Looking forward to trying Qobuz. Pricing is better than Tidal.

www.qobuz.com/nz-en/music/streaming/offers

Qobuz finally launched yesterday in New Zealand

From initial listening it's very very good, free trial currently running

www.qobuz.com/nz-en/music/streaming/offers

Enjoy!

Manager & Product specialist at Rapallo AV & HI-FI

A very 'sciency' illustration here, I think not.

What about if your 20-20khz amp (or mobile device) actually doesn't perform well above 20khz?
Let alone your speakers?

I do have a couple of amps here that are rated in specs to 100khz+. Even 120khz, 150khz. Many amps aren't rated beyond 20khz. So ...
Nor speakers, except with super tweeters.

So I do sense that there is some selling here to those who think they might get a better sound ... when their equipment might not reveal it.



Besides, I'm finding it hard to even catch up with the music I already have ...

But nice, nonetheless! ;=})

The main claimed benefit of high-resolution audio files is superior sound quality over compressed audio formats such as MP3 and AAC.

Downloads from sites such as Amazon and iTunes, and streaming services such as Spotify, use compressed file formats with relatively low bitrates – such as 256kbps AAC files on Apple Music and 320kbps Ogg Vorbis streams on Spotify.

The use of lossy compression means data is lost in the encoding process, which in turn means resolution is sacrificed for the sake of convenience and smaller file sizes. This has an effect upon the sound quality – those formats aren't telling the full story of our favourite songs.

This might be fine when you're listening to Spotify playlists on your smartphone on the bus on the morning commute, but serious audiophiles and music fans should want better. This is where high-resolution audio comes in.

To illustrate why it should sound better than MP3, for example, let’s compare the relative bitrates. The highest quality MP3 has a bitrate of 320kbps, whereas a 24-bit/192kHz file has a data rate of 9216kbps. Music CDs are 1411kbps.

The hi-res 24-bit/96kHz or 24-bit/192kHz files should, therefore, more closely replicate the sound quality the musicians and engineers were working with in the studio. And they could be that very same recorded file, too. These files are labelled as "Studio Masters" in some cases.

With more information on the file to play with, hi-res audio tends to boast greater detail and texture, bringing listeners closer to the original performance – provided your system is transparent enough.

Deano

Manager & Product specialist at Rapallo AV & HI-FI

Pricing is practically identical to Tidal $29.99 per month.
Year subscription discounted to $22.49 per month.

Apr 15, 2021 6:28:36 GMT 12 deano1974 said:

The main claimed benefit of high-resolution audio files is superior sound quality over compressed audio formats such as MP3 and AAC.

Downloads from sites such as Amazon and iTunes, and streaming services such as Spotify, use compressed file formats with relatively low bitrates – such as 256kbps AAC files on Apple Music and 320kbps Ogg Vorbis streams on Spotify.

The use of lossy compression means data is lost in the encoding process, which in turn means resolution is sacrificed for the sake of convenience and smaller file sizes. This has an effect upon the sound quality – those formats aren't telling the full story of our favourite songs.

This might be fine when you're listening to Spotify playlists on your smartphone on the bus on the morning commute, but serious audiophiles and music fans should want better. This is where high-resolution audio comes in.

To illustrate why it should sound better than MP3, for example, let’s compare the relative bitrates. The highest quality MP3 has a bitrate of 320kbps, whereas a 24-bit/192kHz file has a data rate of 9216kbps. Music CDs are 1411kbps.

The hi-res 24-bit/96kHz or 24-bit/192kHz files should, therefore, more closely replicate the sound quality the musicians and engineers were working with in the studio. And they could be that very same recorded file, too. These files are labelled as "Studio Masters" in some cases.

With more information on the file to play with, hi-res audio tends to boast greater detail and texture, bringing listeners closer to the original performance – provided your system is transparent enough.

Deano

Oh I quite agree Deano, and perhaps I was a bit reactionary in my post - the crude stepped waveform advert  illustration got me a bit.

Of course I accept that if you're prepared to pay for a streaming service (which I'm not, yet) that you're far better off getting uncompressed files to listen to or download!

