[All Platforms][Music] HiFi Quality - Lossless Streaming 16bit 44.1khz

[timiambeing]

I've just started a trial of Qobuz - they offer the standard 320kbps as well as lossless FLAC streaming (and high res downloads if you purchase them) the sound quality is noticeably better and on classical it's just wonderful to get all that resolution through your hi-fi or headphones! The catalogue has a way to go to get to Spotify's level, but they are getting there. The iPad app isn't' too bad (the desktop app is in need of an upgrade but I hear they are putting all their efforts into mobile apps right now).

So - lossless streaming - if Qobuz can do it then so can Spotify, they must have the same source - and obviously if you are asking £20 a month then those record labels and distributors take enough notice to make the high res tracks available for streaming. What this all means is soon, very soon, we will get lossless streaming and closely followed by high res downloads - but if Spotify aren't careful it will be Apple who get there first with an audiophile premium offering, and when they do it will be a much harder market place to make money in!

** please don't lump this suggestion with the main one on lossless downloads, that's a different idea entirely guys!

[timiambeing]

I've just started a trial of Qobuz - they offer the standard 320kbps as well as lossless FLAC streaming (and high res downloads if you purchase them) the sound quality is noticeably better and on classical it's just wonderful to get all that resolution through your hi-fi or headphones! The catalogue has a way to go to get to Spotify's level, but they are getting there. The iPad app isn't' too bad (the desktop app is in need of an upgrade but I hear they are putting all their efforts into mobile apps right now).

[timiambeing]

So - lossless streaming - if Qobuz can do it then so can Spotify, they must have the same source - and obviously if you are asking £20 a month then those record labels and distributors take enough notice to make the high res tracks available for streaming. What this all means is soon, very soon, we will get lossless streaming and closely followed by high res downloads - but if Spotify aren't careful it will be Apple who get there first with an audiophile premium offering, and when they do it will be a much harder market place to make money in!

[rollerotr]

Where did the name "Supremium) come from?
Sometimes I wonder...if we all keep subscribing to Spotify, year after
year, hoping they will finally give us lossless...then what is their
incentive to upgrade?

[Bujakasha]

I was kind of disappointed regarding the last price raise since it was not combined with any benefits. I would recommend to give something in exchange. So if the plan is to charge extra cost for HiRes-quality in the future make at least CD-quality available for all users at no extra cost. This would be a fair offer for the significant higher price you charge now and would still give you the chance to charge extra cost for much bigger files in HiRes-quality.

[Samppa3]

I don't believe that Spotify will ever adopt lossless or hi-res quality to their service.

The answer is that they've been quiet and promised this for years, but nothing has happened.

The developers who used to work on this are telling insight stories on reddit and so..

Very disappointing way to develop app and service as market leader.

[rollerotr]

I tend to agree with Samppa3. Spotify, as yet, has no financial incentive to do so. It caters to users who are mostly concerned with an excellent UI and added services like audiobooks and podcasts, etc. And that includes US!! Otherwise we would blow off Spotify and stick to the many hi res services out there.

However, there will come a time when one or more of the available hi res services catches up, UI wise. Apple has hi res but sh*t access. And Amazon Unlimited has a terrible UI comparatively speaking. Tidal and Qobuz serve niche audiences, not a threat.

So, I continue to use Spotify on my low fi smart speakers, and Tidal Connect and Amazon on my main stereo, although I'm rethinking what MQA is doing to the music. I stream Apple Music to a premium Peachtree Audio Deep Blue Sky speaker via Airplay. I'm even thinking of going back to Qobuz! 

Amazon and Apple have the deep pockets to create that dream UI and access to it (Apple). So does Google. But evidently they are much more concerned with R&D for there vast product lines. All good news for Spotify. Bad news for those of us that would like to have one streaming service that does it all regardless of the price. 

[Samppa3]

At first it really looked promising as they acknowledged it and it was somehow being talked so it felt like possibility.

I thought maybe they would finally give proper and better quality as other services had passed them in that area, but unfornately no that's not the case with Spotify how they deal with this.

But now with the time they've taken being totally silent and the developers (that were laid off previously) that have been talking made me think maybe they are playing time.

If they somehow will bring lossless or hi-res to their service Im glad, but surely they've taken too long time by now.

Im so sick of thinking changing to other service as Spotify otherwise gives all I need. Now, just give us the users what we have the most requested ever on this forum.

[xenusbitch]

Plan

Free/Premium

Country

Device

(iPhone 8, Samsung Galaxy 9, Macbook Pro late 2016)

Operating System

(iOS 10, Android Oreo, Windows 10,etc.)

My Question or Issue

Hi. What, exactly, determins what sound quality i get on each of the 3 alternatives, low - normal and high, when using a laptop?

Over the years, test have been done by several external testers of the Premium sound quality, and it has showed, then, that the sound quality has not been what you have said, so, is it still like that, that one gets low quality to a large degree even with Premium?

When will Hifi quality come, the quality you have been talking about for years and years. A date please, otherwise an approximate date. If you do not know, say so.

