Tidal: The Test, Can you really hear a difference?

Odyssey

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
643
Location
Austin, TX & Suburban Chicago
TIDAL · High Fidelity Test

If you are play this thru you computer audio into your system be sure and use Chrome. It supports lossless.

I took the test only listening to each song once and got 3 out of 5 right. What the....??

Are my ears that old?

I took the test a second time listening to each track a couple of times and got 4 out of 5 right. But it wasn't a lead pipe cinch. Felt I was guessing on a couple of tracks. It seems I was keying on some musical artifacts to make some decisions. I had to zero in on some instruments to make my determination instead of the overall feel of the music.

Is it worth it if you can't easily tell the difference effortlessly?

Can you tell the difference? Be honest...:audiophile:
 
It seems I was keying on some musical artifacts to make some decisions. I had to zero in on some instruments to make my determination instead of the overall feel of the music.

You have done the right thing.
The difference between high bitrate MP3 and CD is exactly in the tiny distortions you noticed.
"Feel", "Soundstage" etc. forget it, the devil is indeed in details
BTW: if you do hear this tiny artifact you do have a acute hearing
 
The TIDAL Test was shown to be tampered with..


here is the adjusted versionABX High Fidelity Test à la Tidal

Quick background- Tidal put out an A-B, Blind test for listeners to decide if they could tell the difference. Well the internet being the internet, there was a discrepancy found in the original test.

So some one had to fix it..


Also.. This is a test, it is only a test.

You can choose to do 5, 10, or 20 trials of each track, and if you do 10 or 20 trials it will give you per-track results as well as overall results (as p < .01, p < .05, etc.).

There can be a bit of glitching when switching between A, B and X. Unfortunately thats just a limitation of the Web Audio API. It's worth reading the instructions - there are hotkeys for everything so you don't need to be clicking buttons with your mouse (and so can have your eyes closed and concentrate)

.
Also, FireFox and Chrome only.

If you want to try this at home with Foobar2000 or some other player here are the test tracks.

http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/blake_30.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/blake_30_lossy.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/daftpunk_30.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/daftpunk_30_lossy.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/dixiechicks_30.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/dixiechicks_30_lossy.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/eagles_30.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/eagles_30_lossy.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/killers_30.flac
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/tracks/corrected/killers_30_lossy.flac[/QUOTE]
 
I'm in the same boat too Odyssey, at 320kbs with a good encoder I can hardly (if at all) identify differences. Maybe if I really concentrated instead of the more cursory comparisons I have made but I don't really see the point. Anyhow my test failed on the 4th song so I never did get to see my results...
 
I'm in the same boat too Odyssey, at 320kbs with a good encoder I can hardly (if at all) identify differences. Maybe if I really concentrated instead of the more cursory comparisons I have made but I don't really see the point. Anyhow my test failed on the 4th song so I never did get to see my results...

Thanks for your honesty. At least I'm not the only one who thinks I'm going deaf! :bonkers:
 
I r confuzzled.

Are they really using two FLAC files for A/B comparison purposes?
 
I r confuzzled.

Are they really using two FLAC files for A/B comparison purposes?

Yes, same encoding(flac), different qualities. Can you tell the difference between them?

Basically, you have to answer correctly with repeatability on several trials of the songs. Chances are you may not be familiar with the tracks. Which is a limitation.

The human voice and unamplifed instruments are what you should focus on.
 
Well Bill, I'll be straight up with you. To me, those samples sound identical to one another. While I'd love nothing more than to blame my shitty sounding iMac and my Harbeth loudspeakers that roll off at 15kHz for my inability to definitively tell which track is which, the truth is that they sound pretty similar to me. If this is Tidal's way of convincing the masses that their service is preserving the musical experience - methinks it's not a very good one.
 
TIDAL · High Fidelity Test

I took the test a second time listening to each track a couple of times and got 4 out of 5 right. But it wasn't a lead pipe cinch. Felt I was guessing on a couple of tracks. It seems I was keying on some musical artifacts to make some decisions. I had to zero in on some instruments to make my determination instead of the overall feel of the music.

Is it worth it if you can't easily tell the difference effortlessly?

