• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Tidal vs. Deezer vs. Qobuz vs. Spotify vs. Apple Music

adlervft

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
22
Likes
25
Location
Luxembourg
That's easy to spot with DeltaWave.

@pkane, could you please help out a bit here? I'm 110% positive that the track from Tidal is identical with the one published on Deezer, just the compression streaming algorithms are different. By looking at the above pics, can you please say some more about these files? Let me know if you need the FLACs, please.

Thank you!

If you have the two FLAC files it's easy, invert the polarity of one and combine with the other one, the result should be silence.
 

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,626
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
That's easy to spot with DeltaWave.

@pkane, could you please help out a bit here? I'm 110% positive that the track from Tidal is identical with the one published on Deezer, just the compression streaming algorithms are different. By looking at the above pics, can you please say some more about these files? Let me know if you need the FLACs, please.

Thank you!

If you can upload the FLAC files, I can see more of the details. As is, it looks like there's primarily a difference in the filtering above 17kHz.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trl
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
How was the stream captured? Was any of the apps operating in exclusive mode?
Tried with both, dedicate apps and Chrome browser (built-in apps) and found no differences. The recording was done via AudFree Audio via WASAPI Exclusive mode and Non-exclusive (I haven't found any diff.).

Basically, I find that TIDAL is somehow better than DEEZER when using similar bitrate, although I do not understand why they mixed Standard with High Quality, because it's misleading. Too bad TIDAL has no Lyrics and no multi-language support, quite not a good way to address a service globally.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
If you have the two FLAC files it's easy, invert the polarity of one and combine with the other one, the result should be silence.
There's no way the two recorded files to be bit-by-bit identical, due to different streaming codecs these services are providing, but I'm sure the original tracks from both providers are the same.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
If you can upload the FLAC files, I can see more of the details. As is, it looks like there's primarily a difference in the filtering above 17kHz.

Thank you!
 

Attachments

  • DEEZER_HiFi-Camarero.zip
    7.5 MB · Views: 245
  • TIDAL_HiFi-Camarero.zip
    7.5 MB · Views: 192

maverickronin

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 19, 2018
Messages
2,527
Likes
3,308
Location
Midwest, USA
There's no way the two recorded files to be bit-by-bit identical, due to different streaming codecs these services are providing, but I'm sure the original tracks from both providers are the same.

Aren't they supposed to be using lossless codecs at those qualities?
 

Fluffy

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 14, 2019
Messages
856
Likes
1,423
Basically, I find that TIDAL is somehow better than DEEZER when using similar bitrate
Better in what sense? And how can you definitely know what bitrate you are getting?

As I see it, the difference is due to different filters used. More energy in 18khz+ isn't necessarily "better", it could actually be a deviation from the original recording. I think the best way to know which one is more accurate to the recording is to rip the track of a CD and compare it to what you get in each service (if we assume the CD is the best reference).

Though personally I don't think whatever happens above 18khz matters too much.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
Aren't they supposed to be using lossless codecs at those qualities?
Well, I'm sure their intentions are good, but they can't deliver bit-perfect lossless via streaming, but I'm sure an A/B test won't tell a difference.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
Better in what sense? And how can you definitely know what bitrate you are getting?

As I see it, the difference is due to different filters used. More energy in 18khz+ isn't necessarily "better", it could actually be a deviation from the original recording. I think the best way to know which one is more accurate to the recording is to rip the track of a CD and compare it to what you get in each service (if we assume the CD is the best reference).

Though personally I don't think whatever happens above 18khz matters too much.

The bitrate is what service providers tell, or other website reviewers are telling, but in the end I get FLAC file having almost identical sizes when choosing let's say 320Kbs bitrate on both Deezer and Tidal.

I know what you mean about the energy above 18KHz, but I trust more an audio service that provides as-close-to-lossless-as-possible audio quality, that means no roll-off at all up to 20KHz.

Like I said in my previous posts, I don't think in an A/B test between Hi-Fi and 320Kbs anyone will actually feel a difference, but that's debatable. After all, it's good that the final customer can choose it's own audio quality/price ratio.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
Could you please elaborate why they can't deliver bit-perfect lossless via streaming?
Their streaming codecs are not perfect, like the Bluetooth codecs that can't deliver a true bit-by-bit audio file to the other endpoint, although this shouldn't stop us to use these streaming options, because we're definitely not feel the differences.

might worth watching.
 

adlervft

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
22
Likes
25
Location
Luxembourg
Their streaming codecs are not perfect, like the Bluetooth codecs that can't deliver a true bit-by-bit audio file to the other endpoint, although this shouldn't stop us to use these streaming options, because we're definitely not feel the differences.

might worth watching.

I'm talking about Tidal HIFI, it should be lossless, streaming FLAC files without any compression.
 

