Tidal (streaming quality)

Function TIDAL / QOBUZ / SPOTIFY
#24

For sure. It’s the same how conspiracy theories spread. Start with something somewhat plausible, and then add just enough technical jargon tht one needs to know something about the subject to realize that it is bunk. A bit of wink and nudge “they are hiding it, but we know” and there you have it.

You just have to remember a very simple thing. The manufacturer wants to sell product. Anything they tell you, short of the price and verifiable measurements, has to be treated as marketing – because it is marketing. And youtube reviewers are even worse, they will try to sell you anything in return for free samples and payola.

Basically, 99% of them (Darko, Hans, and similar clowns) are the guys who do not want to do any work at all, but are too ugly to run a successful OnlyFans so they prostitute themselves to manufacturers instead. Really quite funny how that Hans guy claims to be AES member, implying that he knows something about audio engineering. But anyone can be an AES member, just pay the dues. If you check his member page, his only connection to audio is that he has been writing ignorant nonsense about it for many years…

1 Like
#25

Good day @BorisM,

just another great post!

I’m telling you, I can’t complain about you.

Those who do it anyway know in secret that in many cases they have spent far too much money. They just don’t admit it and when someone comes along (like you), they fight tooth and nail… or in this case threaten to complain to Rose to get you out of the chat. Most people don’t admit their mistakes and then get trapped in their bubble or matrix of lies.

It’s so easy to say no or…“Man, I got ripped off there”.

Boris, as long as you still have Rose technology, keep it up here.

This isn’t meant to be sycophantic.

Greetings to Texas :v:t2:

#26

But they don’t want to admit it – it would mean acknowledging both that their ears are not so golden, as well as that they are technically ignorant. All the angry posts about great improvements they get from cables, magic crystals, or painting blue with lilac polka dots is as much an effort to convince themselves as others.

Why wouldn’t I? Rose devices still work well for me.

1 Like
#27

Exactly…

again, you hit the nail on the head!

That’s how it looks, they would have to come out and that’s not possible at all. Then they keep spinning and spinning until they’ve completely lost touch with reality.

:v:t2:

#28

For sure. Pretending that your hearing is more sensitive than the precision lab equipment, that you know something those stupid egggheads don’t, and that because you have enough money to buy some expensive kit you must have the best, rather than just have wasted money, that’s all much more pleasing than realizing that you are just an average Joe, and that your stereo setup is no better than what some poor peon had assembled for $1000.

1 Like
#29

Yes, @BorisM, you are absolutely right! But what can you do if a lot of people are so stubborn and are in a perpetual twilight sleep. They have to wake up to see what you are trying to tell them.

Is everything OK with your technology???

You have Roon and Rose is sure to be running perfectly.

PS:
If you are ever “bored” you can read through the chat

and make your statement. It really sounds different with…

(Elmedia Player) I have no explanation

:v:t2:

#30

Oh, no problem at all. As long as you know Rose’s limitations, it works fine. Never had any problems feeding either 250 or 520 from Roon (actually, never had any problems using Qobuz directly either, but Roon just makes it so much nicer that I rarely do it). Really, BlueSound, despite having far morte products, developers, support, etc., etc., breaks Roon compatibility far more often than Rose ever did.

I’ve seen that thread. As long as it is only the believers in magical pink unicorns engaging in mutual masturbation over hearing things, I’d rather stay out, just like the threads of people singing praises to specific SFP modules. Little point arguing with people that stupid.

There can be any reasons why using DLNA might sound different. DLNA often recodes to a different resolution, in some arbitrary way, DLNA input can be set to higher volume, or something like that. And just people wanting to believe in crap. Unless and until there’s a proper level-matched test involving exactly same bits sent to the DAC, I treat these stories the same as the stories about the effect of green markers on CD sound.

1 Like
#31

@BorisM

:sweat_smile: :clap:t2: :clap:t2:

Oh, no problem at all. As long as you know Rose’s limitations, it works fine. Never had any problems feeding either 250 or 520 from Roon (actually, never had any problems using Qobuz directly either, but Roon just makes it so much nicer that I rarely do it). Really, BlueSound, despite having far morte products, developers, support, etc., etc., breaks Roon compatibility far more often than Rose ever did.
[/quote]

If it didn’t cost so much money, I would buy Roon (try it). I’ve read a lot of your posts and Roon makes the sound better and you also have the 520. I’ll wait a little longer and try Roon in the new year.