Have you tried listening effortlessly? Listening to music is a complex work that the conscious mind doesn't master. We can focus on this or that, but that always mean we're missing on everything else. We perceive things that we can't isolate. So sometimes we can't pinpoint the difference between A and B, but we go back to A and never to B, and that's as objective an indication as anything.
 
Well Bill, I'll be straight up with you. To me, those samples sound identical to one another. While I'd love nothing more than to blame my shitty sounding iMac and my Harbeth loudspeakers that roll off at 15kHz for my inability to definitively tell which track is which, the truth is that they sound pretty similar to me. If this is Tidal's way of convincing the masses that their service is preserving the musical experience - methinks it's not a very good one.

Okay, now that you have done the tests.. I think it's just a test and the truth is anyone can tell the difference. This test is not sufficient to evaluate songs that were originally FLAC Uncompressed then Compressed to AAC Files (Removal of information) and that have been converted back to FLAC Files.

Why?

  • The tracks aren't sufficient for evaluation. Any number of us will pipe up with their reference track and will confirm that when the file goes through the uncompressed, compressed, convert "wash" that they will notice a difference. Link here to what the stuff sounds like that is tossed.
  • The A/B test does not account for changes over time. In other words, buy a brand of coffee, same flavor. Drink that coffee for 14 days without switching. Then switch to a known regular brand and flavor. You will tell a difference. This effect is also present when I listen to My Computer based music exclusively and then switch to records. There is an "ah" and an "ah ha" moment there too. I ebb and flow between the two but both are very pleasing. This month I'm on Keurig Vue 100% Fair Trade colombian organic coffee (not bad for the DRM or MP3 of coffee).
  • Lasty, the trials take a good amount of time and there is much repitition. The test in itself turned me off to The Eagles- I can't even listen to that track anymore!

I would not get worried about this test. I posted it to share that Tidal came up a way to measure, however we are not measuring everything or the whole story.

That said, I am still not sure Tidal is worth $20. I am still a subscriber. I use it for demo'ing albums that I may or may not purchase. I use a value calculation too. It's $20/(the number of songs I listen to, minus the tracks that I listen to more than once) >= $20/(the number of songs from used CD I can buy on amazon). What's not in there is managing ripping, metadata, and storage- that process has value (very little of it!). I record the tracks I listen to through last.fm (it's built into the App or use Sonos). Another value, is that Tidal provides an excellent way to discover music at the highest bitrates. So again, I am undecided and I keep consuming music at increased rates on streaming and physical copies (CD and LP).

Here's another curious point, http://roonlabs.com/ <-This company is going to take Tidal's Metadata and combine it with AllMusic | Music Search, Recommendations, Videos and Reviews 's into a Merdian sooloos/Digital music system -like interface.

Demo 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dlawHfO8sM
Demo 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmf00DrTak4

Thoughts?
 
My take away is this: How do I know the test is not skewered one way or another?
How do I know the test really represents what Tidal offers?
How do I know what the source of the tracks are on Tidal? As we know you can’t take a highly compressed file, convert it into FLAC or lossless WAV or any other lossless format and expect to get the data back that was lost in the first compression. It’s like cooking, you can add seasoning and such, but you can’t take away. In other words, it’s a one way street.

I’m sure Tidal sounds good, but personally, if I’m using streaming to discover and audition new music or the like with the intent of maybe or maybe not purchasing it on a format I prefer for listening (LP or CD in my case), I don’t necessarily need to worry much about having the very best sound quality, just decent will do the job. Then is Tidal worth it verses say, Spotify for example? Answer = No.
If I use streaming as a main source of listening and if Tidal really offers superior sound quality to Spotify and the rest then the answer would be yes, Tidal is worth it, no doubt about it.

Just my personal take on it, the mileage of all others will vary.
 
My take away is this: How do I know the test is not skewered one way or another?
How do I know the test really represents what Tidal offers?
How do I know what the source of the tracks are on Tidal? As we know you can’t take a highly compressed file, convert it into FLAC or lossless WAV or any other lossless format and expect to get the data back that was lost in the first compression. It’s like cooking, you can add seasoning and such, but you can’t take away. In other words, it’s a one way street.

