# What Is Your Favorite Streaming Service For Classical Music?



## haydnguy

I have always bought all my music on CD's. I haven't changed my mind on that. I was just wondering what streaming service were people's favorites in case I change my mind. I like to know what's out there.


----------



## Bulldog

Naxos Music Library - expensive, doesn't have everything, well organized, much less commercialized than Spotify.


----------



## Guest

Naxos Music Library is fantastic and I enjoy using it, but I do like Spotify just for having more stuff.


----------



## bharbeke

Spotify covers me for classical and non-classical music. Any gaps can generally be made up from YouTube.


----------



## DarkAngel

If you have good sound system Tidal has best sound quality using premium service with growing selection of masters series (MQA 24/96) but even the standard selections are CD quality vs 320 mp3 best for Spotify.......both have weak classical music search functions, but you learn how to use eventually.


----------



## Thomyum2

I have Amazon Music, the 'free' version of which comes included with an Amazon Prime subscription and I find it has a pretty broad selection of classical music if not quite a comprehensive one. I find it a good way to explore a lot of composers or pieces or performances that I'm not necessarily sure I want to invest in actually purchasing. You can also pay a little extra to subscribe to the 'Music Unlimited' which gives you access to the full library.


----------



## Thomyum2

I'd also mention that the Berlin Philharmonic and the Metropolitan Opera offer video streaming services (recordings of live performances), both of which are excellent, in my opinion.


----------



## Madiel

Qobuz 
219.99 Euros a year in CD quality


----------



## jegreenwood

DarkAngel said:


> If you have good sound system Tidal has best sound quality using premium service with growing selection of masters series (MQA 24/96) but even the standard selections are CD quality vs 320 mp3 best for Spotify.......both have weak classical music search functions, but you learn how to use eventually.


Ditto on all points.


----------



## ClassicalListener

All streaming services are trash. On Tidal a great amount of albums have the tracks out of order, rendering them unusable. Spotify has awful MP3 audio quality. On Qobuz you can't search for albums. If you search for 'Bruckner Karajan' you get nothing. You must first select an artist and then spend two hours sifting through its listings to find what you want.

The best medium we will ever have for listening to music is the audio CD. We should all tend to its survival by buying more of them.


----------



## Madiel

ClassicalListener said:


> The best medium we will ever have for listening to music is the audio CD. We should all tend to its survival by buying more of them.


the CD is a poor thing when compared to hi-res audio, it is a pity that the SACD or DVD-A never got much support.


----------



## KenOC

Madiel said:


> the CD is a poor thing when compared to hi-res audio, it is a pity that the SACD or DVD-A never got much support.


Maybe they never got much support because nobody could hear the difference? Just asking.


----------



## Madiel

KenOC said:


> Maybe they never got much support because nobody could hear the difference? Just asking.


no doubt about it, according to blind tests that I have conducted myself with friends (audiophiles some of them) and family, only a 10% can tell the difference (and the result with MP3 versus CD is quite similar), but in the end imho it is only a marketing failure - helped by the fact that the SACD came around when free illegal downloading of MP3 files was already a success - as a fact there is a lot of merchandise/products enjoying success/sales despite the fact that no one can tell the difference.


----------



## Krummhorn

Naxos Music Library by far the best, imho. It's a perk that's part of my paid subscription status for IMSLP. 

At other times I use Pandora, for which I also have a paid subscription.


----------



## haydnguy

The Naxos Music Library looks good to me. Thanks for everyone's responses. :tiphat:


----------



## Bulldog

KenOC said:


> Maybe they never got much support because nobody could hear the difference? Just asking.


I've always found the differences between cd and sacd significant.


----------



## premont

Madiel said:


> no doubt about it, according to blind tests that I have conducted myself with friends (audiophiles some of them) and family, only a 10% can tell the difference (and the result with MP3 versus CD is quite similar), but in the end imho it is only a marketing failure - helped by the fact that the SACD came around when free illegal downloading of MP3 files was already a success - as a fact there is a lot of merchandise/products enjoying success/sales despite the fact that no one can tell the difference.


Even if I own quite a number of hybrid CD/SACDs. I have never acquired a SACD player. But I suppose, that one needs high-quality playback-equipment to actually hear the difference..


----------



## Madiel

premont said:


> Even if I own quite a number of hybrid CD/SACDs. I have never acquired a SACD player. But I suppose, that one needs high-quality playback-equipment to actually hear the difference..


according to experience a high quality hearing system counts way more than playback equipment (meaning: if your hearing is able to tell the difference then you will hear it no matter the price tag of the equipment). As for me, I've always been happy with medium range machines, first a Denon 1500-AE, now the latest Arcam FMJ, the problem I have is that I still haven't found a fully satisfying way to manage hi-res files (you can find much more music available in download format than SACD) - it seems that medium range machines don't exist for this new format.


----------



## premont

Madiel said:


> according to experience a high quality hearing system counts way more than playback equipment (meaning: if your hearing is able to tell the difference then you will hear it no matter the price tag of the equipment).


I was a bit unclear, because I didn't only mean able to hear the difference as such (my hearing is rather good), but also to appreciate it to a reasonable degree, supposing the difference is next to insignificant, if one uses other than high-grade equipment compared to the medium range equipment I use.. I have also always been satisfied with medium range equipment and have the feeling that I should spend about four times as much money to get any real improvement. And I would also have to find a larger room for the purpose.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Madiel said:


> no doubt about it, according to blind tests that I have conducted myself with friends (audiophiles some of them) and family, only a 10% can tell the difference (and the result with MP3 versus CD is quite similar), but in the end imho it is only a marketing failure - helped by the fact that the SACD came around when free illegal downloading of MP3 files was already a success - as a fact there is a lot of merchandise/products enjoying success/sales despite the fact that no one can tell the difference.


Audio quality requires discrimination. Its appreciation is something you cultivate and learn to relish. It is not something immediately obvious to someone lacking the capacity to recognize it. How many people, ignorant of art or philosophy, would be able to 'tell the difference' between an original Raphael or a paragraph from Hegel and an imitation? Good things in life are not for ordinary people to judge or distinguish.

For me the difference between my CDs and Spotify is crushing. The latter sounds by comparison plain, thin, one-dimensional, artificial, brittle, to the point of being unlistenable. I would never trade its convenience for the sheer pleasure of smooth, silky CD sound on an only barely decent system.

If SACD were more widely adopted, it would of course be better.


----------



## ClassicalListener

By the way, another defect of Tidal is that you cannot listen to a selection from an album if you don't have the screen right next to you and are constantly monitoring it. Let's say you find a recording which includes several discs or volumes that isn't out of order to begin with, and you wish to sit down some distance from your device and listen to just disc 2. This isn't possible because there isn't a function to play up until a given track, and if you add all the tracks of a disc to the queue or a playlist, the stupid software will add them out of order, which of course for classical music makes it unusable.


----------



## Madiel

ClassicalListener said:


> Audio quality requires discrimination. Its appreciation is something you cultivate and learn to relish. It is not something immediately obvious to someone lacking the capacity to recognize it. How many people, ignorant of art or philosophy, would be able to 'tell the difference' between an original Raphael or a paragraph from Hegel and an imitation? Good things in life are not for ordinary people to judge or distinguish.


I disagree 
the difference between MP3 and CD requires a hearing capable to perceive some frequencies that are absent in the lower quality file, so it is an innate ability, if your hearing doesn't get them, there is no way to educate yourself.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Madiel said:


> I disagree
> the difference between MP3 and CD requires a hearing capable to perceive some frequencies that are absent in the lower quality file, so it is an innate ability, if your hearing doesn't get them, there is no way to educate yourself.


No, it is not a matter simply of frequencies, but of the qualities of sound. The contour around an instrument. The air between them. Their physical positioning. How sounds arise and fade. Their texture. The richness of coloring. The perception of friction when the bow strikes the string.

These qualities are not obvious and you perceive them through critical listening, not casual blind testing. With modestly decent (not spectacular) equipment, you come to enjoy them immensely and simply cannot go back to MP3s. The matter is that most people no longer know how to listen to music, and employ it as little more than background noise. Thus the popularity of Spotify, Apple and the likes.


----------



## Dan Ante

Bulldog said:


> I've always found the differences between cd and sacd significant.


That is interesting what difference do you hear?


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> By the way, another defect of Tidal is that you cannot listen to a selection from an album if you don't have the screen right next to you and are constantly monitoring it. Let's say you find a recording which includes several discs or volumes that isn't out of order to begin with, and you wish to sit down some distance from your device and listen to just disc 2. This isn't possible because there isn't a function to play up until a given track, and if you add all the tracks of a disc to the queue or a playlist, the stupid software will add them out of order, which of course for classical music makes it unusable.


By out of order, do you mean it inserts the added disc after the current track? If that's your concern, you can avoid it with advance planning. I'll assume you're starting with an empty play queue. Instead of just selecting album 1 and hitting play, select the album and choose play next. Then you can start playing the newly queued tracks. After that you can add a second album to the end by choosing add to play queue.

In my case, I only use the computer based app when I am sitting at my computer. Otherwise I will have Tidal streaming to another device with my phone as a remote control. I do this with Squeezeboxes and the Aries Mini. I have also tested it with Google Chrome Audio (where you start Tidal on your phone and cast the music to the Chrome), but the Squeezebox remote app can control the Google device, so I don't use the Tidal app for casting.


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> No, it is not a matter simply of frequencies, but of the qualities of sound. The contour around an instrument. The air between them. Their physical positioning. How sounds arise and fade. Their texture. The richness of coloring. The perception of friction when the bow strikes the string.
> 
> These qualities are not obvious and you perceive them through critical listening, not casual blind testing. With modestly decent (not spectacular) equipment, you come to enjoy them immensely and simply cannot go back to MP3s. The matter is that most people no longer know how to listen to music, and employ it as little more than background noise. Thus the popularity of Spotify, Apple and the likes.


The two improvements I notice most (and by no means on all SACDs) are tonal coloring, which I attribute to more accurate preservation of an instrument's overtones and the decay of notes.


----------



## Bulldog

Dan Ante said:


> That is interesting what difference do you hear?


the soundstage opens up - more expansive every time.


----------



## Dan Ante

Bulldog said:


> the soundstage opens up - more expansive every time.


Personally, what exactly do you mean by soundstage is it the location of individual instruments in an ens or perhaps a wider stereo spread or could it be surround sound?


----------



## Bulldog

Dan Ante said:


> Personally, what exactly do you mean by soundstage is it the location of individual instruments in an ens or perhaps a wider stereo spread or could it be surround sound?


All three of those are on target.


----------



## Dan Ante

Bulldog said:


> All three of those are on target.


OK I would hope there is more to it as a decent Hi Fi set up should get all of that apart from surround sound, that will come with a decent listening room in the form of reflected sound, I have a holographic selector on my pre amp which gives the equivalent of surround sound but once the novelty wore of I just stick to normal stereo.


----------



## Bulldog

Dan Ante said:


> OK I would hope there is more to it as a decent Hi Fi set up should get all of that apart from surround sound, that will come with a decent listening room in the form of reflected sound, I have a holographic selector on my pre amp which gives the equivalent of surround sound but once the novelty wore of I just stick to normal stereo.


No listening room involved; I use headphones.


----------



## ClassicalListener

jegreenwood said:


> By out of order, do you mean it inserts the added disc after the current track? If that's your concern, you can avoid it with advance planning. I'll assume you're starting with an empty play queue. Instead of just selecting album 1 and hitting play, select the album and choose play next. Then you can start playing the newly queued tracks. After that you can add a second album to the end by choosing add to play queue.
> 
> In my case, I only use the computer based app when I am sitting at my computer. Otherwise I will have Tidal streaming to another device with my phone as a remote control. I do this with Squeezeboxes and the Aries Mini. I have also tested it with Google Chrome Audio (where you start Tidal on your phone and cast the music to the Chrome), but the Squeezebox remote app can control the Google device, so I don't use the Tidal app for casting.


Let's say there is a recording composed of several volumes or discs, and I wish to listen to just one of them. How do I do that? With a CD I insert it in the player, push play, and problem solved. With newer technology however everything is harder. There is no option for simply playing a recording up until a point. If you try to add a selection of tracks to either the queue or a playlist, it will add them in disorder, for instance 5., 6., 7., 8., 1., 2., 3., 4. Correcting this can be very difficult because, firstly, most of the time you can't see the track number as the column is too narrow and the text description is interrupted, and secondly, some albums have 30, 40 or 50 tracks.

I attempted to give these services a try but both the abysmal sound quality and usage complexities bring me back to trusty old CDs, the most enjoyable way ever to listen to music.


----------



## Dan Ante

Bulldog said:


> No listening room involved; I use headphones.


Aha that explanes your reasoning


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> Let's say there is a recording composed of several volumes or discs, and I wish to listen to just one of them. How do I do that? With a CD I insert it in the player, push play, and problem solved. With newer technology however everything is harder. There is no option for simply playing a recording up until a point. If you try to add a selection of tracks to either the queue or a playlist, it will add them in disorder, for instance 5., 6., 7., 8., 1., 2., 3., 4. Correcting this can be very difficult because, firstly, most of the time you can't see the track number as the column is too narrow and the text description is interrupted, and secondly, some albums have 30, 40 or 50 tracks.
> 
> I attempted to give these services a try but both the abysmal sound quality and usage complexities bring me back to trusty old CDs, the most enjoyable way ever to listen to music.


I'm not sure I follow. If I want to listen to disc 2 of Pierre-Laurent Aimard playing WTC (chosen by me at random just now), I select the album, scroll down to Volume 2 and play the first track. The others tracks follow in order. If I want to add tracks, I can use the procedure I described earlier. (I do have to add them 1 by 1 but they are added in the order I select. n.b. I can't remember the last time I wanted to do that.) If I want to stop at a specific point, and I am not using my phone as a remote (as I generally do when I am not at my computer), I would have to get up and hit stop. But wouldn't you have to get up and put in a new disc?

I am certainly not saying that the streaming services handle classical music with elegance. The search engines are terrible, but you can learn how to increase the likelihood of finding what you want. They are playlist/shuffle, not album, oriented, but you can minimize that problem as well. And they give you access to a massive library of music, including recordings that are OOP, recordings that you may only wish to hear on rare occasions, and in my case, recordings that I won't buy because I am running out of space in my apartment.


----------



## ClassicalListener

jegreenwood said:


> I'm not sure I follow. If I want to listen to disc 2 of Pierre-Laurent Aimard playing WTC (chosen by me at random just now), I select the album, scroll down to Volume 2 and play the first track. The others tracks follow in order. If I want to add tracks, I can use the procedure I described earlier. (I do have to add them 1 by 1 but they are added in the order I select. n.b. I can't remember the last time I wanted to do that.) If I want to stop at a specific point, and I am not using my phone as a remote (as I generally do when I am not at my computer), I would have to get up and hit stop. But wouldn't you have to get up and put in a new disc?


How do you get the program to play just disc 2 and then stop by itself?


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> How do you get the program to play just disc 2 and then stop by itself?


From my prior post:

"If I want to stop at a specific point, and I am not using my phone as a remote (as I generally do when I am not at my computer), I would have to get up and hit stop. But wouldn't you have to get up and put in a new disc?"


----------



## ClassicalListener

jegreenwood said:


> From my prior post:
> 
> "If I want to stop at a specific point, and I am not using my phone as a remote (as I generally do when I am not at my computer), I would have to get up and hit stop. But wouldn't you have to get up and put in a new disc?"


I don't want to be checking a screen while I'm listening. I want to sit down, enjoy the program, and have it stop by itself when it's over. I don't want to check after each track to see if it was the last of the selection I wished to listen.


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> I don't want to be checking a screen while I'm listening. I want to sit down, enjoy the program, and have it stop by itself when it's over. I don't want to check after each track to see if it was the last of the selection I wished to listen.


I guess I listen differently. To use my example of WTC, maybe I want to start with Book II. I play the Prelude in C from Book II and keep listening until I want to hear something else. It's rarely tied into what's on a particular disc. And while I would be unlikely to break up prelude and fugue, if they were treated as a single track (as they sometimes are) I actually might want to shuffle them.

On the other hand it's nice not to have to get up and change discs while listening to the St. Matthew Passion.

Edit - given that I have ripped all my CDs to a hard drive, the same pretty much goes when I listen to them.


----------



## RobertKC

Regarding the problem of how to search for classical music (i.e., a schema for metadata), has anyone tried this free enhancement to Spotify? http://getconcertmaster.com/

I've downloaded the app, but have not yet tried it. I think the reason is that I rarely use Spotify Premium. Note to self: either start using Spotify Premium - and try Concertmaster - or stop paying for it.

My preferred way to consume classical music is Blu-ray audio/video featuring surround sound, followed by hi-res audio recordings featuring surround sound.

I find Youtube convenient for exploring music - but again, I need to give Concertmaster a try before I cancel Spotify Premium.


----------



## Dan Ante

ClassicalListener said:


> I don't want to be checking a screen while I'm listening. I want to sit down, enjoy the program, and have it stop by itself when it's over. I don't want to check after each track to see if it was the last of the selection I wished to listen.


I find that a CD will do that  the only thing I stream is the radio


----------



## RobertKC

I tried Concertmaster this afternoon, and gave up in frustration.

When I accessed Spotify Premium for the first time in more than a month, I met a familiar aggravation. Following is the explanation that I gave Spotify for cancelling their service today (which is the same reason I gave Tidal for cancelling their service):

--------------

My opinion is that Spotify is not very smart from a marketing perspective. (To put it politely.) I listen to classical music and opera. Nonetheless, every time I log in, Spotify pushes rap (or some other form of pop music) music (and associated imagery) at me. I (intensely) dislike this.

It seems to me that the smart thing to do would be to set the “theme” of the GUI (e.g., pictures of artists) – and, more importantly, the recommended recordings - based on the type of music that the CUSTOMER likes, not what the owners of Spotify like (or get paid to promote). Every time I accessed Spotify I got the impression that your service isn’t intended for me.

Why not make a classical music fan feel at home, and recommend relevant recordings? Why not make a country music fan feel at home, and recommend relevant recordings? And make a heavy metal fan feel at home, and recommend relevant recordings? Etc, etc.

It’s Spotify’s right to push whatever music you want. It’s my right to not use your service.

The second reason I quit: poor ability to search for classical music. NEWS FLASH: Not everyone in the world listens to pop music. The concept of “album” and “band” and “song” doesn’t fit for classical music, where there is a composer, composition, conductor, orchestra, numerous soloists, etc.

The third reason: This survey demonstrates your myopia (and/or the limitations of your technology). My preferred way to consume classical music: hi-res surround-sound audio/video (i.e., Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray). My second choice: hi-res multi-channel audio.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Dan Ante said:


> I find that a CD will do that  the only thing I stream is the radio


Correct. I'll say it again: the CD is along with the paper book one of the greatest consumer products ever created and the best way there is of enjoying music.


----------



## ClassicalListener

So I find an interesting recording and look it up on Tidal. Notice anything... out of order?:

https://tidal.com/album/68506055

Ordered the CD, along with some incredible bargains, from JPC.de.


----------



## KenOC

ClassicalListener said:


> I don't want to be checking a screen while I'm listening. I want to sit down, enjoy the program, and have it stop by itself when it's over. I don't want to check after each track to see if it was the last of the selection I wished to listen.


My own method when I want to listen to a longer work (this week's Saturday Symphony, for instance). I download the movements from YouTube and save them at MP3 files. Then when I want to listen, I just drag them into Foobar and play them like any other music. I can start and stop at my pleasure, and when it's over it's over. I can save the files for later repeat listening, of course. And I no longer accidently close the YouTube tab in my browser at just the wrong time! :lol:


----------



## jegreenwood

RobertKC said:


> . . .
> 
> My opinion is that Spotify is not very smart from a marketing perspective. (To put it politely.) I listen to classical music and opera. Nonetheless, every time I log in, Spotify pushes rap (or some other form of pop music) music (and associated imagery) at me. I (intensely) dislike this.
> 
> . . .


If you think that's a problem with Spotify, try using a streaming service owned (in part) by Jay-Z. But I do get to hear Beyonce's albums right away.


----------



## jegreenwood

Dan Ante said:


> I find that a CD will do that  the only thing I stream is the radio


You could always switch to Amazon's service. When the work is over you just say, "Hey, Alexa. Stop."


----------



## Dan Ante

jegreenwood said:


> You could always switch to Amazon's service. When the work is over you just say, "Hey, Alexa. Stop."


When the work is over the CD stops itself. not bad for 30 year old technology eh


----------



## rumleymusic

CD, as a format, is near perfect. Gapless, durable to an extent, and reaches the absolute limit of human psychoacoustic perception. "Hi-Res" audio does little except make the file bigger, and add frequencies only dolphins can hear. Not only can we as humans not hear the high frequencies, most speakers cannot play it without distortion, and most instruments cannot produce it with any recordable energy. SACD and DSD was more of a copy protection format in the time of Napster than it was a viable alternative. It is extremely difficult to work with from an engineering perspective. It is also impossible to edit or mix a DSD recording without converting it first to PCM, and then exporting it again as DSD. 

MP3 is rather bad from an audio quality standpoint, the dynamic range and soundstage collapse compared to uncompressed .wav files, though without a side-by-side comparison. Most of us don't notice. My biggest gripe with streaming is the way files are separated, creating buffering times between the corresponding CD markers. I hate listening to a Mahler symphony separated by dozens of tracks in each movement and having the audio pause momentarily every 45 seconds.


----------



## RobertKC

rumleymusic said:


> CD, as a format, is near perfect. Gapless, durable to an extent, and reaches the absolute limit of human psychoacoustic perception. "Hi-Res" audio does little except make the file bigger, and add frequencies only dolphins can hear.


These assertions are hotly contested.

CD "is near perfect"??? CD cannot deliver the experience of Blu-ray, or Ultra HD Blu-ray. Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts

CD cannot deliver the experience of multi-channel hi-res audio recordings.

There are many modern classical recordings that feature hi-res audio/video, and hi-res audio with surround sound.

Regarding the audio quality of stereo hi-res vs. CD: If you can't hear a difference with your ears/brain, using your hi-fi system, etc - OK. But why presume to tell others what they can hear?


----------



## Dan Ante

RobertKC said:


> These assertions are hotly contested.
> 
> CD "is near perfect"??? CD cannot deliver the experience of Blu-ray, or Ultra HD Blu-ray. Blu-ray Videos of Classical Concerts
> 
> CD cannot deliver the experience of multi-channel hi-res audio recordings.
> 
> There are many modern classical recordings that feature hi-res audio/video, and hi-res audio with surround sound.
> 
> Regarding the audio quality of stereo hi-res vs. CD: If you can't hear a difference with your ears/brain, using your hi-fi system, etc - OK. But why presume to tell others what they can hear?


Just out of curiosity have you ever tried an A - B test ?


----------



## RobertKC

Dan Ante said:


> Just out of curiosity have you ever tried an A - B test ?


Yes. IMO there is no comparison between listening/watching a Blu-ray classical concert video (HD video, DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1) and listening to a CD.

The issue of "his-res" audio (e.g., SACD, 24bit/192kHz PCM) vs. CD (and lower bit rates) has been discussed in several existing threads, including this one: Can you hear the difference?


----------



## Dan Ante

RobertKC said:


> Yes. IMO there is no comparison between listening/watching a Blu-ray classical concert video (HD video, DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1) and listening to a CD.
> 
> The issue of "his-res" audio (e.g., SACD, 24bit/192kHz PCM) vs. CD (and lower bit rates) has been discussed in several existing threads, including this one: Can you hear the difference?


I am not really interested in videos, I was questioning your ability to tell the difference of audio between todays CD and the other forms of recorded music that you mention.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

I think that anyone over 50 (I'm 55) would struggle to tell the difference and that ain't so bad.


It gives you an excuse to crank it up a far bit and it doesn't have to be such an expensive system anymore to sounds good.


----------



## haydnguy

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> I think that anyone over 50 (I'm 55) would struggle to tell the difference and that ain't so bad.
> 
> It gives you an excuse to crank it up a far bit and it doesn't have to be such an expensive system anymore to sounds good.


I agree. I'm 63. The more you know about something, the less people that are likely to know what you are talking about.

There will always be the audiophiles (rightly so), but WalMart didn't become so big because it sold the best merchandise. Most people will buy as much as they can afford or the perceived value that they are getting.


----------



## RobertKC

Dan Ante said:


> I am not really interested in videos, I was questioning your ability to tell the difference of audio between todays CD and the other forms of recorded music that you mention.


I don't want to take this thread too far off its topic of streaming services.

If you wish to join a discussion about whether or not people can hear the difference in "hi-res" vs. "lower-res" recordings, please read the following thread: Can you hear the difference? A few years ago, I posted my opinions on that thread in some detail. If that discussion is resumed and I have anything new to add, I'll comment there.


----------



## Dan Ante

RobertKC said:


> I don't want to take this thread too far off its topic of streaming services.
> 
> If you wish to join a discussion about whether or not people can hear the difference in "hi-res" vs. "lower-res" recordings, please read the following thread: Can you hear the difference? A few years ago, I posted my opinions on that thread in some detail. If that discussion is resumed and I have anything new to add, I'll comment there.


You must have some interesting conversations in real life if you try to insist that they stay strictly on topic, myself I enjoy the twists and turns that a discussion takes it can throw up some interesting things. I do not think this thread has gone off topic it is all part of the same subject.
FYI, I have been in threads with Bigshot on lossy v lossless etc.


----------



## haydnguy

I was just thinking about an incident that happened to me sometime in the early 2000's I think.

I had gone to a high school to pick up a friends daughter from school. On the way home I was just trying to make conversation so I said, "Look at this CD I just bought!" She replied, "Why would anyone ever pay for a CD?"

I knew right then we were in trouble. She was a good kid, above average intelligence and kind of nerdy. The fact that SHE didn't see anything wrong with it told me that we were going to have a whole generation that saw no need to buy like my generation had done.

As with everything there is a trade-off. On the one hand, today we have almost unlimited amounts of music. When I was in high school I had a rather modest shelf where I kept my record albums. On the other hand, today you have to keep up with files, backups, UGGHHH!!! It was just easier then. At first you might say, "oh just put them on a USB stick". Which in a given instance might be true. But when you think of the totality of all this stuff, I think I would have stuck with my Marantz receiver.


----------



## Madiel

haydnguy said:


> I was just thinking about an incident that happened to me sometime in the early 2000's I think.


this reminds me of an incident of mine around those same years, it was before the ipod, I don't even remember the brand of the MP3 player I was using, when a friend of mine saw it, he asked me to try it - he said he was surprised to see a notorious music lover using an infamous listening device, the more he listened the more an incredulous look possessed his face, then he gave me back the player and said: why do they say MP3 is bad? it sounds great


----------



## haydnguy

Madiel said:


> this reminds me of an incident of mine around those same years, it was before the ipod, I don't even remember the brand of the MP3 player I was using, when a friend of mine saw it, he asked me to try it - he said he was surprised to see a notorious music lover using an infamous listening device, the more he listened the more an incredulous look possessed his face, then he gave me back the player and said: why do they say MP3 is bad? it sounds great


Yeah it was like when I made the switch from Monaural to Stereo. Things really came to life!!


----------



## Madiel

have you any idea how many mono devotees are still around?


----------



## Dan Ante

Madiel said:


> have you any idea how many mono devotees are still around?


I am with you two and I still have mono LPs and some mono CDs.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I'm eclectic. I use all forms for listening and can't much tell a difference between them with the exception of YouTube which can be bad at times. Mp3, flac, cd, Amazon, spotify all about the same for me. So I don't give a rat's rear end about the fine point arguments. 

If anyone is interested, Amazon prime music has its unlimited access priced $. 99 for 4 months. I signed up and the selection seems as good as spotify the last time I tried it.


----------



## Konsgaard

Qobuz if you like classical music only and lossless. Spotify and Apple Music offer more or less the same catalogue and same quality indistinguishable from the orginal CD (even though lossy). BUT, there is a huge but: Apple offers gapless playing, so important in classical music, only on the Desktop version of iTunes. So if you want to save money and have what is probably the fastest user interface you should go with Spotify. Overall Spotify has the best user interface just search for "Beethoven karajan" and you get instant replies without hitting Enter, the mp3 ogg vorbis format on the premium service is the same as CD (because of the high quality of encoding), offers gapless playing on all platforms.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Konsgaard said:


> Qobuz if you like classical music only and lossless. Spotify and Apple Music offer more or less the same catalogue and same quality indistinguishable from the orginal CD (even though lossy). BUT, there is a huge but: Apple offers gapless playing, so important in classical music, only on the Desktop version of iTunes. So if you want to save money and have what is probably the fastest user interface you should go with Spotify. Overall Spotify has the best user interface just search for "Beethoven karajan" and you get instant replies without hitting Enter, the mp3 ogg vorbis format on the premium service is the same as CD (because of the high quality of encoding), offers gapless playing on all platforms.


Spotify's audio quality is NOT indistinguishable from CDs, it is dramatically inferior. Personally, I cannot enjoy a recording through them. Instruments sound artificial.


----------



## vamei

I hear deezer and spotify. There is a very rich discotheque in both applications. The sound quality is not bad but it doesn't get the quality of cd's. The environment is better in deezer and I think it has a slightly better sound quality.


----------



## Dan Ante

What is the audio quality of spotify premium is it still a lossy compression or flac?


----------



## ClassicalListener

Dan Ante said:


> What is the audio quality of spotify premium is it still a lossy compression or flac?


Lossy. And it has a nasty effect where instruments sound unnatural, as if produced by a computer. As I said, I simply cannot listen to it.

Regarding Deezer, it seems it is missing the Hungaroton catalogue, so I wouldn't consider using it.

In the end, nothing will ever be as good as old-fashioned CDs.


----------



## Dan Ante

ClassicalListener said:


> Lossy. And it has a nasty effect where instruments sound unnatural, as if produced by a computer. As I said, I simply cannot listen to it.
> 
> Regarding Deezer, it seems it is missing the Hungaroton catalogue, so I wouldn't consider using it.
> 
> In the end, nothing will ever be as good as old-fashioned CDs.


I must admit what I have heard from spotify has not been been a pleasant experience especially at med to high volume which distorts.


----------



## ClassicalListener

The nightmare is already coming true. I had been listening to these recordings on Spotify and Tidal, and today they have disappeared:

https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-string-quintets-string-sextet-trio-and-guests-supraphon-4cds.html

https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-chamber-works-2-guarneri-trio-prague-supraphon-7cds.html

https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-complete-string-quartets-panocha-quartet-supraphon-8cds.html

Can a kind soul please see if they can find them? If not, this is our fate if streaming ever takes over, waking up one day and finding our favorite recording has disappeared.


----------



## KenOC

Oldhoosierdude said:


> If anyone is interested, Amazon prime music has its unlimited access priced $. 99 for 4 months. I signed up and the selection seems as good as spotify the last time I tried it.


You may mean Amazon Unlimited. Amazon Prime music is free with a Prime membership.

I also tried that 99-cent Unlimited deal but unsubscribed because the Amazon web player inserts pauses between tracks, which chops up some classical works horribly. Others may be less bothered I suppose. The selection is great and the sound (in other respects) is fine.


----------



## Bulldog

It's best not to put all your eggs in the streaming world - you control nothing.


----------



## jegreenwood

KenOC said:


> You may mean Amazon Unlimited. Amazon Prime music is free with a Prime membership.
> 
> I also tried that 99-cent Unlimited deal but unsubscribed because the Amazon web player inserts pauses between tracks, which chops up some classical works horribly. Others may be less bothered I suppose. The selection is great and the sound (in other respects) is fine.


I've spent a few days trying to determine whether Tidal in its current incarnation is gapless, and my answer is a definite sometimes. (This conclusion seems to be substantiated by the on-line debate on the subject.) I'm not sure if it's dependent on the hardware - how well the server communicates with the renderer - or the recording itself. I saw a few posts on the terrible gaps on Tennstedt's live Mahler 8th heard via Tidal, and they are pretty bad. But then I listened to a recording of "Faust" and might have heard gaps once or twice over 60 odd tracks. (Some of the track divisions were natural pauses.)



Bulldog said:


> It's best not to put all your eggs in the streaming world - you control nothing.


And I don't. I have thousands of shiny discs and 100+ purchased downloads. The discs have all been ripped. Using either the Squeezebox or Auralic app on my phone, I can access my own library plus Tidal (integrated into the server software) and play them through any system in my apartment from my Ayre/PSB Synchrony main system to my two Google Chromecast Audios.


----------



## ClassicalListener

ClassicalListener said:


> The nightmare is already coming true. I had been listening to these recordings on Spotify and Tidal, and today they have disappeared:
> 
> https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-string-quintets-string-sextet-trio-and-guests-supraphon-4cds.html
> 
> https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-chamber-works-2-guarneri-trio-prague-supraphon-7cds.html
> 
> https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-complete-string-quartets-panocha-quartet-supraphon-8cds.html
> 
> Can a kind soul please see if they can find them? If not, this is our fate if streaming ever takes over, waking up one day and finding our favorite recording has disappeared.


I would immensely appreciate it if someone could please check if they can find these recordings on either Spotify or Tidal in order to confirm they have been deleted from the catalogue and not simply removed from my specific region. Many thanks in advance!


----------



## RobertKC

ClassicalListener said:


> The nightmare is already coming true. I had been listening to these recordings on Spotify and Tidal, and today they have disappeared:
> 
> https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-string-quintets-string-sextet-trio-and-guests-supraphon-4cds.html
> 
> https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-chamber-works-2-guarneri-trio-prague-supraphon-7cds.html
> 
> https://www.mdt.co.uk/dvorak-complete-string-quartets-panocha-quartet-supraphon-8cds.html
> 
> Can a kind soul please see if they can find them? If not, this is our fate if streaming ever takes over, waking up one day and finding our favorite recording has disappeared.


I don't find these recordings on Spotify Premium. (I'm in USA.)

I see the first and third recordings on Naxos. (I received a Naxos login as a benefit to my subscription to my local symphony.)


----------



## Konsgaard

ClassicalListener said:


> Spotify's audio quality is NOT indistinguishable from CDs, it is dramatically inferior. Personally, I cannot enjoy a recording through them. Instruments sound artificial.


Really? On the Premium service even??? I've tested this with a friend in proper studio equipment (as well as Apple Music) and we concluded that we cannot hear any difference between original CD and Spotify Premiun/Apple Music. Btw, iTunes offers the Mastered for iTunes format, which means recording labels send high definition source files to Apple to be converted (not CD source files). You will be surprised that in some cases the iTunes files, when Mastered for iTunes, might sound better than CD.


----------



## ClassicalListener

RobertKC said:


> I don't find these recordings on Spotify Premium. (I'm in USA.)
> 
> I see the first and third recordings on Naxos. (I received a Naxos login as a benefit to my subscription to my local symphony.)


Thank you very much for letting me know. In addition to the danger of a recording being deleted altogether from the catalogue, there is the associated threat of it being removed only from your region, which I believe makes it less likely to be restored.



Konsgaard said:


> Really? On the Premium service even??? I've tested this with a friend in proper studio equipment (as well as Apple Music) and we concluded that we cannot hear any difference between original CD and Spotify Premiun/Apple Music. Btw, iTunes offers the Mastered for iTunes format, which means recording labels send high definition source files to Apple to be converted (not CD source files). You will be surprised that in some cases the iTunes files, when Mastered for iTunes, might sound better than CD.


The difference between Spotify premium and a CD are immediate and obvious. This is not dependent on equipment or physiological hearing but perception. If you can't identify it, you simply have limited listening discernment.  Personally, I cannot listen to classical music on Spotify. Sounds appear synthetic, as if they were produced by a computer instead of musical instruments.


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> All streaming services are trash. *On Tidal a great amount of albums have the tracks out of order, rendering them unusable.* Spotify has awful MP3 audio quality. On Qobuz you can't search for albums. If you search for 'Bruckner Karajan' you get nothing. You must first select an artist and then spend two hours sifting through its listings to find what you want.
> 
> The best medium we will ever have for listening to music is the audio CD. We should all tend to its survival by buying more of them.


I've been using Tidal (quite a lot) for over 3 years. I can count the number of recordings I've run across with tracks out of order on two hands.

Edit - upon further reflection, I had the problem with the Annie Fischer Beethoven box set and less than 5 other albums. However the individual Annie Fischer Beethoven albums are properly sequenced.


----------



## ClassicalListener

jegreenwood said:


> I've been using Tidal (quite a lot) for over 3 years. I can count the number of recordings I've run across with tracks out of order on two hands.


I discover a new one almost daily. Yesterday:

https://tidal.com/album/69102936

https://tidal.com/album/31940911

This is a major issue with Tidal.


----------



## Dan Ante

Konsgaard said:


> Really? On the Premium service even??? I've tested this with a friend in proper studio equipment (as well as Apple Music) and we concluded that we cannot hear any difference between original CD and Spotify Premiun/Apple Music. Btw, iTunes offers the Mastered for iTunes format, which means recording labels send high definition source files to Apple to be converted (not CD source files). You will be surprised that in some cases the iTunes files, when Mastered for iTunes, might sound better than CD.


I checked last night and found that Spotify premium is @ 320kbps I am surprised that you cannot detect a difference but it would depend upon how old you are if you are past your mid 70's I would agree but I could definitely tell the difference when I was in my 60's and last night I played a CD ripped as [email protected] (LvB violin sonatas) and that sounded like a stainless steel instrument. :tiphat:


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> I discover a new one almost daily. Yesterday:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/69102936
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/31940911
> 
> This is a major issue with Tidal.


No - it is a major issue *for you *with Tidal. I will not allow you to tell me what is a major issue for me.


----------



## jegreenwood

Dan Ante said:


> I checked last night and found that Spotify premium is @ 320kbps I am surprised that you cannot detect a difference but it would depend upon how old you are if you are past your mid 70's I would agree but I could definitely tell the difference when I was in my 60's and last night I played a CD ripped as [email protected] (LvB violin sonatas) and that sounded like a stainless steel instrument. :tiphat:


It also may depending on the recording. For instance, based on data from my library of ripped albums, a lot of piano music can be compressed losslessly to 400-500 kbps. So you are not losing much information compared with 320 kbps. On the other hand lossless harpsichord recordings are closer to 1000 kbps. So you are losing more info.

And a technical point, unless Spotify has changed since I last examined it closely, it does not use the mp3 format; it uses OGG.


----------



## ClassicalListener

jegreenwood said:


> No - it is a major issue *for you *with Tidal. I will not allow you to tell me what is a major issue for me.


No, having album tracks out of order is an objective defect - one that is widespread on Tidal and a major drawback. That you don't mind listening to albums with movements in haphazard order and mismatched is personal (and quite eccentric) opinion.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Another album with tracks out of order, one that I really wished to listen. Does anyone really listen to classical music in this way?:

https://tidal.com/album/37860190

Another one:

https://tidal.com/album/60617878

There are countless like this. I don't understand how anyone can be so mediocre to defend this.

One more:

https://tidal.com/album/68545336


----------



## jegreenwood

ClassicalListener said:


> Another album with tracks out of order, one that I really wished to listen. Does anyone really listen to classical music in this way?:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/37860190
> 
> Another one:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/60617878
> 
> There are countless like this. I don't understand how anyone can be so mediocre to defend this.
> 
> One more:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/68545336


Because after three years listening to Tidal, I can say that I have rarely experienced it. I'm sure there are other out of order recordings, but if my choice of recordings is a fair sampling, the out of order recordings represent less than 0.5%, probably less than 0.3%, of Tidal's library. And calling me mediocre does nothing to change my experience.

I have made a point of not insulting you. I have given you advice on how to add tracks to the end of a Tidal play queue and described my experience with out of order tracks on particular albums. I will not respond to you anymore.


----------



## ClassicalListener

jegreenwood said:


> Because after three years listening to Tidal, I can say that I have rarely experienced it. I'm sure there are other out of order recordings, but if my choice of recordings is a fair sampling, the out of order recordings represent less than 0.5%, probably less than 0.3%, of Tidal's library. And calling me mediocre does nothing to change my experience.
> 
> I have made a point of not insulting you. I have given you advice on how to add tracks to the end of a Tidal play queue and described my experience with out of order tracks on particular albums. I will not respond to you anymore.


You stated that Tidal's defects were somehow my problem, and even bolded it out. You made it personal, not me. Have a good day.


----------



## San Antone

I use streaming services for convenience, SpotifyP & Amazon Unlimited, but continue to purchase CDs (although far fewer than previously). I have a large digital library of my CD collection in iTunes which was uploaded in lossless format and doubly backed up.

I enjoy being able to listen to a wide variety of music no matter where I am, traveling, etc., so streaming works fine for me.


----------



## Bulldog

ClassicalListener said:


> Another album with tracks out of order, one that I really wished to listen. Does anyone really listen to classical music in this way?:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/37860190
> 
> Another one:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/60617878
> 
> There are countless like this. I don't understand how anyone can be so mediocre to defend this.
> 
> One more:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/68545336


Wow!! That looks all messed up in some kind of devilish random order. It's pure incompetence. I use Naxos Music Library and the track order is always correct; there isn't any good reason for it not to be in order.

However, jegreenwood does not appear to encounter this problem as frequently as you do. He must be streaming different music than you.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Bulldog said:


> Wow!! That looks all messed up in some kind of devilish random order. It's pure incompetence. I use Naxos Music Library and the track order is always correct; there isn't any good reason for it not to be in order.
> 
> However, jegreenwood does not appear to encounter this problem as frequently as you do. He must be streaming different music than you.


I've mostly gone back to my CDs but when I was testing streaming options intensively I found an album with incorrect track order almost daily on Tidal, often several ones. I've linked to some that I could recall from memory. Here is another one:

https://tidal.com/album/37109447


----------



## Dan Ante

jegreenwood said:


> And a technical point, unless Spotify has changed since I last examined it closely, it does not use the mp3 format; it uses OGG.


OK, my info must have been out of date, when posters refer to gaps in the music do they mean that in just one movement there will be gaps similar to buffering?


----------



## jegreenwood

Dan Ante said:


> OK, my info must have been out of date, when posters refer to gaps in the music do they mean that in just one movement there will be gaps similar to buffering?


Buffering gaps happen once in a while, but as I think about it, they are generally caused by my own server. E.g. when I play Tidal through the LMS (Squeezebox) server on my home computer, I will get buffering gaps on occasion. When I play it using the Tidal apps on my iDevices I almost never have buffering gaps.

But there may be gaps between tracks. If one is listening to a Mozart symphony this is not a problem as (to my knowledge) they all have breaks between movements. But it is a problem when listening to the Mendelssohn Violin Concerto or worse "Tristan" (or "Dark Side of the Moon" or a live concert) where there should be no breaks. I understand this is generally a hardware problem. The server (where the music is located) and the renderer (the music player) must be able to communicate with one another, such that before the current track is over, the renderer can tell the server "OK - get the next track queued up and ready to go (and maybe even send me the first few seconds)," and the server understands the message. 
Some hardware is capable of doing that, but some hardware is not. This affects not only Tidal, but other streaming sources. It can even be dependent on the file format.

The thing I find weird with Tidal is that sometimes it seems to be able play music without gaps but sometimes it cannot. (Or maybe in some cases the gaps are so, so brief I can't even detect them using headphones.) I posted on this earlier in the thread. Before I posted I Googled the topic and saw that there was disagreement among Tidal users. Maybe it is tied in with the hardware being used to stream Tidal, but I tested the live Tennstedt Mahler 8th on a number of different types of Tidal players I use, and there were terrible gaps in every case.


----------



## haydnguy

*Julia Fischer - "Star soloist: I haven't bought a CD in 10 years"* from Slipped Disk.

Julia Fischer is a wonderful violinist. I have several of her CD's. I am 28 years older than she is and so I've been listening (and buying) CD's for a long time. I suspect the availability of CD players will be with us for a long time because CD's have been out so long and people have a big investment in CD's so will want to continue to listen to them.

I'm not sure if that is true of the number of new CD's being released. I suspect that the number will dwindle. As my OP alludes, I'm planning for that day that I no longer can buy the new music that is being released. I suspect I will keep my music on an external hard drive until storing music on cloud drives becomes practical. I still like to keep (at least a copy of) my music "local".

One of the things that I missed when we went from vinyl to CD's was the art work on the vinyl's sleeve. We have been keeping that artwork "alive" by posting the picture from the jewel case of the CD's from Amazon and other online places. I wonder if they will continue to show pictures of streaming music the way they now do with CD's. I will miss that very much if they don't.

But I agree with Fischer. The clock is ticking. 

https://slippedisc.com/2018/07/star-soloist-i-havent-bought-a-cd-in-10-years/


----------



## Dan Ante

no post..............................


----------



## Dan Ante

jegreenwood said:


> Buffering gaps happen once in a while, but as I think about it, they are generally caused by my own server. E.g. when I play Tidal through the LMS (Squeezebox) server on my home computer, I will get buffering gaps on occasion. When I play it using the Tidal apps on my iDevices I almost never have buffering gaps.
> 
> But there may be gaps between tracks. If one is listening to a Mozart symphony this is not a problem as (to my knowledge) they all have breaks between movements. But it is a problem when listening to the Mendelssohn Violin Concerto or worse "Tristan" (or "Dark Side of the Moon" or a live concert) where there should be no breaks. I understand this is generally a hardware problem. The server (where the music is located) and the renderer (the music player) must be able to communicate with one another, such that before the current track is over, the renderer can tell the server "OK - get the next track queued up and ready to go (and maybe even send me the first few seconds)," and the server understands the message.
> Some hardware is capable of doing that, but some hardware is not. This affects not only Tidal, but other streaming sources. It can even be dependent on the file format.
> 
> The thing I find weird with Tidal is that sometimes it seems to be able play music without gaps but sometimes it cannot. (Or maybe in some cases the gaps are so, so brief I can't even detect them using headphones.) I posted on this earlier in the thread. Before I posted I Googled the topic and saw that there was disagreement among Tidal users. Maybe it is tied in with the hardware being used to stream Tidal, but I tested the live Tennstedt Mahler 8th on a number of different types of Tidal players I use, and there were terrible gaps in every case.


So the breaks are occurring in a movement where no breaks should be.
That is unacceptable and unbelievable has no one questioned them about this?


----------



## Dan Ante

haydnguy said:


> *Julia Fischer - "Star soloist: I haven't bought a CD in 10 years"* from Slipped Disk.
> 
> Julia Fischer is a wonderful violinist. I have several of her CD's. I am 28 years older than she is and so I've been listening (and buying) CD's for a long time. I suspect the availability of CD players will be with us for a long time because CD's have been out so long and people have a big investment in CD's so will want to continue to listen to them.
> 
> 
> https://slippedisc.com/2018/07/star-soloist-i-havent-bought-a-cd-in-10-years/


Your comment made me wonder about the cost of music collections, I have approx 2500 (very small compared to some) at an estimated price of $30/CD that means it has cost me $75000, I hope the misses never finds out


----------



## jegreenwood

Dan Ante said:


> So the breaks are occurring in a movement where no breaks should be.
> That is unacceptable and unbelievable has no one questioned them about this?


Many, many people have questioned it.

This is not limited to Tidal. Google's Chromecast Audio is not gapless. Spotify seems to have issues with gapless playback. Even Oppo struggled with it (at least with its BDP 105). It shows up elsewhere.

As per the above, this is not limited to streaming services. If you rip your music to a hard drive you may still have a problem if your hard drive and your player do not communicate properly. A search of JRiver's threads shows 145 with "gapless" in the title. I suspect it's less of a problem with iTunes as they keep tighter control over their technology. JRiver has to get along with other people's technology.

There are ways of avoiding this problem with ripped discs. Specifically you can rip a complete work or an entire CD as a single track. I stuck with iTunes as my ripping software for years to take advantage of this feature. Only recently did I discover that JRiver has the same feature buried in its endless options. With JRiver as the ripper you can also generate a "cue" file that identifies the points on the original recording where each track begins. JRiver and other software can use the cue files to jump to individual tracks as if the track breaks remain. But all in all it is much easier to buy hardware that handles gapless playback properly.

Edit - OK, I'm going to have to eat some words here. I went back to understand why the gaps were so bad on the Tennstedt Mahler disc. A bit of background; I had selected that disc because someone in another forum had identified one gap as being particularly egregious. I found the recording on Tidal and jumped to the break between the tracks to which he had referred, and it was awful. But at the time, I didn't notice why it was awful. The tracks were in the wrong order like the discs mentioned above. Specifically, Tidal had failed to distinguish between disc 1 and disc 2, so that they played in the order of disc 2 track 1, disc 1 track 1, disc 2 track 2, disc 1 track 2 etc. Obviously I should have picked this up from the music itself, but that's not what I was paying attention to; I was paying attention to the break between tracks. So add another one to tracks out of order, but once the recording started playing the tracks in the correct order near the end of the recording there were no gaps. So I return to my hypothesis that with the appropriate hardware, Tidal can be gapless.


----------



## Dan Ante

jegreenwood said:


> Many, many people have questioned it.
> 
> This is not limited to Tidal. Google's Chromecast Audio is not gapless. Spotify seems to have issues with gapless playback. Even Oppo struggled with it (at least with its BDP 105). It shows up elsewhere.
> 
> As per the above, this is not limited to streaming services. If you rip your music to a hard drive you may still have a problem if your hard drive and your player do not communicate properly. A search of JRiver's threads shows 145 with "gapless" in the title. I suspect it's less of a problem with iTunes as they keep tighter control over their technology. JRiver has to get along with other people's technology.
> 
> There are ways of avoiding this problem with ripped discs. Specifically you can rip a complete work or an entire CD as a single track. I stuck with iTunes as my ripping software for years to take advantage of this feature. Only recently did I discover that JRiver has the same feature buried in its endless options. With JRiver as the ripper you can also generate a "cue" file that identifies the points on the original recording where each track begins. JRiver and other software can use the cue files to jump to individual tracks as if the track breaks remain. But all in all it is much easier to buy hardware that handles gapless playback properly.
> 
> Edit - OK, I'm going to have to eat some words here. I went back to understand why the gaps were so bad on the Tennstedt Mahler disc. A bit of background; I had selected that disc because someone in another forum had identified one gap as being particularly egregious. I found the recording on Tidal and jumped to the break between the tracks to which he had referred, and it was awful. But at the time, I didn't notice why it was awful. The tracks were in the wrong order like the discs mentioned above. Specifically, Tidal had failed to distinguish between disc 1 and disc 2, so that they played in the order of disc 2 track 1, disc 1 track 1, disc 2 track 2, disc 1 track 2 etc. Obviously I should have picked this up from the music itself, but that's not what I was paying attention to; I was paying attention to the break between tracks. So add another one to tracks out of order, but once the recording started playing the tracks in the correct order near the end of the recording there were no gaps. So I return to my hypothesis that with the appropriate hardware, Tidal can be gapless.


I have d/l many flac files and about half a dozen mp3 and never had this problem they have decoded and burned perfectly I have had some that d/l as one track but just by running it through an editing program it was no trouble to separate the tracks, none of this was from streaming. 
You have convinced me to stay away from streaming and stay with my trusted CDs. Thanks for you explanations. :tiphat:


----------



## ClassicalListener

Can anyone see MDG albums on either Tidal or Spotify? You can search for Woyrsch and see if there is the recording of his First Symphony. I just realized they're available on Qobuz Europe but not elsewhere. Also, the recordings of the Florestan Trio seem to be restricted to Europe.

This is another bane of streaming. Whereas you can import a CD from anywhere in the world, if you're regionally blocked from a recording on a streaming service, there is absolutely nothing you can do and are permanently barred from listening to it.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

KenOC said:


> You may mean Amazon Unlimited. Amazon Prime music is free with a Prime membership.
> 
> I also tried that 99-cent Unlimited deal but unsubscribed because the Amazon web player inserts pauses between tracks, which chops up some classical works horribly. Others may be less bothered I suppose. The selection is great and the sound (in other respects) is fine.


Correct, that is what I meant. Thank you. The sound seems fine to me. I have noticed no problems. I've looked up some lesser recorded works and they seen too have them all.


----------



## jegreenwood

Listened to the Sutherland/Pavarotti "Norma" last night on Tidal. There was one notable break over 43 tracks. (It actually sounded as if a note had been cut off, so I attribute that to poor uploading.) Annoying, but I can live with that just as I can live with clicks on LPs (more accurately had to live with clicks), hiss, audience noise, missed notes, etc.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Another problem with Tidal. Listen to the last track of the following album:

https://tidal.com/album/12505416


----------



## Dan Ante

ClassicalListener said:


> Another problem with Tidal. Listen to the last track of the following album:
> 
> https://tidal.com/album/12505416


That is due to slip shod editing, so would happen anywhere

NB. I forgot to mention that I have CDs where this has happened; a note should be allowed to decay naturally with an added 3-4 seconds of silence, it is a thing that really annoys me.


----------



## Taplow

I have a paid subscription to Spotify, and access to Amazon's music library as part of my Prime subscription. I use the former for previewing recordings and deciding which CDs I am going to buy, that is all. I never use the latter.

The lack of quality, the gaps in available recordings or labels, and the inconsistent and inadequate tagging and search are factors that keep me away from ever using such services more. I also don't like the idea that at any time the corporations involved could revoke my access to my favourite works.


----------



## KenOC

I use the Amazon music library mainly to store my purchases but seldom stream from there. The library is also used to store Amazon Prime free music, of which there is quite a bit and a lot of it first-drawer. But the Prime selections can't be downloaded and (I assume) will disappear if your Prime account is cancelled at some point.


----------



## ClassicalListener

Dan Ante said:


> That is due to slip shod editing, so would happen anywhere


I don't understand your reply. The track I referenced, along with a few preceding ones from the same album, skips horribly, something none of the fifteen-hundred CDs I own does. This is yet another example of Tidal's utter disregard for any form of quality control. This particular album doesn't skip on Spotify, though from a few others that I've listened there another one of Berwald's symphonies does.

Streaming is a regression in every sense. I pray people start buying CDs again because I don't want to be stuck with this.


----------



## Dan Ante

ClassicalListener said:


> I don't understand your reply. The track I referenced, along with a few preceding ones from the same album, skips horribly


OK, when I listened to the last track it stopped suddenly at the end according to the progress bar so I thought that was the undignified end, I now get a message that I have to sign up or start a free trial to hear the complete track? not really interested in joining them so I guess I will never hear what you were referring to.


----------



## Joe B

ClassicalListener said:


> ...I pray people start buying CDs again because I don't want to be stuck with this.


Hey, I'm doing my part!


----------



## ClassicalListener

Dan Ante said:


> OK, when I listened to the last track it stopped suddenly at the end according to the progress bar so I thought that was the undignified end, I now get a message that I have to sign up or start a free trial to hear the complete track? not really interested in joining them so I guess I will never hear what you were referring to.


It's better not to and stick to our beautiful, trusty CDs. My subscription to both Tidal and Spotify is ending soon so my tribulations will also be over.


----------



## Dan Ante

ClassicalListener said:


> It's better not to and stick to our beautiful, trusty CDs. My subscription to both Tidal and Spotify is ending soon so my tribulations will also be over.


One thing that I noticed was that the first time I played the track it would have been approx 3 min give or take a bit but the last time it was 10-15 sec max that is when I got the invite, so they use cookies.


----------



## HelpMeUnderstand

Youtube is my favourite for sure.


----------



## Hugo9000

I use Spotify Premium to discover which music I should buy on CD. With so many conductors, orchestras, soloists, singers, etc, in classical, it helps to narrow things down by previewing. I hated the old method of buying every version of a symphony or concerto to try to find the perfect (or sometimes the least awful, or most acceptable lol, etc) version. I think I owned over 30 recordings of Tchaikovsky's violin concerto at one time. Now, I'll only buy additional versions of favorite works if it's actually a great interpretation that I feel I shouldn't live without. So Spotify's 10 bucks/month is worth it for me. If something seems interesting, and isn't on Spotify, I can normally find it on youtube to give it an audition.

I loathe streaming as far as "primary" listening goes. I don't want to be at the mercy of my ISP, the streaming service, or whatever. When I want to listen to favorite music, I play the CD or SACD. I don't have to worry about dropouts, glitches, gaps, wrong order, something disappearing from a service, whatever.

Eventually, I'll probably cancel Spotify Premium, as I'm nearly done surveying the composers I'm not as familiar with, so I won't have enough left to audition to justify using anything more than youtube.

Incidentally, the only reason I first subscribed to Spotify was because Mariah Carey asked her fans on social media to stream _All I Want for Christmas Is You_ last December, so I paid 99 cents for the 3-month trial so I could stream it nonstop for her benefit. I did my part to help her get that song to number 9 after all these years hahahaha! It was released in 1994, for those who don't know (if anyone cares, which is probably doubtful on this forum lol). She and Patti Page are the only pop singers I ever listen to. Anyway, during that 3-month trial, after streaming that Christmas song nonstop for a week or two (sound off most of the time lol), I found about a dozen great albums to buy on CD, mostly on BIS, so I decided to keep the Premium service for a while longer at their normal rate.


