I would be interested in other views on the relative merits of the 2 players. I will be subscribing to Tidal in future, mainly because of dropout probs with Qobuz and the fact that I understand that a Jplay plugin will be incorporated into Tidal in the near future. TIDAL Master - most of the delta spectrogram is near 0dB. TIDAL Master - almost identical files across audio spectrum. TIDAL Master - almost identical frequency response. In summary, Tidal has better GUI and general user-friendliness ,while Qobuz has slightly better SQ due to its direct JPlay option. DEEZER (posted on the first page as well now) QOBUZ 24bit/48KHz vs. Both sound superb through Jplay beta 6.4 in Dual-PC mode. I slightly preferred Tidal - but Qobuz just won out when used direct to Jplay. My impression is that Tidal was slightly clearer and brighter, - a good thing in my system. Sound-quality was tested with both players routed through AsioBridge to Jplay. Needs VB-AsioBridge to integrate with Jplay Not such good selection of Classical/Jazz material adding/deleting tracks from playlistsĬontinuing stuttering and dropouts during playback, particularly at start of tracks GUI slightly long-winded in some functions eg. Poor Help facility (mainly in French as well !) These are the main impressions of the relative merits of each product ( BTW Tidal did NOT have any dropouts or stuttering during my trial period ) :īetter selection of Classical/Jazz material (my main genres) In the meantime, I have started a trial of Tidal, to see if the same problem persists. The Eagles Hotel California from Hell Freezes over. However I recently read an article that mention Qobuz, which got me interested. I think I might choose Qobuz based on this. Qobuz vs Tidal dasherdiablo1 1 2 Next D dasherdiablo1 Established Member 1 I’ve been using Tidal for a long time - certainly a few years. I’ve had a chance to hear a 90 000 system a couple of times (Genelec 1236A) and Qobuz makes my small speakers sound more like that big system. Qobuz on the other hand is more controlled, smooth and ‘adult’. Tidal sounds better.though very similar, it just does not have that edge. I’ve found Tidal to sound more aggressive, sharp and in-your-face. I don't understand why Amazon loose playing queue, while casting and Qobuz misses the "play similar song" button.I've been having some problems streaming Qobuz recently - stuttering and dropouts. The CD is closer to Qobuz which sounds better than Tidal. I decided to stay with Tidal hi-fi, for pricing reasons and (IMHO) better app. I can't absolutely say that Amazon is worst but it seems a little fake and results may vary.Īmazon has also variable sampling rate and results, even in the same album. Tidal and Qobuz are more similar among them, in sound character and have less stereo "distance". With old file footage, especially from 70ies and 80ies, which are definitely digitized and frequently upsampled, Amazon generally tends to give 192khz and adds a sort of wider stereo image, with voices and guitars a little bit backwards. Generally speaking, new releases don't have so much differences in sound charachtet, I think editors already give digital masters not needing further process. I set up to do instant switch, testing dozen of synced same song releases, without this, aural memory can easily lead to false impression. Just to add another not requested opinion.ĭuring a long recover from a ski accident, I did compulsively comparisons among AMU and Tidal hi-fi, sometimes with some from free qobuz plan.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |