Tidal

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 2391 times.

RoadTripper

Re: Tidal
« Reply #20 on: 16 Mar 2017, 11:15 pm »
I'm talking Mac here not Windows. And I'm talking FLAC not WAV or CD-Format. Or any other. I know I had to install a player on my Mac to play FLAC files (also on my work Windows machine). They wouldn't play without some 3rd party software installed.

If that's not true then I can't account for the remarkable SQ improvement I heard on Tidal by adding the Amarra interface.

The Squeezebox just ships the FLAC bits to a DAC (at least mine did).

gregcss

Re: Tidal
« Reply #21 on: 17 Mar 2017, 12:10 am »
I'm talking Mac here not Windows. And I'm talking FLAC not WAV or CD-Format. Or any other. I know I had to install a player on my Mac to play FLAC files (also on my work Windows machine). They wouldn't play without some 3rd party software installed.

If that's not true then I can't account for the remarkable SQ improvement I heard on Tidal by adding the Amarra interface.

The Squeezebox just ships the FLAC bits to a DAC (at least mine did).
I see now. I've never owned a Mac so I can't be sure, but from what I read Mac does not support FLAC. So, what you say may be true. I just did a quick search and supposedly Vox Mac Player https://vox.rocks/mac-music-player will handle lossless formats as is. Please note I have not read into the details and YMMV.

RoadTripper

Re: Tidal
« Reply #22 on: 17 Mar 2017, 02:18 am »
Yeah. There's plenty of players that support FLAC. But my windows box at work didn't handle FLAC natively. I used Foobar2000 ultimately after giving up on VLC. The only reason I am uneasy about my claims in this matter is that I haven't read any corroboration of them elsewhere. All I know is what I heard with Tidal once I added Amarra into the mix.

Rusty Jefferson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 867
Re: Tidal
« Reply #23 on: 17 Mar 2017, 04:10 am »
Apologies for adding to the derailment of this thread.
Rusty, so you're positive that in the demo you heard uncompressed music was going through the DAC in use?.....
Yes, uncompressed FLAC and WAV files (vs Tidal) via an Aurender N-10 server to a Aesthetix Romulus cd player/DAC.
I pull Tidal tracks in DLNA mode through network to my Sonore MicroRendu, which is a micro-computer designed for optimal conversion and USB output to DAC.  I use the same approach to pull my CD rips from my NAS on the home network.

In my system, Tidal is superior sound quality to my CD rips...... 
Interesting. Opposite experience from what I just had. Are your files on the NAS uncompressed FLAC or still in a compressed state?   It's a surprisingly important step to uncompress them. Using the same Ethernet cable throughout the network?

dB Cooper

Re: Tidal
« Reply #24 on: 17 Mar 2017, 04:36 am »
I see now. I've never owned a Mac so I can't be sure, but from what I read Mac does not support FLAC. So, what you say may be true. I just did a quick search and supposedly Vox Mac Player https://vox.rocks/mac-music-player will handle lossless formats as is. Please note I have not read into the details and YMMV.

This is what I use and to my ears, the sound is as good through my Schiit Modi Multibit DAC as the same Redbook material sourced from CD rips.

You can play FLAC on the Mac with third party players, just not through iTunes. There used to be 3rd party plugins for itunes that did it but they have all disappeared.
Don't know how this might be affected by Tidal's announcement of forthcoming support for MQA on computers (but not mobile devices).

I might make one of my very occasional forays over to Computer Audiophile and see what guidance can be found there.

jarcher

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1940
  • It Just Sounds Right
Re: Tidal
« Reply #25 on: 19 Mar 2017, 06:43 am »
I've used the tidal app on Macs and iOS devices and its definitely not converting or downgrading FLAC to MP3 before outputting it to the DAC. You do need to remember when you install and first open the app to go to settings and choose the hifi level streaming option. Regardless of your subscription level the default setting on streaming quality is the lower resolution MP3 level.

Something Amarra does which will definitely improve the sound quality of tidal is to cache the track to memory. This is something Aurenders and later Auralic were doing as well. This avoids many of the pitfalls you get when streaming audio content in real time. If you own / use jriver, puremusic, etc this is a must feature to activate for playback of your own content.

Rusty Jefferson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 867
Re: Tidal
« Reply #26 on: 19 Mar 2017, 04:11 pm »
Thanks jarcher, but don't you feel the Tidal stream is still down a notch compared to the best digital transport and server options?

bluemeanies

Re: Tidal
« Reply #27 on: 19 Mar 2017, 05:38 pm »
I've used Tidal premium for over one and a half years and it's mostly been great to have. I can use it everywhere I've traveled without a hitch. However, just as you have mentioned, I'm tired of seeing all the rap, hip hop, etc. that they over-emphasize. [My son listens to a lot of this though.]

Perhaps it's time for the old fogies to band together with a request and/or complaint about not being able to customize the interface. What do you think?

Michael



I agree. I have had TIDAL premium for just about a year and a half now and I dig it!
Is it for everyone ABSOLUTLY NOT.
It's like everything else with this hobby. What sounds good to me might not sound that good for you.
As far as hip-hop I am and never have been interested. Classical does lack a bit in the selection but TIDAL has only been around a short time and one of the owners was Jay-Z.
Overall I think it is worth the price of one cd a month and for Veterans there is a decent discount. Maybe $12.00.
As far as sound quality I think the music is exactly as advertised...CD QUALITY IN HI-FI MODE!
Now that 3dimensional sound someone mentioned that they was lacking when listening to TIDAL. IMO that could be a result of inferior speaker positions which is imperative in 2channel.
My 803's are positioned so the sound is moving behind my head while NOT directly positioned to my ears. Vocals as well as instruments depending on recording methods sound as if they are coming from my center channel that I have for Home Theater.
95% or better I have that pseudo 3dimensional sound quality.

jarcher

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1940
  • It Just Sounds Right
Re: Tidal
« Reply #28 on: 19 Mar 2017, 10:13 pm »
Thanks jarcher, but don't you feel the Tidal stream is still down a notch compared to the best digital transport and server options?

Not in any significant way if the "best approach" is taken to Tidal streaming - e.g the way genjamon has done it.  Or if you use a streamer such as the ones from Aurender / Auralic that cache the file and have high quality playback systems (low noise / sound optimized / linear power supplies / etc).  When that's done there's precious difference as the file is essentially being handled the same way. One main difference is the genesis of the file - ripped by the record company & delivered to Tidal vs your own rip - and usually you'd expect the former to be better. 

I have found recently one thing that seems to substantially improve streaming sound quality : the quality of the ethernet cable.  Trust me : that was a hard one for me to accept as much as anyone else  - but the better ethernet cables - eg.. the Wireworld Starlight - had substantially better soundstage (particularly deeper) and a lower noise floor with better detail and resolution.  Apparently streamed audio uses the UDP protocol, which does not have the error correction of the TCP protocol for regular data (which as it's not being played does not have the same timing constraints).  This means data has to be delivered in real time once - which means it's subject to potential losses and therefore the quality of the transmitting medium comes into play. 

So that's potentially another part of the caveat / requirement to make streaming Tidal sound as good as your own ripped files. 

Rusty Jefferson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 867
Re: Tidal
« Reply #29 on: 20 Mar 2017, 03:32 am »
Thanks again.  As I described in a previous post the system I heard did use an Aurender server, however I didn't ask about Ethernet cable, router, or switch brands that support the Tidal stream to the server. Perhaps those are the difference, but what a COW (can of worms) that is.

jarcher

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1940
  • It Just Sounds Right
Re: Tidal
« Reply #30 on: 20 Mar 2017, 06:59 pm »
Thanks again.  As I described in a previous post the system I heard did use an Aurender server, however I didn't ask about Ethernet cable, router, or switch brands that support the Tidal stream to the server. Perhaps those are the difference, but what a COW (can of worms) that is.

The difference should not have been as notable on an Aurender - but our store owner who's more of a "golden ear" than I am also feels that NAS / local file rips sound better vs Tidal - all other things being equal.  I do think a better ethernet cable would help to close the gap - something I hope to try A/B in the days to come.

Network quality for the audiophile is an issue that has just arrived on the horizon as more are going to streaming audio - whether off a NAS or commercial services.