# Amazon launches Music HD with lossless streaming



## gemNeye

_Amazon is planning to launch a new high-fidelity music streaming service with better-than-CD-quality audio, reports Music Business Worldwide. The new service is expected to cost around $15 a month, and it would sit alongside Amazon’s existing music services. These include Prime Music and Music Unlimited, which currently offer streams at a maximum of 256 Kbps, well below the 1,411 Kbps bitrate of CDs.
_
Continue reading at link below:

https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/26/...-hi-fi-tidal-competitor-unlimited-prime-price


----------



## The Socialist Nerd

Impressive but due to politics, I really don't support Amazon so Tidal streaming gets my weight.


----------



## alan_g

yeah got a message about the service earlier today, I don't bother with streaming but im sure some will give them a go


----------



## gemNeye (Sep 17, 2019)

Just updated the thread title and now here is an updated press release.  Highlights from the release are as follows:

$12.99/mo. for Prime members.  $14.99/mo. for everyone else.
90 day free trial for a limited time
Will offer lossless streaming and lossless download purchases

Amazon HD trial link

https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/amazon-launches-amazon-music-hd-with-lossless-audio-streaming/


----------



## Dtuck90

I can’t seem to get this working on iOS. I’ve upgraded but still getting the same low quality as before


----------



## gemNeye

Dtuck90 said:


> I can’t seem to get this working on iOS. I’ve upgraded but still getting the same low quality as before



I don't have any iOS devices to test this, but if and when you get this resolved, be sure to post the fix in case anyone else runs into the same issue.


----------



## Dtuck90

gemNeye said:


> I don't have any iOS devices to test this, but if and when you get this resolved, be sure to post the fix in case anyone else runs into the same issue.



I’ve sorted it. Update the app and then sign out and back in and that sorted it


----------



## Double C

This is great news!


----------



## Inoculator

I am excited this is finally launching, but they need to do some serious work on their desktop app if they want to be taken seriously as an audiophile streaming source. Terrible UI and no way to bypass windows mixer.


----------



## Marlowe

I started the 90 day free trial a couple of hours ago. With casual listening, sound is comparable to Tidal. Unfortunately, the Windows app is really a pain to navigate.


----------



## Dtuck90

Sorted out my iOS problems and currently got my iPad Pro connected to my Sony WM1A. My Walkman is showing every tracks as 192 so I think the app upsamples everything. For example when I use my Walkman with NYA my Walkman shows the correct quality for each track

Is there a way to change it to show albums in chronological order rather than popular albums?


----------



## sathyam

Subscribed for the Annual Family HD Plan for $149.99. Its got a 30 day trial.

Will try it out when I get my SP2K later this week.


----------



## imackler

Nice! Just a little over $12/month for HD is fantastic.


----------



## Tooros

sathyam said:


> Subscribed for the Annual Family HD Plan for $149.99. Its got a 30 day trial.
> 
> Will try it out when I get my SP2K later this week.



It’s not here in the UK yet but that seems like a good price. How many users if I may ask? 
How does it do the high bitrate stuff? Is it MQA anyone?


----------



## Dtuck90

Tooros said:


> It’s not here in the UK yet but that seems like a good price. How many users if I may ask?
> How does it do the high bitrate stuff? Is it MQA anyone?



It is available in U.K. as it gave me the option for all the different plans earlier. No MQA all FLAC


----------



## PopZeus

I’ll be curious to see if Android DAP makers start prioritizing Amazon Music app compatibility as a matter of evolving audiophile listening habits.


----------



## beemarman

Dtuck90 said:


> It is available in U.K. as it gave me the option for all the different plans earlier. No MQA all FLAC


I’ve installed it on my iOS device.  Am based in the Uk.  The sound quality rivals Qobuz and the catalog is very good. For £12.99 for prime users it definitely betters Qobuz and Tidal for value for money. 

Using my Chord Hugo 2 with my iPhone.   At the moment I can’t seem to get to work on my A&K SP1000.  

90 day trial offered at the moment.  I’ve already cancelled my subscription for Quboz.


----------



## Tooros

Signed up. Thanks everyone. Got it on the iPhone. Is there a web player or do I need to install the amazon music app on pc? Cheers!


----------



## sathyam

Tooros said:


> It’s not here in the UK yet but that seems like a good price. How many users if I may ask?
> How does it do the high bitrate stuff? Is it MQA anyone?



6 Users. It's FLAC 24bit/44khz for the UltraHD songs. Have not tried it yet with a HiRes player as i have not unpacked my equipment after a move. Waiting on the SP2000 later this week.

I think UK is planned for soon.


----------



## TK33 (Sep 17, 2019)

I coincidentally signed up for a 90 day Amazon Music Unlimited trial yesterday so trying out HD (they let you upgrade the existing trial).  Sounds fantastic so far.  I am using a Galaxy S9 and had to delete app data to get the app to redownload my music.

Question - anyone else using this notice that for purchased music it does not show Ultra HD, HD, or SD?  Unsure if it is just something wrong with my app.  Now if only they would let me purchase FLAC...


----------



## AudibleLegend (Sep 17, 2019)

sathyam said:


> 6 Users. It's FLAC 24bit/44khz for the UltraHD songs.



Hmm. The Amazon guy talking about this to the media was saying that some listeners won't be able to go beyond "44 khz" because of their audio capabilities. In fact, if you click the HD symbol, it shows what your device is most capable of running. Perhaps they haven't delivered yet beyond 24bit/44khz though, but they would certainly be planning to given his comments.




Tooros said:


> Signed up. Thanks everyone. Got it on the iPhone. Is there a web player or do I need to install the amazon music app on pc? Cheers!



They force you to install the PC music app...and then of course you need to do line-out playing or else you're going to be transmitting it via BlueTooth which defeats the purpose. So, yeah, no web player capabilities (which makes sense) and I doubt they'll ever have it.

I was personally already a subscriber to the annual plan ($79.99 a year for Prime Members - easily the best value of any service). They chuck on an extra $50 for HD for a year and then charge you $79.99 on your next annual billing date and then $50 on the next HD billing date (two different dates, obviously, if you were already an annual subscriber).

Not sure if this is totally worth it yet for me (I'm on a month-long trial). It would be a no-brainer if I had a direct device that could access it (maybe try it with my phone and a line-out?). Not really going to want to deal with playing stuff off the laptop (I've been using the Amazon Music Roku TV App).


----------



## AudibleLegend

Inoculator said:


> I am excited this is finally launching, but they need to do some serious work on their desktop app if they want to be taken seriously as an audiophile streaming source. Terrible UI and no way to bypass windows mixer.



Ugh. I was noticing that regarding Windows. Congrats on the Angel Olsen avatar, by the way, she's amazing.


----------



## AudibleLegend

That is pretty cray-cray that you can download 16 and 24 Bit FLAC files in the app. It puts HD Tracks and the like completely out of business, basically.

Most people's phones are useless though. How much room would you really have for 24 Bit albums? Like enough space for 10 of them among your other apps, etc.?


----------



## TK33

AudibleLegend said:


> Most people's phones are useless though. How much room would you really have for 24 Bit albums? Like enough space for 10 of them among your other apps, etc.?



That's why I refuse to give up my microSD cards  400gb cards are pretty cheap nowadays.


----------



## tomwoo

Tooros said:


> It’s not here in the UK yet but that seems like a good price. How many users if I may ask?
> How does it do the high bitrate stuff? Is it MQA anyone?


Still don't get MQA other than those people want to use it to make money...(which is bad news for consumers)
It's not that we don't have the bandwidth to stream 24/192 files, we are already streaming 4K HDR videos for god's sake.


----------



## TjPhysicist

I'm still on the fence between this and Tidal. Tidal has better PC and Mac app (audirvana) and the app on my music player (iBasso) says it's not capable of more than 24/44khz so it defaults to 16/44, so...identical to Tidal for me at least. Plus theres the political reasons you may not wanna go with Amazon. OTOH - Amazon is FAR less likely to suddenly go under, stop it's service etc, which I feel like is always a chance with Tidal?

What do you guys think so far? Switch to amazon music even if it offers the same audio? Now, the masters, compression etc may be better with amazon music vs tidal, idk yet.


----------



## Tooros (Sep 18, 2019)

Obviously iPhones feeding anything through the lightning port are hobbled to 24/48 anyway so I haven’t tried anything above that yet. Looking forward to installing and playing with the desktop thing later. Seems ok so far on the phone though. Decent catalogue and there are things there that I can’t find on tidal. However. I have encountered (twice) the ‘sorry this is not available in your region’ nonsense. Why show me something I can’t play?


----------



## Devodonaldson

Tooros said:


> Obviously iPhones feeding anything through the lightning port are hobbled to 24/48 anyway so I haven’t tried anything above that yet. Looking forward to installing and playing with the desktop thing later. Seems ok so far on the phone though. Decent catalogue and there are things there that I can’t find on tidal. However. I have encountered (twice) the ‘sorry this is not available in your region’ nonsense. Why show me something I can’t play?


Using iPhone to Mojo and iPhone to ifi xDSD. I get up to 24-bit/192khz, not 24/48. The only issue is that even 24/96 is getting updampled to 24/192. On the positive, it seems as though hi-res audio sounds a bit better than Tidal Masters, even though Tidal is giving me proper resolution, 24/48, 24/96.


----------



## TjPhysicist

Devodonaldson said:


> Using iPhone to Mojo and iPhone to ifi xDSD. I get up to 24-bit/192khz, not 24/48. The only issue is that even 24/96 is getting updampled to 24/192. On the positive, it seems as though hi-res audio sounds a bit better than Tidal Masters, even though Tidal is giving me proper resolution, 24/48, 24/96.


yea, so all in all seems like it's real tough to get something to do bitperfect with amazon HQ, that's sad.


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> yea, so all in all seems like it's real tough to get something to do bitperfect with amazon HQ, that's sad.


True. Glad it's a 90 day trial. The sound is nice. Noticing a bit of an upgrade over Tidal, but I don't like that all audio is being upsampled. I'm adding music to Amazon library, but keeping my Tidal downloads. We'll see if they make some changes before December. If they do go bit-perfect, by then I could see myself switching. $20 for a 6 member family plan, vs $30 for a 5 member family plan via Tidal. Hopefully they continue to work on it.


----------



## Ra97oR

It's fixed to 48/24 on Android too.


----------



## Devodonaldson

Ra97oR said:


> It's fixed to 48/24 on Android too.


All audio apps are fixed to 24/48 on Android. On iOS it upsampled to 24/192 if you're DAC is capable of that


----------



## TjPhysicist

Devodonaldson said:


> All audio apps are fixed to 24/48 on Android. On iOS it upsampled to 24/192 if you're DAC is capable of that


yea but it's curious that even custom modded androids that do NOT have that failling (i.e. have their own audio stack) like DAPs and phones like LG evidently don't go upto 192 for amazon hq? Or at least, from what I can tell whilst testing the two DAPs i've tried today (DX150 and X5).

I'm curious to know why that is, and if this is just a freak case for iBasso or if even other customized android version that SHOULD support native bitperfect sampling have this issue?


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> yea but it's curious that even custom modded androids that do NOT have that failling (i.e. have their own audio stack) like DAPs and phones like LG evidently don't go upto 192 for amazon hq? Or at least, from what I can tell whilst testing the two DAPs i've tried today (DX150 and X5).


If I'm not mistaken, both of those devices are not bit-perfect with streaming apps, only the local player or apps with built in Android SRC bypassing. Dx 150 doesn't do direct transport audio, I don't think. Also, the LG DAC only bypasses Android SRC for Tidal MQA audio. Even the normal CD quality audio gets upsampled on the LG phones, because it runs through the Android Audio stack.


----------



## TjPhysicist

Devodonaldson said:


> If I'm not mistaken, both of those devices are not bit-perfect with streaming apps, only the local player or apps with built in Android SRC bypassing. Dx 150 doesn't do direct transport audio, I don't think. Also, the LG DAC only bypasses Android SRC for Tidal MQA audio. Even the normal CD quality audio gets upsampled on the LG phones, because it runs through the Android Audio stack.


wait, so bitperfect only applies to local apps? I suspected as much at first but thought that had changed, that sucks. All in all though, is there ANY way to get Tidal bitperfect transport? That's sad...more to the point - for amazon HQ since bitperfect actually matters here - can we get ANY portable solution that offers bitperfect?


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> wait, so bitperfect only applies to local apps? I suspected as much at first but thought that had changed, that sucks. All in all though, is there ANY way to get Tidal bitperfect transport? That's sad...more to the point - for amazon HQ since bitperfect actually matters here - can we get ANY portable solution that offers bitperfect?


What is the device you are using?


----------



## TjPhysicist

Currently DX150, but I wouldn't mind selling it and buying another device if it means I can get >44khz streaming. Maybe I should just go with my initial plan of non streaming DAP with better quality+buy my flacs or smthg...lol.


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> Currently DX150, but I wouldn't mind selling it and buying another device if it means I can get >44khz streaming. Maybe I should just go with my initial plan of non streaming DAP with better quality+buy my flacs or smthg...lol.


Current Android DAPs that do direct transport audio aka bypass Android sample rate conversion on all apps when using the built in DAC are Hiby R5, R6, R6 pro, Cayin 6ii. Not aware of any others currently. I do not believe these DAPs output bit-perfect audio to external DAC/amps though. iOS actually outputs bit-perfect audio to external DACs that have hi-res capability via apps with hi-res output such as Tidal and Qobuz.Amazon music upsampled for the time being, but I believe the hi-res flacs soundb than Tidal Masters. I just don't like the upsampling of all the audio. However, if I continue to feel it sounds better to my DACs than Tidal, perhaps I may switch over before the 3 month trial expires. It's cheaper on a family plan by $10, anyway.


----------



## TjPhysicist

Devodonaldson said:


> Current Android DAPs that do direct transport audio aka bypass Android sample rate conversion on all apps when using the built in DAC are Hiby R5, R6, R6 pro, Cayin 6ii. Not aware of any others currently. I do not believe these DAPs output bit-perfect audio to external DAC/amps though. iOS actually outputs bit-perfect audio to external DACs that have hi-res capability via apps with hi-res output such as Tidal and Qobuz.Amazon music upsampled for the time being, but I believe the hi-res flacs soundb than Tidal Masters. I just don't like the upsampling of all the audio. However, if I continue to feel it sounds better to my DACs than Tidal, perhaps I may switch over before the 3 month trial expires. It's cheaper on a family plan by $10, anyway.


hmm, is this a software thing? I mean lurkers mod on ibasso SHOULD be able to do bitperfect or something? not sure...at any rate, can someone test out a DAP using *internal* DAC and tell me one that works with Ultra HQ for sure? I should be able to sell my ibasso to buy it...


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> Currently DX150, but I wouldn't mind selling it and buying another device if it means I can get >44khz streaming. Maybe I should just go with my initial plan of non streaming DAP with better quality+buy my flacs or smthg...lol.


That was my original thought, but I like the power and sq of external DACs. People have an issue with stacking on their phones, which I understand, and carrying around a double stack in your hand or pocket can be irritating, however with an iOS device, there are a myriad of belt holsters available, so the device can sit on your hip hands free. In my signature, that Monolith DAC is dual locked to a 256,gb iPhone 7 used as transport, and I have a holster that the iPhone slides into, SOI don't have to carry in my pocket or hand.cive been using Tidal for a few years and switched from Android to iOS for music ONLY once Tidal added Masters audio to the mobile platforms. Qobuz costs too much. I love Tidal, minus the fact that adding several albums in the play que negates the ability to shuffle the que, but the 24/44, 24/48 and 24/96 audio to a chord Mojo has been awesome.


----------



## TjPhysicist

Devodonaldson said:


> That was my original thought, but I like the power and sq of external DACs. People have an issue with stacking on their phones, which I understand, and carrying around a double stack in your hand or pocket can be irritating, however with an iOS device, there are a myriad of belt holsters available, so the device can sit on your hip hands free. In my signature, that Monolith DAC is dual locked to a 256,gb iPhone 7 used as transport, and I have a holster that the iPhone slides into, SOI don't have to carry in my pocket or hand.cive been using Tidal for a few years and switched from Android to iOS for music ONLY once Tidal added Masters audio to the mobile platforms. Qobuz costs too much. I love Tidal, minus the fact that adding several albums in the play que negates the ability to shuffle the que, but the 24/44, 24/48 and 24/96 audio to a chord Mojo has been awesome.


i don't MIND doing a transport, and honestly i would LOVE to use my phone...but something something, USB-C+Android is just the WORST at this.


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> hmm, is this a software thing? I mean lurkers mod on ibasso SHOULD be able to do bitperfect or something? not sure...at any rate, can someone test out a DAP using *internal* DAC and tell me one that works with Ultra HQ for sure? I should be able to sell my ibasso to buy it...


Just read the changelog for Lurker mod. That mod only adds Hiby Music and USB Audio player, allowing bit-perfect audio to locally stored music files, not offline files from streaming services.


----------



## TjPhysicist

Devodonaldson said:


> Just read the changelog for Lurker mod. That mod only adds Hiby Music and USB Audio player, allowing bit-perfect audio to locally stored music files, not offline files from streaming services.


, so what's my best solution here? 

1. Buy another device (which one?)
2. Use my PHONE as transport + UAPP or something.

You know what, better yet, can someone tell me a 100% "this works for me all the time" solution that involves playing streaming bitperfect >44khz audio (esp, with Amazon streaming actually offering this)?


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> , so what's my best solution here?
> 
> 1. Buy another device (which one?)
> 2. Use my PHONE as transport + UAPP or something.
> ...


As of right now, Amazon Music HD does not do bit-perfect audio. We'll all be waiting to see if this gets updated. As far as other streaming services such as Tidal, Qobuz with offline stored music you will get bit-perfect to external DAC on an iOS device. iPhone 7 and up have a 256gb model. Got a used 7 for $250. IOS itself is limited to 24/48, but certain hi-res apps transport at the native rate of the music to external DACs that are capable. Tidal Masters to an external DAC that does MQA outputs MQA on an iPhone to those DACs. I do that with my ifi xDSD. But my Chord Mojo sounds better at the 24/96 first unfold from the app, than MQA fully unfolded to my xDSD, so I use the mojo more. So, as I stated, your current options for DAPs are Hiby R5, r6, r6 pro, and Cayin n6ii for bit-perfect output using ALL apps. iOS device to external DAC for streaming/offline apps. And, we are all waiting to see if Amazon music upgrades. That is the extent of it at the moment


----------



## TjPhysicist

Devodonaldson said:


> As of right now, Amazon Music HD does not do bit-perfect audio. We'll all be waiting to see if this gets updated. As far as other streaming services such as Tidal, Qobuz with offline stored music you will get bit-perfect to external DAC on an iOS device. iPhone 7 and up have a 256gb model. Got a used 7 for $250. IOS itself is limited to 24/48, but certain hi-res apps transport at the native rate of the music to external DACs that are capable. Tidal Masters to an external DAC that does MQA outputs MQA on an iPhone to those DACs. I do that with my ifi xDSD. But my Chord Mojo sounds better at the 24/96 first unfold from the app, than MQA fully unfolded to my xDSD, so I use the mojo more. So, as I stated, your current options for DAPs are Hiby R5, r6, r6 pro, and Cayin n6ii for bit-perfect output using ALL apps. iOS device to external DAC for streaming/offline apps. And, we are all waiting to see if Amazon music upgrades. That is the extent of it at the moment


So HIby does bitperfect using ANY android app? (i wonder why that's something Hiby can do, but Fiio and Ibasso cannot?)...and If I'm hearing you right, for some reason Tidal should be able to do Bitperfect as is on Hiby but Amazon HD cannot due to some way it works?


----------



## Devodonaldson

TjPhysicist said:


> So HIby does bitperfect using ANY android app? (i wonder why that's something Hiby can do, but Fiio and Ibasso cannot?)...and If I'm hearing you right, for some reason Tidal should be able to do Bitperfect as is on Hiby but Amazon HD cannot due to some way it works?


Hiby specifically worked on the software to make it bit-perfect output. Ibasso did not. Amazon music as currently set has some coding that runs at possibly the highest resolution it sees from the DAC. IT'S all software stuff that can be fixed in the app. As far as the DAPs, that is more about hardware and software implementation, so more work on getting them to work together. Something that is usually achieved in development.


----------



## C_Lindbergh

Is the 90 day trial only for certain countries? I can only sign up for 30 days :/


----------



## SoraNeko

C_Lindbergh said:


> Is the 90 day trial only for certain countries? I can only sign up for 30 days :/


yeah.. here too...


----------



## judson_w

I managed to get the 90 day trial and there was a note stating it was for new subscribers only.  I had never subscribed to Amazon Music Unlimited, which might be why I got the 90 day trial instead of 30 day?


----------



## exdmd

TjPhysicist said:


> I'm still on the fence between this and Tidal. Tidal has better PC and Mac app (audirvana) and the app on my music player (iBasso) says it's not capable of more than 24/44khz so it defaults to 16/44, so...identical to Tidal for me at least. Plus theres the political reasons you may not wanna go with Amazon. OTOH - Amazon is FAR less likely to suddenly go under, stop it's service etc, which I feel like is always a chance with Tidal?
> 
> What do you guys think so far? Switch to amazon music even if it offers the same audio? Now, the masters, compression etc may be better with amazon music vs tidal, idk yet.



I dropped Tidal for Qobuz a while back because SQ was a bit better on Qobuz for me. I took Amazon up on the 90 day free trial and after a few hours of listening it was pretty obvious to me that sound quality was always better listening to the same track on Qobuz than Amazon HD. If Amazon makes changes so that a DAC can have exclusive control of the music like Tidal and Qobuz does I bet quality would improve. I'll keep it around for a few months but right now I will be using Qobuz through Audirvana+ as usual.


----------



## TK33 (Sep 18, 2019)

judson_w said:


> I managed to get the 90 day trial and there was a note stating it was for new subscribers only.  I had never subscribed to Amazon Music Unlimited, which might be why I got the 90 day trial instead of 30 day?



I had contacted Amazon via chat about the IMDB 90 day promo they were running and they told me that the 90 day trial is only for new subscribers.  I cancelled service in 2017.  I told the agent that I have been getting random popups congratulating me on being eligible for a 90 day trial during the last few weeks (makes more sense now in light of this new offering).  Of course, Amazon's fabulous customer support rep chose to ignore my comments and just read from the script (this assumes I was actually chatting with a person and not a robot).  Later that day, I just opened up the app again and the promo popped up once again so I jumped on it before the Alexa popup could take over my screen again.  I am currently using the 90 day trial (it is a 30 day trial with a renewal at $0/month for 2 months) and I was able to upgrade the trial to Amazon Music HD at no additional cost during the trial period so it is not only for new subscribers.  Perhaps the promos are targeted?  If it matters, I am in the US.


----------



## sathyam

In the US, The monthly subscription seems to give 90 days trial. The annual seems to give 30 days trial.


----------



## csglinux

Devodonaldson said:


> If I'm not mistaken, both of those devices are not bit-perfect with streaming apps, only the local player or apps with built in Android SRC bypassing. Dx 150 doesn't do direct transport audio, I don't think. Also, the LG DAC only bypasses Android SRC for Tidal MQA audio. Even the normal CD quality audio gets upsampled on the LG phones, because it runs through the Android Audio stack.


That's not quite true. Anything 24 bit will play at native resolution on these quad DAC phone. So anything hi-res is fine. 44/16 is the problem, but there is a work-around for that, because you can stream Tidal at the correct (original) sample rate via UAPP.

As for this Amazon "HD" music service - Amazon seem to have dropped the ball here. I don't know why they'd release this to the masses when their own app is crippled from the get-go on every single platform.


----------



## loomisjohnson

just started my free trial and here are my initial impressions:
1. UI isn't terrible (better than tidal) but vastly inferior to spotify; dark background is difficult to navigate
2. library seems deep, especially in jazz, and comparable to spotify; however there's less ultra hd content than advertised. they don't have the podcast and non-music offerings of spotify, but i expect that will change.
3. hd sound is vg and better than spotify premium, if not night-and-day different. ultra hd is superb
4. playlists and recommendations are adequate, though again much behind spotify.
i fully expect amazon will continue to upgrade and improve the app as it gains traction--they have a long-term plan for world domination and the $$$ for development. i assume this will force spotify to roll out a hi-rez tier; i don't see how tidal will remain relevant or viable.


----------



## Tooros (Sep 18, 2019)

Very Initial thoughts/issues
Catalogue seems huge.
I have seen issues trying to play items that appear to be there but on clicking are blocked due to 'unavailability in my region'  (Biosphere: 'Substrata') specifically.
I downloaded some 192/24 stuff to my phone (there is no choice - UHD gives you whatever the highest is - It would only play in my car for about 2 mins then suddenly stopped and I couldn't skip/restart (Apple Carplay)
I quite like the desktop app but - I can't let the dac do what it wants. So  - I have to set windows to allow 192/24 and the dac will always show 192/24 even if the track is 44.1/16 - the desktop player does show what's the source/what's playing and what the dac is capable of - I think that's pretty nice feature but - I'd far rather (like tidal) let the dac deal with everything directly.
I wholeheartedly agree this will be the kick in the proverbials that apple music / spotify need.

EDIT - this is weird too - a mix of HD/UHD tracks on the same album?! - the Desktop players says 'Ultra HD' but on opening the album only one or two tracks are - the rest being HD only.


----------



## tomwoo

Can any one get UltraHD to work for Mojo on Mac? Mine is stuck at 24/44 no matter the source...


----------



## SilverEars

exdmd said:


> I dropped Tidal for Qobuz a while back because SQ was a bit better on Qobuz for me. I took Amazon up on the 90 day free trial and after a few hours of listening it was pretty obvious to me that sound quality was always better listening to the same track on Qobuz than Amazon HD. If Amazon makes changes so that a DAC can have exclusive control of the music like Tidal and Qobuz does I bet quality would improve. I'll keep it around for a few months but right now I will be using Qobuz through Audirvana+ as usual.


I found Tidal to sound better over Qobuz, and this was based on comparing same album, but I generally felt Tidal for some reason sounds better, best of any streaming apps on the desktop.  And I don't believe the difference are due to bit-perfect, as both have bit-perfect.

I would be interested if Amazon adds bit-perfect mode though.  Other than that, I don't like the crippled desktop app and it's ui.  Sounds fairly ordinary like any other streaming service to me.


----------



## judson_w (Sep 18, 2019)

tomwoo said:


> Can any one get UltraHD to work for Mojo on Mac? Mine is stuck at 24/44 no matter the source...



I will say that "UltraHD" seems to be anything above 16/44.1.  I am listening to "Sound & Color" by Alabama Shakes and it lists the max resolution possible as 24/44.1.  I am assuming you have confirmed that all of the things you have tried are listed being available above 24/44?

Also, I am not sure what visibility options are available to you, but I know on the mobile app it does show the max resolution available, max resolution you can play on your device, and what resolution you are playing.

Edit: For Clarification, Sound & Color is listed as UltraHD in the app, but shows as 24/44.1, and my phone is listed as capping at 24/48.


----------



## PopZeus

It's interesting that Amazon is pushing this as a way of differentiating themselves from the other players, but none of their physical audio products are capable of presenting the improvement that HD, UHD bring over lossy in a compelling way. At least from what I've seen so far.


----------



## tomwoo

judson_w said:


> I will say that "UltraHD" seems to be anything above 16/44.1.  I am listening to "Sound & Color" by Alabama Shakes and it lists the max resolution possible as 24/44.1.  I am assuming you have confirmed that all of the things you have tried are listed being available above 24/44?
> 
> Also, I am not sure what visibility options are available to you, but I know on the mobile app it does show the max resolution available, max resolution you can play on your device, and what resolution you are playing.
> 
> Edit: For Clarification, Sound & Color is listed as UltraHD in the app, but shows as 24/44.1, and my phone is listed as capping at 24/48.


When I clicked on the UltraHD icon, it showed the track itself was 24/96, however my device capability was 24/44, pretty sure Rob Watts won't agree with that


----------



## judson_w

tomwoo said:


> When I clicked on the UltraHD icon, it showed the track itself was 24/96, however my device capability was 24/44, pretty sure Rob Watts won't agree with that



Could be a setting for Mojo? Or Mac?  Or just Amazon misreading the system. I don't know as I do not use it or Mac.  I know my phone is limited to 24/44.


----------



## Papa253

Ok 
I have a home receiver by Onkyo and it offers access streaming services like tidal Deezer Amazon etc etc.
But on the Amazon app in Onkyo it's not playing hi-rez files but in Tidal it's is! 

Anybody got a fix for that?


----------



## Ken G

tomwoo said:


> When I clicked on the UltraHD icon, it showed the track itself was 24/96, however my device capability was 24/44, pretty sure Rob Watts won't agree with that



What type of computer are you using to stream it to the Chord device? 
I had the same problem initially and had to configure the settings in my iMac Midi configuration to get full hi-res. On most Macs the default "system" maximum output rate for devices is set to 16/44. Since Tidal, Roon and other apps allow you to output right to the device, it will bypass the "system" and play at the native rate however Amazon requires you to use the Computer system output device which is defaulted to 16/44. 

To fix this on a MAC, open the Audio Midi Settings (From launchpad - likely in the "Other" folder), find your device and set it to the highest output setting it will allow.  This should fix the issue and you should see the device capability reflect the true rates.

Windows would likely have a similar Midi settings in the Sound preferences.


----------



## TK33

Papa253 said:


> Ok
> I have a home receiver by Onkyo and it offers access streaming services like tidal Deezer Amazon etc etc.
> But on the Amazon app in Onkyo it's not playing hi-rez files but in Tidal it's is!
> 
> Anybody got a fix for that?



I'm guessing its a firmware thing.  A notification popped up last night in my HEOS (Denon) app last night and mentioned an update so I am guessing it was related to this since I also received an email from Denon yesterday announcing Amazon Music HD.  Haven't had a chance to try it out on my HEOS speakers or receiver (X4300H) yet so can't confirm it works for either.


----------



## tomwoo

judson_w said:


> Could be a setting for Mojo? Or Mac?  Or just Amazon misreading the system. I don't know as I do not use it or Mac.  I know my phone is limited to 24/44.


I don't know if there is even a setting for that...I have no problem with Tidal app or Audirvana. It has to be Amazon Music app. Hopefully Amazon will get it right soon. I really cannot think of a reason why they are not able to do it while Tidal can.


----------



## Ken G

Btw, I forgot how terrible the Amazon Music interface is.


----------



## tomwoo

Ken G said:


> What type of computer are you using to stream it to the Chord device?
> I had the same problem initially and had to configure the settings in my iMac Midi configuration to get full hi-res. On most Macs the default "system" maximum output rate for devices is set to 16/44. Since Tidal, Roon and other apps allow you to output right to the device, it will bypass the "system" and play at the native rate however Amazon requires you to use the Computer system output device which is defaulted to 16/44.
> 
> To fix this on a MAC, open the Audio Midi Settings (From launchpad - likely in the "Other" folder), find your device and set it to the highest output setting it will allow.  This should fix the issue and you should see the device capability reflect the true rates.
> ...


It works, thanks a lot!


----------



## tomwoo

Ken G said:


> Btw, I forgot how terrible the Amazon Music interface is.


I'm sure they will get it right, eventually...


----------



## TK33

Ken G said:


> Btw, I forgot how terrible the Amazon Music interface is.



Me too...remembering why I stopped paying for it.  Doesn't look like it has improved at all during the last few years.


----------



## Ken G

tomwoo said:


> It works, thanks a lot!



If they really want to retain hi-res users, they really need to allow users to select the output device within the app like Tidal, Roon and Audirvana does. Otherwise they are likely to get flooded with complaints about users not getting the maximum song resolution. I put in feedback through the app to suggest that they do this.


----------



## Ken G

TK33 said:


> Me too...remembering why I stopped paying for it.  Doesn't look like it has improved at all during the last few years.



It's giving me flashbacks to the prehistoric Rhapsody mp3 subscription service circa 2004.


----------



## exdmd

Ken G said:


> If they really want to retain hi-res users, they really need to allow users to select the output device within the app like Tidal, Roon and Audirvana does. Otherwise they are likely to get flooded with complaints about users not getting the maximum song resolution. I put in feedback through the app to suggest that they do this.



Same here. If they do not improve their desktop app within the three month trial I will just drop them and stay with Qobuz. However Amazon may not really care about audiophiles as long as they meet their subscription targets. I suspect they may be finding a ton of us dropping Amazon Music HD before the trial is up if they don't improve the sound quality.


----------



## Papa253

Ken G said:


> It's giving me flashbacks to the prehistoric Rhapsody mp3 subscription service circa 2004.


Lol


----------



## Papa253

You can download for offline content for listening on Mac, beats tidal in that.
Maybe it will push Tidal to allow offline on Mac and Pc's


----------



## Left Channel

Papa253 said:


> Ok
> I have a home receiver by Onkyo and it offers access streaming services like tidal Deezer Amazon etc etc.
> But on the Amazon app in Onkyo it's not playing hi-rez files but in Tidal it's is!
> 
> Anybody got a fix for that?



You'll probably need to update your Onkyo receiver, if available. Onkyo is listed at the bottom of this page as an official partner: https://www.amazon.com/b?node=14063680011


----------



## Papa253

Left Channel said:


> You'll probably need to update your Onkyo receiver, if available. Onkyo is listed at the bottom of this page as an official partner: https://www.amazon.com/b?node=14063680011


Yea I thought of that too and download us the latest version not included.
Maybe later.


----------



## csglinux

Ken G said:


> To fix this on a MAC, open the Audio Midi Settings (From launchpad - likely in the "Other" folder), find your device and set it to the highest output setting it will allow. This should fix the issue and you should see the device capability reflect the true rates.


Is that really a fix? For one thing, it's certain that you're now up-sampling lower sample-rate tracks. More importantly, this hasn't guaranteed that you're actually getting anything higher than 44 kHz or 48 kHz.  (I've already checked the Android app and it seems to specifically limit the sample rate to nothing more than 48 kHz, even after it's told you the downloaded file has a higher sample rate.) I'll check the desktop clients when I get time, if nobody else beats me to it.



exdmd said:


> Same here. If they do not improve their desktop app within the three month trial I will just drop them and stay with Qobuz. However Amazon may not really care about audiophiles as long as they meet their subscription targets. I suspect they may be finding a ton of us dropping Amazon Music HD before the trial is up if they don't improve the sound quality.


That's exactly where I'm at too with their Android client. I'll give them three months, but I'm not optimistic. If they were able to overlook all this at launch, what are the odds that they even understand the issues?


----------



## tomwoo

Ken G said:


> If they really want to retain hi-res users, they really need to allow users to select the output device within the app like Tidal, Roon and Audirvana does. Otherwise they are likely to get flooded with complaints about users not getting the maximum song resolution. I put in feedback through the app to suggest that they do this.


Agreed. It's not exactly rocket science. Even though it is, it won't bother Bezos because he owns Blue Origin.


----------



## Papa253

tomwoo said:


> Agreed. It's not exactly rocket science. Even though it is, it won't bother Bezos because he owns Blue Origin.


Yep I'm right there with you


----------



## Ken G

csglinux said:


> Is that really a fix? For one thing, it's certain that you're now up-sampling lower sample-rate tracks. More importantly, this hasn't guaranteed that you're actually getting anything higher than 44 kHz or 48 kHz.  (I've already checked the Android app and it seems to specifically limit the sample rate to nothing more than 48 kHz, even after it's told you the downloaded file has a higher sample rate.) I'll check the desktop clients when I get time, if nobody else beats me to it.
> 
> 
> That's exactly where I'm at too with their Android client. I'll give them three months, but I'm not optimistic. If they were able to overlook all this at launch, what are the odds that they even understand the issues?



Shoot. I've been tinkering and I believe you are correct and it will just upsample which doesn't solve the problem. 

Does anyone know a bit perfect MAC solution to override the MIDI settings? There is a app called "bit perfect" but it seems to only work within iTunes and won't for any other apps.

Any answers?


----------



## AudibleLegend (Sep 18, 2019)

So, the iOS app gives you access to the HD stuff? Nothing has changed in the app for me at this time. I can see the changes on the PC app though.

EDIT: Never mind. Went into the App Store and saw a new update was added yesterday, so that should be it.

2nd Edit:  Nope. Still showing none of the HD stuff.


And no word about the television app, right? That's still the same for me.


----------



## TjPhysicist

AudibleLegend said:


> So, the iOS app gives you access to the HD stuff? Nothing has changed in the app for me at this time. I can see the changes on the PC app though.
> 
> EDIT: Never mind. Went into the App Store and saw a new update was added yesterday, so that should be it.
> 
> ...


wait, even the iOS app doesn't get you HD and ultra HD? wasn't that the ONE app where ultra HD should be working?


----------



## Dtuck90

AudibleLegend said:


> So, the iOS app gives you access to the HD stuff? Nothing has changed in the app for me at this time. I can see the changes on the PC app though.
> 
> EDIT: Never mind. Went into the App Store and saw a new update was added yesterday, so that should be it.
> 
> ...



Log out and then back in. That’s what I had to do after updating


----------



## 211276

It is disapointing that Amazon HD can not be accessed from third party apps such as BubbleUp and Audio Player Pro. I would give it a try if it was.


----------



## Duncan

Strangely my 90 day trial takes me all the way through until March 2020 - not complaining (UK)

Bit miffed that despite running an external DAC (Hidizs Sontata) on my phone - the best the app can see is 24/48, but - still sounding good.


----------



## Buckster

I've got fixed audio output to my E17 from my P20 Pro at 24/48

Still sounds fantastic though

My iPhone SE slightly better in that using internal Dac maximum output is 24/48 but app suggests he output is bit matching where it can so I've seen the app state device is outputting 24/48, 24/44, 16/44 etc


----------



## Tooros

Duncan said:


> Strangely my 90 day trial takes me all the way through until March 2020 - not complaining (UK)



May I ask how you check that? I'd like to ensure I have a correct reminder set for cancellation should it not work out.


----------



## XGeneX88

TLDR: Amazon Music HD does NOT sound right. I think they are doing something funny to the music and it is NOT reference. Does anyone else agree?

I've been listening to Amazon Music HD/Ultra HD since it's been out, doing comparative A/B listens on the following equipment: DX200 Balanced -> Aeons Closed, Cayin N5II -> Z1R, HE400i, and DX7 -> Z1R, HE400i, HD800S. The Apps I've used to compare have been Spotify 320kbps, Tidal MQA, and personal CD RIPS / 16bit 44.1 tracks. My conclusion is that Amazon Music is coloring the sound through either EQ or codec. There seems to be a +2/3 dB boost in bass, more / hotter treble (feels like maybe they're adding treble to create a perceived increase in detail but to me it just falls apart when listening for fidelity on tracks I use to test) and some songs get a strange artificial smoothness affect while losing lots and lots of detail (especially small fine details on tracks that happen in the background). As things currently sit, I prefer Spotify 320kbps sound over the Amazon HD Ultra tracks (generally speaking). I do not think they are giving us reference sound. I would love to hear opinions from other members of this forum. Am I crazy? Has anyone else noticed this? I've brought this up with my peers who have also been listening (at least a couple of them also being fellow audiophiles) and so far, I'm not the only one. I'd love to hear more voices on this. What do you guys think?


----------



## SilverEars

XGeneX88 said:


> TLDR: Amazon Music HD does NOT sound right. I think they are doing something funny to the music and it is NOT reference. Does anyone else agree?
> 
> I've been listening to Amazon Music HD/Ultra HD since it's been out, doing comparative A/B listens on the following equipment: DX200 Balanced -> Aeons Closed, Cayin N5II -> Z1R, HE400i, and DX7 -> Z1R, HE400i, HD800S. The Apps I've used to compare have been Spotify 320kbps, Tidal MQA, and personal CD RIPS / 16bit 44.1 tracks. My conclusion is that Amazon Music is coloring the sound through either EQ or codec. There seems to be a +2/3 dB boost in bass, more / hotter treble (feels like maybe they're adding treble to create a perceived increase in detail but to me it just falls apart when listening for fidelity on tracks I use to test) and some songs get a strange artificial smoothness affect while losing lots and lots of detail (especially small fine details on tracks that happen in the background). As things currently sit, I prefer Spotify 320kbps sound over the Amazon HD Ultra tracks (generally speaking). I do not think they are giving us reference sound. I would love to hear opinions from other members of this forum. Am I crazy? Has anyone else noticed this? I've brought this up with my peers who have also been listening (at least a couple of them also being fellow audiophiles) and so far, I'm not the only one. I'd love to hear more voices on this. What do you guys think?


I suggest changing your default sampling rate on windows sound setting to 16/44 see what that does.  That's the sampling rate of HD tracks.


----------



## TK33

Tooros said:


> May I ask how you check that? I'd like to ensure I have a correct reminder set for cancellation should it not work out.



You can see it in the app  I am using an Android phone and if you click the gear icon to go to settings --> Your Account (should say "Amazon Music HD Member") they tell you when it will renew at the bottom. It also gives you an option to receive a reminder 3 days before renewal, although I also have a calendar reminder set up.


----------



## beemarman

XGeneX88 said:


> TLDR: Amazon Music HD does NOT sound right. I think they are doing something funny to the music and it is NOT reference. Does anyone else agree?
> 
> I've been listening to Amazon Music HD/Ultra HD since it's been out, doing comparative A/B listens on the following equipment: DX200 Balanced -> Aeons Closed, Cayin N5II -> Z1R, HE400i, and DX7 -> Z1R, HE400i, HD800S. The Apps I've used to compare have been Spotify 320kbps, Tidal MQA, and personal CD RIPS / 16bit 44.1 tracks. My conclusion is that Amazon Music is coloring the sound through either EQ or codec. There seems to be a +2/3 dB boost in bass, more / hotter treble (feels like maybe they're adding treble to create a perceived increase in detail but to me it just falls apart when listening for fidelity on tracks I use to test) and some songs get a strange artificial smoothness affect while losing lots and lots of detail (especially small fine details on tracks that happen in the background). As things currently sit, I prefer Spotify 320kbps sound over the Amazon HD Ultra tracks (generally speaking). I do not think they are giving us reference sound. I would love to hear opinions from other members of this forum. Am I crazy? Has anyone else noticed this? I've brought this up with my peers who have also been listening (at least a couple of them also being fellow audiophiles) and so far, I'm not the only one. I'd love to hear more voices on this. What do you guys think?



Not me. I'm just enjoying the music instead of trying to analyzing the finer details. To my ears, it sounds very good.


----------



## Tooros

TK33 said:


> You can see it in the app  I am using an Android phone and if you click the gear icon to go to settings --> Your Account (should say "Amazon Music HD Member") they tell you when it will renew at the bottom. It also gives you an option to receive a reminder 3 days before renewal, although I also have a calendar reminder set up.



Thanks - I couldn't find it in the app but found it on amazon co uk  - It says 16th December so that's the 90 days.
Thing is - it says I'm a member of amazon music unlimited (not HD) and I'm going to be billed £14.99 on Dec 16th (I've signed up for the family membership on HD so I'd expect that to say £19.99)
Gremlins/ Teething issues  abound. 

The biggest one for me is apple car play - if I can't fix that I'm out for sure. Waiting for iOS13 to see what else goes wrong.


----------



## XGeneX88

SilverEars said:


> I suggest changing your default sampling rate on windows sound setting to 16/44 see what that does.  That's the sampling rate of HD tracks.



I'm hearing this on all of my devices, not just Windows. Cayin running Lollipop, Hiby R6 running Oreo, Windows 10, it doesn't seem to matter. I don't think this is a sampling rate issue. I'll have to check when I get home but I'm also fairly certain I already have this set as it was part of my setup for the DX7 gear I run on my Windows box.


----------



## XGeneX88

beemarman said:


> Not me. I'm just enjoying the music instead of trying to analyzing the finer details. To my ears, it sounds very good.



My issue isn't an "analyzing vs enjoying" the music. My issue is that tracks I'm very familiar with simply don't sound right. The bass and treble are off. It may make some headphones sound more "fun" or better but I don't think you're getting audio that is true to the recording. It sounds like they are adding their own "secret sauce" whether it's EQ or codec. The result in my opinion is an inferior product and it's something I'd like Amazon to acknowledge and fix. I love the price point they are offering but feel it needs to be reference and true to the recordings without any tinkering on their end.


----------



## SilverEars (Sep 19, 2019)

XGeneX88 said:


> My issue isn't an "analyzing vs enjoying" the music. My issue is that tracks I'm very familiar with simply don't sound right. The bass and treble are off. It may make some headphones sound more "fun" or better but I don't think you're getting audio that is true to the recording. It sounds like they are adding their own "secret sauce" whether it's EQ or codec. The result in my opinion is an inferior product and it's something I'd like Amazon to acknowledge and fix. I love the price point they are offering but feel it needs to be reference and true to the recordings without any tinkering on their end.


For me, I can tell the difference between oversampling and native rate of the file.

Oversampling doesn't sound right to me.  Sounds smoothed out, less detailed, and less tight response.  This is why I suggested setting the sampling to CD quality of 16/44, which all HD tracks run at.  

This is why oversampling product like Hugo M scalar is snakeoil.

Also, you can tell there's volume difference from Tidal, lower level, and this maybe due to normalization on.


----------



## XGeneX88

SilverEars said:


> For me, I can tell the difference between oversampling and native rate of the file.
> 
> Oversampling doesn't sound right to me.  Sounds smoothed out, less detailed, and less tight response.  This is why I suggested setting the sampling to CD quality of 16/44, which all HD tracks run at.
> 
> ...



Thank you for clarifying. I will verify my Windows box and see if my DAP can be set to a fixed 16/44. For what it's worth, my DAP does display already that it's running at 44.1 so that may not be the issue here at least with the Hiby R6. For reference, I have it hard set to do the HD Ultra with Volume Normalization turned OFF on all apps used to listen.


----------



## Ken G

XGeneX88 said:


> The result in my opinion is an inferior product and it's something I'd like Amazon to acknowledge and fix.


Good luck with that! When I put in a ticket yesterday with Amazon stating that the bit rate displayed the Amazon app (using my iPhone) didn’t match the reading on my external DAC (Mojo connected via CCK), below is the response. 

“I would like to inform you that all Amazon Digital Music files are in MP3 format, free of any software that may restrict how you play or store your music. They can be played with most music player applications and portable music devices.”​ 
Not very encouraging, huh?  I believe the response center that answer these calls and emails about the Amazon Music service are in the Phillipines and have a very limited knowledge on how Hi-Res audio works. No techs or engineers were available to talk to when I also called yesterday.


----------



## XGeneX88 (Sep 19, 2019)

Ken G said:


> Good luck with that! When I put in a ticket yesterday with Amazon stating that the bit rate displayed the Amazon app (using my iPhone) didn’t match the reading on my external DAC (Mojo connected via CCK), below is the response.
> 
> “I would like to inform you that all Amazon Digital Music files are in MP3 format, free of any software that may restrict how you play or store your music. They can be played with most music player applications and portable music devices.”​
> Not very encouraging, huh?  I believe the response center that answer these calls and emails about the Amazon Music service are in the Phillipines and have a very limited knowledge on how Hi-Res audio works. No techs or engineers were available to talk to when I also called yesterday.



"Inserts Sad Face Here" - Very discouraging indeed. Makes it sound like they don't know their own product.


----------



## judson_w

XGeneX88 said:


> "Inserts Sad Face Here" - Very discouraging indeed. Makes it sound like they don't know their own product.



Well, it seems like just a preformatted response for an issue.  Not sure how the question was phrased, but new products can take some time to catch up on, and mistakes can happen.  A company I worked for shipped to US and Canada with UPS.  When you track packages in UPS, when the package is delivered in Canada it would show up as "City, CA" (ex. Vancouver, CA).  There were some people in the call center (in the US) who would misinterpret the CA as California instead of Canada.  Most of them interacted with US customers so they were not used to Canadian orders.

The point being, customer care makes mistakes and rolling out a new product or service like this can cause hiccups with service.  I am pretty sure they thought the question was related to digital music purchased from Amazon which is mp3 and not the new service.  Or they misread.  Or they followed the flow chart wrong.  Or... lots of different things are possible.

I do hope that the processes are brought up to speed soon though.


----------



## Duncan

Tooros said:


> May I ask how you check that? I'd like to ensure I have a correct reminder set for cancellation should it not work out.


On the apps homepage (android) go to the settings cog, then the top option (your account), and - then under the price plans it says "subscription renewal", and - the dates are shown within that paragraph.

Hope this helps,


----------



## AudibleLegend

Well, the iOS update happened and I got access to the HD stuff. But my (excellent) Sony Soundbase system does not recognize the iPhone as a USB device nor does the television (for the latter, to do passthrough to the Soundbase). Obviously, they're meant just for inserting a regular USB drive and playing music and such.

Which then means I don't really have access to this quality of music on my iPhone (there's no audio in-line for the television or SoundBase since they're both newe(r) products). It would work downstairs though just by hooking it up to my relatively old-school speaker system.

Obviously, what I really need is for an update to the Roku TV Amazon Music app on my television. I'm sure it could at least do 24/44 and that would be fine since the vast majority of stuff I'd be listening to are 16 Bit CD rips...but until then, not sure this service is really going to be worth it since the iPhone is leaving me with "just BlueTooth it!" as the only real option most of the time.


----------



## Ken G

So I noticed that Amazon updated the desktop app today and had a header on the new version with a link to this page below:

https://www.amazon.com/b?node=14070322011#hd-anchor2

Key Lines in the FAQ:

*Which Mac devices support Amazon Music HD?*
Any Mac from 2013 or later supports HD/Ultra HD. However, adjusting the default Mac audio settings is required to listen in the highest quality:


Go to Applications/Utilities folder
Open “Audio MIDI Setup.app”
Update speaker or headphone “Format” setting to the highest sample rate for 24-bit (96 kHz or 192 kHz)

*Which Windows devices support Amazon Music HD?*
PC support for HD/Ultra HD playback depends on the built-in audio player and DAC, which varies by device. Please check your manufacturer specifications.​I haven't tested a Windows device but on a MAC (I tested a 2011 iMAC and 2017 MacBook) it only upscales the sample rate to whatever you set (96kHz or 192kHz) regardless of whether it is HD or "Ultra HD".
Not really and ideal solution. 
In addition, I noticed on my iPhone that the Amazon app seems to upscale everything to 192kHz when I connect my Chord Mojo to it. Just to make sure it wasn't my devices,  I switched over to Tidal and it was bit perfect - the lights on the Mojo corresponded correctly to whatever I played (ie, 16bit/44kHz Redbook, 24/96, 24/192, etc). 
The Amazon Music app won't play anything on my Fiio X7mkII. Pretty much useless. 

The more I kick the tires on this service the more disappointed I am. Are others seeing the same?

I really wonder if Amazon did a substantial beta test on this with knowledgable users or if they are rolling this out just to check a "Hi Res" box to differentiate themselves from Apple/Spotify and undercut Tidal.


----------



## waynes world

Does anyone know when this will be available in Canada? (ie amazon.ca)


----------



## Brava210

XGeneX88 said:


> My issue isn't an "analyzing vs enjoying" the music. My issue is that tracks I'm very familiar with simply don't sound right. The bass and treble are off. It may make some headphones sound more "fun" or better but I don't think you're getting audio that is true to the recording. It sounds like they are adding their own "secret sauce" whether it's EQ or codec. The result in my opinion is an inferior product and it's something I'd like Amazon to acknowledge and fix. I love the price point they are offering but feel it needs to be reference and true to the recordings without any tinkering on their end.



I would have to agree with you, I have notices the treble can be quite irritating. There is definitely something not quite right.
I am listening through an LGV40 and it does not sound as good as tidal


----------



## kdphan

Is anyone having issues getting the updated 16.2.2 version of amazon music to work on an android DAP?
I updated the app to the new version on the FiiO M11, but the app will only buffer on both online and offline mode.

quite strange.

No issues on my iphone.


----------



## Ken G

Brava210 said:


> I would have to agree with you, I have notices the treble can be quite irritating. There is definitely something not quite right.
> I am listening through an LGV40 and it does not sound as good as tidal



Would you folks mind posting some of the songs (and even the time within the song) where you're noticing differences. I'm curious to also test some of these out between A-HD and Tidal.

Thanks.


----------



## Ken G

kdphan said:


> Is anyone having issues getting the updated 16.2.2 version of amazon music to work on an android DAP?
> I updated the app to the new version on the FiiO M11, but the app will only buffer on both online and offline mode.
> 
> quite strange.
> ...



I have a Fiio X7 mk II and have the same issue. Just constant buffering. 
The music plays on my iPhone but there are some other bitrate issues there.


----------



## Brava210

Listening to "Royce Da 59" Caterpillar on Amazon then Tidal shows there is something not quite right
Amazons offering is so flat and muddy


----------



## csglinux

Ken G said:


> The more I kick the tires on this service the more disappointed I am. Are others seeing the same?



Yep. Every Android device I throw at it (latest 16.2.2 version) produces sample rates no higher than 48 kHz. That doesn't tally with Amazon's claims:

• Listen to millions of songs in Ultra HD with up to 10x+ the bitrate (24-bit, 192 kHz), including Hi-Res quality.

Is there anybody out there with an Android device that's seen anything higher than 48 kHz? If so, have you been able to confirm this with audio_flinger?


----------



## kdphan

Ken G said:


> I have a Fiio X7 mk II and have the same issue. Just constant buffering.
> The music plays on my iPhone but there are some other bitrate issues there.


I reached out to Amazon
they told me to restart device, clear cache and refresh my music

it did not resolve the issue.

not sure what else to do.


----------



## XGeneX88

Ken G said:


> Would you folks mind posting some of the songs (and even the time within the song) where you're noticing differences. I'm curious to also test some of these out between A-HD and Tidal.
> 
> Thanks.



Try Linkin Park's "A Place For My Head" - in the very beginning, there are bass / drum kicks. Pay attention to the level of thump / bass from those between Amazon and Tidal. On my MDR-Z1R, the Amazon sounds boomy and slightly distorted while on my FLAC (or Spotify) it sounds very clean and organic.


----------



## Brava210

XGeneX88 said:


> Try Linkin Park's "A Place For My Head" - in the very beginning, there are bass / drum kicks. Pay attention to the level of thump / bass from those between Amazon and Tidal. On my MDR-Z1R, the Amazon sounds boomy and slightly distorted while on my FLAC (or Spotify) it sounds very clean and organic.


Doing the comparison Tidal vs Amazon, the latter is louder and definitely has some kind of EQ applies to it


----------



## csglinux

kdphan said:


> I reached out to Amazon
> they told me to restart device, clear cache and refresh my music
> 
> it did not resolve the issue.
> ...


I also reached out to Amazon. I told them what devices I was using, how I'd tried reinstalling the app, what I was seeing from the various devices, including audio_flinger output.

They then read from a script and asked me 1) what devices I was using 2) whether I'd tried reinstalling the app and 3) what troubleshooting steps I'd taken.

If you have a full day to spare, see how much fun you folks can have with Amazon customer support


----------



## Brava210

XGeneX88 said:


> Try Linkin Park's "A Place For My Head" - in the very beginning, there are bass / drum kicks. Pay attention to the level of thump / bass from those between Amazon and Tidal. On my MDR-Z1R, the Amazon sounds boomy and slightly distorted while on my FLAC (or Spotify) it sounds very clean and organic.


I have just tried this, yes I can hear the distortion, I think they have upped the gain so much to distortion levels.


----------



## kdphan

csglinux said:


> I also reached out to Amazon. I told them what devices I was using, how I'd tried reinstalling the app, what I was seeing from the various devices, including audio_flinger output.
> 
> They then read from a script and asked me 1) what devices I was using 2) whether I'd tried reinstalling the app and 3) what troubleshooting steps I'd taken.
> 
> If you have a full day to spare, see how much fun you folks can have with Amazon customer support


my DAP might flow out the window if I had to go through that for a day


----------



## XGeneX88

Brava210 said:


> Doing the comparison Tidal vs Amazon, the latter is louder and definitely has some kind of EQ applies to it



Right... If I wanted EQ, I'd do it myself. I think this is amateur stuff for them to be doing. Sounds like they are misleading their customers in more ways than one. I'm also hearing from a peer that there are tracks that will down sample Ultra HD to 16 bit / 44.1 while still displaying Ultra HD (obviously this should just be regular HD). I don't think this thing should've been rolled out with so many bugs & issues.


----------



## Brava210

XGeneX88 said:


> Right... If I wanted EQ, I'd do it myself. I think this is amateur stuff for them to be doing. Sounds like they are misleading their customers in more ways than one. I'm also hearing from a peer that there are tracks that will down sample Ultra HD to 16 bit / 44.1 while still displaying Ultra HD (obviously this should just be regular HD). I don't think this thing should've been rolled out with so many bugs & issues.


It's also laughable having albums flagged as UHD only to find some tracks are in HD? Weird


----------



## beemarman

kdphan said:


> Is anyone having issues getting the updated 16.2.2 version of amazon music to work on an android DAP?
> I updated the app to the new version on the FiiO M11, but the app will only buffer on both online and offline mode.
> 
> quite strange.
> ...


Yes, am getting the same issue on my A&K Sp1000. No issues with the iphone.


----------



## joshnor713

Dang, definitely some kinks to work out. Maybe should stick with Tidal for a couple more months.


----------



## kdphan

joshnor713 said:


> Dang, definitely some kinks to work out. Maybe should stick with Tidal for a couple more months.


I cancelled my Tidal sub yesterday too
freaking amazon

at least I can reinstall the older version and it'll work for now.


----------



## kdphan

beemarman said:


> Yes, am getting the same issue on my A&K Sp1000. No issues with the iphone.


so it seems to be a problem across all platforms and not use android.
amazon issue, that is.


----------



## Amberlamps

Subscribed, 5 minutes later I cancelled.

PC app needs exclusive mode, either that or we need to change the sample rate in windows, which is a no no.

Qobuz will do for just now.


----------



## Left Channel

Many of the above impressions may be improved if loudness normalization is turned off. But the Amazon app also does not get around various kinds of system resampling even when an external DAC or the LG internal Quad DAC is available. The specifics are different across Android, iOS, Windows, and macOS, but in all or most situations the result in resampling, sometimes upsampling but in other cases downsampling. 

On phones this includes resampling of the signal sent to external DACs and even high-end internal DACs, and no third-party apps yet have access to the Amazon API to help us find a way around this problem. On desktops the apps don't allow you to select anything but the main system audio, so no options like ASIO or exclusive, and there's no integration with third-party player apps possible there yet either. 

This only makes sense when one considers that Amazon's main competitors in this space are Apple Music and Spotify. Many say it sounds better than those services. But it appears most Qobuz and Tidal users remain unimpressed.


----------



## tomwoo

XGeneX88 said:


> Right... If I wanted EQ, I'd do it myself. I think this is amateur stuff for them to be doing. Sounds like they are misleading their customers in more ways than one. I'm also hearing from a peer that there are tracks that will down sample Ultra HD to 16 bit / 44.1 while still displaying Ultra HD (obviously this should just be regular HD). I don't think this thing should've been rolled out with so many bugs & issues.


I'm sure they will blame record companies for that. Because they will claim they got the files directly from record companies and didn't alter them in any way.


----------



## SamuelLBronkowitz

Forgive my ignorance: How do I find and listen to Amazon HD and Amazon UHD tracks? I have the Amazon Music app (I didn't see any Amazon Music HD app) and tried out a few tracks, some of which I know are available in MQA on Tidal (e.g., Fleetwood Mac) and others which aren't (e.g., Van Halen). Using my iPhone X and iOS 13, my Dragonfly Black held the same pink-ish color across all tracks I tried (i.e., not the bright purple/pink I get with MQA on Tidal). As well, each song didn't say "HD" or "UHD". How do I access the lossless files so I can do some A/B comparisons? Using V-Moda M-100 Master's and a variety of B&W's.


----------



## kdphan

SamuelLBronkowitz said:


> Forgive my ignorance: How do I find and listen to Amazon HD and Amazon UHD tracks? I have the Amazon Music app (I didn't see any Amazon Music HD app) and tried out a few tracks, some of which I know are available in MQA on Tidal (e.g., Fleetwood Mac) and others which aren't (e.g., Van Halen). Using my iPhone X and iOS 13, my Dragonfly Black held the same pink-ish color across all tracks I tried (i.e., not the bright purple/pink I get with MQA on Tidal). As well, each song didn't say "HD" or "UHD". How do I access the lossless files so I can do some A/B comparisons? Using V-Moda M-100 Master's and a variety of B&W's.


whichever device you're using, you'll need to update to latest version of the app.


----------



## joshnor713

SamuelLBronkowitz said:


> Forgive my ignorance: How do I find and listen to Amazon HD and Amazon UHD tracks? I have the Amazon Music app (I didn't see any Amazon Music HD app) and tried out a few tracks, some of which I know are available in MQA on Tidal (e.g., Fleetwood Mac) and others which aren't (e.g., Van Halen). Using my iPhone X and iOS 13, my Dragonfly Black held the same pink-ish color across all tracks I tried (i.e., not the bright purple/pink I get with MQA on Tidal). As well, each song didn't say "HD" or "UHD". How do I access the lossless files so I can do some A/B comparisons? Using V-Moda M-100 Master's and a variety of B&W's.



Might need to go in Settings and say to stream in that highest quality.


----------



## SamuelLBronkowitz

I figured out the problem - I needed to update/upgrade my subscription on my computer, then everything was good to go on my iPhone. Lots of testing tonight...


----------



## AudibleLegend (Sep 19, 2019)

SamuelLBronkowitz said:


> I figured out the problem - I needed to update/upgrade my subscription on my computer, then everything was good to go on my iPhone. Lots of testing tonight...



So, you're saying the problem is that you didn't subscribe to a service feature that you expected to get without subscribing...I can understand the confusion though.

I'm agreeing with a lot of the other posters that there's a lot of drawbacks here. For every amazing feature (offline downloads, ease of knowing the quality of the tracks, etc.) there's plenty of others that are not up to snuff. They really need better apps, and meanwhile, my iPhone is basically useless to connecting to my upstairs speaker setup which basically eliminates most of the appeal for me. I want to listen upstairs and all I'm left with is the option to BlueTooth from my phone. Bleh.


EDIT:  FINALLY got it working. Using A/V in-line on my television (passthrough to Sony Soundbase). Didn't think the line would work if it wasn't video, but I guess it does. Major hassle though. Major. 

Tunes sound great though. A lot "fuller" sounding for the same album that I was just listening to in MP3 streaming via the television app.


----------



## Gus141

Left Channel said:


> But it appears most Qobuz and Tidal users remain unimpressed.


I’m very unimpressed as a Qobuz Sublime+ and TIDAL subscriber. But I’m also very on-the-fence. Amazon could be the last service standing, so do I  duplicate my library in Amazon Music HD and hope their apps improve and they figure out bit-perfect playback on desktop and mobile+DAC setups?

Decisions, decisions. The Bluesound app isn’t bad for TIDAL and Qobuz but it is terrible for Amazon Music right now. The native Amazon apps are really messing up the bit-perfect concept on mobil by upsampling/downsampling everything to max capability of the DAC attached (or internal DAC if nothing attached). And no exclusive mode on desktop!! What?! How could they launch this without that capability?

Anywho, I’m probably going to do the year sub and reevaluate at the end of the year; just like I’m doing with Qobuz. We’ll see who wins out, but right now Qobuz is doing better on the bit-perfect lossless (and Non-MQA!) end, and TIDAL is great for depth of catalogue and music discovery (I like the My Mix playlists and I add the songs I like to Qobuz). 

I do hope this is the death of MQA though; however, Sony just announced new DAPs with native MQA-streaming support. I guess competition is good


----------



## purk

I enrolled on a free trail as well.  Hope all issues will get sort out soon.


----------



## CANiSLAYu (Sep 20, 2019)

Highly intrigued by this option due to the price, high res without MQA, and integration with Amazon/Alexa.  Currently a Tidal subscriber.  Haven't even bothered with Qobuz because of the price and I'm happy with Tidal for now.  Tried out Amazon Music today and here are my thoughts with various devices:

Google Pixel 3 > iBasso DC01 USB C to 2.5mm DAC/Amp dongle = Amazon Music HD - was capped at 24/48.  Android limitation reared it's ugly head as the stated max resolution was 24/48.  I use USB Audio Player Pro to get around that typically, but no Amazon integration there yet
iPhone XS > Apple CCK > USB A male to USB C female > iBasso DC01 = also capped at 24/48, but curiously it showed the device capability at 24/192 (device is actually capable up to 32/384)

I also have an Astell & Kern SR15 and KANN CUBE, but I have not tried the side loaded Amazon app yet.  A&K players should bypass the 24/48 Android limitation to the max supported resolution, but A&K confirmed on the SR15 thread it is being limited to 24/48 and DAPs from other manufacturers have the same issue.  Appears it is an issue on Amazon's side on their mobile app for both Android and iOS.

Tried the desktop app on Mac.  Mac > Massdrop x Airist Audio R-2R.  Appears to be playing at max resolution.  Set the capability in Audio Midi Setup to 24/384 and it displays the capability on the Amazon Music app and it appears to be playing up to 24/192 fine.  The DAC has no indicator lights and I can't validate the resolution, but when I click the details on the Amazon app it does show different resolutions depending on the track.  As others have pointed out though, no exclusive mode.  Annoying when an e-mail ding and the like chimes in.

Overall I think it's a nice start for something that just launched this week and sounds very nice.  If this was another company people would probably be thrilled with this out of the gate, but since it's a tech giant like Amazon we set the bar much higher.  Hopefully they fix the issue with the apps and allow for controlling the desktop app from a phone. Hoping for integration with UAPP for Android and with Roon.  If that happens, I will probably drop Tidal.  Otherwise, probably riding Tidal until the wheels fall off.


----------



## Duncan

Tooros said:


> Thanks - I couldn't find it in the app but found it on amazon co uk  - It says 16th December so that's the 90 days.
> Thing is - it says I'm a member of amazon music unlimited (not HD) and I'm going to be billed £14.99 on Dec 16th (I've signed up for the family membership on HD so I'd expect that to say £19.99)
> Gremlins/ Teething issues  abound.
> 
> The biggest one for me is apple car play - if I can't fix that I'm out for sure. Waiting for iOS13 to see what else goes wrong.


 call them - mine was broken too, they fixed it whilst I was on the phone


----------



## Tooros

Duncan said:


> call them - mine was broken too, they fixed it whilst I was on the phone



I'm seeing HD on the desktop and phone app. I can play in UHD - I have the family plan running and three of us share the trial.
The only gremlin is that amazon thinks I'm owing 14.99 in december and not 19.99 
I'm not sure I want to call them yet


----------



## SilverEars (Sep 20, 2019)

waynes world said:


> Does anyone know when this will be available in Canada? (ie


That's weird.  It's available for Duncan in the uk, but not you from CA in North America?

Anyway, what I like about Tidal is the depth of how the ui was setup for easy music discovery.  I heard Spotify has a good interface as well.  The caveat is the limited library, and I'm sure that's where Amazon shines, but if music discovery is gimped, that large library isn't easy to explore.

For me, one of the most important part of streaming service is how easy it is to discover new music.  That's a big part of having immediate access to a huge library.  I just luv the availability of streaming services these days, makes music discovery very easy.


----------



## gefski

SilverEars said:


> That's weird.  It's available for Duncan in the uk, but not you from CA in North America?
> 
> Anyway, what I like about Tidal is the depth of how the ui was setup for easy music discovery.  I heard Spotify has a good interface as well.  The caveat is the limited library, and I'm sure that's where Amazon shines, but if music discovery is gimped, that large library isn't easy to explore.
> 
> For me, one of the most important part of streaming service is how easy it is to discover new music.  That's a big part of having immediate access to a huge library.  I just luv the availability of streaming services these days, makes music discovery very easy.



Yes. Compared to what I've gone through to get good music through the years, Audirvana/Tidal is like a gift. Glitch free, easy music discovery, and Redbook  music files that sound nearly as good as my cd rips.


----------



## loomisjohnson

some further impressions:
1. catalog is deep, though the search function is quirky--you have to probe a bit to find more obscure picks. i have gotten use to the ui and graphics, which are pretty good but lag spotify
2. the discover/recommendations features are vastly inferior to spotify's, and there are far fewer playlists. it also appears that they have a limited number of radio stations and, unlike spotify you can't set a radio station for any artist you choose.
3. as others have stated, there does appear to some eq to the sonics--compared to tidal, notes have a lot of body and bass and upper mids seems to be enhanced. it's also significantly louder than spotify. i like how it sounds; it works very well with mobile.

overall, as presently constituted, amazon hd is excellent as long as you know what you want to listen to and are willing to set up a queue--it's not optimal for folks who want to be introduced to new stuff


----------



## gefski

For me, all the complaints by those who love to listen to music are hardly unexpected. Amazon Is looking at a WAY bigger customer base than us audiophools, a base that will go with the "Amazon HD" buzzword without any sort of critical analysis of how it sounds, and be perfectly satisfied as long as it works.


----------



## TjPhysicist

gefski said:


> For me, all the complaints by those who love to listen to music are hardly unexpected. Amazon Is looking at a WAY bigger customer base than us audiophools, a base that will go with the "Amazon HD" buzzword without any sort of critical analysis of how it sounds, and be perfectly satisfied as long as it works.


See, that makes SENSE. No one outside of a few of us in the hobby community cares ANY about "high fidelity sound" or "lossless" etc...but then why bother? are you REALLY going to notice a difference between 320kbps MP3 and a FLAC file with an iphone and bluetooth earbuds? Buzzword for sure, but again - WHY bother getting ultra HD quality stuff (arguably getting CD quality stuff may not have costed them anything extra even in terms of effort if they already had access to that and that's where they were getting their MP3s from before).


----------



## SilverEars (Sep 20, 2019)

TjPhysicist said:


> See, that makes SENSE. No one outside of a few of us in the hobby community cares ANY about "high fidelity sound" or "lossless" etc...but then why bother? are you REALLY going to notice a difference between 320kbps MP3 and a FLAC file with an iphone and bluetooth earbuds? Buzzword for sure, but again - WHY bother getting ultra HD quality stuff (arguably getting CD quality stuff may not have costed them anything extra even in terms of effort if they already had access to that and that's where they were getting their MP3s from before).


Using the term 'ultra HD' is them attempting to install the notion of the audio content being similar to 4K resolution video contents (which is also referred to as ultra HD), which isn't really how it works. It's marketed to those avg consumers that have little experience in Hifi audio.  These consumers probably don't care about equipment to the point of knowing about bit-perfect audio.

We all know that the master quality has to be on par with the spec of the original mastering, and upsampling of that will do nothing other than not sounding like the original master. 

All I care about is mastering quality.  Is it true to original master (although sometimes old mastering has been redone)?


----------



## TjPhysicist

SilverEars said:


> Using the term 'ultra HD' is them attempting to install the notion of the audio content being similar to 4K resolution video contents, which isn't really how it works. It's marketed to those avg consumers that have little experience in Hifi audio.  We all know that the master quality has to be on par with the spec of the original mastering, and upsampling of that will do nothing other than not sounding like the original master.
> 
> All I care about is mastering quality.  Is it true to original master (although sometimes old mastering has been redone)?


YES, exactly, sometimes that info (at least IME) has been wierdly hard to find. It's like "yea i see a 192khz stream for this song, but was it mastered at this? it's pretty old how are they getting quality that high?", then there's others which are just like "how is the best quality available here CD quality, did the master only happen at that sample rate?"


----------



## SamuelLBronkowitz

AudibleLegend said:


> So, you're saying the problem is that you didn't subscribe to a service feature that you expected to get without subscribing...I can understand the confusion though.



Nope, that's not what I was saying. I originally upgraded via my iPhone but that didn't seem to do the trick. It was working properly after I subsequently tried to upgrade via my MacBook. I am aware that you need to subscribe to the HD package to get HD material.

Overall, I think it's pretty good. I like high-quality audio, but don't consider myself a true audiophile (I only use my iPhone, a Dragonfly Black, and B&W headphones). I noticed that all tracks I play on Amazon HD (including UHD tracks) light up the same shade of "light pink" on my Dragonfly. When listening to tracks on Tidal, regular CD quality lights up green, and MQA is the bright purple/pink. Two questions: 1. Does that mean that the regular HD tracks are higher quality than Tidal's CD tracks (i.e., pink represents a higher bit rate than green), and 2. While not the bright purple/pink color as found with MQA files, are Amazon's UHD files still the same level of quality? It doesn't sound like it to my ears.


----------



## TjPhysicist

SamuelLBronkowitz said:


> Nope, that's not what I was saying. I originally upgraded via my iPhone but that didn't seem to do the trick. It was working properly after I subsequently tried to upgrade via my MacBook. I am aware that you need to subscribe to the HD package to get HD material.
> 
> Overall, I think it's pretty good. I like high-quality audio, but don't consider myself a true audiophile (I only use my iPhone, a Dragonfly Black, and B&W headphones). I noticed that all tracks I play on Amazon HD (including UHD tracks) light up the same shade of "light pink" on my Dragonfly. When listening to tracks on Tidal, regular CD quality lights up green, and MQA is the bright purple/pink. Two questions: 1. Does that mean that the regular HD tracks are higher quality than Tidal's CD tracks (i.e., pink represents a higher bit rate than green), and 2. While not the bright purple/pink color as found with MQA files, are Amazon's UHD files still the same level of quality? It doesn't sound like it to my ears.


When you click on teh little golden box that says HD or Ultra HD it'll pop up with a message that tells you exactly what quality teh file is at, and what quality is being played. IME, most of the files for me at least, end up being 44.1khz but 24bit instead of 16. Ostensibly Amazon's Ultra HD COULD BE better than MQA files, but do note that in some cases ultra HD is still only 44.1/24 or 88/24 because that is simply the best quality available for that song. While tidal MQA if unfolded properly results in a 96/24 thing, however I don't trust this "folding unfolding" crap tbh, so Tidals either gonna sound the same or maybe worse. But this is all dependent on the song specifically and who knows what the actual original source for these files are, none of the particularly reveal the source or master (esp. tidal sometimes I have a hard time figuring out which of the 5 different existing masters tidal is using).


----------



## CANiSLAYu

TjPhysicist said:


> See, that makes SENSE. No one outside of a few of us in the hobby community cares ANY about "high fidelity sound" or "lossless" etc...but then why bother? are you REALLY going to notice a difference between 320kbps MP3 and a FLAC file with an iphone and bluetooth earbuds? Buzzword for sure, but again - WHY bother getting ultra HD quality stuff (arguably getting CD quality stuff may not have costed them anything extra even in terms of effort if they already had access to that and that's where they were getting their MP3s from before).




I agree for the masses who are going to listen to on AirPods, Beats, etc. the increased fidelity isn’t worth a hill of beans. Thing is, even for Joe Schmoe family man it’s a compelling argument. It’s <$17/mo for a family plan if you do the annual payment, less than $2/mo more than Apple Music family plan. And if you already have Alexa devices, why not “get the best” for effectively the same price?

From Amazon’s perspective, why not? There’s not much downside and plenty of upside. They basically power half the internet with AWS, so the extra bandwidth is nothing for them. 

The benefit for Amazon:
Another hook into their Prime/Alexa ecosystem, which will help with Prime membership retention and selling hardware (new hardware to be announced on 9/25). 

Then the same with everything else with Amazon; more user data. Would anyone be surprised if Amazon learned what was popular then made their own record label? Think Prime Video originals, but for music. I don’t see them doing it (they could have become a book publisher with the same process, but they haven’t done that), but it’s not far fetched. 

From my perspective, it was needed for a major player to make this push for hifi streaming to go mainstream, so I’m all for it.


----------



## TjPhysicist

CANiSLAYu said:


> I agree for the masses who are going to listen to on AirPods, Beats, etc. the increased fidelity isn’t worth a hill of beans. Thing is, even for Joe Schmoe family man it’s a compelling argument. It’s <$17/mo for a family plan if you do the annual payment, less than $2/mo more than Apple Music family plan. And if you already have Alexa devices, why not “get the best” for effectively the same price?
> 
> From Amazon’s perspective, why not? There’s not much downside and plenty of upside. They basically power half the internet with AWS, so the extra bandwidth is nothing for them.
> 
> ...


Haha "isn't worth a hill of beans", I like it very "southern". Anyways, yea, I do hope that's where it goes. But who knows, IF amazon really does push for greater quality then that's great, people start realizing that bluetooth support for Ultra HD isn't great and get back to wired headphones and good headphones. (Amazon's FAQ actually mentions or hints at some of this at least, so they're not just saying "yea just listen to it on whatever who cares"). So that's a good point!

Now...if only amazon would fix bitperfect on at least some devices esp. android DAPs. Heck, they could work with companies like Sony...


----------



## Tooros

We’re a pain aren’t we. 
Thing is: it’s mostly lossless streaming at cd quality, and sometimes much higher for basically the same cost as 320kbps Spotify. If all it does is kick Spotify and Apple Music where it hurts, and squeezes tidal’s pricing we’re winning.


----------



## Left Channel

SamuelLBronkowitz said:


> Overall, I think it's pretty good. I like high-quality audio, but don't consider myself a true audiophile (I only use my iPhone, a Dragonfly Black, and B&W headphones). I noticed that all tracks I play on Amazon HD (including UHD tracks) light up the same shade of "light pink" on my Dragonfly. When listening to tracks on Tidal, regular CD quality lights up green, and MQA is the bright purple/pink. Two questions: 1. Does that mean that the regular HD tracks are higher quality than Tidal's CD tracks (i.e., pink represents a higher bit rate than green), and 2. While not the bright purple/pink color as found with MQA files, are Amazon's UHD files still the same level of quality? It doesn't sound like it to my ears.



