Qobuz Canada: legal problems? anti Canada? Or what?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Khorn, Feb 25, 2020.

  1. Agitater

    Agitater Forum Resident

    Location:
    Toronto
    It’s important to keep perspective and not make random guesses and assumptions. There is an enormous amount of absurdly popular Canadian content of far more than sufficient popularity (in terms of airplay and subscriber requests) to keep the CRTC happy. Drake, Bieber, and very long list of other Canadian international acts have long ago succeeded in putting to bed all of the old CRTC/Canadian content requirement tropes that Canucks assert in these situations when they’re trying to blame “the government” because they think they can’t have nice things. It’s just not accurate anymore.

    I’m not sure why anyone thinks that Qobuz (or TIDAL or any other major streaming service) has turned a profit of any kind. None of the streaming services have turned a profit to date, though Spotify is close. I’m also not sure where you get the idea that Qobuz charges less per month that TIDAL. While it’s true that Qobuz is doing heavy-duty subscription promotions that include significant monthly discounts, all of those offers are temporary as is true with all introductory offers in new markets from all providers.

    I think it’s important to keep in mind is that Qobuz doesn’t own any of the music it streams. Like all the other streaming services, Qobuz licenses its music library from all the rights holders - the music labels, directly from artists in some cases, estates, label/distributors, etc., etc. Obtaining the rights to distribute/stream to subscribers in a new market (e.g., Canada) takes a long time, costs a lot of money to negotiate, and requires the investment in infrastructure through deals with a robust backend provider. Don’t forget the marketing costs, and the front-end investment for subscription management, customer support, and so on. It’s expensive, and there has to be a reason to spend that much cash.

    Did you really just compare New Zealand’s population and geography to ours? I don’t think that supports your complaint well at all. New Zealand, in its entirety, is a nation of 268,000 square kilometres. The entire country and all 4M residents fit easily into southern Ontario. NZ has a robust high-speed internet already in place. However, Qobuz has recently announced last week?) that it will begin a rollout in Australia, Norway, Sweden and a couple of other countries because, according to Forbes, those are areas in which streaming music shows worthwhile growth potential.

    Have you ever considered the idea that maybe - just maybe - Qobuz was negotiating to get into various other markets well before it looked toward Canada. I’m a loyal Canadian - got the scars to prove it - but I’m under no delusions about the fact that doing business in Canada is expensive. It’s expensive because there are - for a company like Qobuz - between 250,000-750,000 subscribers (at the very most), spread across 3,500 miles of territory. Any business operator with even a lick of sense will think very, very long and hard about how to capture that market. He’ll also think very, very long and hard about exactly how to go about capturing the potential market. Then, there’s also the idea that maybe - again, just maybe - streaming growth in Canada (at least from the perspective of actual streaming companies that are in that business and study it) sucks and hasn’t yet reached a sufficient level of uptake to convince Qobuz investors and management that Canada is a worthwhile investment bet.

    So... maybe all of us up here should give our heads a shake, because Qobuz isn’t stupid. It’s looking at Canada as a market that is already loaded with Spotify and TIDAL subscribers. Exactly how large does anybody think the Canadian high-resolution, streaming music subscriber market really is? 38.5 million people in Canada. That’s fewer people than the combined populations of Texas and Georgia, but spread across the entire breadth of the continent. So how many potential Qobuz subscribers really exist? A thousand cats who hang out on SHF? Will they really jump from Spotify or TIDAL? How many potential subscribers across the country who’ve never heard of SHF but do pursue high-resolution audio and care to get into or expand their streaming? Canada has yet to be identified as an expanding market for streaming. Maybe we’re flying below the radar?

    Any idea? Until someone has those numbers, they should stop blaming Qobuz’s absence from Canada on anything other than good business sense.
     
    dennis the menace and jonwoody like this.
  2. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian Thread Starter

    Canada is now seriously considering a “Netflix” digital type tax. I don’t personally mind paying if it’s deemed necessary but others might be opposed and I don’t know how or if this would affect Qobuz’s decision to open up here.
     
    david1111 likes this.
  3. Deuce66

    Deuce66 Senior Member

    Location:
    Canada
    I think launching Qobuz in Canada is now DOA with Apple's recent announcement.
     
    wgriel, Tim 2 and david1111 like this.
  4. hifisoup

    hifisoup @hearmoremusic on Instagram

    Location:
    USA
    Ain't socialism grand?
     
    david1111 likes this.
  5. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian Thread Starter

    If that is the case then why would anyone bother with Qobuz anyway?
     
  6. Tim 2

    Tim 2 MORE MUSIC PLEASE

    Location:
    Alberta Canada
    I'm very happy with Tidal, unless there was a drastic reduction in service I can't see changing or adding.
     
    robertash and david1111 like this.
  7. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian Thread Starter

    Seeing as Streaming is my sole music source I would be happy with a service that provides music solely in their native resolutions up to 192/24 anyway. I’m really interested in seeing what the new Apple deal is all about.
     
    Monty12 and david1111 like this.
  8. Deuce66

    Deuce66 Senior Member

    Location:
    Canada
    Changes take effect June 1.


    Official Apple announcement

    Apple Music announces Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio

    Apple Music announces Spatial Audio with Dolby Atmos; will bring Lossless Audio to entire catalog
    The next generation of sound on Apple Music is coming to subscribers June 2021 at no additional cost

    CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA Apple today announced Apple Music is bringing industry-leading sound quality to subscribers with the addition of Spatial Audio with support for Dolby Atmos. Spatial Audio gives artists the opportunity to create immersive audio experiences for their fans with true multidimensional sound and clarity. Apple Music subscribers will also be able to listen to more than 75 million songs in Lossless Audio — the way the artists created them in the studio. These new features will be available for Apple Music subscribers starting next month at no additional cost.

    “Apple Music is making its biggest advancement ever in sound quality,” said Oliver Schusser, Apple’s vice president of Apple Music and Beats. “Listening to a song in Dolby Atmos is like magic. The music comes from all around you and sounds incredible. Now we are bringing this truly innovative and immersive experience to our listeners with music from their favorite artists like J Balvin, Gustavo Dudamel, Ariana Grande, Maroon 5, Kacey Musgraves, The Weeknd, and so many more. Subscribers will also be able to listen to their music in the highest audio quality with Lossless Audio. Apple Music as we know it is about to change forever.”

    Lossless Audio
    Apple Music will also make its catalog of more than 75 million songs available in Lossless Audio. Apple uses ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec) to preserve every single bit of the original audio file. This means Apple Music subscribers will be able to hear the exact same thing that the artists created in the studio.

    To start listening to Lossless Audio, subscribers using the latest version of Apple Music can turn it on in Settings > Music > Audio Quality. Here, they can choose different resolutions for different connections such as cellular, Wi-Fi, or for download. Apple Music’s Lossless tier starts at CD quality, which is 16 bit at 44.1 kHz (kilohertz), and goes up to 24 bit at 48 kHz and is playable natively on Apple devices. For the true audiophile, Apple Music also offers Hi-Resolution Lossless all the way up to 24 bit at 192 kHz.1

    Producer Piper Payne
    said: “The soul and life of the mix is sitting in the extra bits of data that are stored in the lossless file. As a mastering engineer, having the ability to convey the music to the listener at its highest quality is the end goal of what I work for every day.”

    Availability
    • Spatial Audio with support for Dolby Atmos and Lossless Audio will be available to Apple Music subscribers at no additional cost.
    • Thousands of tracks will be available in Spatial Audio with Dolby Atmos at launch, with more added regularly.
    • Apple Music’s catalog of more than 75 million songs will be available in Lossless Audio.
     
    Khorn and wgriel like this.
  9. Kingby

    Kingby Active Member

    Location:
    Calgary
    I am still trying to grasp your different geography/vast argument (this is the second time you brought it up). Am I missing something here? I assume Qobuz is NOT building its own telecommunication networks and will be piggy backing off the usual Canadian suspects as part of the regular old internet access. These networks are already in place with a robust/high-speed network to 90% of the population. Same argument you gave about NZ except the population is actually in our favour to sort out the licensing agreements.

    Maybe I am missing something.
     
