This has come up many times already. I tried Tidal and cancelled. Search engine is terrible. Selection of classical music and film music is way smaller than Spotify. If you have a real good dac with a great usb input then the difference in sound is not that great.
Agreed I have both right now and through my laptop I can't tell much of a difference. Who knows maybe my system isn't up to snuff.
Tidal all the way! No contest for sound quality, at least as rendered through Squeezebox touch. And the catalog is good enough for a good time.
In my very good home desktop system I could not listen to Spotify. It was just very bad sounding. Tidal in that system sounds incredible. This system is comprised of the following:
KEF LS50 speakers
Paraound A23 amp
Windows 2012 Server R2 Computer
At my work I was able to use Spotify without too much annoyance because my setup was not that great. I have the following there:
Audio Engine A2 speakers ($199)
Emotive XDA-1 DAC ($150)
Windows 2012 Server R2 Computer
However, to my surprise TIDAL also sounds better on this work desktop system. So I do not even listen to Spotify | Beats | Pandora at work anymore. It is all TIDAL.
I am looking forward to getting the PS Audio Direct Stream DAC with Bridge II to listen TIDAL through. This will be for my living room system. With the Bridge II I can use the computer on the home office to stream the music to the DAC.
While I don't use my computer to stream and I don't listen to classical or film music, I find Tidal exemplary. I have only found a few albums or artists so far that Tidal did not have, but for the most part, the catalog is great.
I use a hardwired (Cat6a STP) Sonos Connect, coax out to my DAC in my he-man rig. It sounds very, very good.
I'm also trying Deezer at the same time because I got a free 30 day trial, but so far I like Tidal better.
For me, Tidal is keeper.
Based on this thread and my increasing frustration with the poor sound quality of Spotify through my Sonos I just signed up for Tidal and downloaded it and set it up on my Sonos. From the first few notes I heard, to borrow a phrase from the kids, OMG! Seriously the sound quality is amazing! Not the same catalog depth as Spotify but I am keeping it as this is the best streaming sound I have hear from an online music service! Thanks guys!
Tidal is the real deal, guys. Spotify, not so much. If you can't hear the difference, thats the Good Lord telling you that your better suited for video.
How do I delete a track from a playlist that I created, and added the track to?
I'm having a difficult time trying to figure out how to delete a few duplicate tracks in a playlist...
The interface with Tidal isn't as good as Spotify. I hope they get this and the music content down because Spotify has Tidal beat, and Pandora worked bettrr on the radio station compared to spotify, and tidal is worse.
Misspell a an Artist by one letter and they arent there, and discovering good new music on Tidal has not been working for me at all. Please Tidal, get this sorted out!!
I have been contemplating trying either Tidal or Spotify but have yet to do so.
I listen to Radio Paradise 90% of the time when not listening to my own tunes. Their music quality never ceases to amaze me. Can Tidal & Spotify stand up the RP's quality?
Listening thru; Windows 7 laptop, USB to Benchmark DAC2 HGC to Krell KCT pre.
For sound quality its Tidal. The difference quickly becomes apparent when using computer USB to DAC to headphones.
For interface its Spotify regardless of platform. Best Platform for both in my experience is Desktop using keyboard and mouse which for me tends to level the playing field. On my Samsung Note 3, that has a decent DAC, Spotify interface is better, but I use Tidal because of quality. On ROKU, Spotify interface is more limited, and Tidal is not on ROKU (yet).
Using Broadband direct at 30 Mbps, I have more issues with Tidal caching. You can download for offline play and that solves caching issues.
For Catalog of artist / albums I am looking for, Spotify has some that Tidal does not.
Currently I will keep both, as the combined cost is less than what I use to spend on new CDs
As happy as I have been about the quality of sound from Spotify, I am thrilled almost giddy at the sound quality of Tidal. And this is just the start of competition for high quality streaming to come.
I agree. Tidal has great sound quality. If I can't think of any more artists to search for, I have just been going to Spotify to find some new ones, then I search for them on Tidal. It has been working pretty well that way. I also appreciate the "off line" mode with Tidal. It downloads them (or whatever it is doing) instantly as opposed to Spotify which takes a few seconds (5-60 seconds). I like to compile offline lists to listen to on the go and also because the load faster and play uninterrupted.
I have heard of Tidal from audiophile friends, but never of Spotify. I have never heard either. Right now I use a music server with a raid with 1.75 Gbs of music ranging from CDs to that recorded in double DSD.
Can the streaming music ever compete with double DSD?
According to Pitchfork, Jay Z has offered to buy Aspiro, the company behind both Tidal and WiMP, and his offer of $56 million has been accepted by Aspiro's board of directors. I wonder how committed he will be to audiophile quality streaming?
I also search on Spotify then build titles on Tidal from my Spotify search. The best way I have found is to have both open on a desktop at the same time while doing the personal programming.
If you have not tried tidal yet, you are missing alot of fun. A ton of music at your fingertips UNCOMPRESSED. Who in the world is offering more than that for $20 a month???
Let me type it slower so you spotify guys can follow this.
U N C O M P R E S S E D.
Can you explain your search method ? What does Spotify give you that Tidal doesn't via search ?
As recommended above, I signed up for Tidal Streaming and immediately cancelled my account.
I discovered that Tidal Hi-Fi CD quality streaming is ONLY available on the Chrome browser and is NOT available on Safari, Bing or IE. I was very surprised. AAC 320 streaming is available on Tidal using Safari but the hi-fi CD quality option is not. I am willing to pay $20 per month for Hi-Fi CD quality but not for the AAC 320 streaming option.
I immediately contact Tidal and they report "they are currently working on making TIDAL available for more browsers. This expansion should happen soon as we finalize development".
I sm surprised that Tidal only supports Chrome and not the other popular browsers. Does anyone know when Tidal Streaming will support Safari and the other browsers?
Do you have to use a browser ?
If you have windows they have a downloadable app that can be set to the CD quality.
I run this app from Win 7 computer USB to DAC to processor or headphone amp, very satisfied, especially for the $20 fee.
My browser is Safari on my Mac. I do not have Windows or plan to run Windows on my Mac. I will re-activate Tidal when they support Safari. My guess is it will be very soon.
Geifman, Chrome works like a charm on Mac; I like it better than Safari m'self. I'm a little stunned that you'd pass up full-res access to damn near every recording in the universe over the choice of a browser.
To each his own. ;-)
Okay. You convinced me. If I install Chrome on my Mac, how do I tell Tidal to use Chrome and not Safari?
You just launch Chrome instead of Safari as the web browser.
Then go to Tidalhifi.com. Tidal will automatically know.
I have both and will keep both.
My wife shares Spotify playlists with her friends and enjoys it on her iPad.
I have Spotify & Tidal on my Autonomic MMS-5A music server, the app on my iPad is OK, so I use their web clients to configure my "favorites".
The sound quality is definitely better on Tidal. I find both apps to be good enough to find enjoyable music. But on my high-end audio system, I use Tidal.
As suggested, I installed Chrome on my Mac and then installed Tidal. I cannot believe it. The sound quality is very good. I am still experimenting with different artists, etc. Based on results so far, it is easily worth $20 per month. Yes, it is a little slow to load the music but this is no problem. Thanks again for your suggestions.
Guys... IE is a HOG and is the reason why your computer
is sooo slow when you are on line (that and malware, long
story). DITCH IE.... (Sorry Bill. You know its bad).
Chrome is lean and not as mean (as IE) and free and easy
and much faster (MUCH faster and much more compatible
with web sites).
BUT, you can download Tidals player or use ickstream.
The best way to run tidal is via ickstream, next
downloaded tidal program, lastly streaming via browser
due to bandwith bottlenecks in all three places (their
server, your server, your puter). Its 2015! Get a
better web browser!
