Qobuz.

I too was as hopeful as the rest for Qobuz USA. And then I tried the beta trial.

For me the subjective improvement in sound quality isn’t enough to overcome the objective shortfalls: the native app UX & function, the web app UX & function, their catalog gaps, the metadata misses, the weirdo curation, etc. All of that and for +$5/mo. more than the kinda-comparable Tidal "HiFi" plan. Tidal has its issues for sure - like I said in a earlier post it ain’t quite a race to the bottom, but it’s close. It’s just that for now, Qobuz wins that race.

I’ll stay with Tidal. Maybe later, after Qobuz sorts ’le merde’.

I haven't yet directly compared SQ of Tidal MQA against 24 bit Qobuz but I did prefer 24 bit files on my drive to Tidal MQA using Roon to do the first unfold. I am quite certain I do not want, much less need, MQA. Pretty sure I will cancel Tidal and pay for Qobuz subscription.

 

The only thing that gives me pause is the ~30 titles in my library on Tidal but not Qobuz. Some are obscrure artists but others are more mainstream (eg, John Prine, Josh Ritter). I am hoping Qobuz will get many of these titles as they move out of beta. But I think I will just buy many of these files rather than keep paying Tidal.

I was a Tidal subscriber, and am now using the Qobuz trial.

I find the sound quality on Qobuz to be superior to Tidal.  However, >50% of the time, I'm not able to find titles (jazz, electronic) that I find on other services.

So for me, I'll probably not renew Qobuz for the time being.  I'm assuming (hoping) that the catalog will only grow (it is offered as beta), so I expect to check-in again.

My Qobuz trial was up tomorrow, decided to "take the plunge" and sign up for a year of the hi-res streaming plan.  I find that they have a better selection of classical music and the search for that is a little better than Tidal.  I'll be keeping Tidal, using it and Qobuz with my Roon subscription.

Qobuz has more bodies than Tidal MQA. But the Qobuz App beta is difficult to look compare to Tidal. Lack of App on Apple TV and Oppo 105, 204 player is another draw back. Tidal HiFi/MQA has $9.99 price discount for student and Sprint customer. I would say Tidal wins so far.

Meats, I'm with you. When it's not stopping or locking up or having to put your audio info in every time you start it up, yeah it sounds great. But I'm a jazz guy and the stuff I'm looking for I search for. Sometimes it shows up sometimes it doesn't. Until their whole catalog is there, whats the point of great sound if there is nothing you want to hear. I'll come back in a couple of month's and check it out. Until then, Spotify. More music then I know what to do with. For me it's more about the music. 

Have been using Qobuz for three weeks. The high res is better than 24/96 MQA (my dac is not MQA) in most cases. I've had no trouble with skipping or lock up using windows app. I do find that Qobuz is lacking in many areas of Jazz in regard to Tidal. They are almost even for all of the usual suspects, but on many lesser names they are way behind. They claim that they do not have there entire catalog available as of yet, licencing issues perhaps. I will give them a few months to get this squared away before I dump Tidal.

By the end of the week I'll be thru my month's trial of Qobuz and will need to decide if I'll buy a membership.  I'm leaning to do so and to also keep my Tidal account as well.

I do enjoy many (but not all of the) MQA masters on Tidal.  If there's anything that doesn't sound "right" to me, it's that many of them seem to have accentuated the bass.

When I've compared the sound of "regular" CD quality albums, Tidal vs. Qobuz, using the same Windows machine, same USB connection to the same DAC, the only difference is the Tidal vs. Qobuz app to do the playback, I must say I believe that the sound quality on Qobuz is slightly superior (i.e. a little better clarity, sound stage, stereo image), not a "day and night" difference, but it does seem to be better with Qobuz.

I have both Tidal and Qobuz at the moment. 

Comparing 24/96 Qobuz and Tidal MQA unfolded to 24/96, both sound good but different. For certain tracks, vocals seem to have more body and are more present on Tidal than Qobuz. For certain tracks, Qobuz seems to have a wider soundstage and better at micro details. On balance, I slightly prefer the sound quality of Tidal. 

At this point, I might stick with Tidal since I find the interface more intuitive (probably since I've been using it longer and prefer the black background) and music selection better aligns with mine. It's not a strong preference and I could be convinced either way. I do find the option of not having to get an MQA DAC a very big plus for Qobuz. 

@jond Thanks. I plan to try it soon, probably go with the sublime package.

beetlemania I just clicked on a random album in the Quobuz store Mini Mansions.....A Guy Walks Into a Bar and the CD version $12.99 hi-rez $14.99 but hi-rez with the sublime streaming package $7.49. Quite a nice savings! The Sublime Tier is $299.99 per year. It's basically the same monthly rate at the Studio tier $24.99/month but you pay upfront.