  10. Stereosound

    Stereosound Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    Still need to see if Apple Music will correctly provide bit perfect output like Qobuz does and not like Amazon Music which doesn’t. Still need to see if Apple Music sounds better than Qobuz or not. Other than those two items maybe for some people the more articles or reviews of artists and albums that Qobuz touts then yes there would currently be no other compelling reasons to bother with Qobuz or Deezer. CarPlay streaming with Qobuz is expected in June at least from a recent post. Tidal, Deezer and Qobuz are now in the most trouble surviving long term depending on how they can react. Hopefully Apple and Spotify’s news makes the others mentioned as well as Pandora, Amazon Music and YouTube Music vastly improve their offerings. Clock is ticking faster now...
     
    Khorn likes this.
  11. gkella

    gkella Glen Kellaway From The Basement

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    You can still buy records and CDs in Canada..
     
    jonwoody likes this.
  12. david1111

    david1111 Barba non facit philosophum

    Location:
    toronto, ontario
    if it was full-on socialism there would at least be some other perks, but I've never lived in a socialist country, or studied the concept, so I don't really know for sure.
    But this pseudo-democracy we're in, is maybe worst of both? I don't know, but seems like things could be better. We have the potential to be a truly great country, I believe.
     
    doctor fuse likes this.
  13. david1111

    david1111 Barba non facit philosophum

    Location:
    toronto, ontario
    Yes, and also just buy and download hi-rez music files from these places and stream them locally with a monthly subscription.
     
    gkella likes this.
  14. david1111

    david1111 Barba non facit philosophum

    Location:
    toronto, ontario
    I meant without a monthly subscription, sorry.
     
  15. Agitater

    Agitater Forum Resident

    Location:
    Toronto
    Maybe you’re missing something; maybe not. Part of the argument I’ve made (more than once, as you noted) relies on the fact that , in fact, Qobuz and TIDAL and Amazon care only a little bit about the so-called “last mile” of internet connectivity for customers - the robust high-speed network you mentioned. They care only a little bit about it because it does’t represent much of a cost to them. It’s a cost borne by their customers - you, me, other SHF members, etc., etc. The connectivity that Qobuz and TIDAL and Amazon to have to pay for directly is the infrastructure backbone access costs that have to be shelled out to the backbone owners in order to access last-mile connected customers. That’s the only way in which major content providers can get access to you and me and the audiophiles next door. We see the marketing and the sales pitches, but Qobuz (for one example) has to negotiate affordable backbone access in order to be allowed to sell their massive (and growing) library to us. In addition, or perhaps before any of that happens, or perhaps concurrently with it, Qobuz has to get the licenses it needs from the content rights holders in order to offer it in various packages to Canadian home consumers/subscribers. Qobuz has to organize and pay for sufficient server-side bandwidth and provisioning to anticipate handling the additional subscribers.

    We don’t have a national backbone that geographically small countries have. As a result, lots of negotiating needs to take place. With Canada being a low priority because we have a small population spread across many backbone access jurisdictions and a variety of competing major internet providers with established regional control, Qobuz is taking its time (if it’s even bothering at all).

    Some other members have blurted “socialism” and “Canadian content rules” and other rumours and innuendo and supposition. It’s the same stuff that was blurted out prior to TIDAL arriving in Canada, but TIDAL showed up anyway after making all of the aforementioned deals.
     
    jonwoody and robertash like this.
  16. Uglyversal

    Uglyversal Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney
    I'd say it is legal contracts, those pesky royalties deals. It took them ages until it became available -only recently- in Australia. I am surprised you didn't get it before us. In the meantime I've found deezer to be quite a good option. I might stay with Qobuz but it is not fully decided yet. We get taxed with most big international companies here, even when they have no local base so I am not sure that is your issue.
     
    david1111 likes this.
  17. TonyCzar

    TonyCzar Forum Resident

    Location:
    PhIladelphia, PA
    I just converted from a free 30-day Qobuz trial to a 1-year Sublime commitment ($249/year+sales tax, paid in advance).

    As someone who regularly buys hi-res content, and who almost always pulls the trigger at Qobuz because
    of price and ability to cherry-pick album tracks, being a Sublime subscriber really could have saved
    me some money over the past year. Right now, it knocks some $$ of the cost of buying the latest
    Joe Strummer on Dark Horse and Marianne Faithfull. (And we're expecting Joni Mitchell and the Ramones before the year is out, yes?)

