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 Still Intends to Launch Delayed HiFi Lossless Plan, Just Don't Ask When
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
really worth it. from what I noticed, Apple Music has more in the library. Many songs are missing on Spotify
There is zero chance you can tell the difference between 16/44 lossless and 24/96 or 24/192 lossless (yet alone differences between HiFi lossless formats). Like you said, it really could only be an error on the mastering - 24 or 32 bit depth is useful when producing music, not listening to it.
In fact, ultrasonics can actually degrade music quality by introducing artifacts that propagate into audible frequencies. Despite this, I do like that HiFi audio from music streamers is much more common nowadays - but I'm coming from an archivist viewpoint.
If 16/44.1 lossless versus 24/44.1, 24/48, 24/96 or 24/192 lossless was the question, that would be an interesting, and different, conversation.
The fact is that Spotify doesn't even offer CD quality (16/44.1) lossless today while their competitors, like Apple, Amazon, Tidal and Qoboz, have moved beyond them in the file quality they offer.
Can people discern the difference between Spotify's lossy music files and those of their competitors? I sure can. And, yes, I used Spotify's "very high" quality setting. That's why I left them for Qobuz.
Here's a What Hi Fi? review of Spotify from last fall.
It's generally positive, but points out the sound quality problem.
"Since as far back as 2017, there have been rumours of Spotify getting a lossless music option called Spotify HiFi, but, alas, it has been extremely slow to materialise. Finally, at the start of 2021, Spotify promised to launch Spotify HiFi “beginning later this year”, but that self-imposed deadline came and went without any fanfare. A year after the announcement, in early 2022, Spotify finally responded to the endless queries on its Spotify Community Forum with this statement: “We know that HiFi quality audio is important to you. We feel the same, and we’re excited to deliver a Spotify HiFi experience to Premium users in the future. But we don’t have timing details to share yet. We will, of course, update you here when we can.” So, frustratingly, we’ll all have to be a bit more patient."
"Better sound quality remains the most logical next step for Spotify. The rest of the competition has already gotten its act together with Apple Music, Amazon Music HD, Tidal, Qobuz and Deezer, all offering music in lossless CD-quality (and hi-res in all cases but Deezer) – and some for the same price as Spotify’s standard tier!"
The ball's in Spotify's court, and it's been there for quite awhile.
The fact is that Spotify doesn't even offer CD quality (16/44.1) lossless today while their competitors, like Apple, Amazon, Tidal and Qoboz, have moved beyond them in the file quality they offer.
Can people discern the difference between Spotify's lossy music files and those of their competitors? I sure can. And, yes, I used Spotify's "very high" quality setting. That's why I left them for Qobuz.
Here's a What Hi Fi? review of Spotify from last fall.
It's generally positive, but points out the sound quality problem.
"Since as far back as 2017, there have been rumours of Spotify getting a lossless music option called Spotify HiFi, but, alas, it has been extremely slow to materialise. Finally, at the start of 2021, Spotify promised to launch Spotify HiFi “beginning later this year”, but that self-imposed deadline came and went without any fanfare. A year after the announcement, in early 2022, Spotify finally responded to the endless queries on its Spotify Community Forum with this statement: “We know that HiFi quality audio is important to you. We feel the same, and we’re excited to deliver a Spotify HiFi experience to Premium users in the future. But we don’t have timing details to share yet. We will, of course, update you here when we can.” So, frustratingly, we’ll all have to be a bit more patient."
"Better sound quality remains the most logical next step for Spotify. The rest of the competition has already gotten its act together with Apple Music, Amazon Music HD, Tidal, Qobuz and Deezer, all offering music in lossless CD-quality (and hi-res in all cases but Deezer) – and some for the same price as Spotify’s standard tier!"
The ball's in Spotify's court, and it's been there for quite awhile.
You just generalized the common sense out of something we both agreed upon 🤣
Believe it or not, some things actually are technical issues - it's why we can't have lightweight, all day AR glasses today.
is lossy only air play. not air play 2. see a lot of threads in this site. Music straming via ACC.
I think Spotify still have an opening to introduce it at a higher price tier: Apple Music and others have raised their subscription prices more-or-less in line with inflation in the last couple of years; Spotify has not raised their prices in at least a decade. This means the money Spotify can pay to labels and publishers (and hence to musicians and songwriters) has been devalued over the years, leading to complaints from said entities that they need to raise their prices. It is time for Spotify to also raise their prices, and doing it first on a higher lossless tier (whether or not it initially includes spatial audio) would make sense; it could even be the same price that Apple is charging for their base tier. Then some time later, in another year or two, they could increase the base price to that higher price (again, in line with inflation).
