• 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

OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
Thank you @Music1969, but what about the lossy default setting vs. the AAC 256 from the Lossless menu? It's clear from the above graph that they're not bitperfect. I can redo this test with another song if you thing I should, but for me these two settings aren't the same. Let me know if you think I'm wrong and I'll dive deep into this.
 

Music1969

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
4,636
Likes
2,809
Thank you @Music1969, but what about the lossy default setting vs. the AAC 256 from the Lossless menu? It's clear from the above graph that they're not bitperfect. I can redo this test with another song if you thing I should, but for me these two settings aren't the same. Let me know if you think I'm wrong and I'll dive deep into this.


Hmmm yes there should be zero difference between "Lossless DISABLED" and "Lossless ENABLED + High Quality AAC 256 option"

So that is indeed strange
 

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
It's strange indeed, but I understand the menu as two options you would not changed later :
- unchecked = force AAC/lossy (if you always want lossy and less data used) and always use it.
or
- checked = let you choose, in which you can pick AAC/lossy, ALAC up to 48kHz and ALAC up to 192kHz

But in this case, it would have been easier to just let choose between both ALAC only, and pick between lossy and lossless by checking/unchecking the first option

There is no reason for them to stream two different AAC, unless that if you uncheck "lossless" it gives you something like Tidal (AAC 96), and checked gives you AAC 256 and both ALAC, but it would be an error to put this AAC 256 in the lossless menu.

If you pick a track you really know, it should be easy to find a difference between AAC 96 and 256 if it's the case, and you can also test with "lossless" checked between AAC 256 and ALAC.
On Tidal, there are some tracks where it's "easy" to find AAC 320 and FLAC (real FLAC) differences
 
Last edited:

Music1969

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
4,636
Likes
2,809
There is no reason for them to stream two different AAC, unless that if you uncheck "lossless" it gives you something like Tidal (AAC 96)

Very easy to check in Apple Music on macOS, you are told bitrate

1623475187367.png
 

aandres_gm

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2021
Messages
311
Likes
353
Location
Germany
I used the Qobuz trial for a month, but won't be keeping my sub. Using the Windows app and WASAPI shared, I get a sound hiccup every time a song ends. This doesn't happen when playing music from foobar using WASAPI shared. That's a deal breaker.
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
In case someone would like to compare Tidal with Apple Music, below there're few compares between the two. A 2021 pop song from Andra Music was choosen for this test.

Tidal_HiFi_vs_iTunes_Lossless_AAC256_01.jpg

Tidal HiFi vs. Apple Music AAC256 (Lossless menu checked)

Tidal_HiFi_vs_iTunes_Lossless_AAC256_03.jpg

Tidal HiFi vs. Apple Music AAC256 (Lossless menu checked)

Tidal_HiFi_vs_iTunes_Lossless_AAC256_04.jpg

Tidal HiFi vs. Apple Music AAC256 (Lossless menu checked)

Tidal_HiFi_vs_iTunes_Lossless_ALAC_24.48_01.jpg

Tidal HiFi vs. Apple Music Lossless ALAC 24bit/48kHz

Tidal_HiFi_vs_iTunes_Lossless_ALAC_24.48_03.jpg

Tidal HiFi vs. Apple Music Lossless ALAC 24bit/48kHz

Tidal_HiFi_vs_iTunes_Lossless_ALAC_24.48_04.jpg

Tidal HiFi vs. Apple Music Lossless ALAC 24bit/48kHz

Tidal_Master_vs_iTunes_Lossless_ALAC_24.48_01.jpg

Tidal Master vs. Apple Music Lossless ALAC 24bit/48kHz

Tidal_Master_vs_iTunes_Lossless_ALAC_24.48_03.jpg

Tidal Master vs. Apple Music Lossless ALAC 24bit/48kHz

Tidal_Master_vs_iTunes_Lossless_ALAC_24.48_04.jpg

Tidal Master vs. Apple Music Lossless ALAC 24bit/48kHz
Looks pretty much the same to me, although I do see the elevated ultrasonic noise from the Apple Music files, probably caused by the streaming filters?!?
 

