- Aug 1, 2019
The best streaming services offer slick interfaces, high-quality audio and access to millions of tracks.
Best music streaming services: free streams to hi-res audio : Read more
I don't understand the comment about Qobus being more expensive than Tidal. So Tidal is £19.99 for their HIFI service and the equivalent Qobus is £15. Also the comment about quality, is this what you have measured or is it based on marketing information?
You don’t need to be a Prime customer to use Amazon Music, they’re separate services - all that being a Prime customer offers you is a discount on some tiers.As sad as it is to say, I think Amazon is the best choice for hi-fi streaming (assuming you have prime). At $13, it's the cheapest option, and it has a lot of hi-fi music. I like Tidal the best, but $20 is just too much to pay per month on music streaming.
Right, I was basically saying it's the best option if you have Prime because it's cheaper. If you don't have Prime, it's the same price as Qobuz, so it makes it a harder decision, at least for me.You don’t need to be a Prime customer to use Amazon Music, they’re separate services - all that being a Prime customer offers you is a discount on some tiers.
I agree, with the U.K. costs of Amazon Music Unlimited HD being about the same in £ as it is in $. Like others have mentioned about the Amazon Prime free tier, I am surprised this hi-res service does not get a mention either.As sad as it is to say, I think Amazon is the best choice for hi-fi streaming (assuming you have prime). At $13, it's the cheapest option, and it has a lot of hi-fi music. I like Tidal the best, but $20 is just too much to pay per month on music streaming.
I uploaded some FLAC files and then played back via the YouTube music windows client that has a 'nerd' option to display the current file being played. It reports the file Codec as 0 / mp4a.40.2 (141). This is beyond me except the mp4a which means the FLAC file has been compressed via the upload process. I will try to do some back to back comparisons later...One thing I believe is missed from this review is the fact that with YouTube music you can upload your flac files
We have to understand that streaming is advertising as revenue (I hope so) should be distributed to the performer and the service. It's another matter if they don't.In view of the fact that WhatHiFi reviews and promotes quality equipment and services, surely the benefit for, or impact upon the artist or artists should be factored into any discussion of streaming services.
Just how much do the artists get paid for each download? If Tidal et al. paid the artists as much for streamed work as the artists get for a CD or vinyl sale, then I would be happy. However, we all know they don’t.
I am reminded of the ways in which record companies ripped-off the early blues artists, and indeed some of the bands in the 60s. If WhatHiFi is genuinely interested in the music, then surely it should score such products against how well they support artists!
I have stepped away from streaming for this reason.