TIDAL

Tidal like Qobuz and Deezer offer lossless services, by streaming FLAC. The streams are effectively the same as the stream from your NAS/media server on your home network. 

Therefore these streams are akin to a ripped CD transport stream but over your home LAN. Spotify uses a lossy codec called Ogg Vorbis, not dissimilar to MP3. These streams are clearly not CD quality but many are very happy with them..as they don't  require CD quality. 

i believe Paul S from Naim has said Naim are looking at developing new Streaming service support, only Naim will be able to confirm for which services.

Simon

Thank you for your reply and explanation about the difference between two services. But I have to tell you that I knew this difference and it was particularly the reason for my questions, because I belong to the people expecting, at list, CD quality from intensively developed last few decades streaming services. 

I think Spotify is enough for devices like Sonos or Band&Olufsson bluetooth speakers, MU SO from Naim, but I am planning to use it with ND5 XS, DAC 100T from CARY audio and preamp and two mono blocks (all tube) as well from CARY. Last 4.3 update allow to start of using Spotify on hi quality network streamers from Naim, I think to bring any CD quality streaming service on the board of Naim  line of streamers would be grate.

Thanks,

Igor.

Igor, it will be certainly great when and if Naim support lossless streaming services.

Yes I can't work out if Wat means that.. just about every artist I have looked for is available streaming, albeit some really obscure one only in lossy.

One of my dear old school friends is an 'artist'. His many albums I have found are available lossless on Tidal and lossy on Napster and I am sure he values the exposure and accessibility these new access methods bring him... without needing big labels to back him or shape him.. and publishing labels were a challenge for him in the very early days  in the era of fanzines and pre web.. Mind you he was never in it for the money.. He was more in it for the self expression and music and enjoyed sharing his art with others and collaborating with other like minded artists.

HH, I have been looking at Tidal recently and comparing with Qobuz, and I agree on classical it's less comprehensive than Qobuz. It will be interesting to see if this improves over the coming months. Tidal is a relatively new service, Qobuz has been going for years.. Tidal does appear to have the upper hand on experimental and avant garde  music ..but as I have suggested before it is unlikely a single streaming service provider will appeal to all tastes, and I am sure we shall see several all with a different focus and feel.

Simon

I tend to agree with Wat,   not that streaming services will be extinct,  but I am uneasy with the marketing, the concept model & the fee's.  I just have a hunch it will go thru a few more iterations. 

In my case its not so much that my jury is still out,  its more a question of a retrial ........   

I've switched streaming services twice and may well do again - it's a matter of cancelling one direct debit and setting up another (I pay monthly). Ten minutes maximum. Also my ripped library is still there as a last resort if every streaming service goes tits up simultaneously. I really can't see any risk at all.

The upside is that I've never had such access to music and never has it been so reliable and so easy! In terms of SQ I can't hear a difference between  a streamed cd and one from my own library.

I agree with the sentiments of the last two posts... also at least in the UK, streaming appears to meet what many of the  consumers/public want

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-33652270

Geoff Taylor, chief executive of music industry body the BPI, called the growth and usage figures "remarkable".

"It demonstrates vividly just how quickly streaming is being embraced by British music fans," he said.

He added he hoped "it will help our world-leading record labels invest even more into unearthing the next generation of British talent for fans here and around the world".

Yes it wont appeal to everyone, as we read on this forum, but it looks healthy in terms of adoption of usage.  It might not last for ever and the world may move on, but here and now it very much looks relevant.

Unfortunately there are regional restrictions in Qobuz service. I do believe that it is not available in Poland but TIDAL is present.

Yeah, but it's OK because with a subscription streaming service you are essentially paying for nothing. So it all shakes out logically!

Try emailing them and asking for the restriction to be lifted. It's a false restriction in any case. They are only towing a marketing line and will break it on request because it's silly and has no basis in law.

Could someone please explain why, whenever someone starts a thread about streaming (hardly unusual in a forum called 'Streaming Audio'), Wat feels the need to repeat for the hundredth time that he doesn't like streaming? Why does he even read the threads here? Most of us contributing to a forum called 'Streaming Audio' have at least a passing interest in the subject.

Paul, who has just enjoyed the new DG Abbado Schubert Great C Major on Qobuz, but already owning four versions of the work, doesn't feel compelled to add another

Naughty boy at school (plenty of lines) 

cheer up though, I'd rather read about alternative strategies to streaming here than some guff about the wavywarpyscratchyrumblyblackstuff!

The term “streaming” covers a variety of possibilities of which paying for a subscription service is only one. Your view appears rather narrow – ironic since this is the basis of your problem with another contributor.

There are some who think subscription services are a con, me among them.  I'm sure that if this breaches the AUP I'll be moderated.

How so 'a con', Harry? For the equivalent (give or take) of a CD a month you get access to zillions of CDs at CD quality in all conceivable musical genres. No one has to buy it. So how is it a con?

Unfortunately Qobiz is not available in Canada and US yet...

On your other point, Harry, Wat doesn't approve of any non-physical media. So what sorts of 'streaming' are relevant for him?

Because you are paying for essentially nothing. It's like a Juke Box, when you stop paying the music stops playing. You could have several hundred albums at CD quality or greater for the cost of a TIDAL subscription in five years or less.  You will own them for all time and won't have to keep paying to play them.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for choice. But I will alert people laying on rails that a gravy train is about to run over them. What happens past that is none of my business - unless this new paradigm (which is actually a very old paradigm AKA The Juke Box) becomes the only way for me to have access to new music.

Choice is good.

I wasn't aware of that. Although I was challenging the narrow use of the term "streaming" in the context of the critical comment, not anybody's wants or needs.

I like your Juke Box analogy. But it's a very big Juke Box. If I buy a CD, I'll probably listen to it twice, and then it gets put on a shelf and maybe never comes out again. So for me, it's quite good value to be able to listen to, say the Schubert I mentioned earlier, as part of a subcription. I can if I want listen to it again and again, though that will rarely be the case. But it's not a 'con' - there's no subterfuge, I know I only have access while I pay.