Nice! I was considering adding a Tidal subscription since I recently purchased a Hifi setup but now I'll wait and see if this manifests.
I applaud Apple for streaming lossless, but it isn't going to come close to Qobuz's 24/96 (and higher). I'm sticking with Qobuz.If it will be lossless I am all in. If not I’ll stay with Qobuz.
WTF is happening in the world when folk are now starting to reference CD Quality as Audiophile, do we need any additional kit to play CD quality files, I mean c'mon seriously?
For folk that have bought into this 256kbs AAC is enough, remember back to when iTunes launched & we were told 128kbs AAC was enough, until it seemingly wasn't.
CD quality is not audiophile in the strictest meaning of the word, it's just as things should sound.
Just play the Foo Fighters new album on iTunes & tell me it sounds ok, just about right, it sounds god awful, as does any other kind of music on there.
256kps is a convenience only.
IIRC, I remember someone saying that the music source files that Apple holds are lossless anyway, so storage issues should face any additional cost.
100%
It's unbelievable that somehow being able to discern a difference between 128/256kbps and a CD means you have some type of magical ears or audio equipment. I guess those guys citing their studies and so-called science will insist on not getting a free upgrade to lossless...
Thank you, I appreciate this explicit reference to it. I often forget to bookmark things like this.Yup. Archimago’s blind test comparing 320 MP3 to lossless found only a small number who showed any consistent preference, and most of those who did actually preferred the MP3. These were almost all self-proclaimed audiophiles with high end equipment. It just goes to illustrate that we’re past needing to worry about bitrates and codecs. Far more important are the transducers (headphones and speakers), room treatments, and especially the quality of the mixing and mastering in the original recording.
lol dude, using 128kbps and 256kbps interchangeably as though the discrepancy in bit rate is a linear function that outputs musical hedons - such that lossless is some Turkish Delight **** - entirely misses the point.100%
It's unbelievable that somehow being able to discern a difference between 128/256kbps and a CD means you have some type of magical ears or audio equipment. I guess those guys citing their studies and so-called science will insist on not getting a free upgrade to lossless...
Exactly. Man I can discern 128 and 256 all the time, srs - whenever I **** around with my Casting and Deezer I notice it ****s up the quality on bluetooth later/ the next time I listen, and usually takes me two songs tops of even modest volume to realize the quality was shafted. Or when doing iOS restores etcBeing able to discern a difference between 128 and 256 on good equipment doesn't mean you have magical ears, that's possible even for "normal" ears. Discern a difference between 256 and lossless? Yeah, rest assured you would fail in a real blind test. The "so called science" is your "hifi" placebo imagination – and I am telling this as a guy who owns a so called audiophile stereo equipment and always tries to achieve perfect sound.
That said, if the AM hifi upgrade is free, I take it, or course. Surely won't pay five or even ten dollars more for it though.
Oh man the 24-bit stuff kills me lol. Really there's something about that one part of this entire machination that is just over the topWouldn't go that far with the "96kbps mp3" – people really believing that their Homepods and AirPod Max Pros sound better with lossless vs 256 AAC or 24-bit instead of 16-bit are real audiophile placebo victims though.
Those of us outside the USA do not receive such stellar service, unfortunately.You should try bringing them in! I had my original airpods replaced even though they were out of warranty
The best you can get from the iTunes music store today is 256kbit/s AAC encoded with a high-quality encoder from 192 kHz/ 24 bit sources. When I started ripping my music, I tried various quality levels and I couldn’t hear a difference between 160 kbit and 192kbit mp3 using good headphones.is HiFi something only audiophiles will be able to appreciate or is this something that everyone can easily notice?
Apple doesn’t have to come up with their own format. ALAC has been there for many years.Aptx is Qualcomm, LDAC is Sony, Apple would probably come up with their own format before paying license fees to these. So forget about those.
Go listen to the Foo Fighters then tell me there's no difference, I'll grant you for some music genres, the difference can appear slight on others it's huge, that said, I can normally tell the difference between Hi-Res & CD, YMMV.Being able to discern a difference between 128 and 256 on good equipment doesn't mean you have magical ears, that's possible even for "normal" ears. Discern a difference between 256 and lossless? Yeah, rest assured you would fail in a real blind test. The "so called science" is your "hifi" placebo imagination – and I am telling this as a guy who owns a so called audiophile stereo equipment and always tries to achieve perfect sound.
That said, if the AM hifi upgrade is free, I take it, or course. Surely won't pay five or even ten dollars more for it though.
Two different things.Apple doesn’t have to come up with their own format. ALAC has been there for many years.
Maybe it will only work with "compatible AirPods"...
No, I called it. Read up on this, they are actually doing this. Just like Audio Sharing and Spacial Audio.A service for a non mainstream audience, from Apple? Unlikely.