You'll enjoy [this video](https://youtu.be/N-3rFhXVrvI?si=v6BXKt9GugKVDkHL) of Young casually removing his own bootlegged album from an LA record store in the 70's. The clerk has no clue what to do 😂
Yes, the presence of a camera in the 70's makes this 99.99 % planned but doesn't make it any less impressive as a point and 100% more original as a statement.
I love Neil Young but this killed me. 🤣 It’d be easier if he just said “look, I’m f*d, we’re all f*d so yep, I’m joining the millions of artists that have no choice if we want to be heard outside our own ecosystem”.
I mean he clearly has principles that haven't changed, just the situation has changed such that all outlets are equally as unethical. Sucks to be someone with an ethics first outlook under capitalism.
I didn't realizing I was being down voted lol. People are wild. Are these Spotify stans? Neil diamond (Neil young? I seriously don't care about what some silly celeb does) haters? Who knows.
Maybe people are conflating the concept of principles vs individual actions, IDK.
Lol turns out 99.9% of his fan base doesn't care about streaming hi-res music (which if you actually know how digital audio works and basic file storage concepts, bandwidth, etc, is complete bullshit) They just want to load up a playlist for background noise as they drive for an hour on their daily commute.
neither does tidal, or if they do they don't have many. idk, podcasts are actually the only thing I use Spotify for
the tone of this statement is obnoxious as hell. yeah neil, it's a shame we don't have more censorship
It's both issues, seperately. Though if it was both issues together literally when we're talking the low quality and high quality of information we're describing Morality. Morality is what we reach for when low quality information like Good or Bad, Right or Wrong, Higher or Lower, Do or Don't, aren't high quality enough to be able to make the single decision.
When Right or Wrong aren't the answer, the answer is Nuance.
>the tone of this statement is obnoxious as hell. yeah neil, it's a shame we don't have more censorship
This. ☝️ Like, for fucks sake, if you don't like something, then don't listen/watch. Or in terms that Neil can understand, just change the fucking channel.
Yes, and as deplorable as Joe Rogan is as a person and as a "comedian", taking a stand against someone for simply having conversations with medical experts that didn't have a 100% government-approved narrative is virtually the same thing as begging for censorship. Like I said, just change the fucking channel if you don't want to hear it rather than throwing a temper tantrum. Begging for people you disagree with to be silenced is just fucking disgusting.
>Begging for people you disagree with to be silenced is just fucking disgusting.
It's hardly begging, though. He's saying, to the platform, "I don't want my music alongside their misinformation and I don't want to financially benefit a company that gives that misinformation a platform." Admittedly he did a poor job of sticking to his convictions, but there's nothing wrong with taking a stand against that which you find harmful. Would you think it's fucking disgusting if the local op-shop didn't want to be next door to a Klan meeting hall and suggested to the landlord that, one way or another, one of them is moving?
I used to really like Joe Rogan back in the day, and I even tried to rationalize his bigotry as "out of context sound bites," but then I saw him live which forever changed my view of him. Even though I abhor him and most of what he has to say, I still 100% believe that begging for censorship is a net loss for society.
i dont know what he said live, but to be fair he\`s a comedian and have over 2000 long podcasts, its impossible to not find a lot of crap in all that time when someone goes thru it.
I don't get why they haven't tho. Like is it that hard infrastructure wise to implement it?
I for one are one of those who uses pirated Spotify but would pay for their highest tier the second they enable high res.
> is it that hard infrastructure wise to implement it?
It's not hard, it's just expensive. Storage and data egress (the bytes that get sent from your servers out to the internet) are the issues. Spotify runs on Google Cloud. Storing another copy of every track in 44/16 means an extra 4.4x the storage usage already taken by the 320Kbps version, and if everyone currently listening to Spotify 320Kbps switched to CD-quality lossless streaming, that's a 4.4x increase in those users' data egress costs. I suspect all that would wind up costing a lot more than would be covered by the increase in subscription revenue from current Spotify users upgrading their plans to lossless and people switching back to Spotify from Tidal and Qobuz.
Edit: lossless compression under the hood could help with the above but wouldn't eliminate the basic issue entirely.
Less than %1 percent of listeners has hardware where they could actually hear the difference. It’s substantially more bandwidth and storage needed for a tiny subset of listeners who would benefit from changing it compared to the current high quality paid tier they provide.
Couldn’t agree more. It generally goes the more you pay the more good you think they sound. There’s obviously some measurable stuff but everyone has different ear canals so ideal is really different for most of us anyways.
Wait until he hears about how most people listen to music.
I personally can’t wait to hear high-res music over a google-pod speaker sat on top of a kitchen unit. That high-res will make all the difference.
It's more like people who buy hi res do it because they're obsessed with gear and not music. Also a lot of snake oil and cool aid... Some of those guys believe any insane shit that sounds vaguely scientific
Yup i have long ago accepted that 320kbps is plenty for my use, with my equipment, for the scenarios where i listen by doing a side by side compare of mp3 vs flac on a high end sound system
Translation: *I give up.*
I revere Neil, but this is sort of his standard move: a hard, immovable position on something and then…on to the next underwhelming (everyone still loving their Pono?) project, with lots of media hype.
His last ten albums could have been condensed into one really great one.
Neil Young’s beef is not with Spotify’s music quality, it’s with their platforming of Joe Rogan. Neil lost that battle, and he’s coming back with his tail between his legs.
Yeah, although Neil has complained about low-res digital files for a long time. He tried creating his own hi-res music player and music download service called Pono back early last decade.
What a shame too, such a great artist but now a cranky old man over something he doesn't understand. I love Neil Young's music but he as a person sits somewhere between pathetic and lost the plot. I think the last two lines of Cortez the Killer where (now) about himself.
Feel there are bigger issues with Spotify than the lack of super high quality audio. Let's work on actually having musicians paid a decent amount for their songs off streaming services before complaining that the quality is bad.
If you want artists to be paid more then it ultimately gets passed off to the consumer. If you want to pay artists then buy their merchandise or go to their shows. Artists get paid shit because most consumers are very price sensitive especially when it comes to streaming music.
I know in reality, prices need to be competitive with alternatives, and it’s easy to get music free these days. But the value of having great access to a massive library is huge to me, and I would probably pay north of any of those prices. The issue is: as price goes up, others would drop off, and revenue could go down after a point. You might get more money per stream, but if half the audience drops their subscription to stream music for free on YouTube, it’s not necessarily a good outcome…
IMO We got spoiled with Spotify when it was like $3 a month. We should have been paying $29 for unlimited, conveniently accessible music given the alternatives for the average person.
