Thank you Wytse for featuring “Funk Heven” on your channel! It’s truly an honor to be part of this. Your kindness is very much appreciated! I would also like to thank everyone that will, have and continued to listen to the song! 🧡 This is only the beginning.
Thanks for investing your time, money, and energy in this. Very useful to get the info coming from someone who has the original master which can serve as a baseline.
Such a great video, absolutely spot-on testing method and easy-to-understand explanations. ALSO... such a surprise to discover such an absolute banger of a tune, I can't stop listening to Funk Heven and simply must have more of this artist's music. How does their video only have 3K views?! Your mix is also superb!
That lossy compressions creates more ear fatigued is a hypothesis which needs proof. AFAIK the opposite is true. Also our brain AFAIK isn't "filling the missing part's" it is more like "the codec is removing/modifying the part's we probably won't hear in the original". If you stare in the direction of the sun you probably won't see every minute detail of the surroundings. It's the same with sound. You are unable to hear every minute detail of noise and high entropy part's. You probably aren't able to differentiate between two white/pink noises which share the same frequency curve.
Absolutely great video. So interesting hearing what is lost through compression with the null testing. It would be great to see Amazon Music included in this too. But very thorough coverage! Thank you
Tidal halved its price and you seem to get Tidal HiFi for 9,99 nowadays, you only pay double if you choose the Master pack but i do not recommend that one.
The problem with Apple Music is that you can only get HIFI through an iPhone or iPad. If you want It on a PC you're screwed. That's why Tidal or Deezer are currently the best option. Because lets be honest no one is going to connect a DAC to an ipad or iphone we all use it on pc. I mean If you wanted to you could but It's just an extra hassle and you can't use the phone normally.
An interesting result I hear is when these high frequencies are attenuated via the compression algorithms they apply, it tends to make the stereo image collapse inwards. Which makes sense, typically you have your high frequency information encoded further to the side channels than the mid channel.
Your results support my own experiences, I switched to Tidas because of the sound quality AND the much better suggestions what to listen next ...Thanks a lot!
This is an informative video with good explanations, thank you! I personally don't understand why the music industry constantly reduced the sound quality over time. We started with Vinyl, then got used to CDs. After that, we were hijacked to MP3 and ended up with streaming between 128 and 320 kbits. Not to forget the removal of the cable and replacing it with Bluetooth. So, our hearing and brain "learned" to get used to these losses what I think is bad as I am sure we lost the memory about how music sounds. Having lossless sound quality back is the minimum we can expect from the music industry and the streaming services. I have been using Tidal Master (switching over from Spotify) for more than five months now and I am happy with it even I am not always able to hear the differences between Tidal and Spotify I can enjoy music for much longer without getting tired and hear more details and there is a slightly better instrument separation.
idk we been used to bad sounding music since the 60s with 33rpm vinyl and 7" 45 that sounded exactly like 33rpm, then cassette tapes, it only went good when CD was introduced and further improved upon the end of 90s, then ipod in the 2000s went in craphole again... do I think AAC/Opus are quite good enough even for carrying as portable player format these days but be sure to just encode it to the highest bitrate, as carrying FLAC with you on DAPs simply just a pain in the crack especially backing those up. lately I just encode all of my FLACs to AAC VBR highest bitrate then put it to my DAP, while 96khz/24bit hi-res audio will remain as FLAC in it to save storage.
If all Tidal, Apple Music and Deezer in lossless pass the null test without any artifacts why do they sound different through the same DAC and hifi system ? Thanks
Did you do the free spotify before or after the premium? Because spotify happily uses cached information unless you manually clear it, you can easily have played the same downloaded information for both the tiers.
Year 2024 here. After years of using Spotify as sound engineer I decided to switch for Apple Music. The second factor that every test skip is the compression itself. Files are not only compressed for less data but also dynamic changes. Thats why as sound engineers we should listen losless because we just to bad sound, less and destroyde dynamic of band and frequency wise. Not sure if you know what I mean - its like always listen to overdriven guitar and then you don't really know chow clean guitar sounds like and always on your mix try to overdrive your guitar even if it should stay clean but you have your mind template of guitar as overdriven. Thats why losless is so important to audio engineers - to stay in perfect template of sound in our mind and ears. THX for that video, 2 years old now but still valuable !
Hi, I liked your test very much. I am curious about the (non-existent) difference between Spotify "High" and "Very High" and wonder if you cleared the Spotify software cache between your tests? After all, it could be that Spotify simply reused the initial downloaded version.
good point! also is worthy to consider that they can give you less quality depending on their servers and the bandwidth of the user. Handy for them to save money on servers, but giving a worse quality at the end
I'm glad at the end you mentioned that there are other factors. I hate spotify for a number of reasons but it's still my go to. The playlists, song recommendations, user communication (public playlists, song sharing, etc.) stuff just makes it the best platform for me. When I make enough money from music that I can pay all my own bills, I'll get Tidal to add on (but by that time Spotify Hi Fi might be ready lol)
First of all, very nice review and very easy and nice layout both in terms of audio and visuals. Now... 14:52 : I can clearly hear just as urself the difference in terms of "Apple Music" using another type of sound fo the percussion in the song and also for thoose really clear and high pitches. I can even hear that they've re-arranged the position from where the vocals emerge from or am I crazy? I love your take on this and setup when comparing. I think audio is a very induvidual experience to each and one of us and it also comes down to matter of taste. But It's always a extra nice feature to just know that the song that you are currently blasting of is actually not "tampered" with in a sense of that it sounds exactly as the original, atleast to my own ears. Again, very very professional and skillfull production of this video! *hands down + clap* Also very nice beat/song! Love the MJ dna feel to it! :) Regards - Marcus Berntssn , Sweden.
There are those who say that the minimum requirement for hi-res is 96 kHz . Well, that's the minimum requirement when it comes to certification for Hi-res. DXD is extremely 352.8KHz DSD is well at 2.8 MHz but then it is only one bit Technology used among other things on SACD
Were you logged into a paid account with UA-cam? From reading online, the premium accounts get higher fidelity, but I still doubt it is lossless. I also wonder how this compares to UA-cam Music. Thanks for the test and explaining the process - I'll post back results here if I try the test.
Curiously you didn't play any of the Qobuz streams (only the 'null' test for losslessness)....after all, you played and compared with your master recording all the others. I've tried most of them (with either a trial or sub) and have now moved to Qobuz which I find has the edge for sound (but not for track listing info. on classical releases!). Oh, and any comment on the Tidal/MQA scandal?
Superficially they kind of sound the same to the average layperson in the street I guess. But the nulltest is quite the eye opener. I’ll think I stick with reflective silver discs. Never have to worry about connection speed, bandwidth and future availability of my favourite artists. On a streaming platform today, but maybe not tomorrow with some platforms. It can be volatile, some music isn’t always available on the streaming platforms either.
