Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Spotify Readies Premium Tier With Hi-Fi Audio and AI Features

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,505
37,794


Spotify users waiting to learn when the service's long-delayed high-quality premium audio service will materialize may finally have something to chew on. Bloomberg reports that the streaming service hopes to roll out a new "Music Pro" tier later this year.

General-Spotify-Feature.jpg

The company is said to be developing the new premium subscription plan that will cost up to $5.99 per month on top of existing plans, offering high-quality audio streaming, remixing capabilities, and exclusive concert ticket access, reports the outlet.

Pricing and timing have yet to be nailed down as Spotify works to secure necessary rights from major music companies. The additional fee is likely to vary by region, with lower prices planned for "developing markets," said the publication.

The new tier is said to include AI-powered features allowing subscribers to mix songs from different artists. Spotify is also exploring various concert ticket sales strategies such as pre-sale access and premium seating options through discussions with major promoters and ticket vendors.

The new tier comes as Spotify looks to diversify its revenue streams and target devoted music fans who regularly spend money on merchandise, concerts, and fan clubs, according to the report. The company apparently believes the enhanced tier could attract millions of subscribers, despite the higher price point.

Development of the additional tier has been in the works for several years, coming after recent price increases for existing subscriptions and the introduction of audiobook offerings. Spotify previously announced plans for a Hi-Fi tier in February 2021, but a launch never materialized, even as rivals Apple Music and Amazon Music Unlimited began offering high-quality audio streaming within their standard subscriptions.

Given the progress of its competitors, Spotify's paid-for "Music Pro" tier will need to be a more comprehensive offering that goes beyond just improved audio quality and some AI-produced playlists. What's actually offered remains to be seen.

Article Link: Spotify Readies Premium Tier With Hi-Fi Audio and AI Features
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2025/02/17/spotify-hi-fi-premium-tier-coming-this-year/
  • Haha
Reactions: H3LL5P4WN, KeithBN and iLuddite
Just as TIDAL integrated it into their normal plan.

I still believe they were ready to release it years ago and then Apple went ahead and stole their thunder by releasing Apple Music without charging extra for it and they were like "damn! Now we can't go ahead"

The only reason I am still on Spotify is Spotify Connect to control music from another device without stopping the music on the other device and because Tidal only integrates into Alexa in the US for some dumb reason
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peterrocks!, TechnoTiger3000, wbeasley and 1 other person
I have Apple Music and Spotify. I primarily use Apple Music myself as it's much higher quality. Apple Music Family is $10 a month for me through Verizon. I also have Spotify Family for Spotify Connect for my receiver and for my sister to be able to use it.

I just checked and it's $20 + tax a month, thanks for letting me know I need to look into canceling it.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: AirunJae, KeithBN, haydesigner and 3 others
Techwatcher said:
No it didn’t. Both Apple Music and Tidal now offer HiFi in the base tier, while Spotify delays release so they can find a way to convince people to pay for a feature that is now free on competitive platforms.
Click to expand...
I prefer Spotify UI and how the playlist shuffles and discovery of music. I am cancelling Apple Music as soon as it's available even for an upcharge.
 
  • Haha
  • Disagree
Reactions: H3LL5P4WN, JakeBarnes12, KeithBN and 1 other person
They feel their service is worth $18 a month.
I'd need a lot of convincing that it's better than AM.
 
1. Spotify needs to pay artists more, although their business in general is unsustainable and like most tech companies that scaled fast they relied on low interest rates and the consummate VC funding, see:
I’m not sure if the price increase will cover the deficit.

2. Given Spotify’s market penetration, they’d better include Atmos because it is finally being widely adopted with most new releases and no longer sucks. If they do it will be interesting comparing Apple Music vs. Spotify since Apple’s renderer does something on top of the dolby one. Mainly of interest to musicians and producers, but still.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley, wanha, ApplesAreSweet&Sour and 1 other person
I just use Spotify while I’m driving and then only because of family member has it and decided to get a family plan. If he ever cancels it, I’ll just switch to Apple Music or just play from my collection of music.