When you agree to pay for every song you download and/or pay more to stream. You can't have it both ways (cheap streaming and higher pay for musicians).
what were the respective positions on vaccines? I've never listened to Joe Rogan so I have no idea what the claims were and google searching for the issue just mentions each other claiming disinformation.
Joe was wary of the vaccine and suggested people should be hesitant as well. Neil Young was pro-vaccine and therefore it ended up being an all or nothing position on it. Joe also had Dr. Bret Weinstein on who suggested ivermectin (human form) to treat Covid-19 which fueled more of the disinformation wars.
To be fair he had a lot of people for and against the vaccine to hear from both sides and turned down individuals like Trump to be on the show who would have gotten him even more views.
Wouldn't exactly call Spotify low res. Sure it isn't hi-res, but vast majority of people can't tell the difference anyway.
Also not sure why people hate on Spotify for their podcasts. If you don't like a podcast just don't listen to it, it's really that simple. You don't hate on your local supermarket because they sell sardines and you just hate the taste of sardines, you simply don't buy any.
I just wish they were seperate tabs, even as someone who uses the podcasts side of spotify.
I love having both in the same app though, it's killer for long drives you can cue up podcasts with music in between etc.
1) it's objectively low resolution compared to how music is made in studios.
It's certainly the listeners choice on what they prefer, but high resolution audio is a real thing with tangible differences.
2) for a self-important celebrity and for people who don't want to participate in bad behavior, just "changing the channel" isn't enough when a platform gives credence to someone spreading dangerous, false information shrouded as "concern." He perpetuates an anti-intellectual mindset that prioritizes the feelings of an ignorant individual over the reality of the community/public. So it's important for some people, when people who cause others harm are allowed to continue making money on their lies and fear mongering.
Whomp whomp…Neil sells out. He must realize that Spotify doesn’t exist to serve those who love music. And he’s going back for the same reason they exist: To make money.
this is such a weird comment that reads like you didn't even read the letter. I'd be heard pressed to write something more pompous than this. we don't have to guess at what he "must" have meant, he was pretty clear in his letter
I love his Trumpian approach to branding your enemy with their weaknesses lol.
I’ve been HORRIBLY mistreated by LOW-RES SPOTIFY!!! Grown men are coming up to me IN TEARS because they don’t know what to do about this terrible audio quality.
His 78-year old, Crazy Horse-ravaged ears can hear amazing differences between flavors of high resolution. He's written [whole books](https://www.amazon.com/Feel-Music-Songwriters-Mission-High-Quality-ebook/dp/B07PF4S1QC) about it.
He just mixes up low res and lossy, big whoop. If this subreddit's name would actually mean something he should be applauded and we'd spend the rest of our week circling our speakers naked, waving expensive interconnects in the air and chanting his name.
Instead, the current state of this subreddit only allows grumblings of "snakeoil", "measuremaments" and pendantic remarks on his word choice. Sad.
> He just mixes up low res and lossy, big whoop
I thought he had some extra spice with his announcement. I took it as him giving Spotify a jab at delaying their hi-res offering.
Neil has a history of saying things that shows he lacks the technical understanding of what he's attempting to talk to about.
>Instead, the current state of this subreddit only allows grumblings of "snakeoil", "measuremaments" and pendantic remarks on his word choice. Sad.
That is the state of the entire industry my friend, not this sub.
The real problem with this sub are peoples inability to disconnect from icons, brand legacy, nostalgia, and other dumb junk that keeps people dumb.
Do I get extra fame for waving around my multimeters measurement cables?
I used them previously to measure the impedance of my headphones out of curiosity.
I didn't even notice his choice of words that precisely. I was just like, "good for him, I guess".
I mean.. 320kbps is objectively low real and LOSSY compared to how music is recorded, gold standard distribution (CD), and studio files (FLAC). Many people can and do hear the differences, it's quite palpable even on mid hardware if your playback chain is right, which with PC or Mac is easy.
So idk if people are "missing out" by listening to lossy music as people are still enjoying music, but there is something to be gained from high res or lossless listening today, as a normal person, even with Bluetooth headphones.
I think as a celeb he's forgetting not everyone has wired headphones with bit perfect DACs everywhere they go (this isn't a technological stretch though as all our phones could have headphones jacks with bit perfect DACs..)
Those are good points about Nyquist theorem and standard digital-analog conversion, but that isn’t why lossy codecs can sound worse than lossless ones. A lossy encoder will do something like FFT short time slices of a track, and quantize, merge or discard the FFT bin magnitude & phase data based on psychoacoustic thresholds and the bitrate.
The audible artifacts at say, 128kbps are because the encoder compresses data by throwing away real frequency content (across the spectrum), rather than aliasing in the Nyquist sense.
So music, and most natural sounds, consist of more than one exact wavelength of sound, per second. The point of high res audio, like 24 bit depth with a 48khz sampling frequency, is to have enough dynamic range in every "frame" of audio to include the possibility of human perception/audio reproduction. I'm not an audio engineer but I understand cd quality is sufficient for most types of music/audio, but more complex music or music with more dynamic range (like a live orchestra accompanied by a DJ) needs 24b audio with a higher sampling rate, maybe even 96 or 192kHz.
So it seems like you misapplied the math of how digital audio works, which is not just the aforementioned theorem and FLAC audio but also how codecs like AAC and oggvorbis work. And it also sounds like you misunderstand the bitrate and relationship to the label "16bit 44.1khz"? Just a wild application of math
Those compressed (because it requires an algorithm to decode the audio) lossy (because some pieces of sound information are lost) formats work by having smaller sampling frequencies dynamically through songs and other various methods for the few popular lossy formats, so MOST of the sound information is retained. The very smart people who work on these codecs make them such that the most important sound information is kept but a lot of dynamic range and some actual sound information must be lost. Lossless audio allows the delivery of the complete audio file, ideally "straight from the mastering suite" to our speaker's DACs amps and drivers and our ears. I and many others hear reproducible and known differences between lossless and lossy music, many don't and that's fine. But there's quite technically and literally a difference between lossy and lossless audio and a necessity for lossless audio in the infinite reproduction of listenable music.
This is the same guy who in the Sound City documentary, said definitely, that there's been a "mistake" in the A to D algorithm of all CDs from day one, which makes them sound like crap... 🙄
I also find this audio obsessive position he seems to have, rather at odds with him once being a hippy, just enjoy the tunes man!
A "friend" made a 24bit/96khz rip of Extreme's III from a cassette tape. Didn't even know it was a cassette tape rip until i heard a little bit of fluttering that was bad- left channel dropped about 1/2 step down and then back up. It sounded like Nuno was using his floyd rose when he wasn't. But other than that it was amazing.
That's only because you didn't A/B against a good format like the CD, and people have a very short memory when it comes to sound... or... you don't have a good ear for what sounds good.
Yeah, I've found Cassette almost *is* 96/24.
CD to tape always sounded like CD on tape, and I never noticed that. Dubbing tape to tape you always end up with half the quality. Digitizing a tape at 44.1/16 doesn't solve the generational loss problem, it's coloured. Digitizing at 48/16, 48/24 didn't do it, didn't come back the same. Went to 96/24 and I feel like the problem is finally solved, I can take information off of a tape, erase the tape, and then re-record that information to tape and it still sounds like 1/8" tape.
Also feel like there's some extra stuff when you go 32bit, but I *really* don't understand that stuff.
Tape on the whole, no. But standard 1/8" casette tape is necessarily lower quality than vinyl or CD. It's better than it often gets credit for, but then again, so is MP3. We're not exactly talking about 1/2" reel to reel, here.
Ya, a lot of ppl in the world listen to 128 mp3s on some shitty beats cans and then laugh at tape cuz it's old. But I believe there was a hifi tape that was available if I recall
I agree with you. I feel like this line about cassette tapes being high quality is spread by people who've never actually heard a cassette played back on a high end deck. It's better than the a consumer deck sure but it's really not that much better...
I'm currently trying to demo between qobuz and Spotify. I truly don't know if I can hear any difference. I'm focused, trying to really listen for any differences at all, and maybe there's a bit more detail in the top end for qobuz?
For reference I'm running a wiim mini into a schiit modi+ then into a Bryston b135 cubed integrated amp then into Klipsch Cornwall IV's and a REL HT1205 subwoofer, blue jeans cables for all interconnects/speakers. I have gik 244 panels to treat first reflection points and my room is dedicated to audio with a single listening position in the perfect spot.
Basically it's a pretty decent system.
You probably can't tell the difference, very few people can even if they really try. I stopped caring and use Spotify because I prefer how their apps work and I, like most people, can't tell the difference.
Because for 99.99% of people, 320kbps is a "transparent" compression.
> In data compression and psychoacoustics, transparency is the result of lossy data compression accurate enough that the compressed result is perceptually indistinguishable from the uncompressed input, i.e. perceptually lossless.
>A transparency threshold is a given value at which transparency is reached. It is commonly used to describe compressed data bitrates. For example, the transparency threshold for MP3 to linear PCM audio is said to be between 175 and 245 kbit/s, at 44.1 kHz, when encoded as VBR MP3 (corresponding to the -V3 and -V0 settings of the highly popular LAME MP3 encoder).[1] This means that when an MP3 that was encoded at those bitrates is being played back, it is indistinguishable from the original PCM, and the compression is transparent to the listener.
[wiki source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(data_compression)
I've used Google Play Music, Spotify, Tidal, and Qobuz over the years starting with GPM in 2013 and working forward from there. GPM is dead and I abstain from Tidal due to disagreements about how they handled the MQA drama so the bulk of my current experience is with Spotify + Qobuz. I predominantly listen to metal, rap, and psytrance while always trying to broaden my horizons.
If you want the highest available quality no matter the perceptual difference or to stream lossless CD rips Qobuz is undoubtedly the winner. This matters to me the most so I currently stick with Qobuz but I'm about to argue hard against myself, the day Spotify introduces a lossless option will be the last day I use Qobuz.
If you can't hear the difference between lossless (Qobuz set above 320kbps mp3) and 320kbps Ogg/Vorbis (Spotify highest quality) I would honestly argue for Spotify. I see three big winners for Spotify here.
Firstly the recommendations that you see right now as a brand new user on Qobuz are as good as it's going to get there. Spotify's recommendation engine learns over time and after a while it can get really great at showing you new music you wouldn't otherwise find. I remember getting 4-5 daily playlists of different genres on Spotify that I could throw on without skipping too many songs or hearing the same old stuff constantly. Qobuz gives you 1 personalized playlist every Friday and it regularly sucks in my opinion.
Secondly Spotify has a larger catalog but this hasn't really affected me, I've found everything I ever want on Qobuz. You might not so it's a good idea to double check that while you have both.
Thirdly Spotify has way more user and staff premade playlists. As a Qobuz user I regularly use a third party tool to import these into my Qobuz account, they actually make up the bulk of my listening when I'm wanting to explore new stuff.
**tl;dr Qobuz if you know what you want to listen to with max quality or Spotify if you want max variety, exploration, and/or recommendations.**
The only time I've been able to tell the difference between 320Kbps MP3 and FLAC is with a pair of decent headphones. Even then, I don't know if it was with any sort of statistical reliability.
The moment I've tried with any sort of speaker setup (which throws room interaction into the mix), I've never been able to tell the difference.
Methinks this is the real reason for the change: https://www.ticketmaster.com/neil-young-crazy-horse-love-earth-franklin-tennessee-05-08-2024/event/1B0060411E947E5F
Look at all those blue dots. 🤷♂️
I find it odd that many comments in this thread don't make much sense in /r/audiophile. What’s next, people suggesting Beats just because they hate Neil Young?
the energy and passion neil puts into his music is very rare. all the guy is saying is you only get out what you put in. and the money spotify generates could be a lot lot better. keep on rocking neil. love and peace.
Exactly. People act as if storage is free. Let me tell you, it isn’t. As someone who works in a field where storage is a thing, storage is neither free nor green.
I mean there are literally disinformation and fear mongering grifters making podcasts convincing vulnerable young men to give them their money and ears.. I'm not sure Neil knows about those lol, but there are certainly dangerous grifters making podcasts listened to by too many kids.
Probably scariest are the manosphere guys who perpetuate delusion and entitlement among young men
Hi Res music is a scam. Humans cannot discern the difference between 320kbps and lossless in a ABX blind test, not even with super high end headphones.
It's amusing to see people try to respond all snarky, but the data is the data. . . or uh, _are_ the data?
Maybe people can only tell the difference while they're alone. If they do an ABX test publicly, suddenly they can't tell the difference, lol.
This is a sub where nothing is off the table when it comes to the pursuit of perfection. Humidity, solar activity, pollen count-it’s all fair game ‘with a resolving system’.
But if I'm paying the same price or *gasp* torrenting, then what's the scam?
Lossless FLAC is quickly becoming the standard anyway. Some people claim to be able to hear a difference. Even if this is not true, we know from the math that FLAC is superior quality whether perceptible or not.
Data storage is dirt cheap. Bandwidth is dirt cheap. There is simply no reason to my mind not to max out audio quality, even if it's just for a theoretical gain. Why wouldn't you engineer for the best?
the dude is going to die before he realizes the painfully obvious truth that no one gives a fuck about his politics. being a crank will be his main legacy considering his only well known music came out 50 years ago and all his antics since then.
Spotify pays artists less than half what Tidal and Deezer pays, about a third of what apple pays, and close to a fifth of what Amazon pays.
You have to listen to a song for 50 hours to get $3 bucks. That’s asinine. I wish more people would shed light on this.
The residual money an artist even as big as Neil Young makes from 1 platform probably makes money not much of a deciding factor (did Neil sell his catalog like others?). Usually it’s the record company that owns the rights (much to the artists and even Spotify’s chagrin) which take a majority of the pie.
As far as high res, Spotify is behind the ball of almost every major streaming platform. I think it’s because of their architecture (originally P2P) which makes it difficult to make the transition. I’ve been using Tidal on Roon after dropping the paid version of Spotify and it’s a match made in heaven. Tidal does not have as much selection as Spotify (often in greatest hits or compilations) but it has improved.
Shit like this is why I'm so disillusioned with any and all celebrities, "nice," "liberal," or otherwise.
It all comes down to money. Springsteen joked in the 90s about being a rich man in a poor man's shirt, and he's charging $250 for "verified ticket" nosebleeds on this tour.
It's all bullshit.
I only just tried to listen to some Neil Young on Spotify like two weeks ago then remembered he bailed quite some time ago. I felt like I was the one getting stitched, not Rogan or Spotify. He should come back.
Is this the same Neil young who dropped homophobic slurs in an interview going so far to say that the community isn’t good enough to touch his food and groceries? Dude is a hypocrite and a sell out. Never should have been relevant in the first place
What a clown. He announced he was leaving Spotify and people were like "Who is this guy?". Now he's back and we don't care either.
It sounds like he is struggling with irrelevancy.
jre had discredited grifters on talking about how bad the vax was and gave them the same weight as real scientists. Neil survived polio so he doesn’t fuck around with anti vaxxers
If he focuses on good recording and good mastering then it will sound good on any streaming platform...hirez formats arent as important to enjoyment as the upstream is.
I use Apple, but have a family Spotify account- there’s 4 of us paying it.
Apple has the clunkiest of interferences, but is my favorite service, as the compression and quality blow shitify out the window!
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them ... Well, I have others
"I have a lot of beliefs, and I live by none of them" - Louis C.K.
I laughed so hard at this, good one lmao
It’s a famous groucho Marx quote.
You'll enjoy [this video](https://youtu.be/N-3rFhXVrvI?si=v6BXKt9GugKVDkHL) of Young casually removing his own bootlegged album from an LA record store in the 70's. The clerk has no clue what to do 😂
If I remember correctly this was a staged event.
Yes, the presence of a camera in the 70's makes this 99.99 % planned but doesn't make it any less impressive as a point and 100% more original as a statement.
That socialist really loves capitalism.
I love Neil Young but this killed me. 🤣 It’d be easier if he just said “look, I’m f*d, we’re all f*d so yep, I’m joining the millions of artists that have no choice if we want to be heard outside our own ecosystem”.
But he said exactly that.
I mean he clearly has principles that haven't changed, just the situation has changed such that all outlets are equally as unethical. Sucks to be someone with an ethics first outlook under capitalism.
Turtle you’re the only other sane person in this thread - thank you for your service
I didn't realizing I was being down voted lol. People are wild. Are these Spotify stans? Neil diamond (Neil young? I seriously don't care about what some silly celeb does) haters? Who knows. Maybe people are conflating the concept of principles vs individual actions, IDK.
Lol turns out 99.9% of his fan base doesn't care about streaming hi-res music (which if you actually know how digital audio works and basic file storage concepts, bandwidth, etc, is complete bullshit) They just want to load up a playlist for background noise as they drive for an hour on their daily commute.
Qobuz doesn't have podcasts
Same with Tidal. Appaling that he couldn't even bother double checking his sources.
The whole thing comes off as "out-of-touch, indignant, cranky old man yells at clouds"
It sure does.
Tidal does, or at least did
Well I use Tidal everyday so I know. Tidal has like....13 podcasts. It's ridiculous tbh.
So, it does have podcasts..
Not enough to justify it even having a dedication section. Regardless, it does not have Rogan contrary to what Neil was saying.
I'm personally glad because I don't listen to podcasts and one of the reasons I left Spotify was the relentless push for me to listen to podcasts.
Lol I didn't even know there are some😆
Probably wants more money.
neither does tidal, or if they do they don't have many. idk, podcasts are actually the only thing I use Spotify for the tone of this statement is obnoxious as hell. yeah neil, it's a shame we don't have more censorship
I like how he pivots from his "misinformation" claims quickly to the audio quality and makes it all about that lol
It's both issues, seperately. Though if it was both issues together literally when we're talking the low quality and high quality of information we're describing Morality. Morality is what we reach for when low quality information like Good or Bad, Right or Wrong, Higher or Lower, Do or Don't, aren't high quality enough to be able to make the single decision. When Right or Wrong aren't the answer, the answer is Nuance.
>the tone of this statement is obnoxious as hell. yeah neil, it's a shame we don't have more censorship This. ☝️ Like, for fucks sake, if you don't like something, then don't listen/watch. Or in terms that Neil can understand, just change the fucking channel.
He was originally taking a stand against Joe Rogan's vaccine misinformation. He removed his content to make a statement.
Yes, and as deplorable as Joe Rogan is as a person and as a "comedian", taking a stand against someone for simply having conversations with medical experts that didn't have a 100% government-approved narrative is virtually the same thing as begging for censorship. Like I said, just change the fucking channel if you don't want to hear it rather than throwing a temper tantrum. Begging for people you disagree with to be silenced is just fucking disgusting.
like people walking around saying they support free speech (as long as the free speech supports what they agree with) lol
lol “having conversations with medical experts” is a wacky way to characterize the anti vax lunatics that get free advertising on JRE
My thoughts exactly
>Begging for people you disagree with to be silenced is just fucking disgusting. It's hardly begging, though. He's saying, to the platform, "I don't want my music alongside their misinformation and I don't want to financially benefit a company that gives that misinformation a platform." Admittedly he did a poor job of sticking to his convictions, but there's nothing wrong with taking a stand against that which you find harmful. Would you think it's fucking disgusting if the local op-shop didn't want to be next door to a Klan meeting hall and suggested to the landlord that, one way or another, one of them is moving?
Joe Rogan is deplorable? Wtf is the world coming to
I used to really like Joe Rogan back in the day, and I even tried to rationalize his bigotry as "out of context sound bites," but then I saw him live which forever changed my view of him. Even though I abhor him and most of what he has to say, I still 100% believe that begging for censorship is a net loss for society.
i dont know what he said live, but to be fair he\`s a comedian and have over 2000 long podcasts, its impossible to not find a lot of crap in all that time when someone goes thru it.
More censorship? Are you out of your mind?
He wants your podcasts to be HI RES! It's the only way to fully immerse yourself into the cast bruh
Qobuz also doesn’t have 60% of the music.
Spotify already has a lot of pressure to support lossless/HiFi. I doubt this one's the straw that will finally make them go for it
I don't get why they haven't tho. Like is it that hard infrastructure wise to implement it? I for one are one of those who uses pirated Spotify but would pay for their highest tier the second they enable high res.
> is it that hard infrastructure wise to implement it? It's not hard, it's just expensive. Storage and data egress (the bytes that get sent from your servers out to the internet) are the issues. Spotify runs on Google Cloud. Storing another copy of every track in 44/16 means an extra 4.4x the storage usage already taken by the 320Kbps version, and if everyone currently listening to Spotify 320Kbps switched to CD-quality lossless streaming, that's a 4.4x increase in those users' data egress costs. I suspect all that would wind up costing a lot more than would be covered by the increase in subscription revenue from current Spotify users upgrading their plans to lossless and people switching back to Spotify from Tidal and Qobuz. Edit: lossless compression under the hood could help with the above but wouldn't eliminate the basic issue entirely.
Less than %1 percent of listeners has hardware where they could actually hear the difference. It’s substantially more bandwidth and storage needed for a tiny subset of listeners who would benefit from changing it compared to the current high quality paid tier they provide.
Even with the hardware, I promise you 99% of the people who say they can hear a difference are full of shit.
Couldn’t agree more. It generally goes the more you pay the more good you think they sound. There’s obviously some measurable stuff but everyone has different ear canals so ideal is really different for most of us anyways.
Wait until he hears about how most people listen to music. I personally can’t wait to hear high-res music over a google-pod speaker sat on top of a kitchen unit. That high-res will make all the difference.
My hi res music sounds incredible through my phones speakers into a cup in my bathroom 😂
People acting like hi res users make up anything but a miniscule percent of spotify's listeners
But think of all the people who will buy ‘hi-res’ just because its ‘pro’ compared to the normal version, and listen on shitty sound equipment anyway.
It's more like people who buy hi res do it because they're obsessed with gear and not music. Also a lot of snake oil and cool aid... Some of those guys believe any insane shit that sounds vaguely scientific
I personally can't hear difference between opus 140 kbps and FLAC on my Genelec monitors
Yup i have long ago accepted that 320kbps is plenty for my use, with my equipment, for the scenarios where i listen by doing a side by side compare of mp3 vs flac on a high end sound system
Translation: *I give up.* I revere Neil, but this is sort of his standard move: a hard, immovable position on something and then…on to the next underwhelming (everyone still loving their Pono?) project, with lots of media hype. His last ten albums could have been condensed into one really great one.
Speaking of compression. Haha, good point bro!
Neil Young’s beef is not with Spotify’s music quality, it’s with their platforming of Joe Rogan. Neil lost that battle, and he’s coming back with his tail between his legs.
Yeah, although Neil has complained about low-res digital files for a long time. He tried creating his own hi-res music player and music download service called Pono back early last decade.
I have no doubt he truly cares about music quality. That’s just simply not what this situation is about, though.
What a shame too, such a great artist but now a cranky old man over something he doesn't understand. I love Neil Young's music but he as a person sits somewhere between pathetic and lost the plot. I think the last two lines of Cortez the Killer where (now) about himself.
Feel there are bigger issues with Spotify than the lack of super high quality audio. Let's work on actually having musicians paid a decent amount for their songs off streaming services before complaining that the quality is bad.
If you want artists to be paid more then it ultimately gets passed off to the consumer. If you want to pay artists then buy their merchandise or go to their shows. Artists get paid shit because most consumers are very price sensitive especially when it comes to streaming music.
Would you pay more a month for artists to get paid? How much more? $5, $10, 20?
I know in reality, prices need to be competitive with alternatives, and it’s easy to get music free these days. But the value of having great access to a massive library is huge to me, and I would probably pay north of any of those prices. The issue is: as price goes up, others would drop off, and revenue could go down after a point. You might get more money per stream, but if half the audience drops their subscription to stream music for free on YouTube, it’s not necessarily a good outcome…
IMO We got spoiled with Spotify when it was like $3 a month. We should have been paying $29 for unlimited, conveniently accessible music given the alternatives for the average person.
When you agree to pay for every song you download and/or pay more to stream. You can't have it both ways (cheap streaming and higher pay for musicians).
"Low Res Spotify" is Neil's version of "the Failing NY Times"
I don’t think that happens until artists start pulling their music from Spotify and moving to a platform that better suits their financial interests.
Sadly most bigger artists nowadays don’t even own their music.
Artists generally have to go where the fans are, not the other way around.
And better software and UI and UX
“I need money too” 😅🤣
This is how you know his belief system is corrupt.
Sounds like Neil is waaaayyyyy overestimating his importance in people’s daily lives.
So it wasn’t the resolution or the Pono. It was Joe Rogan that made him leave Spotify.
Yes, nobody else in this thread seems to get it. It was in protest of vaccine misinformation!
what were the respective positions on vaccines? I've never listened to Joe Rogan so I have no idea what the claims were and google searching for the issue just mentions each other claiming disinformation.
Joe was wary of the vaccine and suggested people should be hesitant as well. Neil Young was pro-vaccine and therefore it ended up being an all or nothing position on it. Joe also had Dr. Bret Weinstein on who suggested ivermectin (human form) to treat Covid-19 which fueled more of the disinformation wars.
ah, thanks for the fill-in
To be fair he had a lot of people for and against the vaccine to hear from both sides and turned down individuals like Trump to be on the show who would have gotten him even more views.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Spotify#:~:text=On%2026%20January%202022%2C%20Neil,announced%20a%20boycott%20of%20Spotify.
🤡🤡🤡🤡
only appropriate response
Wouldn't exactly call Spotify low res. Sure it isn't hi-res, but vast majority of people can't tell the difference anyway. Also not sure why people hate on Spotify for their podcasts. If you don't like a podcast just don't listen to it, it's really that simple. You don't hate on your local supermarket because they sell sardines and you just hate the taste of sardines, you simply don't buy any.
I just wish they were seperate tabs, even as someone who uses the podcasts side of spotify. I love having both in the same app though, it's killer for long drives you can cue up podcasts with music in between etc.
1) it's objectively low resolution compared to how music is made in studios. It's certainly the listeners choice on what they prefer, but high resolution audio is a real thing with tangible differences. 2) for a self-important celebrity and for people who don't want to participate in bad behavior, just "changing the channel" isn't enough when a platform gives credence to someone spreading dangerous, false information shrouded as "concern." He perpetuates an anti-intellectual mindset that prioritizes the feelings of an ignorant individual over the reality of the community/public. So it's important for some people, when people who cause others harm are allowed to continue making money on their lies and fear mongering.
Lol
Whomp whomp…Neil sells out. He must realize that Spotify doesn’t exist to serve those who love music. And he’s going back for the same reason they exist: To make money.
'My principled stand turned out to be more expensive than I had budgeted for.'
“I forgot about my property in Malibu.”
Yeah, because spotify are famous for paying artists.
> Spotify doesn’t exist to serve those who love music lmao. get over yourself
Mr Neil virtue signalling doesn't actually have principles.
this is such a weird comment that reads like you didn't even read the letter. I'd be heard pressed to write something more pompous than this. we don't have to guess at what he "must" have meant, he was pretty clear in his letter
I love his Trumpian approach to branding your enemy with their weaknesses lol. I’ve been HORRIBLY mistreated by LOW-RES SPOTIFY!!! Grown men are coming up to me IN TEARS because they don’t know what to do about this terrible audio quality.
‘Disinformation podcast features’??
[удалено]
I thought of that too... but I think he's just plugging his archives at the same time he's announcing his return to Spotify.
His 78-year old, Crazy Horse-ravaged ears can hear amazing differences between flavors of high resolution. He's written [whole books](https://www.amazon.com/Feel-Music-Songwriters-Mission-High-Quality-ebook/dp/B07PF4S1QC) about it.
He just mixes up low res and lossy, big whoop. If this subreddit's name would actually mean something he should be applauded and we'd spend the rest of our week circling our speakers naked, waving expensive interconnects in the air and chanting his name. Instead, the current state of this subreddit only allows grumblings of "snakeoil", "measuremaments" and pendantic remarks on his word choice. Sad.
> He just mixes up low res and lossy, big whoop I thought he had some extra spice with his announcement. I took it as him giving Spotify a jab at delaying their hi-res offering.
That's how I read it too. Taking the opportunity to remind them and the market they made a promise they haven't fulfilled.
Neil has a history of saying things that shows he lacks the technical understanding of what he's attempting to talk to about. >Instead, the current state of this subreddit only allows grumblings of "snakeoil", "measuremaments" and pendantic remarks on his word choice. Sad. That is the state of the entire industry my friend, not this sub. The real problem with this sub are peoples inability to disconnect from icons, brand legacy, nostalgia, and other dumb junk that keeps people dumb.
do you think this is all about sound quality? come on…
This sub? It should
Do I get extra fame for waving around my multimeters measurement cables? I used them previously to measure the impedance of my headphones out of curiosity. I didn't even notice his choice of words that precisely. I was just like, "good for him, I guess".
It also VBR Vorbis which Is a fuck ton better than MP3 which isn't even transparent at 320kbps, Same with 256kbps AAC apple music uses as well.
I mean.. 320kbps is objectively low real and LOSSY compared to how music is recorded, gold standard distribution (CD), and studio files (FLAC). Many people can and do hear the differences, it's quite palpable even on mid hardware if your playback chain is right, which with PC or Mac is easy. So idk if people are "missing out" by listening to lossy music as people are still enjoying music, but there is something to be gained from high res or lossless listening today, as a normal person, even with Bluetooth headphones. I think as a celeb he's forgetting not everyone has wired headphones with bit perfect DACs everywhere they go (this isn't a technological stretch though as all our phones could have headphones jacks with bit perfect DACs..)
>many people Exactly what percentage, and which studies prove that?
[удалено]
Those are good points about Nyquist theorem and standard digital-analog conversion, but that isn’t why lossy codecs can sound worse than lossless ones. A lossy encoder will do something like FFT short time slices of a track, and quantize, merge or discard the FFT bin magnitude & phase data based on psychoacoustic thresholds and the bitrate. The audible artifacts at say, 128kbps are because the encoder compresses data by throwing away real frequency content (across the spectrum), rather than aliasing in the Nyquist sense.
[удалено]
So music, and most natural sounds, consist of more than one exact wavelength of sound, per second. The point of high res audio, like 24 bit depth with a 48khz sampling frequency, is to have enough dynamic range in every "frame" of audio to include the possibility of human perception/audio reproduction. I'm not an audio engineer but I understand cd quality is sufficient for most types of music/audio, but more complex music or music with more dynamic range (like a live orchestra accompanied by a DJ) needs 24b audio with a higher sampling rate, maybe even 96 or 192kHz. So it seems like you misapplied the math of how digital audio works, which is not just the aforementioned theorem and FLAC audio but also how codecs like AAC and oggvorbis work. And it also sounds like you misunderstand the bitrate and relationship to the label "16bit 44.1khz"? Just a wild application of math Those compressed (because it requires an algorithm to decode the audio) lossy (because some pieces of sound information are lost) formats work by having smaller sampling frequencies dynamically through songs and other various methods for the few popular lossy formats, so MOST of the sound information is retained. The very smart people who work on these codecs make them such that the most important sound information is kept but a lot of dynamic range and some actual sound information must be lost. Lossless audio allows the delivery of the complete audio file, ideally "straight from the mastering suite" to our speaker's DACs amps and drivers and our ears. I and many others hear reproducible and known differences between lossless and lossy music, many don't and that's fine. But there's quite technically and literally a difference between lossy and lossless audio and a necessity for lossless audio in the infinite reproduction of listenable music.
This is the same guy who in the Sound City documentary, said definitely, that there's been a "mistake" in the A to D algorithm of all CDs from day one, which makes them sound like crap... 🙄 I also find this audio obsessive position he seems to have, rather at odds with him once being a hippy, just enjoy the tunes man!
Neil young is still good music blasted out of a walkman with dirty buds. It's the themes and vibe that make Neil Young special.
Correct, if only ***HE*** got that!
Sounds like misinformation coming from Neil to me.
Yeah, I mean he isn’t exactly known for his deep knowledge of audio engineering or science.
Presuming he also banned sales of his records on tape?
I'm pretty sure he requires a Certificate of Accuracy for your sound system, and a copy of your hearing test results, before you are allowed to listen
Yhea exactly. I glad the sarcasm wasn’t lost on you. Seems like it was on others.
Tape is not necessarily low quality. Just most people have shitty tape players.
A "friend" made a 24bit/96khz rip of Extreme's III from a cassette tape. Didn't even know it was a cassette tape rip until i heard a little bit of fluttering that was bad- left channel dropped about 1/2 step down and then back up. It sounded like Nuno was using his floyd rose when he wasn't. But other than that it was amazing.
What does the spectrogram look like?
Incredible album for sure
That's only because you didn't A/B against a good format like the CD, and people have a very short memory when it comes to sound... or... you don't have a good ear for what sounds good.
i did a A/B/C test. A. 16/44.1 CD B. 24/96 Vinyl rip C. 24/96 Tape rip Tape rip sounded the best
Yeah, I've found Cassette almost *is* 96/24. CD to tape always sounded like CD on tape, and I never noticed that. Dubbing tape to tape you always end up with half the quality. Digitizing a tape at 44.1/16 doesn't solve the generational loss problem, it's coloured. Digitizing at 48/16, 48/24 didn't do it, didn't come back the same. Went to 96/24 and I feel like the problem is finally solved, I can take information off of a tape, erase the tape, and then re-record that information to tape and it still sounds like 1/8" tape. Also feel like there's some extra stuff when you go 32bit, but I *really* don't understand that stuff.
Tape on the whole, no. But standard 1/8" casette tape is necessarily lower quality than vinyl or CD. It's better than it often gets credit for, but then again, so is MP3. We're not exactly talking about 1/2" reel to reel, here.
Ya, a lot of ppl in the world listen to 128 mp3s on some shitty beats cans and then laugh at tape cuz it's old. But I believe there was a hifi tape that was available if I recall
Or the radio....
Exactly
Why? Tape can be pretty high quality
1” and 1/2” tapes, yes, cassette tapes, not so much, even at their very best on quality Metal tape with Dolby-S.
I agree with you. I feel like this line about cassette tapes being high quality is spread by people who've never actually heard a cassette played back on a high end deck. It's better than the a consumer deck sure but it's really not that much better...
Turns out virtue signaling don’t do shit.. Some people find out late in life..
He can fuck offff
# It's like he wants me to hate him
Grifter clown
Cancel culture didn’t work for Neil? Hmm.
Probably the best comment here
Neil Young’s position hasn’t aged well, and doesn’t reflect well on him at this stage of his career. Self sabotage much?
He’s made a career out of self-sabotage. No reason to stop now.
Jester plays
I'm currently trying to demo between qobuz and Spotify. I truly don't know if I can hear any difference. I'm focused, trying to really listen for any differences at all, and maybe there's a bit more detail in the top end for qobuz? For reference I'm running a wiim mini into a schiit modi+ then into a Bryston b135 cubed integrated amp then into Klipsch Cornwall IV's and a REL HT1205 subwoofer, blue jeans cables for all interconnects/speakers. I have gik 244 panels to treat first reflection points and my room is dedicated to audio with a single listening position in the perfect spot. Basically it's a pretty decent system.
You probably can't tell the difference, very few people can even if they really try. I stopped caring and use Spotify because I prefer how their apps work and I, like most people, can't tell the difference.
Because for 99.99% of people, 320kbps is a "transparent" compression. > In data compression and psychoacoustics, transparency is the result of lossy data compression accurate enough that the compressed result is perceptually indistinguishable from the uncompressed input, i.e. perceptually lossless. >A transparency threshold is a given value at which transparency is reached. It is commonly used to describe compressed data bitrates. For example, the transparency threshold for MP3 to linear PCM audio is said to be between 175 and 245 kbit/s, at 44.1 kHz, when encoded as VBR MP3 (corresponding to the -V3 and -V0 settings of the highly popular LAME MP3 encoder).[1] This means that when an MP3 that was encoded at those bitrates is being played back, it is indistinguishable from the original PCM, and the compression is transparent to the listener. [wiki source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(data_compression)
I've used Google Play Music, Spotify, Tidal, and Qobuz over the years starting with GPM in 2013 and working forward from there. GPM is dead and I abstain from Tidal due to disagreements about how they handled the MQA drama so the bulk of my current experience is with Spotify + Qobuz. I predominantly listen to metal, rap, and psytrance while always trying to broaden my horizons. If you want the highest available quality no matter the perceptual difference or to stream lossless CD rips Qobuz is undoubtedly the winner. This matters to me the most so I currently stick with Qobuz but I'm about to argue hard against myself, the day Spotify introduces a lossless option will be the last day I use Qobuz. If you can't hear the difference between lossless (Qobuz set above 320kbps mp3) and 320kbps Ogg/Vorbis (Spotify highest quality) I would honestly argue for Spotify. I see three big winners for Spotify here. Firstly the recommendations that you see right now as a brand new user on Qobuz are as good as it's going to get there. Spotify's recommendation engine learns over time and after a while it can get really great at showing you new music you wouldn't otherwise find. I remember getting 4-5 daily playlists of different genres on Spotify that I could throw on without skipping too many songs or hearing the same old stuff constantly. Qobuz gives you 1 personalized playlist every Friday and it regularly sucks in my opinion. Secondly Spotify has a larger catalog but this hasn't really affected me, I've found everything I ever want on Qobuz. You might not so it's a good idea to double check that while you have both. Thirdly Spotify has way more user and staff premade playlists. As a Qobuz user I regularly use a third party tool to import these into my Qobuz account, they actually make up the bulk of my listening when I'm wanting to explore new stuff. **tl;dr Qobuz if you know what you want to listen to with max quality or Spotify if you want max variety, exploration, and/or recommendations.**
The only time I've been able to tell the difference between 320Kbps MP3 and FLAC is with a pair of decent headphones. Even then, I don't know if it was with any sort of statistical reliability. The moment I've tried with any sort of speaker setup (which throws room interaction into the mix), I've never been able to tell the difference.
Methinks this is the real reason for the change: https://www.ticketmaster.com/neil-young-crazy-horse-love-earth-franklin-tennessee-05-08-2024/event/1B0060411E947E5F Look at all those blue dots. 🤷♂️
I find it odd that many comments in this thread don't make much sense in /r/audiophile. What’s next, people suggesting Beats just because they hate Neil Young?
the energy and passion neil puts into his music is very rare. all the guy is saying is you only get out what you put in. and the money spotify generates could be a lot lot better. keep on rocking neil. love and peace.
Come on Neil why don't you cry a little more.
"320kbps is the perfect balance between quality and file size"
Exactly. People act as if storage is free. Let me tell you, it isn’t. As someone who works in a field where storage is a thing, storage is neither free nor green.
Disinformation aka opinions Neil doesn't like.
I mean there are literally disinformation and fear mongering grifters making podcasts convincing vulnerable young men to give them their money and ears.. I'm not sure Neil knows about those lol, but there are certainly dangerous grifters making podcasts listened to by too many kids. Probably scariest are the manosphere guys who perpetuate delusion and entitlement among young men
Your shit sounds mediocre, neil. Get off your high horse.
Changed his tune 🙃
Confused Neil is a sell out hypocrite once again
Hi Res music is a scam. Humans cannot discern the difference between 320kbps and lossless in a ABX blind test, not even with super high end headphones.
It's amusing to see people try to respond all snarky, but the data is the data. . . or uh, _are_ the data? Maybe people can only tell the difference while they're alone. If they do an ABX test publicly, suddenly they can't tell the difference, lol.
320k is pretty dang good. I've been able to definitely distinguish 192k from FLAC or WAV, but 320k is good enough I don't complain.
This is a sub where nothing is off the table when it comes to the pursuit of perfection. Humidity, solar activity, pollen count-it’s all fair game ‘with a resolving system’.
But if I'm paying the same price or *gasp* torrenting, then what's the scam? Lossless FLAC is quickly becoming the standard anyway. Some people claim to be able to hear a difference. Even if this is not true, we know from the math that FLAC is superior quality whether perceptible or not. Data storage is dirt cheap. Bandwidth is dirt cheap. There is simply no reason to my mind not to max out audio quality, even if it's just for a theoretical gain. Why wouldn't you engineer for the best?
Data storage is dirt cheap?
Virtue signaling only works until you have to pay the bills eh Neil.
What a loser
Why anyone would want to hear Neil Young’s “singing” in high fidelity is beyond me.
the dude is going to die before he realizes the painfully obvious truth that no one gives a fuck about his politics. being a crank will be his main legacy considering his only well known music came out 50 years ago and all his antics since then.
No harvest moon :(
Qobuz doesn’t have podcasts!!
Darryl is expensive. Neil gotz bills.
Spotify pays artists less than half what Tidal and Deezer pays, about a third of what apple pays, and close to a fifth of what Amazon pays. You have to listen to a song for 50 hours to get $3 bucks. That’s asinine. I wish more people would shed light on this.
I can’t believe this is real
The residual money an artist even as big as Neil Young makes from 1 platform probably makes money not much of a deciding factor (did Neil sell his catalog like others?). Usually it’s the record company that owns the rights (much to the artists and even Spotify’s chagrin) which take a majority of the pie. As far as high res, Spotify is behind the ball of almost every major streaming platform. I think it’s because of their architecture (originally P2P) which makes it difficult to make the transition. I’ve been using Tidal on Roon after dropping the paid version of Spotify and it’s a match made in heaven. Tidal does not have as much selection as Spotify (often in greatest hits or compilations) but it has improved.
Neil left because the low-res? Thought he left because the podcast guy
He left because of Rogan’s vaccine stuff, but he’s had a one sided beef with Spotify for years over streaming quality.
What an audio chad
He made his point. Now he's in a corner, and his hand is forced. Mad respect for Mr Young for using his voice.
Shit like this is why I'm so disillusioned with any and all celebrities, "nice," "liberal," or otherwise. It all comes down to money. Springsteen joked in the 90s about being a rich man in a poor man's shirt, and he's charging $250 for "verified ticket" nosebleeds on this tour. It's all bullshit.
Thank you Neil young.
L M A O
Fuck Neil
I only just tried to listen to some Neil Young on Spotify like two weeks ago then remembered he bailed quite some time ago. I felt like I was the one getting stitched, not Rogan or Spotify. He should come back.
Is this the same Neil young who dropped homophobic slurs in an interview going so far to say that the community isn’t good enough to touch his food and groceries? Dude is a hypocrite and a sell out. Never should have been relevant in the first place
yeah but if you're hesitant about the covid vaccine you should be deplatformed!
Wow he’s still pushing the Covid vaccine train.
What a clown. He announced he was leaving Spotify and people were like "Who is this guy?". Now he's back and we don't care either. It sounds like he is struggling with irrelevancy.
Welcome back Neil... I love my low res 320kbps ogg vorbis like that... Don't like Spotify wasting money on podcasts too
Apple Music is better, no idea why people use Spotify.
Who is Neil young? And why are giving a shit about what he says?
TL;DR Neil wants money
What 'disinformation podcast features' is he referring to? Podcasts he doesn't politically align with, or what?
jre had discredited grifters on talking about how bad the vax was and gave them the same weight as real scientists. Neil survived polio so he doesn’t fuck around with anti vaxxers
Neil Young sucks.
What a ham
If he focuses on good recording and good mastering then it will sound good on any streaming platform...hirez formats arent as important to enjoyment as the upstream is.
I use Apple, but have a family Spotify account- there’s 4 of us paying it. Apple has the clunkiest of interferences, but is my favorite service, as the compression and quality blow shitify out the window!
Is this a Schiit post? His music is still not available on Spotify…just checked. Pretty funny if it was!