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,629
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
In order to check how lossless Apple Lossless Hi-Res really is, I found an album that I already own in 24bit/96k for comparison:

1624920463817.png

I used an all digital recording from Apple Music on iPad to an iMac. While playing, the app reported Hi-Res Lossless, 24-bit/96 kHz ALAC format.

Turns out Apple track level was lower by 0.2dB which accounts for a not quite bit-perfect transmission. 50% of all samples match perfectly when the flies are reduced to 23 bits, which seems to correspond to a level reduction followed by a dither application. Not sure why 0.2dB was chosen.

All EQ settings were turned off in the Music app, volume set at maximum.

Spectrum:
1624922310117.png



Spectrum of the difference between the two recordings:
1624922384305.png


Spectrogram Difference:
1624923489723.png
 
OP
trl

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,967
Likes
2,523
Location
Iasi, RO
Not BitPerfect, but pretty much the same file, so quite impressed by the new Apple Music streaming quality. Thanks for your tests Paul!
 

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,629
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
In order to check how lossless Apple Lossless Hi-Res really is, I found an album that I already own in 24bit/96k for comparison:

View attachment 137999

I used an all digital recording from Apple Music on iPad to an iMac. While playing, the app reported Hi-Res Lossless, 24-bit/96 kHz ALAC format.

Turns out Apple track level was lower by 0.2dB which accounts for a not quite bit-perfect transmission. 50% of all samples match perfectly when the flies are reduced to 23 bits, which seems to correspond to a level reduction followed by a dither application. Not sure why 0.2dB was chosen.

All EQ settings were turned off in the Music app, volume set at maximum.

Spectrum:
View attachment 138003


Spectrum of the difference between the two recordings:
View attachment 138004

Spectrogram Difference:
View attachment 138005

Being curious about the 0.2dB level difference, I located another hi-res track I could run the analysis on: Bob Dylan, Highway 61 Revisited. Also a 24/96k track. This track showed no level difference, but dither still appears to be applied (and possibly a differently shaped dither):

1624967253788.png



1624967275667.png


This track appears to have small differences right at the edge of the spectrum, of course levels there are at -180dBFS and well above audible range:
1624967466462.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: trl

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
i think it's important to check whether the release is 'Apple digital master' because then true peaks will be below 0 dBFS to prevent clipping in the AAC codec.
 

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,629
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
i think it's important to check whether the release is 'Apple digital master' because then true peaks will be below 0 dBFS to prevent clipping in the AAC codec.

Both tracks I tried were not marked as 'Apple digital master', just as Hi-Res Lossless. The second track was closer to clipping than the first one I tried, but didn't seem to be clipped, and level was not reduced compared to my copy:
1624968326283.png


The first track that was reduced by 0.2dB was not close to clipping:
1624968414223.png
 

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,629
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
Both tracks I tried were not marked as 'Apple digital master', just as Hi-Res Lossless. The second track was closer to clipping than the first one I tried, but didn't seem to be clipped, and level was not reduced compared to my copy:
View attachment 138096

The first track that was reduced by 0.2dB was not close to clipping:
View attachment 138097

By the way, an interesting artifact around 23.3Hz in both files. Very low level but could easily be a sign of watermarking.

Sokolov's recording:
1624968868597.png


Bob Dylan Revisited:
1624969118075.png
 

ummeh0584

New Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
2
Likes
0
View attachment 54538
TIDAL HiFi

vs.

View attachment 54539
DEEZER HiFi - after about 18KHz some slight roll-off could be seen (probably inaudible)

View attachment 54542
TIDAL HiFi Spectrogram

vs.

View attachment 54541
DEEZER HiFi Spectrogram

View attachment 54540
Difference between TIDAL vs. DEEZER (both HiFi, same track)

View attachment 54543
TIDAL vs. DEEZER (both HiFi, same track) - some visible upper trebles roll-off can be visible after 17.5KHz, most likely inaudible
These are all currently great server. But if you need to moves playlists, albums, followed artists and liked songs across various services, you can try MusConv
 
Top Bottom