Am I the only guy w little or no interest in streaming high resolution?

I setup for my late father in law a system (Mac Mini w external CD drive), where he just inserts a CD into it and within 2 mns the album appears on his iPad remote. He didn’t have to do anything else. The system was headless. He ripped 200CDs at the age of 75 and even learned how to scan album artwork when iTunes didn’t find it for his very older CDs.

Spotify is not HiFi, at best is 320kbps lossy. You have many other HiFi services such as Tidal, Qobuz,... w an amazing collection of albums and a very reliable streaming service and very high quality (16/44.1-96, MQA). I’ve had zero issues to date except with the software maybe glitching 3 times for a tiny 1/4s during 100hrs of Tidal HiFi streaming.

My father in law was also opposed to digitizing his CD lib, as he had this emotional attachment to his Classe CD player but he quickly realized the convenience and the joy of re-discovering some of his old CDs from the convenience of his favourite chair.

 

No, you're automatically switched to 320 if your connection can't handle higher resolutions (you can set it to that yourself as well).
People should also note that Young's archives are curently unavailable on smartphones and tablets. They're desktop only at this point.

 

you cant be the only one.

I have no interest in streaming whatsoever. I've got a big music collection, and spent some money over time collecting it... and I want to listen to my investment.

 

I think the person on the Roon forum was being enthusiastically optimistic. More important - and no less goofy - the number of lines the Roon member counted in his TIDAL app or browser depends entirely on the size of the album icons configured in his desktop or app view. Zoom in for large album cover views - the number of rows/lines increases; zoom out for smaller album cover views - the number of rows/lines decreases.

Anyway, neither @LeeS, who may be actually exchanging the occasional email with a TIDAL rep or two - parttimeaudiophile.com has to stay current on things, after all - or TIDAL have reported any such number so far.

The more MQA’d albums TIDAL makes available in the so-called “Masters” section, the quicker that audiophiles and music lovers in general will come to their own conclusions about the convenience/inconvenience, quality/lack of quality, efficacy/fakery, usefulness/uselessness and DRM vs openness of MQA.

Mmmm . . . soooo exciting.

 

And how are you supposed to do it if you need to move around the house, go out or relax in a room away from your main speakers?

 

A bit off topic but useful, Here's the direct link from the forum the Tidal MQA list is maintained The most complete list of MQA albums so far found on Tidal | MQA - Related technology, products and music | The Hitchhikers Guide To Meridian . So I did some Excel work, Filtered by Album, then removed duplicates and entries containing "deluxe", the number is still high ~ 7000 albums but it all depends how that user retrieved that list. I did not validate there is that many

Tidal apparently is still working on providing an easy way to browse MQA in their desktop app, which isn't available in their iOS app. but luckily my trusty Audirvana iOS remote allows to search the Tidal MQA lib.

 

Streaming high res doesn’t interest me, but I wouldn’t mind improving my lossy digital listening. I’m using Apple Music and iTunes through an Airport Express (optical out to my McIntosh C2600). I think the Airport Express is the weak link. Occasionally I can hear some artifacts and little skips. That goes away if I use the analog out from the Airport Express, but overall it sounds worse because the DAC isn’t nearly as good as the one in the C2600.

Most of my home listening is analog, so I’ve not put much effort into trying to fix this, but if anybody has any ideas how to get a better digital signal from iTunes/Apple Music to my C2600’s DAC please let me know!

 

I dont listen to music that way. So this isnt a problem for me. And even if I did, I have a large collection of music on my phone or my tablet.

 

No use for streaming. Next ...

 

There you go! It's great when people try new things. I have Prime and did check out the Music app, but I didn't see a lot of difference from the service I use, but if I didn't have that I would certainly use that as an alternative.

 

Streaming as a primary source of high fidelity music listening is a commitment that is no different in scope from the one you already made to physical media. For those who are satisfied or more than satisfied with CD quality music listening, a TIDAL HiFi subscription opens up a universe of music that is both affordable and innumerable. For those who are immersed in the world of SACD, DVD-A and Blu-ray Audio, streaming from TIDAL HiFi will not be as satisfying when listening to some albums.

TIDAL is the most widely available high fidelity music streaming service because TIDAL’s HiFi subscription provides music at 1411 Kbps (from 16/44 - CD quality - sources provided by the labels and independents) that is available in the greatest number of countries. Other streaming services also offer 1411 Kbps streaming (Qobuz, and a couple of others), but TIDAL is available in more countries. $20/month for all you want.

You can stream TIDAL through a browser on any Windows, Mac or Linux computer. You can stream TIDAL through a number of video players (e.g., the Oppo 105 has the TIDAL app built in). You can purchase a dedicated streaming box such as a Bluesound Node 2, Auralic Aries (and others), along with an external DAC (or use a DAC you already own). The dedicated streaming boxes have interface apps into which you input your TIDAL login.

It’s easy. It can be set up at very high quality for a moderate amount of money. But if an audiophile is satisfied with his music collection of physical media and with the pace at which his music collection is expanding, streaming only adds a way of previewing possible future purchases. To do that sort of previewing though, all that’s really needed is a web browser and a basic TIDAL or Spotify account. On the other hand, for audiophiles who want to dive deeper into high fidelity music than the size and the rate of expansion of their physical media collections allows, a TIDAL HiFi subscription is a great way to do so.

