• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tidal, lossless Spotify competitor launches

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

No Love

Banned
Update: Been using this yesterday and today. Phenomenal. Sound quality is mindblowing for streaming and the artist selection is A+. I literally have not found an artist I like that isn't on there, and every single album in their discography too.

This shit is wettttt. Easily worth the $20/month.
 
entremet

entremet

Member
NoLoveForFailWheelDrive said:
Update: Been using this yesterday and today. Phenomenal. Sound quality is mindblowing for streaming and the artist selection is A+. I literally have not found an artist I like that isn't on there, and every single album in their discography too.

This shit is wettttt. Easily worth the $20/month.
Click to expand...

What's your setup?
 
N

NotBacon

Member
TommyTosser said:
Never understood this "Lossness" of sound malarky.

So is FLAC better sound quality that your average MP3/CD quality?

I only listen to music though my mac speakers or ipod headphones. Am i missing out on the party?
Click to expand...

Lossless means no quality is sacrificed from the original recording, also meaning Free Lossless Audio Codec files are giant. It depends on the MP3 quality on how close it is to flac. VBR V0 is pretty close.

Anyways, you won't notice a difference with your setup. To be truly transported to music nirvana you'll need a high end pair of phones, a good amp, and a quality DAC.
 
F

Five

Banned
I guessed randomly on the first one and got it right, then earnestly on the last four and got them all wrong. I wonder what that says about me.
 
M

Mr. Wonderful

Member
NotBacon said:
Lossless means no quality is sacrificed from the original recording, also meaning Free Lossless Audio Codec files are giant. It depends on the MP3 quality on how close it is to flac. VBR V0 is pretty close.

Anyways, you won't notice a difference with your setup. To be truly transported to music nirvana you'll need a high end pair of phones, a good amp, and a quality DAC.
Click to expand...

False most of the time, since the files are often downconverted to 16-bit/44.1kHz from the original 24-bit/96kHz (or whatever they choose) recording.

Not that I care.
 
N

NotBacon

Member
Mr. Wonderful said:
False most of the time, since the files are often downconverted to 16-bit/44.1kHz from the original 24-bit/96kHz (or whatever they choose) recording.

Not that I care.
Click to expand...

*source

Happy? It doesn't lose any quality from wherever it's ripped from, whether that be 16/44 or 24/96.
 
C

cory64

Member
Weird.

cdjFJrf.png
 
P

Pops Maellard

Member
badb0y said:
I pay 5$ a month for Spotify so it's tough sell for me.
Click to expand...

Yeah... I'm all about lossless, and I have a decent enough desk setup to justify this, but Spotify is so cheap. Also, whenever I use it it's through my phone barely pumping sound into HiFiman RE-600's. Maybe in 10 years when I can afford proper audio equipment.
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
kai3345 said:
advertising a music streaming service in a manner that evokes charity/awareness movements seems scummy af to me
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm curious how many people could get caught up in it and actually be inspired to get their product from this.
 
K

Kipp

but I am taking tiny steps forward
I find it funny that they use a sample of a Killers song from Battleborn. That album is mastered pretty horribly.

cory64 said:
Weird.

cdjFJrf.png
Click to expand...

Well clearly Tidal pays the artists significantly more money than other services or paid them to do some viral marketing.
 
G

Goldrush

Member
The price doesn't seem so bad. Considering lossless tracks look to be going for $2+, $20/month seems to be on par or better than the sub to purchase ratio of other music subscription services.
 
O

OceanBlue

Member
I can't hear a difference. FiiO e07k and Sennheiser HD 598s. I don't regret spending money on the stuff, but it's good to know that a decently encoded MP3 is basically transparent for me.
 
M

Mr.Mike

Member
The Lone Courier said:
If they can provide an app that lets you store songs offline and not filled with bugs and glitches I'll look into. Spotify is terrible in that regard.
Click to expand...
Google Play Music does this and the Tidal FAQ says they do as well (with support for doing so on PC and Mac coming soon).


Hell, Play Music on Android does it automatically. Saves on bandwidth for me and them, so that's cool.
 
T

Treythalomew

Member
I really hope this press event on Monday doesn't bring a bunch of artists leaving Spotify or being exclusive streaming to Tidal. There is a lot of artists that are changing their twitter and facebook to blue.

The Hi-Fi pitch is probably cool for some but Spotify already has a hard enough time selling people on paying for 320 kbps.
 
K

Korey

Member
Slogan: "Human beings physically can't tell the difference, but let the ones who think they can pay twice as much."
 
P

PaulExcellent

Member
I got a 1/5 with my M50s, but I can tell the difference between MP3 and FLAC just fine.
Like, I even did it with The Killers' album since I have it in both.
Hmm. Guess I gotta upgrade.
 