Excellent video - thanks ! I think that Spotify is very clever: they understand that investing heavily in lossless might not be the highest priority for their very wide client base. They have other more important challenges to meet: expand geographically and stay ahead of the fierce competition from Apple, Amazon and others by offering new services (podcasts, audio books, concert tickets, etc). (PS: subscribed to your channel)
It was interesting seeing your video. For me personally I find Qobuz seems to sound a little better than Apple Music and I did wanted to know why. Your video suggests there is no difference in the Qobuz quality settings, so lossless at CD or low quality. Which makes sense to me as I have noticed changing to a low setting no speed improvement to downloading tracks. I stream at CD and if I like the track I download at lossless. I did wondered if there is some way to do a comparison playback of Apple Music to Qobuz and say how they actually differ between each other, rather than just the original recording. I agree the advantage to lossless is it is less taxing on your mind (ie fills in the gaps) especially on a long car trip. I like Qobuz as it sounds better, has better music discovery but definitely a buggy app, slower to play tracks. Apple Music better app, quick playback, poorer music discovery (new artists). Really hard to chose between the too. Thank you for the video.
Great video! It would be interesting to see what happens when you play a song that has the "Master" label without a Hifi+ account. According to the headphone show, it'll play in something way less than lossless (MQA without unfolding instead of CD quality)
Not sure if it has anything to do with samplerate when it comes to Tidal. When uploading songs through Distrokid you get an option to upload the track for Tidals "Master" program which "Allegedly" processes the track in 24-bit. I think its more about the serverspace that youre occupying than the quality of the recording. I could be very wrong tho.
Great job, I like when you do all this research and present the findings. Saves us time, :-) which is a high value you are providing. A thought I had while watching is that it would be great if you did something like this streamed live, giving us notice ahead of time et al, and we could post questions, and you would read and answer them, why? Cause we are many heads, and we may come up with something you have not thought of, and we could all get more out of this type of interaction. Maybe here on YT or on Twitch. I would pay to attend a live stream on an interesting topic. Here are some topics I would love live-streamed. 1. Reaper Walkthrough, where you show us reaper, and we ask hey how you do this and that, and you do a live demo. Would be fab!. 2. Live mastering. 3 Live fix a phase issue. 4. Fix a muddy stem etc etc. I would pay for these, and I'm sure many others wound, especially if we get to ask questions. That artist was amazing and the Master job you did was amazing. Thanks again. 🙏
15:34 I’ve also felt like Apple Music’s sound is a bit weird. It sounds well seperated and clear but the music sounds too wide and empty or lifeless at times if you know what I mean
Agree. I use both Spotify and AM. I use both services but for different songs/purposes. Spotify is better when I want a more direct and uplifting listening. It’s more bass for example. And now I am talking about no adjustments in EQ settings on both Spotify and AM. I have tried more bass in AM EQ but it sounds terrible, not even close to Spotify. I listen to AM when I want to hear the details the production. Like check if I am missing out something in Spotify, sometimes I do but mostly AM is just more of a flat experience (emotionally). I hope Spotify Lossless will come out though. I have a budget setup. iPhone -> original lighting to 3,5 mm dongle. Maybe I would change my mind about this if I had a better setup.
I know you've said that stuff about Tidal's Master quality and it also needs a special hardware, but I am just curious to see you put it to the test as well whenever you have the opportunity. Maybe in the next video when Spotify HiFi comes out?
I love the fact that you if you have obscure audio tracks not available anywhere else, you can upload them to UA-cam Music and play them in any of your devices at any time.. A HUGE plus!
Great video - Thanks! Question - What is the LUFS level of the files being received by the listener for each of these platforms? My sense is though, for example, if one submits to Spotify at -14 LUFS, they then compress the files to a higher LUFS setting. And that might explain the differences you discovered in this video for some platforms.
Ok, first LUFS is not a setting, it is a loudness measurement. We don't dial loudness, we make music and then check the loudness for technical reasons. Then, it's the opposite. If you upload an audio file on Spotify with an integrated loudness of -14 dB LUFS and no peak above -1 dB True Peak, then Spotify won't touch the loudness of the file, because it is already within range of what they use. Most platforms use -14 for modern music, because it kind of works, but no value would cut it for everything. Apple uses -16. Finally, he said at the beginning of the video that the masters had been made with those loudness normalisations in mind, so everything is probably at the same level. The specifications for every platform are well know, so loudness matching would be easy anyway.
@@Mrlultime Hi Jean - Thanks for replying. I hear what you are saying. But I have a situation I can't figure out, hence my comment. Any ideas would be welcome. I mixed and mastered a song to -9 LUFS in Reaper. One of the output files is mp3 format (yes I know that mp3 at -9 LUFS is not optimal, but I did it anyway). I dumped the song onto my phone. I also have Spotify running on my phone. I play my song using the stock music player app (on the phone), then I switch to Spotify and play a reference song. The reference song (or for that matter, any song on Spotify), I perceive as always being at least as loud as the song I mastered at -9 LUFS if not louder. There are no internal volume controls on either the Spotify app or my music player app. And i have not touched the volume nob on my phone when swithcing between Spotify and my music player. My point being, to me it seems that Spotify, after an artist submits their song at -14 LUFS, Spotify then does some sort of internal processing to level all the songs to something louder than -14 LUFS. Do you or anyone else have that experience?
And so I took it one step further - I got mp3s of multiple songs running on a current Spotify playlists that were posted in 2022. I loaded them into Reaper and measured their loudness levels (all were somewhere between -8.8 to -6.0 LUFS - I). Then I loaded them on my phone and A-B compared the same song played on Spotify. There was zero apparent difference in volume between Spotify and the mp3s. Not scientific, but the apparent loudness level on Spotify certainly did not appear to be anywhere near -14 LUFS-I. In fact - to get the mp3s to hit the -14 LUFS-I level I had to significantly reduce the volume of each mastered track, like -8 dB on the loudest track to get Reaper to register it as -14 LUFS-I. 2 specific tracks Black Keys - Wild Child -8.8 LUFS Avril Levine - Bite Me -8.1 LUFS Even though my above process was certainly not specific, I think if Spotify was streaming at -14 LUFS-I, one could certainly hear a difference between that and a -8.X LUFS-I mp3. My guess is there is some fancy compression/expansion manipulation going on within Spotify.