[stephenmichaelbatty]

When are we getting Spotify hifi? We've been waiting years!!!

[habu77]

I have cancelled my Spotify subscription. I have been a Qobuz member for the last 2 years and decided to make it my prime music source. The albums I really miss on Qobuz I'm buying from the artists or second hand on discogs, convert to FLAC and play them from my ssd. This has been going on for too long. One big hyped promise 3 years ago and then nothing.

That said, if they decide to finally go hires I will be back in a heartbeat because no one can touch the UI Spotify has. Something I find very strange. Every other streaming service has developers. All they have to do is look at the Spotify UI and develop their own versions of it but absolutely everyone is lagging behind.

[mrhank3y]

Problem is, most people think they can’t tell the difference between 320kbps (Spotify “very high”) and 1,441kbps (CD quality - 16bit / 44khz). However, there is a significant difference in audio quality, but often its not immediately noticeable.

Some very clever engineers settled on the “Red Book” standard of 16bit 44khz back in the 80s, and they really knew what they were doing.

The lossy MP3 audio compression standard was a subsequent compromise, due to data storage and bandwidth for streaming. Sounds good enough initially - IE. For small inexpensive headphones, small speakers and most Bluetooth connections which are currently restricted to below CD quality.

However, as soon as you use half decent speakers (say above $100 each - and which generally aren’t portable), the difference with lossless (Red Book CD quality) is staggering. Add a decent DAC (CD players sound good even with a basic internal DAC) and you’re off to the races! Use Spotify in that scenario and you really begin to miss out. Even with good Bluetooth headphones.

Spotify 320kbs will also sound better through this setup or a good car audio system than portable/small speakers or cheap headphones, but it becomes the weakest link. This is where Spotify ruins music if you want to hear it properly. However, at a noisy party, few would even notice. So it’s horses for courses.

For me, Spotify is ok until I want to actually listen to music. Then I can’t stand it because it sounds awful in comparison to lossless playback.

MQA is also a lossy format which is why it annoys people because it claims to be as good as lossless. It does not sound as good as CD. Sometimes not even close. It definitely messes with the music. But it is MUCH better than Spotify 320kbps and has the advantage of being a useful compromise. Particularly if streaming music in a car and relying on your data signal. MQA or Spotify’s lossy format is very useful here.

FLAC/ALAC 16bit/44khz 1,441kbps CD quality…

This “lossless” format is the holy grail for anyone streaming to a “hifi” setup or decent headphones/speakers. This is what Spotify is missing. Most people will notice their music will sound better.

The other reason (if you still think you can’t tell the difference) is that listening to “Lossless” quality is not fatiguing. The human ear and brain has evolved to “fill in gaps” in audio (to deal with complicated and noisy environments with audio interference - think waterfalls or similar). This works very well but it is fatiguing because your brain has to subconsciously work very hard. Your brain can make a lossy audio stream sound much better than it does, particularly if you are listening to something familiar. Flick between 320kbps and CD quality and you’ll hardly notice. However, If you listen to music for any length of time (think a whole Album or more) you will find that you enjoy the music MUCH more in lossless quality and that it is more relaxing. Those 1980s engineers figured this out. They knew what they were doing. They didn’t compromise below 16bit 44kHz. They could have.

Hi-Res 24bit 96kHz or 192kHz or 4608kbps+…

This is where I can no longer tell the difference. Personally. Some can. I can VERY occasionally notice on a good hifi system from a good studio master recording. The “Red Book” engineers knew this too. Hence why they settled on the 16/44 standard. It’s plenty good enough.

Spotify 320kbps robs us of good quality music. Hence why I was frustrated waiting for Spotify to “do the right thing”. But the right thing for music quality clearly isn’t the right thing for their business model.

Apple Music Lossless
This is also infuriating. Lossless on small HomePod mini speakers, laptop speakers, Bluetooth headphones etc. is almost pointless. It is difficult to stream Apple Music Losslessly to a HiFi system and AirPlay mostly requires an Apple iOS Device to remain on and tethered. Apple doesn’t support 3rd party HiFi equipment or streamers or Audiophile music software like Roon. However, I ditched Spotify in favour of Apple Music a while ago and I don’t regret it. Apple Music is improving all the time. The app is brilliant (better now in my opinion). You can enjoy lossless once setup properly with the right equipment. Plus Apple Music has many features I like that Spotify doesn’t have (including a classical music app and a really good Dolby Atmos solution for Apple AirPods - yes this is also lossy!! But often sounds fantastic on AirPods!!). 

Spotify Connect is better than AirPlay in this regard, because it allows the connected audio device (or streamer) to handle the stream meaning your device is free from that task but their App can be used to manage playback.

If only Spotify would go lossless.

[rollerotr]

I am about ready to cancel Spotify and Apple Music (can't stream hi res or
lossless). I'll keep Amazon Unlimited and Tidal for now.
If Spotify decides to offer lossless, I will cancel all my other services
because they have the superior platform.