imo This is a pretty pro-competition move from Spotify In that the pricing is so bad that it actively encourages it's userbase to consider the competition!
I agree with what you are saying. I only stream the odd piece of music now and again so I can determine if I will buy it or not as I prefer owning the music and ripping to FLAC. I have the free tier of Amazon Music through my Prime subscription and I occasionally use the free service of Spotify but not very often. I wouldn't be tempted by an expensive lossless streaming service either.
I really like Spotify, but prefer Amazon music when I'm at my desktop. Spotify has a ton of cool features including the curation like you mentioned, recommended playlists, and probably the biggest advantage, the GUI. Compared to Spotify, nothing else I've used (mostly Amazon and Tidal) even comes close to Spotify's UI, and that's a big deal for me. Usually when I'm out and about I'm only using wireless earbuds so the slight lossyness isn't a huge deal, especially with Sony's DSEE. At home when I have a separate DAC/AMP set up and studio headphones, it makes much more of a difference. Additionally on the desktop, there isn't as much difference in the UI as there is on the phone so Amazon is my go to when I'm on my computer. All that being said, I'd pay double to get lossless audio AND the UI and other little goodies from Spotify in one app.
I agree with you. I tried all the major music streaming services and Amazon by far sounded the best. But I had to go back to Spotify for the UX/UI and convenience.
I'm happy on Tidal, I much prefer the UI despite sometimes it's buggy. MQA is not bad, I enjoy it, I really see no major problem with this. It's great enough for people that aren't die hard audiophiles. I like that credits are easily accessible on Tidal, I usually browse those things.
* curation and discovery * more reliable apps * better queue system * blends * best library These are the reasons I still stick with Spotify as without I don't have much discovery and the increase in quality (for my ears) isn't too massive. But most of all, home listening on good equipment is my least used way of listening to music, maybe in the long term I would switch but for now Spotify has the better perks
@@crownx3843 For me my library isn't dependant on a higher overall amount of songs but rather having more of what I personally listen to. Which in my case spotify wins, naturally is personal preferance tho
Same, tried switching to Apple Music and Qobuz for better quality, but music selection and finding new ones via the algorithm wasn’t the same and I didn’t even try to go back, I just noticed after a bit I only used Spotify again
Great to see another post from your channel -- assuming what we've heard is true: yes, too little too late at a ridiculous price. The entire initiative sounds half-baked. I'll probably cancel my Spotify subscription (and keep a free Spotify account to maintain playlists etc), and then subscribe to Apple for lossless. I do wish Apple would revamp its Music app, imo it's long overdue for a refresh.
I gave up waiting on Spotify to release HiFi about a year ago, that coupled with the fact that some artists were pulling their tracks from the service and their focus on podcasts, I decided enough was enough. Now, they have the audacity to ask double the current price and double the competition price to offer essentially what the competition have - the company are a complete joke. I swapped to tidal Hifi for £9.99 a month and absolutely love it - and their UI is better too. Oh, and Tidal Connect works just as well as Spotify connect btw.
I went Tidal and feel angry I lost years of my life listening to such garbage quality Spotify. I didn't know what I was missing. All my music seems new again, after I got a cheap DAC which can fully decode the Master MQA quality.
I managed to blag Tidal HiFi for 87p/mo so I’ll stick with that. I know MQA gets a lot of (kinda justified) hate but some albums do sound richer imo. I’ve never gotten into Spotify
it's not actually justified: the claims about it being lossy instead of lossless didn't mention it trades minor lossyness in inaudible frequencies in order to pack in more of the AUDIBLE DETAILS of the Master recording.
IMHO. I would only change to Spotify HiFi if and only if all of their library gets FLAC even 16Bit44.4KHz. If not I'm gonna stick with my current Qobuz.
Depending on where you listen music on Spotify you will get what your ears need. If you are using a Desktop PC, then you can change the level to High Quality and have 320kbps in quality. That's enough and you can crank it up more with your Desktop volume. The question we should ask is how much can the human ear hear? At 24 bit 192 khz is pushing the limits. That's loud at about 145 dbs. Will Spotify match Apple's HiRes Lossless ? They might even cross the barriers, but for now Spotify is fine.
Provided the two tracks are mixed and mastered identically and the only variable is compression, I absolutely do not think lossless makes any material difference in the listening experience in comparison to the “very high” quality option on Spotify. Parametric eq might be a feature I’d pay for. $10 extra monthy is a ton tho. Idk what enhanced playlist or library features there would be. I hate Spotify’s recommendations and any AI curation for that matter. I generally curate by critic reviews and listen to whole albums and when I made that switch I never looked back and NEVER use discover weekly or song radios or anything of the sort anymore. The queueing system is, by far, the most convenient and straightforward on Spotify. It seems few of the options have a true shuffle option but that’s not something I get too hung up on. I think it has the best UI and the best social features and my friends are on it and my fiancée and I share a huge playlist that I wouldn’t wanna let go of or import to another service.
Well said re the audible difference. I'd love to see some so called audiophiles participate in double blind testing. The original recording and mastering has far more of an impact, as does an individual's room. EQ and room correction way more important.
@@MattSB2588 Ummm, 320kbps vs CD quality is a huge difference even for non-audiophiles, in a high quality listening environment. Maybe not on the earbuds your phone came with, in a car with road noise, or bluetooth speakers that can't even pass CD quality music in the codec.
@@PartyMusic775 disagree completely. Your loudspeakers and room have a far, far larger impact on how a track sounds Vs the original master in the studio, than 320 Vs CD quality. I'm in a high quality listening environment, Genelec speakers and sub, and there is no doubt at all that the room and quality of your gear has a far greater impact.
I really wish Spotify Connect didn't rely on some sort of Google service. I have a degoogled phone. For me to use this feature, I have to open another app that uses a different scanner, and then devices appear in Spotify. It's irritating, and there's no way I'd pay more when this feature already isn't working fully for me. Thankfully, Car Thing works without this extra step. Features that also drove me to Spotify - It's available on PlayStation. It's a big deal to me to turn off the game's music, put on Spotify, and hear both Spotify and the game's sound effects. This is especially helpful on games that have taken me so many play throughs that I'm sick of the music.
The main reason I took so long to migrate from Spotify to Apple Music is that the migration process itself is a pain in the ass and you end up having to pay a third party service to migrate your library.
Tidal gives the highest % to artists and doesn't do digital atttenuation/upsampling/downsampllnig/system mixing/format conversions that downgrade the original lossless signal.
It's 2023 and i actually canceled the competition because of a platinum promise 🤔 I'm given it until summer and if it's not here I'm going to the competition and you know the rest.
I'll be sticking with Apple Music for now (even though the price has gone up in the last couple of days to £10.99/$10.99). As well as all the features mentioned in the video the thing Apple has that made me switch is how my own library of music and other audio, (radio programmes, audiobooks etc) integrates with it. I used to use Google Play Music for this until it was killed off in favour of the dreadful RUclips Music, effectively having my own library in the cloud and integrating it with my AM library works so well for me. I thought when Apple/Amazon starting offering lossless they'd cause Spotify to rethink their HiFi strategy but didn't think it would end up like this. Unless those other features are a genuine value add rather than gimmicks then there seems very little reason to switch to Spotify Platinum.
I like that you can easily edit albums in Apple Music. You can’t do that in Tidal, best you can do is make your own playlist version of an album, but that takes a lot longer than just deleting unwanted tracks from an album. Though I’ve moved across to Tidal, but keeping Apple Music as well for now. On my home system Apple Music sounds a bit less resolving than Tidal or Qobuz for some reason.
@@aussie8114 Because AM is less resolving unless you do extreme stretchy yoga and geek-out hard to make the bit-perfect lossless source stay that way when it finally gets to the output. There are numerous pitfalls in the Apple eco system where the integrity of the original lossless signal can be downgraded by: (-)digital attenuation,(-)downsampling,(-)upsampling,(-)remixing,(-)format conversion. It's almost a scandal.
imo This is a pretty pro-competition move from Spotify
In that the pricing is so bad that it actively encourages it's userbase to consider the competition!
Paying for premium but you get adds well it's a no from me
I agree with what you are saying. I only stream the odd piece of music now and again so I can determine if I will buy it or not as I prefer owning the music and ripping to FLAC. I have the free tier of Amazon Music through my Prime subscription and I occasionally use the free service of Spotify but not very often. I wouldn't be tempted by an expensive lossless streaming service either.
I really like Spotify, but prefer Amazon music when I'm at my desktop. Spotify has a ton of cool features including the curation like you mentioned, recommended playlists, and probably the biggest advantage, the GUI. Compared to Spotify, nothing else I've used (mostly Amazon and Tidal) even comes close to Spotify's UI, and that's a big deal for me. Usually when I'm out and about I'm only using wireless earbuds so the slight lossyness isn't a huge deal, especially with Sony's DSEE. At home when I have a separate DAC/AMP set up and studio headphones, it makes much more of a difference. Additionally on the desktop, there isn't as much difference in the UI as there is on the phone so Amazon is my go to when I'm on my computer.
All that being said, I'd pay double to get lossless audio AND the UI and other little goodies from Spotify in one app.
I agree with you. I tried all the major music streaming services and Amazon by far sounded the best. But I had to go back to Spotify for the UX/UI and convenience.
100% agree on all points.