I’m sure Tidal sounds good, but personally, if I’m using streaming to discover and audition new music or the like with the intent of maybe or maybe not purchasing it on a format I prefer for listening (LP or CD in my case), I don’t necessarily need to worry much about having the very best sound quality, just decent will do the job. Then is Tidal worth it verses say, Spotify for example? Answer = No.
If I use streaming as a main source of listening and if Tidal really offers superior sound quality to Spotify and the rest then the answer would be yes, Tidal is worth it, no doubt about it.

Just my personal take on it, the mileage of all others will vary.

Hi MusicDirector, good comments, sought to answer your questions since I felt others could be asking the same thing.

"How do I know the test is not skewered one way or another?" We know that the original test is skewed here: ABX High Fidelity Test à la Tidal

"How do I know the test really represents what Tidal offers?" I know because Tidal provides the test tracks.

"How do I know what the source of the tracks are on Tidal?" We do not know the provenance of all Tidal's library, so no special masters unless specified, see here https://listen.tidalhifi.com/album/1381759


Do these answers change your viewpoint?
 
Hi MusicDirector, good comments, sought to answer your questions since I felt others could be asking the same thing.

"How do I know the test is not skewered one way or another?" We know that the original test is skewed here: ABX High Fidelity Test à la Tidal

"How do I know the test really represents what Tidal offers?" I know because Tidal provides the test tracks.

"How do I know what the source of the tracks are on Tidal?" We do not know the provenance of all Tidal's library, so no special masters unless specified, see here https://listen.tidalhifi.com/album/1381759


Do these answer change your viewpoint?

Hi Bill,

Thanks. Do these answers change my viewpoint? No, they confirm it. I take the balanced viewpoint. Personally, for the way I use streaming service at this time, Tidal would not be worth it to me. Now, should Tidal come into it's own and be able to honestly just basically specify the provenance to most of their library and I obtain a decent outboard dac and change my usage habits of streaming audio, then my viewpoint would change. I don't see the first item happening anytime in future though and it's still up in the air as to whether or not Tidal will survive the next 12 months or change to a strictly rap/hip hop and pop diet (somewhat doubt that bit, but you never know) or be sold to Apple or go under.
 
I’m sure Tidal sounds good, but personally, if I’m using streaming to discover and audition new music or the like with the intent of maybe or maybe not purchasing it on a format I prefer for listening (LP or CD in my case), I don’t necessarily need to worry much about having the very best sound quality, just decent will do the job. Then is Tidal worth it verses say, Spotify for example? Answer = No.
If I use streaming as a main source of listening and if Tidal really offers superior sound quality to Spotify and the rest then the answer would be yes, Tidal is worth it, no doubt about it.

Just my personal take on it, the mileage of all others will vary.

I use both Tidal and Spotify. Both are offered at $9.99/mo for the same quality of compression. (yes, $20 for "HiFi*".) I think the social media and friend factor on Spotify is great. The curated playlists on Tidal are the best out of all the media streamers- even better than Google Play Music. Why, because they have artist and music critics create these lists, which have an edge over the ones you find elsewhere because of the amount of thought and experience that goes into these playlists.

*Just because a little Hifi Logo lights up, do we really know it's at CD Bit-Rate?

Hi Bill,

Thanks. Do these answers change my viewpoint? No, they confirm it. I take the balanced viewpoint. Personally, for the way I use streaming service at this time, Tidal would not be worth it to me. Now, should Tidal come into it's own and be able to honestly just basically specify the provenance... snip

Did you see this? https://listen.tidalhifi.com/album/1381759 This speaks to the provenance of the recording there are several other like it and you can freely search their catalog.

.... to most of their library and I obtain a decent outboard dac and change my usage habits of streaming audio, then my viewpoint would change. I don't see the first item happening anytime in future though and it's still up in the air as to whether or not Tidal will survive the next 12 months or change to a strictly rap/hip hop and pop diet (somewhat doubt that bit, but you never know) or be sold to Apple or go under.

I don't know where the DAC came into the thought process, but yes a good DAC makes a difference.

I appreciate your personal taste and there is no discussion to your opinion and personal preferences. Still, I think you are making assumptions without experimenting or listening for yourself. There is a free trial on everyone one of the streaming services. I do encourage all to demo, see if you like or not like and tell the community here what your opinion is. I could go either way at this point. (Currently experimenting with JRMC for MAC.)