I do not mess around with WiFi at home. I am a TIDAL HiFi subscriber. All my device connections are via ethernet. WiFi works perfectly well in many, many homes and offices. For all the rest burdened with flaky WiFi environments - and there are many - ethernet rules.

 

Tidal has a problem with its miserable UI which turn into a life threatening hazard when using it while driving. Now, you don't really want to encourage people to risk their life, do you?

 

And did you put the files on your digital devices? If so what format, lossless or lossy?

 

Your personal experience is your own. I find the TIDAL app interface to be intuitively usable. No UI is perfect for all people. Anybody who is trying to use an app interface on a portable device while driving has a problem that has nothing whatsoever to do with an app interface. Stop doing that.

Your generalization doesn’t help, nor does it promote music listening. Personally, I think that’s a mistake.

 

Not the member you quoted. But when I listen to music it's sitting down in my living room where my main system is. If I want music playing in the background I play music from one of my hard drives. I don't have speakers through out my house such as a Sonos system nor do I have any interest in any such systems.

 

The fact is that Tidal doesn't have a functional car mode, so for me it's not a viable streaming solution for 50% of the time I listen to music. You may find it intuitive but I don't and it's OK because it's a personal preference.

People use apps all the time when driving, you need to dial the phone, navigate, tune in to an internet radio channel - these are all apps. The difference is that they were designed to be safe to use (relatively) when driving while Tidal isn't.

 

That’s a narrower use case, and I don’t think it’s a competitive case when compared to the OP’s own preference for SACD, DVD-A and Blu-ray Audio. The greatest value derived from SACD, DVD-A and Blu-ray Audio occurs when seated at least somewhere close to the sweet spot for a listening session. The experience, with a well configured system, can be immersive.

By comparison, moving around in a home while getting work done is most definitely not a dedicated listening experience and is only very rarely immersive. I think that means your comparison is not quite relevant enough to be a consideration.

Then again, considering your point directly, there are quite a few audiophiles who own whole-home music installations and who regulary stream through the house whatever they like including CD, SACD, DVD-A and Blu-ray Audio. The systems are versatile and can also incorporate TIDAL, Internet radio, and of course music files stored on a home server.

 

Hang up and drive, dude. I don't find the tidal app amazingly intuitive either, but I'm not sure what "functional car mode" means.

I guess laws are different, over here its illegal to fiddle with things while you drive. Claiming Tidal is somehow dangerous because there isn't a "good" way to mess with it while you should be focused on driving is funny/terrifying.

 

Your last paragraph is absolutely correct in my case. But let me play the devil's advocate and claim that eschewing streaming completely because it's somehow tied with commercial internet streaming service is a very narrow perspective. Personally I think that having only a single room where I can enjoy my music collection is too restrictive. For me streaming is first and foremost a technology that enabled me to be free to enjoy music everywhere, anywhere and anytime.

 

Stop deprecating. There is no app that is “relatively” safe to use while driving. Anybody who uses a music app while driving is taking his life (and the lives of others) into his own hands. Not a good idea. Ever.

Your statement that some app interfaces “were designed to be safe to use when driving” is utterly false. There is no such thing. That’s why national and regional jurisdiction after jurisdiction has enacted or is enacting strict laws against distracted driving.

Anyway, this is thread crap. We should get off it. The subject was home streaming vs physical media and about which SHF members feel that streaming is not for them.

 

I "stream" Sirius/XM in my cars, does that count. Other than that, no interest at all.

 

Please don't make presumptions on what I use or do while driving, I'd like to believe I'm a bit more responsible than that. I'm not using Tidal in the car because it's dangerous. My phone is mirrored to the head unit screen and the touch panel is mapped to the phone'touch screen. While driving the car mode is activated and everything is displayed with large buttons or voice activated. Internet radio for example has large icons for direct mapping of channels so I don't "fiddle"with searching for favorites. Waze is just a button away on the car mode home screen and there is nothing I do while driving that is different or more dangerous from what anyone else driving is doing when using the built-in infotainment to make a phone call.

If anything else, our laws are more restrictive because I can be fined if caught drinking coffee while driving or keeping my phone on the passenger seat.

Tidal is incompatible with car mode because it's doesn't even have a landscape mode and there is no Android Auto support yet that I know of.

 

@Vinny123 , is it possible to modify your thread to add a poll about the topic? If not open another one strictly for voting . It’s not scientific but interesting to see how different results would be from another forum such as CA

 

Interesting thread. Watching and reading it from the beginning, I think there is some, but not for everyone, confusion about what the term "streaming" is. I use it as the description for listening to music delivered to your device(s) through the internet, like Spotify, Tidal, Amazon Music, etc. Many posters are also, incorrectly, including the use of in-home digitized content played either directly from a server or through the listener's in-home network. Some are taking a stance as to "only" playing physical media like vinyl or CDs.

I do not "stream" to listen to any music. I do, however, have my entire library (less SACDs) digitized and played from a NAS.

 

If someone had told me back in the 70s that I could have instant access to a huge library of music for ten bucks a month, I'd have jumped on it! I think of all the poor purchase decisions I could have avoided by listening first! Pays for itself right there. Streaming is a wonderful thing, but I do feel the sadness of the eventual difficulty of owning physical media or even files.

Anyway, to the original question, I have no interest in streaming anything beyond 16/44. I'm a little puzzled that we went from mp3s to hi-res, with little ability to stream or purchase true CD quality.