Is Apple Music better than Tidal?

[Esprit]

Premise, the source I use for comparison is exclusively an Apple TV so the output is limited to 48kHz.

The differences I notice between the two streaming platforms are evident but understanding which is the best is not easy.

I've been listening to and using Tidal for years and have activated a free period of Apple Music

P.S. Is Apple Music compatible with Audirvāna?

 

[Jmudrick]

Premise, the source I use for comparison is exclusively an Apple TV so the output is limited to 48kHz.

The differences I notice between the two streaming platforms are evident but understanding which is the best is not easy.

I've been listening to and using Tidal for years and have activated a free period of Apple Music

P.S. Is Apple Music compatible with Audirvāna?

No it's not compatible. As with everything Apple its proprietary nature is a pain in the backside if you want or need to use anything outside the ecosystem..Tried and dropped it quickly.

 

[Esprit]

Thanks, what nonsense.
By the way I quickly tried it on a Mac and couldn't change the DAC frequency…

 

[terryforsythe]

The differences I notice between the two streaming platforms are evident but understanding which is the best is not easy.

Both my son and I both noticed a difference between Tidal and Spotify. (I only noticed the difference on my home stereo system, but in my car they sound the same. My son noticed the difference using headphones.)

Some were quick to say that Spotify's lossy streaming protocol vs Tidal's lossless streaming protocol are not audibly different. I don't know whether that is or is not true. It could be that different masters are being used for the recordings to which we listened, or perhaps it is just the placebo effect, but I don't know.

 

[Esprit]

Thanks, I'm trying to figure out whether to ditch Tidal for Apple Music but for now I'm just finding technical issues.

 

[jcarys]

Sounds like you are close to answering your own question. I doubt you will hear much/any difference between the two services. Ergonomics will be more important for making decision.

And slightly off topic, responding to terry, I think most serious listeners can tell the difference between lossy Spotify and lossless Tidal on the best recordings, typically jazz and classical. But most of their subscribers are interested in pop, rap, rock, etc., where it's really difficult to tell the differences, because those are typically compressed and mastered for less critical playback.

 

[DVDdoug]

Both my son and I both noticed a difference between Tidal and Spotify.

There is always the possibility of different streaming services using different masters, different mixes, or even different recordings. A better recording/production will usually sound better even in a slightly "inferior" format.

But, listening tests should be level-matched, blind, and statistically repeatable/valid. What is a blind ABX test?

Some were quick to say that Spotify's lossy streaming protocol vs Tidal's lossless streaming protocol are not audibly different.

You can't really "prove" if someone else is hearing a difference or not. It is VERY common to fool yourself, especially if the differences are hard to describe. If one source has no bass, or a "click" or hiss in the background, that's probably real. If you get 10 out of 10 right in an ABX test, there is a high probability that you are hearing a difference. If you only get 5 or 6 right, that's obviously no better than guessing and you aren't reliably hearing a difference.

 

[FrantzM]

Sounds like you are close to answering your own question. I doubt you will hear much/any difference between the two services. Ergonomics will be more important for making decision.

And slightly off topic, responding to terry, I think most serious listeners can tell the difference between lossy Spotify and lossless Tidal on the best recordings, typically jazz and classical. But most of their subscribers are interested in pop, rap, rock, etc., where it's really difficult to tell the differences, because those are typically compressed and mastered for less critical playback.

Hi

I wouldn't be so sure. Supposing the same source, it is very difficult when level matched to distinguish the better lossy codecs at 256 kbps and up (say 320 k mp3) or (>256 VBR) to lossless... This requires training that most "serious listeners" are completely unaware of. Many believe that by listening to a lot of music they become expert listeners, not so. You have to learn to recognize the artifacts of a given codec. These do not manifest themselves uniformly across codecs and rates..
Harman actually has a software, that could help you recognize lossy codecs artifacts, if you care enough ... How to listen.

Peace.

 

[jcarys]

When I say a serious listener, I am exactly referring to someone who has trained themselves to hear differences in recordings, a la Harman. However, I can sit an untrained listener in front of a good system or on headphones, and point them to transients in percussion or overblown brass, or room decay, and even they can pickup the differences between 320kbps lossless and PCM or other lossless recordings in short order. I agree that most people are completely unaware, but I don't regard that audience as serious. Music is simply accompaniment to their lifestyle.