Yes;- I have > 600 albums in 16/44 flac, a few dozen 24 bit of which most are 96khz sampling freq, and still a small legacy collection of mp3s from earlier, almost all of which are at the max 320kbs. It quickly became apparent to me on even a modest hi fi system that lower bitrate mp3s were increasingly irritating, especially on well recorded music, say acoustic jazz.

But even 320kbs were bettered by the same in CD quality;- I've just kept some as a reminder that I haven't found a CD of same yet.

(128kbs just sound awful, I won't have them! ;-)

Certainly as I go about digitising some favourite LPs, it'll be at 24/96. I now have the gear, just need to find time to devote to the tasks involved ... ;=})

(I'd previously recorded a few to a HiFi Nicam VHS machine and tape cassette, nearly 30 years ago! And am glad I did - some from an MC cartridge now busted!)

Spek is a handy tool that clearly shows the differences between various encodings of any particular music file.

Part of my point though was that even at home, some amplifiers (let alone speakers) may not be up to delivering clean bandwidth up to say at least 48khz, nyquist half of 96khz sampling, and that punters may not realise this. Well, Caveat Emptor, but I was trying to recall the tech details on amp failings at greater than say 20khz spec frequencies.

Intermodulation distortion? I forget. Someone will know the possible flaws and failings possible.

And I do believe super-tweeters might be efficacious, despite the conventional perception that 20hz-20khz is it for human hearing...

I recall reading a paper describing an experiment in which participants listened to both 16 bit and 24 bit files of gamelan music, with electrodes on their heads, and found that (I can't remember, need to find again to note the specific Greek letter brainwaves) - that not only was the (greek letter?) brainwave (enhanced pleasure relaxation & etc.) enhanced with the 24 bit file, but also it (the effect) lasted for several hours after the music had finished!

I'm sorry that that's such a sloppy report, but I'll leave it out there (in here) to remind me to search it out again... for me, it was convincing that higher bit-rate is good.

Cheers!

~ Ross

" Qobuz....will be opening in six new countries: Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland. "

" Qobuz was available in 12 countries and is now available in 18. "

" In mature markets such as Australia, New Zealand, and Northern Europe, these new locations are highly strategic for Qobuz in the context of our international expansion. "

(Georges Fornay, Deputy CEO of Qobuz)

See - Positive Feedback (15 Apr '21)

DarkLantern blog - darklanternforowen.wordpress.com

" Qobuz or Tidal? That’s like asking: Pepsi or Coke? "

See - DARKO (15 Apr '21)

DarkLantern blog - darklanternforowen.wordpress.com

My Tidal sub has just ended so I'm trialing Qobuz.

All good so far.

Not sure if its in my mind but I get the sense that generally the sound is more solid, less aggressive on the tracks I've compared.
But of course its not always clear what version it is that I'm comparing.

A few albums not found So far that are on Tidal, which is worrying...

Still appreciating the sound quality but the mobile ap is less than ideal.

Limited options and offline downloaded files from playlists are not grouped into their original playlist, just lumped one folder.

Sound quality is great easy install & integration with Roon. Like it so far. Even worked out how to transfer Tidal saves

How did you do that?

Any thoughts on Tidal MQA vs Qobuz Hi-Res?

I am using both through the Lumin app. It seems Qobuz has fewer albums in hi-res and Cannot arrange favourites in alphabetical order. Tidal has more albums in mqa and can arrange in alphabetical order.

The hi-res Qobuz albums do sound great!

For me Qobuz is far superior to Tidal MQA, its sounds more rounded amd less thin, also I have never been a fan of MQA as meridian don't release how they master in this format

This video below clarified to me that MQA is pretty bad

Manager & Product specialist at Rapallo AV & HI-FI

Great video. iFi are aware of it. At least the dacs can still decode pcm, dxd and dsd!

AMR-iFi R&D

Still having problems with downloaded offline content.

Downloads to phone but when trying to playback get hiccups, or no plays halfway through the albums. As half my listening to streaming is mobile, this is increasingly frustrating.

Anyone know the maximum number or size of file downloads you can get offline, when it does work?