Is using streaming services worthy of an audiophile?

“you don’t have to be an "audiophile" 100% of the time“

@dhpeck,

I get what you saying, more than often I enjoy listening to Tidal through my SONOS speakers placed throughout the house instead of heading to my dedicated audio room.

Sounds like I am not the only one who has added a Tidal feed to other parts of the house bar the "audio room".

However my findings are that Tidal streamed through my Bluesound Vault 2 and fed via digital coax to my exogal comet plus out to BAT power amp and into Wilson witt speakers sounds noticeably better than CD Redbook playback or even ripped wav files. That is to my ears in my system.
Especially the Tidal masters at 96 and up depending on the release. 

And after saying all that I find myself on a vinyl binge tonight....lol

I agree that CD's sound better after they are ripped. All they are is
"data" and once in that format they are easier to render into music. Putting your CDs in a library will make them sound better as well as make them more accessible and in my opinion more fun to use.

The question posed by the OP doesn't sit well with me. I understand having a discussion about Tidal and the quality of the service vs. other sources but it's that "worthy of an audiophile" part that gets me. Are there standards one must meet to qualify as an "audiophile"? What if a component that I use does not qualify as being "worthy of an audiophile", does that exclude me from the club? What are the standards? Who establishes them? If you have more money does that make it easier to qualify as an audiophile because you can afford the "proper" products? The point I am making is that I don't like labels. To me if we must use the term "audiophile" it is simply someone who cares about music and strives to get the best sound out of whatever system they have regardless of price. Just my two cents.