Man, I just watched 20+ videos about audio quality even on streaming services and you just teached me to hear the differences even I see this on YT. The metod you showed with audio differences you can litterlaly hear it in the full audio playback. I closed my eyes and listen the music and I heard very clearly the differences. But I have to say I managed to hear that only with 1 specific tone there and its the "electronic drum base" (I dont know how to call it). So its not voice and the "clicking sound" (maybe the volume of the clicking sound as well) but the quality of the "drmmm" was hearable. In losless its much more clearer and satured. I dont think I can recognize 256kbps with losless when Im using the app because my brain imagines the quality of the music even it doesnt hear it :D. Will see. Thanks for teaching that!
thanks you for that video :). i was thinking about moving to tidal in a while.. this video helped me alot looking for a streaming service ❤ and btw. was the tidal subscription the hifi or hifi plus
Did you do this test with UA-cam Music which has higher quality than ordinary UA-cam? Otherwise it's nit fair when you compare it with Tidal and Qobuz.
Update and comparisons appreciated! I would have liked to see more analysis of UA-cam, though. While I understood why you did the loseless comparison, I feel like we got a teaser of its quality and I am interested in learning more. I had no idea about the fact that we fill in the music--I am 100% with you that music is to be enjoyed. And now I'm wondering if I am tiring myself out more with UA-cam (and consider one of the other alternatives)-- or if it's just in my head!
Thank you White Sea Studio for excellent work - world class!!! Is it just me that feels that hi res streaming services is for people that cannot judge sound quality by them selves...?? I have tested CD format against Spotify Premium streams with highest setting and cannot hear any audible difference nor could I hear any differences between your examples in this video. I think lossy codecs has come a far way in order to keep sound quality and save data traffic. I was close to jump on a Qobuz subscription, but I think I´ll pass due to above said. Is it just me being too honest and really compare things before I jump into "upgrades" in my hi-fi rig?
Great video! Impressive. Have you done a comparison on video streaming video companies and the quality of audio coming from them such as Apple TV , DIRECTV streaming, Hulu, Amazon Prime, etc. ? Your help is appreciated.
Hey man. Thanks for the great channel, just recently found it. Have you tried melda productions EQ's saturator? I never use the eq part for mixing. But I do like the way it saturates (with the saturator knob - usually implied with 20-40%). I haven't tried too many saturator VSTs but compared to some Melda sounds more pleasing and useful. Id like to hear your thoughts.
Thanks for the comparisons. My best streaming platform is my CD's and the CD player. Just can't compete when it comes to sound quality. And I don't need to be connected to the internet. I just wish lossless was standard across all streaming platforms with no lower or better options. Then as a mixing/mastering engineer having to worry about different LUFS's to cater for different platforms in case they add artefacts that compromise your songs dynamics. When I listen to music from the internet and then play a CD.... it's night and day difference.
Think of it like this. You wanna make a fire. The fire is the digital In order to produce fire You'll need equipments or procedures Physical mediums such as cd, vinyl, etc. are like lighters and stoves Fire wasn't manually made because this equipments was already made to produce fire on itself Next is Dacs Which will be represented as flint and steel In order to make it lit a fire, you'll need to manually do it Dacs indeed does this to your digital Dacs = Live (QUALITY VARIES) Vinyl = A Finished Product (FIXED QUALITY)
I haven't mentioned any amps, power, output speakers, sound meters, other sound equipments, bitrate, sampling rate, dsd files, and many other more, cause it will broaden the topic
I just wanted to you to get the idea or concept on why your cd sounds better than your streaming files, a digital file personally and manually ripped from your cd will even sound better than your digital streaming file. You can do some tests if you don't actually believe me. Its up to you anyway in the end. Your personal preference is what matters. if it sounds good to your ears, why would you still go for others just because of technical differentialities? What your ears can hear, is what matters the most, atleast i think.
This week there was a serious problem in Holland about sand from the Sahara covering cars and streets. It got drifted here in a big windstream high up in the sky. That is what you get when you don't play Sandstorm enough Wytse, i'll bill you the cleaning costs.🌊🚙
This is superb work you are doing for the community, and hopefully for the general public too, eventually! Thanks a bunch!! There's a hint of Sean Connery in your accent :D
I think you were better off with the mic out of sight. Your microphone technique leaves something to be desired..... ;-D Why not put the mic on a boom just above you? Then you can move your hands more feely. What ever...great video as always!
Yes indeed, agree! And BTW he also sounded better - amazing how, with all the engineering & audio talk going on here, almost nobody comments on how exaggerated and pushed the high end "air" on his voice is with this new microphone, really irritating, unnatural. Ah, the power of endorsement/product placement/free gear, huh? 😉 On the other hand, this video was really well done, useful and revealing. 👍
Very cool test. Also very awesome in comparison to 2018 that they ALL got better. Especially the ability to have lossless now almost everywhere is amazing. I'm curious to see how the new spotify plan will be turning out.
Apple music ALAC codec is really weird. And you're definitely not going crazy. You mentioned that apple music loseless sounds different in the mix, and I could hear that too. The position and image of the mix is different compared with any other loseless files. Which is strange. It sounds a bit like in front of you rather than across your head. Been looking for commentary on this strange apple music loseless phenomenon and I couldn't really find anyone talk about it yet on the Internet, cuz you know normal listeners just can't even tell the difference between loseless and degraded low quality settings, let alone they could even pay attention to the sound imaging and other minute element in a track. Your hard work on this comparison does pay off well. Appreciate your effort.
Many thanks for your efforts 👌 I wold like to mention that i have many subscriptions to the most popular streaming services. And very high end DAC's Amplifiers and headphones. Unfortunately i never been able to get any of the streaming services to sound exactly the same on PC because they all use a diferite rendering engine for the file (MQA, FLAC, MP3... ) . And i'm not talking about louder or quite difference. Micro-details and in special the stereo imaging is i bit diferite. Yes i did make sure it was bit perfect playback. As an example: in Audirvana (latest version as may 2022) FLAC losses songs brought from Qobuz sound the same as the streamed ones. Same songs have a touch diferite stereo image and micro-dinamics (not to be confused with micro-detaills) on Tidal. Even when i have set the output volumes equally or disabled entirely 🤔 🙄 I think the only way to test the differences is by using an streamer ( hardware) that supports all this services ( eventually MQA capable) I have the RME ADI-2 FS and i will tray to reproduce this on my own. I'm sure is an audible difference between the lossless formats because of diferite playback software. Or at least sounds like because of diferite dinamic range. One last think i wold like to mention, RME ADI-2 FS doesn't sounds to my ears the same on USB (DragonQuest Carbon USB cable) and SPDIF (optical) It has better "black background" , quiter background on optical. At least on PC. Any way great video as always. Many thanks for your efforts 👌
I still wouldn't trust Spotify's coding even if I left the normalization turned on and my mixes doesn't overshoot. 😂 Wish you would've bypassed it! 🙁 Nonetheless it's weird that they attenuate the crunchy frequencies rather than the top/transient stuff. Weird. Awesome video btw!!!