I've been a Spotify user for about a year now, runs great, never goes down, no issues. I was hesitant to pay $20 for Tidal, but finally went for it. After 2 weeks, I've cancelled Tidal. I'm using the Tidal app on a computer with plenty of power and ram, on a broadband ethernet connection, and it's just one hang-up after another, one "invalid track" error after another. Closing and re-starting doesn't help. I've had almost as many days that I couldn't enjoy it as days that I could. Granted, the sound quality is superb, but the promise of great sound quality doesn't help when all you're getting is silence and "invalid track" errors on every album I pull up. If they get their act together, I'll sign back up, but at this point it feels like I'm paying to be a beta tester.
I have both and there's no comparison in terms of sound quality. Tidal is a must if you are wanting true audiophile quality streaming.
You do need to have a good Internet connection and a pc that is optimized for sound quality. I've only had one time when a track stopped playing due to bandwidth issues. In fact, you can play tidal right through chrome and it's great.
Spotify has interface advantages, but I rarely use it now.
I find Deezer a good subsitute for spotify. Elite is out for Deezer which boast higher rez.
Bcgator - sorry you are unable to enjoy tidal. Its the best thing to happen to me since 9th grade. Have you tried a download sped test to see where your bottleneck is? Try speedtest.net You need a nice signal (50 mips will do it). Its brutal but if you can get the internet bandwith required, its awesome. Kind of like the beginning of HDTV. You need alot of bandwith for it.
Cerrot, I'm pretty sure that my bandwidth isn't the cause of "invalid track" errors. For example, I'll click on an album, and instead of playing the song (and the song isn't greyed-out indicating that it's not available), it gives an "Invalid Track" message at the top of the screen. The software then begins to scroll through the album, song by song, first slowly then quickly, trying to find anything it can play. If I don't stop it, it'll scroll through every song, every album, by an artist, looking for anything to play. Clicking another artist, whose albums I've played previously, will start the scrolling over again. Closing and restarting doesn't help. This seems like software error, not bandwidth drop-out.
I tried Tidal for 3 weeks. It is NOT that much better than Spotify on my Venture speakers, MAC Book Pro, ModWright Elyse DAC, Magnus Audio MA-300 amp and WyWires USB cable.
This maybe a stupid question, but does Tidal have "stations" you can choose like XM. Best way to discover new music, imo. I have not tried Sirius XM over internet yet, but I assume the files are compressed.
Tidal has "Artist" radio, but not a genre category like Sirius/XM. It lets you play similar artists to the one you choose, (kinda like stations on Pandora), but not like 60's or 70's or Classic Rock or Deep Tracks, etc. that Sirius/XM has.
I have read a few posts that people have claimed that Tidal doesn't really sound any better than Spotify/Beats/Rhapsody. I must have either a really crappy system or a ultra hi-rez system because the difference on my system is remarkable. Tidal is so much better, it's not even close. But hey, if you can save the money with Spotify, then cool.
I think that the success, (or lack thereof) with Tidal depends on how you feed it to your system.
I did a tidal trial, its, well think a little better than deezer and spotify but think the trial is only normal quality low rez and not high rez.
Just following up on this.
I'm A/Bing Spotify and Tidal right now. There are definitely holes in both libraries and some non-overlap. Tidal definitely sounds better with the lossless streaming.
For $10 a month, you can get 320 kbps with Spotify. If you're a student, that can be discounted further. Additionally, Sony just announced Spotify will be supported on PS3 & PS4, meaning that it can be a one stop media box. Additionally, I think the Spotify apps are pretty robust.
In a world without Spotify, I wouldn't hesitate to pay for Tidal. But Spotify just works so well at this point.
