Tidal vs Quobuz

I’m sure it all depends on your listening preferences but here is my take. I went from Spotify to Tidal. I had used solely Spotify for 5+ years. Loved the sound quality upgrade of Tidal but hated loosing access to so many tracks. So I kept both. I subscribed to Amazon HD and have never looked back. After two months I have actually canceled my Spotify subscription. Amazon has a much better library than Tidal and has a large selection of High Res albums. No MQA nonsense to fool with. I really recommend giving Amazon HD a trial run if you have not checked it out yet.

@dwhess,

I’m not overly familiar with Yamaha receivers but I assume you are using an app on a phone or tablet to link the streaming service to the receiver? What device / app do you use to control the N803?

If you are using the Yamaha Music Cast app then Amazon Music HD is probably supported. And as stated above I would really recommend giving it a trial vs any of the other options.

Neither! With all that money you are throwing away each month, you could be building a physical record and cd collection that you can call your own. JMO

@audioguy85 I have collected albums and maintained a personal Subsonic server for years.

Here is how I justify paying for a streaming service.

• I simply no longer have the time that it takes to keep a large personal collection organized. Not to mention that server maintenance / cost and network issues are never fun.
  

• The cost of a High Res streaming service varies, but in general $15-$25 is a standard monthly rate. Family plans are even lower. To me this is around the equivalent of two new albums. I currently listen to a lot more than two new albums per month. If I were to cancel my music streaming service, my monthly bill would be astronomical if I were to continue enjoying the wide variety of content I currently listen to each month.
  

• By listening to curated playlist and the variety of artists radios offered by a streaming service I have discovered more music that I enjoy than I ever imagined was possible. By using a streaming service I have discovered a whole new world of music that otherwise I would have never known existed.

• Is collecting fun? Yes! Is a large collection of physically owned media awesome? Absolutely!! But if I were to cancel my music streaming service I would spend many more hours slaving away hording and organizing than actually listening. Unless I were to sacrifice the quality and variety of listening that I currently enjoy.

• Do I plan on shutting down my media server? No! Do I still buy albums? Indeed!! There are a few albums that simply are not available on a streaming service.
  

• If portability is not a concern. Or you do not listen to many new albums per month then it might be a better value to not have a streaming service. But if you give it a honest trial, I think you will have a hard time going back.

• Myself and many others feel like that if you factor in the time and money saved by using a High Res streaming service it is hands down one of the best monthly "investments" you can pay for in this hobby to keep your ears happy and your life simple. :-)

@aeschwartz  I have both Tidal and Qobuz. I more often use Qobuz. I don't really understand MQA with first unfolding, second unfolding, MQA hardware, MQA software. I'm not sure if MQA is a scam or not.

I'm sure there have been many discussions about MQA. Below are my thoughts, anybody feel free to correct me / point me in the direction of some good information about this format.

I fail to see any advantage investing in the MQA format. 

The only benefit I ever saw was smaller file sizes. But if you have a good enough phone plan or home internet that is fast enough to stream a Full Res 24/192 FLAC file why mess with MQA?

To me the marketing department has done a good job of trying to convince us that we need MQA but I'm not convinced that an MQA is the same as a regular uncompressed High Res FLAC file. I even find the Wiki page confusing.

At the end of the day even if MQA is the same as an High Res FLAC file what is the advantage in making sure the whole chain of your music ecosystem supports it vs simply using a regular FLAC file in the first place?

@highpeakrider I use Qobuz in my (not new) cars with Bluetooth. Don’t have to sign in ever. Car controls let me skip/repeat a track. Easy peasy.

Don’t know if “apple play” sound is better? Don’t know how it could be?

A wired Apple Carplay connection would let you play files at a higher bit rate than Bluetooth. A Bluetooth connection will always be lossy. There are a few exclusions to this rule but in general whenever you use Bluetooth for streaming you may as well be playing a lossy MP3 file.

@decooney   Since using Amazon HD, have you by chance gone back and compared "sound quality", and sound stage depth with something like Tidal Connect? I have not, yet. I’m listening for any degradation with AirPlay2.

It has been a few years since I have looked at this so I gladly stand corrected if any of the below information is wrong.

In short the Airplay protocol transcodes all audio to 16/44.1 ALAC. So trying to play a file at a higher bit rate than that is useless if quality is a concern.

I would avoid using Airplay or Airplay2 at all unless the source file is encoded in 16/44.1 ALAC to begin with or you are not overly concerned about quality loss.

I have been a long time user of the original Airport Express 1st gen and also the 2nd gen as well. I have these hooked up for my garage, kitchen, and basement stereo. My family and most friends have iPhones so the convenience factor outweighs any quality degradation. In my mind this is still one the best wireless audio solutions available even though it does have limitations.  

When using optical out and a good DAC it is very hard to beat the combined value of audio quality and convenience that Airplay on an Airport Express provides. However, if you do not need the convenience of wireless audio then a wired connection is ALWAYS better when playing High Res tracks!

I will say that the way the 2nd gen Airport Express handles the transcoding of High Res FLAC files is beyond horrible. I have noticed a lot of distortion on the 2nd Gen, even when using optical out. When playing the same tracks using optical out on 1st Gen Airport Express, the distortion is not noticeable unless you are using higher quality equipment, and then you should not be using Airplay in the first place JMHO...

But alas the 1gen Airport express does not support multi-room audio and is now a bit of a pain to configure so keep this in mind when purchasing. They can be had for as low as $10 off eBay though.

Since most Tidal files are 16/44.1 FLAC I doubt you will notice any audio quality issues when using Airplay. It was when I was playing 24/192 FLAC off of Amazon HD over Airplay2 that things started sounding really bad.

When it comes to how Tidal Connect functions, or how various AVR's handle Airplay2 I honestly do not know. I have had a Denon AVR-X3700H for a month now but have simply not had the time to see how Airplay2 or any wireless functionality works on it. I would still assume that all Airplay Audio is transcoded to 16/44.1 ALAC and so would avoid using it for High Res FLAC playback.

To me Airplay does have its place and still beats bluetooth when it comes to sound quality. But in short, whenever trying to get the best listening experience possible I would avoid using any form of a wireless audio connections.