They are including the 2X to 8X (lossy) expansion from MQA unfold/upsample.All MQA I've came across barely make it to 2000kbps. I have no idea where there getting that fucking 9216kbps figure from.
They are including the 2X to 8X (lossy) expansion from MQA unfold/upsample.All MQA I've came across barely make it to 2000kbps. I have no idea where there getting that fucking 9216kbps figure from.
Than pay for Qobuz, or something else,stop F ing complaining, there's no gun to your head now is there.I found more tidal bullshit.
View attachment 113506
I'll talk about each one
Standard: Techinally there not wrong but they don't tell you that there's files going under 320kbps. AAC is better than MP3 thats a plus I guess.
View attachment 113509
Lossless: The "1411kbps" is the standard of wav not flac, I don't know whos behind this marketing. Techinally there is fake flacs running around on Tidal as we seen before.
Master: I believe Tidal is starting be ashamed of having MQA, they don't even say it anymore. Techinally its a lossy codec and its literally being broken up. All MQA I've came across barely make it to 2000kbps. I have no idea where there getting that fucking 9216kbps figure from.
There is one thing they didn't talk about on there home page: Dolby Atmos.
Tidal using DD+ for Dolby Atmos, I wouldn't mind that if the mixes were good, there not. They felt like cheezy 5.1 upscales (like my alan jackson dvd). They barely used my Height speakers. Techinally DA (packing into a DD+) stream should be possible with chromecasting but its not and I don't know why. With my receiver its only gets the hifi version. Luckily I can get the direct files so I'm not worried. The problem is that you can't send a Dolby Atmos (any kind) over HDMI using Tidal (on pc) and thats stupid. Tidal does not plan to add that feature, so you have to go and out and buy a firestick, firecube or apple tv. The whole Dolby Atmos music thing reminds me of DTS 5.1 CDs and MP3Surround. Its pretty much a gimmick at this point. The movie side of DA is amazing. If you want a true DA experience you gotta watch the John Wick movies.
The next question is why they don't count the lossy expansion of AAC into CD-quality PCM similarly.They are including the 2X to 8X (lossy) expansion from MQA unfold/upsample.
I would get Qobuz but as you see, both platforms having terrible DR versions of music I like.Than pay for Qobuz, or something else,stop F ing complaining, there's no gun to your head now is there.
That's what I did and I use Jriver Media Center to stream my music no matter where in the world I'm at.Streaming platforms will have internal loudness scanning and user side options to auto level the music on playback ala ReplayGain.
What they won't do is to go all the way through all versions and masterings of material and source the very best, or commission special premium remasters (think MFSL, Audio Fidelity) for their platform.
By and large you are going to get the latest remaster or the typical one just before it.
HDDs are cheap. Most pre-owned CDs are cheap. A Raspberry Pi based NAS shouldn't be too expensive to build. Make your own streaming platform at home.
but there are also some crappy loudness war style remasters too, which seems to be more common with titles that have been re-released many times over the years.
Can you explain where and how to find and choose this information in Spotify?ime with Spotify you have the choice between masters of famous titles at least
Can you explain where and how to find and choose this information in Spotify?
Perhaps you could give an example of a track or album?
Like the poison album just because there's different versions doesn't mean there different. There the same files just copied and pasted. If the song is featured in a different album, its mostly likely a different version of that song.Michal Jackson - Billie Jean has 6 versions on SPotify for example. from 6 albums
Like the poison album just because there's different versions doesn't mean there different. There the same files just copied and pasted. If the song is featured in a different album, its mostly likely a different version of that song.
I don't use any streaming service for a few reasons, but primarily because I believe artists should be paid. For that reason, I buy new music from the artists themselves.
An English friend of mine, whose music is on Spotify, has to sell about 10,000 downloads to realize ten quid.
As in just about every other artistic endeavor, the modus operandi remains screw the creator. Well, screw that.
Some artists let youtube (and other platform free platforms) have the full song and then artists bitch about money and piracy. Then these music companies get mad at people for recording/downloading these songs that were basically given away for free. If the artist only has there music on bandicamp and paid-for streaming services, then sure they can complain about there earning rates.
This is one big reason (aside from liking having physical media) I don't rely solely on streaming for music. The vast majority of what I stream is stuff I already own a physical version of, and a lot of the time I use streaming to discover new music - and I'll buy a physical copy of new discoveries that I enjoy enough to want it. I figure it's two revenue streams for the artist that way...He doesn't provide his stuff for free. And his spotify numbers are what other artists have claimed as well. It's a ripoff, IMHO.
Would you want to average about $45.00 per quarter for your annual salary?
This is one big reason (aside from liking having physical media) I don't rely solely on streaming for music. The vast majority of what I stream is stuff I already own a physical version of, and a lot of the time I use streaming to discover new music - and I'll buy a physical copy of new discoveries that I enjoy enough to want it. I figure it's two revenue streams for the artist that way...
Yes, I realize I'm probably an exception to the rule these days, but the economics of streaming stink for artists. I might even go as far to argue that it's not sustainable for the long haul - even if the counterargument from others might be that music just isn't "worth" what it used to be to most people (aka - the low payouts from streaming are simply "what the market will bear").
They are contractually prevented from doing this in many cases. They don't have eternal rights to stream a specific version of an album.I say this again (for the n'th time on all forums) a true audiophile streaming service would curate the good masters for us to enjoy .
But that entails manual work and research which costs money .
Do any streaming actually covering their costs these days ? at all ?