If you can't hear the difference between MP3 spotify and uncompresed tidal, your system is prettty under audiogon par. probably a good thing... your kids will have shoes and go to college (no job but still have shoes..). No one with a big rig can listen to spotify and be 'satisfied'but tidal is an excellent listening experience. Thats the difference. Spotify may be adequate to some but this is the audiogon forum. 320 mps can't do it, buddy. the signal is not there. The difference between 320 and 44.1 is huge and should be a system calibrator, IE if you can't hear it, keep upgrading till you do.
Err, I have no experience with streaming, but presently I have double DSD with up sampling and 2.8 mHz for SACDs. I have little interest in Tidal but have heard it is far superior to Spotify. I might like it for a home intercom system except that I get NPR news there as well good classical and jazz broadcast there.
Bcgator, if you are playing through the browser, you need google chrome, but not a winner for me, due to lags... Try the downloaded player. Ickstream is awesome.
Justtubes, the beauty of tidal is what you didn't try.
Just installed Tidal, had been using Spotify. Tidal is much better. My draw back is the selection of music appears a little bit more limited.
My one question is how do I get my android phone or tablet to act as a remote off my laptop that streams to my DAC in my sound system? I have Tidal installed on both android devices but it does not recognize the laptop. With Spotify I got the message "connect to my PC". Present setup with Tidal plays independently on each device.
It's nice to sit and listen with a remote device in your hand.
It is more limited library wise but it is still in its infancy. It can only get better. Albums I searched for a month ago that were not there are available now, so there is new content pretty much weekly. 2bgeorge - that was my bug so I went with ikstream and a squeezebox and have ipeng on my tablet and its just a really good remote interface for me - album art and search functions. I think we have found a use for the defunct squeezebox.
I do like tidal even at standard version ($9.95/mth) but on trial now and given a choice probably keep it.The selection of newer releases is rather alright compared to the older selections, so this may still work partially for me.
I feel besides resolution issue, each provider has a different sonic flavor (not talking about absolute resolution). Spotify has a bit livelier sound as compared to Deezer (Elite), more relaxed.
Does anyone share my thoughts of just jumping from providers around every month or so.
IMO, if you are primarily listen to the similar selections through any service, then it makes sense to get the music stored as your own collection.
I am wanting to discover and rediscover both old and new music.
After some procrastination I got around to trying Tidal yesterday. I had been relying heavily on Spotify for the last year or so for digital, when I'm too lazy to spin my vinly. Well, I'm now quite sold on the Tidal $20 a month offering and have made the switch. A few main points:
1) The sound quality difference is clear, particularly clear on some tracks which I'm intimately familiar with. I now think I've been silly to play with an uncompressed solution up until now. It's really quite a breakthrough to get uncompressed streaming - a bit of a revelation really.
2) I actually prefer Tidal's interface to Spotify. It's cleaner, less busy, less 'c$%p" everywhere. I just hope Tidal doesn't try to copy every Spotify feature. The interface and feature set is perfectly fine as-is.
3) Catalog feels like it may be less than Spotify's, but to Cerrot's point above, it's surely getting better, so that should fix itself over time.
4) There seems to be some stability issues with Tidal, but I've had plenty of crazy stability issues with Spotify's client too. If anything I expect to be happier in this respect with Tidal as it has fewer 'stuff' going on (For example, Spotify keeps suggesting to me what my FB friends are listening to. I actually don't give a what some random friend is listening to). If anything Tidal feels a bit more stable through Chrome vs. using a standalone client - it's possibly consuming a lot less computer resources and it really feels, looks and works quite fluidly.
5) As 2bgeorge noted above, the key downside I'm experiencing is that I was using Spotify's iPad app as a remote for my desktop (source). Strangely it took Spotify eons to actually launch that feature, but it is great (It has some stability issues too, but generally works ok). I began to leave feedback to Tidal about this on their Help site and there was a recent/related response from them noting that they are working hard and fast on this feature, so that's good to hear.
