I agree and I always wondered this also. More Audiofoolerie.....
bits is bits
Being a retired IT tech, Iʻm a "bits is bits" guy. I keep seeing people rank different streaming services against each other and I have to say, Iʻm mystified. Modern recordings are all digital masters and remastered. If two different hi-res streaming services, say Qobuz and Tidal, have the same track available, why would one sound different from the other, let alone better?
The stream is being fed over TCP/IP from the source, and I see no reason that it you were to do a cksum on the same file/track being delivered by either streaming service, that they would exactly match. So why do people claim better sound from one streaming source over the other. Iʻm assuming they are both full resolution sources, not mp3.
109 responses Add your response
I’m a retired IT guy as well. The bits are bits… it’s what comes with the bits that matters. Qobuz sounds the best… by a small amount… but it is the streamer which receives and isolates and times the bits that then go to the DAC which translates and sets the tonal balance that completely transform the sound quality. Which is why I own a $22K streamer and a $17K DAC that sound incredible. I’ve experienced… PCs, MACs, iPads, cheap streamers and mid tier stuff up to what i have now which step by step improved the sound to true high fidelity. You can see my systems under my user ID. All theoretical questions are quick;t dismissed by listening. |
Clearly bits are not bits and some bits sound like chit. Agree with @ghdprentice that Qobuz sounds better than what is currently available. |
It’s one thing for the digital masters start out as the same ’bits’ upstream at the head end. It’s another thing for how those ’bits’ are reproduced downstream at the playback end. There’s theory. And then there’s application. Here are some discussions from the Audiogon archives. |
@steakster You write: |
It seems that you’ve visited this topic before - link. Apparently, you weren’t satisfied with those responses either. Good luck in your quest. |
@steakster The earlier topic I was involved in had to do with the discussion of data transmission over USB cable. |
@goleksiak +1
More audiofooleri... I am using Amazon Music and it sounds exactly like Tidal and Qobuz. Same bit rates, same resolution, same files, same sound. If you think it sounds different please do a double blind statistically relevant test and show me the results. Oh, maybe Qobuz adds some additional "great" sounding information that other platforms can't. |
“If two different hi-res streaming services, say Qobuz and Tidal, have the same track available, why would one sound different from the other, let alone better? Possibly because the labels may provide different masters to each platform. This isn’t unique to streaming — the same thing happens with physical media too, where variations in mastering can lead to noticeable differences in sound quality. In case of physical media like vinyl, you can usually trace the provenance of a recording. With streaming, though, we’re left guessing. They don’t disclose which master or source file we’re actually hearing. As @ghdprentice pointed out, Qobuz in general, have a better SQ. These differences are more apparent in well appointed audio systems. Cheers! |
The only problem I see here is that the OP is using an HP laptop to Use as a streamer. Until you’re ready to jump into the deep end of the pool, you are always going to have this kind of conversation of bit is bit. Getting a dedicated streamer from any of the big three InnuOs, Aurender or Lumin You’re just spinning your wheels. I have no clue what Tom foolery these guys are doing, but they’re smacking the heck out of a laptop streamer. |
@gkelly The reason I brought up this question is that I saw someone else making the claim that Tidal was better than Qobuz. So I was just curious.
I donʻt do any streaming myself. I just play back digital files from a hard drive. I have a miniPC running Ubuntu Linux and JRiver, which feeds into a Peachtree DAC. I have far too much in my collection to ever consider streaming. I just donʻt need it. |
I would love to know how audio streaming is done by different services. What is being done to the files by Qobuz and Tidal. I don’t know. Does a streamer process Qobuz and Tidal streams differently? How are the files stored…compression methods, delivery, decoding by streamers. It clearly can’t be the same as Tidal sounds different from Qobuz. What sounds better is debatable. I know some hate Tidal MQA but my DAC sounds amazing playing MQA from Tidal. I believe it’s more dependent on how the streamer and DAC process this data. But there’s not enough information to draw any conclusions. |
I am also a retired IT guy with 35 years of experience. Without getting deep into the never ending arguement as to the "bits is bits", the big differences in the high to low end streamers are usually include:
And as @gkelly mentioned... typical computers are among the among the worst at just about all the above issues.