Fluffy

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 14, 2019
Messages
856
Likes
1,423
I know what you mean about the energy above 18KHz, but I trust more an audio service that provides as-close-to-lossless-as-possible audio quality, that means no roll-off at all up to 20KHz.
If this roll off is due to a slow over sampling filter, it has nothing to do with it being lossless. You can have bit perfect playback of a lossless track and apply any filter you like, and it will affect the final frequency response.
Their streaming codecs are not perfect, like the Bluetooth codecs that can't deliver a true bit-by-bit audio file to the other endpoint, although this shouldn't stop us to use these streaming options, because we're definitely not feel the differences.
You need to separate encoder with container. They can have whatever container and lossless compression algorithm they want, but the end result after decompression is a lossless file. The only limit is bandwidth, and in a desktop setting this is negligible. If you transfer a zipped wav file across the internet, it will not lose any data. Bits are bits.
 

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,626
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
The bitrate is what service providers tell, or other website reviewers are telling, but in the end I get FLAC file having almost identical sizes when choosing let's say 320Kbs bitrate on both Deezer and Tidal.

I know what you mean about the energy above 18KHz, but I trust more an audio service that provides as-close-to-lossless-as-possible audio quality, that means no roll-off at all up to 20KHz.

Like I said in my previous posts, I don't think in an A/B test between Hi-Fi and 320Kbs anyone will actually feel a difference, but that's debatable. After all, it's good that the final customer can choose it's own audio quality/price ratio.

There's very little difference between the files. Adjusting for the differences in the filter cutoff, the difference is about -87dB RMS. Most of the differences are in the least significant two bits of the 16 bit samples (otherwise, the files would be a bit-perfect match). Here's the difference spectrum:

1584404158195.png


Timing of samples is a perfect match (almost 97dB correlated null debth), so this indicates the the source files were the same, no phase or jitter differences.

Here's the difference file, so you can hear what's different between these two. The gain was adjusted by +50dB:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/z30j1nvnia6t57y/difference.wav?dl=0

Regards,

-Paul
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
Thank you so much Paul! It's clear now that the two providers are using the same master track in their database.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,626
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
Looks more like compression artefacts to me. However, given it's 50dB amplification, the differences are indeed tiny and, most likely, hard to spot by ear.

Very similar compression on both tracks, but yes, slight differences are visible (zoomed in):
1584446121249.png



Zoomed out:
1584446194115.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: trl

Soniclife

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,499
Likes
5,417
Location
UK
Their streaming codecs are not perfect
Tidal hifi without watermarking matches CD, I've got very deep nulls that way, this should not be surprising. Quite a lot of tracks are watermarked, a much bigger difference than between lossy encoders.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
QOBUZ vs. TIDAL vs. DEEZER (posted on the first page as well now)

index.php

QOBUZ 24bit/48KHz vs. TIDAL Master - almost identical frequency response

index.php

QOBUZ 24bit/48KHz vs. TIDAL Master - almost identical files across audio spectrum


index.php

QOBUZ 24bit/48KHz vs. TIDAL Master - most of the delta spectrogram is near 0dB


index.php

QOBUZ 320Kbs vs. TIDAL 320Kbs- almost identical frequency response

index.php

QOBUZ 320Kbs vs. TIDAL 320Kbs - Delta of Spectrum


QOBUZ_16-44_vs_TIDAL_HiFi_02.pngQOBUZ_16-44_vs_DEEZER-HiFi_02.pngQOBUZ_16-44_vs_DEEZER-HiFi_01.pngQOBUZ_16-44_vs_TIDAL_HiFi_01.png
From what I see from the above pics, QOBUZ and TIDAL are offering about identical audio streaming services for the Lossless Quality and for the 320Kbs as well. Also, both audio streams seems to have more than enough "energy" to cover well above the audible spectrum, so I see no reasons why not to consider that both TIDAL and QOBUZ are offering top of the line streaming services.

For the 320Kbs bitrate, all three streaming services are getting about the same energy across audible spectrum and, in an well-conducted A/B test, I don't think we could spot any difference.
 
Last edited:
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
SPOTIFY_VeryHighQuality_Camarero.png

Spotify Very High Quality (320Kbs) - The most extended trebles from all the four streamers

TIDAL_HiFiQuality_Camarero.png

Tidal Hi-Fi Quality (16bit, 44.1kHz FLAC files with a bitrate of 1411kbps)


TIDAL_Master_vs_SPOTIFY_VeryHighQuality-Camarero.png

Tidal Hi-Fi vs. Spotify Very High Quality
- looks like Spotify has a better trebles extension


TIDAL_Master_vs_SPOTIFY_VeryHighQuality-Camarero_spectrum1.png

Tidal HiFi (16bit, 44.1kHz FLAC files with a bitrate of 1411kbps)

TIDAL_Master_vs_SPOTIFY_VeryHighQuality-Camarero_spectrum2.png

Spotify Very High Quality (320Kbs)
 

Attachments

  • TIDAL_Master_vs_SPOTIFY_VeryHighQuality-Camarero_spectrum.png
    TIDAL_Master_vs_SPOTIFY_VeryHighQuality-Camarero_spectrum.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 203
Last edited:
Top Bottom