Overall, despite kinks (there are always some tradeoffs) Tidal feels like a no-brainer for any audiophile. Frankly, if one is an audiophile and cares about quality I can't really see how Spotify could be a consideration anymore. I feel a bit foolish not to have switched from Spotify to Tidal earlier.
Late reply, but Cerrot I am using the downloaded app. The issues I've had have occurred while using the app, not a browser. It's run fine off and on the last few days, only had to restart a couple of times.
It absolutely does sound better than Spotify, though I prefer Spotify's interface and access to various playlists. Just seems like more content on Spotify...not just in absolute terms, but more different ways to find new content. But the sound quality has Spotify beat.
Sounds great, Bcgator. I am in love with Tidal and scratching my head that more have not embraced it. I haven't purchased a CD since tidal (I was spending $100-$200 every moth on CD's).
Poke around some of the playlists some of the users have put together. There are s e 3,4 and 10-15 hour playlists. I have been discovering new music daily...
Still in love with Tidal here. And while the suggestions, artist radio, and interface of Spotify are super-convenient, imagine going back five years in time with the following offer:
Them: We'll give you CD-quality access to 85% of the recorded albums in the history of music, for $20 a month.
Me: Yeah, well, it sucks if it won't pick out the music I want to listen to for me.
I'd look like a real a**hole, wouldn't I?
I can see a lot of reasons why Spotify users haven't migrated.
Do this, just for one example...pretend you want to explore the decade of the 1970s and put "70s" in the search box of Tidal, and then do the same in Spotify. If you put "70s" in the Spotify search box you get lots of playlists with great 70s music, whether you want disco, glam rock, AM radio hits, etc. That same search on Tidal gets you around 5 or 6 limited playlists of actual songs by their original artists. The rest are made up of tribute-band songs...great hits done by someone nobody has ever heard of. That's just one example. Go ahead and try it...the 3rd playlist shown is not of original artists, the 4th isn't even 70s songs. One of the lists is "Woman of Rock", including Alanis Morisette...had she even hit puberty by the end of the '70s?
I'm sure once their library gets bigger, and they hire someone who was alive in the 1970s to make sure their '70s playlists don't have Alanis Morisette on them, they'll hit their stride and you'll see people flock there in droves. I just don't think they're there yet.
That is not accurate about Tidal and the 70s search. That would yeild just 4-5 playlists but they can be 40 hours long, so youre talking 100-200 tracks. The way to search is to type in a specific artist of the search, IE say, Elton John (70's) or Mama Cass, etc.... then see what coms up. That will keep you busy for months.
Oh... they're there.
But, Cerrot, it's so _inconvenient_ to have to _think_ of the name of the artist or album I want to hear. ;-)
You're absolutely wrong Cerrot, I stand by my previous message. Those 4-5 playlists aren't hundreds of songs long, they're 35-45 songs long. And if you do a search under Elton John, as you suggest, the results return exactly 4 playlists that have anything to do with the 1970s. Just did it myself, looking at it onscreen right now.
If you do a search under Mama Cass, again as you suggest, you get exactly 3 playlists...2 of which are for songs from 2015, and one which has over 400 songs but any connection to the 1970s is purely random - it includes songs from Benny Goodman and Bruno Mars. Bruno Mars wasn't even alive in the 1970s. Go ahead, try it yourself, you'll see what I'm seeing. Did you actually do any of the searches you suggest, before typing your last message?
I'm not saying Tidal is a poor service, I'm simply explaining to you why it's not head-scratching why everyone with access to an internet connection hasn't signed up. Having bitrate isn't enough, they also have to have the library AND the interface and search algorithms to access it. Some days, I've worked so hard my brain is fried, I don't know who I want to listen to, I want to sort of just listen to random radio from a particular time period and maybe re-discover songs I'd forgotten about. We're talking about decade-related playlists...I'm not asking it to make up a playlist of artists who enjoy playing Scrabble on weekends while wearing rasberry berets. A decade-playlist isn't rocket science.