As for Qobuz sounding better than Tidal, I agree. Not bringing hi-rez files into the discussion, I think a lot of it has to do with possibly different masters (or remasters) supplied from the original source(s), as well as differences in encoding software used to create the streaming file. While I've never seen any info from either Qobuz or Tidal on what the format(s) they get or use for the "masters", I don't think those masters are what is actually streamed. Most likely they are ripped or converted (or down sampled from hi-rez, DSD, etc.) into a FLAC, AIFF, etc. file. So different software, configurations, equalization settings, etc. would create differences... ... Just my 10 cents (adjusted for tariffs and inflation... lol) Jeff
|
I will not claim to know the technical side of this issue. All I know is there is a difference between Qobuz and Apple Music. Ive only had one streamer, LUMIN U2 mini and I hope I can improve it in the future with an external power supply. I am a believer in improved sound with better designs and electrical parts. |
I've been told by Qobuz execs that the service streams files exactly as received from the record company or distributor. There's no processing or other alteration to the files and the stream is never throttled even if there's heavy network traffic. Since it uses TCP/IP, it should be delivering a bit perfect file to your streamer. I don't know much about what processes Tidal and other services use. |
@lalitk +1 and I will add that the "well appointed" system will reveal what your sources are doing, good or bad. That's when you can tell what needs upgrading. |
@russbutton We've wandered similar paths..I bought my first system at age 16 with a loan(Mom co-signed, I had a good job and worked nearly full time while in HS) of about $20K in todays dollars. McIntosh, Klipsch, & Tandberg..and various other things. They were the big names back then. Fast forward to today..different system(though I still have some of those pieces from '73) and I have/had a similar collection of CDs. In the last six months I've started streaming..Qobuz. Picked up a Bluesound N130 streamer(upgraded the power supply board and power supply, ran it to my DAC) to get my feet wet and found it's limitations within a few months. I then picked up a used Aurender N10 streamer. While you mention you can't ever see the need to start streaming..just saying..there's a BIG world out there. I now listen to my old CD collection(via streaming) about 10% of the time. There is soooo much new music out there to discover and enjoy and streaming lays it at your feet for a very (very) modest fee. For less than the cost of one CD/month you have access to nearly any music from any age, and any genre you can imagine, and a few that you can't. We're not getting any younger..the journey in discovering new music, even if it's 30-40 years old, for, basically, free..is a great ride. Just a thought..
|
@nogaps big +1 and that’s exactly been my experience as well. My only regret is that I didn’t start streaming sooner. While I’ve enjoyed being an audiophile for decades, streaming has brought a reawakening of my enthusiasm/enjoyment through discovering and listening to new music most of which I never would’ve otherwise found. I’d highly recommend getting something cheap like a used Node (N130 or later so you have a USB out) and do a free trial of Qobuz or Tidal, because even though you think you don’t “need” it once you experience having worlds of new music at your fingertips it’s a revelation, and like nogaps I rarely listen to my own stuff anymore that frankly seems like going backwards and not nearly as enjoyable. Hey, it’s cheap to try and it could change your world as it did ours so why not?!? Just my $0.02 FWIW. |
Assuming streams we receive from various streaming providers are identical I agree bits are bits. I very much doubt these services altering data packages they receive from record companies. By the way, Tidal no longer using MQA, now FLAC files.
I don't use Tidal or Qobuz music players on my main system, both integrated into my Roon library, I can detect absolutely no difference between Tidal or Qobuz streams, and over 3k cd rips for that matter, any differences due to provenance of recording. I posit music player apps such as Roon, Audirvana or proprietary are where the variability in sound quality found, and this sound quality variability due to our streaming equipment. Generally you'll find Roon and Audirvana app more complex interfaces require greater processor resources vs the proprietary apps. |
@jeffbij thank you for all the details. I admit, this is what I thought: the streamer sends "data" to the DAC. Its job is to receive data and pass it to the DAC. It's not changing stuff, validating stuff other than 01101 is 01101. Are you saying it varies? I understand music files vary but that won't give the streamer extra tasks. I can go down the list that happened here 100s of time: a word, a word doc, an image, are all the same at the sender and receiver, there is no noise. How is data for music different? Maybe I should learn about music files. I understand the CD has "data" and sends it to the DAC, that data is always the same, is streaming data not the same unless the transmission fails? |
I have both Tidal and Qobuz and in my experience there is not a consistent SQ advantage of one or the other. For the same indicated resolution, some tracks sound better on Tidal and others better on Qobuz. In some cases, CD quality sounds better that "hi res" versions. This might point to earlier comments that the master quality/version for the uploads may be cause of any difference that exists? Clearly the streamer/DAC quality and the downstream system make a difference but that was not the OP's question. |
I had both Tidal and Qobuz and after spending some time comparing, A/B, the two in my audio system, I ended up cancelling my subscription with Tidal, simply because I preferred the "OVERALL" sound characteristics of Qobuz over Tidal. Some may prefer Tidal over Qobuz, which is solely a matter of preference. Similar to digital coming from different CD players (different DACs/sources), digital coming from different streaming services sound different from each other simply because they come from different sources, which effects their sound. In some cases, the differences may be ever so slight, but yet different. The differences I heard in my audio system were not just a figment of my imagination. I have over 30 years of experience as an audiophile, and I am fully capable or hearing the most minute differences in sound in my audio system. There's a reason why so many experienced audiophiles are constantly pointing out how they all can hear differences in sound quality from one streaming service to another. No, it's not just their imaginations either. Happy listening |
How does it not? Let’s start there and then you get your answer. |
@grunge1000 The question should be, why don't identical files sound the same? What you're saying is technically correct, but not in practical application. The files alone don't produce/make or project actual music that is audible to your ears through your audio system. It's just a file that's just sitting there. It's the implementation of the file that makes it sound different sourced through various different sources, Streaming services, etc., who do not use identical equipment, engineering to covert the file into audible music. Consider a CD a music file. Play the same CD through 10 different CD players, or sources, and you'll get a different sound from the same CD just about every time. Happy listening.
