Will it? Is a HomePod high enough quality to play HiFi quality music like very expensive speakers? Just because it can play music directly doesn't mean what comes out is HiFi quality.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Spotify Launching 'HiFi' Lossless Streaming Option Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am not claiming it’s going to revolutionise the industry but it’s a capable speaker and of course a vast increase in source quality can only be beneficial for the end user especially since these devices are hooked up to our home internet anyway.
I have used Spotify. It's the same hot mess as the rest of them. I am convinced the only reason people like them is because they are a trendy international brand. I see them pop up all over the place via these anti-consumer exclusive partnerships. Partnerships that ruin both hardware and software that would otherwise be great. Meanwhile, competing services are basically free and they provide the same quality music selections and their algorithm is just as good. The playlist argument makes no sense. I can set up playlists with the same music in all of them. Do you mean suggested music? That's a huge gripe for me. Spotify is always getting in my way trying to tell me I will like something else instead of just giving me what I already said I want.
Again, this is not correct. Pass through of an untouched audio stream isnt a thing on bluetooth. The Apple Music AAC lossy files are reencoded again to AAC for bluetooth playback, which further degrades quality, because reencoding lossy to lossy is a very bad idea.
And answering your first question, no. AAC is a lossy codec. Lossless files in the Apple ecosystem, would be trasmited using ALAC, apple own lossless codec.
Yes, that’s perfectly true, but if your primary concern is fidelity, you really are better off spending your $550 on a pair of high-end wired headphones. As an owner of a pair of AirPods Max, I’m very sorry to have to say that my $55 wired Status Audio CB-1s have noticeably better fidelity.
Also, note that Headphone Accommodations are not applied when the AirPods Max are connected wired, only via Bluetooth. Without the Vocal Range Headphone Accommodations, the default tuning of the AirPods Max is a bit muddy in the midrange. (And in any case, Headphone Accommodations don’t work with the Mac, only with iOS and tvOS devices.)
I love the noise cancellation of my AirPods Max. They're great for blocking out (or at least muffling) the infernal mowing and blowing of the so-called “gardeners” in my neighborhood, and they’re fabulous for completely masking my iMac’s fan noise when I’m playing a graphically-demanding game (although every single time I boot up into Windows via Boot Camp, I have to remove them as a Bluetooth device and then re-pair them before they’ll connect, and Windows 10 doesn’t recognize them as a valid USB device in wired mode—it’s almost as if Apple’s left hand doesn’t know what its right hand is doing), but if I had bought them expecting great audio fidelity, I’d have been sadly disappointed.
Last edited:
How can one check this?. I mean, I have a pair of Sony´s WH 1000 XM4, and both my Macs and my Iphone SE (2020), indicate that the codec being used is AAC, but how do you know that is doing pass through and not converting AAC to AAC (the source is Apple Music in this case)?.
It was my understanding that bluetooth pass through was not possible in any OS (not device) because the OS has to mix Siri, audio notifications and such into the stream, so the audio always get reencoded before playback.
Last edited:
Hopefully this finally pushes Apple to offer lossless ALAC in the iTunes store. That’s all I care about as I prefer to purchase music as opposed to streaming.
The above post deserves a LOT more attention than it has got to date.For everyone thinking they've got what it takes. Here's a test passed around the audiophile group.
Is your audio system really ready for lossless?
Do an ABX test in your browser, and see if you can tell the difference between lossless and lossy audioabx.digitalfeed.net
I strongly encourage anyone to take this test, no matter what your attitude to "HQ streaming" is. Note - this takes time and calls for some 30 minutes in a quiet environment with your listening gear.
I stumbled upon the same link from a Verge article and took the test. My setup was obviously an improvement over the usual Spotify streaming situation (in car via Airplay or using Apple headphones from the phone when walking), I used Sennheiser Momentum 2 closed headphones plugged directly into a Mac Pro headphones output. The computer is properly grounded so no AC noise. In AudioMidiSetup I configured the headphones output to 96kHz, 24-bit. Volume set to 50%. This by far exceeds my usual (and I admit, lousy) Spotify listening habits.
Well, it turns out I can not hear the difference between lossy and lossless samples. Here is the breakdown of the test:
The Killers 40% (p >= 0.020)
James Blake 40% (p >= 0.020)
Daft Punk 80% (p >= 0.020)
The Eagles 60% (p >= 0.020)
Dixie Chicks 60% (p >= 0.020)
So obviously, no Spotify Lossless for me, doesn't make any sense for my usage.
Spotify today announced plans to introduce a new "HiFi" premium tier later this year, which will provide higher-quality lossless audio. According to Spotify, the feature will offer CD-quality music that will let fans experience more depth and clarity in their favorite tracks.
Streaming music services like Tidal, Deezer, and Amazon Music have offered lossless audio options but to date, Spotify and Apple Music have not provided higher quality streaming options.
Spotify is Apple Music's main competitor, so with Spotify planning a HiFi music option, Apple could be planning to also offer higher quality streaming in an effort to remain competitive. A lossless audio tier would also pair well with Apple's high-end AirPods Max headphones that were released in late 2020.
There's no pricing information available at this time, but Amazon Music's lossless tier is priced at $14.99 per month ($12.99 for Prime subscribers), while Tidal charges $19.99 per month and Deezer charges $14.99 for its high fidelity plan. Spotify plans to launch HiFi in select markets later in the year, and it will be a premium tier add-on.
HiFi was introduced at Spotify's Stream On event, which can be watched in full on YouTube.
At the event, Spotify also said that it plans to expand to more than 80 new markets in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America, which allows the service to reach over 1 billion potential new customers. A full list of countries where Spotify will soon be available can be found on Spotify's website.