If all tracks result in the same color, then the output is being resampled by the phone.

This is from the DF Black manual:
*Red: *Standby*  Green: *44100.0 Hz  *Blue: *48000.0 Hz
*Amber: *88200.0 Hz   *Magenta: *96000.0 Hz


----------



## CANiSLAYu (Sep 20, 2019)

TjPhysicist said:


> Haha "isn't worth a hill of beans", I like it very "southern". Anyways, yea, I do hope that's where it goes. But who knows, IF amazon really does push for greater quality then that's great, people start realizing that bluetooth support for Ultra HD isn't great and get back to wired headphones and good headphones. (Amazon's FAQ actually mentions or hints at some of this at least, so they're not just saying "yea just listen to it on whatever who cares"). So that's a good point!
> 
> Now...if only amazon would fix bitperfect on at least some devices esp. android DAPs. Heck, they could work with companies like Sony...


That’s a good point you inadvertently made. Wireless protocols are a bottleneck right now, but I don’t see this pushing consumers back to wired, but instead give big companies a reason to invest in actually develop better wireless protocols.

It wasn’t worth investing to develop hifi wireless protocols because it’s a small market that cares, so why spend all this money to develop it if the services/users that could take advantage of it was so niche?

Now if the user base continues to grow and more and more users are clamoring for it, companies will invest and hopefully we’ll see better than AptX and LDAC.


----------



## Ken G

Left Channel said:


> If all tracks result in the same color, then the output is being resampled by the phone.
> 
> This is from the DF Black manual:
> *Red: *Standby*  Green: *44100.0 Hz  *Blue: *48000.0 Hz
> *Amber: *88200.0 Hz   *Magenta: *96000.0 Hz



Here is what the color results look like if you have a Chord Mojo. I guess only up to 192 means anything for Amazon HD. And for what it's worth, using my iPhone with CCK connected to the Mojo, everything shows up as 192 blue regardless of what Amazon says the bit rate is so there is definitely upsampling on the iOS app.


:


----------



## exdmd

Despite the buzzwords I don't think Amazon is going after audiophiles or they would have launched with exclusive mode enabled, I am sure they are capable of that. The question is what will they do in the next few months? Either they open their API so Roon and Audirvana can integrate or they don't. I suspect they won't, and their target demographic is millennials who mainly listen using their phone. Let's see if the audio websites start publishing some critical articles comparing Amazon Music HD to Tidal and Qobuz and what happens.


----------



## SamuelLBronkowitz

TjPhysicist said:


> When you click on teh little golden box that says HD or Ultra HD it'll pop up with a message that tells you exactly what quality teh file is at, and what quality is being played. IME, most of the files for me at least, end up being 44.1khz but 24bit instead of 16.



Thank you, this was extremely helpful. I opened up some Fleetwood Mac UHD tracks from "Rumors" with and without my Dragonfly. Without the Dragonfly, the iPhone tops out at 44.1 and 16 bit, but when plugging in my Dragonfly, that changes to 96 and 24. Unplug it and it goes back to 44.1 and 16. Makes total sense - the Dragonfly is "upping" the capabilities of the iPhone and Amazon therefore sends a higher quality signal.


----------



## dbturbo2

SamuelLBronkowitz said:


> Thank you, this was extremely helpful. I opened up some Fleetwood Mac UHD tracks from "Rumors" with and without my Dragonfly. Without the Dragonfly, the iPhone tops out at 44.1 and 16 bit, but when plugging in my Dragonfly, that changes to 96 and 24. Unplug it and it goes back to 44.1 and 16. Makes total sense - the Dragonfly is "upping" the capabilities of the iPhone and Amazon therefore sends a higher quality signal.



The HD/Ultra HD identifiers work exactly as you describe, then unfortunately the 24/96 UHD Rumors files are being upsampled and sent to your Dragonfly at 24/192.


----------



## rkw

exdmd said:


> Despite the buzzwords I don't think Amazon is going after audiophiles or they would have launched with exclusive mode enabled, I am sure they are capable of that. The question is what will they do in the next few months? Either they open their API so Roon and Audirvana can integrate or they don't. I suspect they won't, and their target demographic is millennials who mainly listen using their phone. Let's see if the audio websites start publishing some critical articles comparing Amazon Music HD to Tidal and Qobuz and what happens.


This is an indicator of Amazon's direction:
https://www.whathifi.com/news/first-wave-of-product-support-for-amazon-music-hd-confirmed
Amazon had coordinated the HD rollout with hardware manufacturers. Amazon is focusing on connected devices, which is an expanding market and becoming a mainstream source of audio. They don't care about the small and stagnant market that connects computers and phones to hi-res outboard DACs.

Regarding opening their API, I posted this in another thread:


rkw said:


> Amazon, like Spotify and Apple Music, will not integrate with Roon or Audirvana. It is not about access to music files. They want control over the user experience for business reasons — user profiling, individual targeting, data collection, etc.
> 
> Tidal and Qobuz allow 3rd party integration because they are very small businesses and need to attract every customer they can. Some perspective about how small these businesses are... Tidal has such a small market share (less than 1%) that it is often not even mentioned in survey reports about the streaming music industry. Even Pandora and Deezer are many times the size of Tidal. And Tidal dwarfs the size of Qobuz. In August, Qobuz announced that they have signed up 25,000 paying customers in the US. Think about it... half of a football stadium. So Tidal is a roundoff error in the industry, and Qobuz is barely detectable noise. I'd like smaller businesses to succeed but it will be a tough road ahead.


----------



## iridium7777 (Sep 20, 2019)

SamuelLBronkowitz said:


> Nope, that's not what I was saying. I originally upgraded via my iPhone but that didn't seem to do the trick. It was working properly after I subsequently tried to upgrade via my MacBook. I am aware that you need to subscribe to the HD package to get HD material.
> 
> Overall, I think it's pretty good. I like high-quality audio, but don't consider myself a true audiophile (I only use my iPhone, a Dragonfly Black, and B&W headphones). I noticed that all tracks I play on Amazon HD (including UHD tracks) light up the same shade of "light pink" on my Dragonfly. When listening to tracks on Tidal, regular CD quality lights up green, and MQA is the bright purple/pink. Two questions: 1. Does that mean that the regular HD tracks are higher quality than Tidal's CD tracks (i.e., pink represents a higher bit rate than green), and 2. While not the bright purple/pink color as found with MQA files, are Amazon's UHD files still the same level of quality? It doesn't sound like it to my ears.



i'm not sure @TjPhysicist understood your question with his response below, to say politely.

i observed the same issue, that songs that are only available in 16/44, when i use with my dragonfly seem to be playing at 96 (magenta). 

i think there's a flaw with the amazon ios app where it'll allow the DAC to up-sample to the highest frequency, which is what seems to be happening, otheriwise i'd expect it to be playing at 44 (green) for files that don't show up with HD/UHD.  {edit, reading further responses it looks like amazon does up-sample everything to the highest the DAC will go to} both tidal and qobuz don't do this and seem to properly output the appropriate sampling rate.  

it's either a design flaw or intentional.  it was a nice novelty to try out and even though i have their 90 day trial i'm not sure at this point they offer anything else that i can't already get between my tidal and spotify subs.


----------



## iridium7777

yup, my same conclusion, amazon is blindly up-sampling every single track to the max capability of the external dac that you connect to your iphone.  i hope this is a flaw considering this is their first release and will get addressed in the next update otherwise it seems like amazon is more about the hype and perceptions.



dbturbo2 said:


> The HD/Ultra HD identifiers work exactly as you describe, then unfortunately the 24/96 UHD Rumors files are being upsampled and sent to your Dragonfly at 24/192.


----------



## TjPhysicist

iridium7777 said:


> yup, my same conclusion, amazon is blindly up-sampling every single track to the max capability of the external dac that you connect to your iphone.  i hope this is a flaw considering this is their first release and will get addressed in the next update otherwise it seems like amazon is more about the hype and perceptions.


So. App says "Track playing at 24/88" says, but then something upsamples it by the time it hits the external dac? is this amazon apps doing, cuz that seems weird in conjunction with the thing that explicitly states "your track is playing at XYZ bitrate"


----------



## iridium7777

i find an album that's only available in 16/44, i plug in my dragonfly and it glows magenta indicating that the output is at 96 (no idea what bit rate it's using though), so it's obviously up-sampling on the output.

tidal (and when i had qobuz) never had this issue, dragonfly always glowed green (44).






TjPhysicist said:


> So. App says "Track playing at 24/88" says, but then something upsamples it by the time it hits the external dac? is this amazon apps doing, cuz that seems weird in conjunction with the thing that explicitly states "your track is playing at XYZ bitrate"


----------



## TjPhysicist

iridium7777 said:


> i find an album that's only available in 16/44, i plug in my dragonfly and it glows magenta indicating that the output is at 96 (no idea what bit rate it's using though), so it's obviously up-sampling on the output.
> 
> tidal (and when i had qobuz) never had this issue, dragonfly always glowed green (44).


Ok, sorry guys I had no idea about this...EWWW What, WHY? Again I say, what's the point of telling me that you're at 16/44 if you're gonna upsample? I wonder if this has something to do with the iPhone's audio stack itself or just amazon app being weird. I assume tidal doesn't do this on iphones, so must be amazon?


----------



## Ken G

iridium7777 said:


> i find an album that's only available in 16/44, i plug in my dragonfly and it glows magenta indicating that the output is at 96 (no idea what bit rate it's using though), so it's obviously up-sampling on the output.
> 
> tidal (and when i had qobuz) never had this issue, dragonfly always glowed green (44).



I experienced the same on my Chord Mojo. No problems with any other service. It almost certainly is an upscaling issue with Amazon Music.


----------



## iridium7777 (Sep 20, 2019)

yup, definitely amazon's app.  my only question is whether it's intentional or a glitch.  and how many people will complain and if it'll ever be addressed.

amazon explicitly stated that they don't want to use [16/44]Redbook/Hi-Res terms because their service is tailored to the masses and "those" people respond, and under better, the terms of HD and UHD because they're cross shopping between apple music and spotify.

i don't think amazon is after tidal/qobuz and to some extent deezer users.  they're throwing in the sink to entice the masses away from apple/spotify.




Ken G said:


> I experienced the same on my Chord Mojo. No problems with any other service. It almost certainly is an upscaling issue with Amazon Music.


----------



## TjPhysicist

Hey someone who has a DAC that shows them this info, can you guys try PC and/or MAC desktop apps and see if it's the same stuff? I assume with PC it's the same crap cuz it just goes by whatever sample rate you set in your windows settings right?


----------



## TjPhysicist

iridium7777 said:


> yup, definitely amazon's app.  my only question is whether it's intentional or a glitch.  and how many people will complain and if it'll ever be addressed.
> 
> amazon explicitly stated that they don't want to use [16/44]Redbook/Hi-Res terms because their service is tailored to the masses and "those" people respond, and under better, the terms of HD and UHD terms because they're already cross shopping between apple music and spotify.
> 
> i don't think amazon is after tidal/qobuz and to some extent deezer users.  they're throwing in the sink to entice the masses away from apple/spotify.


The weird thing is, if I put it in video terms most ppl will understand what the issue here is: You ever tried to watch a Standard Def video on a 4K TV? it looks awful. (well, I suppose a more accurate comparison would be 4k TV, 1080p video but being upsampled to 4k and displayed on your TV...it still looks awful to a lot of ppl if you did that).


----------



## iridium7777

not to derail the discussion here, but what is "standard def video"? 1080p?  i've had a 4k TV for 2 years and all i was watching was at 1080p.  about a months ago i figured out i could pay more for netflix to do 4K video and while it was amazing to watch something like planet earth 2, i honestly can't say i feel deprived watching re-runs of madman in 1080p vs. stranger things in 4k.




TjPhysicist said:


> The weird thing is, if I put it in video terms most ppl will understand what the issue here is: You ever tried to watch a Standard Def video on a 4K TV? it looks awful. (well, I suppose a more accurate comparison would be 4k TV, 1080p video but being upsampled to 4k and displayed on your TV...it still looks awful to a lot of ppl if you did that).


----------



## TjPhysicist

iridium7777 said:


> not to derail the discussion here, but what is "standard def video"? 1080p?  i've had a 4k TV for 2 years and all i was watching was at 1080p.  about a months ago i figured out i could pay more for netflix to do 4K video and while it was amazing to watch something like planet earth 2, i honestly can't say i feel deprived watching re-runs of madman in 1080p vs. stranger things in 4k.


Well that's kinda what i mean. The issue people are having here, is that Amazon App is upsampling their say 44khz audio to 192khz. Which if you do in video would probably be like upsampling 1080p to 4k Now note, watching netflix in 1080 is NOT upsampling, at least on my TV, when i watch a 720p video the tv actually displays only at 720p resolution, it doesn't do some complex calculation to resample the video to 4k..which is different, and a bit worse IMO. BUT that being said, some people don't care, there are upsampling boxes out there, that can take 1080 video sources and umsample and output actual 4k video and some ppl I know have them and quite like it.


----------



## Ken G

TjPhysicist said:


> Hey someone who has a DAC that shows them this info, can you guys try PC and/or MAC desktop apps and see if it's the same stuff? I assume with PC it's the same crap cuz it just goes by whatever sample rate you set in your windows settings right?



I just tried it and it won't work testing what the true bit rate is from Amazon music because of the system sample rate as you mentioned. If you play "HD" (ie, 16/44 CD quality) it will always show as the sample rate that you set in the MIDI (on a MAC). I tried 192kHz, 352kHz and 384kHz and the DAC always displayed whatever the system sample rate was.


----------



## iridium7777

Ken G said:


> I just tried it and it won't work testing what the true bit rate is from Amazon music because of the system sample rate as you mentioned. If you play "HD" (ie, 16/44 CD quality) it will always show as the sample rate that you set in the MIDI (on a MAC). I tried 192kHz, 352kHz and 384kHz and the DAC always displayed whatever the system sample rate was.



another built-in flaw with amazon?  any other music app that i have will automatically detect the sampling rates of my DAC and still *will only play at the max sample rate of the actual sample music*.  it seems like what you're saying amazon requires you to pre-select some sample rate from your dac and will output that to that rate no matter what the original sample is?


----------



## Ken G

iridium7777 said:


> another built-in flaw with amazon?  any other music app that i have will automatically detect the sampling rates of my DAC and still *will only play at the max sample rate of the actual sample music*.  it seems like what you're saying amazon requires you to pre-select some sample rate from your dac and will output that to that rate no matter what the original sample is?



So most other services like Tidal, Qobuz, Roon, Audirvana are able to bypass the "system" sample rate by allowing you to select the device from within the application and it will play bit perfect music to that device. Since Amazon doesn't allow you to select the device, it defaults to whatever you set the system sample rate to.


----------



## csglinux

rkw said:


> This is an indicator of Amazon's direction:
> https://www.whathifi.com/news/first-wave-of-product-support-for-amazon-music-hd-confirmed
> Amazon had coordinated the HD rollout with hardware manufacturers. Amazon is focusing on connected devices, which is an expanding market and becoming a mainstream source of audio. They don't care about the small and stagnant market that connects computers and phones to hi-res outboard DACs.
> 
> ...



Nice post(s). You convinced me to un-cancel my Tidal subscription


----------



## CANiSLAYu

Well, I did my part:



> Thanks for writing with suggestion about Music desktop app and Mobile music app  to improve Amazon music experience.
> 
> I understand that you wish to have, bit-perfect output and exclusive mode in Music desktop app. Also, controlling music desktop app with Smartphone.
> 
> ...


----------



## gefski

CANiSLAYu said:


> Well, I did my part:



You did!

Hilarious response -- 100+ words to say "Thanks, we''ll look into that." 

Surprised they didn't wish you, your family, and your friends and associates health, joy, love, and success in all their endeavors for many long years.


----------



## mixman

rkw said:


> This is an indicator of Amazon's direction:
> https://www.whathifi.com/news/first-wave-of-product-support-for-amazon-music-hd-confirmed
> Amazon had coordinated the HD rollout with hardware manufacturers. Amazon is focusing on connected devices, which is an expanding market and becoming a mainstream source of audio. They don't care about the small and stagnant market that connects computers and phones to hi-res outboard DACs.
> 
> ...


Yep not sure I am holding my breath for bit perfect from Amazon. They are targeting a far larger market than us niche audiophiles. The HD thing is to just try and dominate the market and appear that they are giving you better service options than Apple Music and Spotify. If and only if they think they can make money will they address our issues. Tidal and Qobuz aren’t even on their radar for comparison purposes. Hell they might even suggest you go to them if your really need a bit perfect app and if by chance they do ever add that feature it will not be because we asked, but because they can make money from it.


----------



## tomwoo

I still can't believe Amazon released their app without carefully examining Tidal's. After all there are not too many streaming services providing 'Hires' music. I doubt it is technically challenging for them to incorporate bit-perfect playback to their app. I won't stay if they can't get it right in free trial period.


----------



## mixman (Sep 21, 2019)

tomwoo said:


> I still can't believe Amazon released their app without carefully examining Tidal's. After all there are not too many streaming services providing 'Hires' music. I doubt it is technically challenging for them to incorporate bit-perfect playback to their app. I won't stay if they can't get it right in free trial period.


As I mentioned above, Tidal is not even on Amazon's map, they could care less what they do. They are as concerned with Tidal as GM is concerned about Lamborghini.

Actually, the best case scenario is if enough of the Tech and Audio press gives the Amazon HD service enough negative or mediocre reviews and they think their bottom line is affected, then they will implement the feature in the near future.


----------



## tomwoo

mixman said:


> As I mentioned above, Tidal is not even on Amazon's map, they could care less what they do. They are as concerned with Tidal as GM is concerned about Lamborghini.
> 
> Actually, the best case scenario is if enough of the Tech and Audio press gives the Amazon HD service enough negative or mediocre reviews and they think their bottom line is affected, then they will implement the feature in the near future.


I wouldn't say they don't care about Tidal, many people didn't even know CD quality streaming was a thing before Tidal. Amazon must have done enough research about Tidal and other high quality music streaming services before rolling out their own version. I hope they could at least put MQA nonsense out of business.


----------



## kdbur

Hi, I am a qobuz user who plays 'exclusive mode to my outboard dac but I am looking at this Amazon offer and I understand it doesn't offer a 'bit perfect' option as yet but I do have a question which I really should know the answer to but i don't, so any answers would be appreciated.....

My MSI PC has a 'sabre' audio dac installed and my  Win10 system offers me a few audio options up to 24/192 as default but does this mean if i choose the 24/192 as default  everything will play  at that sample rate or does it mean it will only play that if  I play a 24/192 track but automatically play 16/44  or 16/48  or 24/96 when I play these tracks?

Thanks for any answers!


----------



## exdmd

Since Amazon Music HD uses Windows Sound Mixer in shared mode I believe if you set the system audio at 24/192 (I do) your laptop upsamples everything to 24/192 when you are using Amazon, at least that is what my Yggy is telling me. When I use Audirvana+ streaming Qobuz my DAC reports the correct sampling rate as Audirvana+ uses Wasapi Exclusive mode. I could be wrong about the upsampling though. Amazon sound quality is inferior to Qobuz so I am not using it much.


----------



## Left Channel

kdbur said:


> Hi, I am a qobuz user who plays 'exclusive mode to my outboard dac but I am looking at this Amazon offer and I understand it doesn't offer a 'bit perfect' option as yet but I do have a question which I really should know the answer to but i don't, so any answers would be appreciated.....
> 
> My MSI PC has a 'sabre' audio dac installed and my  Win10 system offers me a few audio options up to 24/192 as default but does this mean if i choose the 24/192 as default  everything will play  at that sample rate or does it mean it will only play that if  I play a 24/192 track but automatically play 16/44  or 16/48  or 24/96 when I play these tracks?
> 
> Thanks for any answers!





exdmd said:


> Since Amazon Music HD uses Windows Sound Mixer in shared mode I believe if you set the system audio at 24/192 (I do) your laptop upsamples everything to 24/192 when you are using Amazon, at least that is what my Yggy is telling me. When I use Audirvana+ streaming Qobuz my DAC reports the correct sampling rate as Audirvana+ uses Wasapi Exclusive mode. I could be wrong about the upsampling though. Amazon sound quality is inferior to Qobuz so I am not using it much.



Reports I've seen indicate it will upsample everything to 24/192 in that case. It will also allow system sounds, videos on web pages, and other audio to interfere with your music. It will still likely sound better than Apple Music or Spotify, but it will not sound better than Qobuz or Tidal, and that is why I'm saving my trial months for when — or if — Amazon supports ASIO, WASAPI Exclusive, and other basics.


----------



## brianlg

Does anyone know what *Standard* quality means in their app? HD and Ultra HD show the sample rate and bit depth, but standard shows no such info. Is it 320? Is it mp3? Could it vary?

Also, they need to incorporate custom sorting, because seeing albums by "most popular" is ridiculous. 

So far I'm excited though. The price point is great coming from paying $20/mo for years.


----------



## Ken G

brianlg said:


> Does anyone know what *Standard* quality means in their app? HD and Ultra HD show the sample rate and bit depth, but standard shows no such info. Is it 320? Is it mp3? Could it vary?
> 
> Also, they need to incorporate custom sorting, because seeing albums by "most popular" is ridiculous.
> 
> So far I'm excited though. The price point is great coming from paying $20/mo for years.


It is mp3 which Amazon has encoded as 256 I believe.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

iridium7777 said:


> another built-in flaw with amazon?  any other music app that i have will automatically detect the sampling rates of my DAC and still *will only play at the max sample rate of the actual sample music*.  *it seems like what you're saying amazon requires you to pre-select some sample rate from your dac and will output that to that rate no matter what the original sample is*?


That's the best course of action right now or you will face quality degrading oversampling. Bit depth can be kept at 24bit but adjust sample rate to the played track for best possible quality.
And don't forget to contact Amazon customer service with request to support exclusive mode WASAPI, ASIO. The more of us complain the better the chances to have it done sooner than later.


----------



## exdmd (Sep 21, 2019)

brianlg said:


> Does anyone know what *Standard* quality means in their app? HD and Ultra HD show the sample rate and bit depth, but standard shows no such info. Is it 320? Is it mp3? Could it vary?
> 
> Also, they need to incorporate custom sorting, because seeing albums by "most popular" is ridiculous.
> 
> So far I'm excited though. The price point is great coming from paying $20/mo for years.



Price is only a bargain if Amazon can match Tidal and Qobuz sound quality which they have not so far. I have already written customer support about why the lack of exclusive mode? It would seem trivial for Amazon to add Wasapi exclusive mode to their desktop app and only then could we really see if sound quality approached Qobuz and Tidal. They may not care however.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Standard is 256kbps mp3, 
HD is 16/44 FLAC and Ultra HD is anything 24bit with sample rates 44-192 FLAC.


----------



## stuck limo

I'm signed up for the 90 day trial. I don't seem to have been charged the $7.99 (I am not an Unlimited member) that some other people mentioned.

The selection seems great and the "search" bar function works flawlessly. However, the UI seems WAY underbaked and I can't believe anyone at Amazon thought this would be acceptable to release as a competitor to Spotify or Tidal. The major things that are bothering me:

1. Lack of "Similar Artists" functionality -- only 4 other artists listed per artist???

2. Lack of Scrobbling (last.fm connectivity)

3. The Play/Pause button looks nice but it should be at the center of the screen/progress bar like Spotify

4. Lack of user generated playlists (I hope this gets fixed)

5. No feature like "Spotify Connect"

6. UI looks haphazard and not well thought out. Not slick at all.

7. No way to search for "Ultra HD" titles

Sound quality seems fine, I haven't really done any hard comparison between Spotify and Amazon. I did do a brief test and I couldn't hear the differences. I'll be listening to it more over the trial period before I make a final call, but I'll probably stick to Spotify because of ease/use of functionality and ubiquity.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

You probably didn't use Qobuz Spartan UI.
Tidal UI is all right, but they use some non standard ports that get blocked by most corporate firewalls.
Out of all lossless I liked Deezer UI the most, flow, personalized playlist, genre based selection, almost flawless.


----------



## rkw

stuck limo said:


> I can't believe anyone at Amazon thought this would be acceptable to release as a competitor to Spotify or Tidal.


I agree that the Amazon interface lags behind the others, but the bottom line is that Amazon is more than competitive and in a strong third place behind Spotify and Apple Music, and growing at a faster pace than Spotify.



stuck limo said:


> 2. Lack of Scrobbling (last.fm connectivity)


I know about scrobbling and last.fm, but I don't see its appeal. What do you like about it?


----------



## stuck limo

Andrew_WOT said:


> You probably didn't use Qobuz Spartan UI.
> Tidal UI is all right, but they use some non standard ports that get blocked by most corporate firewalls.
> Out of all lossless I liked Deezer UI the most, flow, personalized playlist, genre based selection, almost flawless.



You posted this after my comments. Who is this post in reference to?


----------



## stuck limo (Sep 22, 2019)

rkw said:


> I know about scrobbling and last.fm, but I don't see its appeal. What do you like about it?



I like to keep track of what I listen to. I listen to thousands of artists and I can't keep track of them all. I like to see my listening reports and see what artists/albums/songs I've been listening to the most. I also like tracking other peoples' listening choices and seeing how my taste lines up or perhaps listening to their artists if I'm unfamiliar with them.

From my desktop, I have no way of tracking (to my knowledge) Amazon Music plays, even with a third party app. On Android, I can use Pano Scrobbler and it works fine for Amazon Music.

For those who are unfamiliar with Scrobbling, it is done through Last.FM and tracks what you've listened to. If you're on Spotify or Tidal, you simply go into "Settings" and input your Last.FM account info into the Scrobble field. Here is mine:


----------



## DevilofLife

I tried it on my Hiby R5 and Ibasso DX220 which both bypass the android sample rate and use the app sample rate to play music

The Amazon Music app just plays everything 16Bit 44kHz not matter what sample rate the song is so I think the app just downsample everything to 16Bit 44kHz


----------



## stonesfan129

I'm curious when the download sites (Amazon, Google Play, iTunes) will start offering CD-quality lossless downloads.  I don't mind 256kb/s AAC or 320kb/s MP3, but would prefer to keep a lossless file on my server as it gives more flexibility in encoding to other formats.


----------



## clerkpalmer

Any thoughts on whether its time to ditch tidal? I've always pulled for them as the underdog but 40 percent cheaper is significant.


----------



## csglinux

clerkpalmer said:


> Any thoughts on whether its time to ditch tidal? I've always pulled for them as the underdog but 40 percent cheaper is significant.


I'm sticking with Tidal. The SQ from Amazon's service isn't there yet. If it gets there one day, I'll certainly reconsider.

Right now, if you're using Android, Amazon's service doesn't offer what's advertised. It seems to be impossible to get any Android device to give anything over 48 kHz.


----------



## exdmd (Sep 22, 2019)

clerkpalmer said:


> Any thoughts on whether its time to ditch tidal? I've always pulled for them as the underdog but 40 percent cheaper is significant.


 
I don't think just yet. Tidal has advantages over Amazon Music HD. Better sound quality since Amazon Music HD uses Windows Sound Mixer in shared mode, the UI is nowhere as nice as Tidal's. Tidal has videos, etc. If you already have Amazon Prime you can get a 90 day free trial to Amazon Music HD (as long as you were not a previous Amazon Music customer) so try it if you want to but I would not drop Tidal yet. Let's see what Amazon does over the next three months in response to complaints and If they change the desktop app to allow exclusive mode and open their API so Roon and Audirvana can integrate.


----------



## clerkpalmer

csglinux said:


> I'm sticking with Tidal. The SQ from Amazon's service isn't there yet. If it gets there one day, I'll certainly reconsider.
> 
> Right now, if you're using Android, Amazon's service doesn't offer what's advertised. It seems to be impossible to get any Android device to give anything over 48 kHz.



Is the issue software related? Can't be hardware can it?


----------



## clerkpalmer

exdmd said:


> I don't think just yet. Tidal has advantages over Amazon Music HD. Better sound quality since Amazon Music HD uses Windows Sound Mixer in shared mode, the UI is nowhere as nice as Tidal's. Tidal has videos, etc. If you already have Amazon Prime you can get a 90 day free trial to Amazon Music HD (as long as you were not a previous Amazon Music customer) so try it if you want to but I would not drop Tidal yet. Let's see what Amazon does over the next three months in response to complaints and If they change the desktop app to allow exclusive mode and open their API so Roon and Audirvana can integrate.



Thanks - interesting about a lack of ultra HD for android. Seems like a major misfire particularly since I would imagine the vast majority of subscribers will be using android.


----------



## CANiSLAYu (Sep 22, 2019)

exdmd said:


> Let's see what Amazon does over the next three months in response to complaints and If they change the desktop app to allow exclusive mode and open their API so Roon and Audirvana can integrate.



I'm optimistic they'll improve their apps, but the timeframe is probably the bigger question. I have Tidal (for just me), Apple Music (family uses it) and Amazon HD trial. They all have their limitations and niggles, so it's a bit of an ugly man contest and it seems like no one is in a rush to deliver a top notch UX that is a real differentiator.

On the latter piece though, as a Roon lifetime subscriber I certainly hope they integrate (I already dropped my suggestion box comment), but I never see that happening. Amazon is just too big to care about the (by comparison) paltry user base. Also they have capabilities in their app to link out to buy the songs, etc. I bet in the future they do things like link to concert tickets and artist merchandise (that they'll sell you of course). They want the eyeballs on their app, not someone else's.


----------



## csglinux

clerkpalmer said:


> Is the issue software related? Can't be hardware can it?


Not hardware related. Amazon just didn't put any care or attention into its Android app.


----------



## CANiSLAYu

csglinux said:


> Not hardware related. Amazon just didn't put any care or attention into its Android app.


That's not true. It's an Android issue as Android SRC limits all output systemwide. 

To have anything higher you need an app like USB Audio Player Pro that bypasses the SRC and an external DAC.


----------



## clerkpalmer (Sep 22, 2019)

CANiSLAYu said:


> That's not true. It's an Android issue as Android SRC limits all output systemwide.
> 
> To have anything higher you need an app like USB Audio Player Pro that bypasses the SRC and an external DAC.



Is usb audio player does it, can't Amazon do it? Or is it not that simple? Edit my bad, nevermind. I see the need for the dac.


----------



## csglinux

CANiSLAYu said:


> That's not true. It's an Android issue as Android SRC limits all output systemwide.
> 
> To have anything higher you need an app like USB Audio Player Pro that bypasses the SRC and an external DAC.


What you're saying is incorrect. Most Android DAPs are perfectly capable of by-passing the 48-kHz Android mixer. As are the entire LG range of quad-DAC smartphones: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/music-apps-tips-and-tricks-for-the-lg-v30.868978/ They are able to do this with hi-res files (anything 24-bit) without the need of UAPP.

Amazon's app is not even using Android's mixer. You can check it for yourself with audio_flinger. Amazon is intentionally limiting the sample rate.


----------



## CANiSLAYu

clerkpalmer said:


> Is usb audio player does it, can't Amazon do it? Or is it not that simple? Edit my bad, nevermind. I see the need for the dac.


Not sure how difficult it is to code, but my gut tells me this is one of the spots where Android fragmentation comes into play.  This chart is from August 2018 when Android 9 was launched, but still illustrates the point:


 

Also there are hundreds of phone/tablet manufacturers running various Android implementations with hundreds of different Built in DACs. I think limiting to 16/48 is just playing to the lowest common denominator. 

Then lastly I think the segment of the population that actually cares and will attach an external DAC to their phone is infinitesimal, so I imagine there’s a cost/benefit component as well. 

I just think it’s false to say Amazon doesn’t care because of this Android issue because every other streaming service has this same limitation.


----------



## CANiSLAYu

csglinux said:


> What you're saying is incorrect. Most Android DAPs are perfectly capable of by-passing the 48-kHz Android mixer. As are the entire LG range of quad-DAC smartphones: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/music-apps-tips-and-tricks-for-the-lg-v30.868978/ They are able to do this with hi-res files (anything 24-bit) without the need of UAPP.
> 
> Amazon's app is not even using Android's mixer. You can check it for yourself with audio_flinger. Amazon is intentionally limiting the sample rate.


Yes and same with Astell&Kern, et al, with modified Android OSes, but they’re modifying the core OS to run on their specific hardware, not the individual apps.


----------



## csglinux

CANiSLAYu said:


> Yes and same with Astell&Kern, et al, with modified Android OSes, but they’re modifying the core OS to run on their specific hardware, not the individual apps.


I'm sure most people are aware of that. I don't think anybody's expecting Amazon to give them 192 kHz playback on hardware that's incapable of ever playing back 192 kHz.
We're talking about Android DAPs, phones, etc., that are otherwise perfectly capable of playing sample rates higher than 48 kHz, but Amazon's music app is specifically prohibiting that. Thus, it is a software (Amazon) issue. Not a hardware issue.


----------



## csglinux

CANiSLAYu said:


> I just think it’s false to say Amazon doesn’t care because of this Android issue because every other streaming service has this same limitation.



That also isn't true. Tidal, Qobuz, etc., are perfectly capable of playing hi-res files back on Android devices.

Either Amazon doesn't care, or they're incompetent. Take your pick.


----------



## rkw

csglinux said:


> Tidal, Qobuz, *etc*., are perfectly capable of playing hi-res files back on Android devices.


Who are the "etc" (among streaming services)?


----------



## csglinux

rkw said:


> Who are the "etc" (among streaming services)?


I'm not aware of other services (yet) that go beyond 44 kHz, but services like Deezer at least give bit-perfect CD quality. Amazon doesn't even give you that, because it's up-sampling everything - on every single platform at launch. IMHO, that's a far bigger problem than not going beyond 44 kHz. I'd be a happy camper with bit-perfect red-book FLAC, but Amazon doesn't even give you that.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 22, 2019)

clerkpalmer said:


> Thanks - interesting about a lack of ultra HD for android. Seems like a major misfire particularly since I would imagine the vast majority of subscribers will be using android.


On my LG V30 amazon app shows device capabilities as 24/48 and outputs at that rate. Unless your device OS is pretty old it should work.
https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=14070322011


> *Which Android devices support Amazon Music HD?*
> Most Android devices released since 2014 can support HD/Ultra HD playback (up to 48kHz). Please ensure that your device is running on Android Lollipop, or later.
> 
> At this time Amazon Music HD is not supported on Chromecast.



On Windows desktop side, after matching shared mode sample rate with the track, the quality is indistinguishable from Qobuz running in ASIO, ASIO just a tiny bit louder. Using Auralic external USB DAC.
Flipping sample rate is a hassle though, hope exclusive bit-perfect mode is on the way. At least customer rep response sounded promising.


----------



## mixman

Would love for some Roon integration, but I doubt that will ever happen. As mentioned, the user base is way too small for them to care about Roon, which is why I am going to stick with Tidal for now.......Qobuz....not too sure about.


----------



## Left Channel

clerkpalmer said:


> Is the issue software related? Can't be hardware can it?





clerkpalmer said:


> Thanks - interesting about a lack of ultra HD for android. Seems like a major misfire particularly since I would imagine the vast majority of subscribers will be using android.



It's software, and it's not just Android and Windows. Quoting myself here: 



Left Channel said:


> Many of the above impressions may be improved if loudness normalization is turned off. But the Amazon app also does not get around various kinds of system resampling even when an external DAC or the LG internal Quad DAC is available. The specifics are different across Android, iOS, Windows, and macOS, but in all or most situations the result in resampling, sometimes upsampling but in other cases downsampling.
> 
> On phones this includes resampling of the signal sent to external DACs and even high-end internal DACs, and no third-party apps yet have access to the Amazon API to help us find a way around this problem. On desktops the apps don't allow you to select anything but the main system audio, so no options like ASIO or exclusive, and there's no integration with third-party player apps possible there yet either.
> 
> This only makes sense when one considers that Amazon's main competitors in this space are Apple Music and Spotify. Many say it sounds better than those services. But it appears most Qobuz and Tidal users remain unimpressed.


----------



## Left Channel

Andrew_WOT said:


> On my LG V30 amazon app shows device capabilities as 24/48 and outputs at that rate. Unless your device OS is pretty old it should work.
> https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=14070322011
> 
> 
> ...



On Windows many of us hear a clear improvement from Qobuz in ASIO or WASAPI.On a high-end phone like the LG V30, it's a crying shame that the Amazon app can't make use of the Quad DAC and instead lets the stream get resampled to the Android system limitation of 24/48. On the same phone, many hear a clear difference because the Tidal app does that correctly for MQA, and the UAPP app does that correctly for all streams from Tidal and Qobuz. 

Not everyone can hear these differences though, and if you can't consider yourself lucky! This will benefit your wallet in the long run.


----------



## exdmd

Andrew_WOT said:


> On my LG V30 amazon app shows device capabilities as 24/48 and outputs at that rate. Unless your device OS is pretty old it should work.
> https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=14070322011
> 
> 
> ...



I am using Qobuz streamed through Audirvana+ which uses Wasapi exclusive mode. I went to the trouble of setting the sample rate and bit depth for a few tracks played in Amazon Music HD in Windows mixer, then did a quick comparison to the same tracks played through Audirvana+. I can hear a difference, mainly in sound stage width and depth and imaging in favor of bit perfect through Audirvana+. This was on 16/44 and 24/192 files. Amazon Music HD really needs Wasapi exclusive mode. Maybe we see it, time will tell.


----------



## Left Channel

CANiSLAYu said:


> That's not true. It's an Android issue as Android SRC limits all output systemwide.
> 
> To have anything higher you need an app like USB Audio Player Pro that bypasses the SRC and an external DAC.





clerkpalmer said:


> Is usb audio player does it, can't Amazon do it? Or is it not that simple? Edit my bad, nevermind. I see the need for the dac.



In this case the post metioned the LG V30, which has a high-end internal Quad DAC. The Tidal app bypasses the Android system to make use of that DAC for MQA, and UAPP does the same for all streams from Tidal and Qobuz.


----------



## clerkpalmer

If I am understanding this properly, for someone like me who is just streaming tidal out of their note 10, with no dac, the Amazon hd would be equivalent to tidal hifi?


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 22, 2019)

Left Channel said:


> On Windows many of us hear a clear improvement from Qobuz in ASIO or WASAPI.On a high-end phone like the LG V30, it's a crying shame that the Amazon app can't make use of the Quad DAC and instead lets the stream get resampled to the Android system limitation of 24/48. On the same phone, many hear a clear difference because the Tidal app does that correctly for MQA, and the UAPP app does that correctly for all streams from Tidal and Qobuz.
> 
> Not everyone can hear these differences though, and if you can't consider yourself lucky! This will benefit your wallet in the long run.