|
If we ignore using a DAC internal to the streamer, and focus on just passing the data stream to an external DAC, on the surface you would think it doesn't matter. However in reality that is not true. If you break down the path of the data from the network connection through the streamer:
Steps 2 through 5 all require passing through different circuitry, integrated circuits, software, and possibly even DC amplifiers to boost the signal strength if needed. While the data 1s and 0s remain intact, jitter and clock timing errors are ALWAYS introduced into the data stream. And thus the design of the streamer, components used, etc. can effect sound quality regardless if the 1s and 0s are the same.
|
What I am talking about is two music files that are identical. I am assuming Tidal, Qobuz, Amazon, etc. uses the same files (Ie. Moving Pictures from Rush). How could one sound different when using the same electronics? Let's say they are going through @ghdprentice 17k DAC/ 22k Streamer. Each of these files are bit by bit exactly alike and are going through the same streamer/DAC/Preamp/Amp/Speakers. They will sound identical--If they don't then somethings amiss. |
@grunge1000 Two music files that are identical can sound different coming from Tidal, Qobuz and all other streaming services simply due to factors like different audio compression methods (codecs), bit rates, digital signal processing (DSP), and volume normalization, all of which can alter the original sound. Different services use different formats and processing techniques to balance sound quality with bandwidth and storage efficiency. Other factors include; Device and app settings, Network and buffering and Mastering and loudness. So, it doesn’t matter if it’s two music files that are identical, or a 1000 music files that are identical. As previously stated, it’s how the original, identical music files are implemented that makes them sound different. I understand that you’re perhaps attempting to convey some kind of profound concept. However, the answer to your question is really quite elementary. Whether you accept the facts is entirely up to you. Happy listening. |
thanks @jeffbij with a analogy, if it was an image, the output image to the DAC would have bad pixels? |
+1 Excellent explanation. Eg: My first generation streamer. My Auralic Aries was introduced in 2014. It came with its own stock 16 vdc LPS. It sounded terrible when compared to playing the same song via Tidal vs on my CD transport - using the same DAC. Being a tweaker, my 1st mod was to swap out the flimsy cheap stock DC umbilical cord (to the stock LPS) with a DIY version of 20 awg pure copper OCC solid core wire. The improvement in SQ was a substantial - and I mean substantial. My 2nd mod was to replace the stock Auralic 16vdc LPS with a better quality one. Again, another big jump in SQ. My 3rd mod was to add a USBe Perfect signal regenerator to the output of the Auralic streamer. Another big jump in SQ. The music was even more refined - with a blacker background. The 4th mod was to add a DDC between the streamer and DAC. With these 4 minor mods, the same streamer now outperformed my CD transport - by far - using the same DAC. The other components in the system remained the same. A high-quality streamer will have all of these improvements built-in - plus much, much more. Better design, better firmware, better parts, quieter circuitry, better power supply, better EMI protection, etc. In other words, a high-quality streamer will address all of the factors that @jeffbij addressed in his post. - - - Over the years, my entire digital streaming chain has been substantially upgraded. I stream only. I don’t miss my CD’s. A 96 piece orchestra sounds magnificent. |
... Yes... although I would use the words "bad streamer". Typically you get what you pay for. A $90 WiiM Mini is a quality product if you are judging it based on what it costs. Just like a $2000 streamer typically will meet expectations in that price category. It is all relative.
|