Other announcements included Spotify's new Barack Obama and Bruce Springsteen "Renegade" podcast, new interactive podcast features for creators like polls and Q&A tools, and new music promotion resources for artists.
Article Link: Spotify Launching 'HiFi' Lossless Streaming Option Later This Year
Are you being facetious? 320kps is lossy mp3 quality. Lossless CD quality (44.1/16 bit) is 1414 kps. People can debate over whether the ordinary listener with cheap desktop speakers or crappy headphones will actually be able to notice the difference. But at least now Spotify will be giving people a choice.
Not only does Apple have ALAC, for quite a while Apple has been getting hi resolution digital master files from the record labels. You may wonder why Apple asks for hi resolution source files for its "mastered for iTunes" music, while at the same time insisting that lossy mp3 quality streaming is good enough for consumers. Valid question. Mp3 quality may have made sense back when the iTunes store was first opened and high speed internet didn't exist. But it's pretty pathetic that, despite an exponential increase in internet speeds, Apple hasn't even bothered to offer music content in CD-quality (must less hi resolution audio). Apple has changed with the times when it comes to video content, offering movies in HD and now 4K HDR. It's high time they offer similar improvements with audio content.
Maybe that test is useful to some if they do not already know whether lossless is worth paying for or using.
I did that ABX test. it’s not useful at all to me. Just because the difference is not easily apparent to me using the samples *they* chose, does not mean there aren’t scenarios where I *can* tell the difference and might prefer lossless.
I’ll agree— for a lot of music, especially stuff recorded in studio, and recently, I may not readily be able to pick out a difference. But for older, live, analog recordings— lossy compression is less forgiving. Is it bad enough that I want to pay for lossless? That’s a different question and still subjective.
I’m in the boat that primarily looks forward to this in the hopes that Apple will step up with something similar. Not that I use Apple’s streaming service, but I do occasionally purchase music and also use iTunes Match, where much of my personal library is lossless. (I’m sure the fact that I’ve settled for Apple’s AAC versions of everything has been sufficient for me will support your argument against lossless. I still would prefer the option for at least some music, however.)
Perhaps the AirPods Max 2 headphones will feature a low power wifi chip allowing you to stream lossless music to them via Airplay 2.
Which was my point. If the studio mix sounds bad, the result will sound bad, regardless of whether it’s 44k 16bit or 98k 24-bit. These HiFi services only make sense if they’re simultaneously delivering HiFi quality masters. Just delivering an audio file in Hi Res won’t really improve the sound if it’s the same master they use for non Hi Res releases, since most people
in blind listening tests can’t really discern quality differences between high bitrate lossy formats, CD, and Hi Res (assuming same mix, same listening environment, etc.). Now, one advantage that you could get from Hi Res is maybe quad/surround. Imagine getting to listen to the original quad mix of Fly Like an Eagle via a streaming service and what independent artists could do with a mainstream service that supports quad or 5.1 surround.
I’ve used a $40k system and can’t tell the diff. What you’re hearing is different origins. It’s not like there’s an agenda. The test was made by an audiophile community not someone trying to win an argument.
Spotify currently is no-where near CD quality.
Here's a couple of absolutely terrible sounding tracks I found on Spotify which sound like they were re-encoded from a 256k MP3!
Over the last couple of years I've found hundreds that have been encoded badly many that were re-recordings from Vinyl (scratches and skips n' all) !
https://open.spotify.com/embed?uri=spotify:track:6IInmTzmNZHSWdzhIMDIKw
https://open.spotify.com/embed?uri=spotify:track:5gcFN7cZ4O1heEptmd3u2I
I had thought of switching to Tidal, but only about 50% of my playlists are available and I find Spotify far easier to go crate digging after you've used it for a while. Their discover algorithm is outstanding IMHO.
Cant wait for Spotify hi-fi even if it is "Only" actual CD quality.
Also, the mix of the music. I’ve been playing with some obsolete formats recently (MiniDisc and turntables), and I’m convinced there aren’t too many factors that affect sound quality. There’s the pickup mechanism (only relevant on analog), quality of manufacture of media (again, only relevant on analog, digital will play anything as long as it’s in spec), bandwidth (increased tape speed, disc speed, bitrate), build issues that adversely impact bandwidth (poor encoders in the digital space, low quality DC motors in tape, records), speaker quality, and the original mastering of the mix.
Actually, I’m somewhat convinced that the limitation in my own audio setups is mostly either the speakers I use or me. I have a HomePod, AirPods Pro, first gen AirPods, and the earphones that came with my MiniDisc player. I’m going to do some tests with a new record I bought, compare that to the same record on Apple Music, doing some tests with Hi-MD MiniDisc. I plan on doing an AB test with 1) record recorded to MiniDisc with a modern digital sampler connected optically to my MiniDisc player recording in PCM, with the same setup and sampler recording Apple Music, 2) Apple Music to PCM with the modern sampler and with the MiniDisc recorder’s 17 year old sampler, and 3) Apple Music using the built-in sampler to PCM, Hi-SP, and Hi-LP. If I had optical on my laptop, I’d test whether Sony’s SoundStage software introduces any issues, and I’d check speaker quality with some better speakers. My hypothesis is that, with the three tests, I might notice a difference on Hi-LP, but probably none of the others.
That’s completely unrelated to the audio quality of the streaming service and is an issue with the original audio submitted. Garbage in, garbage out. CD quality streaming won’t impact anything like that unless Spotify really makes a push for better input files (say, audiophile mastering from the masters).