Is using streaming services worthy of an audiophile?


I read that a lot of people on this forum use Tidal etc. Is this ok from audiophile perspective? I mean, do people who use such services actually know what quality is streamed? Don’t you lose all control over your music when you surrender to streaming services?
defiantboomerang
Another great, and completely free streaming option is the HiDef Radio app for iPhone. Probably available on android. And i think you can just use their website now.  Download it and search for the jazzgroove.org channel (if you like that kind of music). 128kbps stream. Extremely nice for casual listening. Run it thru USB into your dac and it is very nice. I do use a usb decrapper, but not much more. Cables are pretty low level. Nice sound.
Yes, only the audiophiles who want access to massive quantities of music of all varieties, though.
I've been Tidaling for about a week now, both in my Hegel/Oppo/Acoustic Zen reference system and in my family room Sony/Elac system. It sounds much better than spotify in both and though it doesn't quite match my vinyl rig for sheer detail, I'm perfectly happy with it in lieu of spinning discs, especially when I'm too lazy to actually get up to change discs.
The reason the vinyl rig seems to produce more detail is that the dynamic range of vinyl is more limited. Therefore, both in the mastering and in the cutting the peaks have to be limited to avoid distortion and even the stylus jumping out of the groove, and the low level signals have to be lifted above all that surface noise (also, low frequencies have to be in mono for the same reason that peaks have to be limited). The end result is a dynamically compressed signal that suggests there is more detail. If you want to, you can achieve the same with digital compression. There are quite a few plug ins for mastering consoles to mimic this vinyl sound.
Sorry if I have destroyed an illusion.
@willemj Illusions, by their nature, exist as self-created projections of what the individual wants to see or hear. Thus, you can't destroy what is not yours to destroy.
willemjsThe reason the vinyl rig seems to produce more detail is that the dynamic range of vinyl is more limited. Therefore, both in the mastering and in the cutting the peaks have to be limited to avoid distortion and even the stylus jumping out of the groove ...
This is a common misconception and completely mistaken. It's easy to see why people believe this, though, because digital certainly has a wider potential dynamic range than LP. However - in practice - that potential is often not realized. In part because of the Loudness Wars, the dynamic range of digital files is often compressed, which can make them more listenable in a noisy environment. Producers of LPs rightly assume that an LP is more likely to be heard in a quiet, domestic environment, so it can accommodate a wider dynamic range. You can prove this for yourself by purchasing a few LPs of new releases, and comparing them to the same music on other formats.

The claim that on an LP  "low level signals have to be lifted above all that surface noise" is just nonsense. You can prove this to yourself by listening to the quiet bands between LP tracks at your normal listening level. Nor is it true that LF must be summed into mono, although it is a very common practice.

 
Post removed 
It’s pretty obvious digital has more detail than analog. But analog is more musical. Untreated CDs in untweaked systems are kind of the worst case scenario, inasmuch as they almost ALWAYS sound thin, wiry, bass shy, rolled off, tinny, electronic, lumpy, two dimensional, boring, synthetic, fake, congealed, and a lot like paper mache.

"... almost ALWAYS sound thin, wiry, bass shy, rolled off, tinny, electronic, lumpy, two dimensional, boring, synthetic, fake, congealed, and a lot like paper cache."

  I have both a decent vinyl rig and digital.  Broad generalizations like the above has just not been my experience.  For me it "almost ALWAYS" comes down to the individual recordings.  Sometimes vinyl sound better...sometimes digital.  I'm just happy to have the choices and do not feel the need to draw a line in the sand and take a stand for one or the other.  Same is true of streaming... just another choice. 
+1, randyhat

I too, have heard excellent examples  of both formats. Anyone that says that one format can always outdo the other is only fooling themselves. It's all about recording quality.
One format always outperforms the other? Are you hot dogging me? 🌭

Nobody said that. Obviously a good example of either format - and one that is tweaked to perfection - can outperform a bad example or a stock out of the box example of the other format. Hel-loo! Each format has it’s advantages. Well, potential advantages. You don't hear too many CDs that actually have a dynamic range of 90 dB, do you? Let’s bring the argument back down to Earth.

+2 randyhat. I am not sure I understand the analog vs. digital debate. I guess I could if I had to pick one or the other... but I don’t. I mean I can purchase a turntable, tonearm, cartridge, needle and phono preamp AND I can aquire a DAC, streamer or computer to play digital music. I can listen to either format. I think the debate is silly because if I were thinking one is better than the other I would be listening to that format and if I changed my mind switch back. What is the problem????
BTW I have two audio systems, in one I have a tube amp, the other a solid state amp.... again not a problem only more options.
I’m not sure how many died and true audiophiles are interested in reducing their listening experience to merely another application on a computer.

Having said that, that's mostly what I end up doing these days. Even when I play a record, the ADC is running to get the music ready for loading to my music server. I guess I am a traitor. But I do spend more time than ever actually listening to and enjoying the music so at least I am a happy traitor.

Untreated CDs in untweaked systems are kind of the worst case scenario, inasmuch as they almost ALWAYS sound thin, wiry, bass shy, rolled off, tinny, electronic, lumpy, two dimensional, boring, synthetic, fake, congealed, and a lot like paper mache.

This is why I don't listen to CD's.  I listen to .wav rips of CD's.  The operative word is "almost".  There are very good digital systems now that beat even the best vinyl and sound very much analog.  I'm lucky enough to enjoy one of these.  It's much more difficult to make digital sound like analog than making analog sound like analog.

Steve N.

Empirical Audio

I really like Tidal. I was actually quite dismayed when I A/B'd it with the vinyl rig I had at the time. I had to concede that the only big reason I wasn't selling my collection was for the physical aspect.
Geoffkait,

You obviously took my words and twisted them completely. I have come across people who say they cannot listen to digital, at all. Analog is the only thing they listen to. What a shame. Lots of music they are denying themselves of. 

No, I am not "hot dogging" you, I am trolling you because I have nothing better to do....Hel-loo!

Tidal is one of the very best but a cheap Deezer or Spotify account give you great ambient music.  It exposes you to so much great stuff and helps you select what you want to hear more of and pick up (or make) the Hi-REs files that will only sound inferior to the best vinyl has to offer.  In other words, streaming services are very pleasing to the ear and help you know what you want to hear more of!!!

jhv