Bill
 
Sorry I don’t understand how to use the multi-quote thing.
Anyway, so Tidal is now $10/month for 320kps MP3 or $20/month for lossless? I thought that choice was still in the works and they had not yet rolled it out. I don’t really have issue with the cost $10 or $20 by itself anyway.

I don’t care about social media one iota. I don’t partake in it unless you count forums then I’m good for one. I also have no use for curated playlists. I do my own curation and discovery on my own rather well, thank you. (You don’t spend a few years in radio as library clerk, then move up to Music Director and Associate Producer and come out clueless). To those whom don’t DIY it in this regard, I can see the value of that.
As to the HiFi logo, the same can be said for Spotify Premium (which I currently subscribe to). Just because it says “premium” in the corner how do we now it isn’t 256kps or less? Anyway, it’s next to impossible to tell the difference between 256kps and 320kps with our ears. Once you have lost data, that’s it, it doesn’t matter the rate. (By the way, I used to subscribe to MOG and ran fast and far when Beats bought them. I saw the writing on the wall and I was right on that one).

Thanks for the link. I did not see that. I’ll try to find the time to read it. I also want to find the time to search the Tidal catalog and compare it to Spotify’s in depth.

The DAC comes in for me personally because my PCs both have sound issues. My desktop has a high-end internal soundcard that is not worth a crap because I mostly hear the hard drive, fans, etc. It is my understanding that an outboard DAC between the soundcard and speakers will solve that issue. My laptop’s soundcard…well, how good is a laptop soundcard? (Not very good). I also don’t like using my PCs as sources as there is too much going on in the background with various processes and such which I believe degrades the music.

The “free trial” for Tidal is not so good. Seven days is not enough time unless your home 24/7 and cancel it if you don’t want the service at least 3 to 4 days in advance so your card doesn’t get charged. That is unless they have changed their trial offer as well, I’d be curious to know. I’ll take a look when I get the chance to search their library, since I’ll be there anyway.

I am not doubting that Tidal sounds good, but I also don’t know where Tidal will be going since mister rapper dude bought them. I like to see where things will end up sort of before climbing on board. I only joined Spotify two years ago if that gives you any indication of how I go. The only real assumptions I feel I am really making is based on my personal usage habits of streaming audio and current ability to use it, not completely on sound quality. First of all I would not be able to tell the difference between the $10 version and the $20 version or between Spotify and HiFi Tidal without a good DAC. (I have discussed this with Tidal reps who told me that very thing). I do not have an outboard DAC and I don’t know when or if I will be able to afford one.
I also don’t really want to use streaming audio as a listening source. I use it strictly for discovery and research or occasionally for background (not paying much attention). I also don’t have a convenient way of listening to it as I won’t ever be able to afford a streaming device like those four digit jobs flying around here.

~Eric
 
Here's what originally confuzzled me: Tidal is claiming to offer CD-quality streaming. A big part of their 'shtick' revolves around this selling point. So when I read that, I automatically assume that when you buy into Tidal's premium "Hi-Fi" service, you'll be listening to the same exact .WAV files that are on the retail discs. A straight up mirrored copy of the original file. Sure that approach would soak up lots of bandwidth, but it's the price we pay for quality, right? Well that, and apparently $20 a month.

So you could imagine my surprise when I learn that their A/B test - which is not only designed to help sell their product, but also represents their very credo - fails to utilize either a .WAV file or the mp3/ogg files that their competitors use. I mean, what the actual lump? Am I missing something here?
 
Sorry I don’t understand how to use the multi-quote thing.
Anyway, so Tidal is now $10/month for 320kps MP3 or $20/month for lossless? I thought that choice was still in the works and they had not yet rolled it out. I don’t really have issue with the cost $10 or $20 by itself anyway.