I'm happy on Tidal, I much prefer the UI despite sometimes it's buggy. MQA is not bad, I enjoy it, I really see no major problem with this. It's great enough for people that aren't die hard audiophiles.
I like that credits are easily accessible on Tidal, I usually browse those things.
* curation and discovery
* more reliable apps
* better queue system
* blends
* best library
These are the reasons I still stick with Spotify as without I don't have much discovery and the increase in quality (for my ears) isn't too massive. But most of all, home listening on good equipment is my least used way of listening to music, maybe in the long term I would switch but for now Spotify has the better perks
All good points. But I assume you wouldn't pay double for lossless?
@@AudioFixation oh definitely not. I am currently on a family plan so i would consider it based on how much the family option costs
best library when Apple Music has more songs?
@@crownx3843 For me my library isn't dependant on a higher overall amount of songs but rather having more of what I personally listen to. Which in my case spotify wins, naturally is personal preferance tho
Same, tried switching to Apple Music and Qobuz for better quality, but music selection and finding new ones via the algorithm wasn’t the same and I didn’t even try to go back, I just noticed after a bit I only used Spotify again
I'm on Deezer and pretty satisfied. It has a larger library than Qobuz, though the later sounds better to me.
I like deezer a lot - nice interface, no gimmicks - just CD quality audio which is good enough for me!
Great to see another post from your channel -- assuming what we've heard is true: yes, too little too late at a ridiculous price. The entire initiative sounds half-baked. I'll probably cancel my Spotify subscription (and keep a free Spotify account to maintain playlists etc), and then subscribe to Apple for lossless. I do wish Apple would revamp its Music app, imo it's long overdue for a refresh.
just jumped ship and on a tidal wave, good move actually, spotify are happy to coast... great breakdown, thanks
Spotify Connect is the only reason I'm interested in Spotify HiFi since my Audiolab supports it, but not for 20 bucks a month....
Tidal connect - 9.99 a month👍
Yeah tidal connect is pretty good
Deezer is an excellent alternative as well. As for Spotify no chance I would sooner chew on cut glass!
Yes I like deezer
I gave up waiting on Spotify to release HiFi about a year ago, that coupled with the fact that some artists were pulling their tracks from the service and their focus on podcasts, I decided enough was enough. Now, they have the audacity to ask double the current price and double the competition price to offer essentially what the competition have - the company are a complete joke. I swapped to tidal Hifi for £9.99 a month and absolutely love it - and their UI is better too.
Oh, and Tidal Connect works just as well as Spotify connect btw.
Agreed - tidal connect is good, needs to roll out to more devices though
I waited so long for this. I have thought about Tidal a lot, but I kept waiting. And now this news. Well Spotify. You lost me...
I went Tidal and feel angry I lost years of my life listening to such garbage quality Spotify. I didn't know what I was missing. All my music seems new again, after I got a cheap DAC which can fully decode the Master MQA quality.
I use to use tidal, now I use Spotify because a lot of the songs I like aren’t on tidal, but I miss the quality:(
I have a solution for you, try Deezer! It's the best of both of them!
I managed to blag Tidal HiFi for 87p/mo so I’ll stick with that. I know MQA gets a lot of (kinda justified) hate but some albums do sound richer imo. I’ve never gotten into Spotify
it's not actually justified: the claims about it being lossy instead of lossless didn't mention it trades minor lossyness in inaudible frequencies in order to pack in more of the AUDIBLE DETAILS of the Master recording.
IMHO. I would only change to Spotify HiFi if and only if all of their library gets FLAC even 16Bit44.4KHz. If not I'm gonna stick with my current Qobuz.
Depending on where you listen music on Spotify you will get what your ears need. If you are using a Desktop PC, then you can change the level to High Quality and have 320kbps in quality. That's enough and you can crank it up more with your Desktop volume. The question we should ask is how much can the human ear hear? At 24 bit 192 khz is pushing the limits. That's loud at about 145 dbs. Will Spotify match Apple's HiRes Lossless ? They might even cross the barriers, but for now Spotify is fine.
320kbps is not high quality. It's passable for background music in a non-quiet space doing other activities.
I mean if it I have 3:
Qobuz:12
Spotify:10
Apple:family
May make sense for me but qobuz sounds good tbh
Tidal: 10. CD quality, better UI, supports artists more.
Provided the two tracks are mixed and mastered identically and the only variable is compression, I absolutely do not think lossless makes any material difference in the listening experience in comparison to the “very high” quality option on Spotify.
Parametric eq might be a feature I’d pay for. $10 extra monthy is a ton tho. Idk what enhanced playlist or library features there would be.
I hate Spotify’s recommendations and any AI curation for that matter. I generally curate by critic reviews and listen to whole albums and when I made that switch I never looked back and NEVER use discover weekly or song radios or anything of the sort anymore.
The queueing system is, by far, the most convenient and straightforward on Spotify. It seems few of the options have a true shuffle option but that’s not something I get too hung up on.
I think it has the best UI and the best social features and my friends are on it and my fiancée and I share a huge playlist that I wouldn’t wanna let go of or import to another service.
Well said re the audible difference. I'd love to see some so called audiophiles participate in double blind testing. The original recording and mastering has far more of an impact, as does an individual's room. EQ and room correction way more important.
@@MattSB2588 Ummm, 320kbps vs CD quality is a huge difference even for non-audiophiles, in a high quality listening environment. Maybe not on the earbuds your phone came with, in a car with road noise, or bluetooth speakers that can't even pass CD quality music in the codec.
@@PartyMusic775 disagree completely. Your loudspeakers and room have a far, far larger impact on how a track sounds Vs the original master in the studio, than 320 Vs CD quality. I'm in a high quality listening environment, Genelec speakers and sub, and there is no doubt at all that the room and quality of your gear has a far greater impact.
Deezer Premium is ~10,99€/month or ~100€/Year, and it includes FLAC music.
So Spotify @20$/month.. well...
Exactly! Go figure Spotify’s strategy here!
I switched from Spotify for Deezer and never looked back Spotify really needs to step their game without breaking the bank.
I really wish Spotify Connect didn't rely on some sort of Google service. I have a degoogled phone. For me to use this feature, I have to open another app that uses a different scanner, and then devices appear in Spotify. It's irritating, and there's no way I'd pay more when this feature already isn't working fully for me. Thankfully, Car Thing works without this extra step.
Features that also drove me to Spotify - It's available on PlayStation. It's a big deal to me to turn off the game's music, put on Spotify, and hear both Spotify and the game's sound effects. This is especially helpful on games that have taken me so many play throughs that I'm sick of the music.
that's an excellent point re: spotify integration with PS
For 19 dollars you it is high price in apple music in india it is 99 ruppes which is 1dollar you get hires audio
The main reason I took so long to migrate from Spotify to Apple Music is that the migration process itself is a pain in the ass and you end up having to pay a third party service to migrate your library.
That's so true. What did you use? Soundiiz seems quite popular
That's exactly the one I used, though I was still using Android back then otherwise I'd give Soundshift a try
Apple gives artists a higher % payout per stream. I left Spotify when that became public. That was years ago now.
Tidal gives the highest % to artists and doesn't do digital atttenuation/upsampling/downsampllnig/system mixing/format conversions that downgrade the original lossless signal.
It's 2023 and i actually canceled the competition because of a platinum promise 🤔 I'm given it until summer and if it's not here I'm going to the competition and you know the rest.
I agree
TRENCH!!!!!!!!!!
$10 a month is my limit on music streaming. Give me CD quality at $10 a month and i'm happy.
I think that that is a reasonable ask!
I'll be sticking with Apple Music for now (even though the price has gone up in the last couple of days to £10.99/$10.99). As well as all the features mentioned in the video the thing Apple has that made me switch is how my own library of music and other audio, (radio programmes, audiobooks etc) integrates with it.
I used to use Google Play Music for this until it was killed off in favour of the dreadful RUclips Music, effectively having my own library in the cloud and integrating it with my AM library works so well for me.
I thought when Apple/Amazon starting offering lossless they'd cause Spotify to rethink their HiFi strategy but didn't think it would end up like this. Unless those other features are a genuine value add rather than gimmicks then there seems very little reason to switch to Spotify Platinum.
Yeah I do love the integration of offline music “iTunes” with AM
I like that you can easily edit albums in Apple Music. You can’t do that in Tidal, best you can do is make your own playlist version of an album, but that takes a lot longer than just deleting unwanted tracks from an album. Though I’ve moved across to Tidal, but keeping Apple Music as well for now. On my home system Apple Music sounds a bit less resolving than Tidal or Qobuz for some reason.
@@aussie8114 Because AM is less resolving unless you do extreme stretchy yoga and geek-out hard to make the bit-perfect lossless source stay that way when it finally gets to the output. There are numerous pitfalls in the Apple eco system where the integrity of the original lossless signal can be downgraded by: (-)digital attenuation,(-)downsampling,(-)upsampling,(-)remixing,(-)format conversion. It's almost a scandal.
Nope. Or they will give spatial audio and hifi for free with the premium version or nothing. Like apple and amazon.
I always have been and will still be a pirate⚔️
Put music video
Tidal is terrible.
They delete music and most music I like are not in Tidal.
Just rip cd is best.
Spotify sucks. Tons of network errors.
Even if it's true I'll try it, if the quality is normal I'll stick with Apple Music & qobuz