i use spotify on different phones, my tablet, my laptop and my chromebook. Never had to log out of any of them to be able to use it
My thing with Spotify is that my internet connections, over the years, have always been and still are, too slow for anything higher than a YouTube setting on 360. (I'm with Spotify since the beginning of it's appearance in Europe, I was on the waiting list etc.) I'm not going to pay for a service I can't receive. Otherwise I don't have any bad word about Spotify. From the point of a free user I do think that criticism on Spotify would be a bit hypocritical. (I'll keep that for myself and live with it). For those who will be able to get hi-fi streaming, enjoy. I'll be a tiny, tiny bit jealous but at the same time pleased for those who will enjoy this.
Tried the test, got fed up listening to the same few seconds of the Killers over and over, gave up. However, I then started wondering whether the headphone output of my 2010 MacBook Air was even capable of delivering high-res audio from a lossless source. Does anyone know?
I've never streamed anything but this can only be a good thing. The more good quality audio available the better.
I’m not sure about your laptop’s capabilities, but I don’t believe any of those test samples were hi-res. They are just lossless vs lossy. There far too many variables at work than just bit rate. What didn’t get mentioned is that if you don’t use wired headphones, they’re probably won’t be any difference at all. Since most people are using Bluetooth headphones and speakers these days, it won’t make any difference. Apple AirPods, for example, only stream at a max 256AAC, no matter what the source is.
If I try to play a song and Spotify is showing that I am already listening on another device, a pop up appears asking if I want to play on the current device and I press yes. Not much hassle there.
2L High Resolution Music .:. free TEST BENCH The music may not be to your taste, but if you want to compare different sample rates / bit depths of some well recorded music, there's a variety of files you can play with. Maybe even make your own Ogg Vorbis 320K files and compare them to lossless which is what the old vs. new Spotify offerings will be. I haven't been brave enough to do a proper comparison yet, but have been able to use the files to confirm that my new DAC can support some stupidly high resolution files.
I shouldn't have used hi-res in that context. What I meant was can a MacBook Air's headphone socket deliver audio at the same quality as the source, when the source is a web site in Safari? Anyway, my gut feeling is that the quality of the stream will have some impact on how much you enjoy music, but it may not be as simple as saying 'that one sounds the same/better/worse than the other' but more a case of 'that one makes me tap my feet/nod my head more than the other'. And enjoyment can't easily be measured when all you hear is a few seconds of music.
A lot of Apple devices use an internal DAC capable of 48K / 24 bit decoding which is probably the upper limit of the headphone output's capabilities. Any file of higher resolution will be downsampled by MacOS. Even if you use an external DAC or soundcard with greater capabilities, you may have to use the Audio MIDI setup menu to set the correct sampling rate and bit depth. Some music playback software [Decibel, Audivarna, Amarra] will do this automatically so that music goes to an external DAC at its native sample rate and bit depth.
Spotify going "CD quality" is the same as when we started seeing CDs 30 years ago with a sticker that said "remastered" - just another way to squeeze a few more $$$ from the majority of users who don't know a thing about audio but will be happy to feel they're getting quality.
While I dont really understand why the switch *needs* a price hike, do you think it wilk be an improvement in sound quality? I believe that there is a threshold of when "improvements" are heard and what the human ear is capable of. However, is there a difference between 320kbps and 1411kbps sound quality to you?
I do not have an "i" anything. I have android phone. But I NEVER listen to music on my phone. WTF? If listening with my phone and buds is what I would do, hirez or even CD quality would be moot. I do not even own headphones of any kind.
I won't be getting. I've been trying for years to tell the difference between 128k mp3s and lossless FLAC files and actually can't do it. I thought that I could see a massive difference with Spotify but it turns out that it's just the way their software automatically applies EQ so it sounds better on cheap phones and presumably those homepod style speakers. Once I downloaded a separate equaliser for my PC and started tweaking it, again, I could tell no difference between Spotify streams and mp3s at a range of bitrates. I'm not saying that people/audiophiles are wrong here, but I think hearing must be one of those things where some people can discern certain types and frequencies of sounds and others can't. I'm certain I can't and whilst I like to buy CDs and CD quality sound so I'm sure I'm not missing any quality in the long term (maybe I'll upgrade my system in the future and it will make a difference?) I won't be paying spotify more money for something I can't personally hear!
Well, everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but a lossless source (even Hi Res) file or stream, via a phone connected to me of the many portable DACs driving one of the many sets of quality headphones is a pretty nice musical experience, which is why Spotify offering better sound quality is good news for those us who like that sort of thing. Contribute to a thread that is relevant to you instead maybe?
SHtv: “Streaming sucks, it’s in lossy mp3 quality. I’ll stick with my CDs!” (Spotify raises their quality to CD quality) SHtv: “CD quality sucks too!”
I can definitely hear it. It comes out especially in cymbals and audience noise and such (But not exclusively those frequencies). But I'm an Apple Music user much of the time, and it doesn't really bother me. Sometimes I'll hear something and go "oh yeah, that's the AAC compression" (Apple's version of mp3...I think Spotify uses Ogg Vorbis?) but like, it's the music that matters, and it sounds fine for my everyday listening through my DAC and headphone rig. So I'll happily pay for the upgrade to 1411kbps whenever Apple finally joins the party there, but it's an incremental, not substantial improvement. Above redbook, I honestly don't think there's a perceptible difference unless you have the most sensitive, unharmed ears ever (and have never gone to a rock concert or played in a band ). But no one should think of this as a mass-market option...it's a niche add-on, which is totally fine.
I think you need much better gear than a lot of people are willing to admit to hear the difference, but if you've got the gear, you'll know. Streaming from Tidal and switching from the 320kpbs setting to hi-res, through my Shure SE535's and Dragonfly Red (my ~$650 office setup), I can either barely hear the difference or not hear the difference at all depending on the recording. But through the digital front end and main stereo I've been slowly upgrading for over a decade now (~$ many thousands, over ten at this point, I try not to think about it) the difference between 320 mp3 and CD or hi-res is very obvious across a broad range of music. I can tell what I'm listening to in just a few seconds. My girlfriend, who is not an audiophile and thinks I'm ridiculous, can also consistently hear it. It's a loss of extension and slower transients. The bass doesn't go as low, and the high's don't go as high. The slower transients are especially obvious with percussion, which causes cymbal hits and anything else that's happening rapidly and repeatedly in a song to blur together. It's the difference between "sh-sh-sh-sh-" and "shhhhhhhhh". So yes, for the vast majority of people, the switch from 320 to lossless will not be perceptible, or barely perceptible. This is much bigger news for those of us that have already built a great stereo and are unsatisfied with the current choices for lossless streaming. For me though, they'll need to add a decent hi-res library before I leave Tidal and it's awful interface and barebones feature set behind. Unlike the difference between mp3 and CD, the difference between hi-res and CD is pretty subtle, even on my main stereo. But what can I say. The sugar pills are sweet and please me.
The way my friends will know that I have been kidnapped and am in grave danger will be when I tweet "Guess what everyone, I've just signed up for Spotify". That'll be when everyone goes "OK, where's octy and what have you done with her???" Fornicate that company.
Spotify doesn't do that because through Spotify Connect you can remote control the other client if you want, instead of always pulling playback to your device.