Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pkelly500 t1_ja8gm0k wrote

Qobuz is better than both, although its playlist algorithm isn't as good and its userbase-generated playlists are far more sparse.

So, if you want the best sound quality and don't listen to a lot of obscure bands or genre, Qobuz is the pick. If music discovery and social sharing are most important to you, Spotify still is the king. Otherwise, Apple Music is pretty damn good.

I don't like Tidal because it shoves MQA in our face, which isn't true lossless and is largely marketing snake oil. Qobuz only uses MQA when no other source file is available from the record company.

1

ultra_prescriptivist t1_ja8k5xq wrote

>Qobuz is better than both ... So, if you want the best sound quality and don't listen to a lot of obscure bands or genre, Qobuz is the pick.

You know there is no inherent difference in sound quality between lossless streaming services, right? All the apps do is download the files they have on their servers and play them.

If the files are based on the same master recordings, which they generally are (especially if the album was released in the past twenty years or so), then they will be the same regardless of which streaming service you happen to be using.

3

pkelly500 t1_ja8upgg wrote

Not true. Tidal uses MQA encoding on many of its files, even if non-MQA versions are available. Qobuz does not. Apple Music does not.

MQA isn't true lossless, either. https://goldensound.audio/2021/11/29/tidal-hifi-is-not-lossless/

1

ultra_prescriptivist t1_ja8zhg6 wrote

Tidal aside, it is absolutely true. Amazon, Deezer, Qobuz, and Apple will generally be using the exact same files.

But yes, Tidal is the one exception.

That said, the distortion introduced by MQA is apparently not significant enough to be audible. In a blind test, people seem unable to tell them apart. While the philosophy behind MQA may be objectionable, it doesn't seem to adversely affect the sound in a noticeable way.

2

pkelly500 t1_ja91or5 wrote

Saying "Tidal aside" is like making a sweeping generalization about the pickup truck market and saying, "Toyota aside ... "

Doesn't really work, man. Tidal is not like the others. It's not pure lossless.

But yes, once you remove Tidal, the files largely are the same. Then it comes down to which UX, algorithm, additional features you prefer.

−2

ultra_prescriptivist t1_ja94d24 wrote

You're the one who keeps trying to make this all about Tidal, but that's not the reason why I responded to your initial comment.

You started by sayin:

>Qobuz is better than both ... So, if you want the best sound quality and don't listen to a lot of obscure bands or genre, Qobuz is the pick.

Now you're saying

>But yes, once you remove Tidal, the files largely are the same. Then it comes down to which UX, algorithm, additional features you prefer.

That's quite a shift in stance, don't you think?

3

pkelly500 t1_ja9cpcp wrote

Fair enough. But you made the sweeping generalization that all lossless streaming services use the same files. They do not.

And your "Tidal excepted" retort was lame because it's not like Tidal is some puny upstart in the lossless streaming space. Just admit you were wrong, just like I'm admitting that Qobuz, Deezer, Amazon and Apple pretty much use the same files, so my initial response was wrong -- Tidal excepted, of course. :)

−4