In the case of providers depending on the user's ability to compensate for the loss of quality, maybe it's in the interest of the streaming service provider to discourage subscribers from using the service for too long. Maybe that's how they maximize profit. There should be a point of diminishing return, for the provider, beyond which the cost of the bandwidth begins to significantly diminish the amount of subscription profit. Keep them only happy enough to continue paying.
So you're saying there is no difference between Spotify High and Very High qualities? I just wanna know if the second file is bigger or exactly the same haha
Just switched to Apple Music for the lossless actually, and the fact you can sync your Bandcamp downloads and CD rips to the cloud. Plus, no shaky political drama from a certain podcaster either :)
Awesome test! Although, I think the audio quality differences are pretty trivial. At the end of the day, it's not really going to matter which service is the best, since they are all pretty good in comparison and also since you have no control over how they process the audio. As long as you as the musician/producer upload 24 bit wav files vs uploading a mp3 file, you should be good! 😁👍
Hi! This is a really interesting way to test this! Thanks for doing it! It was really, really surprising to hear so much in those null tests. I've tried the NPR "can you hear the difference" test a few times with different equipment, and it is incredibly different for me to hear - so to have this much of a difference was a total surprise. I have a question though: (EDIT: I'm a moron. I just went back and noticed you recorded the stream through your interface loopback. Ohh boy. I'll leave this question here anyway in case someone else is wondering the same thing.) In the two Spotify files, High and Very High, you displayed that there is no difference - they are completely nullified. However, in the clip where you showed changing the Spotify quality, you were changing the Streaming quality, not the Download quality. Was this just an editing thing or did you actually just download the same version twice? It feels silly to even ask but I just, I have to ask it because it's stuck in my head now 😅 (EDIT: I'm a moron. I just went back and noticed you recorded the stream through your interface loopback. Ohh boy. I'll leave this question here anyway in case someone else is wondering the same thing.)
@@Whiteseastudio Yeaah I got it a little after I wrote the original comment. Saw someone else's comment, then went back to the beginning. Somehow I just missed it!
@@Whiteseastudio Although now that I think about it, it would be interesting to know if there's any difference between streaming it to your interface and recording from there, and downloading the file directly? (Obviously most of the time you'd be using streaming to listen, but it might make a difference if the quality is different)
Fantastic effort. The real issue with music on the streaming services is that now the big labels have added audible watermarking on all their music, so there is some loss in music quality that way.
@ Literally all music uploaded by the big labels is watermarked. Try adding even a few seconds to a YT video, and you'll get a copyright notice straight after upload. Some of it is audible, and you can see it in any pro music app that shows a full spectrum of the music as a band through the mid-range.
Doesn't a Downsappling affect the sound quality?. And you then well still have strong filter if the sample rate is low which is said to affect the sound quality
No difference between Spotify High (free) and the premium „Very high“ is quite disappointing to say the least … so basically, one pays to avoid the ads 🙄
This is a very good test, thanks 🙂My question is about MQA: Tidal and most modern HiFi DACs also support MQA and MQA claims to be lossless and providing the Master file... However there is a lot of debate on the internet claiming that the lossless claim of MQA is not true. Can you do a similar test like the loopback test with MQA (Tidal) and MQA capable DAC?
This is interesting but i have a question. During the tidal hi fi vs original master comparison at around 8:44 I can see in the waveform (proper term?) that there is a visible difference ie some of the peaks and lows are in fact visibly different between master and tidal hi fi, yet there apparently no difference between the two recordings ie no sound in the comparison. Can you explain this?
what i would have loved to hear is a Compressor-Comparison in Streamingservices. If i lower the volume on the App it starts compressing the files. thats why i choose Deezer (years ago, i found their compressor better).
@@blueletric1680 i am not hearing from things, i hear them. if you cant hear that (on a desktop PC) that deezer atleast has compression on low volume.. then im pretty convinced you are wrong.. its clear as day.. Then on spotify, i cant say.. its not my job.. its only my information on some streamingservices (deezer) its unmistackable IN My OPPINION
@@blueletric1680 @Blueletric i though how i could follow you confident critique, figured the only way is to download videocapture, go to dezzer, record the utput, lod it into reaper one time with, one time without volumeslider at minimum output position, screencapture it, load it onto my youtube acout.. and thats the fastest possible method. but i figured your explonation or justification is pretty minimal.. so, i think i wont do that, but if i did, im pretty shure i would see a more compressed and less compressed Waveform.
Thank you Wytse for featuring “Funk Heven” on your channel! It’s truly an honor to be part of this. Your kindness is very much appreciated!
I would also like to thank everyone that will, have and continued to listen to the song! 🧡
This is only the beginning.
Very nice song! -> oldskool to newskool, love it...
Great song!
Love that Michael Jackson touch!
Yooo dope track! Huge MK/Weeknd vibes!! really dig it!!
I've searched for something like this for months. Thank you very much, what an awesome video.
Best audio comparison method i've EVER seen on a UA-cam video. So cool!!
Thanks for investing your time, money, and energy in this. Very useful to get the info coming from someone who has the original master which can serve as a baseline.
This is for sure one of my top 10 favorite videos on UA-cam - very, very well done !!!!!
Such a great video, absolutely spot-on testing method and easy-to-understand explanations. ALSO... such a surprise to discover such an absolute banger of a tune, I can't stop listening to Funk Heven and simply must have more of this artist's music. How does their video only have 3K views?! Your mix is also superb!
That lossy compressions creates more ear fatigued is a hypothesis which needs proof. AFAIK the opposite is true.
Also our brain AFAIK isn't "filling the missing part's" it is more like "the codec is removing/modifying the part's we probably won't hear in the original".
If you stare in the direction of the sun you probably won't see every minute detail of the surroundings. It's the same with sound. You are unable to hear every minute detail of noise and high entropy part's. You probably aren't able to differentiate between two white/pink noises which share the same frequency curve.
I really like that this is an actual test Vs other reviews which just rehash info found online. Good work!
Absolutely great video. So interesting hearing what is lost through compression with the null testing. It would be great to see Amazon Music included in this too. But very thorough coverage! Thank you
The fact apple music has lossless at not additional cost is enough for me. Tidal is double the price. Also Spotify said it will cost more too
Tidal halved its price and you seem to get Tidal HiFi for 9,99 nowadays, you only pay double if you choose the Master pack but i do not recommend that one.
Tidal are one of the best when it comes to paying artists. If you want to support an artist use Tidal.
The problem with Apple Music is that you can only get HIFI through an iPhone or iPad. If you want It on a PC you're screwed. That's why Tidal or Deezer are currently the best option. Because lets be honest no one is going to connect a DAC to an ipad or iphone we all use it on pc. I mean If you wanted to you could but It's just an extra hassle and you can't use the phone normally.
@@timcesnovar978 that's a big thing that they need to change
@@timcesnovar978 I connect an iPad to my DAC via and it works very well.