P

potam

Banned
Tried with my ATH-M50s, and my Macbook. No idea if it's the headphones, the laptop, or my shitty ears, but I only got 3/5 right...and I feel like I was guessing on most of them.
 
F

FLAguy954

Junior Member
tidal69umw.png


I got 4 out of 5 correct. I felt like I was guessing on the Killers and the Eagles I thought I nailed for sure. This shit is too expensive for my tastes atm so I'll pass for now.

My setup btw is 2x Sanyo 150W towers with a 80W center speaker for a 3.1 setup via optical out (I wish I could use HDMI but I can't afford a better receiver atm).
 
I

injurai

Banned
codex119 said:
Is FLAC a better quality than 320kbps mp3's?


Didn't notice any diff btw.
Click to expand...

Technically yes flac is better. It's lossless audio assuming it's not a transcode. Which is why you would work with flac while recording. Lossless audio is what is then encoded on vinyl and cds.

But the human hear can't hear all that data. The human ear can only hear up to 20Hz so they extend the encoding range up to 22Hz. The digital sampling rate must be twice the peak frequency to capture the signature of the peak frequency so 44Hz. So every second 44,100 sample points are needed capture the signature of the wave. This can be achieved with 320kbps mp3. Where not all those frequencies are present you can use variable bit rate encodings such as V0 to save even more space without lessening the audio quality. Obviously you wouldn't want to manipulate this file any further or sample it. Because then you would get artifacting. Transcodes are bad. But an 320 V0 encoded from a FLAC will sound no different than the FLAC itself.

So only your data usage bills will feel the difference.
 
R

Remark

Banned
A new album is supposed to be exclusively coming to Tidal and it's supposed to be a big name too. Kinda curious.
 
M

Mau ®

Member
Remark said:
A new album is supposed to be exclusively coming to Tidal and it's supposed to be a big name too. Kinda curious.
Click to expand...

Must be a Roc Nation artist given it's Jay-Z's service

It's either:

a) Kanye

b) Rihanna

3) Jay Z & Bey's duet album.
 
D

Dead

well not really...yet
I doubt anyone who listens to Rihanna gives a shit about quality and audio fidelity.

Kanye can at least wank and pretend like he gives a shit, in order to get his fans to spend their money on this.
 
D

Discotheque

Banned
Dead said:
I doubt anyone who listens to Rihanna gives a shit about quality and audio fidelity.

Kanye can at least wank and pretend like he gives a shit, in order to get his fans to spend their money on this.
Click to expand...

MBDTF was mixed so poorly too

love yeezy but his music is a poor example of high quality/fidelity sound these days.
 
C

corn_fest

Member
Depends on whether this album is exclusive-exclusive to Tidal or just streaming-exclusive.

I could see Kanye cutting out Spotify & co., maybe, but not iTunes and everything else.
 
T

tanuki

Member
I got 1/5, hahahaha amazing. I'm an audio engineer, should be acing this. To be fair, i did the test off my Macbook's headphone ports, gonna have to try on the monitors in the studio.

I do think FLAC is pointless for streaming though, I'm totally ok with the high quality streaming that Spotify has. My car speakers aren't good enough for it to make a difference.

Also Spotify only costs me about USD2.70 a month.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
Got 3/5 on the audio test, but quite honestly I was questioning whether the switch of audio feeds between higher quality and not even worked. I couldn't fucking tell at all.

Also, searched through randomly on their site to see their music selection, and it seems kind of shitty compared to Spotify. They do have most of the bands I searched, but were missing a lot of their newer albums.
 
Ü

Übermatik

Member
I have the world's worst cold right now, and my ears have been popping all morning - that and no. 4 (The Eagles) wouldn't work for me for some reason? It only played one sample. Anyway, I got 3/5.

My setup isn't good enough to warrant paying for a service like this, nor do I mind about high fidelity much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Microsoft explains how its DLSS competitor uses AI to improve any game (Auto SR will ship first on Copilot Plus PCs with Qualcomm chips)
News Platform
47
2K
Roxkis_ii replied
PlayStation Pulse Explore wireless earbuds launch in select markets starting in December
2
79
5K
Imtjnotu replied
Apple Music announces Spatial Audio with Dolby Atmos; Lossless Audio to entire catalog
2
56
7K
Pagusas replied
[DF] Mark Cerny talks Dolby Atmos support for PlayStation 5
News Hardware 2 3
103
9K
MarkMe2525 replied
Are audiophiles full of it or have I just been spoiled by halfway decent gear?
2
73
4K
Maiden Voyage replied
Top Bottom