Sound quality problems with Tidal Streaming Service?

I've been listening to Tidal for 2 days now from my Oppo. No problems whatsoever.

 

I think there might be to different third party implementations and Tidal. I resubscribed a few days ago and find it to be rock solid now on computers and phones, but It's still just an absolute dog through my Sonos.

 

I guess I'll have to start using the Oppo but it's less convenient than using my Squeezebox Touch, with it I can make a playlist that has songs from my files, spotify, and now tidal.

 

If you read post #22 of this thread, you see that I found the reason for the distorted tracks on Tidal. It's due to Tidal publishing songs sourced from Universal Music. Songs sourced form Universal have embedded "watermarking" which causes a distortion of the audio. If you have been listening to Tidal for two days, you certainly have encountered one of theses tracks and I'm guessing you thought the distortion was part of the recording. It isn't. If you were to compare one of theses tracks to the actual CD, you would likely then hear the "watermark" distortion. See post 22 for a link for examples of this type of distortion.

Bottom line is that Tidal expressly advertises "hi-fi" (CD quality) streaming and for many of their tracks, they have failed to do that.

 

I'm pleased to report that I have not experienced any such distortion on any of the tracks I have listened to; from classical to rock. I have compared CD versions of albums with the streaming version & have heard no variation in sound quality. So I am quite happy with their claim of CD quality.

 

In my initial post (post #1), I listed an example track from Tidal that demonstrates the watermark distortion. Barber's "Adagio for Strings".

tidal.com/track/8334755

Have you listened to it? Please do that and give your opinion.

 

I will do that. I am a bit perplexed, though, why I haven't heard any of this distortion after hours & hours of classical music; where you claim to hear it a fairly high, in my opinion, percentage of the time. 5 to 10% of the time is high. One would think that I would have run across even one example in my listening experience.

 

I just finished listening to the above mentioned track on my home system... 3 times. Not a hint of the slightest distortion. Sorry.

 

You are just not hearing it (or recognizing it). It is distorted and definitely does not sound like the CD of the same recording. Perhaps the word "distorted" is incorrect. It's not your typical harmonic distortion that most of us equate with the word "distortion". It is more an "artifact" that is created by the watermarking process. A shimmering /modulation/pulsation of a certain portion of the high frequencies. That effect is definitely not part of the original recording. And there are thousands of other tracks on Tidal have the exact same-sounding "effect".

Tidal has admitted to me that a significant percentage of their tracks do indeed have watermarking and that they are are trying to replace them with non-watermarked tracks. Why would they go to all that trouble if those tracks sounded fine (the same as the CDs). Also, it is a fact that watermarking caused audible artifacts. That link about watermarking I mentioned demonstrates it.

 

Well, honestly, I'm not losing any sleep over it. I have over 10,00o CDs I will never get rid of; most currently in storage. This is a viable option for me at the moment & I am enjoying it. I'm sorry you can't...
My advice; drop the service & play your CDs.

 

None!

 

I will keep the service because it's a great idea if properly implemented. I think having instant access to a million-plus albums with CD quality is amazing.

The correct course of action is to complain to Tidal about the problem, which I have done. They replied the same day saying it is a real problem and that they are working to correct it.

 

As mentioned before, I am not hearing the problem, so no need for me to complain to Tidal.

 

Hi, like TimL I *do* hear shimmering / modulation / tremolo on classical music on Tidal HiFi - perfect example is the end of track 4 of Bach: Cantatas Wachet Auf / Herz & Mund by John Eliot Gardiner and Monteverdi Choir. The 'biggest' moments of the chorus become noticeably tremolo, and I compared this with Spotify - which was fine. Using mobile app in both cases. I will be complaining to Tidal and using this thread as evidence that it's not just me! - Chris

 

Another good example of obvious watermarking is this comparison of two versions of the very same recording of Chopin's Ballade No. 1 played by Kristian Zimerman, one with watermarking, and the other without. It's immediately audible on headphones at the sustained opening note, but of course the complete track is affected; one sounds jittery/fluttery, while the other sounds clean as a whistle:

Version 1
Version 2

 

For fun once my wife and I did a comparison of Tidal with Apple Music.

Tidal sometimes was better, often sounded the same (i.e. original source matter) but in some not insignificant % of the cases (10-20%?) actually sounded worse. Weird highs and loud parts especially, maybe the shimmering effect you mention but we did this several months ago. In the end my wife, who has a pretty good ear, didn't much feel that $10 extra a month for Tidal over Apple was worth it. I'm more mixed on it but I see her point.

Regarding dynamic range, I always thought Spotify seemed the worse, the volume there is definitely jacked.

 

Spotify's default setting indeed uses dynamic range compression, but you can turn that off by deselecting 'Set the same volume level for all songs' under (advanced) settings. When you do that, dynamic range is just as unimpaired as it is with Tidal.

