# Tidal Music Service



## Golden Ear

Anyone using Tidal? I keep seeing ads for it but haven't heard of anyone using it yet. You get a free 7 day trial but after that it's $20/month


----------



## bradknob

I tried it out. There's a noticable change in the quality but nothing drastic. If you don't have perfect reception, it will pause to load the song constantly. It's annoying. Spotify has the option to stream at 320kbit/s also, but same goes for the reception and pausing. At least spotify allows you to change the streaming rate and is $10 less/ per month.


----------



## Golden Ear

So the "hd" music streaming tidal is talking about is 320kbit/s just like Spotify? Not CD quality?


----------



## Beckerson1

Golden Ear said:


> Anyone using Tidal? I keep seeing ads for it but haven't heard of anyone using it yet. You get a free 7 day trial but after that it's $20/month





bradknob said:


> I tried it out. There's a noticable change in the quality but nothing drastic. If you don't have perfect reception, it will pause to load the song constantly. It's annoying. Spotify has the option to stream at 320kbit/s also, but same goes for the reception and pausing. At least spotify allows you to change the streaming rate and is $10 less/ per month.





Golden Ear said:


> So the "hd" music streaming tidal is talking about is 320kbit/s just like Spotify? Not CD quality?


I tried it and to me it isn't worth the cost. Spotify (once a paying member) allows you to download (so does Tidal) playlists so you can play them offline. 

I wouldn't say its Not CD quality but its not the best loseless ether. At least through my experience with it. Basically Tidal is spotify (everything about it) but claims to be high quality. I'd put it this way:

Spotify----Tidal-----Actual Loseless

So for me wasn't worth the $10 extra a month


----------



## bradknob

Golden Ear said:


> So the "hd" music streaming tidal is talking about is 320kbit/s just like Spotify? Not CD quality?



I'd be lying if I told you exactly how it was streamed. What I mean to say is that I have a difficult time distinguishing between 320 and alac. Which is what %100 of my iPod is made of. So tidal isn't worth the extra money when spotify sounds pretty much the same. To me. Wouldn't hurt to try it for a week though and see for yourself.


----------



## Krank

Tidal gives you the option of FLAC or ALAC, depending on your OS(both lossless).

Does that mean it sounds better? Than a properly encoded 320 aac?
That's something you'll have to decide for yourself and decide if the bandwidth and extra money are worth it to you. If you don't already know your preference, some experimentation is due.​
Personally, my tongue can't identify all 12 spices in my wife's fried chicken and my ears can't distinguish a difference between Spotify and Tidal... My senses just aren't as astute as maybe some other audiophiles and food critics.


----------



## Golden Ear

I think I'll do the free trial to hear for myself. If it's not a $10/mo difference then I'll stick to Spotify. I got 3 months of premium for $.99 because I didn't sign up right after the free trial so I'll use that up too


----------



## Theslaking

I use Rhapsody typically. I just grabbed Tidal a couple weeks ago. What peaked my interest about Tidal was loss less downloads. If you riding in a vehicle or playing music on a job site radio streaming loss less does not matter (which is me 90% of the time). Only maybe 5% of my listening is in a quite environment. Then I do want my high quality downloads. Rhapsody is not for rap. Most people I put on to this service thought it was because they never took the time to see how it was spelled or understand the definition. I have been using Rhapsody for more than 5 years. I have a great device for streaming, good carrier, and unlimited data plan so reception is not an issue ever. I only steam at 320. Rhapsody has a better library, more sub genre categories, adjustable streaming rate (if it matters), easier user interface, and way less loading time. Tidal has a good library as they have been around for a long time, just not in the US. Tidal has "stations" that are really just playlist that start over every time you quit running the app. Super annoying. So if you kill the app and go in the store and come back out a start listening again then you have to skip past all the tracks you already listened to either manually or by que. 
Tidal does play the more obscure tracks and artist which I love. Rhapsody stations are definitely geared towards the more popular tracks from a band. Rhapsody also offers more authorized devices and playlist. So my wife. two kids, and I all have multiple devices for an extra $5 a month. Well worth it. With Tidal I also have more loading interruptions than I prefer. Rhapsody- rarely, movies- some, tidal-most. It's not horrible but it leaves a sour taste when your jamming so intensely you don't know how you drove the last 2 miles and then at the climatic part of the song- loading.......
As for quality. I never once noticed the difference driving around. I would load the same tracks on both apps and flip back and forth. No noticeable difference. If I switched Rhapsody to low quality steaming I can certainly hear the difference. As I have went past my free trial I decided I needed to make a decision on which service to keep. I decided that driving around was not a fair arena for high quality comparison. So just two nights ago I sat in my driveway, car off and started the battle. Flac vs Rhapsody 320 vs Tidal. I played random tracks from Tidal and Rhapsody and maybe heard a difference. I was not sure if some parts really sounded more clear or if I just wanted them to. Both good. After several tracks I maybe noticed a very tiny difference. I then went to the final test. I payed a song I was extremely familiar with that I had downloaded in Flac as well. I listened to the first minute and a half alternating between Rhapsody and Tidal. I could hear a difference in some parts of the song. I had to go back to that part of the track on the other service to make sure I was really hearing a difference. I was. Then I played the Flac. I could also only hear the difference at some parts of the song. Basically 3 or 4 minor things over an entire song. So yes Flac was still best.
In the end I am going to cancel Tidal. If I had to work this hard to barely hear a difference, only when I'm parked in my driveway streaming over my very good home wi-fi then it's not worth the extra $10 over Rhapsody. Better quality for Tidal, barely. Less friendly interface, less songs (at least what I searched), less devices, less features, more money.