Balanced HD800,  Auralic Vega DAC and Taurus MkII HP amp. You say you can tell the difference after matching volume on HD650?
I am afraid most of the perceived difference comes from not matching sample rate of shared mode with track original sample rate which triggers mixer resampling and degrading interpolation and the fact that ASIO or exclusive WASAPI is a bit louder than what you get from mixer, and louder always sounds clearer and better in comparison.
Not defending amazon, they should have looked at the exclusive mode very first thing when introducing this audiophile tier. Hopefully that'll be addressed in no time.

On Android side, sorry, no idea what you are talking about, MQA should die the horrible death it deserved. Hopefully amazon will help with phasing  out Tidal and that contraption out of this world.


----------



## Left Channel

Andrew_WOT said:


> Balanced HD800,  Auralic Vega DAC and Taurus MkII HP amp. You say you can tell the difference after matching volume on HD650?
> I am afraid most of the perceived difference comes from not matching sample rate of shared mode with track original sample rate which triggers mixer resampling and degrading interpolation and the fact that ASIO or exclusive WASAPI is a bit louder than what you get from mixer, and louder always sounds clearer and better in comparison.
> Not defending amazon, they should have looked at the exclusive mode very first thing when introducing this audiophile tier. Hopefully that'll be addressed in no time.
> 
> On Android side, sorry, no idea what you are talking about, MQA should die the horrible death it deserved. Hopefully amazon will help with phasing  out Tidal and that contraption out of this world.



Yes I can hear a difference like that, but many people cannot. This range of variation is a normal human thing. I found this study interesting: http://www.doc.gold.ac.uk/~mas03dm...

As for Android, Tidal's implementation of MQA for the LG V30 is just an example not a recommendation. I use UAPP for Qobuz and Tidal (without the MQA add-in) it does sound better than the official apps.


----------



## Devodonaldson

DevilofLife said:


> I tried it on my Hiby R5 and Ibasso DX220 which both bypass the android sample rate and use the app sample rate to play music
> 
> The Amazon Music app just plays everything 16Bit 44kHz not matter what sample rate the song is so I think the app just downsample everything to 16Bit 44kHz


On my Mojo or Monolith portable, everything gets upsampled to 192khz


----------



## Devodonaldson

CANiSLAYu said:


> That's not true. It's an Android issue as Android SRC limits all output systemwide.
> 
> To have anything higher you need an app like USB Audio Player Pro that bypasses the SRC and an external DAC.


Not just an Android issue. On iOS, everything is getting updampled to external DAC at 192khz for he audio. Tidal and Qobuz output at native resolution to external DWCs


----------



## Andrew_WOT

As we would have to deal with Shared mode for some unknown time before (if) Amazon introduces exclusive mode support, this article covers in depth of what happens in shared mode and explains importance of matching bit rate of the original material.
Technically if shared mode bitrate matches original and all special effects are off, the only modification to original stream is conversion to 32-bit float for internal processing and dithering back to output specified fixed bit depth. 
Not as good as exclusive mode that is just mem copy but should be close enough.


----------



## tomwoo

Andrew_WOT said:


> As we would have to deal with Shared mode for some unknown time before (if) Amazon introduces exclusive mode support, this article covers in depth of what happens in shared mode and explains importance of matching bit rate of the original material.
> Technically if shared mode bitrate matches original and all special effects are off, the only modification to original stream is conversion to 32-bit float for internal processing and dithering back to output specified fixed bit depth.
> Not as good as exclusive mode that is just mem copy but should be close enough.


As a Mojo user, this basically took all the fun away from looking at the color-changing balls. I guess it also holds true for Hugo users


----------



## muski (Sep 24, 2019)

Has anyone tried an Amazon Echo Link? I assume it's for streaming Amazon HD? Strangely, it only does 16/48!

From their help pages:

_Digital Audio Inputs (optical TOSLINK and coaxial RCA) - Uncompressed PCM audio (16bit/44.1, 48, 88.2 or 96kHz)_
_Digital Audio Output (optical TOSLINK and coaxial RCA) - 16bit/48kHz Uncompressed PCM stereo_

From a question on the product page:
_Q: Does it work with amazon music hd? can it play in ultra hd quality via the s/pdif & optical outputs? 
A: I will answer my own question, incase others are wondering. I uncovered this from reading the audioscience review of the link. This unit, despite being marketed towards people who value audio quality, does not support what amazon is now calling Ultra HD Music streams. It will accept sample rates above 48Khz, but it will downsample everything before playing it internally, or sending out the digital outputs to an external DAC. At launch it seems Amazon has no official way to play Ultra HDstreams at native resolution (96Khz, 192Khz) other than using the PC/Mac app or using an Apple iPhone with an external DAC. Hopefully the Link is removed promply from the Market and replaced with a fully functional unit that supports amazon's own services. If all you want is the CD quality playbacks (44.1) offered by the HDService...you are going to be OK. But all the fancy Ultra tracks Audiophiles drool over will be downgraded through this box. When Amazon fixes this, Ill buy it. see less 
By JimT on September 19, 2019_

https://www.amazon.com/Echo-Link-Stream-stereo-system/dp/B0798DVZCY


----------



## Taz777

I'm hoping that this and the other Amazon Music HD thread can be merged!


----------



## Tooros

Taz777 said:


> I'm hoping that this and the other Amazon Music HD thread can be merged!


I can’t find another thread. Has it already been merged?


----------



## Taz777

Tooros said:


> I can’t find another thread. Has it already been merged?



I think this is the other one:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/amazon-music-lossless-tier.915298/

It makes no sense to have two threads!


----------



## loomisjohnson

two questions:
1. is there a function on the amazon app which continues to play similar songs after your play queue is finished?
2. whereas spotify has a radio station for every artist, it appears that amazon only has a limited number of stations--am i missing something?


----------



## Taz777

loomisjohnson said:


> two questions:
> 1. is there a function on the amazon app which continues to play similar songs after your play queue is finished?
> 2. whereas spotify has a radio station for every artist, it appears that amazon only has a limited number of stations--am i missing something?



1. Not that I've been able to see. The nearest is a 'Recommendations' section but that's quite far removed from the functionality that you're asking about.
2. No. It looks like the 'Stations' are genre-based.

I'm new to the Amazon Music app and I'm using it on macOS so I may be wrong!


----------



## Taz777

I spent a few hours listening to the same songs on Amazon Music HD, Tidal desktop and Amarra Luxe desktop, all running on macOS Mojave 10.14.6. It was a laborious process as I made sure I only had one of the apps open at any time to stop exclusive access to my Topping D50 DAC becoming an issue, plus I had to check the settings each time I opened one of the three apps to make sure that the settings hadn't changed. Anyway, a side interest to me was Tidal have updated their app twice in 24 hours!

My objective was to see which app produced the best sound to my ears, as that's all that matters to me.

In order of 'best sound quality' to my ears:

1. Amarra Luxe desktop for macOS Version 4.3.510-208 - a very poorly written app in terms of UI and adhering to macOS app standards - seems to break every standard there is for macOS apps BUT...sounds simply delicious. I use Amarra Luxe to play my Tidal playlists so the source files are streamed from Tidal. The app produces a thoroughly engaging representation of the music. Rich timbre, wide sound stage, beautiful separation of instruments. It's hard to see how the sound could be bettered on my current hardware.

2. Tidal desktop app for macOS Version 2.7.0.5 - not far behind Amarra Luxe, to my surprise! A lovely UI and some really useful features to discover new music. A glorious representation of the music, deep and wide soundstage, a full-bodied richness to the tracks. It's progressed a long way from a year ago.

3. Amazon Music HD for macOS Version 7.8.2.2104. UI-wise it's probably where Tidal was a year ago so will improve with new updates I imagine. Unfortunately the sound, possibly due to lack of exclusive access and lack of overriding the OS mixer and volume control, was a little flat and anaemic compared to the other two apps. It's a pleasant enough sound but lacks engagement - better suited to background listening as far as I am concerned. I'm really hoping that Amazon can rapidly update this app as there's no technical reasons why they cannot make it sound as good as the Tidal app. I'm guessing it's a step up for Spotify users, but it's a couple of steps down from Tidal at the moment. Needless to say I've set up the reminder from within the app to notify me three days before my free trial ends.


----------



## exdmd

Taz777 said:


> I spent a few hours listening to the same songs on Amazon Music HD, Tidal desktop and Amarra Luxe desktop, all running on macOS Mojave 10.14.6. It was a laborious process as I made sure I only had one of the apps open at any time to stop exclusive access to my Topping D50 DAC becoming an issue, plus I had to check the settings each time I opened one of the three apps to make sure that the settings hadn't changed. Anyway, a side interest to me was Tidal have updated their app twice in 24 hours!
> 
> My objective was to see which app produced the best sound to my ears, as that's all that matters to me.
> 
> ...



Thanks nice review! Substitute Audirvana+ for Windows 10 for Amarra Luxe and your findings agree with mine. You got me curious about demoing Amarra Luxe but when I investigated it only plays up to 96 kHz while Audirvana also does 192. There is a lot of 192 content on Qobuz.


----------



## rkw

muski said:


> Has anyone tried an Amazon Echo Link? I assume it's for streaming Amazon HD? Strangely, it only does 16/48!


Amazon will probably announce new Echo models at their event tomorrow, which are expected to support Amazon HD streaming.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/23/...ware-event-echo-fire-tv-kindle-what-to-expect


----------



## Taz777

exdmd said:


> Thanks nice review! Substitute Audirvana+ for Windows 10 for Amarra Luxe and your findings agree with mine. You got me curious about demoing Amarra Luxe but when I investigated it only plays up to 96 kHz while Audirvana also does 192. There is a lot of 192 content on Qobuz.



I'm not sure about that. I run Amarra Luxe on macOS and it runs bit-perfect. The confusion may arise out of MQA which would be limited to 96kHz if your external DAC doesn't do the MQA processing. It has MQA pass-through for external MQA DACs and that needs to be selected for the second unfold on the DAC.


----------



## exdmd

jkauff posted at Steve Hoffman Forum that he was able to get Amazon Music HD running in exclusive mode on Windows using JRiver:


> JRiver Media Center users can run Amazon Music in Exclusive mode. Load the JRiver audio driver (WDM, for Windows), set it as your primary audio device, and all audio will be directed to Media Center where you can select a WASAPI (or ASIO) audio output that can be set to exclusive.


 
Instructions for loading the WDM driver are at the jriver.com Wiki here. I don't have JRiver Media Center so have not tried this myself.


----------



## Papa253 (Sep 25, 2019)

This morning there was an update for Android.

I don't know what changed and Amazon didn't give any details.

Does any one know what changed?


----------



## Left Channel

Papa253 said:


> This morning there was an update for Android.
> 
> I don't know what changed and Amazon didn't give any details.
> 
> Does any one know what changed?



Looks like you've just received the update that adds the new Music HD service, unless they forgot to change the What's New info for a minor bugfix release. I saw that same update message over a week ago, and haven't received any new updates since.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

exdmd said:


> jkauff posted at Steve Hoffman Forum that he was able to get Amazon Music HD running in exclusive mode on Windows using JRiver:
> 
> 
> Instructions for loading the WDM driver are at the jriver.com Wiki here. I don't have JRiver Media Center so have not tried this myself.


It still goes through the shared mode mixer and only then get piped into JRiver selected driver. I was looking at it myself yesterday.


----------



## exdmd

@Andrew_WOT thought it sounded too good to be true. Thanks you saved me the trouble of d/l a demo copy of JRiver to try it out.


----------



## mixman

Has anyone tried Amazon HD with the JRiver WDM driver yet? If so, has the SQ improved?


----------



## Blueshound24

exdmd said:


> jkauff posted at Steve Hoffman Forum that he was able to get Amazon Music HD running in exclusive mode on Windows using JRiver:
> 
> 
> Instructions for loading the WDM driver are at the jriver.com Wiki here. I don't have JRiver Media Center so have not tried this myself.




This is exactly right. I use it for all music applications.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

mixman said:


> Has anyone tried Amazon HD with the JRiver WDM driver yet? If so, has the SQ improved?


You cannon bypass shared mode mixer, it still does resampling based on specified bit rate in WDM driver control panel. Not sure if adding middle man does more harm than good. There is also VoiceMeeter that can do the same. But shared mode is shared mode you can't cheat around core OS thing like that.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

This diagram may help, in shared mode it always goes through audio service with mixer and only then to audio driver.





Taken from https://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/WASAPI.htm
good article to understand limitations and possible workarounds to improve shared mode performance.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

And if anyone wondering why it is suboptimal to rely on Windows resampler.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...indows-resampling-not-actually-that-bad.9092/

Hope Amazon comes to their senses and give exclusive mode for HD tier. Seems like they just wanted to beat Spotify and Apple Music to the market with client apps clearly not ready. 
Well, 90 days trial for everyone, a lot of time to fix things if they really want our money.


----------



## tomwoo

If it only takes a programmer half a day to get it done, why not bringing in Tidal/Qobuz users? Even though there are only 10K users I cannot imagine how great this deal is...


----------



## Left Channel

tomwoo said:


> If it only takes a programmer half a day to get it done, why not bringing in Tidal/Qobuz users? Even though there are only 10K users I cannot imagine how great this deal is...



Qobuz has 25,000 subscribers in the USA, and 200,000 worldwide, most of them audiophiles. Tidal has millions of subscribers, but only a small portion are audiophiles. Those numbers are just "rounding errors" to a company like Amazon. But to Qobuz and part of Tidal, it's their whole business model to charge more to fewer customers, and the Qobuz USA GM has publicly stated their goal is to capture only 1% of the market: audiophiles. Will Amazon care? Hard to say.


----------



## Left Channel

Papa253 said:


> This morning there was an update for Android.
> 
> I don't know what changed and Amazon didn't give any details.
> 
> Does any one know what changed?





Left Channel said:


> Looks like you've just received the update that adds the new Music HD service, unless they forgot to change the What's New info for a minor bugfix release. I saw that same update message over a week ago, and haven't received any new updates since.



Huh. I just got that update too. No telling if it's a small bugfix that includes old What's New info, or if this is happening because I have two Google accounts on my phone. Android is messy sometimes. And that's the way we like it.


----------



## Left Channel

Amazon has just released a Music HD compatible Alexa device, the Echo Studio. The announcement also says they're going to support Dolby Atmos music. Atmos music may be a topic for another thread, but I must say it seems like an abomination to me. I'm sure some folks will find it tickles their brains just right though.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Left Channel said:


> Qobuz has 25,000 subscribers in the USA, and 200,000 worldwide, most of them audiophiles. Tidal has millions of subscribers, but only a small portion are audiophiles. Those numbers are just "rounding errors" to a company like Amazon. But to Qobuz and part of Tidal, it's their whole business model to charge more to fewer customers, and the Qobuz USA GM has publicly stated their goal is to capture only 1% of the market: audiophiles. Will Amazon care? Hard to say.


Tidal and Qobuz are not even registered in the streaming services market share report, falling under Others category.
https://musicindustryblog.wordpress.com/2018/09/13/mid-year-2018-streaming-market-shares/

But what is the point of introducing lossless "audiophile" tier at all if you can't deliver it properly to the end user. I am pretty sure they are busy fixing this already.


----------



## Left Channel

Andrew_WOT said:


> Tidal and Qobuz are not even registered in the streaming services market share report, falling under Others category.
> https://musicindustryblog.wordpress.com/2018/09/13/mid-year-2018-streaming-market-shares/
> 
> But what is the point of introducing lossless "audiophile" tier at all if you can't deliver it properly to the end user. I am pretty sure they are busy fixing this already.



Is that really what they're doing, targeting audiophiles? There's a lot more money in selling Echo Studio units to people that will enjoy the highly processed sound of Doby Atmos. "HD" is just gravy on that goose.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Left Channel said:


> Is that really what they're doing, targeting audiophiles? There's a lot more money in selling Echo Studio units to people that will enjoy the highly processed sound of Doby Atmos. "HD" is just gravy on that goose.


We'll see in 90 days or sooner. I can't imagine Echo market is that big, but this is just speculative, and how on Earth anyone could tell lossless from lossy on that tiny speaker to pay extra for HD.
Would be quite silly for amazon losing customers just because of the little thing like exclusive mode support, few lines of code, I am sure customer reps got their share of complaints already.


----------



## exdmd

Enabling exclusive mode would be a big step. I would have to see how it sounds compared to Audirvana+ streaming Qobuz. Audirvana+ manages computer resources to reduce noise and improves on the sound of the desktop Qobuz app. Noticeable enough that I only use Audirvana+. Opening up their API is something Amazon may not want to do to enable Roon and Audirvana to integrate Amazon Music HD though, time will tell.


----------



## Left Channel

Andrew_WOT said:


> We'll see in 90 days or sooner. I can't imagine Echo market is that big, but this is just speculative, and how on Earth anyone could tell lossless from lossy on that tiny speaker to pay extra for HD.
> Would be quite silly for amazon losing customers just because of the little thing like exclusive mode support, few lines of code, I am sure customer reps got their share of complaints already.



The Amazon folks are calling this their first high-end speaker, and are actually recommending people buy two for their "home theaters". The microphones automatically tune the speaker to the room, like Apple and Sonos products do.

This is all about using Atmos to sell electronics to a lot more people than would ever switch from Qobuz or the Tidal audiophile segment. But hopefully they'll get around to supporting us too.

Here's an article that includes a photo of a transparent mock-up showing the placement of the speakers: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/25/...os-sound-listen-hands-on-specs-features-price


----------



## muski

No update announced for the Echo Link for high-res support —so still only 24/48 digital out.


----------



## rkw

muski said:


> No update announced for the Echo Link for high-res support —so still only 24/48 digital out.


When they get around to it, most likely hi-res support will be through firmware update over the web.


----------



## muski

rkw said:


> When they get around to it, most likely hi-res support will be through firmware update over the web.


Yes, that's what I was thinking. Let's hope it's a software issue, not a hardware one...


----------



## John Blackshear

The service sounds good with my rig.


----------



## RickB

I'm finding that it sounds noticeably better than Spotify. I don't use Audirvana so I've never really had "exclusive mode" or whatever the Mac equivalent is called. However, my music app Swinsian has a setting to automatically set the right bit rate/sample rate for each track. It would be nice if the Amazon Mac app could do the same thing.


----------



## Tanelorn

TjPhysicist said:


> So HIby does bitperfect using ANY android app? (i wonder why that's something Hiby can do, but Fiio and Ibasso cannot?)...and If I'm hearing you right, for some reason Tidal should be able to do Bitperfect as is on Hiby but Amazon HD cannot due to some way it works?


Hiby Does, but...
Amazon does not check that and only checks for software. It recognizes it is android and so the App wont let you play Music on higher bitrates, because Amazon just assumes every android player will have the standard Android limitation. 
I alsready opened a support case and reported this via the feedback function but not enough people complained, so the prio is oltra low.
if you want to have it fixed, please spam amazon with reports about that..


----------



## Tanelorn

XGeneX88 said:


> Right... If I wanted EQ, I'd do it myself. I think this is amateur stuff for them to be doing. Sounds like they are misleading their customers in more ways than one. I'm also hearing from a peer that there are tracks that will down sample Ultra HD to 16 bit / 44.1 while still displaying Ultra HD (obviously this should just be regular HD). I don't think this thing should've been rolled out with so many bugs & issues.


try to switch off volume normalzation in the Amazon music app. its magic XD


----------



## Tanelorn

Ken G said:


> It is mp3 which Amazon has encoded as 256 I believe.


320, but yes, mp3


----------



## Taz777

The poorer sound quality, compared to Tidal, is a huge source of frustration for me. I tend to listen out for new tracks that are played on smooth jazz radio stations and build up a list of them (via Shazam) and then try to find them on Tidal. Tidal doesn't have several of them, yet Amazon Music HD found all of them so far!


----------



## jt25741 (Sep 26, 2019)

Taz777 said:


> The poorer sound quality, compared to Tidal, is a huge source of frustration for me. I tend to listen out for new tracks that are played on smooth jazz radio stations and build up a list of them (via Shazam) and then try to find them on Tidal. Tidal doesn't have several of them, yet Amazon Music HD found all of them so far!



Agree.  Fundamentally the library in Amazon HD is more complete, larger and has more Hi-Def content than Tidal MQA.  The UI is pretty impressive given how new the service is, provided Amazon continues to refine and add features.   The somewhat trivial task of fixing the I/O to use exclusive mode may/should resolve all the sound quality issues and allow the content to shine with higher quality on Ultra HD content over Tidal (purported MQA merits notwithstanding).  All for significantly less than Tidal (for Prime and Yearly purchase) --- they will have a great service.   Apparently Audirvana and perhaps others will solve part of the sound quality issue on their own too, eventually.   I am hopeful.    As for Amazon having a proper end point device to connect to an external DAC --- not so sure its coming anytime soon


----------



## saintintn

I made the move to the family plan for Amazon Music HD, the first day I it was offered.  Cancelled Apple Music (kids) and Tidal HIFI (me). I’m a prime member, have several Echo’s, but am pretty much Apple based with phones, laptops, and tablets. I am getting Ultra HD no problem on iPhone X with Dragonfly Black. Sound is great. Indistinguishable from Master MQA songs on Tidal. Only thing I’m waiting on is Roon integration andr KEF LS50W WiFi capability.


----------



## Papa253

Taz777 said:


> The poorer sound quality, compared to Tidal, is a huge source of frustration for me. I tend to listen out for new tracks that are played on smooth jazz radio stations and build up a list of them (via Shazam) and then try to find them on Tidal. Tidal doesn't have several of them, yet Amazon Music HD found all of them so far!


I couldn't agree more.
One of my favorite bands is Fink, on Amazon they list 30 albums where as on Tidal they list 8.

As for the sound differences between them, amazon is a bit warmer with less details.
That just for Fink.


----------



## Taz777

I've spent a couple of hours this evening listening to the Amazon Music HD app and the Tidal app on my Android-based LG V30+ phone (previously I was listening to Amazon Music HD on my Mac desktop). The difference in quality is even more stark. I've been using a semi-decent pair of headphones - beyerdynamic T51i on-ears, and for a shorter time, my AKG N40 in-ears. Several tracks have played 'correctly' in terms of bitrate and bit-depth at 48kHz, 24-bit according to the info details when I click the Ultra-HD icon in the Amazon Music HD app (Android). However, the audio is completely muddled up and unlistenable to me. If anyone has the Amazon Music HD app on an LG phone, could they check the quality with a decent pair of headphones? Something must be wrong. The Tidal app is in a completely different league in terms listenability and sound quality, and I'm not listening to any MQA tracks either.


----------



## jt25741

Taz777 said:


> I've spent a couple of hours this evening listening to the Amazon Music HD app and the Tidal app on my Android-based LG V30+ phone (previously I was listening to Amazon Music HD on my Mac desktop). The difference in quality is even more stark. I've been using a semi-decent pair of headphones - beyerdynamic T51i on-ears, and for a shorter time, my AKG N40 in-ears. Several tracks have played 'correctly' in terms of bitrate and bit-depth at 48kHz, 24-bit according to the info details when I click the Ultra-HD icon in the Amazon Music HD app (Android). However, the audio is completely muddled up and unlistenable to me. If anyone has the Amazon Music HD app on an LG phone, could they check the quality with a decent pair of headphones? Something must be wrong. The Tidal app is in a completely different league in terms listenability and sound quality, and I'm not listening to any MQA tracks either.



Yes same experience...on lg v40.   Same issues as Amazon has with all the Fire OS devices too....audio is destroyed.


----------



## stuck limo

Taz777 said:


> Several tracks have played 'correctly' in terms of bitrate and bit-depth at 48kHz, 24-bit according to the info details when I click the Ultra-HD icon in the Amazon Music HD app (Android).





jt25741 said:


> Yes same experience...on lg v40.   Same issues as Amazon has with all the Fire OS devices too....audio is destroyed.



Are we talking about JUST Ultra HD? I have a V20/V40 I can check some comparisons.


----------



## jt25741

stuck limo said:


> Are we talking about JUST Ultra HD? I have a V20/V40 I can check some comparisons.



Everything sounds bad to me, as everything goes through the android mixer from Amazon Music (like Google Music too).  Unless they take unpublished interfaces/hacks like UAPP does, they will need to make use of the MQA offload path as Tidal does with devices like LG.  Here the ESS SoC is handed the FLAC natively, and it does decode using the offload feature -- far away from Android Mixer/Resampler .   

Im hoping UAPP integrates Amazon Music HD eventually on Android ... if enough people ask for it no technical reason why it wont happen.


----------



## Tanelorn

Taz777 said:


> I've spent a couple of hours this evening listening to the Amazon Music HD app and the Tidal app on my Android-based LG V30+ phone (previously I was listening to Amazon Music HD on my Mac desktop). The difference in quality is even more stark. I've been using a semi-decent pair of headphones - beyerdynamic T51i on-ears, and for a shorter time, my AKG N40 in-ears. Several tracks have played 'correctly' in terms of bitrate and bit-depth at 48kHz, 24-bit according to the info details when I click the Ultra-HD icon in the Amazon Music HD app (Android). However, the audio is completely muddled up and unlistenable to me. If anyone has the Amazon Music HD app on an LG phone, could they check the quality with a decent pair of headphones? Something must be wrong. The Tidal app is in a completely different league in terms listenability and sound quality, and I'm not listening to any MQA tracks either.


Every is fine for me, even a bit more clear and a great Soundstage. 
But.. I had the same issue at first also.. You should try and switch off loudness management  in the Amazon app. That option fully destroys high quality sound..


----------



## Left Channel

jt25741 said:


> Im hoping UAPP integrates Amazon Music HD eventually on Android ... if enough people ask for it no technical reason why it wont happen.



No technical reason but there are business reasons, misguided though they may be. Amazon does not make their API public, and are currently only partnering with hardware partners who make products Amazon sells a lot of. Audiophile software apps have a tiny number of customers in comparison, and also UAPP only sells through Google Play which would complicate the relationship.


----------



## jt25741

Left Channel said:


> No technical reason but there are business reasons, misguided though they may be. Amazon does not make their API public, and are currently only partnering with hardware partners who make products Amazon sells a lot of. Audiophile software apps have a tiny number of customers in comparison, and also UAPP only sells through Google Play which would complicate the relationship.



Sadly what you say about the business reasons why not, are compelling.   Nevertheless, maybe well see some integrations on the SW front somewhere, although it really doesnt likely matter much to Amazon.


----------



## Left Channel

jt25741 said:


> Sadly what you say about the business reasons why not, are compelling.   Nevertheless, maybe well see some integrations on the SW front somewhere, although it really doesnt likely matter much to Amazon.



Amazon may also prefer to keep us within their own apps, so they can sell us downloads (even though they're MP3 not Hi-Res at this time) and other products. It's all about owning the customer. Not sure I like being owned...


----------



## Left Channel

In addition to Atmos, Amazon Music HD and Echo Studio will also support Sony 360 Reality Audio: https://www.engadget.com/2019/09/26/echo-studio-360-reality-audio/


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 26, 2019)

Taz777 said:


> I've spent a couple of hours this evening listening to the Amazon Music HD app and the Tidal app on my Android-based LG V30+ phone (previously I was listening to Amazon Music HD on my Mac desktop). The difference in quality is even more stark. I've been using a semi-decent pair of headphones - beyerdynamic T51i on-ears, and for a shorter time, my AKG N40 in-ears. Several tracks have played 'correctly' in terms of bitrate and bit-depth at 48kHz, 24-bit according to the info details when I click the Ultra-HD icon in the Amazon Music HD app (Android). However, the audio is completely muddled up and unlistenable to me. If anyone has the Amazon Music HD app on an LG phone, could they check the quality with a decent pair of headphones? Something must be wrong. The Tidal app is in a completely different league in terms listenability and sound quality, and I'm not listening to any MQA tracks either.


Have the same phone, sounds outstanding on UE900s. Few pointers:
- disable volume normalization
- adjust streaming quality, it's standard by default on mobile plan
- and if you have some audio simultaneously coming from other source (browser), the sound will be muffled, guess that's how shared audio mode works on Android. Kill all the other running apps, and if browsing, disable (mute) audio in chrome preferences.

One more thing, I have noticed something similar happening on PC, quality is impacted but not by such degree. The give away is that HD badge that you can click to see current bitrate disappears.
Usually happens when other app like browser accesses audio in shared mode first. Almost as there is some sort of semi-exlusive mode Amazon can optimize if using audio device exclusively, a while back I've read Window Media Player can do the same.
In any case keep an eye on that HD yellow badge with bit rate, phone or PC, if it disappears, something is wrong, check for other apps accessing audio output.

And exclusive mode support is coming, don't worry, they just need some time.


----------



## RickB

There was an update to the Mac app, 7.8.3.2109, just now for me. To my ears the sound is less flat now. Not as "airy" as Qobuz, but better.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 28, 2019)

PC was updated too, not in Windows store though. You can download it from here, just uninstall Win10 Store version first or it won't let you install.
No idea what changed, but exclusive option is not there yet you still need to play with resolution matching in Control Panel Sound settings. When matched sounds pretty great though, you can leave bit depth at 24bit, it doesn't affect 16bit material negatively (lossless padding)


----------



## Taz777

RickB said:


> There was an update to the Mac app, 7.8.3.2109, just now for me. To my ears the sound is less flat now. Not as "airy" as Qobuz, but better.



Did you have to do anything to get the update? Mine is still on version 7.8.2.2104 and the About box tells me that I have the latest version. I'm running macOS Mojave 10.14.6.


----------



## Taz777

I downloaded the DMG from amazon.com and reinstalled to get the latest version. It looks like the version on Amazon UK isn't the latest version and doesn't auto-update. My Amazon account is in the UK.


----------



## Tooros

I can live with most of its quirks. I’d prefer many things to be much better than they are. They have 80-odd days to fix them. What boils my ‘expletive deleted’ is the stupid mix of uhd/hd on a single album. I just don’t get it.


----------



## mixman (Sep 28, 2019)

Taz777 said:


> Did you have to do anything to get the update? Mine is still on version 7.8.2.2104 and the About box tells me that I have the latest version. I'm running macOS Mojave 10.14.6.


Click on your name(next to search) > Help > About Amazon Music.  It will tell you the version of the App and tell you whether there is an update available. Oops, just saw you have a Mac this was for PC Windows 10.


----------



## RickB

Taz777 said:


> Did you have to do anything to get the update? Mine is still on version 7.8.2.2104 and the About box tells me that I have the latest version. I'm running macOS Mojave 10.14.6.



No, it just popped up automatically.


----------



## tomwoo

RickB said:


> There was an update to the Mac app, 7.8.3.2109, just now for me. To my ears the sound is less flat now. Not as "airy" as Qobuz, but better.


Still no exclusive mode?


----------



## exdmd

Nope no exclusive mode don't hold your breath waiting for it.


----------



## RickB

tomwoo said:


> Still no exclusive mode?



Nope.


----------



## MonkeyDance (Sep 28, 2019)

If I leave my DAC at 786kHz via the OSX Midi Controller and listen to Amazon music will it automatically drop to 96, or 44.1 based on the file? I don't really understand what happens. 

For instance with the Eagles Ultra HD I see the following on Amazon Music: 
Ultra HD Audio
Track Quality: 24 bit / 192 kHz
Device Capability: 24 bit / 768 kHz
Currently playing at: 24 bit / 192 kHz

I want to drop Tidal but the "Exclusive mode" is a great feature. I am not saying I can hear a difference between 44.1 and 96 or 88.2 but because my DAC has a screen that shows the sample rate, it is nice to get that confirmation vs always seeing whatever I set the Midi Controller format to.


----------



## 435279

The only way I have ever seen 24bit 192Khz from Amazon Music, across all my devices, is from my NAD T758 V3 AV amp. The "BluOS" module supports a number of different online music services including Amazon Music.

The NAD display has a page that shows the bit-rate and sampling frequency and according to that it is bit-perfect and sounds very good, as good as Qobuz and Tidal, so the Amazon service has the potential to sound very good.

I think I will keep AM at the end of the trial and get rid of Qobuz and Tidal, despite all the issues with lack of exclusive mode and with getting bit-perfect from the service, I hope and believe the software will one day catch-up.


----------



## BBGirl

would never support Amazon


----------



## Taz777

MonkeyDance said:


> If I leave my DAC at 786kHz via the OSX Midi Controller and listen to Amazon music will it automatically drop to 96, or 44.1 based on the file? I don't really understand what happens.
> 
> For instance with the Eagles Ultra HD I see the following on Amazon Music:
> Ultra HD Audio
> ...



No, and this is the issue here. You set your DAC artificially to support a high sampling rate and bit-depth. The Amazon app sends the song to the DAC at the rate it says it does, then your DAC upsamples at the rate you’ve set in the Audio MIDI settings before converting to analogue. This is not bit-perfect. What should happen, as per the Tidal app for example, is that the DAC should adjust dynamically to the sampling rate and bit-depth of the song.

On my Topping D50, the display never changes from the values set in Audio MIDI Settings. When I play songs via Tidal, the display changes to reflect the original sample rate and bit-depth of the song.

The current situation with the Amazon Music HD app may well be good enough for most people. However,  I feel that an HD music service should be able to control the DAC.

The other issue is that the sound mixer isn’t bypassed, as far as I am aware.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

BBGirl said:


> would never support Amazon


That's funny, where do you do your shopping?


----------



## Andrew_WOT

MonkeyDance said:


> If I leave my DAC at 786kHz via the OSX Midi Controller and listen to Amazon music will it automatically drop to 96, or 44.1 based on the file? I don't really understand what happens.
> 
> For instance with the Eagles Ultra HD I see the following on Amazon Music:
> Ultra HD Audio
> ...


Amazon player sends stream to OS at that rate, where it gets upsampled to 24 bit / 768 kHz using less than optimal OS resampler, so your DAC receives  already resampled 24 bit / 768 kHz.


----------



## BBGirl

Andrew_WOT said:


> That's funny, where do you do your shopping?



Woolworth's


----------



## runssical

The Socialist Nerd said:


> Impressive but due to politics, I really don't support Amazon so Tidal streaming gets my weight.



Unimpressed by app design and lack of bitpefect playback... additionally don't subscribe because Jeff Bezos runs forced labor camps at his warehouses.


----------



## runssical

Prediction: this will be a flop


----------



## 435279

runssical said:


> Prediction: this will be a flop



It may not get the level of up-take Amazon would like but it won't "flop" Amazon already do a low quality music streaming service so does it really matter if they only get 100 subscribers to this HD service.


----------



## runssical (Sep 29, 2019)

SteveOliver said:


> It may not get the level of up-take Amazon would like but it won't "flop" Amazon already do a low quality music streaming service so does it really matter if they only get 100 subscribers to this HD service.



Limited uptake is an understatement. Their existing lossy service is a dismal failure. The market for lossless streaming is quite small but those who want lossless streaming are very knowledgeable and demanding. Qobuz and Tidal have more competency in this area.


This is essentially American Online redux. Walled in garden and all that jazz. A substandard experience comprised of dozens of mediocre services all anchored by the Prime membership.


----------



## rkw (Sep 29, 2019)

runssical said:


> Their existing lossy service is a dismal failure.


Being the 3rd largest service, behind Spotify and Apple Music, makes it a dismal failure?

Amazon has gained market share since this 2018 chart...


----------



## runssical (Sep 29, 2019)

rkw said:


> Being the 3rd largest service, behind Spotify and Apple Music, makes it a dismal failure?
> 
> Amazon has gained market share since this 2018 chart...



Amazon's streaming music market share is clouded by Amazon's inclusion of their Prime Music users into their tally. *Prime Music is a free service that's included with a Prime membership. Amazon has not reported how many of it's streaming users pay for their Spotify clone, Amazon Music Unlimited. They refuse to do so much like Netflix refuses to share viewcounts for it's shows. The exact method Amazon uses to designate an Amazon Prime as a Prime Music subscriber are not clear. It could be as simple as anyone who downloads the Amazon Music or has streamed ONE song in a trailing 90 day period.

The following article confirms my suspicion....

https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/03/amazon-tens-of-millions-music-unlimited/

You can see more up to date market share number in this article...

https://www.engadget.com/2019/07/12/amazon-music-subscribers-growing-faster-than-spotify/

The relevant quite here is "As of April, Amazon had more than 32 million subscribers across its music services, including Unlimited and Prime Music."

So Amazon is consolidating the free Prime Music users and their paid Unlimited users into their figure. I don't think the figures from Amazon have much credibility and are likely inflated.

Has anyone here used Amazon as their go-to music streaming service for the last 12+ months? I'm guess no. Furthermore, I can't think of a single person that I know that has used their service. Amazon has absolutely no cache in the audiophile community.

When Amazon anoouned the HD streaming tier I never expected it to really catch on. Your typical Amazon digital media consumer is old and not tech savvy. They are generally not concerned about audio quality and many don't know what FLAC even is. So I don't see this service gaining much traction, either from Amazon's existing pool of customers or by pulling in serious music lovers and audiophiles currently content with Qobuz or Tidal.

My hope is that Amazon's move can spur Spotify to offer lossless and additionally help keep a lid on subscription fees at Tidal and Qobuz.


----------



## McCol

runssical said:


> Unimpressed by app design and lack of bitpefect playback... additionally don't subscribe because Jeff Bezos runs forced labor camps at his warehouses.



As much as I admire your sentiment I assume you have researched every single penny/cent etc you spend to ensure that every person involved in the chain has been paid a decent living wage?


----------



## McCol

runssical said:


> Amazon's streaming music market share is clouded by Amazon's inclusion of their Prime Music users into their tally. *Prime Music is a free service that's included with a Prime membership. Amazon has not reported how many of it's streaming users pay for their Spotify clone, Amazon Music Unlimited. They refuse to do so much like Netflix refuses to share viewcounts for it's shows. The exact method Amazon uses to designate an Amazon Prime as a Prime Music subscriber are not clear. It could be as simple as anyone who downloads the Amazon Music or has streamed ONE song in a trailing 90 day period.
> 
> The following article confirms my suspicion....
> 
> ...



Agree fully on this but with a couple of potential differences where Amazon might make headway.

I'm giving the service a go and if they can offer bit perfect support then I will drop tidal and Spotify like a hot potato.  I think there are thousands of other users who would do the same, might even be hundreds of thousands, Amazon have the setup to allow them to play the long game with this. If they get a small amount of success it could make it very difficult forT TidalSpotify/Qobus to compete as I gather they have yet to turn any reasonable profit and this kind of pressure over time could force a change in the market.


----------



## runssical

McCol said:


> As much as I admire your sentiment I assume you have researched every single penny/cent etc you spend to ensure that every person involved in the chain has been paid a decent living wage?



I'm speaking of their inhumane labor abuses, not pay. Amazon used to station ambulances outside their warehouses where temperatures would reach a stiffling 110°F inside with no fabs or air conditioning. There's been a number of undercover investigations by news outlets, labor groups, and individual workers documenting the grueling and unreasonable requirements Amazon workers must meet.


----------



## runssical

McCol said:


> Agree fully on this but with a couple of potential differences where Amazon might make headway.
> 
> I'm giving the service a go and if they can offer bit perfect support then I will drop tidal and Spotify like a hot potato.  I think there are thousands of other users who would do the same, might even be hundreds of thousands, Amazon have the setup to allow them to play the long game with this. If they get a small amount of success it could make it very difficult forT TidalSpotify/Qobus to compete as I gather they have yet to turn any reasonable profit and this kind of pressure over time could force a change in the market.


Good luck with it. I wouldn't expect much improvement of the service going forward. I was surprised the catalog was so small. When Qobuz launched in the USA they got dinged for catalog gaps but the situation with Amazon is far worse. 

Spotify isn't concerned. Not is Apple. The social element, slick functioning apps and multiplatform support are what keep Spotify number 1. If the market demands lossless in the numbers you suggest then Spotify will jump in at that point. 

I still think downloads will hold sway with audiophiles. When sound quality matters do you really want to put your music through the meat grinder of adaptive bitrate technology and MQA faux Hi Res gimmickry?


----------



## McCol

runssical said:


> I'm speaking of their inhumane labor abuses, not pay. Amazon used to station ambulances outside their warehouses where temperatures would reach a stiffling 110°F inside with no fabs or air conditioning. There's been a number of undercover investigations by news outlets, labor groups, and individual workers documenting the grueling and unreasonable requirements Amazon workers must meet.



Dozens of companies have terrible pay and working practices including those in our audio world!


----------



## phixion

Yeah I mean cutting your nose off to spite your face comes to mind.

Amazon will still exist if you don't use them, as will every other unethical company.


----------



## McCol

runssical said:


> Good luck with it. I wouldn't expect much improvement of the service going forward. I was surprised the catalog was so small. When Qobuz launched in the USA they got dinged for catalog gaps but the situation with Amazon is far worse.
> 
> Spotify isn't concerned. Not is Apple. The social element, slick functioning apps and multiplatform support are what keep Spotify number 1. If the market demands lossless in the numbers you suggest then Spotify will jump in at that point.
> 
> I still think downloads will hold sway with audiophiles. When sound quality matters do you really want to put your music through the meat grinder of adaptive bitrate technology and MQA faux Hi Res gimmickry?



Again I agree to an extent however again I think Spotify will be a little concerned if Amazon get a foothold. Apple won't but then they have the kind of following who really don't care about quality in their downloads, Apple could tell them that their 256kbs files sound better than 24bit DSD files due to some magic sauce they have sprinkled and people will buy it!!!


----------



## McCol

So far I'm finding the Amazon not too bad, I use with Samsung S10+ and Dragonfly Cobalt, would be nice if they do add bit-perfect support in the future.  
I'm hoping UAPP add Amazon support to their app in the future, this might help with the limitations of Android


----------



## saintintn

We’ve seen the future with Amazon making this change, and it won’t be pretty for Deezer, Qobuz, or Tidal. No one thought the Korean car manufacturers would make it hear in America, me included. But they were far cheaper than every other manufacturer and their quality was “good enough”. It wasn’t Honda or Toyota quality, but you’re also not paying 30% more upfront.


----------



## mixman

One of the cool things about Amazon HD is that you now have the ability to stream bands like Metallica in HD. Tidal nor Qobuz has their catalog, not sure about Deezer though, I have never had it. I am sure there are other bands this might be first in regards to streaming them in HD.


----------



## runssical

McCol said:


> So far I'm finding the Amazon not too bad, I use with Samsung S10+ and Dragonfly Cobalt, would be nice if they do add bit-perfect support in the future.
> I'm hoping UAPP add Amazon support to their app in the future, this might help with the limitations of Android


UAPP never worked right for me when I had it synced with my Qobuz account. The audio stream would freeze occasionally. Album art would not always display. It was even worse for the Google Music integration. That part of UAPP seemed very buggy. 

I didn't know Dragonfly had a Cobalt. I'm not keeping up with things.


----------



## Blueshound24

runssical said:


> I'm speaking of their inhumane labor abuses, not pay. Amazon used to station ambulances outside their warehouses *where temperatures would reach a stiffling 110°F inside with no fabs or air conditioning*. There's been a number of undercover investigations by news outlets, labor groups, and individual workers documenting the grueling and unreasonable requirements Amazon workers must meet.



In what country does this happen? And what is a fab?


----------



## runssical

mixman said:


> One of the cool things about Amazon HD is that you now have the ability to stream bands like Metallica in HD. Tidal nor Qobuz has their catalog, not sure about Deezer though, I have never had it. I am sure there are other bands this might be first in regards to streaming them in HD.



Well that's nice of you like Metallica. I checked their classical catalog and it's super light. Qobuz has so much more albums and labels. Tidal as well.


----------



## runssical

Blueshound24 said:


> In what country does this happen? And what is a fab?



https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-warehouse-2011-9


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 29, 2019)

runssical said:


> Limited uptake is an understatement. Their existing lossy service is a dismal failure. The market for lossless streaming is quite small but those who want lossless streaming are very knowledgeable and demanding. Qobuz and Tidal have more competency in this area.
> 
> 
> This is essentially American Online redux. Walled in garden and all that jazz. A substandard experience comprised of dozens of mediocre services all anchored by the Prime membership.


3rd largest streaming service after Spotify and AppleMusic.


----------



## exdmd

saintintn said:


> We’ve seen the future with Amazon making this change, and it won’t be pretty for Deezer, Qobuz, or Tidal. No one thought the Korean car manufacturers would make it hear in America, me included. But they were far cheaper than every other manufacturer and their quality was “good enough”. It wasn’t Honda or Toyota quality, but you’re also not paying 30% more upfront.


Amazon might steal some Tidal subscribers but not those who like the videos Tidal has or those who have MQA enabled DACs. As far as Qobuz Amazon needs to enable Wasapi exclusive mode in their desktop app to even hope to compete and there is still the lack of Roon and Audirvana integration.


----------



## Ken G

runssical said:


> Prediction: this will be a flop



I would consider it a HUGE success if this spurs Spotify or Apple to also stream Hi-Res and decide to do it right (Exclusive Mode, no MQA) for a more competitive price than Tidal or Qobuz.


----------



## Blueshound24

runssical said:


> https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-warehouse-2011-9



Not defending that, but isn't that one instance and it was 9 years ago?


----------



## Left Channel (Sep 29, 2019)

McCol said:


> So far I'm finding the Amazon not too bad, I use with Samsung S10+ and Dragonfly Cobalt, would be nice if they do add bit-perfect support in the future.
> I'm hoping UAPP add Amazon support to their app in the future, this might help with the limitations of Android



It's not really up to UAPP. I'm sure Davy would add it if he could. Amazon has never made the API public, and currently they are only sharing it within restrictive partnership agreements for hardware that Amazon just happens to resell. Also, Amazon would of course prefer to keep listeners within their own apps, so they can cross-sell everything from MP3 downloads, to player hardware, and of course socks etc.


----------



## Left Channel (Sep 29, 2019)

runssical said:


> UAPP never worked right for me when I had it synced with my Qobuz account. The audio stream would freeze occasionally. Album art would not always display. It was even worse for the Google Music integration. That part of UAPP seemed very buggy.
> 
> I didn't know Dragonfly had a Cobalt. I'm not keeping up with things.



I've had nothing but good experiences with UAPP, on four or five phones so far, as well as a DAP and one or two tablets. That's not to say the issues you experienced are not valid reasons for dropping the app, and for one thing I've never used it with Google Music. But overall I believe it has worked well for most customers. I use it with Qobuz, Tidal, local files, and internet radio.


----------



## saintintn

exdmd said:


> Amazon might steal some Tidal subscribers but not those who like the videos Tidal has or those who have MQA enabled DACs. As far as Qobuz Amazon needs to enable Wasapi exclusive mode in their desktop app to even hope to compete and there is still the lack of Roon and Audirvana integration.



Videos?  Do people really use Tidal for videos?  Just kidding.   

What I’m saying is that as a prime member and Tidal HiFi user, Amazon makes a very compelling case to switch, which I have.  In fact, I went all-in with the Family HD membership and cancelled the family Apple plan we had. I have a Dragonfly Black DAC and hear no difference between an MQA version of the White Album and Amazon’s Ultra HD.  I’ve had the Red Dragonfly and there wasn’t enough improvement (to me) to use it over the Black. I don’t profess to have ears of a music producer, but I think my ears may be a tad better than the mainstream.

Qobuz, Deezer, and Tidal only become sustainable as long as they add new users. That great sucking sound you hear in the distance is Amazon Music HD getting them.


----------



## McCol

runssical said:


> UAPP never worked right for me when I had it synced with my Qobuz account. The audio stream would freeze occasionally. Album art would not always display. It was even worse for the Google Music integration. That part of UAPP seemed very buggy.
> 
> I didn't know Dragonfly had a Cobalt. I'm not keeping up with things.



Cobalt is my first Dragonfly and so far I'm very impressed, seems to get mixed reviews but I really like it, excellent sound quality in a small form factor.
UAPP has been fine with Tidal and Cobalt for me so far, biggest drawback being that you can't download tidal stuff with it, streaming only.


----------



## runssical

Andrew_WOT said:


> 3rd biggest streaming service after Spotify and AppleMusic.



In an earlier comment I posted links to two Engaget articles that point out that Amazon includes their free Prime Music service in their figure which imo artificially boosts their user count. Amazon is refusing to divulge how many subscribers they have to Amazon Music Unlimited.  

I also saw the most recent summer 2019 market share numbers and Amazon added 5 mil users in the past year while Spotify added 15 mil. 
T
numbers are for paying subscribers only. To reiterate, Amazon counts people who use Amazon Prime which is a free service as "paying customer" because it falls under the Prime membership. 

Here's an Engadget article that tries to paint a rosy picture for Amazon...

https://www.engadget.com/amp/2019/07/12/amazon-music-subscribers-growing-faster-than-spotify/

But it notes that the Amazon figure includes both the paid Unlimited service and the free Prime Music service. 

Another breathlessly positive article from Engadget shows Amazon is being vague about it's numbers...

https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/03/amazon-tens-of-millions-music-unlimited/

No breakdown of how many customers bare actually paying for what. 

Additionally, the Engadget articles seem to dismiss Spotify as "slowing down". To the contrary, Spotify has seen it's numbers of premium subscribers double in the past two years.


Tidal got exposed in 2017 for grossly inflating their subscriber count...

https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/20/14336218/tidal-subscriber-numbers-inflating-report

Amazon could be doing the same.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Amazon Cloud hosts perhaps like 90% of internet services, including your favorite streaming ones, and most likely this site as well. That's where most Bezo's money come from, btw.
Pretty hard taking amazon-no-support stance unless you are willing go back into stone age.


----------



## runssical

exdmd said:


> Amazon might steal some Tidal subscribers but not those who like the videos Tidal has or those who have MQA enabled DACs. As far as Qobuz Amazon needs to enable Wasapi exclusive mode in their desktop app to even hope to compete and there is still the lack of Roon and Audirvana integration.



I can't imagine Amazon allowing integration of their service into those applications. They might add mixer bypass support. It just seems like they're focused on using this lossless service to bait people into buying their Echo products and upcoming Sonus knockoffs.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 29, 2019)

runssical said:


> Well that's nice of you like Metallica. I checked their classical catalog and it's super light. Qobuz has so much more albums and labels. Tidal as well.


----------



## runssical

Andrew_WOT said:


> Amazon Cloud hosts perhaps like 90% of internet services, including your favorite streaming ones, and most likely this site as well. That's where most Bezo's money come from, btw.
> Pretty hard taking amazon-no-support stance unless you are willing go back into stone age.



What does internet backbone infrastructure have to do with Amazon's ability to excel in any consumer facing segment. They are not tops in any category that I know of. Netflix is better than Amazon Video. Dropbox is better than Amazon Drive. Spotify/Qobuz is better than Amazon Music. Google and Microsoft have better cloud business apps. Oh, maybe Kindle and ebooks. That's it.


----------



## Left Channel

runssical said:


> What does internet backbone infrastructure have to do with Amazon's ability to excel in any consumer facing segment. They are not tops in any category that I know of. Netflix is better than Amazon Video. Dropbox is better than Amazon Drive. Spotify/Qobuz is better than Amazon Music. Google and Microsoft have better cloud business apps. Oh, maybe Kindle and ebooks. That's it.



And Betamax was better than VHS. Oh, wait...


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 29, 2019)

runssical said:


> What does internet backbone infrastructure have to do with Amazon's ability to excel in any consumer facing segment. They are not tops in any category that I know of. Netflix is better than Amazon Video. Dropbox is better than Amazon Drive. Spotify/Qobuz is better than Amazon Music. Google and Microsoft have better cloud business apps. Oh, maybe Kindle and ebooks. That's it.


That was in reference to "I do not support amazon". Well, we all do, willingly, or not.


----------



## Ken G

Left Channel said:


> And Betamax was better than VHS. Oh, wait...



I'm still a big "HD DVD" fanboy!


----------



## CANiSLAYu

Andrew_WOT said:


> That was in reference to "I do not support amazon". Well, we all do, willingly, or not.



Exactly. Even the competitors cited, such as Netflix and Dropbox, run on AWS. So using them is inadvertently putting money in Amazon’s pocket.


----------



## MonkeyDance

So is there any downside to leaving it at 768 kHz? I am not aware of any 768 kHz files on Tidal and I know Amazon HD music only goes to 192 kHz.


----------



## exdmd

Andrew_WOT said:


> Amazon Cloud hosts perhaps like 90% of internet services, including your favorite streaming ones, and most likely this site as well. That's where most Bezo's money come from, btw.
> Pretty hard taking amazon-no-support stance unless you are willing go back into stone age.


According to this post at AS Qobuz is indeed hosted on AWS at least for US customers. I agree with @runssical that Roon and Audirvana integration probably won't happen but we can hope for Wasapi Exclusive Mode. Amazon's customer forum has quite a few complaints about lack of exclusive mode. 

Of course as @runssical pointed out even that may not be a priority and Amazon is just looking to wring a few more dollars out of existing Prime customers and use Amazon Music HD as a way to promote products from their approved partners.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Sep 29, 2019)

MonkeyDance said:


> So is there any downside to leaving it at 768 kHz? I am not aware of any 768 kHz files on Tidal and I know Amazon HD music only goes to 192 kHz.


There is HUGE downside of doing that as it will trigger not so great OS resampler. Matching to the material sample rate is the best, bit depth can be left at 24bit, there are no downsides to that.


----------



## KPzypher

What about downloadable songs (purchases)?  Are those still MP3 only? or will that change too eventually?


----------



## Left Channel

KPzypher said:


> What about downloadable songs (purchases)?  Are those still MP3 only? or will that change too eventually?



Those are still MP3. Nobody outside Amazon knows if that will change. We don't even know if anyone inside Amazon knows if that will change.


----------



## RickB

Left Channel said:


> Those are still MP3. Nobody outside Amazon knows if that will change. We don't even know if anyone inside Amazon knows if that will change.



The pirates will probably figure out how to decrypt the FLACs before they're available for purchase. LOL.


----------



## rkw

KPzypher said:


> What about downloadable songs (purchases)?  Are those still MP3 only? or will that change too eventually?


Download purchases are still MP3. They may offer lossless purchases if there is enough demand and profit. I'm skeptical that it will happen because it is not the direction of the music industry.
https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/07/10/music-downloads-extinct/


----------



## Xzephyr23

If they include international listening I will certainly give it a try. (I know many Japanese Rock albums that are available only on amazon.jp vs amazon.na)


----------



## Left Channel (Sep 29, 2019)

Xzephyr23 said:


> If they include international listening I will certainly give it a try. (I know many Japanese Rock albums that are available only on amazon.jp vs amazon.na)



The music labels control availability in each country market. Even Amazon is subject to the limitations of that licensing. One way around that may be to open Amazon accounts in more than one country, if possible. For a while I had accounts with another streaming service in two countries, but I had to use VPN to pay for the overseas account (though I didn't have to stay on VPN and PayPal to play music). I have no idea if that's possible with Amazon, and in fact I think the other service has since figured out ways to prevent me from using PayPal to do that again.


----------



## MonkeyDance

Andrew_WOT said:


> There is HUGE downside of doing that as it will trigger not so great OS resampler. Matching to the material sample rate is the best, bit depth can be left at 24bit, there are no downsides to that.



So if you want to listen to Amazon Ultra HD, the best thing to do is either change the sample rate to match each song or just leave it at 44.1? My only options are 32bit in the midi controller. There is no 24bit.


----------



## Papa253

saintintn said:


> Videos?  Do people really use Tidal for videos?  Just kidding.
> 
> What I’m saying is that as a prime member and Tidal HiFi user, Amazon makes a very compelling case to switch, which I have.  In fact, I went all-in with the Family HD membership and cancelled the family Apple plan we had. I have a Dragonfly Black DAC and hear no difference between an MQA version of the White Album and Amazon’s Ultra HD.  I’ve had the Red Dragonfly and there wasn’t enough improvement (to me) to use it over the Black. I don’t profess to have ears of a music producer, but I think my ears may be a tad better than the mainstream.
> 
> Qobuz, Deezer, and Tidal only become sustainable as long as they add new users. That great sucking sound you hear in the distance is Amazon Music HD getting them.


Sadly you may be on point.


----------



## MonkeyDance

I use Tidal for music videos. I like to watch them if I am doing cardio at the gym. The selection sucks but I like to avoid Google as much as possible. Spotify, Deezer, and Amazon Music do not have music videos.

As of right now I am going to keep my Tidal HiFi subscription. If Amazon comes out with an exclusive mode then I will likely make the switch.


----------



## Papa253

MonkeyDance said:


> I use Tidal for music videos. I like to watch them if I am doing cardio at the gym. The selection sucks but I like to avoid Google as much as possible. Spotify, Deezer, and Amazon Music do not have music videos.
> 
> As of right now I am going to keep my Tidal HiFi subscription. If Amazon comes out with an exclusive mode then I will likely make the switch.


What is this exclusive mode everyone keeps talking about can someone take the time to explain that to me?
I'm using an lg v30 as my primary source.


----------



## exdmd (Sep 30, 2019)

Papa253 said:


> What is this exclusive mode everyone keeps talking about can someone take the time to explain that to me?
> I'm using an lg v30 as my primary source.


The link has been posted before but here it is again hope it helps: http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/WASAPI.htm

Note Wasapi only applies to Windows, not the Android OS. With your LG V30 to get best sound quality at this time I believe you would need to use Tidal as that phone has a DAC built in that can unfold MQA and play bit perfect at rates higher than 16/44 using the Tidal app for Android.

You have a nice phone with a built in DAC you should be using Tidal instead of Amazon Music HD to get the audio quality you paid for.


----------



## muski (Sep 30, 2019)

runssical said:


> I checked their classical catalog and it's super light. Qobuz has so much more albums and labels. Tidal as well.


This wasn't my experience—I found the Amazon classical catalog to be quite compelling, and with a decent amount of 24-bit/96kHz classical content that I don't remember seeing on Qobuz and can't find on TIDAL (even in MQA, which I'm not a fan of). A few examples:

Igor Levit's new recording of the Complete Beethoven Piano Sonatas is available in 24/96 on Amazon HD, and only 16/44.1 on TIDAL
Amazon HD has eight Vikingur Olafsson recordings vs 5 on TIDAL.
Amazon HD has a 133 Murray Perahia albums. TIDAL has 50.

Lastly, I've found Amazon's metadata to be better than TIDAL's. As an example, many recordings by Gustavo Dudamel are available on TIDAL, but don't show up under Dudamel as an artist. They're all there on Amazon.

So I'd definitely encourage classical music fans to have a look. Wish it had Roon integration and fiddling with the Mac Audio Midi settings is a drag, but I imagine they'll get there.


----------



## muski

runssical said:


> What does internet backbone infrastructure have to do with Amazon's ability to excel in any consumer facing segment


I think they have a consumer marketplace that's doing ok? Perhaps excelling?


----------



## MonkeyDance

Papa253 said:


> What is this exclusive mode everyone keeps talking about can someone take the time to explain that to me?
> I'm using an lg v30 as my primary source.



If you turn on Exclusive Mode, Tidal will adjust the bit rate of your "audio device" based on the track that is playing. So if I am listening to songs at different sample rates Tidal adjusts my DAC to match the rate of the song. 
Amazon Music by comparison recommends setting your audio controller to 192k and 24bit. So if you listen to songs that are 44.1k according to Andrew_WOT 





> There is HUGE downside of doing that as it will trigger not so great OS resampler. Matching to the material sample rate is the best, bit depth can be left at 24bit, there are no downsides to that.



My DAC has a small display. When I listen to Tidal in exclusive mode I see the sample rate change based on the song. For Amazon I see whatever I set my computer to, which per Amazon should be 192kHz. So I'll listen to 44.1k songs and the screen will read 192kHz...and I guess that is bad


----------



## runssical (Sep 30, 2019)

muski said:


> This wasn't my experience—I found the Amazon classical catalog to be quite compelling, and with a decent amount of 24-bit/96kHz classical content that I don't remember seeing on Qobuz and can't find on TIDAL (even in MQA, which I'm not a fan of). A few examples:
> 
> Igor Levit's new recording of the Complete Beethoven Piano Sonatas is available in 24/96 on Amazon HD, and only 16/44.1 on TIDAL
> Amazon HD has eight Vikingur Olafsson recordings vs 5 on TIDAL.
> ...



I searched for my favorite composer, Anton Bruckner. There was maybe 60 albums or so. Ideally there should be hundreds.

Oddly enough there were some albums not available in FLAC that you can readily access on Tidal and Qobuz in lossless. Even stranger is that some of these albums were from labels that Amazon had partially available in lossless. It's possible they are still transitioning to lossless and these albums will eventually be available in FLAC. But it seems odd to skip certain albums within a catalog while doing others. This was also a small orchestra label. Less than 100 albums. So I don't understand it.

The meta data is okay-ish. It's not on par with Naxos Music Library. Nor do they offer booklets like Qobuz streaming. You can tap within the Qobuz app and read the booklet in a PDF reader. This is very useful for classical music, especially unfamiliar music.


----------



## rkw

runssical said:


> I checked their classical catalog and it's super light. Qobuz has so much more albums and labels. Tidal as well.





muski said:


> This wasn't my experience—I found the Amazon classical catalog to be quite compelling


I agree with @muski. Classical is 95% of my listening and I find the Amazon classical catalog to be excellent. Among the music services, at this point I find Qobuz to have the weakest catalog in the US because they are still building it up (the Qobuz classical catalog in Europe is much more extensive than the current state of their catalog in the US).


----------



## rkw

runssical said:


> I searched for my favorite composer, Anton Bruckner. There was maybe 60 albums or so. Ideally there should be hundreds.


Their search function is totally broken. Instead of searching for "anton bruckner", try searching (for example) "bruckner symphony". I thought search on Tidal and Qobuz were bad, but Amazon takes the cake.


----------



## 435279

After some initial disappointment with the lack of a bit-perfect/exclusive mode I'm quite liking the Amazon service at the moment. As others have said the selection of music appears to be better than Tidal and Qobuz, the search function is way, way better IMHO, so that's one big positive. 

I have an LG V30 and Ifi xDSD, plus a 100GB p/m data plan and over Bluetooth (thus at least with 16/44.1) it avoids the obvious re-sampling issue. (although some re-sampling may well occur but I'm none the wiser  ) Most important the sound is actually quite good, good enough for me in any case.


----------



## Buckster

Bit matched output seems tricky on Android

Surprised none of these services add an option to.enable.or disable high quality upsampling/downsampling can't imagine that difficult to code and whilst a compromise probably better than letting OS do it

That said I still think Amazon HD sounds a lot better than Spotify to me


----------



## Soundizer

I just downloaded 72GB of Amazon MUSIC’s ULTRA HD songs on my iPad Pro.

Can anyone recommend a DAC under £600 that I can connect to the iPad Pro (USB-C port) and receive the full resolution for these ULTRA HD tracks. My headphones are Focal Clear.


----------



## Left Channel (Sep 30, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> I just downloaded 72GB of Amazon MUSIC’s ULTRA HD songs on my iPad Pro.
> 
> Can anyone recommend a DAC under £600 that I can connect to the iPad Pro (USB-C port) and receive the full resolution for these ULTRA HD tracks. My headphones are Focal Clear.



Look at the iFi iDSD line, nano and micro. There's also the Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 Digital. Also the Audioquest DragonFly lineup, though they only work up to 96 kHz.

Reports posted here indicate that the Amazon iOS app will resample your files to the highest rate your external DAC is capable of. That may change the sound (which offends many of us), but it will likely still be better than Apple Music and Spotify.


----------



## Soundizer

Left Channel said:


> Look at the iFi iDSD line, nano and micro. There's also the Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 Digital. Also the Audioquest DragonFly lineup, though they only work up to 96 kHz.
> 
> Reports posted here indicate that the Amazon iOS app will resample your files to the highest rate your external DAC is capable of. That may change the sound (which offends many of us), but it will likely still be better than Apple Music and Spotify.


Thank you. My iPad Pro is USB-C output, so can we be sure it will allow audio output to IFI IDSD in full resolution?


----------



## Left Channel

Soundizer said:


> Thank you. My iPad Pro is USB-C output, so can we be sure it will allow audio output to IFI IDSD in full resolution?



USB-C is the standard connection now, and although I've never tried that product line but those DACs should work fine. I'm sure others will chime in here with their experience using an iFi on an iPad. The main barrier to getting the best audio will be the Amazon app, not the DAC.


----------



## Left Channel

Papa253 said:


> What is this exclusive mode everyone keeps talking about can someone take the time to explain that to me?
> I'm using an lg v30 as my primary source.



The replies you've received above do a good job explaining that exclusive mode is a Windows thing, and that your LG V30 has an excellent internal DAC for which some apps have the Android equivalent (kinda sorta) of exclusive mode. Unfortunately the Amazon app does not do that, and will allow the Android OS to resample everything you play. The Tidal app works well with the LG for MQA tracks, but they haven't tried to do the same with their CD-quality tracks. The Qobuz app also allows Android resampling. So, I use the third-party app UAPP for Tidal and Qobuz with all Android phones. If a phone doesn't have a great internal DAC like the V30, UAPP still does a great job of sending the right signal to an external DAC. Unfortunately thus far Amazon has shown no interest in working with software partners like UAPP.


----------



## tomwoo

SteveOliver said:


> After some initial disappointment with the lack of a bit-perfect/exclusive mode I'm quite liking the Amazon service at the moment. As others have said the selection of music appears to be better than Tidal and Qobuz, the search function is way, way better IMHO, so that's one big positive.
> 
> I have an LG V30 and Ifi xDSD, plus a 100GB p/m data plan and over Bluetooth (thus at least with 16/44.1) it avoids the obvious re-sampling issue. (although some re-sampling may well occur but I'm none the wiser  ) Most important the sound is actually quite good, good enough for me in any case.


At least it's a big step forward from lossy streaming services such as Spotify and Apple Music


----------



## 435279

tomwoo said:


> At least it's a big step forward from lossy streaming services such as Spotify and Apple Music



It certainly is, I've signed up to the family plan and transferred the whole family over from Spotify. Aren't I the model Amazon customer.


----------



## tomwoo

SteveOliver said:


> It certainly is, I've signed up to the family plan and transferred the whole family over from Spotify. Aren't I the model Amazon customer.


It doesn't hurt to get some extra savings as a prime member


----------



## Soundizer

The deal is even better when you pay annually at £129 for 12months. Equivalent to £10.75 a month. 
For along time Tidal has exploited Customers that enjoy quality streaming at ridiculous prices, with no discounts even for annual payments and a rubbish recommended for you AI. 

i hope Google and Microsoft also offers a competitive offering with high res. Then soon it will be the norm and we can move away from sub CD level audio.


----------



## exdmd

Soundizer said:


> The deal is even better when you pay annually at £129 for 12months. Equivalent to £10.75 a month.
> For along time Tidal has exploited Customers that enjoy quality streaming at ridiculous prices, with no discounts even for annual payments and a rubbish recommended for you AI.
> 
> i hope Google and Microsoft also offers a competitive offering with high res. Then soon it will be the norm and we can move away from sub CD level audio.



Until Amazon takes care of basics like providing streaming in Wasapi exclusive mode I don't consider Amazon Music HD competitive to Tidal or especially Qobuz. I don't mind paying extra for the better sound quality I hear in Qobuz. YMMV.


----------



## tomwoo

I have both Apple Music and Amazon Music HD. I wound't bother to use my setup to listen to Apple Music, it's only for bluetooth earbuds. Now with Amazon Music HD I enjoy the music quite a bit, better soundstage, better instrument separation, better bass, better everything...Still undecided if I want to pay for it or not, I'm waiting for the exclusive mode just like everyone else in this thread.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Amazon rep suggested to use Amazon Music player "Help/Tell us how we're doing" function to submit request for exclusive mode. The more the merrier.


----------



## exdmd

Andrew_WOT said:


> Amazon rep suggested to use Amazon Music player "Help/Tell us how we're doing" function to submit request for exclusive mode. The more the merrier.



Already did, doubt it will make a difference. If Amazon really cared about sound quality vs. bottom line they would have launched with Wasapi exclusive mode. They certainly took a good look at both the Tidal and Qobuz UI and made a decision not to enable a feature that is already in Windows ready to be used.


----------



## Devodonaldson

saintintn said:


> Videos?  Do people really use Tidal for videos?  Just kidding.
> 
> What I’m saying is that as a prime member and Tidal HiFi user, Amazon makes a very compelling case to switch, which I have.  In fact, I went all-in with the Family HD membership and cancelled the family Apple plan we had. I have a Dragonfly Black DAC and hear no difference between an MQA version of the White Album and Amazon’s Ultra HD.  I’ve had the Red Dragonfly and there wasn’t enough improvement (to me) to use it over the Black. I don’t profess to have ears of a music producer, but I think my ears may be a tad better than the mainstream.
> 
> Qobuz, Deezer, and Tidal only become sustainable as long as they add new users. That great sucking sound you hear in the distance is Amazon Music HD getting them.


I understand thAts your experience, but heard absolute difference between red and black with everything I listened to. I've moved on from the red since then to an ifi DAC, and Chord Mojo, but absolutely heard difference, and hear a difference between these


----------



## MonkeyDance

Andrew_WOT said:


> Amazon rep suggested to use Amazon Music player "Help/Tell us how we're doing" function to submit request for exclusive mode. The more the merrier.



I’ll request it.


----------



## muski

Soundizer said:


> I just downloaded 72GB of Amazon MUSIC’s ULTRA HD songs on my iPad Pro.
> 
> Can anyone recommend a DAC under £600 that I can connect to the iPad Pro (USB-C port) and receive the full resolution for these ULTRA HD tracks. My headphones are Focal Clear.



I’d also suggest auditioning a Chord Mojo.


----------



## muski

I really like the Amazon mini-player. I've been begging Roon to do one for years. Still not there.


----------



## Soundizer

tomwoo said:


> I have both Apple Music and Amazon Music HD. I wound't bother to use my setup to listen to Apple Music, it's only for bluetooth earbuds. Now with Amazon Music HD I enjoy the music quite a bit, better soundstage, better instrument separation, better bass, better everything...Still undecided if I want to pay for it or not, I'm waiting for the exclusive mode just like everyone else in this thread.


What does exclusive mode mean? I thought it is related to MQA.


----------



## 435279

Soundizer said:


> What does exclusive mode mean? I thought it is related to MQA.



Its just a term used to describe a playback mode where the music app can bypass the OS/System mixer. This usually results in the best possible sound quality possible from a source. 

MQA needs exclusive mode to work properly but exclusive mode is not directly connected to MQA.


----------



## Blueshound24

Haven't tried it yet but this is supposed to move playlists from Spotify to Amazon. 

https://freeyourmusic.com/move-from-spotify-to-amazon-music.html


----------



## Left Channel

Blueshound24 said:


> Haven't tried it yet but this is supposed to move playlists from Spotify to Amazon.
> 
> https://freeyourmusic.com/move-from-spotify-to-amazon-music.html



Thanks! Soundiiz has offered this for a while too. It may be worth comparing features. https://soundiiz.com/


----------



## Ken G

Left Channel said:


> Thanks! Soundiiz has offered this for a while too. It may be worth comparing features. https://soundiiz.com/


I’ve tried both and while Soundiiz works great it doesn’t allow favorites and playlists to be transferred TO Amazon Music (I think Apple Music also has this limitation). 
STAMP doesn’t have the same limitation and I was able to transfer from Tidal to Amazon just this morning. 
However I won’t consider leaving Tidal for Amazon until Amazon fixes some of the major deficiencies that have been pointed out on this thread.


----------



## tomwoo (Oct 1, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> What does exclusive mode mean? I thought it is related to MQA.


MQA is just a proprietary technology to compress Hi-res music to take less bandwidth for streaming. It will help when you have slow or limited mobile data plan but still want to stream Hi-res music through your mobile data. I don't think it's even necessary for any other modern internet connections. We are already streaming 4K HDR videos in a heart beat.


----------



## stuck limo

tomwoo said:


> MQA is just a proprietary technology to compress Hi-res music to take less bandwidth for streaming. It will help when you have slow or limited mobile data plan but still want to stream Hi-res music through your mobile data. I don't think it's even necessary for any other modern internet connections. We are already streaming 4K HDR videos in a heart beat.



When MQA was first announced, it was specifically mentioned that MQA was aimed at mobile applications. A lot of MQA detractors ignore this and insist MQA isn't necessary for hardwired connections.


----------



## Brava210

Listened to a couple more Albums on Amazon HD today.....Not great compared to Tidal.
It sounds like the different tracks come from different sources as if uploaded onto a file sharing site?
Weird


----------



## Soundizer

I have not been able to find a 24bit 192KHz track yet. Anyone seen this quality?


----------



## tomwoo (Oct 1, 2019)

stuck limo said:


> When MQA was first announced, it was specifically mentioned that MQA was aimed at mobile applications. A lot of MQA detractors ignore this and insist MQA isn't necessary for hardwired connections.


Because it is useless for high speed internet. For what is worth, it won't give you better sound quality. The problem MQA wanted to solve will no longer exist when 5G rolls out.


----------



## stuck limo (Oct 1, 2019)

tomwoo said:


> Because it is useless for high speed internet.



Which is why MQA was developed and advertised for mobile applications, as I and Meridian previously stated.

Whether or not it sounds better is irrelevant to this point. MQA was developed for mobile connections, because of data caps and bandwidth, unless you have a data cap and speed and connection coverage to handle a hi res album.

5G still doesn't really exist for real world applications and it certainly didn't exist when MQA was developed. Theoretically it could solve the hi res data issue but it's not even out in the world yet in any sort of reliable capacity.


----------



## tomwoo

stuck limo said:


> Which is why MQA was developed and advertised for mobile applications, as I and Meridian previously stated.
> 
> Whether or not it sounds better is irrelevant to this point. MQA was developed for mobile connections, because of data caps and bandwidth, unless you have a data cap and speed and connection coverage to handle a hi res album.


Thanks for the information.
It's getting a little off-topic since Amazon Music HD doesn't use MQA.


----------



## ralong

stuck limo said:


> When MQA was first announced, it was specifically mentioned that MQA was aimed at mobile applications. A lot of MQA detractors ignore this and insist MQA isn't necessary for hardwired connections.



MQA wasn't designed for mobile application and bandwidth . But for more control over the music file. There are meta data embedded in the file like watermark for the record companies. It's an attempt to control and extract revenue from every part of the supply chain. In example when a company producing DAC-s doesn't pay licence fees, You wont be able to listen YOUR files in highest quality.

And also its lossy compression.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 2, 2019)

I've run into a bug with Music HD on my ipod touch. Maybe someone could verify it. It's making playing Ultra-HD content (starting with 96kHz) not possible for me.

I'm using an iPod touch 6 gen with DFR as my source, no streaming, everything's downloaded in a best available quality. When I'm starting to play a really high data rate content, e.g. Getz /Gilberto , just first track (The Girl from Ipanema), I see that the slider showing data load (although there is no load actually, WiFi is disabled and the app is in the offline status) is lagging behind the playback, at some point of time (this track at around 1:30) the playback would just stop, as if the amount of data is not enough (also the data buffer slider showing that buffer is empty), then it will pump some data into the buffer, in will continue playback (after few seconds of wait), at some point of time fall back to Standard instead of HD quality. And this all with DOWNLOADED content, no streaming... Also verified my sanity by monitoring the network load. Definitively no streaming, the data are really coming from the iPod's memory...

It looks like the app has too short buffers even for reading from the memory, that do not cover the data hunger of the HiRes content.

My attempts to communicate the issue to Amazon result in usual conversation with non-technical employees who have troubles to understand my issue description (even though it was provided in a written form) and start the usual troubleshooting: re-install the app, try e.g. a computer instead of iPod... They just don't understand that this seems to be a bug in an isolated iOS app, different sources like computer/android phone won't have the same problem...

Anyone in the US who could submit this bug report to Amazon? I seem to have no luck in Europe...


----------



## 3Putter

Brava210 said:


> Listened to a couple more Albums on Amazon HD today.....Not great compared to Tidal.
> It sounds like the different tracks come from different sources as if uploaded onto a file sharing site?
> Weird


Bingo. I was excited about the larger selection in HD that Amazon 'brings'. They don't. Sounds sub-par compared to Tidal. Compared both services this AM running on the same gear and couldn't find a reason to keep Amazon HD. Can't justify an $8/month savings for lesser quality and more quantity. Never been a 'buffet' fan.


----------



## a-LeXx

Indeed some records have a strange mix of tracks with different quality, but not too many.

Quality vs. Quantity: Tidal for example doesn't have anything from Chesky Records, Qobuz also only a small selection. Amazon Music HD has now full Chesky Records selection in uncompressed CD quality. What's not to like about that?


----------



## 3Putter

a-LeXx said:


> Indeed some records have a strange mix of tracks with different quality, but not too many.
> 
> Quality vs. Quantity: Tidal for example doesn't have anything from Chesky Records, Qobuz also only a small selection. Amazon Music HD has now full Chesky Records selection in uncompressed CD quality. What's not to like about that?


Love Amazon's quantity. Just couldn't get over the lack of quality sound. I listened from Day1, cancelled Tidal. I've tried Quboz and didn't get on with their catalog. Their customer service is awful. I couldn't get down with Amazon's HD, their glitches, and when I'm listening and hear a difference that isn't better I can afford the extra money per month. Totally worth it.


----------



## a-LeXx

3Putter said:


> Love Amazon's quantity. Just couldn't get over the lack of quality sound. I listened from Day1, cancelled Tidal. I've tried Quboz and didn't get on with their catalog. Their customer service is awful. I couldn't get down with Amazon's HD, their glitches, and when I'm listening and hear a difference that isn't better I can afford the extra money per month. Totally worth it.



Well, Music HD is just 2 weeks old, of course glitches are bad, but can happen with a new service. I don't find Tidal to sound better than Amazon. In turn, Amazon has all of the content I'm missing on Tidal. What is best quality good for, if the content you want to listen to is not there?  I had Tidal HiFi and Amazon Music (even before they launched HD) in parallel, and then canceled Tidal, because I was listening to Amazon Music more than half of the time, even though it was compressed vs. uncompressed/MQA at that time. Now, most of my content is available at least in CD quality on Music HD, even better... I'm happy... Well, not entirely, it glitches on my iPod touch (see my post above)... But those are SW bugs, can happen, will be resolved...


----------



## 3Putter

a-LeXx said:


> Well, Music HD is just 2 weeks old, of course glitches are bad, but can happen with a new service. I don't find Tidal to sound better than Amazon. In turn, Amazon has all of the content I'm missing on Tidal. What is best quality good for, if the content you want to listen to is not there?  I had Tidal HiFi and Amazon Music (even before they launched HD) in parallel, and then canceled Tidal, because I was listening to Amazon Music more than half of the time, even though it was compressed vs. uncompressed/MQA at that time. Now, most of my content is available at least in CD quality on Music HD, even better... I'm happy... Well, not entirely, it glitches on my iPod touch (see my post above)... But those are SW bugs, can happen, will be resolved...


Well, I'm not trying to convince you of what I hear. The app has been updated and is glitch. Songs that should be HD aren't. Too many. Getting a white circle with an exclamation point over the HD label. When comparing HD tracks from Amazon with Tidal, Tidal wins on every track. You may think I'm nuts. I just might be. But I dont enjoy listening to music I like in poor quality.


----------



## 435279

Soundizer said:


> I have not been able to find a 24bit 192KHz track yet. Anyone seen this quality?



Yes, Norah Jones - Come Away With Me is one example.


----------



## a-LeXx

3Putter said:


> Well, I'm not trying to convince you of what I hear. The app has been updated and is glitch. Songs that should be HD aren't. Too many. Getting a white circle with an exclamation point over the HD label. When comparing HD tracks from Amazon with Tidal, Tidal wins on every track. You may think I'm nuts. I just might be. But I dont enjoy listening to music I like in poor quality.



You might have just a technical issue there. Amazon Music HD really sounds good to me, listening via SE846/HD600/T5p.2

But, what they do, is: they would actually switch from HiRes to a lowest bitrate (sounds really terrible) in case of a single network glitch while streaming. That‘s why I‘m not using it with streaming, only with downloaded content ... which doesn‘t currently work for me with real HiRes tracks, sadly.


----------



## Marlowe (Oct 2, 2019)

It somewhat embarrasses me to say so, but I really can't hear much, if any, of a difference between Tidal and Amazon HD. (FWIW, I use exclusive mode on Tidal and have the volume maxed on both and controlled by my amp.) Admittedly, my ears are less educated than many here and they're old (turned 66 last month). Though in the past when I listened to some gaps in Tidal's catalog on Amazon's free lossy service for Prime members, I immediately found the SQ definitely inferior to Tidal. I'm listening on reasonably good gear (desktop is usually SMSL SU-8>THX 789>Focal Elex; mobile listening is LG G8 with quad DAC>Campfire Audio Lyra II). I will keep experimenting.

For my interests (primarily rock and folk from '50s to present, though I listen to a little bit of almost everything except hip hop, dance music, and classical), the catalogs are not that different, though I am still exploring Amazon. And most of the stuff I found missing on Tidal is still missing on Amazon. However, Amazon does plug some glaring gaps on Tidal, such as Jerry Garcia's '70s solo albums (though the best songs there are available in better versions on many Dead live albums), the first reconstituted Band album sans Robbie Robertson from the early '90s, and Metallica. And most happily, Amazon does have a greatest hit compilation (several in fact) for the Four Seasons, who went mostly missing on Tidal some months ago. Though Amazon has some prominent gaps of its own--for example, while it has an extensive Ringo Starr selection, it somehow is missing Ringo, by far his best, and probably best selling, album. There are also some weird glitches. Fairport Convention's classic Liege and Lief is one of my favorite albums and Tidal has two versions: one with the album's original eight songs and two bonus tracks and a deluxe version with eight additional bonus tracks. However, Amazon had only the deluxe version with the ten bonus tracks, but only three of the original eight tracks (correctly numbered 2, 4, and 8). But when I searched separately for Liege and Lief, I found the ten track version (eight original and two bonus tracks) and was able to play it and save it to My Music. But I still can't see it on FC's page.

I am surprised that Amazon's UI does not get slagged even harder here. It's not bad, it's abominable. Things that can be done with one click on Tidal's Windows app (which is not a great UI} can take many on Amazon. It's also very annoying that you cannot directly save favorite artists, my preferred method of arranging my collection. There is an artists list in My Music, but you cannot save directly to it--you have to favorite an album and then the artist will appear on the artists list. (And when you click on the artist, only that album will appear. You have to change the view from My Music to Unlimited to see the rest. Really dumb.) And the Amazon app will not respond to the forward and back buttons on my mouse; Tidal does. However, the desktop amp is a masterpiece compared to the Android app, which is incredibly difficult and non-intuitive to navigate. I'm somewhat surprised by this since I assume phone users make up by far the largest pool of potential Amazon listeners.


----------



## 3Putter

Marlowe said:


> It somewhat embarrasses me to say so, but I really can't hear much, if any, of a difference between Tidal and Amazon HD. (FWIW, I use exclusive mode on Tidal and have the volume maxed on both and controlled by my amp.) Admittedly, my ears are less educated than many here and they're old (turned 66 last month). Though in the past when I listened to some gaps in Tidal's catalog on Amazon's free lossy service for Prime members, I immediately found the SQ definitely inferior to Tidal. I'm listening on reasonably good gear (desktop is usually SMSL SU-8>THX 789>Focal Elex; mobile listening is LG G8 with quad DAC>Campfire Audio Lyra II). I will keep experimenting.
> 
> For my interests (primarily rock and folk from '50s to present, though I listen to a little bit of almost everything except hip hop, dance music, and classical), the catalogs are not that different, though I am still exploring Amazon. And most of the stuff I found missing on Tidal is still missing on Amazon. However, Amazon does plug some glaring gaps on Tidal, such as Jerry Garcia's '70s solo albums (though the best songs there are available in better versions on many Dead live albums), the first reconstituted Band album sans Robbie Robertson from the early '90s, and Metallica. And most happily, Amazon does have a greatest hit compilation (several in fact) for the Four Seasons, who went mostly missing on Tidal some months ago. Though Amazon has some prominent gaps of its own--for example, while it has an extensive Ringo Starr selection, it somehow is missing Ringo, by far his best, and probably best selling, album. There are also some weird glitches. Fairport Convention's classic Liege and Lief is one of my favorite albums and Tidal has two versions: one with the album's original eight songs and two bonus tracks and a deluxe version with eight additional bonus tracks. However, Amazon had only the deluxe version with the ten bonus tracks, but only three of the original eight tracks (correctly numbered 2, 4, and 8). But when I searched separately for Liege and Lief, I found the ten track version (eight original and two bonus tracks) and was able to play it and save it to My Music. But I still can't see it on FC's page.
> 
> I am surprised that Amazon's UI does not get slagged even harder here. It's not bad, it's abominable. Things that can be done with one click on Tidal's Windows app (which is not a great UI} can take many on Amazon. It's also very annoying that you cannot directly save favorite artists, my preferred method of arranging my collection. There is an artists list in My Music, but you cannot save directly to it--you have to favorite an album and then the artist will appear on the artists list. (And when you click on the artist, only that album will appear. You have to change the view from My Music to Unlimited to see the rest. Really dumb.) And the Amazon app will not respond to the forward and back buttons on my mouse; Tidal does. However, the desktop amp is a masterpiece compared to the Android app, which is incredibly difficult and non-intuitive to navigate. I'm somewhat surprised by this since I assume phone users make up by far the largest pool of potential Amazon listeners.


I wish I didn't hear a difference. Wanted to use the new Amazon HD application. Just didn't sound right on too many tracks. It's also cumbersome. And like I have mentioned, I get a white circle with an exclamation point over the top of the HD label on many tracks and not on others. The Ultra HD stuff I listed to sounded really good. Maybe I will change back but a track by track comparison listening to segments at a time on the same gear resulted in better sound from Tidal.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 2, 2019)

3Putter said:


> I wish I didn't hear a difference. Wanted to use the new Amazon HD application. Just didn't sound right on too many tracks. It's also cumbersome. And like I have mentioned, I get a white circle with an exclamation point over the top of the HD label on many tracks and not on others. The Ultra HD stuff I listed to sounded really good. Maybe I will change back but a track by track comparison listening to segments at a time on the same gear resulted in better sound from Tidal.



Exactly that exclamation mark over HD label shows that you have technical issues and are NOT listening to losless/HiRes. There are multiple possible issues with different root causes, you need to click on that exclamation mark in order to check the actual message behind it. One of the possible issues - you have this content downloaded in compressed quality. In this case the app is informing you, that instead of playing available HiRes tracks, you are playing pre-saved compressed stuff... As I said, you need to click/tap on it in order to see what‘s actually the reason...

I think, amazon made a big mistake here, which will lead to people bashing the quality. With Tidal, or Qobuz, if something is wrong, the quality doesn‘t change, so in worst case your playback will stutter. On amazon, it would instead silently (the HD label is still displayed) fall back to lowest possible quality with very audible compression artifacts. And there is no way to disable this variable bitrate selection... A very bad decision from amazon. This works ok for videos/movies, but not for hifi enthusiasts who want their content in best available quality.


----------



## 3Putter

a-LeXx said:


> Exactly that exclamation mark over HD label shows that you have technical issues and are NOT listening to losless/HiRes. There are multiple possible issues with different root causes, you need to click on that exclamation mark in order to check the actual message behind it. One of the possible issues - you have this content downloaded in compressed quality. In this case the app is informing you, that instead of playing available HiRes tracks, you are playing pre-saved compressed stuff... As I said, you need to click/tap on it in order to see what‘s actually the reason...
> 
> I think, amazon made a big mistake here, which will lead to people bashing the quality. With Tidal, or Qobuz, if something is wrong, the quality doesn‘t change, so in worst case your playback will stutter. On amazon, it would instead silently (the HD label is still displayed) fall back to lowest possible quality with very audible compression artifacts. And there is no way to disable this variable bitrate selection... A very bad decision from amazon. This works ok for videos/movies, but not for hifi enthusiasts who want their content in best available quality.


There is no clicking the symbol. For my testing, however, I did not use any tracks where this symbol was present. Tidal still sounded better. I have not heard or found anyone that can tell me what this symbol is representing. I signed up on an annual basis for Amazon Music Unlimited. I upgraded and updated my PC and phone apps. They automatically converted to HD or Ultra HD. Now, after a few days of use the white symbol started up and many of my albums would only display a track or two unless I opened the remaining tracks of the album. I did a fair comparison and Tidal sounds better. I get that it shouldn't given the specs. But it does. Do you work for Amazon? LOL


----------



## a-LeXx

3Putter said:


> There is no clicking the symbol. For my testing, however, I did not use any tracks where this symbol was present. Tidal still sounded better. I have not heard or found anyone that can tell me what this symbol is representing. I signed up on an annual basis for Amazon Music Unlimited. I upgraded and updated my PC and phone apps. They automatically converted to HD or Ultra HD. Now, after a few days of use the white symbol started up and many of my albums would only display a track or two unless I opened the remaining tracks of the album. I did a fair comparison and Tidal sounds better. I get that it shouldn't given the specs. But it does. Do you work for Amazon? LOL



No, I don‘t work for amazon. Obviously you have a mess with old and new content conflicting on your devices. Uninstall everything, then re-install and re-download.on my iOS app on ipod touch and ipad the exclamation mark, also HD label, are clickable and would show further details and problem descriptions. It‘s difficult to hit though, as the icons are really tiny...


----------



## 3Putter

a-LeXx said:


> No, I don‘t work for amazon. Obviously you have a mess with old and new content conflicting on your devices. Uninstall everything, then re-install and re-download.on my iOS app on ipod touch and ipad the exclamation mark, also HD label, are clickable and would show further details and problem descriptions. It‘s difficult to hit though, as the icons are really tiny...


Will try this and report back, thanks for the tip.


----------



## 3Putter

Ok, reloaded application on LGV30. No dice. Still some songs in standard quality. However, now when I click on the HD/exclamation point it pops up a window explaining that the track is standard quality. I guess I have to figure out a way to wipe out the albums/songs that are SD and replace with HD. Much of my music did convert to HD automatically. Some did not. I'm going to test again tonight HD vs. HD on Tidal. I felt the quality was better on Tidal. We will see. (a real pain to have to deal with this over a few bucks a month). I'm good through Jan 2020 on Amazon HD so I have time.


----------



## a-LeXx

3Putter said:


> Will try this and report back, thanks for the tip.



Don't forget to set download quality to HD when re-downloading. The default setting is strangely 'stsndard', so if you forget to switch it to HD before re-downloading, you will have to redo everything again. Been there myself...


----------



## TK33

3Putter said:


> Ok, reloaded application on LGV30. No dice. Still some songs in standard quality. However, now when I click on the HD/exclamation point it pops up a window explaining that the track is standard quality. I guess I have to figure out a way to wipe out the albums/songs that are SD and replace with HD. Much of my music did convert to HD automatically. Some did not. I'm going to test again tonight HD vs. HD on Tidal. I felt the quality was better on Tidal. We will see. (a real pain to have to deal with this over a few bucks a month). I'm good through Jan 2020 on Amazon HD so I have time.



I have had similar issues on my phone (Galaxy S9) since the Amazon Music HD service launched and am starting to suspect it may have to do with some tracks that Media Monkey imported on my phone (some of these are MP3s I have purchased from Amazon).  I emailed Amazon when the new service launched about the issue but they wanted to troubleshoot live.  I just spent 5 hours on the phone with them regarding AMZL shipping/delivery issues over the last 2 weeks so I think I am done talking to Amazon CS for a while.  For now, I am slowly recreating my playlists on Amazon to see if removing the music from my phone will help fix the issue.  I am also having to constantly logout and log back in because songs I add to my playlist are not showing up until I do so (or the app tells me that a song I have never added before is already on my playlist and clicking "Refresh My Music" or clearing cache does nothing).

I agree this is a real pain to deal with and given how buggy the app is, I will probably go back to buying CDs when my trial is up unless the service improves substantially.


----------



## Papa253

SteveOliver said:


> Yes, Norah Jones - Come Away With Me is one example.


I just went 10 or more version on AM none of the are 192. Care to be more specific?


----------



## TK33

Papa253 said:


> I just went 10 or more version on AM none of the are 192. Care to be more specific?



Try Lonestar in that album.  Shows up as Track Quality 24/192 for me although my phone is only capable of 24/48 so I can't verify it..


----------



## Papa253 (Oct 2, 2019)

3Putter said:


> Ok, reloaded application on LGV30. No dice. Still some songs in standard quality. However, now when I click on the HD/exclamation point it pops up a window explaining that the track is standard quality. I guess I have to figure out a way to wipe out the albums/songs that are SD and replace with HD. Much of my music did convert to HD automatically. Some did not. I'm going to test again tonight HD vs. HD on Tidal. I felt the quality was better on Tidal. We will see. (a real pain to have to deal with this over a few bucks a month). I'm good through Jan 2020 on Amazon HD so I have time.


Did you delete from app's to be deleted file on your v30?


----------



## senorx12562

runssical said:


> Unimpressed by app design and lack of bitpefect playback... additionally don't subscribe because Jeff Bezos runs forced labor camps at his warehouses.


Now this is funny.


----------



## blueninjasix

TK33 said:


> Try Lonestar in that album.  Shows up as Track Quality 24/192 for me although my phone is only capable of 24/48 so I can't verify it..


I searched for 192kHz and it found a song by Supertramp.


----------



## Killeen

Television - Marquee Moon 24/192


----------



## 435279

Papa253 said:


> I just went 10 or more version on AM none of the are 192. Care to be more specific?



Check out Come Away With Me by Norah Jones on Amazon Music
https://music.amazon.co.uk/albums/B001IYPQ4M?ref=dm_sh_ZobixYXXHj6eAEXGWPon3k7qt

Its actually just the first track on this one is 24/192 for me, I'm in the UK though, perhaps there are regional differences. Amazon do have an odd habit of mixing different bit-rates in one album as evidenced by this release.


----------



## a-LeXx

blueninjasix said:


> I searched for 192kHz and it found a song by Supertramp.



The whole Getz/Gilberto album is 192kHz. A complete overkill, but if you are looking for 192kHz content...


----------



## a-LeXx

Anyone noticed the massive battery drain with HiRes content? On my ipod touch (1000 mAh battery), it‘s completely killing a fully charged battery in 1 hour! The ipod is also getting really hot to touch.


----------



## 3Putter

Papa253 said:


> I just went 10 or more version on AM none of the are 192. Care to be more specific?


Joni Mitchell


Papa253 said:


> Did you delete from app's to be deleted file on your v30?


I deleted the app from my phone and then reloaded it. Did I go through all my music and delete just to have to redownload it all again? No. If I have to go to that extreme I will give up. I did clean up alot of SD files I had and upgraded them to HD through manual operation. Some tracks/albums did this automatically some did not. I listened for 90 minutes on several tracks between Tidal and Amazon HD. Still prefer Tidal. Better pop and clarity. Would listen to 30 seconds to a minute or until a verse turns to the chorus of the track so I was listening apples to apples. Amazon HD is a bit louder but cloudier. Will keep comparing and see where it leads. But Tidal is a bit better sounding on my gear. LGV30 running directly to Periodic Audio Carbons and Be's and through JDS Labs Atom from LGV30.


----------



## 3Putter

TK33 said:


> I have had similar issues on my phone (Galaxy S9) since the Amazon Music HD service launched and am starting to suspect it may have to do with some tracks that Media Monkey imported on my phone (some of these are MP3s I have purchased from Amazon).  I emailed Amazon when the new service launched about the issue but they wanted to troubleshoot live.  I just spent 5 hours on the phone with them regarding AMZL shipping/delivery issues over the last 2 weeks so I think I am done talking to Amazon CS for a while.  For now, I am slowly recreating my playlists on Amazon to see if removing the music from my phone will help fix the issue.  I am also having to constantly logout and log back in because songs I add to my playlist are not showing up until I do so (or the app tells me that a song I have never added before is already on my playlist and clicking "Refresh My Music" or clearing cache does nothing).
> 
> I agree this is a real pain to deal with and given how buggy the app is, I will probably go back to buying CDs when my trial is up unless the service improves substantially.


It is a decent app. I prefer the listening and navigational experience from Tidal over Amazon. I have both through January 2020 so I can continue to test/compare. Tidal is just easier. I can listen to an entire album and when it's over the app continues to play/select tracks of a similar sound. Good discovery tool. Amazon has Playlists but I find them off base and not as appealing generally. The sound on Amazon is less clear, percussion doesn't pop, and the volume is a bit louder at the same setting, same gear, as I have it set on Tidal. They are closer than what I had previously said given I now have HD play back on my comparison tracks but Tidal is preferred.


----------



## Sebastian000

a-LeXx said:


> Anyone noticed the massive battery drain with HiRes content? On my ipod touch (1000 mAh battery), it‘s completely killing a fully charged battery in 1 hour! The ipod is also getting really hot to touch.



 I use an iPhone 7 connected to an iFi micro BL. If i listen to Ultra HD quality the battery goes from 100% to flat in 3 hours. 

I hope they fix this. ..


----------



## a-LeXx

Sebastian000 said:


> I use an iPhone 7 connected to an iFi micro BL. If i listen to Ultra HD quality the battery goes from 100% to flat in 3 hours.
> 
> I hope they fix this. ..



Ok, then it's abiut the same for you. The battery iof an iPhone 7 is about x2 the size of that in an iPod, but I also power a DFR off the iPod...

I actually doubt they will ever fix it. Amazon was never good at optinization, even before HD it was the heaviest on battery app from all the competition (itunes, spotify, tidal)


----------



## Blueshound24 (Oct 3, 2019)

Blueshound24 said:


> Haven't tried it yet but this is supposed to move playlists from Spotify to Amazon.
> 
> https://freeyourmusic.com/move-from-spotify-to-amazon-music.html




Well, I tried to transfer my playlists with Stamp or Paddle, or whatever they call it, but got the message that I quickly ran out of the limit to transfer.

It asked to pay the premium of $9.99 for unlimited transfer, so I thought what the hell, why not. It's got to be easier than figure it out by myself. So now after paying, it is in the process of transferring 35,000 tracks from 164 playlists with 7 hours to finish? And it says 50 "songs not matched" so far.

So... to be continued.

We will see if it works, and how many "songs not matched" there are.


----------



## Blueshound24

PS: It is now *3%* finished with 77 "songs not matched", with 7h 17m to go.


----------



## Blueshound24 (Oct 4, 2019)

1. The program keeps pausing when the computer screen shuts off. So I went into the Control Panel and set the screen to "Never" shut off which solved that issue.

2. Also, It keeps pausing and it gives the message, *"Couldn't download track:400, {__type":"com.amazon.coral.validate#ValitdationException","message":"1 validation error detected: Value''at 'tracks' failed to satisfy constraint: Member must have length greater than or equal to 1"}*
So, I have to frequently keep clicking on the arrow to restart the program downloading.

It is at 54% finished and running since yesterday, however it paused itself quite a bit of that time due to the above mentioned issue.

There are also ~ '2800 songs not matched so far'.

I do have a lot of playlists and tracks the program is trying to transfer if that makes any difference.


----------



## juang1985

Hello fellas

Haven't post here in a while so here it goes.


I have been following this thread for a few days now.    I subscribed to Amazon HD a few days ago and have been using it for a good amount of time.   I am also a Tidal hifi Subscriber.

My gear: HD800S, HD820s and IE800S pair them with Chord Hugo 2 via USB to my Windows pc.  

My first impressions of Amazon Music HD are mostly positive.    I do like the UI of Tidal better for sure but when it comes to sound quality there is really very very little difference if any, at least to my ears.  I am 33yrs old and think I have pretty good hearing.   I am paying 30 a month for Tidal family plan and subscribed to Amazon HD family plan yearly for 200$ a year thats about 17 a month almost half a price of what I was paying for Tidal.  As much as I love tidal I just cant justify paying double the price for almost the same quality and almost the same music library (for my taste of music at least).

The only way to spot the difference is by doing A/B side by side and listen to the song multiple times and you might notice a little different tonality in some cases but over all I am happy with Amazons new service and most likely canceling tidal in the near future.

I think Amazon Music HD will only get better... they know the service is new and not perfect and that's probably the reason why they are offering 90 days free trial while they fix their little glitches here and there. 

oh by the way, if you subscribe for the yearly plan up front you only get 30 day trial... one way around that is by subscribing for monthly plan first then simply change the plan after within the app to yearly and you still keep the 90 day free trial.


----------



## Blueshound24 (Oct 5, 2019)

Blueshound24 said:


> 1. The program keeps pausing when the computer screen shuts off. So I went into the Control Panel and set the screen to "Never" shut off which solved that issue.
> 
> 2. Also, It keeps pausing and it gives the message, *"Couldn't download track:400, {__type":"com.amazon.coral.validate#ValitdationException","message":"1 validation error detected: Value''at 'tracks' failed to satisfy constraint: Member must have length greater than or equal to 1"}*
> So, I have to frequently keep clicking on the arrow to restart the program downloading.
> ...





EDIT: The transfer has been trouble free now for the last few hours. Stamp help line got back to me via email and suggested transferring one playlist at a time, but like I said it is running well now with no hiccups and should be done soon.

EDIT: Finished. Worked well and transferred most all tracks.


----------



## csglinux

juang1985 said:


> they know the service is new and not perfect...



I reached the opposite conclusion. On my Android devices, everything (HD or Ultra HD) is re-sampled to 48 kHz. Tidal sounds notably better on every track I've compared.

I contacted Amazon support and sent them audio_flinger logs. They don't care. I was told point blank they are not even able to connect me to anybody who knows what a sample rate is.


----------



## juang1985

csglinux said:


> I reached the opposite conclusion. On my Android devices, everything (HD or Ultra HD) is re-sampled to 48 kHz. Tidal sounds notably better on every track I've compared.
> 
> I contacted Amazon support and sent them audio_flinger logs. They don't care. I was told point blank they are not even able to connect me to anybody who knows what a sample rate is.




Sorry to hear that,  I use my PC for music so cant speak about android OS.    Hopefully it gets sorted out for you


----------



## csglinux (Oct 4, 2019)

juang1985 said:


> Sorry to hear that,  I use my PC for music so cant speak about android OS.    Hopefully it gets sorted out for you


Thanks. I'm not holding my breath though. Amazon's support staff are utterly clueless.

It does appear that the situation is somewhat better for Windows and Mac, but to get bit-perfect playback, you need to manually set the sample rate in the OS (which might vary from track to track).


----------



## exdmd (Oct 4, 2019)

Qobuz bests sound quality of Tidal in my experience: I dropped Tidal for Qobuz many months ago. Qobuz is *really* good. Amazon Music HD can't equal the sound quality of Qobuz because it streams only in Windows shared mode, it is crippled by lack of ability to enable Wasapi exclusive mode in their desktop app. I've been listening to the free trial and Qobuz played using Audirvana+ is noticeably better than Amazon Music HD. I like their catalog but am still puzzled why they did not launch with Wasapi.

I have no problem paying more for Qobuz than Amazon Music HD, the sound quality is that much better. Sure I would be glad to save $10 a month but I won't even consider paying for Amazon Music HD unless they enable Wasapi exclusive mode. At this rate I will just let the free trial run out: it does not seem Amazon really cares about ultimate sound quality, Roon or Audirvana integration.


----------



## Blueshound24

So with JRiver there is an option to choose WDM driver and I can set audio device to WASAPI. And I think Tidal, Amazon HD, Spotify all sound better and more clear. Isn't that then the same as using exclusive mode?


----------



## runssical (Oct 5, 2019)

rkw said:


> Their search function is totally broken. Instead of searching for "anton bruckner", try searching (for example) "bruckner symphony". I thought search on Tidal and Qobuz were bad, but Amazon takes the cake.



What I like about Qobuz is that you can browse the download store on a web browser and use the web search facility instead of conducting searches through the app. This way you can have more granular search results by filtering for specific record labels, sorting by release date, ect. It's so much easier. On the website you can add albums to your favorites and they will appear in the streaming app.


----------



## 435279

Blueshound24 said:


> So with JRiver there is an option to choose WDM driver and I can set audio device to WASAPI. And I think Tidal, Amazon HD, Spotify all sound better and more clear. Isn't that then the same as using exclusive mode?



I don't think so. Amazon Music still sends its output to the Windows mixer so JRiver doesn't really fix the exclusive bug. You can test this by playing music or anything from another app, you will hear both streams of audio.


----------



## runssical

exdmd said:


> Qobuz bests sound quality of Tidal in my experience: I dropped Tidal for Qobuz many months ago. Qobuz is *really* good. Amazon Music HD can't equal the sound quality of Qobuz because it streams only in Windows shared mode, it is crippled by lack of ability to enable Wasapi exclusive mode in their desktop app.



Thank you for confirming what I've been trying to tell people on this sub. Amazon HD's inferiority is even apparent using Sony Bluetooth headphones with LDAC codec. It sounds like 128kbps MPEG. The mobile Qobuz app sound the best with Tidal a distant 2nd and Amazon HD not even in the same ballpark. These differences only expand on a desktop setup. 

I don't think Amazon cares about the needs of music lovers or audiophiles.


----------



## mixman

runssical said:


> Thank you for confirming what I've been trying to tell people on this sub. Amazon HD's inferiority is even apparent using Sony Bluetooth headphones with LDAC codec. It sounds like 128kbps MPEG. The mobile Qobuz app sound the best with Tidal a distant 2nd and Amazon HD not even in the same ballpark. These differences only expand on a desktop setup.
> 
> I don't think Amazon cares about the needs of music lovers or audiophiles.


With some genre's it's really a toss up between some Tidal and Qobuz songs. Generally I will gravitate to the Qobuz versions, but I don't think the the SQ is always a given for Qobuz. True, right now, Amazon HD isn't even in the running.


----------



## senorx12562

For me, the only relevant comparison for Amazon's service is Spotify. I was never going to pay the freight for Tidal, Quobuz, or Roon. A little less than $1 more per month, and the sq is much better than Spotify, via android or windows. The UI is not as good, and music discovery requires a little more of me, but those costs along with the $1 are well spent, even assuming no improvement over time, which is probably unrealistic. Sold.


----------



## Papa253 (Oct 5, 2019)

Another amazon music update this morning I don't thing it's fixed any issues.


Yes I've had the Amazon HD update 2 weeks ago. So I can't see why this update came through this morning?


----------



## Andrew_WOT

For people hearing difference with Qobuz on Windows desktop app, how do you setup app and sound options in control panel?
The trick is to bypass Windows resampler and not to use loudness normalization in app. For redbook just set it to 24/44.1, for ultra HD match it to the track sample rate. 
Special effects and spatial sound disabled, volume maxed out in app and sound option.
On latest Win10 they are the same, just perhaps small difference in gain.
Keep in mind that generous 90 days trial is essentially early beta program, a lot of things are still in flex and subject to change, including exlusive WASAPI and even ASIO support.
And the do care, Windows and Android apps were updated at least once already since the start of the program, and more is coming.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 5, 2019)

Andrew_WOT said:


> For people hearing difference with Qobuz on Windows desktop app, how do you setup app and sound options in control panel?
> The trick is to bypass Windows resampler and not to use loudness normalization in app. For redbook just set it to 24/44.1, for ultra HD match it to the track sample rate.
> Special effects and spatial sound disabled, volume maxed out in app and sound option.
> On latest Win10 they are the same, just perhaps small difference in gain.
> ...



Sorry your fix has been mentioned before, I have tried it and the effect on sound quality is not noticeable for me at any sample rate.

Expecting users to go into Windows Sounds and change sample rate and bit depth for each song played is not practical, and they won't hear a difference anyway because the overriding problem is Windows shared mode and the noise prone Windows audio stack.

Nothing short of enabling Wasapi Exclusive mode in the Amazon Music HD app will get the sound quality closer to Qobuz. Wasapi is built into Windows 10, all Amazon's engineers have to do is take advantage of it. It is a mystery why they did not, they must have studied their competition. I assume they believe Windows mixer is "good enough".


----------



## runssical

Why can't we just have a 16bit lossless service? 24bit is snake oil and it seems like these companies use it to justify the high subscription  cost. 

$10 per month should be the ceiling. Some how Netflix can make money at that price their pushing far more data. Netflix spent $8 billion on original content last year and had a $1.2 billion net profit.


----------



## runssical

Anyone know if UAAP is going to add Amazon support?


----------



## exdmd (Oct 5, 2019)

runssical said:


> Anyone know if UAAP is going to add Amazon support?


If you mean USB Audio Player Pro that is up to Amazon and they would have to make their API available which they so far are only doing for some brands they have partnership agreements with.






Amazon being Amazon they prefer to keep you in their app or force you to buy hardware they make money from like Bluesound. Notice echostudio is first on the list I suppose there is the remote possibility of Roon or Audirvana integration but Amazon is not going to open up their API for free, there would have to be a licensing agreement they would make money from.


----------



## runssical

I'm testing Amazon Music HD on my V20. It sounds okay but I get better sound quality through Neutron playing locally stored 320kbps AAC files.


----------



## runssical

exdmd said:


> If you mean USB Audio Player Pro that is up to Amazon and they would have to make their API available which they so far are only doing for some brands they have partnership agreements with.
> 
> Amazon being Amazon they prefer to keep you in their app or force you to buy hardware they make money from like Bluesound. I suppose there is the remote possibility of Roon or Audirvana integration but Amazon is not going to open up their API for free, there would have to be a licensing agreement they would make money from.



In that case I doubt it will ever happen.


----------



## Taz777

So far Amazon Music HD has been a sonic disappointment for me. Tidal is way better to my ears. However, the Amazon Music catalogue is impressive.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Oct 5, 2019)

exdmd said:


> Sorry your fix has been mentioned before, I have tried it and the effect on sound quality is not noticeable for me at any sample rate.
> 
> Expecting users to go into Windows Sounds and change sample rate and bit depth for each song played is not practical, and they won't hear a difference anyway because the overriding problem is Windows shared mode and the noise prone Windows audio stack.
> 
> Nothing short of enabling Wasapi Exclusive mode in the Amazon Music HD app will get the sound quality closer to Qobuz. Wasapi is built into Windows 10, all Amazon's engineers have to do is take advantage of it. It is a mystery why they did not, they must have studied their competition. I assume they believe Windows mixer is "good enough".


It makes big difference to me, but yeah, flipping sample rate back and forth is not practical, unless I am listening for the whole album in Ultra HD, I just leave it at 24/44.1, seems like amazon just streams higher res tracks in 16/44.1 in that case, which is better than Redbook upsampled to 192 or 96.

My experience is that shared mode can be "almost" as good as exclusive, with Auralic Vega/Taurus stack and balanced HD800 same masters sound identical to me, but that's me, you might have different ears and perhaps different level of prejudice.

From the article posted earlier


> Q: If you
> •don't apply any per-stream or global effects and
> •only have one application outputting audio and
> •the sample rate and bit-depth set for the sound card matches the material's sample rate
> ...



So yeah, there is dithering step that in theory impacts bit-perfect output, but impact (if audible)  should be negligible comparing to OS resampler.

Not trying to defend shared mode by any mean, btw, it was not designed for hi-fi, and exclusive mode will always be the best, but before we get there, the posted above steps can get you pretty close.

And if you really interested in improvement being made, please submit feedback through the music player, requesting exclusive mode.
It's under *Your Name/Help/Tell us how we're doing*

Complaining here will not make wheels moving.


----------



## exdmd

I imagine everyone here who is on the free trial of Amazon Music HD has already submitted a request for Exclusive mode support through the app. My feeling is that if Amazon was going to take the trouble to support exclusive mode they would have done so when they launched. Shared mode is good enough for the masses, and they will only provide Exclusive mode if they can make some extra cash from doing so. We'll see.


----------



## rkw

runssical said:


> Anyone know if UAAP is going to add Amazon support?


It will be Amazon's decision whether to allow UAPP integration, and it is very doubtful for the same reasons that Spotify, Apple Music, Deezer and others do not (they want control over the user experience and profiling of user activity). I'm actually surprised to see that Google Music is supported.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Has anybody been able to run Amazon HD on their android DAP units?    Do any units allow downloads of music directly to the unit yet?  Thanks.

Right now I've been sending audio from the App from my iphone to my Shanling portable DAP units.  Sounds pretty good through the Shanling M0 by the way; better than through the M2S.


----------



## runssical

Taz777 said:


> So far Amazon Music HD has been a sonic disappointment for me. Tidal is way better to my ears. However, the Amazon Music catalogue is impressive.



They certainly are up to date with new releases for classical music. But the sorting is random. Means it takes a lot of scrolling to find what I want.


----------



## runssical

I played a live version of Fleetwood Mac's Chain. It was marked as Ultra HD. It honestly, sounded horrible. I turned it off less than half into the song because the mids and vocals sounded brittle and distorted. It was like a 128kbps MP3 file. The bass had a nice thump and natural ambient decay to it. The song started off with a long bass into on the drums. It sounded really nice until the singing started, then it was horrible. 

None of the Ultra HD albums I've sampled have sounded particularly good. 

Using my own files sounds better. 

The only service that I have tried that sounds close to local file playback is Qobuz. It's just too pricey imo. 

Maybe Spotify will step up and do lossless. I just want well executed 16bit lossless.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 5, 2019)

Qobuz costs $249.99 per year paid up front, $50 more than Tidal. How much do we spend on TV, internet and phones per month? Compared to how much I used to spend on vinyl and CDs a year Qobuz is a bargain. I think Qobuz is priced fairly for the sound quality. So is Amazon Music HD because it does not impress me at this time. Another example of you do sometimes get what you pay for.


----------



## RickB

exdmd said:


> Qobuz costs $249.99 per year paid up front, $50 more than Tidal. How much do we spend on TV, internet and phones per month? Compared to how much I used to spend on vinyl and CDs a year Qobuz is a bargain. I think Qobuz is priced fairly for the sound quality. So is Amazon Music HD because it does not impress me at this time. Another example of you do sometimes get what you pay for.



Considering that I can't find most of the indie and alternative music I'm interested in on Qobuz, I would say I wouldn't get what I paid for. Amazon's catalog is huge and sounds much better than Spotify. Totally worth it for me.


----------



## Blueshound24

RickB said:


> Considering that I can't find most of the indie and alternative music I'm interested in on Qobuz, I would say I wouldn't get what I paid for. Amazon's catalog is huge and sounds much better than Spotify. Totally worth it for me.




Agreed! And the price is more in line with what I believe it should be for streaming CD quality files, especially in comparison with HD movie streaming site prices. I have no issues with the sound quality, and think it is way more than acceptable, even without exclusive. However, that would be very cool if and when Amazon implements it.


----------



## SilverEars

The streaming is either 44.1 or 48khz.  I doubt that any of them are real 24bit masters.  They must have up sampled the bit-depth and market them as UHD.  It's for those consumers.  

Any news on support of bit-perfect?


----------



## Andrew_WOT

SilverEars said:


> The streaming is either 44.1 or 48khz.  I doubt that any of them are real 24bit masters.  They must have up sampled the bit-depth and market them as UHD.  It's for those consumers.
> 
> Any news on support of bit-perfect?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-resolution_audio


> *High-resolution audio* (*High-definition audio* or *HD audio*) is a technical and marketing term for audio with greater than 44.1 kHz sample rate and/or higher than 16-bit linear bit depth. It usually means 96 kHz or 192 kHz, sometimes informally written as "96k" or "192k", meaning a Nyquist frequency of 48 kHz. However, there also exist 44.1 kHz/24-bit, 48 kHz/24-bit and 88.2 kHz/24-bit recordings that are labeled HD Audio.



What amazon calls UHD is HD and HD is just lossless compression Red Book.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 6, 2019)

SilverEars said:


> The streaming is either 44.1 or 48khz.  I doubt that any of them are real 24bit masters.  They must have up sampled the bit-depth and market them as UHD.  It's for those consumers.
> 
> Any news on support of bit-perfect?



Not yet. If they were going to give us exclusive mode included in the price I think they would have done it at product launch. Wait six months and let's see if they offer a $20 a month product with a new app and bit perfect exclusive mode. I don't think we are going to get it for free but I could be wrong. I can imagine the meetings "what we have now is good enough. If those crazy audiophiles want Exclusive mode give it to them but charge for it."


----------



## mixman

exdmd said:


> Not yet. If they were going to give us exclusive mode included in the price I think they would have done it at product launch. Wait six months and let's see if they offer a $20 a month product with a new app and bit perfect exclusive mode. I don't think we are going to get it for free but I could be wrong. I can imagine the meetings "what we have now is good enough. If those crazy audiophiles want Exclusive mode give it to them but charge for it."


Even if Amazon does do a Super HD music service and charge more for it, they would have to add more value than just exclusive mode. Maybe do this while offering Roon or their own server app for free. Other than a few Audiophiles there are not enough that care about exclusive mode. My bet is that they will eventually just add it to their regular service.....when that will be.....who knows?


----------



## SilverEars (Oct 6, 2019)

mixman said:


> Even if Amazon does do a Super HD music service and charge more for it, they would have to add more value than just exclusive mode. Maybe do this while offering Roon or their own server app for free. Other than a few Audiophiles there are not enough that care about exclusive mode. My bet is that they will eventually just add it to their regular service.....when that will be.....who knows?


I would luv some sort of Roon competition.

Two things Roon has that I want:

1. Parametric EQ built into the app itself.  There is no Windows music player app that has it's own parametric EQ built in.

2. Control a network device.  I realized this can be really useful if you have a bunch of devices connected into a network router.  For example, Kef LS50 wireless, which can connect to your network via wireless connection.  Let's say that you want to control the device that's connected to the network, you cannot through windows unless the device itself has a software built in for it or a windows software to control the network device.  Roon is such software that is able to control devices on a network, which is rarely existent.

The problem with scenario is that you need software in Windows to control the device, and the network device need to communicate with this software.  So, you see label for Kef LS50W that it's Roon ready.

3.  Roon controls all these devices bit-perfect.  I thought I throw this one in since its's important.

If Amazon makes their desktop software into a Roon type software, that would be awsome!  Roon is too expensive!  We need alternatives.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Why are we assuming that the Ultra HD tracks are just upsampled?  For the most part the tracks they are labeling as Ultra HD are in fact available in HD on sources such as HDTracks.  So I have no reason to think that Amazon is misleading us.


----------



## grokit (Oct 6, 2019)

I'm using Amazon Music HD with a variety of setups, and prefer the desktop app for two-channel listening. I have an old Mac Mini core duo running it with a usb/spdif device, dedicated to my system. That computer also meets the minimum requirements for Tidal's desktop app. I forgot to turn off Tidal so I have it for another month. For me the main issue with Amazon is HD/Ultra HD in the same album, I think that should be fixed for sure. And I agree that if the stream is challenged it should time out, not go to lossy compressed just to keep it playing. Hopefully this is a work in progress and not the finished product.

I can also control Tidal with my phone via wifi and a Chromecast Audio, the re-clocked optical output actually sounds really good. I had issues with Tidal and Chromecast Audio at first, but they've been worked out.

I haven't gotten the Chromecast Audio device working with Amazon Music HD yet. I think they're supposed to work together. Is anybody using a Chromecast Audio wifi device with Amazon Music HD?


----------



## Richter Di

Short question. I just signed up for Amazon Music with Ultra HD with their 90 day offer. 
I downloaded the App to my Samsung A8 and my FiiO M11. While the Amazon Music app works flawlessly on my Samsung it refuses to play songs on my FiiO M11 in most cases. Sometimes it works on my FiiO but most of the time if I start a song the Play/Pause button starts to spin. 

The last time it worked on my FiiO M11 I had Amazon customer service on the line de-installed and re-installed the entire app. It then worked until I opened the Qobuz app at the same time and started a song there. Amazon Music stopped and Qobuz started but when I returned to Amazon it refused to work with the Play/Pause button spinning. Since then I have re-installed the app but it just does not work any longer. Any ideas?


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Amazon is shared mode (for now), Qobuz is exclusive, you would need to kill Qobuz process completely so other apps can play audio.


----------



## rkw

originalsnuffy said:


> Why are we assuming that the Ultra HD tracks are just upsampled?


There is no "we". It was just one member who made this unfounded claim a few posts earlier.


----------



## runssical

exdmd said:


> Qobuz costs $249.99 per year paid up front, $50 more than Tidal. How much do we spend on TV, internet and phones per month? Compared to how much I used to spend on vinyl and CDs a year Qobuz is a bargain. I think Qobuz is priced fairly for the sound quality. So is Amazon Music HD because it does not impress me at this time. Another example of you do sometimes get what you pay for.




But the market shows us few people are willing to pay $20 for music streaming. Tidal and Qobuz lossless plans probably have only a 1% market share. 

When Qobuz filed for bankruptcy in France a few years ago they were forced to reveal how many subscribers they had to their lossless streaming tier. It was about 3,000 people... That is sad ☹️

I doubt little has changed since then. They opened up in USA this year. That should provide a one-time boost. But there is no growth.


----------



## runssical

RickB said:


> Considering that I can't find most of the indie and alternative music I'm interested in on Qobuz, I would say I wouldn't get what I paid for. Amazon's catalog is huge and sounds much better than Spotify. Totally worth it for me.



Yup and people in the Qobuz thread have been defending Qobuz for over 9 months by saying that they will update their catalog "quickly" and it hasn't happened. They have such glaring holes in their catalog since launching in the USA.


----------



## runssical

Blueshound24 said:


> Agreed! And the price is more in line with what I believe it should be for streaming CD quality files, especially in comparison with HD movie streaming site prices. I have no issues with the sound quality, and think it is way more than acceptable, even without exclusive. However, that would be very cool if and when Amazon implements it.




Regarding prices I see no convincing rationale for there to be a 100% price increase for lossless streaming. 70% or more of subscription revenue goes to copyright holders. About 30% covers distribution costs for CDNs, server storage, and employee ect. Anything left over is profit. 

A lossless file in FLAC is about 80% larger than a 320kbps CBR lossy file. 

If a streaming company's server, CDN, and bandwidth costs for lossy files are 15% of revenues and they switch to 16bit. lossless that equates to ONLY a 12% increase in expenses. 

Yet, these companies double the price from $10 to $20. It's pure greed and these companies hope someone like me won't run the numbers and expose them. 

Amazon's price is very reasonable especially if you have a Prime membership already. 

Qobuz and Tidal need to lower prices or neither will last.


----------



## runssical

runssical said:


> Regarding prices I see no convincing rationale for there to be a 100% price increase for lossless streaming. 70% or more of subscription revenue goes to copyright holders. About 30% covers distribution costs for CDNs, server storage, and employee ect. Anything left over is profit.
> 
> A lossless file in FLAC is about 80% larger than a 320kbps CBR lossy file.
> 
> ...


----------



## Left Channel

runssical said:


> Tidal and Qobuz lossless plans probably have only a 1% market share.



The GM of Qobuz USA has publicly stated their goal is 1% market share. They are targeting audiophiles who will pay more for better sound and a deep selection in genres like jazz and classical. They currently have about 25,000 users in the USA and 200, 000 worldwide. Tidal may have a similarly small audiophile subscriber base; their largest segment is non-audiophile HipHop/R&B. 

Amazon is competing with Spotify and Apple Music, and only on a forum like this is their service compared with Qobuz and Tidal. Reports say that it sounds better than Spotify and Apple Music, and that really is the only thing it should be compared with. The audiophile segment is too tiny for them to care about, almost a rounding error in their calculations, but they may slowly add features we want and accidentally compete with Qobuz and Tidal. 



SilverEars said:


> I would luv some sort of Roon competition.



Roon has competition: Audirvana, Amarra, Pure Music, etc. But add their users all together, and the subscriber base is still far too tiny for Amazon to care about. As I said they may wind up matching some basic software features of those services, but only as part of a strategy to compete with Spotify and Apple Music.


----------



## tradyblix

Qobuz has some stuff nobody else has tho. Having said that, I couldnt justify keeping it at their prices. But if I was more wealthy, perhaps it wouldnt be an issue


----------



## Left Channel

grokit said:


> I haven't gotten the Chromecast Audio device working with Amazon Music HD yet. I think they're supposed to work together. Is anybody using a Chromecast Audio wifi device with Amazon Music HD?



The head of Amazon Music HD has stated that the HD service does not (yet?) support Chromecast. They do support standard quality, if/when it works: https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=GNPY8ZGH6BMS7UJQ


----------



## Marlowe

runssical said:


> Yup and people in the Qobuz thread have been defending Qobuz for over 9 months by saying that they will update their catalog "quickly" and it hasn't happened. They have such glaring holes in their catalog since launching in the USA.


I took a free trial to Qobuz at US launch. I quickly cancelled after finding numerous dealbreaking catalog gaps after only checking a couple of dozen artists, so many that sound quality quickly became irrelevant. Sounds like it hasn't improved.


----------



## dmackta

runssical said:


> Yup and people in the Qobuz thread have been defending Qobuz for over 9 months by saying that they will update their catalog "quickly" and it hasn't happened. They have such glaring holes in their catalog since launching in the USA.


We've added almost 9 million tracks since launching in the USA 7 months ago. Literally ingesting them as fast as is possible.  We know we don't have Metallica (they control the rights themselves and we're negotiating) and 3 important US indie rock labels that I can think of (Merge (deal in the works), Saddle Creek, and Bloodshot). I would be interested to know what you're not seeing.


----------



## Left Channel

Marlowe said:


> I took a free trial to Qobuz at US launch. I quickly cancelled after finding numerous dealbreaking catalog gaps after only checking a couple of dozen artists, so many that sound quality quickly became irrelevant. Sounds like it hasn't improved.



The catalog has improved vastly since then, but still has many gaps though they seldom affect me. I maintained accounts on both the USA and UK services for a year but now the USA catalog is much closer to the range available in Europe. I don't know why we keep discussing Qobuz and Tidal here though. Amazon Music HD is competing with Spotify and Apple Music, and I'm told it sounds better than those services which is really all that matters to Amazon.


----------



## csglinux

Left Channel said:


> Amazon is competing with Spotify and Apple Music, and only on a forum like this is their service compared with Qobuz and Tidal. Reports say that it sounds better than Spotify and Apple Music, and that really is the only thing it should be compared with. The audiophile segment is too tiny for them to care about, almost a rounding error in their calculations, but they may slowly add features we want and accidentally compete with Qobuz and Tidal.


Great comment  I'm hoping for some major accidents at Amazon HQ


----------



## grokit

Left Channel said:


> The head of Amazon Music HD has stated that the HD service does not (yet?) support Chromecast. They do support standard quality, if/when it works: https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=GNPY8ZGH6BMS7UJQ


Yes, I read elsewhere that Chromecast support is currently limited to 16/48. Lossless quality, with room for improvement.


----------



## MrPanda

dmackta said:


> We've added almost 9 million tracks since launching in the USA 7 months ago. Literally ingesting them as fast as is possible.  We know we don't have Metallica (they control the rights themselves and we're negotiating) and 3 important US indie rock labels that I can think of (Merge (deal in the works), Saddle Creek, and Bloodshot). I would be interested to know what you're not seeing.



The classical and jazz selections are terrific, and the organization of the services blows the competition out of the water with those two genres. Liner notes and booklets are easily available.  Integration with Roon makes the integration with my own library painless.   As far as sound quality goes, it has no rivals.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 7, 2019)

Amazon Music HD *is* competing with Tidal and Qobuz. Their own web page states that Ultra HD has:


> Highest-quality lossless audio
> Up to 3730 kbps - more than 10X the bitrate of standard streaming services
> Up to 24-bit/192 kHz
> Millions of songs



Considering they are streaming some 24/96 and limited 24/192 it is quite fair to compare sound quality of the same sample rate tracks in Amazon Music HD to Qobuz and Tidal.


----------



## McCol

Left Channel said:


> The catalog has improved vastly since then, but still has many gaps though they seldom affect me. I maintained accounts on both the USA and UK services for a year but now the USA catalog is much closer to the range available in Europe. I don't know why we keep discussing Qobuz and Tidal here though. Amazon Music HD is competing with Spotify and Apple Music, and I'm told it sounds better than those services which is really all that matters to Amazon.



I think Amazon is competing with whoever is in the music market place.

At £129 for a year subscription they are going for the jugular of all the services.  
To my ears there is not a great deal of difference sound quality wise between Tidal HiFi and Amazon HD through my S10+/Dragonfly Cobalt.  However there is a £100 difference over the year.  
I tried Qobus for a while and yes it was very good quality but at almost double the price it becomes difficult to justify.

If Amazon over the next few months believe they can mop up a few hundred thousand premium customers from Tidal/Qobus by adding some extra features I think they may well do so.


----------



## tradyblix

should everyone chuck their money at amazon tho ? at least tidal is artist owned. amazon already owns too much.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 7, 2019)

McCol said:


> I think Amazon is competing with whoever is in the music market place.
> 
> At £129 for a year subscription they are going for the jugular of all the services.
> To my ears there is not a great deal of difference sound quality wise between Tidal HiFi and Amazon HD through my S10+/Dragonfly Cobalt.  However there is a £100 difference over the year.
> ...


IMO if you do your listening through a phone you may as well use the least expensive streaming service that has the catalog you are looking for. Differences in sound quality become quite noticeable when you are using a laptop with a very good external DAC.


----------



## 3Putter

exdmd said:


> If you listen through a phone you may as well use the least expensive streaming service that has the catalog you are looking for. Differences in sound quality really show up when you are using a laptop with a very good external DAC.


Oh, I don't know about that. My LGV30 is my primary source for convenient listening. It sounds as good as most external DAC's that I've tried. I don't have the budget for an expensive rig and found the LG phone a great resource. I've tried Qubuz and loved the sound quality. Found some really cool artists, too. But that ran out quickly and their catalog was pretty limited on what I prefer to listen to so I cancelled. Their customer support was rude when cancelling when I ran into a problem. They double billed me - long story - but directly responded to me with 'that's too bad, we're closing the ticket'. So, they better include back rubs if I'm to return to them ever. Amazon HD was exciting but when I compare to Tidal there's a difference in quality. Some people say I'm nuts, and they're probably right, but my ears don't lie.


----------



## McCol

exdmd said:


> IMO if you do your listening through a phone you may as well use the least expensive streaming service that has the catalog you are looking for. Differences in sound quality become quite noticeable when you are using a laptop with a very good external DAC.



Not listening directly through the phone, using a very good DAC in the Cobalt.


----------



## Gus141

The problem with external DACs connected to mobile devices is that Amazon’s app upsamples *everything* to the max capable sampling rate of the connected DAC. For example, connect to an iPad (using the Camera Connection Kit) a DAC with a display (or an LED) that tells you what sampling rate it is receiving, play a 16/44.1 “HD” song through the Amazon Music app and the DAC will tell you it is receiving it’s max capable rate (e.g., 192kHz for my two external DACs with displays).

Two problems with this:
1. Some DACs don’t apply any DA reconstruction filters with anything upsampled beyond a certain point, and the redbook quality file might sound better with the inbuilt filters versus the upsampled stream.
2. Even though we can chose the stream quality (e.g., “Best Available”, “HD/Ultra HD”, “Standard”, etc) I think Amazon is delivering the audio stream at a lower quality if it determines your network connection is too slow (rather than just buffering more of the song). But since the app upsamples everything to the max capability of the external DAC, you think you’re getting 16/44.1 or higher, but may be getting 320kbps MP3 upsampled to 192kHz FLAC.

Maybe this lack of exclusive mode on all apps is a way to hide the actual quality being delivered. Folks who are measuring network traffic may be on the right track and are seeing throughput at rates lower than expected (i.e.,  lower than Qobuz for the same song at the same supposed quality).


----------



## Left Channel

McCol said:


> I think Amazon is competing with whoever is in the music market place.
> 
> At £129 for a year subscription they are going for the jugular of all the services.
> To my ears there is not a great deal of difference sound quality wise between Tidal HiFi and Amazon HD through my S10+/Dragonfly Cobalt.  However there is a £100 difference over the year.
> ...



"A few hundred thousand premium customers" is probably more than the total number of Tidal and Qobuz premium customers in the countries Amazon Music HD now operates.  Not likely. However, they are probably already peeling off price-sensitive customers from among Tidal's many non-premium customers, and a few of the relatively rare non-premium Qobuz subscribers as well.


----------



## Left Channel

Gus141 said:


> Maybe this lack of exclusive mode on all apps is a way to hide the actual quality being delivered.



You clearly have more respect for Amazon than most of us!  I believe that would have required far more intelligence and intent than Amazon actually applied to this launch.


----------



## McCol

Left Channel said:


> "A few hundred thousand premium customers" is probably more than the total number of Tidal and Qobuz premium customers in the countries Amazon Music HD now operates.  Not likely. However, they are probably already peeling off price-sensitive customers from among Tidal's many non-premium customers, and a few of the relatively rare non-premium Qobuz subscribers as well.



To be honest I have absolutely no idea how many subscribers are using qobuz/tidal's highest tier service, I was only quoting a figure that I'm sure was in this thread!

I do think that there many like myself who will switch to Amazon for the price/quality ratio.  
I will give until my free 3 months finished but so far I'm likely to switch from Tidal to Amazon, hopefully with a few extra features added by Amazon


----------



## mixman

Eventually this might all be a moot point since I think inevitably all the services will go HD. When that will occur will be a matter of how hot the streaming race gets. For instance I just read Apple is planning on now bundling their services soon.....Apple TV, Apple Music and other products. I am sure soon thereafter they will be looking to maximize their music service and offer an HD service also. Spotify will then have no choice but follow.


----------



## rkw (Oct 8, 2019)

runssical said:


> *Regarding prices I see no convincing rationale for there to be a 100% price increase for lossless streaming*. 70% or more of subscription revenue goes to copyright holders. About 30% covers distribution costs for CDNs, server storage, and employee ect. *Anything left over is profit.*


The prices are to cover the higher licensing fees charged by the music labels for lossless. And profit? There is none. All of the streaming services are losing money.


runssical said:


> Qobuz and Tidal need to lower prices or neither will last.


Qobuz and Tidal are in a tough position, not having a profitable parent (like Apple, Google, and Amazon) to subsidize losses. If they need to cut prices to retain customers, they'll lose even more money.


----------



## a-LeXx

Gus141 said:


> The problem with external DACs connected to mobile devices is that Amazon’s app upsamples *everything* to the max capable sampling rate of the connected DAC. For example, connect to an iPad (using the Camera Connection Kit) a DAC with a display (or an LED) that tells you what sampling rate it is receiving, play a 16/44.1 “HD” song through the Amazon Music app and the DAC will tell you it is receiving it’s max capable rate (e.g., 192kHz for my two external DACs with displays).
> 
> Two problems with this:
> 1. Some DACs don’t apply any DA reconstruction filters with anything upsampled beyond a certain point, and the redbook quality file might sound better with the inbuilt filters versus the upsampled stream.
> ...



Upsampling as such is not a big deal. Almost every DAC is oversampling anyway. And the upsampling is done properly, I don‘t prrceive any upsampling artifacts. The only issue with upsampling - it‘s causing additional battery drain, for both upsampling and sending more data via USB...

The point with datarate is true though. At a first network glitch (can happen with a best wifi connection) amazon would fall back to heavily compressed playback. My simple solution for that - always download the whole record/playlist. You can start playback after the first track is completely downloaded, it will ensure the quality is always a highest possible...


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Not quick and dirty resampler that designed for speed, not quality.
https://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/11/measurements-windows-10-audio-stack.html


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 8, 2019)

Andrew_WOT said:


> Not quick and dirty resampler that designed for speed, not quality.
> https://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/11/measurements-windows-10-audio-stack.html



Well, that’s Windows. There is no upsampling in iOS, it always works with native sampling rates. The upsampling is done by  amazon‘s app itself, and seems to be good, at least to my ears. No way to measure it though, you can‘t force your content through an amazon‘s app...


----------



## runssical

3Putter said:


> Oh, I don't know about that. My LGV30 is my primary source for convenient listening. It sounds as good as most external DAC's that I've tried. I don't have the budget for an expensive rig and found the LG phone a great resource. I've tried Qubuz and loved the sound quality. Found some really cool artists, too. But that ran out quickly and their catalog was pretty limited on what I prefer to listen to so I cancelled. Their customer support was rude when cancelling when I ran into a problem. They double billed me - long story - but directly responded to me with 'that's too bad, we're closing the ticket'. So, they better include back rubs if I'm to return to them ever. Amazon HD was exciting but when I compare to Tidal there's a difference in quality. Some people say I'm nuts, and they're probably right, but my ears don't lie.



The LG phones have formidable DACs. Audiosciencereveiw puts the Quad DAC on par with the new Modi. So an LG phone makes for a good DAP. 

I have the V20. I've tried all three major lossless services and I would rank them exactly as you have. Qobuz has the best SQ, Amazon the worst, and Tidal is in the middle but closer to Amazon (bad) then Qobuz. 

It's really unfortunate that streaming music services are so poorly managed. Currently, there is no substitute for local playback or using your own home network.


----------



## runssical

a-LeXx said:


> Well, that’s Windows. There is no upsampling in iOS, it always works with native sampling rates. The upsampling is done by  amazon‘s app itself, and seems to be good, at least to my ears. No way to measure it though, you can‘t force your content through an amazon‘s app...



I would be surprised if the Amazon app did upsampling correctly. Resampling in general is a very bad idea. Better for it to be done within the DAC then by the Amazon app. 

Android resampled 16bit 44.1k to 48k and that had a negative impact on the sound. So I doubt some clunky cookie cutter music app from Amazon would be any different.


----------



## runssical

rkw said:


> The prices are to cover the higher licensing fees charged by the music labels for lossless. And profit? There is none. All of the streaming services are losing money.
> Qobuz and Tidal are in a tough position, not having a profitable parent (like Apple, Google, and Amazon) to subsidize losses. If they need to cut prices to retain customers, they'll lose even more money.



I agree and wonder how Spotify has been propped up by venture capital for so long. I'm guessing those investors are hoping a company like Google or Facebook acquires Spotify.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 8, 2019)

runssical said:


> I would be surprised if the Amazon app did upsampling correctly. Resampling in general is a very bad idea. Better for it to be done within the DAC then by the Amazon app.
> 
> Android resampled 16bit 44.1k to 48k and that had a negative impact on the sound. So I doubt some clunky cookie cutter music app from Amazon would be any different.




Well, there will be no objective answer to this, as I said, you can't source your content through the app to measure. But subjectively I don't perceive any sound degradation. Sometimes, when upsampling is involved (with other setups) there is an unnatural sense of air added, accompanied by dimensional cues getting smeared a bit. I do not hear this with amazon. And all that computing power wasted should be good for something, hopefully, as the amazon app is a power-hungriest streaming client across all the available platforms. Of course I would much more prefer no upsampling paired with decent battery life. But at least the SQ doesn't suffer with a current implementation. I'm using a DFR as a DAC on my ipod touch 6th gen (that can now barely play 3 16/44.1 records pre-downloaded into the flash memory with a fully loaded battery on Amazon Music HD ). That extreme battery drain is a real problem though.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

a-LeXx said:


> Well, that’s Windows. There is no upsampling in iOS, it always works with native sampling rates. The upsampling is done by  amazon‘s app itself, and seems to be good, at least to my ears. No way to measure it though, you can‘t force your content through an amazon‘s app...


There is yellow HD badge, when you click it it shows track bitrate, device capability and quality at which it is sent to OS.


----------



## a-LeXx

Andrew_WOT said:


> There is yellow HD badge, when you click it it shows track bitrate, device capability and quality at which it is sent to OS.



sorry, I don‘t get what you want to tell me, I perfectly know how to operate the app and didn‘t ask any questions... Are you sure you replied to a correct post?


----------



## Andrew_WOT

a-LeXx said:


> sorry, I don‘t get what you want to tell me, I perfectly know how to operate the app and didn‘t ask any questions... Are you sure you replied to a correct post?


"The upsampling is done by amazon‘s app itself, and seems to be good, at least to my ears. No way to measure it though".
On Windows and Android app doesn't do any upsampling relying on OS, the bitrate sent to OS mixer is shown in "Currently playing at" field. What does it show on MacOS?


----------



## csglinux

Andrew_WOT said:


> On Windows and Android app doesn't do any upsampling relying on OS, the bitrate sent to OS mixer is shown in "Currently playing at" field.


My experience with the Android app is that you can't trust that "Currently playing at" information. For example, look at the following:

   

In all three cases, this is what it was actually doing:



> Output thread 0xe1bfc000, name AudioOut_75D, tid 18455, type 1 (DIRECT):
> I/O handle: 1885
> Standby: no
> Sample rate: 48000 Hz
> ...



Amazon's app seems to be handling the upsampling itself, and to their credit, they're at least doing this with floating point, which avoids some of the most egregious errors that are audible at low volume with 16-bit integer-based interpolation, which is what Android's mixer will usually do:



> Output thread 0xe3883000, name AudioOut_15, tid 1321, type 0 (MIXER):
> I/O handle: 21
> Standby: no
> Sample rate: 48000 Hz
> ...



However, Amazon's Android app is still re-sampling almost everything. As a result of this silly oversight, its SQ is not as good as Tidal's or Qobuz's, even for redbook FLAC, and you are not getting Ultra HD from any Android device right now (even on Android devices that are perfectly capable of playing back 44/16, 96/24, 192/24, etc.). Amazon's Ultra HD claims in the Google Play Store are false advertising.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 8, 2019)

On my laptop under the advanced tab in speaker/headphones properties for Win 10 I have the default format for sample rate and bit depth to be used when running in shared mode at 24/192 for the default device (my Yggdrasil DAC.)

Amazon Music HD runs in shared mode. Even though Amazon Music HD reports a song is being played at 16/44 that is incorrect as my DAC is correctly reporting 24/192. Either Windows or the Amazon app is upsampling. I assumed it was Windows as directed to by the settings for the audio stack.

If Amazon Music HD could run in exclusive mode like Qobuz and bypass Windows mixer the DAC would automatically play at the correct 16/44 rather than being upsampled,

@csglinux on laptop is the upsampling being done by the Amazon Music HD app or Windows mixer?


----------



## csglinux

exdmd said:


> @csglinux on laptop is the upsampling being done by the Amazon Music HD app or Windows mixer?


You might guess from my username that I'm not much of a Windows fan  I've not tested anything on a Windows machine, but my guess would be Amazon is up-sampling via their own software on all platforms. Hence the extra power/battery drain people are noticing.


----------



## exdmd

csglinux said:


> You might guess from my username that I'm not much of a Windows fan  I've not tested anything on a Windows machine, but my guess would be Amazon is up-sampling via their own software on all platforms. Hence the extra power/battery drain people are noticing.



Yeah the app on Win 10 is using 5-20% CPU. Audirvana+ playing Qobuz stays around 5%. And sounds better but we have already covered that.


----------



## jt25741

csglinux said:


> My experience with the Android app is that you can't trust that "Currently playing at" information. For example, look at the following:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for sharing this insightful post.  I never would have thought the app was resampling just munged by the OS.   At least they may be kinda trying at Amazon  LoL


----------



## runssical

a-LeXx said:


> Well, there will be no objective answer to this, as I said, you can't source your content through the app to measure. But subjectively I don't perceive any sound degradation. Sometimes, when upsampling is involved (with other setups) there is an unnatural sense of air added, accompanied by dimensional cues getting smeared a bit. I do not hear this with amazon. And all that computing power wasted should be good for something, hopefully, as the amazon app is a power-hungriest streaming client across all the available platforms. Of course I would much more prefer no upsampling paired with decent battery life. But at least the SQ doesn't suffer with a current implementation. I'm using a DFR as a DAC on my ipod touch 6th gen (that can now barely play 3 16/44.1 records pre-downloaded into the flash memory with a fully loaded battery on Amazon Music HD ). That extreme battery drain is a real problem though.



I never considered the battery drain aspect of Amazon HD streaming. That's unfortunate. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.


----------



## tradyblix (Oct 8, 2019)

Audirvana might sound better because of its own upsampling settings tho. It would be cool of them to support this service in a new update, maybe for 4.0 since they did so much for us in 3.5 already.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

At least on Windows it's just shared mode, there is no resampling going on in app.


----------



## a-LeXx

Andrew_WOT said:


> "The upsampling is done by amazon‘s app itself, and seems to be good, at least to my ears. No way to measure it though".
> On Windows and Android app doesn't do any upsampling relying on OS, the bitrate sent to OS mixer is shown in "Currently playing at" field. What does it show on MacOS?



Sorry, you got it completely wrong. I understand you are trying to help, so, no problem at all. But, as I said, I am perfectly clear on how to operate the app.
What I meant by ‚no means to measure‘, is - to measure the quality of the upsampling on a signal analyzer. To be able to do this, you need to be able to source your own content, with e.g. dual tone to measure IMD. And you cannot do this with an amazon app, because it would only play amazon‘s content, you cannot make it play your files...


----------



## TK33

a-LeXx said:


> Sorry, you got it completely wrong. I understand you are trying to help, so, no problem at all. But, as I said, I am perfectly clear on how to operate the app.
> What I meant by ‚no means to measure‘, is - to measure the quality of the upsampling on a signal analyzer. To be able to do this, you need to be able to source your own content, with e.g. dual tone to measure IMD. And you cannot do this with an amazon app, because it would only play amazon‘s content, you cannot make it play your files...



Not sure if this is the same thing that you guys are discussing but my Amazon app actually shows local files stored on my microSD card and when I play those songs, I don't get the SD/HD/Ultra HD box that you can click on.  Is there a way you can set the app to only play Amazon content (sorry if I misunderstood)?  I am using a Samsung Galaxy S9.  I have been recreating my Amazon playlists and deleting the files off my phone to force the Amazon app to use Amazon content since some of the files it is picking up are mp3 files and I would prefer to actually try out the HD/Ultra HD content during my trial period.


----------



## a-LeXx

TK33 said:


> Not sure if this is the same thing that you guys are discussing but my Amazon app actually shows local files stored on my microSD card and when I play those songs, I don't get the SD/HD/Ultra HD box that you can click on.  Is there a way you can set the app to only play Amazon content (sorry if I misunderstood)?  I am using a Samsung Galaxy S9.  I have been recreating my Amazon playlists and deleting the files off my phone to force the Amazon app to use Amazon content since some of the files it is picking up are mp3 files and I would prefer to actually try out the HD/Ultra HD content during my trial period.



you need to uninstall and reinstall the app. Next step, after you reinstalled, you need to set the download quality to highest possible. Then re-download your music, then you will be able to play it from the local storage at the beast available quality...


----------



## TK33

a-LeXx said:


> you need to uninstall and reinstall the app. Next step, after you reinstalled, you need to set the download quality to highest possible. Then re-download your music, then you will be able to play it from the local storage at the beast available quality...



Thanks. Did that a few times already but it just detects the files again when I reinstall (also cleared data and cache before uninstalling). Guess I'll just continue removing files manually. I wish there were a way to designate which folders get picked up by the app. Appreciate the response.


----------



## a-LeXx

On iOS it‘s removing all the content when reinstalling the app. Probably on Android it doesn‘t...


----------



## rkw

a-LeXx said:


> On iOS it‘s removing all the content when reinstalling the app. Probably on Android it doesn‘t...


If by "reinstalling" you mean first uninstalling the app, Android deletes content as well. It is expected on both iOS and Android that uninstalling any app will also delete all of the app's local data.


----------



## a-LeXx

rkw said:


> If by "reinstalling" you mean first uninstalling the app, Android deletes content as well. It is expected on both iOS and Android that uninstalling any app will also delete all of the app's local data.



Actually yes, but it seems that somehow something is wrong with this particular app, see the reply from @TK33 

No issues in this regard on iOS though. I also had my full library downloaded before the Music HD has been launched. Uninstalled the app, reinstalled, re-downloaded the library in best quality (around 50GB). No conflicts observed...


----------



## rage3324

What is the consensus so far of Tidal vs Amazon HD? I mostly use Tidal for music at home and while driving via android auto/car play for lossless music in my car. It works really well. It sounds Amazon is worth a try, but I believe I saw something about its streaming algorithm needs work in the sense that it downgrades the stream from Lossless to lossy if needed which would drive me insane..


----------



## exdmd

If you read though the thread many feel the sound quality of Amazon Music HD is not as good as Tidal and the difference is noticeable on Android. Sign up for the free trial and let us know your thoughts.


----------



## grokit

Purely subjective, but playing the new Abbey Road Super Deluxe Edition in Ultra HD compared to Tidal's MQA (not decoded), I felt I wasn't missing a thing. 
I'm using both of their respective desktop apps, everything else is the same. My current usb/spdif converter limits both to 24/96.


----------



## Brava210 (Oct 9, 2019)

rage3324 said:


> What is the consensus so far of Tidal vs Amazon HD? I mostly use Tidal for music at home and while driving via android auto/car play for lossless music in my car. It works really well. It sounds Amazon is worth a try, but I believe I saw something about its streaming algorithm needs work in the sense that it downgrades the stream from Lossless to lossy if needed which would drive me insane..



After comparing the 2 platforms over the past 2 weeks, I would say Amazon initially sounds Good, but becomes fatiguing after a while
everything sounds too bright and thrashy not how it should sound in my opinion.
Like iv'e said before even complete albums seem to have differing quality audio, where as the original albums do not. On Tidal this doesn't happen.
Casual listening in the car via bluetooth maybe ok, but not through decent Headphones


----------



## rage3324

I will give it a try as well. I am not expecting to hear that much difference in my Volvo XC90 w/ Bowers & Wilkins via Carplay. I will give it a more deep test on my home equipment. I am rooting for Tidal but it is always nice to save money.


----------



## Soundizer

csglinux said:


> Thanks. I'm not holding my breath though. Amazon's support staff are utterly clueless.
> 
> It does appear that the situation is somewhat better for Windows and Mac, but to get bit-perfect playback, you need to manually set the sample rate in the OS (which might vary from track to track).


It works fine on Mac if you do the following 2 actions:
1. Set Audio Midi to 24bit / 96KHz.
2. Go to settings / privacy and add Amazon App.

then it plays at correct bit rate and KHz.


----------



## RickB

Soundizer said:


> It works fine on Mac if you do the following 2 actions:
> 1. Set Audio Midi to 24bit / 96KHz.
> 2. Go to settings / privacy and add Amazon App.
> 
> then it plays at correct bit rate and KHz.



In what section of Privacy do you add the Amazon app? There are many.

Edit: actually, I see on my Mac it is in Accessibility.


----------



## csglinux

Andrew_WOT said:


> At least on Windows it's just shared mode, there is no resampling going on in app.


How have you confirmed that? Isn't it simply playing at whatever sample rate you've set your Windows OS to?


Soundizer said:


> It works fine on Mac if you do the following 2 actions:
> 1. Set Audio Midi to 24bit / 96KHz.
> 2. Go to settings / privacy and add Amazon App.
> 
> then it plays at correct bit rate and KHz.


Surely, if you set the OS' sample-rate/bit depth to 96/24, then 96/24 is what you'll get - regardless of the actual sample rate of the track in question???


----------



## Soundizer

csglinux said:


> How have you confirmed that? Isn't it simply playing at whatever sample rate you've set your Windows OS to?
> 
> Surely, if you set the OS' sample-rate/bit depth to 96/24, then 96/24 is what you'll get - regardless of the actual sample rate of the track in question???


No, it changes in accordance to track. You can see this on the yellow ultra hd badge. It switches according to track.


----------



## Soundizer

Just a personal subjective opinion. 

when you consider TV content streaming Services such as Netflix Premium provides HDR DOLBYVISION and ATMOS for only £12 a month, then I think the price of Music HD Streaming services should not be more than this. So i think Amazon HD Music is a more fair price and for too long has Tidal HIFI/QUBUZ been enjoying a Dualopoly price. 

i hope Google, Apple also launch HD Music streaming at competitive price point. 

I previously really liked TIDAL HIFI, but they don’t offer a discount even for annual payment which sucks.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 9, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> No, it changes in accordance to track. You can see this on the yellow ultra hd badge. It switches according to track.



I set my Windows 10 mixer setting to 24/96 and played various tracks, 16/44 to 24/192 from several different albums on Amazon Music HD. Either the app or the OS up or down sampled every track to 96 as shown on my Yggy. The information provided by clicking on the HD badge for each track is wrong.


----------



## csglinux

Soundizer said:


> No, it changes in accordance to track. You can see this on the yellow ultra hd badge. It switches according to track.


I understand what you're saying, but like @exdmd said - I don't think you can trust what Amazon's telling you  Try connecting an external DAC to your Mac (one that will correctly report the sample rate it receives). I think you're going to find it just gives you whatever sample rate you set in the audio midi setup. Regardless of HD or Ultra HD.


----------



## Soundizer

csglinux said:


> I understand what you're saying, but like @exdmd said - I don't think you can trust what Amazon's telling you  Try connecting an external DAC to your Mac (one that will correctly report the sample rate it receives). I think you're going to find it just gives you whatever sample rate you set in the audio midi setup. Regardless of HD or Ultra HD.


I will try this.


----------



## a-LeXx

csglinux said:


> I understand what you're saying, but like @exdmd said - I don't think you can trust what Amazon's telling you  Try connecting an external DAC to your Mac (one that will correctly report the sample rate it receives). I think you're going to find it just gives you whatever sample rate you set in the audio midi setup. Regardless of HD or Ultra HD.




The information, when clicking at that yellow badge, is plain wrong. It‘s not showing the actual sampling rate. I use DFR as a DAC, and with new amazon music app, it‘s showing the data stream to alway be 24/96 (purple LED color on DFR), no matter what the yellow badge is showing. Amazon‘s app upsamples/downsamples EVERYTHING to the highest possible resolution/sampling rate supported by the DAC. That‘s how simple it is...


----------



## exdmd

a-LeXx said:


> The information, when clicking at that yellow badge, is plain wrong. It‘s not showing the actual sampling rate. I use DFR as a DAC, and with new amazon music app, it‘s showing the data stream to alway be 24/96 (purple LED color on DFR), no matter what the yellow badge is showing. Amazon‘s app upsamples/downsamples EVERYTHING to the highest possible resolution/sampling rate supported by the DAC. That‘s how simple it is...



Yes up and down sampling is going on. My Yggy supports 192. One note: it is not the highest sampling rate supported by the external DAC but the sampling rate and bit depth you chose in sound settings for your laptop.


----------



## Left Channel

Soundizer said:


> Just a personal subjective opinion.
> 
> when you consider TV content streaming Services such as Netflix Premium provides HDR DOLBYVISION and ATMOS for only £12 a month, then I think the price of Music HD Streaming services should not be more than this. So i think Amazon HD Music is a more fair price and for too long has Tidal HIFI/QUBUZ been enjoying a Dualopoly price.
> 
> ...