----------



## Dan Ante

Hugo9000 said:


> I use Spotify Premium to discover which music I should buy on CD. With so many conductors, orchestras, soloists, singers, etc, in classical, it helps to narrow things down by previewing. I hated the old method of buying every version of a symphony or concerto to try to find the perfect (or sometimes the least awful, or most acceptable lol, etc) version. I think I owned over 30 recordings of Tchaikovsky's violin concerto at one time. Now, I'll only buy additional versions of favorite works if it's actually a great interpretation that I feel I shouldn't live without. So Spotify's 10 bucks/month is worth it for me. If something seems interesting, and isn't on Spotify, I can normally find it on youtube to give it an audition.


Are you saying that Spotify runs a review on all or even the latest recordings of works? I find that hard to believe.


----------



## Guest

I'm a little unclear about how to use a music streaming device. My computer and audio system are in two different rooms. I know I need a streamer, such as this Cambridge Audio, to run through my audio system:










And it would wirelessly connect to my computer (I hope!). So, then I connect to the streaming service on my computer, such as Primephonic, then what? How would I direct the Cambridge to communicate with my computer? Would I be able to search for the music I want to hear via the Cambridge? Would it use a remote app? Help!


----------



## KenOC

Kontrapunctus said:


> I'm a little unclear about how to use a music streaming device.


Can you hear sound (like YouTube videos or whatever) through your computer's speakers? If so, just type KUSC.org into your browser's address bar. When the KUSC page comes up, just click on the arrowhead inside the circle up at the top and you should hear the music. You're now streaming.

If you want to stream to your stereo in the other room, buy an audio cable to connect your smartphone to your stereo (the stereo will usually need 2 RCA plugs for the R and L channels). Then you can download the appropriate app -- the KUSC app for instance is available for free for either Android or Apple phones. Now you simply select the appropriate input on your stereo, open the app, and you'll get the music there.

Third, you really don't need even the app. Just open your phone's browser and go to the station's web page and click wherever you're supposed to to stream the music. Just like on your computer.


----------



## Guest

Thanks, but I'm looking for more audiophile sound than my phone can provide!


----------



## KenOC

Kontrapunctus said:


> Thanks, but I'm looking for more audiophile sound than my phone can provide!


Have you ever plugged a good pair of headphones into your smart phone? You may be surprised.


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> Have you ever plugged a good pair of headphones into your smart phone? You may be surprised.


Yes, and the sound is egregious compared to my stereo!


----------



## KenOC

Kontrapunctus said:


> Yes, and the sound is egregious compared to my stereo!


Then I guess you need to go a different route.


----------



## Guest

Yes, such as the one I'm asking about!


----------



## Dan Ante

Kontrapunctus said:


> I'm a little unclear about how to use a music streaming device. My computer and audio system are in two different rooms. I know I need a streamer, such as this Cambridge Audio, to run through my audio system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And it would wirelessly connect to my computer (I hope!). So, then I connect to the streaming service on my computer, such as Primephonic, then what? How would I direct the Cambridge to communicate with my computer? Would I be able to search for the music I want to hear via the Cambridge? Would it use a remote app? Help!


Cambridge Audio are a good brand, I have one of their CD players, you say you want audiophile sound if so you will have to go for flac not mp3 but it will cost you heaps as far as I know, I have heard streamed mp3 through a good system but it is not for me it distorts at volume and sounds crap which is why I stick with the old CD, you may have to lower your expectations.

I just checked your streamer 'Primephonic' and see they do stream in flac, sorry about that. How much does it cost you?


----------



## Guest

If I do it, I will definitely stream FLAC. I haven't signed up yet, so I don't know the cost. I think it's around $200 a year, which is a fraction of what I spend on CDs, FLAC, and LPs!


----------



## jegreenwood

Kontrapunctus said:


> I'm a little unclear about how to use a music streaming device. My computer and audio system are in two different rooms. I know I need a streamer, such as this Cambridge Audio, to run through my audio system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And it would wirelessly connect to my computer (I hope!). So, then I connect to the streaming service on my computer, such as Primephonic, then what? How would I direct the Cambridge to communicate with my computer? Would I be able to search for the music I want to hear via the Cambridge? Would it use a remote app? Help!


Here's a link to the Cambridge Audio Manual download page.

https://techsupport.cambridgeaudio....227.507408744.1537097768-338795451.1537097768

From what I can read in the product description, it does not appear that you can stream directly from Primephonic to the CA product (as opposed to Spotify and Tidal, from which you can stream directly). 
It looks like you can stream from your iDevice to the CA product using Apple Airplay. From the support page:

You can play any streaming service on your network player using AirPlay from a compatible Apple device.

Choose "More Devices" and select the Apple AirPlay icon from within your chosen App, Control Centre or iTunes (PC/Mac) and select your Network Player.

Compatible Streaming Services: Spotify, Apple Music, Tidal, YouTube Music, Deezer, Amazon Music etc.


----------



## Guest

Thanks. I just used it as an example--I'll search for a Primephonic compatible device.


----------



## jegreenwood

Kontrapunctus said:


> Thanks. I just used it as an example--I'll search for a Primephonic compatible device.


That may be a challenge as of now.

https://primephonichelp.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/sections/360001579731-Streaming-to-my-sound-system

Let us know if you find one.


----------



## tortkis

Airplay sends audio data in Apple Lossless format. If 44.1KHz/16-bit is good enough for you, then there should be no difference between direct (from Internet to 851N, for example) and indirect (through Airplay). Airplay downsamples A high-res 24-bit stream (which primephonic seems to support) to 16-bit.

If you want to stream audio better than Apple Lossless, and if you cannot place computer close to the amplifier, probably an easier way is to get a cheap computer and connect it to Internet and a good DAC through USB. The computer connected to DAC/amp can be controlled remotely from another computer.


----------



## gardibolt

I keep getting ads on my phone for Idagio, which claims to be "a music streaming service designed specifically for classical music lovers." Anyone have any experience with them?


----------



## Ras

gardibolt said:


> I keep getting ads on my phone for Idagio, which claims to be "a music streaming service designed specifically for classical music lovers." Anyone have any experience with them?


No, I haven't heard heard about it. NML is devoted to classical. I use Spotify Premium. I like to have rock n roll and jazz and classical and whatever you can think of for a small amount every month. Some prefer tidal or Qobuz, but I haven't tried those.

Here is a comparison of some streaming services:
https://www.whathifi.com/best-buys/streaming/best-music-streaming-services


----------



## johnlewisgrant

Kontrapunctus said:


> I'm a little unclear about how to use a music streaming device. My computer and audio system are in two different rooms. I know I need a streamer, such as this Cambridge Audio, to run through my audio system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And it would wirelessly connect to my computer (I hope!). So, then I connect to the streaming service on my computer, such as Primephonic, then what? How would I direct the Cambridge to communicate with my computer? Would I be able to search for the music I want to hear via the Cambridge? Would it use a remote app? Help!


Raises the more general, but also more fundamental question: what is the best signal path?

For example, while I completely understand the appeal of CDs in classical, I don't understand the appeal of the actual mechanisms that read the bits and bytes of which the music consists!!!

Why, for example, do we need a laser beam to read the 1s and 0s? Wouldn't it be more accurate to read the wavefile more directly? Similarly with all other extraneous components in the signal chain that stands between the live performance and our eardrums.

What IS that signal chain, exactly? And, notwithstanding the current state of wifi signal transmissions, wouldn's streaming be in theory perfectly acceptable as long as we get ALL the information (whether that's 128kps or one of the alternative gold standards)?


----------



## johnlewisgrant

johnlewisgrant said:


> Raises the more general, but also more fundamental question: what is the best signal path?
> 
> For example, while I completely understand the appeal of CDs in classical, I don't understand the appeal of the actual mechanisms that read the bits and bytes of which the music consists!!!
> 
> Why, for example, do we need a laser beam to read the 1s and 0s? Wouldn't it be more accurate to read the wavefile more directly? Similarly with all other extraneous components in the signal chain that stands between the live performance and our eardrums.
> 
> What IS that signal chain, exactly? And, notwithstanding the current state of wifi signal transmissions, wouldn's streaming be in theory perfectly acceptable as long as we get ALL the information (whether that's 128kps or one of the alternative gold standards)?


Many typos here. Mea culpa. Can barely figure out what I'm getting at. And I wrote it (while very much into a bad cold)! So, a little redux: I don't like 128kps. All the highs are gone. 320kps: I can manage that. 44.1 (wav file) even better. So the question/comment is this: as long as the same binary bits and bytes are there, what does it matter what FORM (CD or Streaming) the transmission of the 000s and 1111s takes? The DAC.... THAT of course matters; that's an important part of what I call the "signal chain." But that stage in the signal path is (correct me if I'm wrong) completely independent of the digital source material.....

Correct?


----------



## Albert Berry

You want to believe the DAC is an important part of the chain. Google Musicians and Hearing Aids. The DAC means that my hearing aids distort the sounds received on the microphone that feeds the hopelessly inadequate DAC. The same sounds streamed to my aids via Bluetooth are just fine. A soft stopped flute starts to warble at middle F with my digital aids. Analog aids are no longer available. I'm researching Bluetooth transmitters to plug into the headphone output of my digital organ, but that sure won't help when I want to listen to a real organ live and not on a recording. 

My reading on the web tells me that the DAC is deliberately chopping the higher frequencies so that voices sound more clear. That sure doesn't help me enjoy music on my instrument or in concert.


----------



## DennyL

I read this thread with interest. I have Amazon Unlimited music streaming service and I've been very pleased with it - I said to a friend that it's like having free access to the biggest CD shop in the World. But after reading this thread I compared an SACD with the same item on Amazon Unlimited (which I have set to the highest quality level). I listened the last three movements of Chailly's Mahler's third symphony, which has orchestral, solo instruments, solo vocal and choirs, and goes very load. (incidentally, I counted 85 recordings of Mahler's third on Amazon Unlimited!) Well, after this experience I don't think I'll bother to listen to classical music on Amazon Unlimited again. Compared to SACD, Amazon Unlimited was flat, uninvolving and dull, with curtailed highs and very limited dynamic range. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by that, but it was a bit of a shock to experience it. I then went on to compare the CD layer and the SACD layer on the same CD. The CD layer sounded pretty good, but the SACD was clearly better, having more 'openness', 'immediacy' or 'rawness' on the vocals, and coping better with the high violin tuttis, where I heard better that separate violins were playing, rather than a steely mass of sound. I could live with the CD sound, but it has renewed my enthusiasm for SACDs and left me wondering what is the best way to stream classical, which is clearly the future. For anyone interested I was using a Unico hybrid amplifier feeding 2 x LS3/5A speakers and a REL Strata subwoofer. The CD was played on a Marantz CD6000OSE CD player feeding a Beresford DAC, and the SACD was played on a Philips DVD963SA through its own internal DAC because there is no digital output when it's playing SACDs, so the CD and SACD sounds did use different DACs. I did hear more bass from the CD, a bit exaggerated, maybe, as I don't hear it quite like that in a concert hall, but I though that may be down to the different DACs.


----------



## rodrigaj

I restarted an older thread on TC several days ago and now see that this thread is more current. So I'll jump in here.

This has been my experiences with classical music streaming.

TIDAL
After about 4 years with Tidal they began truncating track titles. For example, Spotify vs Tidal:













I gave up my subscription when after several exchanges of support tickets it became clear that they did not care a whit about their classical music subscribers.

PRIMEPHONIC 
Supports gapless streaming.
They don't have a desktop app, but they do have a Chrome browser page that is accessible only after you have already signed up via their iOS app. You can't sign up for their service from your desktop computer.
For $14.99/mo you get up to 24bit streaming, so high resolution is there if that matters to you.
Only Airplay works for me. Unfortunately, Airplay throttles the bit rate to 16bits.
No DLNA support.
The sound quality is superb and I had no stuttering or stops.
The search function yields no dates of album release information, mastering dates, copyright dates, etc.

IDAGIO
No gapless streaming.
Excellent use of metadata.
Dates of album release are confusing especially with reissues.
Easier to search than PRIMEPHONIC.
The sound quality is superb and I had no stuttering or stops.

SPOTIFY (PREMIUM)
Supports gapless streaming
DLNA support via Spotify Connect (requires paid subscription)
Only 320kbps rate
Search is set up for popular music. (Don't try opus numbers)

QOBUZ
Currently unavailable in the USA so I have not been able to evaluate it.
Supports DLNA and gapless
General consensus on CA is that their search function is not very good for classical music.

Conclusion
I must have gapless, so IDAGIO is out for me. I will probably continue with PRIMEPHONIC once my 14 day trial is completed. I will keep Spotify Premium because of their vast library including jazz and popular music.


----------



## rodrigaj

PRIMEPHONIC:
With six days to go in my free trial, I know I won't be continuing my subscription.

The search function is simply too frustrating to use... and... don't start an album playing and begin another search while listening. You will have to start the search for the album that is playing all over again to get back to it.

Furthermore, I found that PRIMEPHONIC will do this to albums some of the time:







Good luck trying to figure out which sonata is playing.

I found that If you are content to hang out in their homepage with their picks, new releases, etc... that you stand a better chance to enjoy the service. Not even their curated playlists are of much value since they include only excerpts from pieces. For example, a Bach 2nd movement followed by a Mozart 3rd movement.

The whole experience is even more remarkable given that they promote themselves as a classical music enterprise.

I do recommend that you give them a try. No credit card is required if you don't choose a plan during the initial 14 days.


----------



## Konsgaard

Spotify is the fastest service on PC from my experience. And it offers gapless playing as mentioned by others.

Apple music has the advantage of showing full album covers in playlists. Gapless playing only for the desktop app, the Android app doesn't support it. Also the responsiveness of the desktop app on a very fast PC is a but slow.

I mention the above because last time I checked these two had the most comprehensive catalogue.


----------



## gHeadphone

Ive tried a few (Spotify, Apple) but as a classical fan my streaming choice for the past no of months (maybe a year now) is Qobuz. I like it for 2 reasons


Classical Selection - it has great coverage of classical labels (other than Hyperion i think) with most new releases. I find the search facility to be really decent (nothing is perfect) for classical compared to other providers. You can even set a homepage filter on genre to classical so that you only get suggestions/playlists that are relevant.
Sound Quality - I use the CD Quality version; you can get 24/96 and 24/192 but both are more expensive. The MP3 320 version is cheaper.

It means that i don't spend so many hours rooting in an increasingly diminishing set of CD retailers when i visit any city, but i actually kind of miss that, so i do pop my head in now and again to reminisce!


----------



## rodrigaj

gHeadphone said:


> Ive tried a few (Spotify, Apple) but as a classical fan my streaming choice for the past no of months (maybe a year now) is Qobuz. I like it for 2 reasons
> 
> 
> Classical Selection - it has great coverage of classical labels (other than Hyperion i think) with most new releases. I find the search facility to be really decent (nothing is perfect) for classical compared to other providers. You can even set a homepage filter on genre to classical so that you only get suggestions/playlists that are relevant.
> Sound Quality - I use the CD Quality version; you can get 24/96 and 24/192 but both are more expensive. The MP3 320 version is cheaper.
> 
> It means that i don't spend so many hours rooting in an increasingly diminishing set of CD retailers when i visit any city, but i actually kind of miss that, so i do pop my head in now and again to reminisce!


Here in the USA we are eagerly awaiting Qobuz.


----------



## Albert Berry

rodrigaj said:


> Here in the USA we are eagerly awaiting Qobuz.


It isn't available in Canada yet, either. I just checked.


----------



## Bulldog

rodrigaj said:


> Here in the USA we are eagerly awaiting Qobuz.


I'm in the USA and not eagerly awaiting Qobuz.


----------



## rodrigaj

Sorry, I should have said: 
"Here in the USA, those of us who care about redbook streaming and hi res streaming services are eagerly awaiting Qobuz".


In general, I find the TC community to be somewhat hostile to streaming services. I'm surprised given that we now have Primephonic, Idagio, Tidal and soon, Qobuz all vying for the subscription dollars of the classical music lover. This does not bode well for these services.

I thought there would be more enthusiastic support for these services, but I was wrong. It seems that the TC community favors purchases of CD's as the preferred form of classical music consumption.

Again, just a generalization, from a new member, nothing more.


----------



## jegreenwood

rodrigaj said:


> Sorry, I should have said:
> "Here in the USA, those of us who care about redbook streaming and hi res streaming services are eagerly awaiting Qobuz".
> 
> In general, I find the TC community to be somewhat hostile to streaming services. I'm surprised given that we now have Primephonic, Idagio, Tidal and soon, Qobuz all vying for the subscription dollars of the classical music lover. This does not bode well for these services.
> 
> I thought there would be more enthusiastic support for these services, but I was wrong. It seems that the TC community favors purchases of CD's as the preferred form of classical music consumption.
> 
> Again, just a generalization, from a new member, nothing more.


Fortunately, in a recent study biophysicists determined that it is within the scope of human capacity to enjoy both.


----------



## DLOinQUEENS

Spotify is absolutely incredible for searching and finding new music. There are so many clickable paths to new composers, performers, and recordings, that you don't even need your keyboard to get lost for a day. If you have Spotify Connect hooked up to your receiver, it's even more amazing to be able to browse and skip with your phone or tablet. I honestly never listen to the same work twice anymore with the wealth of new recordings at my fingertips. And thank god for a label like CPO, who has brought back to life so many unjustly forgotten works. Why major orchestras are not expanding their recording repertoire by now is beyond me.

That said, I just signed up for Idagio as well because of the higher bitrate streams. I honestly can't tell for certain if I hear a difference, but it eases my mind to know they're there, haha. I'll have to do a test to confirm it some time. Compared to Spotify, though, their search ability doesn't even come close.


----------



## DennyL

How do they source their material, the streaming services that offer higher quality than CD, as they can't just upload the CD?


----------



## Joe B

DennyL said:


> How do they source their material, the streaming services that offer higher quality than CD, as they can't just upload the CD?


Material is sourced directly from the recording labels, who make a good deal of money per day from the set up: *"Digital Music News"*.


----------



## rodrigaj

DLOinQUEENS said:


> Spotify is absolutely incredible for searching and finding new music. There are so many clickable paths to new composers, performers, and recordings, that you don't even need your keyboard to get lost for a day. If you have Spotify Connect hooked up to your receiver, it's even more amazing to be able to browse and skip with your phone or tablet. I honestly never listen to the same work twice anymore with the wealth of new recordings at my fingertips. And thank god for a label like CPO, who has brought back to life so many unjustly forgotten works. Why major orchestras are not expanding their recording repertoire by now is beyond me.
> 
> That said, I just signed up for Idagio as well because of the higher bitrate streams. I honestly can't tell for certain if I hear a difference, but it eases my mind to know they're there, haha. I'll have to do a test to confirm it some time. Compared to Spotify, though, their search ability doesn't even come close.


Since signing up for Idagio, I very rarely listen to Spotify. I keep the subscription going because for genres different than classical, it can't be beat.


----------



## DennyL

Joe B said:


> Material is sourced directly from the recording labels, who make a good deal of money per day from the set up: *"Digital Music News"*.


Do studios habitually record material in a standard better than the 16 bit/44.1kHz CD standard and downgrade it for CDs? What is the studio practice on this?


----------



## Joe B

DennyL said:


> Do studios habitually record material in a standard better than the 16 bit/44.1kHz CD standard and downgrade it for CDs? What is the studio practice on this?


I'm not in the industry, but I do know the label 2L (Lindberg Lyd) records in 24 bit/352 kHz and then provides the music for downloads in 16/44, 24/96, 24/192, and several DSD formats as well as blu-ray audio (which they were the first to ever release) and SACD and CD. I have many CD's that state they were originally recorded in DSD or in 20 bit format. So I believe the answer to your question is YES, studios generally record in a higher format than 16/44.


----------



## Bulldog

rodrigaj said:


> Sorry, I should have said:
> "Here in the USA, those of us who care about redbook streaming and hi res streaming services are eagerly awaiting Qobuz".
> 
> In general, I find the TC community to be somewhat hostile to streaming services. I'm surprised given that we now have Primephonic, Idagio, Tidal and soon, Qobuz all vying for the subscription dollars of the classical music lover. This does not bode well for these services.


As it happens, I've had a subscription to NML for a few years now. I'm pleased with it, so I'm not looking for alternatives.


----------



## rodrigaj

Bulldog said:


> As it happens, I've had a subscription to NML for a few years now. I'm pleased with it, so I'm not looking for alternatives.


I looked at NML a while ago:

Currently, Naxos Music Library is $315 per year for an individual premium subscription. It contains the Naxos library plus some other independent labels.

Most, if not all, of that same library is available on the other streaming services for about one third the cost. Plus many other labels are also included at this same lower cost.

NML has never been a logical choice for me. Maybe, I'm missing something.


----------



## Bulldog

rodrigaj said:


> I looked at NML a while ago:
> 
> Currently, Naxos Music Library is $315 per year for an individual premium subscription. It contains the Naxos library plus some other independent labels.
> 
> Most, if not all, of that same library is available on the other streaming services for about one third the cost. Plus many other labels are also included at this same lower cost.
> 
> NML has never been a logical choice for me. Maybe, I'm missing something.


The money doesn't matter; I've got plenty of that. As for labels, NML has more than "some" other labels; it has hundreds. Also, I find it to be the least commercial and have the best screens.


----------



## jegreenwood

DennyL said:


> Do studios habitually record material in a standard better than the 16 bit/44.1kHz CD standard and downgrade it for CDs? What is the studio practice on this?


They even use hi-res masters for lossy formats. This from Apple on Mastered for iTunes.

Even so, many experts feel that using higher resolution PCM files during production
provides better-quality audio and a superior listening experience in the end product. For
this reason, 96/24 resolution is quickly becoming a standard format in the industry, and
it's also common to see higher resolution files, such as 192/24.
To take best advantage of our latest encoders send us the highest resolution master file
possible, appropriate to the medium and the project.

. . . .

An ideal master will have 24-bit 96kHz resolution. These files contain more detail from
which our encoders can create more accurate encodes. However, any resolution above
16-bit 44.1kHz, including sample rates of 48kHz, 88.2kHz, 96kHz, and 192kHz, will benefit
from our encoding process.

https://images.apple.com/itunes/mastered-for-itunes/docs/mastered_for_itunes.pdf


----------



## rodrigaj

Bulldog said:


> The money doesn't matter; I've got plenty of that. As for labels, NML has more than "some" other labels; it has hundreds. Also, I find it to be the least commercial and have the best screens.


The commercial aspects of Spotify Premium is off-putting, but it does change somewhat as you use it and their algorithms begin to respond to your prefered genres.

Idagio is much better, but that is because they only do classical music.

Tidal is completely over the top with their emphasis on Hip-Hop and Rap. They never "get" your listening preferences. Just awful.

I will definitely have to revisit Naxos Music Library again. Naxos issued an Idil Biret box set, and even if one just listened to that, it would be worth at least one years subscription.

Thank you for the suggestion.


----------



## tmarshl

rodrigaj said:


> Tidal is completely over the top with their emphasis on Hip-Hop and Rap. They never "get" your listening preferences. Just awful.
> 
> .


I must agree. I enjoy many of the _MQA Masters_ on Tidal, but having to slog through all of the hip-hop and rap offerings is painful. If they would only provide a landing page for their voluminous classical selection, that would be a step forward. I have recently signed up for a subscription to Qobuz in the US, and will be evaluating it against Tidal in the coming months, and then selecting the one that I prefer. I prefer 16/44 audio and above for streaming.


----------



## Joe B

posted in wrong thread


----------



## sangy

Has anyone tried primephonic, I found it online. It looks great but i am not sure if they have good/complete recordings


----------



## JB Henson

I'm perfectly satisfied with Amazon Music.


----------



## gardibolt

I haven't tried Primephonic, but I did some looking into it. People seem to be happy overall with it but the software was glitchy; they recently (April) did a major overhaul and I don't know whether that resolved the problems. When I have more time for listening I may give their free trial a shot.


----------



## bigshot

Amazon Prime Music is great because I can access it from my media server, my computer, my phone, my receiver, my Alexa and in my car.


----------



## DarkAngel

I have been thinking about trying Qobuz now available for USA, anyone here signed up?

How does it compare to Tidal etc? They claim to have largest music catalog, hmmmm.....

https://www.qobuz.com/us-en/music/streaming/offers


----------



## annaw

I've used mainly Spotify Premium but I recently decided to try out the free trials of Idagio and Tidal. Sadly both of them had software problems that I couldn't stand after some time. Idagio was just lagging a lot even though my computer should definitely be capable of running a lot larger programs than either Idagio or Tidal. Tidal was not responding properly most of the time (responded to a click a few seconds later). I'm really happy with my Spotify Premium at the moment  .


----------



## Guest

Since my first response to this thread, I've subscribed to Qobuz's hi-res plan. I run a long USB cable from my laptop to the DAC in my McIntosh amp. The sound is superb, but there are a few hitches. 1) Pure web streaming is not gapless and has brief but frequent dropouts 2) their Windows app simply won't work on my laptop 3) I ended up buying Audiovrana's interface to connect my laptop to the DAC. It solves the gapless problem, but I get a slight low-level burst of static between tracks. I suspect my laptop might be the culprit. Today, I signed up for a free trial with Primephonic. Not impressed. The frequency and seriousness of the dropouts is unacceptable, and it's not gapless, nor do they offer an app yet. Their library is quite vast, but both it and Qobuz have titles that the other doesn't carry. I guess one can't have it all! I'm hoping the various audio issues go away with a new laptop.


----------



## johnlewisgrant

tmarshl said:


> I must agree. I enjoy many of the _MQA Masters_ on Tidal, but having to slog through all of the hip-hop and rap offerings is painful. If they would only provide a landing page for their voluminous classical selection, that would be a step forward. I have recently signed up for a subscription to Qobuz in the US, and will be evaluating it against Tidal in the coming months, and then selecting the one that I prefer. I prefer 16/44 audio and above for streaming.


Trying TIDAL with the "Master" option, but same as you.... no landing for classical! And the search program seems to me weak. The HI FI standard is NOT CD quality. But the "Masters" option, when it is available, seems to be pretty close. Not a bad classical collection, but nothing to right home about either. Up here in the Great White North, the pickings for QUALITY online classical music streaming are slim. Not sure Qobuz is an option for us. It might be.


----------



## jegreenwood

Just found out that my New York Public Library card gives me free access to the Naxos Music Library. :clap:


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Does anyone know why anything issued by Testament is so hard to find on streaming services?

I use Apple Music and find it has greater selection than Spotify.


----------



## Merl

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Does anyone know why anything issued by Testament is so hard to find on streaming services?
> 
> I use Apple Music and find it has greater selection than Spotify.


I use Deezer and it's similar in that there are very few Testament recordings on there, Bhs. Looking at Testament's mission statement, I'm guessing that Testament generate most of their income by concentrating on selling CDs and downloads as streaming may not be worth their while for such a small audience. Also, Testament is an artist-based label and they have to get the permission and cooperation of artists, record companies and radio stations to release recordings. Perhaps some of these refuse to let their music be streamed. Testament is in a unique position in this way and it may be more complicated gaining permission for streaming with so many people in the chain. Just a guess.


----------



## KenOC

bigshot said:


> Amazon Prime Music is great because I can access it from my media server, my computer, my phone, my receiver, my Alexa and in my car.


I'll add that your Amazon music library is available as its own channel if you're streaming to your TV with the Firestick or Fire TV.

Also, multiple family members can install the Amazon Music app on their phones and access the in-cloud library simultaneously.

Added: Just noticed that the Beethoven Symphony Cycle by Bernstein with the VPO (on DG) was available for free Prime listening. I added it to my Amazon cloud library and now both my wife and I can listen to it on our phones wherever we are.


----------



## maussf

Just try to find, outside IDAGIO, all the recordings of Walcha, Karl Richter and some oldies from DGG. Neither on Amazon, Apple, Qobus, Tidal. IDAGIO works perfectly on APPLE and the CD quality is simply good enough with the SONY headphone WH-1000XM3.

Maybe the "search" function deserves a better efficiency.


----------



## Guest

tmarshl said:


> I must agree. I enjoy many of the _MQA Masters_ on Tidal, but having to slog through all of the hip-hop and rap offerings is painful. If they would only provide a landing page for their voluminous classical selection, that would be a step forward. I have recently signed up for a subscription to Qobuz in the US, and will be evaluating it against Tidal in the coming months, and then selecting the one that I prefer. I prefer 16/44 audio and above for streaming.


Does your DAC completely unfold MQA files? If not, then you are not getting the full benefits of the format.


----------



## Guest

I made an adjustment to the DAC in my McIntosh amp (turned off the auto-mute function) and all of the stray noises have disappeared. I still get an occasional dropout, but I think that's a function of wi-fi reception.

I must say that both Qobuz and Tidal have terrible search engines. I get very different results when searching for a composer vs searching for a performer of the same composer. It's clearly aimed at the pop/rock/rap crowd. With enough sleuthing, however, I can eventually find the recording I want.


----------



## Merl

Kontrapunctus said:


> I made an adjustment to the DAC in my McIntosh amp (turned off the auto-mute function) and all of the stray noises have disappeared. I still get an occasional dropout, but I think that's a function of wi-fi reception.
> 
> I must say that both Qobuz and Tidal have terrible search engines. I get very different results when searching for a composer vs searching for a performer of the same composer. It's clearly aimed at the pop/rock/rap crowd. With enough sleuthing, however, I can eventually find the recording I want.


Deezer is the same. I have to put in all sorts of wording connotations to get the music I'm after. Crap search engine. Very annoying.


----------



## Ras

Merl said:


> Deezer is the same. I have to put in all sorts of wording connotations to get the music I'm after. Crap search engine. Very annoying.


I use Spotify and have similar problems.


----------



## maussf

Search on IDAGIO is a real pleasure !


----------



## NLAdriaan

We have Spotify for the family, it works well with pop music, but the search engine is terrible for jazz and classical. They should make a connection with allmusic.com for jazz! For classical, they should change the search engine to search on specific compositions.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

bigshot said:


> Amazon Prime Music is great because I can access it from my media server, my computer, my phone, my receiver, my Alexa and in my car.


What I use.

I can access in a jet, getting wet, while dancing to a castanet.!


----------



## jegreenwood

Neither of the pre-amp/amp set-ups I use have streaming capability, and I don't own a car. Otherwise I can access Tidal on my Logitech Media Server via my Squeezebox streamers and Google Home and ChromeCast, as well as on my phone and my computer. Also in theory through my Oppo 105, although I've never tried. I have Spotify's free service, which I can access through voice commands to my Google Home. I would consider switching to or adding Spotify's paid service, but I doubt Google is ready to parse, "Hey Google, play Beethoven's complete Eroica symphony conducted by von Karajan from his 1963 cycle."


----------



## Fabulin

I am puzzled about the complaints about Spotify search. I usually google to get some info as to which recordings are considered the best, tap "Bernstein Mendelssohn E minor", and get everything I want.


----------



## Guest

I like Qobuz. The sound quality is very good, if not quite as good as a CD or SACD, and I agree about the dismal search engine. Searching labels also yields different results than by the composer, performer, or even composition title. At least they have lowered the price to $14.95, so it's a great way to fully sample an album or add an album to one's library with minimal expense. If I like it enough, then I sometimes buy the CD/SACD or hi-res file.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Streaming is my sole source of listening, because (a.) I'm young, on a budget, and can't afford to have a CD collection, plus the fact that I don't even own a CD player; (b.) My collecting interests lie otherwise in my irrational hoards of books, and (c.) I can get all the CD benefits on my current streaming service without the hassle of physical media. I know that makes me a total non-purist in the classical listeners' community, but it's what I have to do. For almost 2 years I used Spotify. When it comes down to it it has many good features, but two things I couldn't stand - poor audio quality and tracks being referred to as "songs" (I know, nitpicky, but the interface really is not meant for classical). So this last month I switched over to IDAGIO, and though it has its share of problems, it really is infinitely better than Spotify or any other popular-music oriented service for classical fans. Currently I'm enjoying pristine lossless audio at the price of a regular subscription (for three months at least, then I have to pay $14.99 per month, which I think I'll suck up and stick with because I can't imagine going back to lackluster sound). The search is miraculous - type a composer and an opus number and recordings are all arranged for you to sift through. Of course they try to "sell" you on newer recordings because of their artist payment system, but that's a minor inconvenience. Gapless playback is very nice (but only on mobile), the library is well-rounded with all sorts of obscure composers and most of my favorite recordings (sans, of course, the labels like Hyperion, Testament, and Supraphon that don't make it on any streaming service). I really am very satisfied with it. Only big problem - there's no organization of saved albums and recordings. This drives me absolutely nuts. However, the search really is easy enough that you can find what you're looking for without any hassle. For my purposes it's about the best you can get. Besides the app, all I need is my trusty pair of Sennheisers and I have a listening experience that suits me perfectly.


----------



## DaddyGeorge

I only listen to music through headphones. Two years ago I completely redesigned my audio system (CD player, amplifier, headphones) and drove around my country and spent tens of hours in hi-fi studios. Technical parameters are one thing, but listening is the most important. My price limit for everything was $ 5,000 (I really can't afford more expensive set). Finally, I decided for the Creek 50CD player, the Schiit Audio Jotunheim amplifier and two headphones - Audeze LCD-X and Focal Clear. The most fundamental difference is (in my case) clearly in the headphones. It's like visiting an acoustically absolutely different hall. During the selection of the audio set, I performed countless blind tests and I can say that for my ears the difference between the music from the CD player and the stream (Apple Music) is absolutely negligible. I have a collection of about 3000 CDs, but I am increasingly using music from Apple Music ($ 10 a month for my whole family - 6 accounts), where I can find tens of thousands of recordings (including Supraphon and partially even Hyperion).


----------



## The3Bs

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Streaming is my sole source of listening, because (a.) I'm young, on a budget, and can't afford to have a CD collection, plus the fact that I don't even own a CD player; (b.) My collecting interests lie otherwise in my irrational hoards of books, and (c.) I can get all the CD benefits on my current streaming service without the hassle of physical media. I know that makes me a total non-purist in the classical listeners' community, but it's what I have to do. For almost 2 years I used Spotify. When it comes down to it it has many good features, but two things I couldn't stand - poor audio quality and tracks being referred to as "songs" (I know, nitpicky, but the interface really is not meant for classical). So this last month I switched over to IDAGIO, and though it has its share of problems, it really is infinitely better than Spotify or any other popular-music oriented service for classical fans. Currently I'm enjoying pristine lossless audio at the price of a regular subscription (for three months at least, then I have to pay $14.99 per month, which I think I'll suck up and stick with because I can't imagine going back to lackluster sound). The search is miraculous - type a composer and an opus number and recordings are all arranged for you to sift through. Of course they try to "sell" you on newer recordings because of their artist payment system, but that's a minor inconvenience. Gapless playback is very nice (but only on mobile), the library is well-rounded with all sorts of obscure composers and most of my favorite recordings (sans, of course, the labels like Hyperion, Testament, and Supraphon that don't make it on any streaming service). I really am very satisfied with it. Only big problem - there's no organization of saved albums and recordings. This drives me absolutely nuts. However, the search really is easy enough that you can find what you're looking for without any hassle. For my purposes it's about the best you can get. Besides the app, all I need is my trusty pair of Sennheisers and I have a listening experience that suits me perfectly.


I have also been thinking to sign up with Idagio.

I listen mainly to CDs and LPs.. and have been using Spotify mostly for sampling and discovering new music before I buy...
I tested Idagio last year and was quite impressed with the music availability even though it was still quite buggy.


----------



## DarkAngel

I have used Pristine XR and Tidal streaming for some time now, I like Tidal HD because I listen to rock just as much as opera/classical

Just recently I added new *Amazon HD service* with huge library and streaming up to 24/192 for new desktop player app, $13 month for Prime members so cheaper than Tidal ......again great for people who listen to many types of music

Don't confuse this with the old Amazon Prime music service, this is the real deal


----------



## Granate

Recent sales in Qobuz have suggested me to switch to that streaming device. So far it doesn't seem to have a very different catalogue than Spotify. Also, they have developed finally a streaming app for desktop. And I hope they have solved the gap issues because if they didn't I wouldn't be able to listen to Opera.

My student subscription for Spotify ends in October. I was thinking of keeping the premium subscription there for 10€ a month, but I wonder if the Premium subscription (320kbps) for Qobuz sounds better in that app. It's the same money but I would be able to save 20€ with the annual plan. And then keep Spotify free and stream the few albums I cannot find on Qobuz.

Would it be a good deal? I'm still going to buy CDs. It's the streaming quality I care about. Not the FLAC, the MP3 quality between those two.


----------



## Joachim Raff

I have a question: Do most of these streaming services allow uploading of music to their platforms? I have a lot of music collected that is not commercially available and wish to upload instead of clogging my hard drive up.


----------



## Simplicissimus

I enjoy collecting CDs, have for years. I only buy CDs that I really “need” so after about 30 years I only have about 1000 discs. Although I do my serious listening with CDs, I have liked having a streaming service these past couple of years. What I like about my Amazon HD service is that when I purchase an “Autorip” CD on Amazon, an MP3 copy gets added automatically to my “Amazon music library” because I’m a Prime member. Amazon HD plays well through my pretty good AVR so I can listen with my good amp and speakers (for various reasons I don’t use headphones). And of course I use Amazon HD (with my growing library) on mobile devices. The search capabilities for classical seem to be miserable and the classical catalogue is a joke, however. Nevertheless, I’m planning to stick with it because it seems to offer the best complement to my CD collecting hobby.


----------



## adriesba

Joachim Raff said:


> I have a question: Do most of these streaming services allow uploading of music to their platforms? I have a lot of music collected that is not commercially available and wish to upload instead of clogging my hard drive up.


If I'm not mistaken, you can on Google Play music.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

adriesba said:


> If I'm not mistaken, you can on Google Play music.


You can do that. Warning it organizes the music googles way and you can't change it.


----------



## adriesba

Oldhoosierdude said:


> You can do that. Warning it organizes the music googles way and you can't change it.


What do you mean?


----------



## jegreenwood

I've "uploaded" about 10,000 tracks to Google Play - I got carried away. I put "upload" in quotes, because I believe Google does matching similar to Apple - if the track is in its library, it simply uses that - and its version of the track may be different from mine (e.g. different mastering). Fortunately, many of my classical "tracks" are multi-movement works, which I joined during ripping, so Google can't find those in its library. Additionally, I don't believe Google maintains them in lossless format. I don't worry about this, as I only use it for casual listening - and for that matter, mostly popular music and jazz. I like to call out, "Hey Google, shuffle my playlist "60's Jazz," while I'm making dinner or avoiding getting out of bed. I can also cast the music to either of my ChromeCast Audios. The upload service is not terribly well documented, so the above information may not be totally correct.

I can organize the music to my satisfaction. The web access offers rudimentary tag editing capabilities. To make sure Google understands what I want to hear, I have a particularly strict naming convention for classical music, which differs from the convention I have on my own computer. Even then, Google Play sometimes doesn't understand my vocal commands. Playlists are the most reliable alternative (as opposed to albums and artists).

All of this with a free account. (But maybe because I have several Google Home units.) And yet, I'd still recommend an extra hard drive instead.

Edit: Also, Google Play has issues with gapless playback. I don't know if that is true in all cases.


----------



## DLOinQUEENS

I like Spotify, Idagio, and Primephonic. Idagio is unbeatable for their search engine. It’s amazing to quickly sort exactly what you’re looking for, by conductor, by orchestra, etc. It makes comparing recordings and performances so much fun. Spotify’s selection, interface, cross functionality, and playlist management is worth the price alone. And Primephonic has booklet support for certain albums, hi res, gapless playback on all platforms (unlike Idagio, which only does Apple to my knowledge), and a nice interface with curated selections. 

In a perfect world, I’d have all three, but the choice for me really comes down to Spotify+Idagio or Primephonic. Spotify is a must for popular music, and the choice between the other two is too close to call at the moment.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

For those struggling to decide between Idagio and Primephonic it comes down to one thing: if you want your saved album “collection" organized alpahebetically by composer, go with Primephonic. Idagio does not have this capability, nor does it even let you organize manually - it is just ordered according to the last albums you saved. This drives me nuts. However, the search is so easy that it’s not a big deal for me and I’m sticking with it for now. With Idagio, one nice thing I’ve also noticed is that I often search for a recording that they don’t have, then I try again a few days later and it’s there; like they see your empty search request and remedy it.


----------



## Marc

I now have joined Idagio for free, since a couple of weeks ago. Which means: with advertising in between movements and such. It's my first streaming experience and I feel like a rather modern 21st century human being for the first time in my life.

Uhh, well, since I have got nothing really interesting to add… that's all for now. Just wanted to say that I'm happy with it. So far I mainly used it to check some stuff that I normally would not consider purchasing on CD.
There is still a 'risk' though, that when I like it, I might go for the old fashioned way and order something 'touchable' again.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

I would consider switching to Primephonic if I had not taken advantage of Idagio’s offer a couple months ago of premium lossless sound for regular price. Now that I’ve heard FLAC I can’t imagine ever going back to the artificiality of the compressed stuff I was used to on Spotify. And 5 extra dollars per month may not seem like a lot (Primephonic, Tidal, and others charge $15.00 monthly for premium sound) but it really adds up.


----------



## Jokke

I'm happy with Spotify on my Cambridge CXN.


----------



## PuerAzaelis

Title is self-explanatory.

What in your opinion is the best subscription service out there for classical music?

Primephonic?


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

I posted this on a couple different threads before, it might be of help to you...

As one of the only members here who does not own a single CD and who listens exclusively from streaming, I can help you out a bit. I have extensively tried both Idagio and Primephonic and am currently subscribed to Primephonic. Both services have major pros and cons which I touch on.

*Sound quality*
Both offer standard MP3 for their basic packages and charge something close to $14.99 per month for lossless (which I spring for). Both of them offer gapless playback (a non-compromising must for me) on mobile, but Idagio does not do so on their desktop app.

*Selection*
Idagio, in my experience, has the wider library. They have a lot of older performances which Primephonic does not. However, Primephonic also has some very good recordings from all eras that Idagio does not. I would recommend trying the free trial on both (for the Primephonic free trial they don't even need your credit card info), searching for some specific recordings you're interested in, and seeing which service best provides what you're looking for.

*Search function*
Both services have a dreamy search function if you're used to searching for popular music on other services. Type any shorthand abbreviation for any work and you're likely to find what you're looking for. However, it's a bit tougher to search for the exact recording you want on Primephonic than it is on Idagio, in my experience.

*Interface/Arrangement*
If your eyes are strained with a purely black and white interface, go for Primephonic. But in general I think Idagio's interface is more sleek and handsome. Both services are not ideal for arrangement of your personal album/recording library. On Idagio there is no option at all to arrange your albums alphabetically; it saves in an infernal random order without even a search function to find what you're looking for. Luckily the main search function is so good that you don't really need to save albums. On Primephonic you are given the option to save alphabetically, but have to manually change it every time you open the folder.

*General downfalls of both and nice individual perks*
The main downfall for both is that they heavily push newer recordings and performers to such an extent that the vintage recordings get buried. They're easy to find if you know what to search for, though. Primephonic does some interesting exclusive podcasts and performer interviews that can be intriguing. Both offer "classical radio" which I find is pretty much non-applicable to "serious" classical listeners. I do kind of like the "mood" function on Idagio, though, which lets you spin a wheel and gives you a piece that matches a certain emotion. Primephonic has recordings on Melodiya and a few on Supraphon (many of which I love), while Idagio has Nonesuch and even the token Testament recording.

So it looks like I've given more positives to Idagio. Why do I use Primephonic? Because I only do my "serious" listening on desktop (my audiophile headphones will only work on my computer) and Idagio's desktop app is non-negotiably bad - terribly slow, clunky, and without gapless playback. If they updated that and maybe fixed their alphabetization function, I would switch back to them. But Primephonic meets my needs about as ideally as could be for right now.

General recommendation if you're on mobile - Idagio.


----------



## PuerAzaelis

Thank you VM!!!


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Primephonic has just been bought out by Apple Music, and they will be shutting down within a week. Apparently Apple will launch a new classical service next year. Ugh! I am switching to Idagio, which costs $5 less per month for premium sound anyway - and unless you want to deal with Apple's horrendous classical search function for the next six months, I suggest all Primephonic subscribers do the same.


----------



## Malx

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Primephonic has just been bought out by Apple Music, and they will be shutting down within a week. Apparently Apple will launch a new classical service next year. Ugh! I am switching to Idagio, which costs $5 less per month for premium sound anyway - and unless you want to deal with Apple's horrendous classical search function for the next six months, I suggest all Primephonic subscribers do the same.


Rotten to the core (pun intended).


----------



## PuerAzaelis

Yes just got the email today. Disappointing, but Idagio is just dandy.


----------



## donnie a

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I am switching to Idagio, which costs $5 less per month for premium sound anyway - and unless you want to deal with Apple's horrendous classical search function for the next six months, I suggest all Primephonic subscribers do the same.


I got the email today, too, and have canceled my account and moved over to Idagio.

I'm really disappointed-in the short time I used Primephonic, I had grown to love it (though it wasn't perfect). Yes, Idagio will do fine, as it's really very similar; but the folks at Primephonic seemed to have a real love and enthusiasm for the music, and were always very responsive and appreciative to my questions and suggestions.

I'm not interested at all in Apple Music streaming at this point. I'm glad Apple seems to be taking classical music more seriously, and I'll wait to see what kind of "classical" app they come up with-but I'm skeptical. I do like Apple hardware and operating systems, and use the Music app on my Mac to organize my purchased music; but Apple has never understood or particularly seemed to care about classical listeners in the past.

Are there any Primephonic subscribers here who decided to take them up on the free six months of Apple Music?


----------



## Jen L

I was very happy with Primephonic, with the streaming quality, the search engine and all the value-added features, along with what appeared to be a collaborative approach with their customers. 

So the acquisition by Apple, announced earlier this week, and the shutting down of the service next week, has come as a quite a shock. Time will tell what happens when Apple folds ‘the best of Primephonic’ into its Music offering. It may be an irresistible offering for classical music customers, but I’m not holding my breath… and signed up to Idagio yesterday.

My understanding is that Primephonic and Idagio operate a by-the-second payment model, which is more appropriate and more fairly awards the classical music industry, than a by-the-song model. Will Apple adopt this payment model for classical, I wonder?


----------



## FrankinUsa

This just happened. Primephonic was bought by Apple and will be shut down soon. Present Primephonic subscribers will get 6 months of Apple Music. Apple will say they will create a dedicated site for classical music. Honestly I am not surprised. It’s called “capitalism.” There probably will be further shakeout of streaming services and the smaller services may not survive. There has even been discussion that Tidal may not survive. I did a trial of Tidal and it’s awful for classical music.


----------



## FrankinUsa

Per my above post you can google/search engine for details


----------



## Art Rock

I've copied the relevant posts from the more recent thread to here, and deleted remarks about the duplicate threads.


----------



## Merl

Since I last posted in this thread, 2 years ago, I abandoned Deezer as it was the glitchiest streamer Ive ever used and they had lots of classical recordings where you could only listen to half the album or they were really badly organised or cut off before the end (especially Exton recordings). I tried a couple more streamers but settled on Spotify cos it was cheap, easy to use and seemed to have the best selection. These days I think many of them have very similar recordings available but I've stuck with Spotify just cos I can't be @rsed changing. The search engine seems to have improved quite a bit since I started using it but there's still plenty of room for improvement.


----------



## eljr

haydnguy said:


> I have always bought all my music on CD's. I haven't changed my mind on that. I was just wondering what streaming service were people's favorites in case I change my mind. I like to know what's out there.


Depends on what you listen to and how you intend to listen. Spotify is by far the best as far as selection and convenience. It is however inferior quality 320kbps on premium.

I have tried many services, I almost always have two services at a time. Forget Tidal, their MQA is nonsense and as a classical enthusiast you are seldom considered.

Primephonic offers great quality. I love them. Same with Qobuz. These are the best if you don't mind the inconveniences that come along with them. As mentioned above though, bye bye Primephonic.

If you are like me and have music in every room in your home and zones set up, Spotify is the only one that is seamless.

So get Spotify with a side order of Qobuz for serious but less convenient listening.


----------



## wkasimer

eljr said:


> Depends on what you listen to and how you intend to listen. Spotify is by far the best as far as selection and convenience. It is however inferior quality 320kbps on premium.


I've stayed with Spotify for the same reason - best selection, particularly for historic vocal material; I think that they may be the only service that streams the entire Preiser catalogue.

Since I'm mostly using Bluetooth when using Spotify (in the car or the office), 320 kbps is more than sufficient. If I want better resolution, that's what CD's are for.


----------



## Granate

If one classical music lover would start from Scratch and never buy a Single CD, I would reccomend either Qobuz or Idagio, or the platform that develops their UX and library the best. They would still save more money than those like me who pay a monthly price for a large 320kbps library (with a very good,yet not perfect, smartphone app) and complement with purchasing their favourite performances on CD or FLAC.

For research purposes, either Youtube or download sites work better to cover the fewer gaps remaining in the Spotify library. But the piracy years are over, and they were really inconvenient compared to just streaming.

I can bear with Spotify's search engine (It has become increasingly difficult to find the complete discography from major composers), but the buffering in the phone app every 10 minutes is the most annoying thing ATM.


----------



## Dan Ante

I suppose I am just an old fudgy dudgy locked in the past but I am very happy with my CDs, Tapes and LP's plus a good local radio station for classical music.


----------



## jegreenwood

eljr said:


> Depends on what you listen to and how you intend to listen. Spotify is by far the best as far as selection and convenience. It is however inferior quality 320kbps on premium.
> 
> I have tried many services, I almost always have two services at a time. *Forget Tidal, their MQA is nonsense and as a classical enthusiast you are seldom considered.*
> 
> Primephonic offers great quality. I love them. Same with Qobuz. These are the best if you don't mind the inconveniences that come along with them. As mentioned above though, bye bye Primephonic.
> 
> If you are like me and have music in every room in your home and zones set up, Spotify is the only one that is seamless.
> 
> So get Spotify with a side order of Qobuz for serious but less convenient listening.


Not willing to forget Tidal. I can integrate it into my LMS through a plug-in. And if I don't want MQA I can set streaming to Hi-Fi instead of Master. Personally, when I tested CD Quality vs. MQA I could hear a difference, but my preference varied from recording to recording.

LMS has a Qobuz plug-in as well, but my initial experience with Qobuz (described somewhere on this forum) was negative. And Qobuz has apparently disallowed public access to its documentation*, making it difficult to maintain the LMS plug-in going forward.

* LMS is now maintained and updated by volunteers.


----------



## jegreenwood

jegreenwood said:


> Not willing to forget Tidal. I can integrate it into my LMS through a plug-in. And if I don't want MQA I can set streaming to Hi-Fi instead of Master. Personally, when I tested CD Quality vs. MQA I could hear a difference, but my preference varied from recording to recording.
> 
> LMS has a Qobuz plug-in as well, but my initial experience with Qobuz (described somewhere on this forum) was negative. And Qobuz has apparently disallowed public access to its documentation*, making it difficult to maintain the LMS plug-in going forward.
> 
> * LMS is now maintained and updated by volunteers.


Edit - after reading some recent posts on LMS, Tidal and MQA, I see that the combination may be the worst of all possible worlds (the truncated original without MQA). Still not happy about Qobuz. I'll have to reconsider my choices once Spotify's offerings are upgraded.

Not interested in classical-only sources. Most of my streaming is for popular music.


----------



## donnie a

Dan Ante said:


> I suppose I am just an old fudgy dudgy locked in the past but I am very happy with my CDs, Tapes and LP's plus a good local radio station for classical music.


You may have something there!


----------



## FrankinUsa

Couple of months ago there was a big hullabaloo about Apple offering hi-rez(cd quality and bit-rate beyond) and Dolby Atmos/spacial music. Other streamers followed suit. First of all,whatever classical music I have heard in Dolby Atmos. It was awful. Instead of sensing music coming from a stage it sounds like an orchestra is placed in a very large auditorium and each musician is spaced multichannel feet away from each other. For example if there is a clarinet(etc) solo it sounds as if the clarinetist is outside of the orchestra many feet away. Some of the majors are offering (Decca,Dg,Warner) are doing some classical in Dolby Atmos and they are putting it out on Blu-ray and on streaming services. NO THANKS. As to hi-Rez it is extremely difficult to actually access the hirez tracks for various reasons. YouTube/John Darko went into good detail about the various issues. NO THANKS. There were a bunch of publicity/YouTube videos 3 months ago when all this happened but it has completely died down. I have been using Apple Music for streaming because it gives me access to a huge amount of music across many genres. As for classical music,Apple seems to do a fair job of posting new releases at least from the major labels. If I hunt around around other music/cd websites and find something that I’m interested in I do a search on Apple and see if they have it. In terms of classical I use streaming to hear new/available CDs and will buy if I like it.


----------



## donnie a

FrankinUsa said:


> Couple of months ago there was a big hullabaloo about Apple offering hi-rez(cd quality and bit-rate beyond) and Dolby Atmos/spacial music. Other streamers followed suit. First of all,whatever classical music I have heard in Dolby Atmos. It was awful. Instead of sensing music coming from a stage it sounds like an orchestra is placed in a very large auditorium and each musician is spaced multichannel feet away from each other. For example if there is a clarinet(etc) solo it sounds as if the clarinetist is outside of the orchestra many feet away. Some of the majors are offering (Decca,Dg,Warner) are doing some classical in Dolby Atmos and they are putting it out on Blu-ray and on streaming services. NO THANKS. As to hi-Rez it is extremely difficult to actually access the hirez tracks for various reasons. YouTube/John Darko went into good detail about the various issues. NO THANKS. There were a bunch of publicity/YouTube videos 3 months ago when all this happened but it has completely died down. I have been using Apple Music for streaming because it gives me access to a huge amount of music across many genres. As for classical music,Apple seems to do a fair job of posting new releases at least from the major labels. If I hunt around around other music/cd websites and find something that I'm interested in I do a search on Apple and see if they have it. In terms of classical I use streaming to hear new/available CDs and will buy if I like it.


That Dolby Atmos sounds awful.

Frankin, can you answer a question about Apple Music? I have a large library of downloaded music in the Music app on my Mac, carefully organized into playlist by composer, work, etc., some of which I've purchased from Apple and some of which has been bought elsewhere or ripped from CD. Will subscribing to Apple Music streaming mess up my playlists? In other words, if I stream something, will the tracks show up mixed in with my current music? Not sure about the interaction there. A long time ago, I did a trial subscription, and seems like I had some problems along those lines, but I can't remember exactly.


----------



## D Smith

donnie a said:


> That Dolby Atmos sounds awful.
> 
> Frankin, can you answer a question about Apple Music? I have a large library of downloaded music in the Music app on my Mac, carefully organized into playlist by composer, work, etc., some of which I've purchased from Apple and some of which has been bought elsewhere or ripped from CD. Will subscribing to Apple Music streaming mess up my playlists? In other words, if I stream something, will the tracks show up mixed in with my current music? Not sure about the interaction there. A long time ago, I did a trial subscription, and seems like I had some problems along those lines, but I can't remember exactly.


Make sure Sync Library is turned off in Preferences/General. If it's on, yes there is a risk Apple Music will screw up your library, changing metadata and so on.


----------



## donnie a

D Smith said:


> Make sure Sync Library is turned off in Preferences/General. If it's on, yes there is a risk Apple Music will screw up your library, changing metadata and so on.


Thanks, D. If I decide to try it, I'll make sure that's unchecked (it is at present) and make sure I have a fresh backup of my library. However, I'm still a little leery.


----------



## Mark Dee

Dan Ante said:


> I suppose I am just an old fudgy dudgy locked in the past but I am very happy with my CDs, Tapes and LP's plus a good local radio station for classical music.


I have vinyl, CD's, downloads, and I listen free to Accuradio's very good classical channels. Plenty for me to be getting on with!


----------



## FrankinUsa

donnie a said:


> That Dolby Atmos sounds awful.
> 
> Frankin, can you answer a question about Apple Music? I have a large library of downloaded music in the Music app on my Mac, carefully organized into playlist by composer, work, etc., some of which I've purchased from Apple and some of which has been bought elsewhere or ripped from CD. Will subscribing to Apple Music streaming mess up my playlists? In other words, if I stream something, will the tracks show up mixed in with my current music? Not sure about the interaction there. A long time ago, I did a trial subscription, and seems like I had some problems along those lines, but I can't remember exactly.


I will admit I don't know.


----------



## Barnaby

I believe that if you have “sync music” selected, Apple searches it’s online database and matches whatever it believes is the correct track in your library to that. This probably works for popular stuff quite well but it frequently gets it wrong with classical and your library ends up getting mangled. 

Af least that’s what happened to mine. 

That aside, I’ve used it for years and by and large I really like Apple Music. It’s great for most genres and I’m hoping they will bring their magic to classical streaming. I’m saving 6 months subs and the need to subscribe to Primephonic as well as Apple as I have been doing for a while now. 

I’m optimistic about this change


----------



## donnie a

Barnaby said:


> I believe that if you have "sync music" selected, Apple searches it's online database and matches whatever it believes is the correct track in your library to that. This probably works for popular stuff quite well but it frequently gets it wrong with classical and your library ends up getting mangled.
> 
> Af least that's what happened to mine


That confirms what I'm seeing mentions of here and there online. Thanks!


----------