An interesting result I hear is when these high frequencies are attenuated via the compression algorithms they apply, it tends to make the stereo image collapse inwards. Which makes sense, typically you have your high frequency information encoded further to the side channels than the mid channel.
Your results support my own experiences, I switched to Tidas because of the sound quality AND the much better suggestions what to listen next ...Thanks a lot!
This is an informative video with good explanations, thank you! I personally don't understand why the music industry constantly reduced the sound quality over time. We started with Vinyl, then got used to CDs. After that, we were hijacked to MP3 and ended up with streaming between 128 and 320 kbits. Not to forget the removal of the cable and replacing it with Bluetooth. So, our hearing and brain "learned" to get used to these losses what I think is bad as I am sure we lost the memory about how music sounds. Having lossless sound quality back is the minimum we can expect from the music industry and the streaming services. I have been using Tidal Master (switching over from Spotify) for more than five months now and I am happy with it even I am not always able to hear the differences between Tidal and Spotify I can enjoy music for much longer without getting tired and hear more details and there is a slightly better instrument separation.
idk we been used to bad sounding music since the 60s with 33rpm vinyl and 7" 45 that sounded exactly like 33rpm, then cassette tapes, it only went good when CD was introduced and further improved upon the end of 90s, then ipod in the 2000s went in craphole again... do I think AAC/Opus are quite good enough even for carrying as portable player format these days but be sure to just encode it to the highest bitrate, as carrying FLAC with you on DAPs simply just a pain in the crack especially backing those up. lately I just encode all of my FLACs to AAC VBR highest bitrate then put it to my DAP, while 96khz/24bit hi-res audio will remain as FLAC in it to save storage.
I am perfectly happy with the UA-cam Music paid service for music. Sounds good, best UI, combo of music and video and no video ads.
If all Tidal, Apple Music and Deezer in lossless pass the null test without any artifacts why do they sound different through the same DAC and hifi system ? Thanks
Did you do the free spotify before or after the premium? Because spotify happily uses cached information unless you manually clear it, you can easily have played the same downloaded information for both the tiers.
Before the premium
I'm so glad you did the null tests. This proves their lossless claims. The advantages of being a mix engineer!
Year 2024 here. After years of using Spotify as sound engineer I decided to switch for Apple Music. The second factor that every test skip is the compression itself. Files are not only compressed for less data but also dynamic changes. Thats why as sound engineers we should listen losless because we just to bad sound, less and destroyde dynamic of band and frequency wise. Not sure if you know what I mean - its like always listen to overdriven guitar and then you don't really know chow clean guitar sounds like and always on your mix try to overdrive your guitar even if it should stay clean but you have your mind template of guitar as overdriven.
Thats why losless is so important to audio engineers - to stay in perfect template of sound in our mind and ears.
THX for that video, 2 years old now but still valuable !
Hi, I liked your test very much. I am curious about the (non-existent) difference between Spotify "High" and "Very High" and wonder if you cleared the Spotify software cache between your tests? After all, it could be that Spotify simply reused the initial downloaded version.
good point! also is worthy to consider that they can give you less quality depending on their servers and the bandwidth of the user. Handy for them to save money on servers, but giving a worse quality at the end
@@EduRGB Good point? Meaning, you didn't check this? OMG...
Between the quality and military/veteran discount that made it cheaper, Tidal won out after using amazon hd for years.
I'm glad at the end you mentioned that there are other factors. I hate spotify for a number of reasons but it's still my go to. The playlists, song recommendations, user communication (public playlists, song sharing, etc.) stuff just makes it the best platform for me. When I make enough money from music that I can pay all my own bills, I'll get Tidal to add on (but by that time Spotify Hi Fi might be ready lol)
Wow I was just hoping you would do another one of these a few days ago lol. Great stuff
First of all, very nice review and very easy and nice layout both in terms of audio and visuals. Now... 14:52 : I can clearly hear just as urself the difference in terms of "Apple Music" using another type of sound fo the percussion in the song and also for thoose really clear and high pitches. I can even hear that they've re-arranged the position from where the vocals emerge from or am I crazy?
I love your take on this and setup when comparing. I think audio is a very induvidual experience to each and one of us and it also comes down to matter of taste. But It's always a extra nice feature to just know that the song that you are currently blasting of is actually not "tampered" with in a sense of that it sounds exactly as the original, atleast to my own ears.
Again, very very professional and skillfull production of this video! *hands down + clap* Also very nice beat/song! Love the MJ dna feel to it! :)
Regards - Marcus Berntssn , Sweden.
There are those who say that the minimum requirement for hi-res is 96 kHz . Well, that's the minimum requirement when it comes to certification for Hi-res. DXD is extremely 352.8KHz DSD is well at 2.8 MHz but then it is only one bit Technology used among other things on SACD
Were you logged into a paid account with UA-cam? From reading online, the premium accounts get higher fidelity, but I still doubt it is lossless. I also wonder how this compares to UA-cam Music. Thanks for the test and explaining the process - I'll post back results here if I try the test.
Curiously you didn't play any of the Qobuz streams (only the 'null' test for losslessness)....after all, you played and compared with your master recording all the others. I've tried most of them (with either a trial or sub) and have now moved to Qobuz which I find has the edge for sound (but not for track listing info. on classical releases!).
Oh, and any comment on the Tidal/MQA scandal?
Superficially they kind of sound the same to the average layperson in the street I guess. But the nulltest is quite the eye opener. I’ll think I stick with reflective silver discs. Never have to worry about connection speed, bandwidth and future availability of my favourite artists. On a streaming platform today, but maybe not tomorrow with some platforms. It can be volatile, some music isn’t always available on the streaming platforms either.
Excellent video - thanks ! I think that Spotify is very clever: they understand that investing heavily in lossless might not be the highest priority for their very wide client base. They have other more important challenges to meet: expand geographically and stay ahead of the fierce competition from Apple, Amazon and others by offering new services (podcasts, audio books, concert tickets, etc). (PS: subscribed to your channel)
Omg, you did such an amazing and comprehensive video! Thank you for your work, it is greatly appreciated.
It was interesting seeing your video. For me personally I find Qobuz seems to sound a little better than Apple Music and I did wanted to know why. Your video suggests there is no difference in the Qobuz quality settings, so lossless at CD or low quality. Which makes sense to me as I have noticed changing to a low setting no speed improvement to downloading tracks. I stream at CD and if I like the track I download at lossless.
I did wondered if there is some way to do a comparison playback of Apple Music to Qobuz and say how they actually differ between each other, rather than just the original recording.
I agree the advantage to lossless is it is less taxing on your mind (ie fills in the gaps) especially on a long car trip.
I like Qobuz as it sounds better, has better music discovery but definitely a buggy app, slower to play tracks. Apple Music better app, quick playback, poorer music discovery (new artists). Really hard to chose between the too.