I just can’t imagine the hi-fi being good enough to satisfy audio files, and for the rest of us will never notice the difference
 
charlie1284 said:
Apple Music competition just got a lot of bigger. Only reason I have Apple Music is for Hi-Fi
Click to expand...
Only reason I’m trialing Tidal now is because they let me use it to stream music with better quality.

However Tidal is pretty buggy, and does not integrate well with an iPhone when using ”Connect”.

There is a clear difference in audio quality if using Airplay for Apple Music. When connecting my computer with spdif I’d say the quality is the same, or Apple Music is even better, thats just not usually an option for me.
 
MacRumors said:
even as rivals Apple Music and Amazon Music Unlimited began offering high-quality audio streaming within their standard subscriptions.
Click to expand...
Spotify Premium is already more expensive than Apple Music and now they want people to pay even more for Hi-Fi quality that comes standard elsewhere? That's definitely quite the, uh... bold business move. 🫢
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirunJae, KeithBN, haydesigner and 2 others
And here I am coming out the other end of this spectrum...I couldn't care less about FLAC or Hi-Res Lossless audio. I used to be one of the audiophiles touting the superiority of FLAC and above quality. It turns out, it really is just snake oil and placebo. I have spent countless hours A/B testing all kinds of music across various streaming services and my own FLAC collection, with all kinds of different headphones and speakers. What I can tell you without a doubt is this: almost every person cannot tell the difference between 256 AAC or 130 OPUS and FLAC or Hi-Res Lossless. All of this HiFi audio marketing is just that - marketing. The vast majority of people are listening to music over bluetooth either in wireless buds or in their car (neither of which can transmit FLAC or higher). Not to mention you wouldn't even hear the supposed differences while driving down the road in a car or walking around with buds in. Just put on regular quality and enjoy your music, and more importantly, enjoy using less data and taking us less storage if you are downloading. A song in FLAC is around 38 mb while an AAC or OPUS song is like 5 mb. The data savings is insane and you CANNOT tell the difference in audio quality, at all.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Wow
Reactions: pianophile, DEMinSoCAL, poematik13 and 20 others
this has been said for literal *years*

i probably wont spend on it as lossless already comes with apple music by default, but if Spotify brought back support for their API to DJ apps, i would happily buy into that tier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN
Frankied22 said:
And here I am coming out the other end of this spectrum...I couldn't care less about FLAC or Hi-Res Lossless audio. I used to be one of the audiophiles touting the superiority of FLAC and above quality. It turns out, it really is just snake oil and placebo. I have spent countless hours A/B testing all kinds of music across various streaming services and my own FLAC collection, with all kinds of different headphones and speakers. What I can tell you without a doubt is this: almost every person cannot tell the difference between 256 AAC or 130 OPUS and FLAC or Hi-Res Lossless. All of this HiFi audio marketing is just that - marketing. The vast majority of people are listening to music over bluetooth either in wireless buds or in their car (neither of which can transmit FLAC or higher). Not to mention you wouldn't even hear the supposed differences while driving down the road in a car or walking around with buds in. Just put on regular quality and enjoy your music, and more importantly, enjoy using less data and taking us less storage if you are downloading. A song in FLAC is around 38 mb while an AAC or OPUS song is like 5 mb. The data savings is insane and you CANNOT tell the difference in audio quality, at all.
Click to expand...

I don't know if snake oil or placebo, etc ...

But I do know that our hearing absolutely degrades as we age, and I'm definitely at the point where MP3/AAC files at 256+ are just fine for me

I do keep my entire library in ALAC just so I have the best quality source to always work off of though. That's what I listen to off my Mac, but I enjoy the same music downmixed to 256 on my Shuffles & Nanos and it never is an issue as I'm listening with Airpods anyways
 
  • Like
Reactions: brilliantthings, jjudson, haruhiko and 1 other person
We shouldn’t have to pay extra for this but if the new tier finally improves audio quality when streaming from Apple Watch then I’ll sign up for it, reluctantly.

I’m on the current premium tier and last time I checked, a year or so ago, audio quality from the Spotify Watch app to AirPods was horrendous. Unusable even. Does anyone know if this has been improved already? I haven’t heard anything about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back