 

I've always ripped my music from CD using ALAC (I tried Media Monkey and using EAC but iTunes is so much more convenient). I'll sometimes buy pop singles on the iTunes store since many pop artists could care less about quality and their CD versions don't sound that much better than the 256 AAC file that Apple sells. Anyway I just signed up for the Tidal free trial and I am extremely disappointed. I thought this would save me money because I'd no longer need CD's but the sound quality is NO WHERE near the CD's I've ripped. First off the Tidal versions of songs are not as clear nor is the bass as punchy and warm as the same songs I've ripped myself. Further listen to "Nobody's Empire" from Belle & Sebastian and at the 3:10 mark you should hear two singers as you do on the CD version. Listening to it on Tidal there is only one singer - much like the Spotify version. I don't believe Tidal uses good quality source material for its encoding and instead relies on the record companies to provide their music. Compare this with the Apple Music version and you do hear two singers - Apple is on record saying they use the original source material - Tidal has not disclosed their source yet.

Bottom line - Apple music is glitchy and won't let me sync my ALAC songs to my iPhone nor does it allow me to put the Apple Music songs on my iPod. Spotify is great for convenience and they are coming out with an iPod shuffle clone to work with Spotify (The Mighty Audio Streamer), but the sound quality is piss poor (yes even at 320kbs - it sounds like trash compared to the rest of the streaming companies and ALAC music). Google Music's interface is a pain and they don't have a good playlist curation. Pandora is just radio and the sound quality is poor. And Tidal has the false "HIFI" while also having glitches and issues all the same. Bottom line is that the streaming services are so promising yet so far from being complete... I'll stick to buying used CD's for my serious music and using iTunes to get cheesy pop songs.

 

What's the latest consensus on Tidal? I'm thinking of trying it out via the App on my iPhone, I have an unlimited data plan via Sprint.

I've tried the free Spotify app (shuffle play) and hook it up via the iPhone adapter in my car. Not bad.

I'm thinking Tidal could take things to the next level. Any free trials out there to test it out?

 

I really like Tidal! My Oppo player offered a 3 month trial with the high quality streaming option. I couldn't tell the difference between the CD version compared to the streaming. I have the app on my iPhone and on my computer. I just need to hook my home system back up after a move so I can switch back from the the mp3 version.

 

ail

Any other free trial besides Oppo? I just can't see myself signing up via Tidal unless I'm allowed to "kick the tires." Spotify has a basic/free service that is called "Shuffle Play," IIRC. Couldn't Tidal offer a similar thing, but with a 30-60 day cut-off date?

 

I hear this distortion also. Sorry to be a late comer to to this forum. I started using Tidal a few days ago, and noticed that about 10 - 20 % of the albums have this distortion. It's quite obvious on the Barber Adagio for Strings. I've noticed this distortion years ago, first with iTunes downloads (e.g. Schumann Symphonies with Chailly, and Beethoven Hammerlavier with Uchida). Some time after that I downloaded some albums from Passionato, and heard the distortion with practically every track. I searched online about the issue. I found a post by someone else who noticed the issue. He compared the Passionato download with the CD, and used Audacity to reverse polarity of the CD and play along with the download. If they were identical, the result would be total silence. However, there was noise, which represented the difference, i.e. distortion. Btw, I only listen to classical. I went to the site that provides samples of music with and without the watermark, and could tell the difference with all the classical samples, but not with the others.

 

This old thread raised an issue that was never fully resolved because too few TIDAL users could hear a problem.

As has been repeatedly stated in this thread and in many other similar threads, TIDAL provides to subscribers what the labels provide to TIDAL. It is not TIDAL that is watermarking or manipulating files in any other way either. Frequently too - and the most likely reason that most TIDAL HiFi subscribers can't hear any wavering or warbling or any other distortion effects - subscribers who do hear a problem are using DACs that don't properly recognize or properly process the watermark. Most DACs handle watermarked files perfectly, but some DACs create problems. In particular, DA conversions by some computer sound cards can cause time-scale problems that manfiest audibly as the sort of warbling effect that the OP originally described.

Audio watermarking of music files is to some extent a holdover from the digital rights management days when almost every label and major rights holder tried to restrict use or confine a downloaded file to a specific device or prevent a download file from being copies or transfered and so on. Spread spectrum audio watermarking is sometimes touted to be useful as an identifier that helps labels and rights holders track where their music files wander after being downloaded or streamed. Some computer soundcards and integrated audio chipsets still have minor fits when DAC'ing some watermarked files. It was never clear in this thread which members were using robust DACs as opposed to desktop or laptop sound cards.

Nonetheless, watermarking is a a double-dumb stupid thing to do to a file intended for streaming use and provided to TIDAL or any other service. The managers and execs who come up with this sort of stuff at the label and rights holder offices need a serious talking-to. I doubt that anyone using a decent DAC - including something inexpensive and well designed from Arcam, Schiit and a few other company - would ever have a problem with music files containing audio watermarking.

 

You say this, but the watermarking is all that keeps me from recording albums from Tidal onto cassettes and selling them at flea markets! Damn record industry, always one step ahead of me!

 

This. I sense a million person march to the head office of UMG, Warner and Sony being organized as we speak. Never mind that we're not actually speaking. Another small business entrepreneur screwed over by the corporate juggernaut.

One sympathizes.