Just started my trial today.  Compared to the last time I perused Tidal, there seems to be a lot more Classical available, not to mention better organized 

Here’s an honest review from someone with an MQA DAC.  I’m currently using an Aurender A10 (which I purchased in order to stream MQA tidal files).  I would like to believe that I have decent equipment that could showcase the potential differences (McIntosh preamp, 601 monoblocks, and Amati Futura speakers).  I’ve been A/B’ing the Tidal MQA files against the comparable Hi-Res files and will say that they are very close to identical for me.  Here’s what it boils down to:

Tidal - $5 cheaper/month, even though MQA is lossy - it sounds identical (to me) to the uncompressed Hi-res files from Qobuz.  The downside is that you have to have an MQA DAC to get the full potential from MQA.  

Qobuz - The biggest plus for Qobuz is that you do NOT need a specific DAC to recognize the potential of Hi-Res and It sounds ohhhh so sweet! Did I mention that they have Springsteen in Hi-Res?  I’ve been quite impressed with their Hi-Res catalog. 

If you have an MQA DAC, you will be just fine with Tidal.  If not, I would recommend Qobuz.  When all is said and done I will probably stay with  Qobuz due to the fact that I prefer their Hi-Res catalog and like the fact that I can purchase the music from them as well.

bye bye $14-25 high resolution downloads from HDTracks

I plan to switch from Tidal to Qobuz soon (I don't understand why anyone prefers MQA over true hi-rez). If I sign up for the top tier Qobuz service, what is the typical price range if I want to buy an album?

I’m in the Qobuz beta now. Observations so far:

- I *love* Hi-Res audio enough to probably stick with Qobuz over Tidal, despite:

-The lack of an Apple TV app
-Many many missing albums, not just in hi-res, but missing completely, by smaller indie artists I like. Have a lot of this on CD though, so maybe not too big a deal.
-Cannot even get the Desktop app to mount.

The bass on the hi-res files tickles my eardrums - this is listening with standard issue apple earbuds and an iPhone. I go back to CD-quality and it sounds weak. I am so happy that artists/labels have gone and produced hi-res versions of songs and albums. Some I have enjoyed so far are Neil Young (of course, but I also subscribe to his NeilYoungArchive), Wilco, Marshmello w/Bastille, the 1975, Grateful Dead.

How the heck does Qobuz sounds so much better than playing the same files thru itunes with Fidelizer ?

I think it sounds incredible.  I never knew my system could sound so good.

Classic I just got an email from Quobuz saying I may now sign up for an account. I've been a beta user for two weeks already. ;p

I can do the same with my Roon. But to get the second, and the final MQA unfold, you need a MQA DAC. So not completely MQA you are comparing, and not fair

Of course it is unfair. Qobuz is true 24/96/192 where Tidal MQA is at best upsampled(unfolded) to 24/96 or 192 if it goes there. Ive been using Qobuz for months, and most anything that you can find in MQA on Tidal can be found in a true hi res version on Qobuz.

My Roon friends report they already can sort albums and have filters for hi-res selection.

You can sort for Qobuz Hi Res in Audirvana too!

I'm still a free beta Qobuz user, but it integrates so well with Roon and the 96/24 sounds so good I'm sure to be a subscriber.  I plan to keep Tidal as well.

I just joined closed beta this week.  Looking forward to canceling my relationship with Jay Z.  Qobuz hires blows away my standard tidal.  I’m running tidal and Qobuz through aurender n10. 

I’m running both Tidal and Qobuz via Roon and preferring Qobuz more generally. UI is irrelevant due to Roon. I am finding more high res pop and rock titles with Qobuz, and both have gaps, nice to use both. Not sure whether I’ll pick one or just keep both.

@thyname,

The comparison was made between identical files of same resolution between Tidal and Qobuz, i.e. Tidal MQA 24/96kHz and Qobuz 24/96kHz. And Qobuz files sounded fuller and natural in comparison. 

The point i was trying to make is with Qobuz streaming upto 24/192kHz resolution, one doesn’t have to rely on a external MQA decoder. As is there are very fewer MQA compatiable DAC’s currently available. In contrast, most modern DAC’s regardless of price point are now capable of decoding resolution upto 24/192kHz and beyond. 

@dgarretson,

I believe the beta trial limits the access to 24/96kHz resolution files only. I don’t use Roon so you may be prevue to something I couldn’t see through my Aurender Conductor app during the trial. 

