Apple wants Tidal

Not sure if it is a good news for consumer. I hope at least it will mean more reliable connectivity. 

The originating article in the WSJ is highly speculative. Tidal has been for sale for some time now, so it's just as likely a strategic leak to drum up interest in Tidal.

That said if it were to become a reality don't expect more reliable connectivity. Expect no connectivity. If we take the article at face value, Apple is interested in the artists exclusively signed up, not the service. The potential ramifications for MQA and Roon in particular could be profound.

engjoo posted:

Not sure if it is a good news for consumer. I hope at least it will mean more reliable connectivity. 

I don't see why it should, on many clients Tidal connectivity is just fine for the vast majority of the time as is consistent with many web services.

Techradar are running the same story. Don't know whether this is good news or not, should it happen.

That's awful news, or it will be if Apple mess about with it and especially if they tie it into ITunes.  I like Tidal, it works and sound brilliant via Audirvana and I don't use or have need of ITunes at all.

Goon525 posted:

Techradar are running the same story.

I think they've all picked up on the WSJ piece, and each is trying to put its own spin on it. Clickbait, doncha know...

If Apple would acquire Tidal I'm pessimistic about the availability of cd quality streaming. Apple has shown no interest at all to provide cd quality streaming. It would make no sense to continue Tidal as a separate brand with its own infrastructure. Tidal does not make enough money and directing people away from Apple Music would make no sense either.

I've had dire experience with Apple acquisitions before. Prior to the existence of iPod and iTunes there was a bit software called Liquid Player that had it's own online library of AAC encoded music and support for the growing number of digital players at the time. In 2001 I bought a Sanyo portable device with Liquid as the defacto software for transferring audio to the device.

Apple purchased Liquid and acquired the music library and the player which code base became iTunes. The first release of which was little more than swapping out the logo.

One day in 2004 I connected my Sanyo player to drag over some tracks I had ripped. Denied! Got a popup saying that Liqiud was no longer supported and had been disable and a link to please download iTunes and buy a new compatible device (presumably an iPod). Liquid Player never worked again and I was never able to recover my ripped collection and my Sanyo player ended up in the bin since it was bricked by Apple.

Sigh. "Pissed off" barely scratched the surface at the time. 

Just to clarify, this acquisition was for adding the iTunes store and revamping iTunes. I know iTunes existed for a while before this. I think even the original version was based on yet another company's product.

Hmmm, maybe Qobuz was a better choise after all. I had Tidal and Qobuz a while next to each other and was in the opportunity to compare the sound quality of both. In my opinion Qobuz sounds a little bit better.

Interesting.

Apple pursues a very specific strategy: develop its own ecosystem so its users stay inside it. Almost everything Apple does is aimed at that outcome, because Apple's premium price point relies on it. So if they purchase Tidal, two things will happen: 1) Tidal will become part of the ecosystem, meaning ALAC rather than FLAC, etc; and 2) its usefulness outside of that ecosystem will diminish rapidly to zero.