apple Music is better for me in multiple ways but different strokes...
If Spotify starts doing 16/44 and MQA it's game over for Tidal. Neither Tidal or Spotify has ever made a profit or shows any signs of doing so any time in the future but Tidal is worse off. I wouldn't be surprised if streaming will belong only to companies who can offer it as a side feature like Apple, Amazon, Google...

 

[chris6878]

Kevin (TIDAL)

Feb 12, 9:13 AM EST

Hello,

Thank you for contacting TIDAL Member Support.

The MQA version is only available in the latest desktop client version. It can be downloaded at tidal.com/download. Masters will be available on mobile and web applications at a later date.

Best Regards,

Kevin - Technical Support Specialist
TIDAL Member Support

So that means sometime in 2030

 

[cmir2426]

Tidal masters streaming is now available on lg v30!!

 

[d3vi0uz]

Tidal masters streaming is now available on lg v30!!

I hope, but I doubt, the next Pixel phone will have this. The removal of the headphone jack on the Pixel 2/Pixel 2 XL was almost a deal breaker for me.

 

[chris6878]

Tidal masters streaming is now available on lg v30!!

Its official
https://forum.xda-developers.com/lg-v30/help/tidal-android-app-update-t3756422

Damn, now im tempted to sale my Pio...pretty much rendered useless now

 

[alkalama]

Tidal masters streaming is now available on lg v30!!

Perfect! Time to sell my V20!

btw is MQA integrated directly to Tidal playlists (mixed with not-MQA music) or you can listen only through Tidal Masters tab (by Album, no possible playlists)?

 

[329161]

Does anyone know if there is any way to listen to Tidal offline via USB dac ? UAPP doesn't support Tidal offline.

 

[styler]

archimago's assessment of MQA, good read. its also on computer audiophile where theres some heated discussion.
http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/03/mqa-review-of-controversies-concerns.html

also, heres a pending study with blinded testing for MQA:
https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/ebriefs/?ID=685