I am just glad that we have options on how we stream our favorite tunes. Qobuz is a keeper for me, bye bye $14-25 high resolution downloads from HDTracks. 

LOL!! The only 24/96 Tidal has is WITH MQA

Just today I was approved for the Qobuz beta free trial and have been poking around and comparing hi-res Qobuz to Tidal MQA streaming within Roon.  There are fewer 24/192 titles than hoped for on Qobuz, but they sound amazing and are a clear notch up from 24/96 with or without MQA.

I know @lalitk 

I can do the same with my Roon. But to get the second, and the final MQA unfold, you need a MQA DAC. So not completely MQA you are comparing, and not fair

@thyname,

That’s correct. Aurender streamers are capable of unfolding MQA encoded files.... upto 24/96kHz resolution 😉

I also liked the fact that with Qobuz I no longer need to pursue a MQA compatiable DAC.

Hmmm.... and yet you were able to compare MQA vs. Qobuz HiRes

After a month of using Qobuz, i signed up for yearly subscription at $249.00. To my ears, the Qobuz high resolution SQ easily trumps Tidal. In direct comparison between MQA 24/96kHz and Qobuz 24/96kHz files, Qobuz is superior in dynamics by a good margin.

I also liked the fact that with Qobuz I no longer need to pursue a MQA compatiable DAC.

Since i use Aurender conductor app, I experienced no issues with artist or albums search with Qobuz. 

@usery,  As a Qobuz beta tester, please report all your comments and suggestions to Qobuz.  Thanks.  

Everyone needs to report their finding to Qobuz. 

I have already reported that my Aurender N10 needs an Qobuz API so they can sort my favorite albums into artist sequence.   And, another API so my Aurender can create a tab so I can select 24/96 coded albums and 24/192 coded albums. Qobuz reports these are on the list but no time frames.  

My Roon friends report they already can sort albums and have filters for hi-res selection. 

Revised verdict:

After a few more days using Qobuz, the slightly-better-than-Tidal audio quality may not be enough to overcome the absolutely sh!tty search UX and catalog indexing. Even if Qobuz has the recordings I've painstakingly assembled in my Tidal library, if one can't find them they might as well not be there at all.  Awful, and a real disappointment.

Also continuing to find holes in the Qobuz catalog compared to Tidal - in classical recordings, of all things.

@bander

"Who is using g [sic] Qobuz and how are you finding it?"

1. Qobuz > Tidal

a. audio quality: to my ear Qobuz "Studio" is better than Tidal hifi and Master: broader dynamic/frequency range, better definition, presence, air, blah blah quack quack ... fill in favorite insipid audiophile adjectives.

b. metadata: Qobuz seems to have broader and deeper collateral data on their catalog selections. Sadly the suck UX’s in web player and Mac native app make it hard to get to (see 3a.)

c. classical catalog - though after cursory look only Qobuz marginally better than Tidal.

2. Qobuz < Tidal

a. curation (playlists, "events" etc): Tidal sets a low bar and Qobuz manages to fall under it. See 3c.

3. Qobuz == Tidal

a. both Qobuz and Tidal native Mac apps are crappy. So is Spotify’s. Not quite a race to the bottom but close. Tidal seems to have copied Spotify’s UX - apparently what’s good enough for Sweden is good enough for Norway. Too bad Qobuz chose a "light" theme as background - at least France could learn from Sweden & Norway.

b. both Qobuz and Tidal seem to have hit-n-miss catalogs. Surprised to find certain off-path classical titles in Tidal’s catalog, as well as more recordings than Qobuz from Nikhil Banerjee (greatest 20th century sitar master you’ve never heard of).

c. both have stupid, what-are-they-thinking assemblies of ’multimedia’ (music, bio’s, AV media, reviews, commentary etc). These seem more the whims of self-indulgent editors and hipsters than anything of much value to subscribers. Producing and/or licensing and curating good content is expensive (hiring experts and licensing expert material). Neither Qobuz or Tidal seem to want to spend that money. On the other hand that might price them right out of business.

4. Verdict
Ultimately audio quality wins the day for me - I’ll probly ditch Tidal after my Qobuz beta/free trial ends. French heritage also gives me some vague, grudging alliance to Qobuz. It won’t be without some PIA given the shortfalls noted above. C’est la vie.

I agree with 'cymbop' in that Qobuz, which i have been beta testing for a week,is a better alternative to Tidal in a number of ways..The hi-rez sound is, in my opinion, as good or better than MQA. The availability of so many classical albums makes it a no brainer too. The complete 'Living Stereo' group of albums is there.The site is well structured and the playlists are superb..I will be staying with it after the 1 month is over..

I've been on the US beta for a couple of weeks, listening through Roon into a PS Audio DSD.