    In terms of the software... yeah, a few problems. Tidal has worked out the whole online/offline thing
    beautifully. You download, go offline, and you're good to play the music offline for 30 days (at least).

    Qobuz, you have to play the offline content while online at least once to get the tracks
    into your device's Qobuz "cache", before you can actually play them offline and fully untethered. And there's no
    online/offline switch in the app itself. If your device is online, your Qobuz is, too. Same
    thing for an offline Android device.


    > Qobuz reckons there's only 12 genres in the world of music,
    > No personalised recommendations based on your tastes/listening habits,

    I've been streaming for years, and it's always been the case that no one service has EVERYTHING.

    But I pit Tidal and Qobuz against each other to let me build playlists out of random songs
    I've "favorited" at an online radio station since 2015, but never got around to buying.

    Neither service had 'em all. Which was not surprising.

    What was surprising was that neither service had more than 50% of the stuff on my wishlist.
    Disappointment all around.

    > You're better off with Tidal if you want a lossless streaming service,
    > don't get too hung up on hi-res streaming.

    Yes, but as a download buyer, Tidal IME is very expensive, and offers lossless at best (last time I checked),
    and Qobuz offers discounts as a membership perq.

    > Do you want a good experience or a bad one where 1% of the catalogue is available as hi-res?

    I offline all my streaming so that my listening is not subject to network issues.
    (A network interruptioo0n can be a show-stopper, not just an interrupter.) Which is
    why I fixated on the difference between how the two approach offlining content, which
    was an important thing to me way back when i bought my first Rhapsody Ibiza.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2021
  18. Hammer70

    Hammer70 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Toronto
    As someone who spent most of my life in Canada, I'm sorry that you can't subscribe to Qobuz and ALSO have to suffer with universal health care, no mass shootings several times each week and a political system that can't be easily gamed for minority rule. That's what we should be striving for. Yeah, damn pseudo-socialism.
     
    kevywevy and MGW like this.
  19. david1111

    david1111 Barba non facit philosophum

    Location:
    toronto, ontario
    Oh no ... here come the Canucks to ruin the thread ...
     
  20. Hammer70

    Hammer70 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Toronto
    Oh no, here are the wannabe Canuck alt-right members to proclaim their loyalty to a cause in another country.

    One thing that I deeply respect about the Americans that I now live amongst: for all the faults within their political system, they never pine for something else. They acknowledge them and move on. If the worst thing you have to deal with is not getting Qobuz and annoying Can-Con regulations from the CRTC, then maybe you should move to Alabama or Arkansas?

    Okay I’m done “ruining” the thread.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2021
  21. Radio

    Radio Forum Resident

    Location:
    Michigan
  22. TonyCzar

    TonyCzar Forum Resident

    Location:
    PhIladelphia, PA
    My annual renewal comes up in a couple of weeks, and I'm re-upping because I have been extremely satisfied with selection (not always wide, but frequently deep), quality, reliability, not to mention the offlining capability and the discounts on hi-res purchases.
     
    Lowrider75 and Radio like this.
  23. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian Thread Starter

    Maybe they know something about us that we don’t.
     
  24. Lowrider75

    Lowrider75 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    Yo Philly. I've been very pleased with Qobuz using a Node2i and Android. I listen mostly to classical and there are new albums added every day. A good amount of jazz, but not that wide a selection of rock. They may have every artist you can think of, but not much of their catalogue.
    Something I noticed regarding the rock genre, the amount of classic rock may be a bit light but the selection of UK new wave and punk is outstanding. There's also info and reviews posted with the albums. The Brit connection to Qobuz may have something to do with this.
     
    jonwoody, Khorn and TonyCzar like this.
  25. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    I trialed Qobuz, and fine in terms of sonics, but shallow in jazz depth, at least beyond the usual warhorses. If someone wants a streaming service for various population genres, fine. It's just not my thing.
    As to availability in Canada, I thought the way most of these deals were structured was that the labels made deals and were responsible to get the publisher(s) on board. We had some simplification of the licensing mechanisms here in the States-- not sure how much it has helped- but even conventional licensing would ordinarily work without "streamlining" the process.
    Beyond that I do not know.
     
    Khorn likes this.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine