Tidal...I think it's excellent.

No, ECM are one of the labels - Hyperion and BIS also come to mind - who are holding out against deals with streaming companies.

Hi Gregg -

Deezer Elite is a great alternative to Tidal. US-only for now, they have a larger library (35M versus 25M lossless tracks), and are even more affordable - $15/month or $120/year.  After a trial period, I signed up for the yearly plan, and am enjoying it very much!

I do sympathize with our UK forum friends about relative pricing. Tidal is Norwegian, so it makes me wonder if there any extra tariffs of fees they have to pay in order to do business in the UK. Also, I am pretty sure that content owners license music on a regional basis, so perhaps that is another potential cause of higher prices. My guess is that, as the newcomer, and if they could afford to do so, Tidal would love to undercut Qobuz's UK pricing and steal their customers.

ATB.

Hook

And then I'd expect to see downward pressure on the all you can eat monthly pricing... It's got to be a good thing.  BTW does Deezer have any magazine tie ins? Qobuz has the Grampohone magazine tie in which is quite a nice feature.

Simon

You are correct - Premium runs on lots of devices, but (lossless) Elite is for now a Sonos-only offering. Deezer's US CEO did hint this will change in the future...

Why are you only allowing U.S. fans to sign up for Deezer Elite through owning a Sonos product?

Tyler Goldman: We really wanted to perfect the use case. Facebook started with one school and then went to multiple schools, then all schools and then to the general public. In this higher quality product we want to make sure it works very well...Then we’re going to go to a broader part of the audio enthusiast movement.

My  issue with Tyler Goldman's comment is that others elsewhere in the world are doing lossless to the general public, albeit in certain countries with no issues at all. Therefore think it might be more to do with global rights they haven't yet negotiated and lack of streaming capacity and infrastructure of thier service. Can't help feeling such a statement attracts minus kudos points.

Simon

You may be interested in SoundCloud. A streaming service run for artists wishing to promote themselves and is free to use. There is some great content to chose from with many genres from classical to avante garde / experimental. No big labels involved here. SoundCloud has been around for years and I used to listen to it a lot on the computer, and since getting my Sonos front end for the Naim have been enjoying it again.. and they now support lossless from the artist.

Simon

Wat

It's nothing to do with radio channels, at least for me. I choose what I want to listen to, not someone else. So I read a review of something that sounds worth a listen, and I can listen to it instantly, in CD quality via Qobuz. I don't understand why you don't understand that that's a good thing - at least for the consumer!

Paul

++1

EXACTLY

BIS is avaliable on spotify

Possibly Simon, but I took it more as Deezer needing time to stabilize their software platform before rolling out to multiple devices beyond Sonos.

Deezer now has over 16M users (6M paying for Premium and Elite) worldwide, and they have contracts to distribute music in 180 countries, far more than any other service.  If licensing is an issue, then that implies that they need separate agreements for lossless versus 320kbps.  I do not know how content owners license their music, but given Deezer's global presence, I question whether securing those agreements is really an issue.

Please understand that I do not want to be known here the Deezer Defender. So far, I think the Deezer Elite/Sonos combo has been awesome, offering more content, equal quality, and equal if not better reliability than did Tidal. But hey, if Qobuz (or, as I like to call it, that other French lossless streaming service ) ever gets it act together and crosses the Atlantic, and if I enjoy a Qobuz trial more than Deezer, then I would add it and/or switch to it in a heartbeat!

Hi Wat - I understand your concern for artists, but don't you think the cow has the left the barn? There are exceptions, Taylor Swift and ECM for example, who for now refuse to participate.  But it seems like 99% of all artists and labels have adjusted to this new distribution channel, and accept it as an additional source of revenue. The good part of streaming serves is that they offer consumers an affordable alternative to piracy. I think the vast majority of (especially young) people still get their music for free from BitTorrent and other download sites, or they just listen for free on YouTube and other streaming sites.  At least Deezer, Tidal, Qobuz and Spotify do pay royalties, however small they might be compared to traditional media sales.

I know that many people live in areas where internet bandwidth remains limited, and they have no choice but to stay with physical media and/or downloads. But hopefully that changes over time.

Hook

PS - Vinyl is still my number one source as well! 

Wat, to be honest I am totally with you - and I know where you are coming from.. I  suspect it is my idealist libertarian values showing through - but hey I like feel thinking like that. I am all for independent thinking but I'm all for big business as well, I guess I am not that naive, but as long as it doesn't mean I have to comply with it and can look on from a safe distance if I want to.

Simon

Hook - It will be interesting with Deezer what proportion of its lossy customer base do opt for lossless. I think I have to be realistic and expect that at least initially lossless will be a premium or niche service.

I can remember where, but I am sure I remember reading lossless rights were different to lossy rights because of the improved quality. That might have changed now of course

Simon

Found a live online Q/A session from November with the guy leading Tidal's US and UK rollouts. Google "reddit pal bratelund" if interested.

He says that licensing lossless isn't very different from licensing lossy, but it requires "stricter security and more money to rights owners".

Also, when asked by someone in the UK about pricing, he says that regional pricing is not entirely up to Tidal, but set "in cooperation with labels according to their local market standards".

Hook

I spoke to the USA national sales manager for SONOS a couple of months ago at the "music matters" event at Audio Advice in NC and asked him directly in a room packed full of people if SONOS would embrace hi-res which they are not at this time. Regarding Deezer he indicated the service will migrate to other platforms after a while. Make no mistake...SONOS is huge at $535m in sales the end of 2013 and Deezer was smart to start with SONOS exclusively. Deezer purchased year at a time if I live 30 more years thats $3kUSD which is a no brainer. It's not perfect but neither is ripping CD's to a NAS etc..but it sounds great through my bare NDAC via SONOS Connect. I have encountered a few CD's in my ripped library that sound better than what's in the Deezer library but thats to be expected no matter what service one has and including the vast ripped libraries those on this forum have. 

Mack

+1 for Soundcloud, but +++1 for Bandcamp. 

I'm a new music junkie but even I can't keep up with the vast amounts of undiscovered, yet excellent stuff being released by small labels and artists directly on Bandcamp. Once you get a fan account and start browsing there're are wonderful breadcrumb trails to follow through fellow fans.

The majority of albums are available to play in their entirety to try before you buy.

Downloads (and physical stuff) are often cheap, and artists frequently offer free stuff. 24 bit offerings are on the increase too. 

P.S. Bandcamp take 10% - the rest goes direct to the artist or label, and most of the latter are cottage industries.