Meanwhile, as they dither, fans don't get to hear lossless music on Spotify and musicians and songwriters are getting underpaid.
Meanwhile, as they dither, fans don't get to hear lossless music on Spotify and musicians and songwriters are getting underpaid.
That is a publication that exists to sell audio hardware and the writers are dependent on audio advertising revenue for their living.If 16/44.1 lossless versus 24/44.1, 24/48, 24/96 or 24/192 lossless was the question, that would be an interesting, and different, conversation.
The fact is that Spotify doesn't even offer CD quality (16/44.1) lossless today while their competitors, like Apple, Amazon, Tidal and Qoboz, have moved beyond them in the file quality they offer.
Can people discern the difference between Spotify's lossy music files and those of their competitors? I sure can. And, yes, I used Spotify's "very high" quality setting. That's why I left them for Qobuz.
Here's a What Hi Fi? review of Spotify from last fall.
It's generally positive, but points out the sound quality problem.
"Since as far back as 2017, there have been rumours of Spotify getting a lossless music option called Spotify HiFi, but, alas, it has been extremely slow to materialise. Finally, at the start of 2021, Spotify promised to launch Spotify HiFi “beginning later this year”, but that self-imposed deadline came and went without any fanfare. A year after the announcement, in early 2022, Spotify finally responded to the endless queries on its Spotify Community Forum with this statement: “We know that HiFi quality audio is important to you. We feel the same, and we’re excited to deliver a Spotify HiFi experience to Premium users in the future. But we don’t have timing details to share yet. We will, of course, update you here when we can.” So, frustratingly, we’ll all have to be a bit more patient."
"Better sound quality remains the most logical next step for Spotify. The rest of the competition has already gotten its act together with Apple Music, Amazon Music HD, Tidal, Qobuz and Deezer, all offering music in lossless CD-quality (and hi-res in all cases but Deezer) – and some for the same price as Spotify’s standard tier!"
The ball's in Spotify's court, and it's been there for quite awhile.
Audio transmission is a solved problem from a technical perspective. The issue with that is that it doesn’t stimulate sales.
Audio outside the scientific/engineering community is a snake oil morass.
I dislike Spotify for buying up podcasts and locking them behind their app.
I already had both Wi-Fi and cellular set to maximum quality.
I guess Spotify are still trying to work out how they can charge a chunk extra per month for something Apple bundles as part of your standard subscription cost. Apple's move certainly caught Spotify with their pants down.
Hasn't made anybody any more interested in Apple Music has it?
100 million more people paying for Spotify and their service isn't even available in China.
Music now has over 616 million paying streaming subscribers globally - Music Business Worldwide
Research firm estimates that Tencent Music Entertainment (TME) overtook Amazon Music to become the third largest DSP globally at the end of 2021…
www.musicbusinessworldwide.com
Doesn't matter. Those of us that use Apple Music get a great addition included with our subscription.
Not particularly interested in what Spotify are doing. The last I heard they were ruining their apps with stuff no one was asking for & denying them the things they promised would be available years ago.
Apple said they were targeting 100 million subscribers when they launched Apple Music, eight years on and they still haven't got there. Spotify only had 28 million Premium subscribers at the time too.
Shows the power of a great product as opposed to 'me too' effort with an Apple logo. Tim Cook should take note.
Some absolutely fantastic Macrumors posts from 2015 when Apple Music launched, including these bangers ..
@dumastudetto It appears Apple announced a bunch of 'me too' stuff that brought nothing new to the table
@dumastudetto It appears Apple announced a bunch of 'me too' stuff that brought nothing new to the table
Last edited:
@sorgo not too late to cancel that Apple Music subscription. Here's a nice playlist from the worlds favourite streaming service
Thank you so much! But I canceled Spotify long ago and personally prefer Apple Music by quite a long shot. I especially love that Apple Music supports lossless streaming free-of-(additional)-charge and pays out approximately twice as much to artists and/or labels.@sorgo not too late to cancel that Apple Music subscription. Here's a nice playlist from the worlds favourite streaming service
The Spotify music-discovery algorithm is nice, though
Thank you so much! But I canceled Spotify long ago and personally prefer Apple Music by quite a long shot.
The Spotify music-discovery algorithm is nice, though
Good on you ! 🤜🤛
Interesting stuff. Spotify user for a long time, I have just resubscribed to AM trial and will have two months to properly try it out again.
Some of my recent niggles with AM discovered so far are:
1) inability to order a playlist by most recently added tracks going first (can easily do it in Spotify);
2) song lyrics missing for quite a few tracks, whereas Spotify has it.
I do like AM sleek interface better, though, or perhaps just want to try/change things for the sake of change.
AM lossless is also growing on me!My test goes on…
Last edited: