Spotify is officially testing Hi-fi audio. Apple, you have to step up on this.

Discussion in 'Apple Music, Apple Pay, iCloud, Apple Services' started by B/D, Mar 1, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. QzzB macrumors regular

    QzzB

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2015
    Location:
    London
    #2
    Can anyone really notice the quality difference? I tried Tidal when it launched, and except for using up more space on my phone, needed a much faster 4G connection with more buffering, I didn't notice any difference
     
  2. v0lume4 macrumors 65816

    v0lume4

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    #3
    Are all songs in Spotify's library offered in lossless?

    If so, I would LOVE to try this out with my Audio Technica ATH-M50's. I haven't gotten the in-opp offer yet! Anxiously awaiting! :D

    edit -- I have an Android and a lot of the new Spotify features are absent from the Android app. Hope this isn't the same way.
     
  3. bbrks macrumors 65816

    bbrks

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2013
    #4
    On your mobile device, what ever it is, you will hardly notice the difference.
     
  4. B/D thread starter macrumors member

    B/D

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2016
    #5


    Spotify lossless is not yet available to the public. Spotify is sending this to a few people, however, I suppose to see how much they will be willing to pay, and if they are interested in lossless audio (they are, there is a 62 page thread on Spotify Community requesting this)
     
  5. Rigby macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2008
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    #6
    I'd suggest for anyone who is interested in this to first do a blind listening test, e.g. using the Foobar ABX Comparator or this web site:

    http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html

    Start with a moderate codec setting such as 160kbps MP3. You'll probably be surprised by the result.
     
  6. tonyr6 macrumors 65816

    tonyr6

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Location:
    Brooklyn NY
    #7
    AAC sound's amazing MP3 sounds like mud. If AM would go to 320kbps AAC you won't even be able to tell the difference.
     
  7. casperes1996 macrumors 65816

    casperes1996

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Location:
    Horsens, Denmark
    #8
    Keyword there for me is "CD quality". Now what that means is that it's lossless 44.1KHz 16-bit. Obviously, objectively speaking, it'll be closer to it's original form when it's less compressed (not talking about what we as humans can perceive - just what is technically measurable). That said, if we're going this route, might as well go 24-bit 192KHz, right? Even if you compress that at a decent bitrate, it'll be measurably more accurate than the lossless "CD quality"
     
  8. boast macrumors 65816

    boast

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Location:
    Phoenix
    #9
    Apple users don't need 4k or "Hi-Fi" audio...
     
  9. dannys1 macrumors 68020

    dannys1

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #10
    Nope they can't - genuinely. Every single scientific test with equipment up to a million pounds worth of value has shown no one can do anything better than blind guessing.

    Of course audiophiles will tell you they can hear depth, width, detail, heights, a soundstage that is incredible. But they're mostly bonkers and delusional.
    --- Post Merged, Mar 2, 2017 ---
    No, because you'll find about 1% of all music has even been bothered to be recorded and mixed at this range, it's a complete waste of resources. 99% of the masters Spotify and Apple will have been given will be 44khz - this IS the lossless original.
     
  10. B/D thread starter macrumors member

    B/D

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2016
    #11
    Thing is, CD it´s been around for a long time before compressed audio formats came around. So people ´ve been incapable of appreciate that level of quality for the most part of the last 30 years? CD audio specs are overkill?
    --- Post Merged, Mar 2, 2017 ---
    You can´t also tell between a Netflix 1080p stream and a Blu-Ray Disc? I think you can, particularly with banding issues.
     
  11. M. Gustave macrumors 68000

    M. Gustave

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Location:
    Grand Budapest Hotel
    #12
    Sorry to say Spotify is desperate to stop the bleeding. They'll throw anything against the wall and hope it sticks. And an audiophool and his money are easily parted.
     
  12. B/D thread starter macrumors member

    B/D

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2016
    #13
    Actually, Apple have quite a few of 24/192 masters, (or lower, but higher than 16/44), as part of their Mastered for iTunes initiative, I think.

    I could be wrong.
    --- Post Merged, Mar 2, 2017 ---
    More than commercial movement, I think this is a strategic and public image one . It is obvious that most people will not be interested, but it will stops critics that say their music is compressed, even if they are only criticism without weight.

    It is the death sentence of Tidal, the only global service of uncompressed music that is usually news every X months for possible purchase by Apple.

    And most important of all, it is an added and optional service. It does not harm any customer and offers the way to pay more for the music in Streaming. Even if it sounds crazy, there are people who would pay more for a service that does not make think that they are receiving less than when buying physical CD , even if it's a purely psychological issue.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page