Tidal Audio Launches Lossless Streaming...

His point is if you're having problems with the desktop app but not the browser (which I'm not sure if you've implied or not), then why not just use the browser.

I can think of all sorts of reasons to prefer a dedicated app to a web browser, but I never found any one way to use Tidal to suck any less then any of the others personally.

 

The app is the only way to (at least in theory) achieve bit perfect playback. Without that, lossless streaming services are certainly not worth $20/month.

Put another way, web playback will be lossy by design. Might as well use Spotify.

 

I guess I'm not following why you're implying that web playback will be lossy by design. It's working exactly like your app except it is also playing the tracks that aren't "HI-FI." It was lit on that first track of your referenced playlist then it went dim for the second track but at least it played.

 

Are you sure about that? Do you happen to know how the stream is getting to your browser? I'm thinking Adobe Flash player or something similar. If you have some detailed technical information on how web playback is "exactly like [the] app", can you provide a link?

The web player doesn't seem to have any way to select an output device. Did I miss that preference somewhere?

 

Everything I've read says that streaming via Chrome will be lossless.

 

Do you have a link to what you read?

 

Besides mentioned in this thread...

https://www.google.com/webhp?source...v=2&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=chrome lossless tidal

 

Thanks

But there's no implication here that a bit perfect stream makes it to the DAC (in the PC or elsewhere) which, again, makes the whole concept of lossless meaningless.

 

Well, it was a little fun, but I'm done. To my knowledge, Tidal did not adequately disclose how much of their library is lossy. And ironically, the existence of these lossy files and the Mac desktop's inability to properly deal with them is what made up my mind about Tidal.

When Tidal comes up with a more reliable bit perfect solution, and purges the lossy files from their library, I may look into the service again.

I have cancelled my subscription. Bye Tidal!

 

So you would rather have no files at all than ones in 320 or whatever the non-lossless ones are encoded at? I'll keep listening as my Mac desktop handles both file-types perfectly. My dac identifies the lossless stream as lossless btw...as does Audio Hijack.

 

I think his issue is that it's not worth double the cost for something he can get with Spotify or other service.

 

What I'm really after is for Tidal to be more transparent with actual bit rates instead of the quaint "HiFi" indicator and more transparent with how much of their catalog is lossy. I never would have signed up if Tidal had used a more truthful description of their service ("some lossless" or "mostly lossless").

A lossless streaming service should be able to provide a bit perfect stream of 16 bits / 44.1kHz to a USB DAC. Anything less than that is not lossless IMHO. Why else would someone pay $20/month?

Perhaps lossless just means something different to me than others.

 

Over the weekend I did some more critical listening tests between Tidal "HiFi" tracks and Google Play Music, both in Chrome. At first I thought there were subtle differences, but once I corrected for volume differences they vanished.

So it's not just a matter of paying half the price for the same quality, one also gets more features such as radio station mode and get it all backed by a company with tremendously more resources and cloud infrastructure.

 

Have you tried?
http://www.imore.com/how-find-out-w...when-streaming-music-over-cellular-iphone-and

 

But it's not the same quality. Maybe it sounds the same to some and maybe people are making claims of upsampling but Tidal is delivering 16/44.1 on their "HI-FI" tracks and Google is not.

 

No, but thank you. The iOS app handles the transition from lossless to lossy just fine. The Mac app, not so much.

 

Anybody with a gmail account can use the free Google Music. I'd like you to listen to a song and both and e-look me in the eyes and tell me you think Tidal sounds any different. I know you say you tried with Beats, but I have no baseline for that and it's not hard to believe Beats doesn't sound good.

If a service that claims to sound better doesn't sound better and charges twice as much and has significant technical issues, I don't care if they're claiming they're streaming in some mythical 10x DSD format.

BTW, both deliver 16/44.1. It's the claimed sampling rate of 1100 vs. 320 that's different.

 

Good to hear you have come to a decision. How long did it take you to realize that all you needed was Google Play Music when comparing your level matched tracks with TIDAL? What were you using so I can try to replicate your conclusions?

Of note: I did notice that Tidal has a radio feature, in App and Desktop versions at least. Thanks for sharing.

 

For the listening tests I did it off my laptop with an Audioquest Dragonfly DAC and a pair of PSB headphones. In the browser, turning the volume slider of both services to the max seemed to match the volumes perfectly. I found a good way to do it was to have both playing simultaneously and use the volume slider to mute one of them at a time. That way you can be in the same part of both songs and listen for differences.

 

Did you use Chrome as your browser?

Okay so you matched the levels by ear using a laptop with an Audioquest Dragonfly DAC and a pair of PSB headphones. I will try your mute technique.

 

Yes, Chrome. Tidal's Hi Fi streaming only works properly in Chrome, and I imagine Google's music service is optimized for Google's web browser to some extent.

 

Interesting development: http://www.engadget.com/2015/01/30/jay-z-tidal-takeover-the-breaks-over/

 

I hope Tidal gets things straightened out and Jayz's buyout is not just to have another low quality streaming service.

I hope Jayz fully intends to market Tidal as a fully lossless streaming service. They need to work on getting their entire catalog to lossless and above and just let us choose what bit rate we want it whatever situation we are in for streaming.

I liked the service but canceled after a few hours when I found out only chrome supported lossless web playback and portions of their catalog weren't lossless.

 

Well that's certainly an interesting development.

 

And a year from now he sells it to Samsung for 5 billion USD.