I really wanted to like tidal, but honestly it’s not really good. The search sucks, no offline mode on desktop, no official Linux client, an incomplete catalog…
It’s not worth it, even if they are the least bad for paying artists.
The limited library was their biggest problem in my opinion. It’s acceptable if you want mainstream, well known artists centered on appealing to North America but there were so many international and independent groups that weren’t on the service. Higher quality streaming is only worth it if you can listen to what you like.
Yeah. The number one reason I won’t subscribe is that if their library is missing a song, you can’t even add it yourself. Both Spotify and Apple Music allow adding your own MP3s, how does Tidal not have that feature?!
I like Tidal because its interface isn’t downright crap. What Spotify did to playlists and to the heart/cross button is so damn annoying.
This is just an ad read.
Article specifically calls how they’re axing military and first responder discounts, how you still get upcharged for HiFi if you use their DJ Integration feature, and how they’re nixing the free tier.
The article is not an advertisement; it contains some good news for consumers and some bad news for consumers. The notable bit is the good news, hence it’s the headline. And it’s notable exactly because it’s good news — most everyone else is raising prices across the board.
You don’t know the Verge, perhaps
This is just a good news and they are reporting it as such
I am too familiar with this gaudy website and its concept of journalism.
Ok. So journalistically, the key points to get across here are:
- Tidal is changing its subscriptions plans
- They are now cheaper
- That’s pretty unique since literally everyone else on the planet is increasing prices, not lowering them
How would you have reported the news? Would you have done something differently?
Not.
It’s not news.
Yes, it is. It may not be interesting to you, but it is (as others said) noteworthy when a company bucks the trend of the industry.
This type of story is business journalism — it’s not world news or politics, but it’s still news. And the article isn’t as rosy as the headline — they are still upcharging for the HiFi service if you used the DJ Integration feature (no idea what this is, I don’t use Tidal), and they’re axing military and first responder discounts.
business journalism
for when you want to legitimize your advertising
I would not have reported this advertisement as news. The thing I would have done differently is not be a shill.
So you’re talking out of your ass. Got it
Funny, I feel the same way.
Hey, at least we agree on something lol
You also feel like you’re talking out of your ass?
This guy is fun at parties
Do you have anything to add that isn’t merely insulting? Like, a thought. Do you have any thoughts to share? Inside of your head. do you have any
Yea, that you’re fun at parties.
next time you have a thought
let it go
I don’t think I’m going to let mr. ”bad-take—edgy-2006-gamer-tag-name-guy” tell me what to do. So nah.
I initially upvoted this comment, but since every other comment you’ve made is weird and combative, you’ve somehow made me stop agreeing with you. It’s an odd feeling.
Hope this is rolled out to other countries and not just the US.
I’ve been using Deezer for a while, but I’ve been looking to move to something else after they absolutely mutilated their UI and actively insulted any paying customer that complained.
Tidal seems like a good choice. I just dread the day they, too, get caught up in current trend chasing and redesign their app to look like a bubbly toy to hook the kids.
Been using tidal ever since Spotify’s Joe Rogan debacle. Main reason? They actually pay the artist. But the sound quality is a nice bonus as well! No regrets…other than people trying to share music with me by sending a spotify link!
They still don’t pay the artists all that much. No streaming services do.
If you genuinely want to support artists financially, you should buy their music outright through online stores like Bandcamp or Qobuz.
It’s true, but at least half the artists I listen to I would never have found if it weren’t for streaming. Something is, after all, better than nothing.
And compared to the competition, Tidal’s payments are good:
~30% more than Apple Music (0.01c)
~300% more than Spotify (0.003 - 0.005c)
~500% more than Soundcloud (0.0025c)
~1000% more than Pandora (0.00133c)
Sure, but even 300% of a tiny amount is still a tiny amount. People shouldn’t be kidding themselves that Tidal pays artists well when the compensation is still significantly less than if you buy an artist’s music directly.
The best approach is to use both - streaming for discovery and online stores for when you find an artists you really like and want to support them financially.
If I had the money to pay for music twice I would 😅
Man fuck Joe Rogan, basic boring prick
Qobuz has the most beautiful and serious-looking UI I’ve tried, I really love it. But I had to stop using it because there is no lyrics integration and some of my favorite (admittedly obscure) music was not there. But the UI is spectacular, especially on desktop.
Tidal’s interface is simply good, nothing more and nothing less, and it’s a more mature product overall with more features
Try apple music. Also has lossless audio for the same price and has a great app, even on android and it does have a pretty good lyrics integration.
Only on non Apple Desktops it’s a bit lacking since your choice is either the ancient iTunes or the web app
I really liked Deezer a few years ago, I thought about trying it again but saw the new UI and was like wtf
I just ended up installing Deemix and moving my library to offline storage.
The headline sounded good but the article lists a lot of negatives too. They’re removing discounts for veterans/first responders, they recently laid off 10% of staff, and their price now matches Amazon and Apple. So don’t mistake this for good intention; this is just a business’ survival instincts taking over.
their price now matches Amazon and Apple
That’s a negative?
So don’t mistake this for good intention; this is just a business’ survival instincts taking over.
A business made a business decision, yes. Your point?
I read the email from Tidal four times and still didn’t believe they weren’t trying to fuck me over. Well, I’ll be damned.