Thank you for the video.
Best review I’ve seen by far
Great video! It would be interesting to see what happens when you play a song that has the "Master" label without a Hifi+ account. According to the headphone show, it'll play in something way less than lossless (MQA without unfolding instead of CD quality)
Hi, do you tried UA-cam Music? It offers higher Streaming Quality.
Not sure if it has anything to do with samplerate when it comes to Tidal. When uploading songs through Distrokid you get an option to upload the track for Tidals "Master" program which "Allegedly" processes the track in 24-bit. I think its more about the serverspace that youre occupying than the quality of the recording. I could be very wrong tho.
Great job, I like when you do all this research and present the findings. Saves us time, :-) which is a high value you are providing. A thought I had while watching is that it would be great if you did something like this streamed live, giving us notice ahead of time et al, and we could post questions, and you would read and answer them, why? Cause we are many heads, and we may come up with something you have not thought of, and we could all get more out of this type of interaction. Maybe here on YT or on Twitch. I would pay to attend a live stream on an interesting topic. Here are some topics I would love live-streamed. 1. Reaper Walkthrough, where you show us reaper, and we ask hey how you do this and that, and you do a live demo. Would be fab!. 2. Live mastering. 3 Live fix a phase issue. 4. Fix a muddy stem etc etc. I would pay for these, and I'm sure many others wound, especially if we get to ask questions. That artist was amazing and the Master job you did was amazing. Thanks again. 🙏
This video is a great and very interesting watch. Fascinating stuff!
15:34 I’ve also felt like Apple Music’s sound is a bit weird. It sounds well seperated and clear but the music sounds too wide and empty or lifeless at times if you know what I mean
Agree. I use both Spotify and AM. I use both services but for different songs/purposes. Spotify is better when I want a more direct and uplifting listening. It’s more bass for example. And now I am talking about no adjustments in EQ settings on both Spotify and AM. I have tried more bass in AM EQ but it sounds terrible, not even close to Spotify.
I listen to AM when I want to hear the details the production. Like check if I am missing out something in Spotify, sometimes I do but mostly AM is just more of a flat experience (emotionally).
I hope Spotify Lossless will come out though.
I have a budget setup. iPhone -> original lighting to 3,5 mm dongle. Maybe I would change my mind about this if I had a better setup.
I know you've said that stuff about Tidal's Master quality and it also needs a special hardware, but I am just curious to see you put it to the test as well whenever you have the opportunity. Maybe in the next video when Spotify HiFi comes out?
GoldenSound did a test last year about the MQA format on his channel. It's not a lossless format, so a reason for me to avoid Tidal from now on
You should have included UA-cam Music. I think it sounds better than normal UA-cam audio.
I love the fact that you if you have obscure audio tracks not available anywhere else, you can upload them to UA-cam Music and play them in any of your devices at any time.. A HUGE plus!
@@quiksilver78 I can sync my music so much easier than with Spotify. Spotify is severely lacking in that
How is UA-cam music for hi res speakers and headphones?
Best comparison out there, very well done. Would love to have known your thoughts on how Qobuz hi res compared to original master.
Great video - Thanks! Question - What is the LUFS level of the files being received by the listener for each of these platforms? My sense is though, for example, if one submits to Spotify at -14 LUFS, they then compress the files to a higher LUFS setting. And that might explain the differences you discovered in this video for some platforms.
Ok, first LUFS is not a setting, it is a loudness measurement. We don't dial loudness, we make music and then check the loudness for technical reasons.
Then, it's the opposite. If you upload an audio file on Spotify with an integrated loudness of -14 dB LUFS and no peak above -1 dB True Peak, then Spotify won't touch the loudness of the file, because it is already within range of what they use. Most platforms use -14 for modern music, because it kind of works, but no value would cut it for everything. Apple uses -16.
Finally, he said at the beginning of the video that the masters had been made with those loudness normalisations in mind, so everything is probably at the same level. The specifications for every platform are well know, so loudness matching would be easy anyway.
@@Mrlultime Hi Jean - Thanks for replying. I hear what you are saying. But I have a situation I can't figure out, hence my comment. Any ideas would be welcome.
I mixed and mastered a song to -9 LUFS in Reaper. One of the output files is mp3 format (yes I know that mp3 at -9 LUFS is not optimal, but I did it anyway).
I dumped the song onto my phone. I also have Spotify running on my phone.
I play my song using the stock music player app (on the phone), then I switch to Spotify and play a reference song. The reference song (or for that matter, any song on Spotify), I perceive as always being at least as loud as the song I mastered at -9 LUFS if not louder. There are no internal volume controls on either the Spotify app or my music player app. And i have not touched the volume nob on my phone when swithcing between Spotify and my music player.
My point being, to me it seems that Spotify, after an artist submits their song at -14 LUFS, Spotify then does some sort of internal processing to level all the songs to something louder than -14 LUFS.
Do you or anyone else have that experience?
And so I took it one step further - I got mp3s of multiple songs running on a current Spotify playlists that were posted in 2022.
I loaded them into Reaper and measured their loudness levels (all were somewhere between -8.8 to -6.0 LUFS - I).
Then I loaded them on my phone and A-B compared the same song played on Spotify. There was zero apparent difference in volume between Spotify and the mp3s.
Not scientific, but the apparent loudness level on Spotify certainly did not appear to be anywhere near -14 LUFS-I.
In fact - to get the mp3s to hit the -14 LUFS-I level I had to significantly reduce the volume of each mastered track, like -8 dB on the loudest track to get Reaper to register it as -14 LUFS-I.
2 specific tracks
Black Keys - Wild Child -8.8 LUFS
Avril Levine - Bite Me -8.1 LUFS
Even though my above process was certainly not specific, I think if Spotify was streaming at -14 LUFS-I, one could certainly hear a difference between that and a -8.X LUFS-I mp3.
My guess is there is some fancy compression/expansion manipulation going on within Spotify.
Man, I just watched 20+ videos about audio quality even on streaming services and you just teached me to hear the differences even I see this on YT. The metod you showed with audio differences you can litterlaly hear it in the full audio playback. I closed my eyes and listen the music and I heard very clearly the differences. But I have to say I managed to hear that only with 1 specific tone there and its the "electronic drum base" (I dont know how to call it). So its not voice and the "clicking sound" (maybe the volume of the clicking sound as well) but the quality of the "drmmm" was hearable. In losless its much more clearer and satured. I dont think I can recognize 256kbps with losless when Im using the app because my brain imagines the quality of the music even it doesnt hear it :D. Will see. Thanks for teaching that!
I heared the diffrence but or me all sounded fine. Would go ofor the bigger database and suggestions and dj live sets.
Usually you hear the diffrence in live recordings why better then in electronic porduced sounds.
