Tidal in trouble

[insider9]

I predicted ages ago on here that businesses which only offered premium-priced lossless streaming couldn't survive long term. Premium-subscribed services could only ever survive as a loss-making sideline for a company which was already making a profit from a much cheaper service that attracted the masses. Why it wasn't obvious to businesmen and investors baffles me. Recent history is littered with the skeletons of dead formats that have failed because they were never destined to attact anything but a minority interest, including Elcaset, S-VHS, DCC, Minidisc to a degree (right product at the wrong time unfortunately), and SACD. Premium-priced lossless streaming is so obviously the same. 

I can see your point but it really shouldn't be either/or situation. Niche products have as much right to exist and do well as the mass market ones. Could it be akin to Minidics? Right product, wrong time... Or is it the right product just marketed wrong? Do enthusiast listen to rap more than anything?

Could Tidal do more to differentiate or change direction? Or maybe Qobuz is the answer with more "grown up" feel to it.

By the way I've seen reports by one user on another forum that Spotify already does lossless streaming in the UK. It's not officially announced but his streamer shows steams as lossless *shok*

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Most of these services are taking a long term view and have accepted losses. It will just be a case of how patient investors and banks are. Niche products have no right to exist if there isn’t a sustainable market for them, and by virtue of the unprofitability of streaming services it’s yet to be seen if, long term, cd quality or hi res streaming service are a long term proposition.

But when cd goes and people have to buy streamers on mass to replace the cd to consume new music, both for downloads and streamed music, it’s then that these steaming firms can realise their potential. I for one hope it happens because a new universally adopted device (the streamer) and format will reduce music prices. Who the hell can see people using a silver disc in 20-30 years time with fast internet and cheap pc storage and no PCs using cd or dvd drives. Frankly it’s more than had its time.

 

[drummerman]

I predicted ages ago on here that businesses which only offered premium-priced lossless streaming couldn't survive long term. Premium-subscribed services could only ever survive as a loss-making sideline for a company which was already making a profit from a much cheaper service that attracted the masses. Why it wasn't obvious to businesmen and investors baffles me. Recent history is littered with the skeletons of dead formats that have failed because they were never destined to attact anything but a minority interest, including Elcaset, S-VHS, DCC, Minidisc to a degree (right product at the wrong time unfortunately), and SACD. Premium-priced lossless streaming is so obviously the same. 

I can see your point but it really shouldn't be either/or situation. Niche products have as much right to exist and do well as the mass market ones. Could it be akin to Minidics? Right product, wrong time... Or is it the right product just marketed wrong? Do enthusiast listen to rap more than anything?

Could Tidal do more to differentiate or change direction? Or maybe Qobuz is the answer with more "grown up" feel to it.

By the way I've seen reports by one user on another forum that Spotify already does lossless streaming in the UK. It's not officially announced but his streamer shows steams as lossless *shok*

News to me. I have heard they were doing some trials but it has gone very quiet since.

 

[insider9]

I predicted ages ago on here that businesses which only offered premium-priced lossless streaming couldn't survive long term. Premium-subscribed services could only ever survive as a loss-making sideline for a company which was already making a profit from a much cheaper service that attracted the masses. Why it wasn't obvious to businesmen and investors baffles me. Recent history is littered with the skeletons of dead formats that have failed because they were never destined to attact anything but a minority interest, including Elcaset, S-VHS, DCC, Minidisc to a degree (right product at the wrong time unfortunately), and SACD. Premium-priced lossless streaming is so obviously the same. 

I can see your point but it really shouldn't be either/or situation. Niche products have as much right to exist and do well as the mass market ones. Could it be akin to Minidics? Right product, wrong time... Or is it the right product just marketed wrong? Do enthusiast listen to rap more than anything?

Could Tidal do more to differentiate or change direction? Or maybe Qobuz is the answer with more "grown up" feel to it.

By the way I've seen reports by one user on another forum that Spotify already does lossless streaming in the UK. It's not officially announced but his streamer shows steams as lossless *shok*

News to me. I have heard they were doing some trials but it has gone very quiet since.

So have I. Have a look at screenshots in this thread

https://hifiwigwam.com/forum/topic/127009-tidal-is-reported-to-be-running-out-of-cash/

 

[Leif]

It is quite likely that if one, dies anotehr will buy up their catalogue, and the resulting company will be much more popular.

The issues I have with streaming are:

1) They have a limited selection of music. I want access to my music.

2) In order to receive the music you need internet access. That is not available everywhere, such as when walking.

3) The cost is not just the streaming service, it's also the internet access i.e. data cost. For CD quality that adds noticeably to the price.

4) If your ISP has an issue, or a basestation goes down, you lose access to music. Talk talk do have issues ... and our local basestation went down for weeks ...

5) I like something I can stroke, and call 'my precious'.

 

[insider9]

It is quite likely that if one, dies anotehr will buy up their catalogue, and the resulting company will be much more popular.

The issues I have with streaming are:

1) They have a limited selection of music. I want access to my music.

2) In order to receive the music you need internet access. That is not available everywhere, such as when walking.

3) The cost is not just the streaming service, it's also the internet access i.e. data cost. For CD quality that adds noticeably to the price.

4) If your ISP has an issue, or a basestation goes down, you lose access to music. Talk talk do have issues ... and our local basestation went down for weeks ...

5) I like something I can stroke, and call 'my precious'.

This may go some way to help. There are free trials to just about any streaming service if you want to try.

1) You still have access to whatever music you own but gain access to lots more

2) You can use them offline also. I use Tidal at the gym as reception there is shocking and there's no WiFi. You would need to download content in advance.

3) True if you don't have an unlimited broadband this could be a factor

4) Again quite right but then you can listen to music you own or use offline content you downloaded when there were no connection issues.

5) No comment

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

I’d agree I wouldn’t call tidal or Spotify limited. You can get all sorts of new and historic music but for searching new albums, couldn’t be better. On tidal you select the ‘download to device’ slider, on mobile devices etc.

I reckon if you buy 12 albums a year Spotify pays for itself, not least it gives you ability to surf music and find stuff you like which you may want to buy the cd to etc.

I think in the internet age, most people have fixed broadband connections for as little at £7-£8 per month. My internet hasn’t gone down 1 day in 4 years.

 

[BigH]

It is quite likely that if one, dies anotehr will buy up their catalogue, and the resulting company will be much more popular.

The issues I have with streaming are:

1) They have a limited selection of music. I want access to my music.

2) In order to receive the music you need internet access. That is not available everywhere, such as when walking.

3) The cost is not just the streaming service, it's also the internet access i.e. data cost. For CD quality that adds noticeably to the price.

4) If your ISP has an issue, or a basestation goes down, you lose access to music. Talk talk do have issues ... and our local basestation went down for weeks ...

5) I like something I can stroke, and call 'my precious'.

1) There are about 20m albums, how many do you own? More being added all the time, the ECM catalogue has just added. Yes not everything is available but its more than you will ever get by buying your own. But it's great for discovering new artists that I would never have done without it.

Just came across a band on tv I had forgotten about, now I can play all their albums.

2) I have internet anyway, if I did not stream it would make no difference. Also you can do offline.

3) Ditto

4) Yes, don't use Talk Talk, I have lost about 4 hours in the last 3 years.

5) Buy a cat or dog, lol.

 

[Pedro]

I just payed 69EUR for 12 months of Spotify (the regular fee over here is 6.99/month).

That's less than 19 cents per day...

 

[Gonepostal]

Spotify and tidal etc are only worthwhile if you have time to listen to music for a few hours daily. If like the majority of people,work/family etc restrict your listening to say an hour each day, then why spend that hour discovering new music. I’d rather play something I know I’m going to like.

When I want to discover new music I use the iPlayer app. Having said that each to their own.

 

[BigH]

Spotify and tidal etc are only worthwhile if you have time to listen to music for a few hours daily. If like the majority of people,work/family etc restrict your listening to say an hour each day, then why spend that hour discovering new music. I’d rather play something I know I’m going to like.

When I want to discover new music I use the iPlayer app. Having said that each to their own.

Well I get bored playing the same music all the time, I want some fresh new music. iPlayer for music?

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Me too with boredom. anyway you don’t need to invest hours a day. I can often work out if I want to listen to albums again after 15 mins, but how much dead time do people have in the day be it commuting,sitting on trains, driving etc.

Spotify and tidal are worth it if the opportunity cost (economic term for what you forego) of the albums you’d otherwise buy on cd etc exceed the subscription cost. If you don’t listen to new music and/or won’t buy around 10 albums a year (which you’d accept as staying in your collection you like) then Spotify isn’t worth it.

 

[johnnyboy1950]

Like I said before I grew up in the sixties so all we had was Vinyl and pirate radio. Now there are so many options. In the past I spent hard earned money on albums that were promising after a good single release but turned out to be disapointing. Now I listen to far more music than I ever could because of the streaming services. So if something really gets me I have the option to buy and keep it. Forget legal downloads, never got why it would be worth it while streaming was available. If we all go over to streaming and nothing else then its just a matter of hiring music rather than owning it. So If you hear it out there and you like it then just buy it!

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_100004211376004]

You can download hi res music....you can't buy it in the shops...so..for some people they can get what they want in downloaded music.....not everyone lives close to a cd mega store with the availability to access the obscure artists that most on the likes of this forum are interested in.It very much is a case of horses for courses nowadays.

 

[steve_1979]

Peoples mentality has changed since the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's. Music is something that should be free bar the cost of the internet access. No one feels like you should have to pay for music anymore.

 

[macdiddy]

if I hear a song I like from a band then I am happy to purchase the album it comes from either online or from my local HMV.

*music2*

 

[Macspur]

Like I said before I grew up in the sixties so all we had was Vinyl and pirate radio. Now there are so many options. In the past I spent hard earned money on albums that were promising after a good single release but turned out to be disapointing. Now I listen to far more music than I ever could because of the streaming services. So if something really gets me I have the option to buy and keep it. Forget legal downloads, never got why it would be worth it while streaming was available. If we all go over to streaming and nothing else then its just a matter of hiring music rather than owning it. So If you hear it out there and you like it then just buy it!

Plus 1

Mac

www.realmusicnet.wordpress.com

 

[andyjm]

Id agree with you major fubar as I read the size of the illegal torrent download market dwarfs the size of legal downloads. So if you added it all in, on basis of the American industry figures, it would take the total revenues for music nearly as they were in the 90s when the internet wasn’t there. But illegal downloads must impact participation of streaming services, so affecting tidal uptake.

These figures are very misleading, and assume every illegal torrent is a lost sale. Consumers would modfy their behavoir if there was a cost, and it is very likely that the increase in actual sales would be small if illegal sharing was prevented. What is more likely is that other free sources of music (radio or the streaming equivalent for example) would see a pickup in listeners.

 

[chebby]

I have recorded many a BBC radio drama, documentary or comedy series starting in 1978 with Hitchiker’s Guide To The Galaxy when 15 years old.

On every single occasion (except where never made available commercially) I have - sooner or later - replaced the recording with an official BBC LP, CD or download.

Then I did it all again to replace all the BBC LPs with CDs!

They have had (and continue to have) thousands of £s of sales from me over the years and that’s just BBC audio. (Well over £200 this year and more to come at Christmas )

 

[Pedro]

I am a creature of habits.

I have a coffee at Costa/Nero every day of the year. Sometimes two if I do serious cycling.

Thats at least £1k a year, probably more like £1.5k.

Tidals £240 seems insignificant in comparison. I can also use it at work . I probably listen about 4 to 5 hours a day during week days, say 25 to 30 hours a week. That's around 1600 hours a year.

By my calculation that equates to approx. 15 pence/hour of music.

If we take a CD playtime of an hour that is incredible.

That's for music of my choice in lossless quality.

Fantastic vfm imho. - I appreciate that is probably at the more extreme side of useage but even if you only use it for roughly an hour a day ... it's still only a quid or thereabouts an hour (at Tidal Hifi price). Not bad for the convenience and choice/quality.

Half that for Spotify Premium.

If you only listen to music an hour or two a week it may not make that much sense but then you would probably not have HIFI as a hobby anyway.

To put that into perspective, I used to listen to favourite cd's perhaps every three months or so. That would equate to an hourly cost of approx. £2.50 for a decent CD costing at a tenner, over a year (a lot of my stuff is eclectic jazz, much of scandinavian origin which is not available at cut prices). Thats 15 to 20 cd's of my choice I can listen to instead using my streaming service. Fair enough, I then owned the music but in hindsight this makes very little difference to me. I'd may feel different if I had very flaky internet connection but it would probably fair to say that for most of us, this is not case anymore.

You have to make your own calculations to see whether you would fully utilize streaming services. Imho just the choice and new music is worth the cash but your mileage may vary if you are happy to rotate your CD collection frequently, only buy heavily discounted or s/h cd's and are not to bothered about daily discovery of new music and/or are happy to use YouTube for this with all its clumsy interface. Then there are of course free streaming services if you are not bothered about advertising or SQ.

To sum it up, it makes me listen to music much more and isn't this what it is all about?

I hope we'll see Spotify lossless soon. I'd pay £25/month for the better interface if SQ holds up.

Let's face It, everything else seems to go up in cost, surely streaming services are no different.

Having said that I happily jump ship if something is better/cheaper. No service loyalty from me but I look at the whole package rather than just price.

Haven't tried quobuz.

+1

I listen to Spotify at my workplace. Some days I use it for 10 hours, for 19 cents. To get things into perspective an expresso here costs around 60/65 cents. A half pint is around 80 cents/1 euro and an underground/bus ticket 1.45EUR. Spotify seems dirty cheap to me!

And yes, if people are just listening music for a few hours a week maybe it doesn't make much sense to buy expensive kit...

 

[drummerman]

I am a creature of habits. I have a coffee at Costa/Nero every day of the year. Sometimes two if I do serious cycling. Thats at least £1k a year, probably more like £1.5k. Tidals £240 seems insignificant in comparison. I can also use it at work . I probably listen about 4 to 5 hours a day during week days, say 25 to 30 hours a week. That's around 1600 hours a year. By my calculation that equates to approx. 15 pence/hour of music. If we take a CD playtime of an hour that is incredible. That's for music of my choice in lossless quality. Fantastic vfm imho. - I appreciate that is probably at the more extreme side of useage but even if you only use it for roughly an hour a day ... it's still only a quid or thereabouts an hour (at Tidal Hifi price). Not bad for the convenience and choice/quality. Half that for Spotify Premium. If you only listen to music an hour or two a week it may not make that much sense but then you would probably not have HIFI as a hobby anyway. To put that into perspective, I used to listen to favourite cd's perhaps every three months or so. That would equate to an hourly cost of approx. £2.50 for a decent CD costing at a tenner, over a year (a lot of my stuff is eclectic jazz, much of scandinavian origin which is not available at cut prices). Thats 15 to 20 cd's of my choice I can listen to instead using my streaming service. Fair enough, I then owned the music but in hindsight this makes very little difference to me. I may feel different if I had very flaky internet connection but it would probably fair to say that for most of us, this is not case anymore. You have to make your own calculations to see whether you would fully utilize streaming services. Imho just the choice and new music is worth the cash but your mileage may vary if you are happy to rotate your CD collection frequently, only buy heavily discounted or s/h cd's and are not to bothered about daily discovery of new music and/or are happy to use YouTube for this with all its clumsy interface. Then there are of course free streaming services if you are not bothered about advertising or SQ. To sum it up, it makes me listen to music much more and isn't this what it is all about? I hope we'll see Spotify lossless soon. I'd pay £25/month for the better interface if SQ holds up. Let's face It, everything else seems to go up in cost, surely streaming services are no different. Having said that I happily jump ship if something is better/cheaper. No service loyalty from me but I look at the whole package rather than just price. Haven't tried quobuz.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Id agree with you major fubar as I read the size of the illegal torrent download market dwarfs the size of legal downloads. So if you added it all in, on basis of the American industry figures, it would take the total revenues for music nearly as they were in the 90s when the internet wasn’t there. But illegal downloads must impact participation of streaming services, so affecting tidal uptake.

These figures are very misleading, and assume every illegal torrent is a lost sale. Consumers would modfy their behavoir if there was a cost, and it is very likely that the increase in actual sales would be small if illegal sharing was prevented. What is more likely is that other free sources of music (radio or the streaming equivalent for example) would see a pickup in listeners.

it doesn’t necessarily matter about every torrent but I understand it goes on the downloads anyway. Same point. I don’t think you modify behaviour if a cost, as music is a very human experience which to be deprived of if not freely available would make most people want to pay for it. My attitude, for the benefit of music industry and consumers, is to make music all paid for. Better music will happen and more variation. So I don’t see it that people should have the facility to go to an alternate free source of music/site. What we see if the ultimate modification of behaviour in free music on you tube, file sharing, sharing Spotify etc already, which needs to be stamped out. Music certainly shouldn’t be free as what incentive is there to start a band or group. Nothing.

 

[Gray]

I could look it up but I've got the experts right here.

Can someone please advise:

What are the bitrates of Spotify Free and Premium?

(To a laptop computer)

 

[drummerman]

I could look it up but I've got the experts right here.

Can someone please advise:

What are the bitrates of Spotify Free and Premium?

(To a laptop computer)

320kbps Ogg Vorbis/Premium.

160 on normal I think.

1,411 kbps Tidal Hifi

... ah yes, I am far from an expert.

 

[MajorFubar]

I can see your point but it really shouldn't be either/or situation. Niche products have as much right to exist and do well as the mass market ones. Could it be akin to Minidics? Right product, wrong time... Or is it the right product just marketed wrong? Do enthusiast listen to rap more than anything?

Absolutely niche products have a right to exist as mass market ones, but unless they are being marketed by a company whose bread and butter money is being made from mass market sales, they will fail. No one I personally know would be interested in spending money on it, and the kind of people I know represent Mr Average.