[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!

[bzero]

Why is nearly everybody in this thread discussing about the codec? Please stop this! Spotify will know best what will fit into the Spotify offer. Lossless is lossless: it means: there is no compression at all from the original source. I don't care what codec it will be as long as it plays in Spotify... @meahtenoha: please just ignore the discussions about the codec, this is NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL IDEA, the original idea just wants lossless, so please go ahead with whatever you think is best for lossless.

[RicktheRecorder]

The discussion is about the existing Codec, not about the lossless Codec.

[amaropolska86]

Ermmm.... the discussion is literally called: HiFi Quality - Lossless
Streaming 🙂

[bzero]

Even worse, there are other places to discuss the current implementation of Spotify than using IDEAS for that.

This reduces the potential of idea discussion.

[Sebasty]

@hans-jürgenI'm on Windows 7... Seeing it's possible to rip CD's into ALAC format in WMP on Win10, I guess Windows 10 makes it possible to listen to ALAC files in Spotify. And that's obviously a local file-related topic 😉

The little problem with lossless is how many users are actually going to gain from it. I have a friend with pretty ok audio interface and headphones and she plays mp3 files. I don't know anyone (personally) who's as serious as me about lossless, or even just stable audio quality.

I see that there are plety of users (at least in this thread) really into lossless audio, but does that number grow?
Could look into the sales numbers of various audiophile / studio grade audio interfaces and speakers/monitors, but.. I don't know.

While I am able to hear the difference between lossy and lossless under certain circumstances, I don't really find lossless that important to me that I want to hear everything in .wav or something, so I am generally quite ok with Spotify quality. I do value source audio enough that when I buy music, I make sure I obtain lossless files.
(I'm slightly afraid that if Spotify comes out with lossless, that would halt me from buying music. 😅)

To make Spotify audio playback as good as possible, make sure volume normalization is turned off. Clair de Lune and the Magic Key (by One-T) will be in opposite sides loudness-wise, but the audio is unaltered.

Lossless would be so nice, still!

Edit: I forgot the generation(s) of people listening to CD's and vinyls. They would definitely look into Spotify if there is lossless.

[mmesutgunaydin]

I think, no more talking... it's too late spotify, really too late...

source: https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/7/18168482/tidal-master-quality-recordings-android-users-mqa-hifi-pr...

[Blueshound24]

---

@mmesutgunaydin wrote:

I think, no more talking... it's too late spotify, really too late...

source: https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/7/18168482/tidal-master-quality-recordings-android-users-mqa-hifi-pr...

Yep, I saw that earlier today! I just don't understand what took me so long getting back to Tidal again. Really loving streaming music again. The music is so much more alive, exciting and real and MQA is just icing on the cake! 

---

[Billl]

• I can’t remember how long ago I first posted re this, but I’ve now been paying for a Tidal account for myself for a year in addition to the Spotify account for my kids.  I’m getting near to the point of upgrading to a Tidal Family account and cancelling Spotify.  I agree with what most people say, ie that Spotify is superior to Tidal in every aspect except for sound quality, but that’s becoming too big a deficit to continue to tolerate.  I also fail to understand how the leading streaming company could be so poor at communicating why it cannot offer what several of its competitors can.  The bland, happy-clappy responses to requests for information on here are more than a tad patronising.

[Blueshound24]

---

@Billl wrote:

•  I also fail to understand how the leading streaming company could be so poor at communicating why it cannot offer what several of its competitors can. The bland, happy-clappy responses to requests for information on here are more than a tad patronising.

AGREED! Just like that canned patronizing, "happy" response I recieved from @SpotifyCares on Twitter. Super annoying! 

---

[ajmarini]

Maybe Spotify sees all the hardware it's availalbe on, mostly Lo-Fi systems, and thinks Hi-Fi is irrelevant.

But, and this is an important thing for them to understand, as tech progresses many of these Lo-Fi outlets can become Hi-Fi. It doesn't cost much to get a decent system that plays music properly. Or, maybe they are staffed by the folks that believe "you can't hear the difference".

Here's what I know about the difference. I tire of listening to Spotify on my Hi-Fi, so I don't do it. However, I find myself suffering through Tidal to find what I want to listen to, and then I end up surfing Tidal and happily listening to music for hours on end. I often lose track of time. Hey Spotify, his is probably the most popular thread on your community boards. How about doing something about it????