Excellent video, and song!
thanks you for that video :). i was thinking about moving to tidal in a while.. this video helped me alot looking for a streaming service ❤
and btw. was the tidal subscription the hifi or hifi plus
Amazing video and a lot of quality effort in there. Thank you
Did you do this test with UA-cam Music which has higher quality than ordinary UA-cam? Otherwise it's nit fair when you compare it with Tidal and Qobuz.
Brilliantly done!
Update and comparisons appreciated!
I would have liked to see more analysis of UA-cam, though. While I understood why you did the loseless comparison, I feel like we got a teaser of its quality and I am interested in learning more. I had no idea about the fact that we fill in the music--I am 100% with you that music is to be enjoyed. And now I'm wondering if I am tiring myself out more with UA-cam (and consider one of the other alternatives)-- or if it's just in my head!
Thank you White Sea Studio for excellent work - world class!!! Is it just me that feels that hi res streaming services is for people that cannot judge sound quality by them selves...?? I have tested CD format against Spotify Premium streams with highest setting and cannot hear any audible difference nor could I hear any differences between your examples in this video. I think lossy codecs has come a far way in order to keep sound quality and save data traffic. I was close to jump on a Qobuz subscription, but I think I´ll pass due to above said. Is it just me being too honest and really compare things before I jump into "upgrades" in my hi-fi rig?
Great video! Impressive. Have you done a comparison on video streaming video companies and the quality of audio coming from them such as Apple TV , DIRECTV streaming, Hulu, Amazon Prime, etc. ? Your help is appreciated.
Hey man. Thanks for the great channel, just recently found it.
Have you tried melda productions EQ's saturator? I never use the eq part for mixing. But I do like the way it saturates (with the saturator knob - usually implied with 20-40%).
I haven't tried too many saturator VSTs but compared to some Melda sounds more pleasing and useful. Id like to hear your thoughts.
Brilliant! Thank you for this fascinating analysis
Thanks for the comparisons. My best streaming platform is my CD's and the CD player. Just can't compete when it comes to sound quality. And I don't need to be connected to the internet. I just wish lossless was standard across all streaming platforms with no lower or better options. Then as a mixing/mastering engineer having to worry about different LUFS's to cater for different platforms in case they add artefacts that compromise your songs dynamics. When I listen to music from the internet and then play a CD.... it's night and day difference.
Think of it like this.
You wanna make a fire.
The fire is the digital
In order to produce fire
You'll need equipments or procedures
Physical mediums such as cd, vinyl, etc. are like lighters and stoves
Fire wasn't manually made because this equipments was already made to produce fire on itself
Next is
Dacs
Which will be represented as flint and steel
In order to make it lit a fire, you'll need to manually do it
Dacs indeed does this to your digital
Dacs = Live (QUALITY VARIES)
Vinyl = A Finished Product (FIXED QUALITY)
I'm sorry my english is bad
What I'm trying to say is
All lossless digital files are the same
Analog converters, and converted medium are the ones that affect the audio quality
I haven't mentioned any amps, power, output speakers, sound meters, other sound equipments, bitrate, sampling rate, dsd files, and many other more, cause it will broaden the topic
I just wanted to you to get the idea or concept on why your cd sounds better than your streaming files, a digital file personally and manually ripped from your cd will even sound better than your digital streaming file.
You can do some tests if you don't actually believe me. Its up to you anyway in the end.
Your personal preference is what matters.
if it sounds good to your ears, why would you still go for others just because of technical differentialities? What your ears can hear, is what matters the most, atleast i think.
This week there was a serious problem in Holland about sand from the Sahara covering cars and streets. It got drifted here in a big windstream high up in the sky. That is what you get when you don't play Sandstorm enough Wytse, i'll bill you the cleaning costs.🌊🚙
I just cleaned my car 😅
This is superb work you are doing for the community, and hopefully for the general public too, eventually!
Thanks a bunch!!
There's a hint of Sean Connery in your accent :D
Sir, these are tremendously wonderful mixes and masters.
Great vid and comparison. Thanks for your hard work.
Is tidas available in the UK. I cant see it in play store. Also which was best for sound quality overall and recommendations
Super . Thanks very much. I love your objectivity.
These compression schemes will sum to mono if there is not enough difference between L&R. That for sure will alter your center image.
I think you were better off with the mic out of sight. Your microphone technique leaves something to be desired..... ;-D Why not put the mic on a boom just above you? Then you can move your hands more feely. What ever...great video as always!
Yes indeed, agree!
And BTW he also sounded better - amazing how, with all the engineering & audio talk going on here, almost nobody comments on how exaggerated and pushed the high end "air" on his voice is with this new microphone, really irritating, unnatural.
Ah, the power of endorsement/product placement/free gear, huh?
😉
On the other hand, this video was really well done, useful and revealing.
👍
Very cool test. Also very awesome in comparison to 2018 that they ALL got better. Especially the ability to have lossless now almost everywhere is amazing. I'm curious to see how the new spotify plan will be turning out.
diggin' this technical content, and you're immediate reactions
You are immediate reactions
Apple music ALAC codec is really weird. And you're definitely not going crazy.
You mentioned that apple music loseless sounds different in the mix, and I could hear that too. The position and image of the mix is different compared with any other loseless files. Which is strange. It sounds a bit like in front of you rather than across your head.
Been looking for commentary on this strange apple music loseless phenomenon and I couldn't really find anyone talk about it yet on the Internet, cuz you know normal listeners just can't even tell the difference between loseless and degraded low quality settings, let alone they could even pay attention to the sound imaging and other minute element in a track.
Your hard work on this comparison does pay off well. Appreciate your effort.
Bloody interesting
Thanks for all your efforts - Great job !
Can you do a comparison between UA-cam and UA-cam Music? Somehow youtube sounds better to me than youtube music but that is counter intuitive.
This is so good!
Many thanks for your efforts 👌
I wold like to mention that i have many subscriptions to the most popular streaming services. And very high end DAC's Amplifiers and headphones.
Unfortunately i never been able to get any of the streaming services to sound exactly the same on PC because they all use a diferite rendering engine for the file (MQA, FLAC, MP3... ) . And i'm not talking about louder or quite difference. Micro-details and in special the stereo imaging is i bit diferite.
Yes i did make sure it was bit perfect playback.
As an example: in Audirvana (latest version as may 2022) FLAC losses songs brought from Qobuz sound the same as the streamed ones.
Same songs have a touch diferite stereo image and micro-dinamics (not to be confused with micro-detaills) on Tidal.
Even when i have set the output volumes equally or disabled entirely 🤔 🙄
I think the only way to test the differences is by using an streamer ( hardware) that supports all this services ( eventually MQA capable)
I have the RME ADI-2 FS and i will tray to reproduce this on my own. I'm sure is an audible difference between the lossless formats because of diferite playback software. Or at least sounds like because of diferite dinamic range.
One last think i wold like to mention, RME ADI-2 FS doesn't sounds to my ears the same on USB (DragonQuest Carbon USB cable) and SPDIF (optical)
It has better "black background" , quiter background on optical. At least on PC.
Any way great video as always. Many thanks for your efforts 👌
Great Topic, thx for the tests, interesting results !
waar is youtube music vergelijking, dacht dat die andere kwaliteit had?
You didn't show this in the video, but what are the differences between Spotify and UA-cam Music? BTW Goede video!
I still wouldn't trust Spotify's coding even if I left the normalization turned on and my mixes doesn't overshoot. 😂 Wish you would've bypassed it! 🙁 Nonetheless it's weird that they attenuate the crunchy frequencies rather than the top/transient stuff. Weird. Awesome video btw!!!
In the case of providers depending on the user's ability to compensate for the loss of quality, maybe it's in the interest of the streaming service provider to discourage subscribers from using the service for too long. Maybe that's how they maximize profit. There should be a point of diminishing return, for the provider, beyond which the cost of the bandwidth begins to significantly diminish the amount of subscription profit. Keep them only happy enough to continue paying.
Great as always
Thanks Wytse for making this video it was really informative
So you're saying there is no difference between Spotify High and Very High qualities? I just wanna know if the second file is bigger or exactly the same haha
Just switched to Apple Music for the lossless actually, and the fact you can sync your Bandcamp downloads and CD rips to the cloud. Plus, no shaky political drama from a certain podcaster either :)
Too bad is one of the worst culprits when it comes to using slave labor in China. Not just cheap labor, but actual slave labor
not true, only 5% of iPhone is actually originates in China. All the parts are sourced from around the world.@@gretre4560
The only two I use are SoundCloud and UA-cam music. Strange to leave those two out
Is there any way you can test it with Roon and Audirvana Studio along with all these streaming services with the method you used?
I know nothing about music, stumbled across this video looking for better service than spotify. I feel better informed now ty
Awesome test! Although, I think the audio quality differences are pretty trivial. At the end of the day, it's not really going to matter which service is the best, since they are all pretty good in comparison and also since you have no control over how they process the audio. As long as you as the musician/producer upload 24 bit wav files vs uploading a mp3 file, you should be good! 😁👍
Some streaming services are lossless - and some are *lifeless*.
Thanks this was a really helpful video!
Thank you sir, you are such a hero!
Hi! This is a really interesting way to test this! Thanks for doing it! It was really, really surprising to hear so much in those null tests. I've tried the NPR "can you hear the difference" test a few times with different equipment, and it is incredibly different for me to hear - so to have this much of a difference was a total surprise.
I have a question though:
(EDIT: I'm a moron. I just went back and noticed you recorded the stream through your interface loopback. Ohh boy. I'll leave this question here anyway in case someone else is wondering the same thing.)
In the two Spotify files, High and Very High, you displayed that there is no difference - they are completely nullified.
However, in the clip where you showed changing the Spotify quality, you were changing the Streaming quality, not the Download quality. Was this just an editing thing or did you actually just download the same version twice?
It feels silly to even ask but I just, I have to ask it because it's stuck in my head now 😅
(EDIT: I'm a moron. I just went back and noticed you recorded the stream through your interface loopback. Ohh boy. I'll leave this question here anyway in case someone else is wondering the same thing.)
I did stream the version I recorded, so the streaming quality is the one that matters...
@@Whiteseastudio Yeaah I got it a little after I wrote the original comment. Saw someone else's comment, then went back to the beginning. Somehow I just missed it!
@@Whiteseastudio Although now that I think about it, it would be interesting to know if there's any difference between streaming it to your interface and recording from there, and downloading the file directly?
(Obviously most of the time you'd be using streaming to listen, but it might make a difference if the quality is different)
You missed Amazon music ? They have lossless also! And 3d audio.
And thanks for another great video.
Fantastic effort. The real issue with music on the streaming services is that now the big labels have added audible watermarking on all their music, so there is some loss in music quality that way.
For example??
@ Literally all music uploaded by the big labels is watermarked. Try adding even a few seconds to a YT video, and you'll get a copyright notice straight after upload. Some of it is audible, and you can see it in any pro music app that shows a full spectrum of the music as a band through the mid-range.
Doesn't a Downsappling affect the sound quality?. And you then well still have strong filter if the sample rate is low which is said to affect the sound quality
So which is the best and what about UA-cam music?
No difference between Spotify High (free) and the premium „Very high“ is quite disappointing to say the least … so basically, one pays to avoid the ads 🙄
This is a very good test, thanks 🙂My question is about MQA: Tidal and most modern HiFi DACs also support MQA and MQA claims to be lossless and providing the Master file... However there is a lot of debate on the internet claiming that the lossless claim of MQA is not true. Can you do a similar test like the loopback test with MQA (Tidal) and MQA capable DAC?
Goldensound did this and MQA no longer claims to be lossless.
This is interesting but i have a question. During the tidal hi fi vs original master comparison at around 8:44 I can see in the waveform (proper term?) that there is a visible difference ie some of the peaks and lows are in fact visibly different between master and tidal hi fi, yet there apparently no difference between the two recordings ie no sound in the comparison. Can you explain this?
An error with the waveform cache. The visual representation of waves is purely for reference.
Brilliant bro!!!! 😮😊
Thanks for the video. Very helpful.
Is there a website to listen to songs post apple volume drop before uploading?
Do the lossy codecs preserve phase?
Otherwise wouldn't the difference in a null test appear to be greater than they actually are?
I matched the timing based on the waveforms, so even if the codec would alter the phase, the null test is still valid
Don't worry Wytse, you aren't going crazy. Crazy would be still buying and ripping CDs in 2022 - that's what I do.
what i would have loved to hear is a Compressor-Comparison in Streamingservices. If i lower the volume on the App it starts compressing the files. thats why i choose Deezer (years ago, i found their compressor better).
Hahahahahah
I wonder where dis you heard those from?????
@@blueletric1680 i am not hearing from things, i hear them. if you cant hear that (on a desktop PC) that deezer atleast has compression on low volume.. then im pretty convinced you are wrong.. its clear as day..
Then on spotify, i cant say.. its not my job.. its only my information on some streamingservices (deezer) its unmistackable IN My OPPINION
@@erewrw1906 hahahahah
@@blueletric1680 @Blueletric i though how i could follow you confident critique, figured the only way is to download videocapture, go to dezzer, record the utput, lod it into reaper one time with, one time without volumeslider at minimum output position, screencapture it, load it onto my youtube acout.. and thats the fastest possible method. but i figured your explonation or justification is pretty minimal.. so, i think i wont do that, but if i did, im pretty shure i would see a more compressed and less compressed Waveform.
which one was the best in terms of quality?