Pardon me if this has been discussed. I grew up on vinyl. Went thru CDs and digital downloads and still use all 3. I had a 300 disc CD changer in the 90s for parties, then went to playing playlists off my phone for casual listening. But I am intrigued by the streaming services. I have multiple Apple devices and con't mind paying a subscription fee - I want to pay for official content, the artists deserve it. But how is sound quality? Equivalent a 320 MP3? 192? Lower?

Which service is of higher quality? More music?

I appreciate and input.

Thanks

I am using Deezer but my half-price discovery will be over next month.
If I change, I'll go for Apple Music

For audiophiles, Deezer has a HiFi option (twice the price of the regular subscription) offering FLAC Files
Qobuz has got even more choice and higher bitrates, but the difference in termes of catalogue is mainly to be found in the jazz and classical sections AFAIK

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]

They're nearly all sh*t.

It's a shame because digital audio is now potentially very good.

The problem is that there is no universally accepted Hi Res format made available across the board by the providers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-03-29 19:14 by Spud.

Apple Music's Jimmy Iovine says streaming services are 'too similar'

[www.bbc.com]

I'm no audiophile, never pretended to be, so selection, convenience, ease of use trumps that in my opinion.

I started with Spotify in its free version and soon tired of the commercials. I'm an eclectic listener -- the last week included Hank3,the Derailers, Christian Scott aTunde Adjuah, and Frank Zappa to name a few, and I can find most of what I'm looking for on Spotify.

I still use CDs in the car, largely because it just feels like "one more thing" to plug a cord into my phone.

T@3

Tried free Spotify and hated it. The Channels/Playlists are shit.

For free streaming I'm now using Pandora. The Channels/Playlist are very good.

If I want to stream specific songs, artists etc. I just use YouTube. The sound quality is typically great but you have to have that app open during use as opposed to Pandora which you can just minimize and do other things on your device at the same time.

The problem I have is my Sonos speaker system is WiFi only and I can't Bluetooth YouTube through them.

I have subscribed to Rhapsody, now Napster, for many years and I like it. I started to get into streaming more than 20 years ago with a young Cie "XM".I had a box and a list of musically themed channels. On the remote there was a screen naming the song, the author, and more info. I realised that streaming was the best way to open new musical avenues and to explore musical genres that I would not have bought, not knowing it. Surprisingly, I got into "new age" for a while. Don't laugh; there is some creative and great new-age music out there;just have to find it.
I think I pay $15 a month for Napster. I don't listen to their lists. I go searching and I dig and I explore the music I love to the max. No limit, as long as you are still curious ,interested and open-minded.
Rockandroll.
Mops



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-03-31 16:12 by rollmops.

I have Amazon Prime and added Amazon music for $3.99 a month. Plays thru my Alexa device. Has access to almost every cd Amazon sells. You can request individual songs, artists, genres, etc. “Alexa - play 70’s hard rock”, “Alexa - play Live in Texas by The Rolling Stones” etc.

Looks like I should try a few different ones. It's amazing to me there are so many options. I wonder if any actually compensate the artists to any degree? I am sure the Stones and any band with past success in the golden eras of CD sales made loads of cash, but bands that never made it big but are still around, or up and coming bands....do they make enough off streaming to support themselves and continue growing.

I do love that the era of huge record deals is gone and that bands have to tour more. I love that virtually anyone with a couple of microphones and a laptop can have a studio, letting artists release what they want to release, recorded on a lower budget, without have a label want it to fit a market.

I just want to make sure a proper amount of the cash I pay for streaming actually goes to the right people.

Thanks for all the feedback. Starting trials today!

Quote
buffalo7478

I just want to make sure a proper amount of the cash I pay for streaming actually goes to the right people.

The French electronic music pioneer Jean-Michel Jarre [Oxygene (1976); Son of film score composer Maurice Jarre] is also President of the global Rights-Organisation CISAC and said in 2016 about Streaming:

“It is not a matter that we should complain about because we are now entering an entirely new age. We’ve never been listening to so much music. If you take a company like Spotify, its value is more than $8 billion and yet the majority of artists at the end of the year get the cost of a pizza without pepperoni. So it is something we have to readjust – we have to reinvent a business model for the 21st century for artists.”

[www.Forbes.com] , [www.TheSun.co.uk]

Great quote. Somewhere out there is a system that will be fair to artists and consumers.

A good overview : What Streaming Music Services Pay :
[www.digitalmusicnews.com]

If you want to stream high resolution music : [www.slashgear.com]

If you're about quality, best streaming quality services are Qobuz in Europe and Tidal in US.

Quote
kowalski

If you're about quality, best streaming quality services are Qobuz in Europe and Tidal in US.

Highresaudio.com (Berlin, Germany) will start Streaming of all their 35,000 Albums in original resolution during April 2018. Subscription costs are €200 per year (or €250 with Downloads 30% lower priced) - [www.Stereo.de] - (in German).

Some interesting US-sales-numbers by the RIAA:



[www.RIAA.com] - (PDF)



[www.RIAA.com] - (PDF)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-17 03:35 by Irix.

Quote
buffalo7478

Great quote. Somewhere out there is a system that will be fair to artists and consumers.

Where the money currently goes in case of Music Streaming:



Of the € 9.99 monthly subscription costs the artists get € 0.68 only.

Legend: 1) French VAT, 2) Estimation by Stiftung Warentest

Source: German consumer organization 'Stiftung Warentest' - [www.Test.de] -- originally a study by French SNEP as well as Ernst & Young (EY), published in February 2015.

So record companies are to blame for the artists low income. Not Apple Music, Spotify or whatever.

Also didn't know songwriters receive more than artists.

Quote
BowieStone

So record companies are to blame for the artists low income. Not Apple Music, Spotify or whatever.

Yep - the Stiftung Warentest article says that the artists still get more royalties from Streaming-Services than from AM/FM-Radio airplay.

Special situation in the United States - AM/FM-Stations only pay the Songwriters and Composers:



Songtrust.com , [www.Radio-Media.com] , [www.RoyaltyExchange.com] , [FutureOfMusic.org] , [www.Billboard.com]

I use Tidal.
With the quad dac on my cell phone and my Bose headphones?
Amazing.
They offer student and military discount as well.

If you'd rather give your money directly to artists consider also Bandcamp : [bandcamp.com]

Quote
BowieStone
So record companies are to blame for the artists low income. Not Apple Music, Spotify or whatever.

Also didn't know songwriters receive more than artists.

Consider someone like Jimmy Buffett - a majority of his discography, he wrote the songs, so his ABC years, which was gobbled up by MCA, which are his biggest selling and most likely most streamed, make him the most money regarding how many times certain songs will be streamed, even though he doesn't own the label, because nothing on his own label will ever be listened to as much as his classics will be (unless someone has a hankering for whatever live version of whatever song(s)).

He formed his very own label in 1999, Mailboat Records, and he (Mailboat) gets about $6 a disc when it comes to hard copies. His records generally go gold whenever he releases one. He's had a couple of platinum ones, his biggest selling record being 2004's LICENSE TO CHILL (Mailboat teamed up with RCA for that and the following album), which was also his first #1 LP (he started in 1970). He's released 29 studio albums and one soundtrack, 13 live albums (a majority on Mailboat) and there have been 2 hits comps.

Not that he needs the money but he's not happy with Spotify etc - even with his label, being the/a songwriter and the artist he's getting ripped off, as is everyone else. Who decided a song is worth 99 cents? That's not much more than what a 45 cost in the 1960s.

That's ridiculous.

Quote
kowalski
A good overview : What Streaming Music Services Pay :

If you're about quality, best streaming quality services are Qobuz in Europe and Tidal in US.

Agreed, tidal HiFi is quite good

.....keep on rolling.....

First of all, please make sure you have equipment that can reproduce HI-RES files.
That means a good DAC for your headphones or amp, and GOOD headphones if that's what you use most to listen.
Due to ringing in my ears, part of my therapy included getting good headphones and ELIMINATING MP3's from my library. I won't listen to them.

Now, for various reasons, I have the following HI-RES streaming services:

Amazon, mainly for convenience when listening through my Sonos equipment at home. It's also convenient for my spouse. I also do Amazon set ups in my small business for customers, so I support the platform.

Now- on my headphones: I use Tidal because I get a discount from my Dad's military service. It's $11:99 USD per month. (I paid for a year and received a 15% discount) IT's also on my Amazon devices and my phone. I stream through a separate DAC and use a bluetooth device that allows LDAC streaming. (look it up- to long to explain all that, here.) My IEM (In Ear Monitor's) plug into my DAC and the DAC is bluetooth to my Galaxy Note 10+ using LDAC. I use this for my therapy to help with the ringing in my ears and personal listening. I really like Tidal for it's deep dive into HI-RES artists and albums.

I just got a year of QOBUZ which I love for it's even deeper dive into HI-RES quality of tracks. The difference is subtle over Tidal but I quite like it. I notice a difference in quality from Bruce Springsteen's Western Stars release. QOBUZ has Tidal beat on sound quality.
Tidal has a better (wider) selection of artists and albums.
Try a month of each service and pick the one that is BEST for you.
Hope this helps you out.

Apple Music Reveals How Much It Pays When You Stream a Song

Streaming services open up about artist payouts, seeking to win credibility and subscribers

The Wall Street Journal · by Anne Steele · April 16, 2021 5:38pm ET


Apple Music said it pays 52% of its subscription revenue to record labels.


Apple Music told artists it pays a penny per stream, according to a letter viewed by The Wall Street Journal.

The disclosure, made in a letter to artists delivered Friday (16-Apr-2021) via the service’s artist dashboard and sent to labels and publishers, reflects music-streaming services’ increasing efforts to show they are artist-friendly. Apple Inc.’s move can be seen as a riposte to Spotify Technology SA, which last month shared some details of how it pays the music industry for streams on its platform.

Apple’s penny-per-stream payment structure - which music-industry experts say can dip lower - is roughly double what Spotify, the world’s largest music-streaming service, pays music-rights holders per stream. Spotify pays an average of about one-third to one-half penny per stream, though its larger user base generates many more streams. Apple’s payments come out of monthly subscription revenue from users.

Artists, managers and lawyers, still reeling from the loss of touring revenue during the pandemic, have been calling for higher payouts from music streaming, which has grown rapidly in the past year. Many fans have joined the push to raise artists’ compensation.

The Union of Musicians and Allied Workers weighed in on Apple’s letter Friday, saying that all music streamers should pay one penny per stream at a minimum and encouraged Apple to make its penny-per-stream payment not merely from a portion of its subscription revenue.

Apple last reported more than 60 million Music subscribers in June 2019. Spotify leads the industry in subscriptions with 155 million, out of 345 million total active users including those who listen free to the ad-supported tier. Amazon Inc. said early last year that its music subscription offerings had 55 million subscribers.

“As the discussion about streaming royalties continues, we believe it is important to share our values,” Apple said in its letter. “We believe in paying every creator the same rate, that a play has a value, and that creators should never have to pay for featuring” music in prime display space on its service.

Artists aren’t paid directly by streaming services, so a single play of a song doesn’t result in a penny going into that artist’s account. Instead, streaming services pay royalties to rights holders - a group that includes labels, publishers and other distributors - which in turn pay artists based on their recording, publishing and distribution agreements. Both Apple and Spotify pay rights holders based on the share of total streams their artists garner on each service.

Yet artists cite the per-stream pay rate as an indicator of their earnings. Major labels say the average monthly streams per user is a better measure of the streaming economy, and growing numbers of streams mean more money coming in for artists. Both Spotify and Apple, they say, are at or near the 1,000-streams-per-listener monthly benchmark that is seen as a success.

In the letter, Apple says it pays 52% of subscription revenue, or 52 cents of every dollar, to all record labels. Spotify, which generates revenue both from subscriptions and its free ad-supported tier, says it pays two-thirds of every dollar of revenue to rights holders, with 75% to 80% of that going to labels - translating to 50 to 53 cents on the dollar, depending on agreements between the service and different labels.

Spotify delivers much more revenue to the music industry than Apple does, since it has many more users. Its average per-stream payout rate is lower, though, because the average Spotify subscriber listens to more music per month than listeners on other services do. Plus, on Spotify’s free tier, ads don’t generate as much revenue as its premium service does. Spotify has said that while its free version generates less income than its paid one, it brings in eventual subscribers.

“We’ve conducted extensive testing that consistently shows that when we take the free service away, those listeners turn to non-revenue-generating alternatives, meaning the collective music industry is missing out on revenue,” the company says in “Loud and Clear,” an online report about payments to artists.

As Apple and Spotify continue to be locked in a battle for subscribers, Spotify has accused the tech giant of operating its App Store in a way that stifles competition. Other developers have also filed similar complaints against the company. In 2019, the music-streaming service filed an antitrust complaint in the European Union alleging that Apple uses its control over the App Store to limit competition from rivals to its music service.

Antitrust investigators in the EU and the U.K. are examining how Apple operates its App Store and treats developers that use the platform. Apple has defended its App Store practices, saying the rules it enforces are applied equally for all developers and that it wants apps that compete with its services to thrive. In 2019, Apple said Spotify wants to benefit from using its service without supporting it. -- [www.WSJ.com] .

I have Tidal HI Res and Qobuz. With the right equipment, it's a noticeable difference in sound quality. If you're using Apple? I wouldn't bother unless you invest in a quality DAC. Tidal offers discounts you may qualify for. I get Qobuz on sale. I hope this helps

On my iPad,I purchased a software add-on that allows for hi res audio. If you're doing Bluetooth invest in equipment that's aptx/hd and use a good quality dac to your home audio system .
My email is dennycranium@live.CA if you want more help.

Apple Music will introduce lossless HiFi-Streaming (up to 192kHz/24bit) in June 2021 - [www.Apple.com] .



Spotify will begin rolling out lossless HiFi-Streaming in select markets later in 2021 - [Newsroom.Spotify.com] .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-05-17 19:35 by Irix.

Apple music is poor fidelity in my opinion.
I subscribe to Tidal Hi Res. I qualified for the military discount at $11.99 USD per month.

