back to article Tidal music launch: Pop plutocrats pour FLAC on rival Spotify

Pop mega-stars including potty-mouthed rapper Jay-Z, professional non-smiler Kanye West and someone called Madonna have “launched” a music-streaming service owned by the artists. It includes a “lossless” FLAC audio quality $19.99-per-month tier, and there’s no ad-supported version. Jay-Z spent $56m this year on Aspiro, which …

  1. John Styles

    Badger surveyor

    Or why not become a badger surveyor http://www.cieem.net/data/files/Resource_Library/Technical_Guidance_Series/CSS/CSS_-_BADGER_April_2013.pdf

    or a newt surveyor

    http://www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk/day-another-day-life-great-crested-newt-surveyor/

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Badger surveyor

      Do badger surveyors also have to count mushrooms and snakes?

      1. breakfast
        Pint

        Re: Badger surveyor

        Nope, they just have to count enough badgers to complete the sett.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Waste of space. MUCH rather have high bitrate lossy aac, ac3, ogg, etc. at a higher hertz and multichannel. Seriously, even if you claim CDDA quality is better than mp3, you still understand this is wasteful for a streaming service. I'm with Neil Young, until CD is dead, high quality music will have to wait.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        This is what should have happened years ago. I hope they aren't too late.

        >Commercial distribution of music to end users in FLAC is a perfect solution as far as I'm concerned.

        Do iphones support FLAC now? If not, well... it was a nice idea. You've also got the problem that Apple might decide it wants to do streaming and removes your app from its store.

        Lastly, but not leastly... how much per month? I'm all for not under-funding things, but are there still people who spend that much on music every month who don't want to buy the CD? Is the service that different from, say, Swift's Vevo postings with the video discarded? Hello JDownloader2, my caching friend!

        Perhaps there is a market out there which can be tapped, but streaming has always seemed to me to be a solution looking for a problem and not finding a problem large enough to allow funding. Oh it solves artists' problems, but it doesn't solve customers' problems.

        Its a bit like catch-up tv streaming. Quite frankly, its worse than piracy. I don't mean, "I don't want to watch commercials" I mean, the compression is so high and the streaming so flaky that it hurts my eyes and irritates me when it crashes and I have to try to scroll through and find my place again, but also watch all the adverts all over again. Torrents give better quality. Why not just put in short adverts of uneven length so it isn't worth skipping and push the video out on a tracker?

        1. nijam Silver badge

          > Do iphones support FLAC now?

          No, that niggling little "F" means that Apple will not tolerate it.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "Commercial distribution of music to end users in FLAC is a perfect solution as far as I'm concerned."

        Just so you here understand, your "perfect" solution wasn't even perfect the year it was drafted, which was 1979. Some of the earlier drafts for Red Book were testing 48khz, not 44.1khz (I've never read on why they couldn't do 48khz, maybe you know since you read about all of this?). If you really like the digital "solution" from 36 years ago, then you're in luck because that is all there is.

        BTW, I know you just read about music quality, because anyone worth their weight in audio knows a higher lossy bitrate has absolutely, positively, nothing to do with whatever a loseless bitrate is...NOTHING!

        "Oh it solves artists' problems, but it doesn't solve customers' problems" <- No it doesn't solve their problems, it creates them. The process of tracking down royalties is cumbersome, and like YouTube, this won't help. Of course piracy is very real and pretty much kills a streaming service at this price point (it costs more than NetFlix!). My suggestion is ditch CDDA completely and invest in a vinyl setup for ripping *if* you're serious about buying right now. Vinyl, sadly, is still mainstream king (but I just can't afford it anymore, financially or the physical room).

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

        2. This post has been deleted by its author

          1. AbelSoul
            Boffin

            Re: The number of people with hearing extending beyond 24000hz is ZERO

            There's an online test to check your own threshold here (clicky)

            Nothing above 16kHz for my auld, battered lugs.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            "... least 50% of audiophiles are perfectly happy with 44100 hz sampling."

            Ah, and there we are, your in that 50%. You continue down the path of 1979, I'm movig on. Wait I can't, your 50% is too stuburn! You'll have plenty of more times to regurgitate what you have posted again, because eventually the entity that keeps your "perfect solution" alive will have to up the bar if they want fight piracy. Wether we like it or not, sales will dictate who's camp will have prevail. I'm hopeful users mine, it makes sense. If they up the numbers, I will be happy and you can down sample to that 70's spec. Win/win, but not enough see it that way.

  3. AceRimmer

    All I see is

    People with lots of money demanding even more money.

    There is literally a couple of billon dollars of net worth signed up to this

    1. Fibbles

      Re: All I see is

      Spotify paying pittance per steam is just as bad for poor artists as rich ones. This service should help improve the situation somewhat.

      Jay-Z's current bank balance is irrelevant.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Trollface

    Re: Must say it..

    Listeners with more refined musucal tastes can always use ClassicsOnlineHD for lossless music, just £11.99/month

  5. Zog_but_not_the_first
    Facepalm

    On the other hand...

    I buy good quality second-hand CDs from eBay, bit-perfect rip them to FLAC or AIF then I have the music and the CD.

    I know we're supposed to rent everything now, but if you lose your income, you have nothing. I can build a house out of my CDs and live in that if need be.

  6. Irongut

    So who are the musicians that are involved? I don't see any musicians listed in the article.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I don't see any musicians

      And you probably never will, musicians have longevity and don't need to shout "pay me loads of money I'm really talented" from their shirt lived podiums

      look up a video called "The Wreckin Crew", see how most bands got their studio sound without ever playing in one

    2. Killing Time

      Thought that myself. Nicki Minaji? Vaguely recall someone obviously dressed to draw attention but with a backside that reminded me of a Neil Hannon lyric. Absolutely no recollection of their contribution to music though…..

  7. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

    Who cares?

    All of the mentioned are musical Zulu Tango Deltas, anyway... Zero Talent Detected.

    1. User McUser

      Re: Who cares?

      And yet despite this notable handicap, they're all doing considerably well for themselves.

  8. MarthaFarqhar

    Pushing back the tide

    Tidal? Never has there been such a collection of self absorbed utter Cnuts assembled in one place in the whole of history

  9. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. mANgLEr

      You should count yourself lucky. At today's currency rate $20==£13.48, and yet all that hard work getting the audio streams through customs tacks an extra £6.52 on to our bills this side of the pond.

    2. Undergrid
      Thumb Down

      Rip-off Tidal

      If you think that's bad, in the UK you'll pay the equivalent of $29.50 (£19.99). And that's the highest of any country listed in the FAQ, some (for example Hong Kong) are paying less than £9. I get we pay VAT over here, but I really don't remember that being put up to 50% recently...

      I may subscribe to a streaming service (I get Deezer via my mobile phone service for example) but I'm not about to subscribe to something that's such a rip-off when compared to itself!

  10. Chands

    So let's see, they're going to charge double for subscriptions and pay double the royalties. To me that sounds like the same % going to the Artist. Do they even math ?

    A complete waste of time, much like other ventures of Music Technology and Artists, aka Beats.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021