|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.46.128.134
In Reply to: RE: TIDAL lossless streaming- first impressions very good. posted by kenzo on August 26, 2015 at 22:48:51
I just began the 30-day trial yesterday. I already subscribe to Spotify and like it very much. So far, my impression is that Spotify at 320 isn't giving up that much to Tidal at 1.411. But then it's only been one day. Ultimately, while sound quality is very important, the size of the library and the availability of music I want to hear is really the most important to me. That, and a good user interface.
Follow Ups:
Spotify does not give up that much to Tidal. I could not pick it out on a blind test with a Lossless. In the end, I found the Tidal content lacking compared to Spotify.
Cut-Throat
I have to admit that I'm not certain I could consistently differentiate between Spotify at 320 and Tidal at 1.411. I'm using Tidal's web interface with Chrome. It's good but I still really like Spotify. Yesterday I wanted to hear the 2007 remastered version of Thad Jones "April in Paris". Spotify had it, Tidal did not. At least I couldn't find it. To be fair I'm sure a case could be made for content available in Tidal but not Spotify. It's just that it hasn't happened to me yet. Fortunately I still have some free time with Tidal so I don't have to make a decision yet. It's a nice problem to have, don't you think?
That's pretty much my experience as well. the lack of content in Tidal was what caused me to drop it.
Cut-Throat
I am new to Spotify, but my first impressions are that Spotify 320 vs FLAC is clearly discernable to me.
I'm using a Samsung Note 3 as a player with a Oppo HA-2 (a portable dac/amp) hooked up to Sennheiser HD600 headphones.
When I play a track from Spotify 320 vs the same track I have transferred from an original CD to a FLAC file on the phone the difference in reproduction quality is immediately apparent.
Now this is not a comparison of TIDAL vs Spotify 320, but FLAC vs Spotify 320. I have no experience with TIDAL so my assumption that it should sound similar to FLAC may be unfounded.
I just want to mention something that all users of Tidal do not know
To hear 16/44 flac quality on Tidal you must open it in Chrome
If you open it in any other browser you will only get 320 MP3
Alan
yep, I use chrome (TIDAL site was clear about that requirement) and HIFI lights up when I play.
If you watch it all the time you will see with some material it does not lite up because they could only get a MP3 file. I have come across several albums like that
Alan
That may be if you are Using a Browser. I listened to Tidal and Deezer Elite via the Ickstream Pluggin via LMS into Squeezebox Touch. This outputs lossless just fine.
Cut-Throat
Yes, this is if you are streaming from a computer and using there web player
Alan
As TIDAL, DEEZER and QOBUZ seem to make no claims to have the ability to stream through a browser, at leas not FireFox or Safari and recommend downloading their respective players.
Which is a good thing as the player has the ability to allocate sizable cache to play from.
No, it is unique to Tidal. In the lower right corner of the Tidal screen is a logo that says HIFI. When it lets up you are getting 16/44 flac. Occasionally there is an album on Tidal that is 320 MP3 .If you play that album the HIFI logo does not light up. If you don't open Tidal in chrome no matter what you play in Tidal the HIFI logo does not light up indicating you are listening to MP3. Go to the Tidal sight. It tells you this Here is a quote from a review of Tidal
"
On this subject it's worth pointing out that Chrome is the only web browser to support lossless playback. A previously available desktop app is not currently available for download - we assume it's getting what was a much-needed update. The mobile app has no such issues.
Read more at http://www.whathifi.com/tidal/review#RIMLSFoiA4KlGl0j.99"
Alan
but as I have an OS-X player for TIDAL, DEEZER Elite and QOBUZ I have no reason to stream in a browser.
Can you stream tunes in a browser at 320kbps material that does not stream on in the player at 16/44.1??
TIDAL may have better search capability in a browser as the search function in the player is a joke. :-(
Tidal stream from a computer not opened in Google Chrome will stream all it's files at 320kbps
Alan
Same exact system here, with the HA-1 driven by a MacBook Air via USB.
Yes, I can tell the difference between Spotify and TIDAL, and the difference is much larger on the 'Main System' using a SONOS connect into a Marantz NA-7004 which perhaps is not as good of a DAC as the HA-1.
Maybe.
Can't tell the difference between TIDAL, QOBUZ and DEEZER Elite on either system.
Certainly the HA-1 deserves a better set of cans than my HD-600's but that will have to wait.
Don't be so hard on the HD-600s. For what it's worth they are still Class A at Stereophile. I've had mine for years and they still sound great. My Oppo HA-2 can even drive them well.
I've had them longer than I can even remember.
HD-800 with balanced cable sounds about the right match for the HA-1.
Hmmm. If you like HD600s on classical music you may well not like HD 800s. I have always found the rather excessivley light or wispy mid/treble sound of the 800s unnatural and am not surprised that there is a such great activity in selling aftermarket cables to try to ameliorate this.
So the HD600's remain top dog for me for the time being. Still, if you do get the 800s plaese remember to post your opinion as I would be very interested if your view differs.
Pete.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: