Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#51

Post by nominated1 »

ksec wrote: post #47
nominated1 wrote: post #14

Purely marketing for the “more is better” pseudo audiophile. ABX testing blew the “lossless sounds better” mantra out of the window nearly 2 decade ago [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codec_listening_test

>Cunningham and McGregor [1] >A total of 100 participants engaged with the listening test and were recruited from the Merchiston campus at Edinburgh Napier University. With respect to background, 28% were students at the University, whilst 33% were academic or faculty staff and 39% were administrative and support staff. Participants were not offered any form of remuneration or any other form of inducement for their i…

> Suggesting better codec doesn't matter and is purely for pseudo audiophile completely neglect the work people have been tuning and making these audio codec better for the past ~20 years.

I never suggested that better codecs don’t matter. I was stating that lossy codecs are amazing and that lossless, no matter which codec is used, isn’t necessary.

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#52

Post by jiofih »

nominated1 wrote: post #14

Purely marketing for the “more is better” pseudo audiophile. ABX testing blew the “lossless sounds better” mantra out of the window nearly 2 decade ago [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codec_listening_test

I can guarantee it’s not. A simple comparison between Spotify and Apple Music shows you with no doubt that Apple is doing something better with regards to compression, it sounds a lot more defined, so there is clearly room for improvement for Spotify.

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#53

Post by nominated1 »

jiofih wrote: post #52
nominated1 wrote: post #14

Purely marketing for the “more is better” pseudo audiophile. ABX testing blew the “lossless sounds better” mantra out of the window nearly 2 decade ago [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codec_listening_test

I can guarantee it’s not. A simple comparison between Spotify and Apple Music shows you with no doubt that Apple is doing something better with regards to compression, it sounds a lot more defined, so there is clearly room for improvement for Spotify.

> … shows you with no doubt that Apple is doing something better with regards to compression…

No it doesn’t. It shows their mastering/tuning techniques are different or they have access to different sources. Compression, wrt codecs, has nothing to do with the difference in sound you’re hearing.

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#54

Post by jiofih »

nominated1 wrote: post #53
jiofih wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can guarantee it’s not. A simple comparison between Spotify and Apple Music shows you with no doubt that Apple is doing something better with regards to compression, it sounds a lot more defined, so there is clearly room for improvement for Spotify.

> … shows you with no doubt that Apple is doing something better with regards to compression… No it doesn’t. It shows their mastering/tuning techniques are different or they have access to different sources. Compression, wrt codecs, has nothing to do with the difference in sound you’re hearing.

Send me to hell if Spotify is mastering or applying EQ to any tracks. That would be egregious.

It’s definitely about compression. Implementations can differ significantly for the same formats, as anyone who remembers the initial MP3 frenzy can tell. The fact you cannot discern two random codecs at their max quality doesn’t mean Apple and Spotify cannot have a meaningful difference with their streaming codecs (both custom afaik).

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#55

Post by karmakaze »

I wonder if they'll initially synthesize the HiFi data from their current sources. e.g. generate 24/32-bit 96kHz predithered data from 16-bit 44.1kHz.

[Sorry if the post covers this, I didn't read it because it wanted too many domains whitelisted for js.]

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#56

Post by Bluestein »

sharklazer wrote: post #5
azinman2 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s still nothing compared to any video. They’re already paying for bandwidth… what exactly is your gripe?

I would guess this guy is still on a 1200 baud modem.

No way! I am happy to have upgraded to 14000 ... about a month ago :)

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#57

Post by Bluestein »

Jonnax wrote: post #36
Bluestein wrote: post #2

Great. More internet bandwidth wasted, for their profit. They should be penalized, taxed, burdened, or forced to build "Netflix-like" own infrastructure ... ... in direct proportion to the delta in bandwidth between their "lossless" codec and state-of-the art compression with comparable sound quality.-

I haven't seen someone who advocates for anti net neutrality in such a seemingly genuine way. Those poor ISPs having to upgrade their services to support their user's needs.

Had not thought of it that way.

I am just overly concerned about internet congestion ...

... but, as somebody upthread rightly points out, it's all video anyway.

(Porn, I posit ...)

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#58

Post by Bluestein »

karmasimida wrote: post #6
Bluestein wrote: post #2

Great. More internet bandwidth wasted, for their profit. They should be penalized, taxed, burdened, or forced to build "Netflix-like" own infrastructure ... ... in direct proportion to the delta in bandwidth between their "lossless" codec and state-of-the art compression with comparable sound quality.-

Wasted? Defining meaningful then. Majority of the bandwidth is spent on entertainment I would assume.

Wasted: The extra bandwith above and beyond what psychoacoustically would sound near perfect anyway, with much less bandwith used ...

(No sane person would object to anything on the basis of it being entertainment ...)

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#59

Post by nominated1 »

jiofih wrote: post #54
nominated1 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> … shows you with no doubt that Apple is doing something better with regards to compression… No it doesn’t. It shows their mastering/tuning techniques are different or they have access to different sources. Compression, wrt codecs, has nothing to do with the difference in sound you’re hearing.

Send me to hell if Spotify is mastering or applying EQ to any tracks. That would be egregious. It’s definitely about compression. Implementations can differ significantly for the same formats, as anyone who remembers the initial MP3 frenzy can tell. The fact you cannot discern two random codecs at their max quality doesn’t mean Apple and Spotify cannot have a meaningful difference with their streaming codecs (both cu…

> Send me to hell if Spotify is mastering…

Pack your bags. Just Google it, or you can start here [1]. A relevant quote “This is because Spotify applies Loudness Normalization to your tracks as they're played to listeners”

A brief search shows that both Apple and Spotify offer 256kbps AAC. ABX testing these two would be pointless. They’re both above transparent. It’s NOT the codec.

Send me to heaven if X would allow for parametric EQ settings based on headphone/sound system. This would appeal to *actual audiophiles [2]. This would confuse the hell out of normals, so bullet point marketing is what we get.

[1] https://artists.spotify.com/faq/mastering-and-loudness [2] https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

Re: Spotify announces HiFi, a lossless streaming tier coming later this year

#60

Post by jiofih »

nominated1 wrote: post #59
jiofih wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Send me to hell if Spotify is mastering or applying EQ to any tracks. That would be egregious. It’s definitely about compression. Implementations can differ significantly for the same formats, as anyone who remembers the initial MP3 frenzy can tell. The fact you cannot discern two random codecs at their max quality doesn’t mean Apple and Spotify cannot have a meaningful difference with their streaming codecs (both cu…

> Send me to hell if Spotify is mastering… Pack your bags. Just Google it, or you can start here [1]. A relevant quote “This is because Spotify applies Loudness Normalization to your tracks as they're played to listeners” A brief search shows that both Apple and Spotify offer 256kbps AAC. ABX testing these two would be pointless. They’re both above transparent. It’s NOT the codec. Send me to heaven if X would allow f…

Loudness normalization happens on the client, and can be opted-out.

What is it then? At any rate, if this new offering can match Apple Music quality then it’s a win - and not “pure marketing”.

Post reply on HN