----------



## t3sn4f2

Theslaking said:


> I use Rhapsody typically. I just grabbed Tidal a couple weeks ago. What peaked my interest about Tidal was loss less downloads. If you riding in a vehicle or playing music on a job site radio streaming loss less does not matter (which is me 90% of the time). Only maybe 5% of my listening is in a quite environment. Then I do want my high quality downloads. Rhapsody is not for rap. Most people I put on to this service thought it was because they never took the time to see how it was spelled or understand the definition. I have been using Rhapsody for more than 5 years. I have a great device for streaming, good carrier, and unlimited data plan so reception is not an issue ever. I only steam at 320. Rhapsody has a better library, more sub genre categories, adjustable streaming rate (if it matters), easier user interface, and way less loading time. Tidal has a good library as they have been around for a long time, just not in the US. Tidal has "stations" that are really just playlist that start over every time you quit running the app. Super annoying. So if you kill the app and go in the store and come back out a start listening again then you have to skip past all the tracks you already listened to either manually or by que.
> Tidal does play the more obscure tracks and artist which I love. Rhapsody stations are definitely geared towards the more popular tracks from a band. Rhapsody also offers more authorized devices and playlist. So my wife. two kids, and I all have multiple devices for an extra $5 a month. Well worth it. With Tidal I also have more loading interruptions than I prefer. Rhapsody- rarely, movies- some, tidal-most. It's not horrible but it leaves a sour taste when your jamming so intensely you don't know how you drove the last 2 miles and then at the climatic part of the song- loading.......
> As for quality. I never once noticed the difference driving around. I would load the same tracks on both apps and flip back and forth. No noticeable difference. If I switched Rhapsody to low quality steaming I can certainly hear the difference. As I have went past my free trial I decided I needed to make a decision on which service to keep. I decided that driving around was not a fair arena for high quality comparison. So just two nights ago I sat in my driveway, car off and started the battle. Flac vs Rhapsody 320 vs Tidal. I played random tracks from Tidal and Rhapsody and maybe heard a difference. I was not sure if some parts really sounded more clear or if I just wanted them to. Both good. After several tracks I maybe noticed a very tiny difference. I then went to the final test. I payed a song I was extremely familiar with that I had downloaded in Flac as well. I listened to the first minute and a half alternating between Rhapsody and Tidal. I could hear a difference in some parts of the song. I had to go back to that part of the track on the other service to make sure I was really hearing a difference. I was. Then I played the Flac. I could also only hear the difference at some parts of the song. Basically 3 or 4 minor things over an entire song. So yes Flac was still best.
> In the end I am going to cancel Tidal. If I had to work this hard to barely hear a difference, only when I'm parked in my driveway streaming over my very good home wi-fi then it's not worth the extra $10 over Rhapsody. Better quality for Tidal, barely. Less friendly interface, less songs (at least what I searched), less devices, less features, more money.


Last time I checked, Rhapsody was still streaming/downloading at 192kbps. 

Edit: Ah nevermind, I see they changed things.

"Audio Quality & Bitrate

Rhapsody continuously evaluates the best way to deliver high audio quality as efficiently as possible. Our mobile apps have the option of streaming Good (AAC+ 64 kb/s), Better (AAC 192 kb/s), and Best (AAC 320 kb/s). Tests show 64 kbps AAC+ is equivalent to 128 kbps MP3, yet requires only half the bandwidth to deliver. Home audio systems use 128 to 192 kbps AAC, depending on the device. PC client downloads in WMA 160 Kbps for offline listening."


----------



## Theslaking

Here's the option.


----------



## Theslaking

It's been this way for at least 2 years.


----------



## Golden Ear

Thanks for reminding me about Rhapsody. They've been around forever so it's understandable that they have a lot of music. I have an audiophile friend who uses it also and swears by it. I'm gonna check and see if they have a free trial. I've also heard there's a way to rip music off of it so that you can add it to your collection. Not sure how to tho.


----------



## t3sn4f2

The only thing I never like about Rhapsody, had it for years, was that they would constantly pull albums from their library and either not put them back or they would return them with a different file name tag. The problem with that is that if you had a complete library of all your favorite tracks, you would loose those tracks and there was nothing to notify you. So you'd be shuffling your library or playlist and it would seamlessly skip that non available track like if it was never there. 

Maybe they've fixed changed that be now? I know with the other one I use now (MOG>Beats), I don't notice it happen. Library is just as big as well.


----------



## t3sn4f2

____


----------



## Golden Ear

Thanks for sharing! I think that's what my buddy uses. Took a ss so if I ever decide to try it I'll have the info.


----------



## papasin

Both Linda and Jim love it. That is all.


----------



## Theslaking

I haven't lost an album in a long time. Maybe with the current widespread acceptance of streaming music artist are just not pulling their stuff anymore. I appreciate the extraction info. I think Rhapsody is the overall best service. Near perfect now that I can rip files.


----------



## rxonmymind

Just tried it. Listening to Eric Clapton 2001 Live album~One more car one more rider I chose the song Bell bottom blues for it's crystal clear guitar picks and good solid bass drums in the end.
Listening to both Google play and Tidal approximately 3x each side by side for the first 2:00 minutes I couldn't notice a huge difference. I then allowed the music to proceed to finish to it's end where the drum roll comes on fairly nicely in a low machine gun roll. Didn't notice a difference. My sub played both exactly the same. 

Not worth the $20 a month in my opinion. Now if they go about sourcing quality Telarc, MFSL and SACD, gold quality disc and stream those THEN it'll be worth it.


----------