I still have a Macbook Air M1 with a 1TB hard drive. It’s just lying around uselessly. Would that be enough for the Roon core??? I quickly read the requirements for Roon. M1 has enough power.

Aha, so that’s the reason. I haven’t really found anything on the internet.

Then it’s like I said jokingly:
So it’s kind of like an upsampling (filter) like in D/A conversion

As I said, you notice the difference, but not dimensions like between telephone quality and a system that meets the high fidelity standard.

That’s like complaining at the highest level.

Thank you for your answer

and have a nice evening :v:t2:

#32

It doesn’t really make sound better by itself. What it does is it allows you to create a convolution filter (there are also PEQ presets for various headphone models) that allows you to fix speaker/room interaction to make frequency and time response more accurate (well, or less accurate, if you want to). That can make sound you hear better.

For me, the main selling point of Roon is that it is the first music library I have seen that is good at managing my collection, can combine my local files with what is available in supported streaming services, and brings in useful metadata. Makes discovering new music much easier. Depending on how you listen and to what it may or may not add much value for you, but I have bought the lifetime subscription before my free trial ended.

You should just try it for free (you can temporarily run the Roon server on whatever computer you are using right now) and see if it works for you. Your Air should be good enough, I think, depending on the size of your library, but for anything common it should be OK.

There is probably something, it’s just that under controlled conditions none of these “dramatic and ibvious differences” are present.

Even the differences between different reconstruction filters are very subtle, if at all audible (and any big difference is in the upper frequency range, usually well above anything any of the “reviewers” gushing about these differences have been able to hear in the past 20 years).

Really, in a proper scientific test, the vast majority of people can not hear any difference between a high enough bitrate MP3 and the original (although there, for very specific sounds, if you really know what to listen to, you could sort of distinguish them). Nobody can hear the difference between CD Quality and High Rez, if they are actually the same recording.

1 Like
#33

Yes, exactly!

I did the test.

I converted a *Flac file with a sampling rate of 24 bits / 192kHz into an mp3 with 320 kbit/s and really didn’t hear any differences. On the contrary: When I edited the mp3 with mp3Gain (without clipping, of course), the sound was much more dynamic than the same Flac file. For me it’s a huge
powerful gag HiRES mafia and they’ve found their sheep again. Because for me the sharpest judges are my ears and not this HiRES symbol that everyone is keen on.

To stay constructive: I have nothing against good quality, that’s what everyone wants… (that it sounds good and it should sound good)

*Flac & DSD sample songs for free download.

You don’t even need to convert it yourself, you can download all three (mp3, CD and Flac quality) and compare them.

Yes, because imagination plays a big role here. Actually, such people are deceiving themselves and the voodoo is inevitable. I have (recently) subscribed to Tidal and I can’t hear any difference between “high” and “max”.
As you said:
I compare it with my small, affordable system and my ears.
I don’t know what it sounds like on a $1 million system.
But then I can only compare a $1 million shelf speaker with my shelf speakers.
I can’t compare my BMW with the ugly little Citroën 2CV either.
I remain constructive and realistic and I’m doing well with it because my soul is free, as I don’t have to think about how I’m going to pay for all this great stuff.
If the soul - or the consciousness - is free, you can enjoy or perceive music much better than constantly having to think about how I’m going to pay for all this stuff.

:v:t2:

#34

Of course. If it is louder, it seems better. Even if it is not. Just don’t go trusting your ears too far. They can tell you if something sounds good to you right now but that’s about it. Too much dependency on completely unrelated factors. In experiment after experiment, people would hear the difference that isn’t there, or not here quite the difference that was ac tually audible, if they were told that something unimportant (cables) would be changed. Instead, speakers were wired out of phase, which yuo normally would hear very well…

Yup. Most of the time, it is only the imagination.

On one hand, speakers are pretty much the only piece where you you do have to spend above a certain minimum to get a good result. Despite what Bose was trying to convince us, you do need drivers of a certain size, in a cabinet of a certain size, with proper shape etc. etc.

On the other hand, chances are that a $1 million speaker is actually orse than a $2000 one, in this range you get speakers made by juju peddlers, probably without a single measurement.

That said, a BMW (well, I am more of an Audi person though) is better than a 2CV in many perfectly measurable parameters that are pertinent to its functionality. For starters, it’s likely to have more than two horses under the hood.

Here we have more of a comparison between a Casio watch and a Richard Mille. A Mille watch… well, it does show time. And if you have a very bad taste, it is prettier than a Casio. It just will never show the time anywhere nearly as well as a Casio does at 1/1000 of the price.

1 Like
#35

Good morning @BorisM,

Yes, I agree with you… Audi has been really tarnishing the image of BMW & Mercedes over the last 20 years. They build dream cars for a country that is slowly being scrapped (see the old man Biden).

But a car or flashy systems aren’t that important to me, but health and family cohesion are more important in these times.

YES again! You can put all the expensive crap on your system, but if you don’t have good speakers, you won’t have any fun.

Stay healthy and an audiophile

:v:t2:

#36

True. It’s all about whether it does what you want it to do, at a price you find agreeable.

I would take the latter as an insult! :rofl:

#37

Hallo @BorisM

Yes, it does!

Of course I have heard other systems and they sounded fantastic (to my ears).

I am a carpenter and I build my extension series around the TV because the OLED picture is more important to my eyes and not, like (hissing): Oh come on, let’s buy the TV, it fits so nicely into the TV part of the extension series.

All I want to say is!

  1. I would not have been able to physically fit this system into my modest apartment.

  2. I would have made myself dependent on the elites by borrowing money.

  3. I have a system (speakers) that sounds good to me and I still play around (a lot or a little) with old school quadrophony.

I am currently very happy with my two pairs of speakers.

:clap:t2: :clap:t2: :clap:t2: Yes, that’s why I posted it (audiophile) and they reacted exactly as I meant it (sarcastic).

That’s why the whole thing (HiRES…HQ Audio) or whatever the mafia wants to call it remains a big surprise for me not to type (snake oil) again

Boris, with that in mind:

Enjoy your life and your health

Greetings Thomas (Bonte) :v:t2:

#38

I just had to reply to all this nonsense.
MQA is now owned by NAD is is being reissued with the reputable streaming service HD Tracks. If you had a proper MQA system you could appreciate how it improved things but so much rubbish was written by people who never owned or heard a proper MQA system it didn’t stand a chance.
If you can’t hear the difference between a CD quality track and a Hires track you need to get a better HiFi system.

#39

Good evening @colin

Yes, of course it is being marketed again. I was talking about the original company (Meridian Audio) MQA.

Then you have a different internet than me.

or I read it wrong!

Have a nice evening :v:t2:

#40

No, no new system…I need more voodoo

:wink:

1 Like
#41

If you own an ultra-high-quality stereo system, test yourself. Ask someone to play High-Res tracks and the same ones in CD quality alternately while you are blindfolded. I assure you, you’ll be surprised and disappointed in your uniqueness and confidence. However, MP3 can be distinguished from CD quality, especially with a very expensive system, including high-performance speakers.

Hint: The sound from a CD will have richer bass compared to MP3. In the upper and mid-frequency ranges, you are unlikely to notice any difference.

1 Like
#42

Good evening, @VIK

That may all be true. But I am a normal earner and for me that is a different galaxies.

That’s why I’m going by my system.

Of course it’s not an (Aldi system). I just don’t reach for the stars without first thinking about the consequences!

Have a relaxing evening

Thomas :v:t2:

#43

MQA is a lossy compression. It is, basically mp3 on HiRes. So, this marketing department managed to fool some people before everybody switched to lossless FLAC. Now, MQA is useless and presumably dead. There is no use of it.

Of course, there was a difference, MQA coding involved some dynamic compression too. Coder was also careless about digital zero overshoots, producing harsh digital distorsion in some songs. So, format was much worse sounding than ordinary original 44/16. MQA is a exaple story about how easy is to sell a story in audio industry. And you do not need a “proper system” to hear how MQA ruined the original audio.

2 Likes