I don’t care about social media one iota. I don’t partake in it unless you count forums then I’m good for one. I also have no use for curated playlists. I do my own curation and discovery on my own rather well, thank you. (You don’t spend a few years in radio as library clerk, then move up to Music Director and Associate Producer and come out clueless). To those whom don’t DIY it in this regard, I can see the value of that.
As to the HiFi logo, the same can be said for Spotify Premium (which I currently subscribe to). Just because it says “premium” in the corner how do we now it isn’t 256kps or less? Anyway, it’s next to impossible to tell the difference between 256kps and 320kps with our ears. Once you have lost data, that’s it, it doesn’t matter the rate. (By the way, I used to subscribe to MOG and ran fast and far when Beats bought them. I saw the writing on the wall and I was right on that one).

Thanks for the link. I did not see that. I’ll try to find the time to read it. I also want to find the time to search the Tidal catalog and compare it to Spotify’s in depth.

The DAC comes in for me personally because my PCs both have sound issues. My desktop has a high-end internal soundcard that is not worth a crap because I mostly hear the hard drive, fans, etc. It is my understanding that an outboard DAC between the soundcard and speakers will solve that issue. My laptop’s soundcard…well, how good is a laptop soundcard? (Not very good). I also don’t like using my PCs as sources as there is too much going on in the background with various processes and such which I believe degrades the music.

The “free trial” for Tidal is not so good. Seven days is not enough time unless your home 24/7 and cancel it if you don’t want the service at least 3 to 4 days in advance so your card doesn’t get charged. That is unless they have changed their trial offer as well, I’d be curious to know. I’ll take a look when I get the chance to search their library, since I’ll be there anyway.

I am not doubting that Tidal sounds good, but I also don’t know where Tidal will be going since mister rapper dude bought them. I like to see where things will end up sort of before climbing on board. I only joined Spotify two years ago if that gives you any indication of how I go. The only real assumptions I feel I am really making is based on my personal usage habits of streaming audio and current ability to use it, not completely on sound quality. First of all I would not be able to tell the difference between the $10 version and the $20 version or between Spotify and HiFi Tidal without a good DAC. (I have discussed this with Tidal reps who told me that very thing). I do not have an outboard DAC and I don’t know when or if I will be able to afford one.
I also don’t really want to use streaming audio as a listening source. I use it strictly for discovery and research or occasionally for background (not paying much attention). I also don’t have a convenient way of listening to it as I won’t ever be able to afford a streaming device like those four digit jobs flying around here.

~Eric

Eric- Excellent comments! Yes there is a tiered version, but there is no free-ad supported version of Tidal.

You personal preference and experience speak volumes to your character and I completely understand your viewpoint.

I agree 7 Days on and off is not enough, what is enough 31 days? or 7 Days at 4-6hrs a day?

Great resources here to buy an excellent external DAC. I am sure David Solomon, Tidal, would know best. I'm not trying to sway you either way. I am pointing to: In areas where we are passionate about, of course we should figure things out ourselves and come to our own conclusions.

Bill
 
You won't find a WAV file on a CD, its format is CD-DA.
Although the content is uncompressed PCM just like WAV or AIFF it won't play on your PC.
If you don't believe this, drag the content from a CD to your HD and check if it plays :)

Tidal doesn't claim it streams WAV. It claims to stream lossless audio.
If they stream e.g. FLAC (lossless compression) their claim is correct.
 
Eric- Excellent comments! Yes there is a tiered version, but there is no free-ad supported version of Tidal.

You personal preference and experience speak volumes to your character and I completely understand your viewpoint.

I agree 7 Days on and off is not enough, what is enough 31 days? or 7 Days at 4-6hrs a day?

Great resources here to buy an excellent external DAC. I am sure David Solomon, Tidal, would know best. I'm not trying to sway you either way. I am pointing to: In areas where we are passionate about, of course we should figure things out ourselves and come to our own conclusions.

Bill

I personally don't feel the need for an ad supported version in on-demand streaming services, but that's just me.
Well, with most people having busy schedules and not working from home 7 days is clearly not enough. 30 days would be more than sufficient in my book. That way one has at least 2 to 3 weeks to evaluate and can cancel in time if the service doesn't fit their needs or desires without worrying about hassle with card charges and auto-subscriptions.

Well, lots of names here of 4 digit dacs to look into, but none for non-audiophiles like myself. A DAC is something I do need to work on soon though, but that's a whole other show as they say.
 
Back
Top