Spotify to offer Lossless Streaming

[garym]

Ogg/FLAC? Given that they are not (apparently) considering HD might be doable at 16/44.1 on existing hardware.
Chromecast, Airplay etc devices are all capable enough.

wasn't the original RadioParadise flac stream actually an Ogg/FLAC stream? (whether that matters, I have no idea)

[d6jg]

wasn't the original RadioParadise flac stream actually an Ogg/FLAC stream? (whether that matters, I have no idea)

My (currently on pause) radio station had an Ogg/FLAC stream with metadata. It wasn’t difficult to put together. The technical issue was with the player software that delivered the stream to the encoder which would crash for no apparent reason.
The non technical issue is copyright in a key area.

[pablolie]

So sue me but I am perfectly happy with the SQ of the current 320k stream. Plenty of listening tests out there show how hard it is to tell the difference between 320k/CD quality/HighRez. There are preciously few albums that are recorded with the required resolution, and even when you're very familiar with them you have to listen to artifacts to be able to tell, and that's with an amount of artificial focus for detail that completely kills the fun of listening to the music. And anyone that claims they can hear additional detail and "airiness" when listening to the 24/192 version of Bill Evans' 1962 "Waltz for Debby" was dropped on their head from a third floor as a baby, really. :-)

I know I go against the fashionable "CD quality sucks" these days, but the whole thing about the combined obsession of HighRez with vinyl addiction to boot is laughable, sorry if I offend anyone.

I spend time curating my collection and playlists, and little time obsessing over whether the castanets in Rodriguez' Concierto de Aranjuez sound ever so slightly more present in 320k or in the recently discovered 1968 mastertape hidden in a deceased Decca executive's secret closet... :-D

[garym]

So sue me but I am perfectly happy with the SQ of the current 320k stream. Plenty of listening tests out there show how hard it is to tell the difference between 320k/CD quality/HighRez. There are preciously few albums that are recorded with the required resolution, and even when you're very familiar with them you have to listen to artifacts to be able to tell, and that's with an amount of artificial focus for detail that completely kills the fun of listening to the music. And anyone that claims they can hear additional detail and "airiness" when listening to the 24/192 version of Bill Evans' 1962 "Waltz for Debby" was dropped on their head from a third floor as a baby, really. :-)

I know I go against the fashionable "CD quality sucks" these days, but the whole thing about the combined obsession of HighRez with vinyl addiction to boot is laughable, sorry if I offend anyone.

I spend time curating my collection and playlists, and little time obsessing over whether the castanets in Roderiguez' Concierto de Aranjuez sound ever so slightly more present in 320k or in the recently discovered 1968 mastertape hidden in a deceased Decca executive's secret closet... :-D

I couldn’t agree more.

[kidstypike]

I couldn’t agree more.

+1

[d6jg]

+1

Generally I am also +1
But, don’t shout at me, I listen a lot using my iPhone, an Audioquest Dragonfly and a pair of B&W P7s. I can tell a 320kbps mp3 from a FLAC and very occasionally I can detect a HiRes FLAC.
However I am not going to replace all my ripped CDs with 24bit downloads despite the music industry dangling the “deluxe” edition with new tracks as the carrot. I do still buy Vinyl but I’ve stopped buying CDs since I signed up with Qobuz and Michael introduced Online Music Library Integration. My wife thanks you Michael.

[garym]

Generally I am also +1
But, don’t shout at me, I listen a lot using my iPhone, an Audioquest Dragonfly and a pair of B&W P7s. I can tell a 320kbps mp3 from a FLAC and very occasionally I can detect a HiRes FLAC.
However I am not going to replace all my ripped CDs with 24bit downloads despite the music industry dangling the “deluxe” edition with new tracks as the carrot. I do still buy Vinyl but I’ve stopped buying CDs since I signed up with Qobuz and Michael introduced Online Music Library Integration. My wife thanks you Michael.

No shouting on this forum. My favorite forum for getting along with everyone! Regarding transparency of different codecs, In the distant past, I did some ABX (double blind) tests of lossless vs various flavors of mp3 (320kbps down to 64kbps I recall). I found most things transparent down to 192kbps (for most normal music). Certain known problem samples where one could focus on harpsichord, piano, etc. I could detect. Otherwise my choices turned out to be random guesses. But getting lower than about 160kbps I could more often tell the lossless vs the lossy. But even at 128kbps, certain "rock/pop" music was not reliably different from lossless for me. Below 128, I found it easier and easier, not unexpectedly.

I rip all my CDs to FLAC, because why not. I purchase hi-res files when that's all that's available, but not because I think they are better. I hate the fact that the Neil Young download store only seems to offer 24/192. Just bought the new "Down in the Rust Bucket" album today, and would have gladly purchased 16/44.1 if it had been available.

[d6jg]

No shouting on this forum. My favorite forum for getting along with everyone! Regarding transparency of different codecs, In the distant past, I did some ABX (double blind) tests of lossless vs various flavors of mp3 (320kbps down to 64kbps I recall). I found most things transparent down to 192kbps (for most normal music). Certain known problem samples where one could focus on harpsichord, piano, etc. I could detect. Otherwise my choices turned out to be random guesses. But getting lower than about 160kbps I could more often tell the lossless vs the lossy. But even at 128kbps, certain "rock/pop" music was not reliably different from lossless for me. Below 128, I found it easier and easier, not unexpectedly.

I rip all my CDs to FLAC, because why not. I purchase hi-res files when that's all that's available, but not because I think they are better. I hate the fact that the Neil Young download store only seems to offer 24/192. Just bought the new "Down in the Rust Bucket" album today, and would have gladly purchased 16/44.1 if it had been available.

I do think a lot of it is subjective but it’s appropriate that pablolie mentions Concierto as the Miles Davis version on Sketches of Spain is where I really heard the difference. SWMBO had bought me a pair of B&WP7’s a few Christmas’s ago and one of the first things I listened to with them was a 320kbps mp3 rip of Sketches of Spain. I heard stuff I’d not heard before - a xylophone deep in the left channel. The following day I re-ripped the CD to FLAC and I swear I heard it more clearly. At that point I decided to re-rip all my CDs to FLAC and to redo any Vinyl rips I’d already done as mp3 to FLAC instead. I’ve done all the CDS but I’ve still got 50 odd LPs to redo.

[TomAmes]

+1 as well

But I pity Michael for having to deal with the likely oncoming demands for what may be a Herculean task. As much credit as Michael gets here, it still is not enough imo.

[d6jg]

Likewise I expect there will be a clamour to get Spotify lossless on board but as far as I am concerned they have missed the boat. Unless it’s massively cheaper (unlikely) and fully supported here (as you say down to Michael) why would I want the hassle of transferring my library from one to other?