Qobuz hi-res streaming provides the best sound quality I have ever experienced in my listening room, hands down.  We're through the looking glass now.  For $25 a month I have access to 170,000 albums in 24/96 and 24/192 quality.  

I was a big fan of Tidal MQA over normal 16/44 material, and Qobuz hi-res sounds better.  In comparison, MQA sounds a little recessed, a little crispy and brittle.  Hi-res brings all the detail and all the body.

For my musical tastes, Qobuz is missing perhaps 10% of the titles I might enjoy in Tidal.  But I could spend a lot of time exploring those 170,000 hi-res albums before I get around to missing what's not on Qobuz.

I was offered a month's trial, installed the Qobuz 64 bit Windows app on my quad core I7/16 gig Dell machine, outputting to my DAC via USB.  I also have the Tidal Windows app installed on the same machine.  I have my audio system "hard wired" to my network, with Comcast service with about 200mb down.

I find the Qobuz app is a little flaky.  Sometimes the cursor doesn't appear to select an item, like it's doing something in the background, consuming all the resources...though Windows doesn't show the processor or memory particularly busy.  Not a consistent thing, more of an occasional nuisance.  I do find their selection of classical to be better than Tidal.  And, I do like their search function to be more rewarding.

When I compare music I'm familiar with, Tidal with MQA and regular CD quality, Qobuz either running regular CD or hi-res quality, more times than not Qobuz (to me) sounds a little more "distinct", not a huge difference by any means, but noticeable.  Most of the 96/24 and 192/24 music from Qobuz is just awesome to my ears!

I'm not yet ready to commit to Qobuz, just had it for a few days, but so far I think it's a winner.  I wouldn't give up Tidal for Qobuz.

If I decide to keep Qobuz, I'll set up Roon to stream both.

Qobuz beta is running as a Roon service along with Tidal on our mac-mini.

Thanks @dmackta !

But how do you know?

Hey @thyname the US service catalog is not complete. The labels you are looking will be live some time in February. 

Lots of reviews about Quoboz and the fact it will work with Roon at the Daily Audiophile site. Getting positive reviews.
David Pritchard

The issue with Qobuz is that it’s missing a lot of albums. Especially in the Alternative/ Indie / Folk / Americana/ Metal genres. Many smaller US labels are missing completely.

32 of my Tidal favorites (albums) are missing, plus many additional albums I browse from my favorites.

As much as I like to cancel Tidal, and keep Qobuz, I am afraid as it stands now, I will stay with Tidal. Cannot keep them both

@dbphd sorry for the delayed response.  In both cases, using the Ethernet render built into the QX5 and using the Aurender and streaming via USB, Qobuz sounds better than Tidal.  In fact, I just cancelled my Tidal membership. 

David that's great I haven't messed around with the app really yet, using the Lightning DS app at home but looking forward to checking it out and exploring more. I haven't decided to cut Tidal yet but I may down the road we shall see.

Qobuz is certainly working for me. I am streaming while driving and getting CD resolution with no dropouts. The sound is excellent. The search engine is easy to use.
Next for me is developing play lists.
I have cancelled my Tidal account. 
I do think Qobuz is for music lovers!
David Pritchard

Spotify (top tier) is 320 kbps

Red Book CD (16/44.1) is 1,411 kbps (44.1 * 16 * 2). So almost five times more than Spotify

Bob don't pay attention to the 44K with Tidal the difference is in the kbps reading. 44K is redbook CD standard the difference it Tidal is Flac and Spotify is MP3 with never get above 320kbps. And as far as Quobuz I am sticking with Hifi as I am 16/44.1 all the way no hi-rez for me. And so far enjoying both classical and jazz on Quobuz.

@jond ,
+1, I agree Spotify sound could be better, but most of Tidal is showing 44K output on my DAC, which is the same as Spotify.
FWIW, after 3 days, I think Quobuz is a keeper. Much better selection for Classical and Jazz than Tidal, and if I get the Supremo subscription, I get a discount on downloads.
B

Bob I gave up Spotify years ago due to the poor sound quality and have used Tidal ever since. Now I need to decide if I need both Tidal and Quobuz. I like them both at least I have a free month to figure it out.

@jond ,
Yes, very good selection on classical and jazz.
Listening to Cal Tjader right now.
Also listened to the remaster Sgt. Pepper album and heard things I never knew were on that record.
And, make sure you set the output quality. I have it on the highest level and am not experiencing any streaming issues. So, I guess, I can drop Spotify (though I do like the Discover tab), Deezer was nothing but problems. Only Tidal remains besides Quobuz.
Bob