Qobuz I mean question, doesn't someone already do that?
I am French and a user of Qobuz since its launch and I should defend this platform... but since its founder left, the quality of customer service has deteriorated and no improvement in the user experience has occurred:
- still no possibility of DLNA-UpNP connection from the Qobuz application on PC or Mac;
- no highlighting of the really rare multichannel files present among the others... (I have never been able to read them in multichannel from the Qobuz application)
- therefore no Dolby Atmos files, nor 4.0, nor 5.0, nor 5.1: they nevertheless exist;
- On the other hand, marketing lies about the better sound quality of HR versus 16/44.1;
- Poor search engine that brings up lots of records that have nothing to do with the name typed in the search engine... sorting is better since Roon and Audirvana (I have both);
- PDF covers less and less present, because Qobuz does not claim them when they are not delivered (the founder of Qobuz made this a principle). Which means that in classical music, we may have no way of knowing the recording date of this or that version... But having the booklets in PDF is essential and it is comical to see that the Classical Music service Apple automatically omitted them...
- Visible metadata which reflects the extremely mediocre work of most editors and integrators... and obviously partially explains the mediocre quality of the search tool...
So much so that I am on the verge of dropping them for Tidal, which I rejected because it had used MQA which offered something that did not correspond to the idea we had of it because of the marketing presentation... At least I would have multichannel... but not the booklets, alas!
No streaming platform provides a service worthy of what a music lover expects... Rather than lowering prices, they would do better to work seriously...