As far as I can tell, I’m actually in the vast minority in that I use the service on a family plan and with my DJ gear. Streaming for DJs is being removed from family plans and it now requires me to pay for an individual plan + $9 a month in addition to what I’m already paying for the wife and kids, so I’m thinking about canning it.
Tidal may not be the best streamer. It certainly does have its faults. But so do the others mentioned in these comments. For a subscription service to halve their rate is really unheard of. I appreciate it. This is really the type of pricing movement we need after so many years of out of control inflation. I wish Amazon, Disney, and Netflix would do something similar rather than endless cost increases without any improvement in services.
I worry because like every streaming service they’ve slowly been reducing the amount they pay artists. How can they halve customer fees and not pay artists less?
My guess is that they’ve realized that nobody subscribed to the highest tier, so they’ve incorporated its features into the normal tier, hoping to make it up in volume (I.e. new people subscribing because it’s cheap and it offers more than Spotify). So perhaps they are going to be able to pay artists the same rates
As far as I can tell, I’m actually in the vast minority in that I use the service on a family plan and with my DJ gear. Streaming for DJs is being removed from family plans and it now requires me to pay for an individual plan + $9 a month in addition to what I’m already paying for the wife and kids, so I’m thinking about canning it.
I wish it was getting cheaper…I’ve been @ $6.35/month for their CD FLAC quality middle tier, with my veteran discount for a few years.
Has been perfect for my budget HiFi setup.
Now it’s nearly doubling in cost, and they won’t have the discount anymore…
Any variation of “yep, you read that right” makes me instantly not care, idk
It does sound clickbait-y and I guess that’s why there are butthurt people in the comments. I guess its meaning is “literally everyone is raising prices, while Tidal is lowering them”. TBF I also had to read the title again because it’s pretty strange to see prices decrease
I mean good on tidal for doing that, no hate towards them.
Is there a word for the opposite of enshitification?
Deshitification
Actually this is a good deal. Curation on tidal is good, meaning they have cool playlists handpicked by people. In the past when I used it it was with questionable MQA encoding, which had a lot of controversy. But 24/192khz flac, If you care about audio quality is a better offer than Qobuz.
Can’t go wrong for the price. But I think the main driver should be audio quality. Because FLAC files (esp 24/192khz) can be very data hungry, for those who use it mobile only. So you need to be careful with that. You can use lower sample rates and higher bitrate mp3 as well if my memory serves well. But that defeats a bit the purpose of what Tidal stands for
But 24-bit audio is useless for playback. The difference is literally inaudible. In fact, the application of dynamic range compression during the mixing/mastering process has a far greater impact on perceptible audio quality than sample rate or bitrate does (the placebo effect notwithstanding).
If you care about audio quality, seek out album masters and music that is well-recorded and not dynamically crushed to oblivion. The bitrate isn’t really all that important, in the greater scheme of things.
I partially agree with you. Yes mixing and mastering is far more important than bitrate. However if I let my gf listen to a identical song both in normal 16/44khz and 24 bit version, she can hear difference. Now is it night and day ? Not always, but subtle Improvement can matter when enjoying music.
Literally the only difference between 16 bit and 24 bit is that the latter has a lower noise floor, which is really only useful for sound production - It doesn’t translate to any increase in meaningful detail or dynamic range when dealing with playback.
16-bit was chosen as the defacto standard for CDs and digital music precisely because it contains more than enough dynamic range for human hearing.
Any difference your gf hears is due to the placebo effect rather than any inherent difference in the actual audio.
That writeup from Xiph is excellent. The comparison with adding ultraviolet and infrared to video makes so much sense. But you’re dealing with audiophiles who seriously consider getting hi-end power and ethernet cables. I read somewhere that there was a listening test with speakers connected with hanger wire - and audiophiles couldn’t tell.
In the end, it’s all physics. I could never hear a quality improvement beyond normal 16bit, 320kbps, no matter how demanding the music.
As a recovering audiophile, I can safely say the hobby is heavily based around FOMO (the nagging doubt that something, somewhere, in your audio chain is causing a loss of audio quality), and digital audio is no exception. Not only is 320kbps more than enough, even with $1000s worth of equipment, but with codecs more efficient than MP3 (especially Opus), even 128kbps can be good enough to sound identical to lossless.
If you have plenty of local storage then 16-bit FLAC is ideal, but if you are just streaming then you really don’t need a lossless service except to keep the FOMO at bay.
Anyone who has ever heard a 128kbps mp3 side-by-side with a 320kbps (or really anything above 192kbps in my experience) version can tell you that bitrate definitely matters. The better audio equipment you play it through, the more noticeable it is.
It definitely becomes inaudible at a certain point, but back in my CD ripping days, I’d scoff at anything below 192kbps
Have you ever done an actual double blind listening test? You’d be surprised. Even with good listening equipment it can be very challenging.
Have a go on the 128 kbps AAC test on this page and see how you do:
I have, yes.
Presumably it was using an older/outdated codec then. With modern encoders, especially with codecs like Opus, Ogg, and Apple’s AAC, the vast majority of listeners find 128kbps to be transparent, and certainly nowhere near night-and-day when compared to lossless.
Check out the results of this public listening test here:
Tidal is still around? I’m impressed
Maybe I would consider paying for tidal but as I am pirating YT music thought ReVanced I think I wouldn’t, so good luck anyway.
Spotify really beats everyone at cricket noises when responding to competitors.
