Spotify and Lossless?

[adamdea]

They will not be introducing lossless.
Their business model doesn’t need it.
280 million users.
180 million subscribers, more than twice as many as any other competitor.

It's worth bearing in mind that those 180/280m people may be more representative of the mere mortals whose blind listening was used to develop the lossy codecs, rather than the superhumans on audio web forums. This seems to square with the experiece of the BBC which trialed flac streaming and concluded that it wasn't worth bothering.

 

[Bob McC]

Agreed.
But the audio nerds don’t amount to a hill of beans in numbers.

 

[scottcarpenter]

I have my reservations about Tidal but I have been a subscriber for many years now using a high end DAC and the quality is superb. The Master recordings are a revelation. I pay $24.99 AUD a month here in Sydney. That's about 13.60 GDP. I won't be changing anytime soon.

 

[booja30]

Spotify is 320kps. I got an account for my daughter and son to share as you can download stuff to listen offline so they could manage on the one account. But after a few months I went for the family subscription as both my wife and I wanted to use it. Her for background music whilst working and I use it for late night listening on headphones. It's fine for that and for exploring new music. I think the family subcription is good value.

Are you a spam bot? Your post is a word for word copy of post #7 from last year by a different user…

 

[John]

There’s folks who have compared Spotify with other streaming services and find Spotify more musical. I have no issue with Spotify, use it a lot and enjoy the sound quality.