I quite enjoy Tidal. The have a robust selection of Stones material in MQA (Master Quality Audio)
I'm able to use it on ALL my devices and ecosystems.
It has a native app for Android, iOS and Windows.
You can download MQA audio to your phone or iPad, etc, for offline play.
This is convenient for plane rides or long drives that doesn't chew up mobile data.

Now, some people say that MQA and hires is a scam or dubious. I disagree with the following caveats.
If you don't have audio gear that isn't hi res (MQA) certified? You don't necessarily need the HiRes option.

I use hi-res certified gear through the audio chain. I use a hi res DAC (digital audio converter) on my phone. It plugs into the headphone jack or usb/lighting port.

I have a Helm Audio DAC I use with my phone and a USB audio app and a hi res Fiio In Ear Monitor (IEM) headphones. I use a Dragonfly red on my computer. I use a hires class D amp, on my desktop.

Now, with all of the proper equipment and listening environment? The improvement in sound quality is dramatically improved. I don't notice any difference in my car. There is too much noise going on around me for any noticeable difference.

Bluetooth audio, unless it's hi res certified, won't bring you any benefits. Bluetooth 5.0 with APTx or LDAC or APTx HD (lots of letters) will give you better sound.

Lastly, there is your hearing. I'm a male in my late 50's.I can hear up to 16khz. My ability to hear high and mid frequencies allows me to enjoy the benefits of Hi-Res audio.

Tidal has a trial period. They offer discounts for different reasons. (Military, First Responders, etc)

I also have Qobuz. They offered a good 1 year deal and I use it occasionally.
Amazon also offers ultra HD service that I quite enjoy.

I'm a budding audiophile and I enjoy researching and testing different equipment. Amps, DAC's and headphones.

I've tried Sonos, Bose and similar.

Right now, I'm impressed with S.M.S.L dacs and class d amplifiers.
Brands to research to get started: Helm Audio for DAC's and headphone Amps. Dragonfly DAC's and headphone amps.

SMSL for value priced Class D amps with Built In Quality DAC's.

For headphones, look at Fiio, Taotronics, MPow and Sound Liberty. Mpow and Soundpeats are great entry level APTX bluetooth headphones. Bose, Sennheiser are great name brands as well

I quite enjoy Tidal Hi-Res (MQA) service. Provided you have the right equipment, listening environment and good hearing? You will, as well. I've the Rolling Stones digital downloads of the album box set, that came out a few years ago. I notice subtle and quite dramatic details I never noticed before.

I hope this helps you and my email is in my profile. Feel free to reach out should you have any questions.

There will be other audiophiles that will probably disagree with my position. They will tell you to invest in better equipment to enjoy better audio and that's true to a degree. The return curve flattens out dramatically once you hit a certain price point. A $4000 dollar DAC or amp or system is not necessarily TWICE as good as a $2000.00 system. Improvements in sound quality may be incremental. Yes, an improvement in sound quality but not necessarily worth the extra investment. If you use an iphone, there is a surprisingly good DAC for under $20.00 to plug a quality pair of headphones into. Try that with trial subscription of Hi-Res Tidal. Do the A/B comparison in the right listening environment. Then make your decision.

Quote
dennycranium

Apple music is poor fidelity in my opinion.

Probably the old version based on lossy AAC.

But there's now a better version with Spatial Audio (Dolby Atmos) and Hi-Resolution Lossless (up to 192kHz/24bit) - [www.Apple.com] .

Quote
Irix

Quote
dennycranium

Apple music is poor fidelity in my opinion.

Probably the old version based on lossy AAC.

But there's now a better version with Spatial Audio (Dolby Atmos) and Hi-Resolution Lossless (up to 192kHz/24bit) - [www.Apple.com] .

This is GREAT news for Apple users. Now, if only iPhones allowed for expandable storage with an SD card. Downloading the files for offline play will gobble up internal storage pretty quickly. As always, Apple is always late to the game. I've been enjoying hi res Tidal for almost 3 years and Qobuz for almost 2 years.Apple is making this seem like it's groundbreaking. If you've lived inside the iOS environment for years, then I guess it is. I've always put Apple on my short list when it's time replace my phone. The lack of a "back" button on the touch screen and the ability to put in a micro SD card has always been a deal breaker. The price Apple charges for increased internal storage is obscene,in my opinion. I want technology to work for me. I don't want to have to work for it. I do enjoy my iPad. It's already out of internal storage. My options are an external drive which plugs into the lightning port. This prevents me from charging the iPad while using it. I either have to buy another iPad with more storage or pay for Apple's cloud storage, that doesn't help me when I'm on a plane or approaching my mobile data cap. A $25-50 SD card would allow me to get full use out of my iPad. But, iOS users are loyal. Loyal to a fault, actually..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-05-17 20:56 by dennycranium.

I found this Youtube video about MQA interesting.

I published music on Tidal to test MQA - MQA Review