There are over 150 million Netflix subscribers. Netflix is in over 190 countries; I believe that's everywhere in the world except Syria and mainland China. 

Tidal claims about 3 million subscribers, and the service is available in 54 countries. Tidal is not profitable, nor is any other music streaming service anywhere.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Oct 9, 2019)

exdmd said:


> I set my Windows 10 mixer setting to 24/96 and played various tracks, 16/44 to 24/192 from several different albums on Amazon Music HD. Either the app or the OS up or down sampled every track to 96 as shown on my Yggy. The information provided by clicking on the HD badge for each track is wrong.


That's how Mixer in shared mode works. It needs to normalize everything going through it to common bitrate set in Control Panel. Amazon apps sends data in bitrate it display as "Currently playing at".
If you disable all effects and set it to match track sample rate, the only thing preventing it from being completely bit perfect is dithering due to Mixer converting everything to 32-bit float and then back to integer device bit rate. If everything else is set right, the audible difference with exclusive mode will be pretty much nonexistent.
That's in theory as well as my experience comparing it against Qobuz and local flac files through JRiver in ASIO mode on relatively resolving stack (Auralic Vega DAC/Auralic Taurus/HD800 in balanced drive).

If any interest you can read more:
https://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/WASAPI.htm

Very enlightening post from ASIO drivers developer
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...music-players-foobar-jriver.7412/#post-171098
Also some good condensed info from the same guy on GitHub
https://github.com/dechamps/FlexASIO/blob/master/BACKENDS.md

Again, this is Windows, most likely shared mode doesn't work exactly the same way on Android and MacOS.

And another proof that it is mixer resampler is because upsampled tracks sound horrible, as this is the only resampler on the market doing this horrible thing.
https://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/11/measurements-windows-10-audio-stack.html

Audio quality wasn't a requirement for that thing, but speed and minimum performance impact.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 10, 2019)

Ok, I want to share my experience with Music HD on iOS, guess all the iOS users would make the same findings.

I've been using my iPod Touch 6gen for streaming for years, with a DFR attached to it permanently. This also worked fine with Amazon Music, until they updated the app and I upgraded to Music HD.

HD and SD content still work, when downloaded (I always download first when I play a record, and my listening habits are to listen to a full record).
However, the play time with a fully loaded iPod's battery is around 3hrs  for HD content, then the battery dies. In comparison, I'm getting between 5-6 hrs with MQA on Tidal and around 6-7hrs with Spotify.

With Ultra HD content, it's a different story. 24/48 plays fine, but on about a half of 24/96 and all 24/192 tracks I'm getting hickups. The playback buffer goes flat and playback stops until the buffer is populated again. And this is with a playback from the internal flash storage, no streaming. The device is getting VERY HOT to touch. Obviously, the amazon's app is using up whole processor power available, which is still not enough for hickup-free playback. And the battery goes flat in 1-1.5hrs, depending on content.

This is ridiculous, even though it's HiRes, it's still just audio, and iPod Touch 6gen is perfectly capable of playing HiRes Video, not just audio. Amazon's developers really messed up the iOS app.

Now Part 2. Just by a coincident I ran into a nice deal last week and bought a NOS iPhone 7 with 256GB for 270 Euro. It's even by far cheaper than a new iPod Touch 7gen with 256GB, which is sold for 449 Euro here, and still a much better device than an iPod. I intend to use it solely for music with DFR, just replacing the iPod Touch...

Anyway, as expected, the iPhone gives me playback times which are about 2x of those of iPod, as the battery is about x2 in size. And this time, the processor power is enough for hickup-free Ultra HD playback.
BUT: also this device is getting very hot with Ultra HD. And, more severe, Ultra HD playback is not possible without a trick that further reduces already low playback time.
The issue with Ultra HD playback: as soon as the display switches off or the app goes into background because you want to do something else while it's playing, iOS would terminate the Amazon music app within seconds. This only happens with Ultra HD content, not with HD. Probably either memory or power consumption is too high for a background app, so iOS decides to kill it.
Workaround: keep the app always in a foreground, and leave the display always on, so that the app always stays in a foreground and won't be terminated by iOS.


All described issues, with both iPad and iPhone go down to the same actual root cause: this app is a power hog, and is consuming WAY more resources than is appropriate for Audio playback. I already provided this feedback on amazonforum, hopefully Amazon would do something to fix this...


----------



## RickB

My music app on my Mac, Swinsian, has an option in preferences for "Automatically adjust audio device sample rate and bit depth" which works on a per track basis. That's what Amazon needs to add to their apps. If a tiny indie software developer for the Mac can do it, then surely there is no problem with Amazon doing it?


----------



## Soundizer

After sticking the Chord Mojo into my iMac I can confirm that Amazon Music HD is buggered in that everything is incorrectly upsampled to whatever is set in Audio Midi Settings. So if a track is actually in 16bit/44.1KHz file format and the Audio Midi Mac software is manually set to 24bit/96KHz, then Amazon will send audio to Chord Mojo DAC incorrectly at 24bit/96KHz.

This is bad news and not liking it. 

I don’t have any faith that this will be resolved, as Amazon might believe that software upscaling is fine. Based on the huge complaints on Amazon Prime TV software, I don’t think Amazon cares about making improvements and has a history of not listening to Customers in these areas. So we might be stuck with it.  

There is a massive compromise which is to set the Audio Midi setting to 24bit/96KHz and then only use Amazon Prime for 24bit/96KHz music songs. But this is a ridiculous compromise. 


Disappointed


----------



## grokit

RickB said:


> My music app on my Mac, Swinsian, has an option in preferences for "Automatically adjust audio device sample rate and bit depth" which works on a per track basis. That's what Amazon needs to add to their apps. If a tiny indie software developer for the Mac can do it, then surely there is no problem with Amazon doing it?


On Amazon's Mac desktop app at least, this is possible. Go to advanced preferences, and select 'loudness normalization' in the 'audio quality section'. Now all songs will play at the same volume level.


----------



## RickB

grokit said:


> On Amazon's Mac desktop app at least, this is possible. Go to advanced preferences, and select 'loudness normalization' in the 'audio quality section'. Now all songs will play at the same volume level.



I'm referring to sample rate and bit depth, not the loudness or volume of the tracks.


----------



## grokit (Oct 10, 2019)

RickB said:


> I'm referring to sample rate and bit depth, not the loudness or volume of the tracks.


Whoops. In the same section, you can select 'best available' for audio quality, which sounds pretty automatic. You can also select/lock in 'hd/ultra hd', but not one or the other, unfortunately.

_edit:_ I don't know if Audio MIDI Setup overrides this or not ...


----------



## RickB

grokit said:


> Whoops. In the same section, you can select 'best available' for audio quality, which sounds pretty automatic. You can also select/lock in 'hd/ultra hd', but not one or the other, unfortunately.
> 
> _edit:_ I don't know if Audio MIDI Setup overrides this or not ...



The problem is, for Mac (and for Windows there is no Exclusive Mode), there is no automatic adjustment of the output to the DAC you're using to match the sample/bit rate of the track you're playing. Music apps like Swinsian or Audirvana on the Mac have long been able to do this. If a track is 16/44.1 and the Audio Midi setup is set to 24/96, the track gets upsampled to 24/96 with Amazon, unfortunately. 

Fortunately, I listen exclusively to albums, so I can make the adjustment in Audio Midi for each album. It would be nice not to have to do this, however.


----------



## Taz777

Just launched the Amazon Music app on my Mac after several days and found there's no update to it. This is very disappointing. It's at times like this I appreciate how good Tidal is - especially on my LG V30 and on my desktop playing through Amarra Luxe. It does cost more every month but I have zero technical issues with it and it delivers bit-perfect sound as far as I am concerned (I only have a couple of MQA tracks in my playlists so nearly all the tracks are CD quality).


----------



## clerkpalmer

Is it me or is the Amazon stream fatiguing?  I just had to take my isine off as my ears felt like they were going to bleed.  I may have to go back to Tidal and see if it's me, my headphones or the streaming.


----------



## exdmd

Don't forget Qobuz had some problems with their Windows app during the beta test. It would sometimes stutter, distort or hang up and stop playing. Difference between Qobuz and Amazon is Qobuz was serious about customer service and worked hard to correct the problems, and the US product manager had and still has an active presence on another forum. However they rolled out Wasapi exclusive mode with the US beta. I don't have a problem giving Amazon time to improve the app, the question is do we even know if they intend to? I have not read one word from Amazon responding to any of the criticisms  being brought up on audio forums.


----------



## jt25741

exdmd said:


> Don't forget Qobuz had some problems with their Windows app during the beta test. It would sometimes stutter, distort or hang up and stop playing. Difference between Qobuz and Amazon is Qobuz was serious about customer service and worked hard to correct the problems, and the US product manager had and still has an active presence on another forum. However they rolled out Wasapi exclusive mode with the US beta. I don't have a problem giving Amazon time to improve the app, the question is do we even know if they intend to? I have not read one word from Amazon responding to any of the criticisms being brought up on audio forums.



The consistent approach I get from Amazon with any of my problems follows along these lines:   Be nothing but courteous and respectful with the language used to the Customer (me).  Always make sure to tell the customer how important they are to them, and how my satisfaction is a primary concern of theirs.  After making the customer feel special and call/chat/email ends, never provide any follow-up of substance and treat the masses as what they really are to amazon... a giant humongous revenue stream.   Have no cohesion between any of the user communities and people who can impact product quality, features or direction.  If we happen to produce a product or feature that really is a big hit, it is because of random luck that an engineer on the inside happened to care about something and took care of it before it was released.           This is largely the same problem other mega companies have like google with their product/field engagements and touch-points.     Amazon is very bad with caring about small things that really bug a small amount of people a great deal.    I will be shocked if they provide exclusive mode support at all, or any time soon.


----------



## grokit (Oct 10, 2019)

Yeah I'm back with Tidal after experiencing too many dropouts with Ultra HD. I want to like Amazon, going with it even helped to justify my Prime membership, but I don't know if I will be able to continue with it. When I had an issue with Tidal's Prime app, they got back to me immediately with a solution, and they followed up.

I'm pretty sure I'll never get that kind of attention from AmazonGlobalCorp


----------



## Richter Di

csglinux said:


> I understand what you're saying, but like @exdmd said - I don't think you can trust what Amazon's telling you  Try connecting an external DAC to your Mac (one that will correctly report the sample rate it receives). I think you're going to find it just gives you whatever sample rate you set in the audio midi setup. Regardless of HD or Ultra HD.



I use the Amazon Music app with the Unlimited HD trial membership on my FiiO M11 player. I output the SPDIF (also tried USB) signal from there to @Jan Meier ‘s Soul.
When I use the FiiO App digital output of the files is correct regarding kHz and bit.

With the Amazon Music App independently of HD or Ultra HD the FiiO M11 only puts out 48 kHz16 bit. Nothing else.
The streaming service Qobuz also on the FiiO M11 does output exactly the file kHz but only in 16 Bit (and only when it finally decides to work.)


----------



## Soundizer

Richter Di said:


> I use the Amazon Music app with the Unlimited HD trial membership on my FiiO M11 player. I output the SPDIF (also tried USB) signal from there to @Jan Meier ‘s Soul.
> When I use the FiiO App digital output of the files is correct regarding kHz and bit.
> 
> With the Amazon Music App independently of HD or Ultra HD the FiiO M11 only puts out 48 kHz16 bit. Nothing else.
> The streaming service Qobuz also on the FiiO M11 does output exactly the file kHz but only in 16 Bit (and only when it finally decides to work.)



Interesting.

Is Amazon MUSIC HD App available on the FiO M11?

My understanding is that the M11 is limited to Android 7 and will not be updated to newer Android due to the Samsung chip in it. Therefore newer versions of Tidal and other Apps might not be up to date or fully featured compared to those running on latest Android OS.


----------



## Soundizer (Oct 11, 2019)

Not sure if everyone has seen this, but it is from Amazon web pages. Obviously still no solution for incorrect KHz sampling.

For now I am only listening to 24bit / 96 KHz tracks in my free trial which is 90days. If they don’t fix it, I will go back to TIDAL HIFI.

from Amazon support site:







*What audio quality does Amazon Music HD support?*
Amazon Music HD offers lossless audio in two quality ranges: HD and Ultra HD.

HD tracks have a bit depth of 16-bits, a minimum sample rate of 44.1 kHz (also referred to as CD-quality), and an average bitrate of 850 kbps. Ultra HD tracks have a bit depth of 24 bits, sample rates ranging from 44.1 kHz up to 192 kHz, and an average bitrate of 3730 kbps.

In comparison, most standard streaming services currently offer Standard Definition (SD) with a bitrate up to 320 kbps. These audio files use lossy compression, where details of the original audio are removed in order to reduce the file size. By contrast, Amazon Music HD preserves the original recording information to deliver the highest quality sound available, more than 2x the bitrate in HD and more than 10x the bitrate at the highest Ultra HD bitrate. Amazon Music HD will always play the highest quality content available, based on network, device capability and your selected settings.


*Which iOS devices support Amazon Music HD?*
Most iPhones and iPads released since 2014 (devices running on iOS 11, or later) can support HD/Ultra HD (up to 24-bit, 48kHz) without any additional equipment. In order to play songs at higher sample rates (96 or 192 kHz), iPhone customers can connect an external DAC capable of supporting those higher sample rates.

Apple AirPlay supports HD quality playback.

*Which Android devices support Amazon Music HD?*
Most Android devices running Android Lollipop, released in 2014, or later support HD/Ultra HD playback. However, Android devices vary widely in quality and purpose, so we advise checking manufacturer specifications for HD/Ultra HD support.

At this time Amazon Music HD is not supported on Chromecast.

*Which Mac devices support Amazon Music HD?*
Any Mac from 2013 or later supports HD/Ultra HD. However, adjusting the default Mac audio settings is required to listen in the highest quality:


Go to Applications/Utilities folder 

Open “Audio MIDI Setup.app” 

Update speaker or headphone “Format” setting to the highest sample rate for 24-bit (96 kHz or 192 kHz)

*Which Windows devices support Amazon Music HD?*
PC support for HD/Ultra HD playback depends on the built-in audio player and DAC, which varies by device. Please check your manufacturer specifications.

*Which home audio devices support Amazon Music HD?*
Amazon Music is integrated in to many home audio devices, including receivers, amplifiers, speakers, and sound bars. Often, you can control playback directly by signing in to Amazon Music within the manufacturer application. For a list of our preferred partners, click here.

We are constantly working to bring Amazon Music to more devices by partnering with leading audio manufacturers. If your device is not listed in our preferred brands, you may still be able to play Amazon Music HD through a wired or wireless connection on your device.

*How do I know if I need an external DAC?*
If your device has a built-in DAC that does not support HD/Ultra HD audio, then you need an external DAC when connecting your player to your headphones or speakers to listen in HD/Ultra HD.

In order to play Ultra HD, the external DAC at a minimum must be capable of processing files with a bit depth of 24-bit and sample rates of at least 44.1 kHz. Check the DAC specifications to ensure it can play higher sample rates available with Ultra HD (48 kHz, 96 kHz, 192 kHz).

On iOS, disable the Alexa Wake Word feature in Settings to ensure playback through your DAC at the highest resolution.

At this time, external DACs are not supported on Android.


*Which headphones/speakers support Amazon Music HD?*
Headphones and speakers with a frequency response of 20 Hz to 20 kHz are recommended to best appreciate HD playback. Headphones certified with a Hi-Res Audio logo have an even higher frequency response (greater than 40 kHz), and are best for Ultra HD playback.

Most wireless headphones compress audio during transmission and are unable to support HD and higher quality playback. Some wireless headphones and Android devices that use advanced Bluetooth with either the Qualcomm aptX/aptX HD or Sony LDAC wireless standards, can support HD/Ultra HD playback (up to 24-bit, 48kHz).


*How much space will Amazon Music HD files take up when downloaded to my device?*
The size of a music download depends on how the song was converted to a digital file, with higher-quality lossless files typically demanding larger file sizes. For a song 3 1/2 minutes long, here are file size examples at maximum resolution:


SD (lossy): 9 MB
HD (lossless, 44.1 kHz sample rate): 51 MB
Ultra HD (lossless, max 192 kHz sample rate): 153 MB
*By comparison, a 30-minute HD video (1080p) has an average file size of 1.8 GB. That means in the same space as a single episode of HD television, you can store more than 2 hours of HD music on your device. *

*[paste:font size="5"]What data speed does my internet connection need to be to listen to Amazon Music HD?*
*A consistent internet connection of least 1.5 Mbps—typically available in LTE signals—is needed for HD streaming. A connection of at least 5 Mbps is needed for Ultra HD streaming. 
*

*HD audio may use up to 5.5 MB of data per minute.*
*Ultra HD audio, at the highest available audio quality (192 kHz sample rate), uses up to 12 MB of data per minute.*
*[/paste:font]
Actual experience depends on device capability.


How do I know the audio quality of content I am listening to?
When listening to music on Amazon Music HD, you can tap/click on the SD/HD/Ultra HD badge on the Now Playing screen and view the following streaming details - 

*


*

Track quality - The highest-quality file available for that track in the Amazon Music HD catalog.

Device capability - The highest-quality audio that your device operating system reports that it is capable of.

Currently playing at - The quality of the source file of the currently playing track. For streaming, the current source file quality may change due to varying network conditions.
*
*Your choice of speakers, headphones, and listening conditions also impacts overall sound quality. *


----------



## Richter Di

Soundizer said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Is Amazon MUSIC HD App available on the FiO M11?
> 
> My understanding is that the M11 is limited to Android 7 and will not be updated to newer Android due to the Samsung chip in it. Therefore newer versions of Tidal and other Apps might not be up to date or fully featured compared to those running on latest Android OS.



Using APKPure allows you to download the latest apps.


----------



## exdmd (Oct 11, 2019)

jt25741 said:


> The consistent approach I get from Amazon with any of my problems follows along these lines:   Be nothing but courteous and respectful with the language used to the Customer (me).  Always make sure to tell the customer how important they are to them, and how my satisfaction is a primary concern of theirs.  After making the customer feel special and call/chat/email ends, never provide any follow-up of substance and treat the masses as what they really are to amazon... a giant humongous revenue stream.   Have no cohesion between any of the user communities and people who can impact product quality, features or direction.  If we happen to produce a product or feature that really is a big hit, it is because of random luck that an engineer on the inside happened to care about something and took care of it before it was released.           This is largely the same problem other mega companies have like google with their product/field engagements and touch-points.     Amazon is very bad with caring about small things that really bug a small amount of people a great deal.    I will be shocked if they provide exclusive mode support at all, or any time soon.



Yup does not sound promising for any changes to the Amazon Music HD app. Probably the best hope we have for bit perfect, automatic sample rate and bit depth switching soon is if Amazon strikes a deal with Audirvana ... if they can afford the licensing fee. Roon has talked to them but apparently needs more daily data pushed to them than the Amazon API provides.

However I don't think Audirvana or Roon integration fits into Amazon's business plan. You don't like the limitations of their desktop app? Well then Amazon wants you to buy a streamer from one of their business partners.


----------



## Soundizer

any difference between downloaded to streamed ultra hd quality? It sounds the same to me so far. Got fast internet here.


----------



## harpo1

Richter Di said:


> Using APKPure allows you to download the latest apps.


The problem is Amazon HD only works for very few people with the M11.  All we get is a spinning wheel and it never plays any music.


----------



## Richter Di

harpo1 said:


> The problem is Amazon HD only works for very few people with the M11.  All we get is a spinning wheel and it never plays any music.



If you found the magic trick it works flawless. Just play a 88.2 kHz with a third party app. Afterwards Amazon Music works without a problem.


----------



## harpo1

Richter Di said:


> If you found the magic trick it works flawless. Just play a 88.2 kHz with a third party app. Afterwards Amazon Music works without a problem.


Can it be from Tidal?


----------



## Richter Di

harpo1 said:


> Can it be from Tidal?



Sorry, I do not have Tidal. Do not know. But here is a link to a free 88.2 Sample Track from eClassical: https://www.eclassical.com/custom/eclassical/files/BIS1447-002-flac_24.flac
Just download to the FiiO M11, start the Onkyo player, play the song and its done.


----------



## harpo1

Richter Di said:


> Sorry, I do not have Tidal. Do not know. But here is a link to a free 88.2 Sample Track from eClassical: https://www.eclassical.com/custom/eclassical/files/BIS1447-002-flac_24.flac
> Just download to the FiiO M11, start the Onkyo player, play the song and its done.


This didn't work.  I still get the spinning wheel.


----------



## Richter Di

harpo1 said:


> This didn't work.  I still get the spinning wheel.



Dif you try it after uninstalling and reinstalling the Amazon Music app. Just asking because this was the way I did it and since then it runs although I’m using different players and streaming platforms inbetween.


----------



## harpo1

Richter Di said:


> Dif you try it after uninstalling and reinstalling the Amazon Music app. Just asking because this was the way I did it and since then it runs although I’m using different players and streaming platforms inbetween.


Yeah I did.  Current Amazon HD is 16.2.5 so I even tried going back to 16.2.4.  Nothing has worked.  I give up and I'll just continue to use Tidal.


----------



## Richter Di

harpo1 said:


> Yeah I did.  Current Amazon HD is 16.2.5 so I even tried going back to 16.2.4.  Nothing has worked.  I give up and I'll just continue to use Tidal.



I have 16.2.5 OTA (#20510)
Did you use the track I linked and did you use the Onkyo HF Player?
I hove no idea if it is important but it worked for me.


----------



## harpo1

Richter Di said:


> I have 16.2.5 OTA (#20510)
> Did you use the track I linked and did you use the Onkyo HF Player?
> I hove no idea if it is important but it worked for me.


I did use the track and Onkyo HF Player.  It's no big deal since I'm retired military and actually pay less for Tidal than Amazon will be charging after the trail period.  Plus I've been using Tidal for several years now and I'm use to the layout so I'm good sticking with them until Amazon fixes this issue with DAP's or not.  I guess time will tell.


----------



## grokit (Oct 11, 2019)

So I'm thinking the dropouts I'm experiencing when playing Ultra HD songs may be due to my wifi being limited to 2.4GHz. I'm using an obsolete Airport Express as my router. Even though it works fine with my HD streaming sticks and Fire TV etc. I have a newer 5GHz 'normal' router that I can install, just don't want to hassle with it if it's not going to solve the issue. I'm using the desktop app on an old mac mini. I guess I should figure out if it even has a 5GHz airport card first; maybe just run a cable.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

grokit said:


> So I'm thinking the dropouts I'm experiencing when playing Ultra HD songs may be due to my wifi being limited to 2.4GHz. I'm using an obsolete Airport Express as my router. Even though it works fine with my HD streaming sticks and Fire TV etc. I have a newer 5GHz 'normal' router that I can install, just don't want to hassle with it if it's not going to solve the issue. I'm using the desktop app on an old mac mini. I guess I should figure out if it even has a 5GHz airport card first; maybe just run a cable.


You can also download, Amazon is one of the few streamers allowing downloading to desktop app.


----------



## hifi80sman

clerkpalmer said:


> Is it me or is the Amazon stream fatiguing?  I just had to take my isine off as my ears felt like they were going to bleed.  I may have to go back to Tidal and see if it's me, my headphones or the streaming.


@clerkpalmer I think you're on to something.  When A/B with Spotify, I do notice a slight increase in volume (unchanged on the device itself).  It may play a little louder to enhance the wow factor for people going from Apple, Spotify, etc. to Amazon Music HD.  Sneaky, sneaky!

Even with the quirks, for a similar price point, it's a clear SQ upgrade from Spotify, Apple Music, etc., although for me, Spotify's library is better.  Still in the 90 days trial, so hopefully it'll get better along the way.


----------



## hifi80sman

grokit said:


> So I'm thinking the dropouts I'm experiencing when playing Ultra HD songs may be due to my wifi being limited to 2.4GHz. I'm using an obsolete Airport Express as my router. Even though it works fine with my HD streaming sticks and Fire TV etc. I have a newer 5GHz 'normal' router that I can install, just don't want to hassle with it if it's not going to solve the issue. I'm using the desktop app on an old mac mini. I guess I should figure out if it even has a 5GHz airport card first; maybe just run a cable.


You may have a point.  Wireless-G or Wireless-N are definitely inferior to Wireless-AC, and deficiencies of the former are amplified even further if you have multiple clients using your network simultaneously.  If that's the case, I would recommend no less than an AC3200 router.


----------



## runssical

Brava210 said:


> After comparing the 2 platforms over the past 2 weeks, I would say Amazon initially sounds Good, but becomes fatiguing after a while
> everything sounds too bright and thrashy not how it should sound in my opinion.
> Like iv'e said before even complete albums seem to have differing quality audio, where as the original albums do not. On Tidal this doesn't happen.
> Casual listening in the car via bluetooth maybe ok, but not through decent Headphones



I've noticed the same "bright" harshness when using Amazon HD. It's really unfortunate.


----------



## TjPhysicist (Oct 11, 2019)

csglinux said:


> My experience with the Android app is that you can't trust that "Currently playing at" information. For example, look at the following:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yea, I mean, Amazon's "Ultra HD" claim is tenuous at best on basically all platforms. I THINK the ONLY platform that actually doesn't do weird re-sampling is iOS? And just going through this thread even iOS app is kinda iffy. So basically, amazon released Ultra HD music, with no reliable way to actually PLAY ultra HD, ESPECIALLY on gear where you'd notice it (cuz let's be honest, you're not gonna notice the difference between a good quality Mp3 or a 44.1 FLAC and higher bitrate files on an alexa speaker).

Oh well, back to tidal I guess. I really cannot function without at least being able to ASSIGN output device in windows to whatever I'm using to play music. It's really sad too, one of the biggest selling points about amazon music HD was actually more that it's a much bigger company. So not just more likely to have more licensing deals in place but also less likely to one day just go under.

Honestly IDK who at amazon thought this was a good idea, but this is like if when Netflix had started going 4K, they forgot to include 4K output support on ANY platform. Then again, a lot of platforms are still limited to 1080p in netflix. Even then it's MILES better than what amazon is doing, there's at least some hardware devices that are actually capable of properly displaying quality 4k (like good quality TVs) that can do 4K netflix for instance.


----------



## grokit (Oct 12, 2019)

hifi80sman said:


> You may have a point.  Wireless-G or Wireless-N are definitely inferior to Wireless-AC, and deficiencies of the former are amplified even further if you have multiple clients using your network simultaneously.  If that's the case, I would recommend no less than an AC3200 router.


My mac mini's airport card has 802.11n but not 802.11ac, meaning I can do 5GHz but not the faster version. So even though my newer router will do 802.11ac, an ethernet cable will be a better option.

_edit:_ a really long ethernet cable. At least it's in the same room as the router, not too inconvenient.


----------



## 435279

TjPhysicist said:


> Yea, I mean, Amazon's "Ultra HD" claim is tenuous at best on basically all platforms. I THINK the ONLY platform that actually doesn't do weird re-sampling is iOS? And just going through this thread even iOS app is kinda iffy. So basically, amazon released Ultra HD music, with no reliable way to actually PLAY ultra HD, ESPECIALLY on gear where you'd notice it (cuz let's be honest, you're not gonna notice the difference between a good quality Mp3 or a 44.1 FLAC and higher bitrate files on an alexa speaker).
> 
> Oh well, back to tidal I guess. I really cannot function without at least being able to ASSIGN output device in windows to whatever I'm using to play music. It's really sad too, one of the biggest selling points about amazon music HD was actually more that it's a much bigger company. So not just more likely to have more licensing deals in place but also less likely to one day just go under.
> 
> Honestly IDK who at amazon thought this was a good idea, but this is like if when Netflix had started going 4K, they forgot to include 4K output support on ANY platform. Then again, a lot of platforms are still limited to 1080p in netflix. Even then it's MILES better than what amazon is doing, there's at least some hardware devices that are actually capable of properly displaying quality 4k (like good quality TVs) that can do 4K netflix for instance.



I certainly notice the quality difference when listening to Amazon music @ 192Khz on my NAD T 758 V3, its BluOS streaming module works perfectly with the service. 

I have to agree with you though it is very, very difficult to actually listen to Amazon music at its best and basically totally impossible when out and about.


----------



## Richter Di

harpo1 said:


> The problem is Amazon HD only works for very few people with the M11.  All we get is a spinning wheel and it never plays any music.



Problems are back! Magic switch is gone
Uninstalling the Amazon Music App does not delete the files on the SD card!
Deleting the files and folders with the M11 explorer is not really easy but it worked.
Will let you know if I get it going again.


----------



## Richter Di

@harpo1 
Found the magic switch for a functioning Amazon Music on the FiiO M11 again.
 You have to play the 88.2 track with the Neutron player not the Onkyo HF player. After that everything works again perfectly.



> For all the ones who want to try here is a link to a free 88.2 Sample Track from eClassical: https://www.eclassical.com/custom/eclassical/files/BIS1447-002-flac_24.flac


----------



## harpo1

Richter Di said:


> @harpo1
> Found the magic switch for a functioning Amazon Music on the FiiO M11 again.
> You have to play the 88.2 track with the Neutron player not the Onkyo HF player. After that everything works again perfectly.


Where did you get Neutron?  It's not free correct?


----------



## Richter Di (Oct 12, 2019)

harpo1 said:


> Where did you get Neutron?  It's not free correct?


@harpo1 I got it from their website. It has a try out time which allows to see if it works as magic switch.
After the try out time you can look for a different music player who does the trick. Or maybe even amazon has created a new version.
In case you like the Neutron they have a possibility for purchase without google playstore.


----------



## Soundizer

I received the Audioquest Cobalt yesterday which includes a 2 month TIDAL HIFI subscription. 
Plugged into my iPadPro and using Focal Clear headphones - I did the following A/B tests, again and again:

1. Diana Krall - Album = "The Look of Love".
- Amazon Music HD = 24bit/96KHz. 
- Tidal HIFI = Master. 
I verify these are output by the colour led on the Cobalt = light blue and purple.


2. Album = "Ready Player One = movie soundtrack".
- Amazon Music HD = 24bit/96KHz. 
- Tidal HIFI = Master. 
I verify these are output by the colour led on the Cobalt = light blue and purple.


Based on my A/B testing to me TIDAL HIFI for the above tracks and format sounds:
- just that little bit sweeter.
- less harsh.
- just a little more depth. 

if i did a blind test I probably could not be able to tell the difference, but because i was deliberating doing A/B in 10 second clips I could hear the above 3 areas of advantage to TIDAL.


----------



## Soundizer

In addition to the above test I also tried a 24bit/44.1KHz Album which Amazon is going to upsample to 96KHz.

For this format vs TIDAL MASTER there is a big difference. The TIDAL MASTER sounds much better, so the upsampling by Amazon is rubbish.

Basically for my experience Amazon Tracks in actual 24bit/96KHz are quite good, but every thing else is upsampled and I will not listen to it.

Like others noted on this thread, maybe Amazon will fix it.
If reminds me of when AppleTV4k was first released and everything was forced into HDR, people complained and within 8 weeks Apple fixed it with firmware and feature update.


----------



## tomwoo

I reckon none of the Amazon employee working on Amazon Music HD are actual audiophiles, SMH..


----------



## McCol

Soundizer said:


> In addition to the above test I also tried a 24bit/44.1KHz Album which Amazon is going to upsample to 96KHz.
> 
> For this format vs TIDAL MASTER there is a big difference. The TIDAL MASTER sounds much better, so the upsampling by Amazon is rubbish.
> 
> ...



Here's my take on using the Cobalt with Tidal and Amazon on Android

Using the UAPP app to stream from Tidal is just pure bliss, you get the full 24/96 experience and the sound quality is simply stunning.

At the moment and I can't see it changing - UAPP doesn't support Amazon.

Comparing the two services with the Cobalt but without UAPP is a little different.  Tidal still marginally shades it however Amazon has a constant click every few seconds.
I emailed Audioquest and apparently it's to do with the sample rate of the tracks on Spotify and Amazon and Android not playing nice with the Cobalt if UAPP is not being used.


----------



## Brava210

I've given up on Amazon at the moment, It's just not right.
UAPP and Tidal from now on.


----------



## Soundizer

McCol said:


> Here's my take on using the Cobalt with Tidal and Amazon on Android
> 
> Using the UAPP app to stream from Tidal is just pure bliss, you get the full 24/96 experience and the sound quality is simply stunning.
> 
> ...


Sorry, what is UAPP?


----------



## grokit (Oct 13, 2019)

grokit said:


> Yeah I'm back with Tidal after experiencing too many dropouts with Ultra HD. I want to like Amazon...
> I'm pretty sure I'll never get that kind of attention from AmazonGlobalCorp


Maybe I did get their, or more likely their AI bot's attention; When I rebooted the amazon App no more dropouts in Ultra HD.



Soundizer said:


> Based on my A/B testing to me TIDAL HIFI for the above tracks and format sounds:
> - just that little bit sweeter.
> - less harsh.
> - just a little more depth.
> ...


I agree and think I may be able to tell blind it's that apparent; I also agree about the why...



Soundizer said:


> In addition to the above test I also tried a 24bit/44.1KHz Album which Amazon is going to upsample to 96KHz.
> 
> For this format vs TIDAL MASTER there is a big difference. The TIDAL MASTER sounds much better, so the upsampling by Amazon is rubbish.
> 
> ...


This is exactly what I was planning to post about. Certain 'flagship' albums like the new Abbey Road are really good, just as good or better than Tidal's MQA without decoding to my ears. But most everything else does sound upsampled, resulting in a somewhat homogenized SQ that reminds me of the loudness wars in a way. To me it is inferior, and more fatiguing to listen to long term. Tidal's approach is consistently better.

I hope you're right that maybe there's hope for a fix, will be rooting for one even if I don't choose to continue. A rising tide of fidelity for the masses lifts all headboats.


----------



## csglinux

Brava210 said:


> I've given up on Amazon at the moment, It's just not right.
> UAPP and Tidal from now on.


Same here. Unsubscribing and cancelling the trial. If, one day, Amazon gets its act together I'll try again. In the meantime, adios folks!


----------



## CANiSLAYu

Soundizer said:


> Sorry, what is UAPP?


USB Audio Player Pro.


----------



## Soundizer (Oct 12, 2019)

I am also hoping Tidal might do some promo’s like 12months for price of 10. I will take that. Especially as they have some competition and most people don’t know about the upsampling issue and what exclusive mode is.


Reading reviews from the so called AV PRESS, hardly anyone has pointed out these flaws. 
People on this thread are more knowledgeable.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Oct 12, 2019)

I am primarily listening in offline mode on an iphone through an external DAC (Shanling M2S).   When things are working, it sounds great to me.

However, sometimes certain tracks just stop playing.  I have deleted the tracks and downloaded again, and the problem persists.  Example is the alternate version of I Want You from the 50th anniversary of Abbey Road.  When the tracks glitch, they seem to crash the app.  It would be better to just go on to the next song.

Some tracks also just refuse to download in their entirety for offline listening.  Two tracks on the Grateful Dead live release all "Saint of Circustance" are an example.  

I wish there was a simple way to delete a single album by an artist.  Seems like you need to delete them track by track.


----------



## Soundizer

originalsnuffy said:


> I am primarily listening in offline mode on an iphone through an external DAC (Shanling M2S).   When things are working, it sounds great to me.
> 
> However, sometimes certain tracks just stop playing.  I have deleted the tracks and downloaded again, and the problem persists.  Example is the alternate version of I Want You from the 50th anniversary of Abbey Road.  When the tracks glitch, they seem to crash the app.  It would be better to just go on to the next song.
> 
> ...



make sure [loudness normalisation] and [hands free with alexa] are both off in settings.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Soundizer said:


> make sure [loudness normalisation] and [hands free with alexa] are both off in settings.



How does that address the issues discussed?


----------



## Soundizer

originalsnuffy said:


> How does that address the issues discussed?


I don’t know, but no harm in trying as it is additional cpu processing which could be a bug.


----------



## Brava210

clerkpalmer said:


> Is it me or is the Amazon stream fatiguing?  I just had to take my isine off as my ears felt like they were going to bleed.  I may have to go back to Tidal and see if it's me, my headphones or the streaming.



Yes it is very fatiguing. Albums that i know to sound flat as thats how they were engineered seem to sound bright and horrid.
Its to please the smiley face equaliser brigade.


----------



## Soundizer

Brava210 said:


> Yes it is very fatiguing. Albums that i know to sound flat as thats how they were engineered seem to sound bright and horrid.
> Its to please the smiley face equaliser brigade.



it almost like the dynamic range is being held back, hence sounds more louder all the time compared to Tidal.


----------



## a-LeXx

A short update for iOS users:

Amazon released an iOS app update tonight that solves the problem with ‚crashes‘ during Ultra HD playback and with heavy battery drain when playing Ultra HD.

The crashes are gone now (iOS‘s housekeeping is not killing the app any longer when it moves into background), the playback time of 24/96 content is now close to 5hrs on an iPhone 7 with a fully loaded battery.


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> A short update for iOS users:
> 
> Amazon released an iOS app update tonight that solves the problem with ‚crashes‘ during Ultra HD playback and with heavy battery drain when playing Ultra HD.
> 
> The crashes are gone now (iOS‘s housekeeping is not killing the app any longer when it moves into background), the playback time of 24/96 content is now close to 5hrs on an iPhone 7 with a fully loaded battery.


Thank you.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 13, 2019)

Brava210 said:


> Yes it is very fatiguing. Albums that i know to sound flat as thats how they were engineered seem to sound bright and horrid.
> Its to please the smiley face equaliser brigade.



Did a 1:1 comparison against Apple Music for almost 2 hours today. Amazon Music HD sound exactly the same as Apple Music, in regards to frequency response. I did not perceive even slightest tuning on Amazon‘s content, and I‘ve been comparing on multiple albums I‘m very familiar with.

On a contrary, while the frequency response was identical, Apple‘s content sounded a bit more clinical, while Amazon‘s content was more organic and relaxing. Minor differences though, like comparing two good DACs with one of them being a bit more clinical...

Apple Music is a good source to compare to, because they are using downsampled HiRes masters whenever available. Very likely exactly the same masters that Amazon is getting.

Tidal, on a contrary, is bound to using different masters, by a definition of MQA.


----------



## a-LeXx

Soundizer said:


> In addition to the above test I also tried a 24bit/44.1KHz Album which Amazon is going to upsample to 96KHz.
> 
> For this format vs TIDAL MASTER there is a big difference. The TIDAL MASTER sounds much better, so the upsampling by Amazon is rubbish.
> 
> ...



That difference is most probably not due to bad upsampling on Amazon, but because Tidal Master uses a different master. It has to, by definition of MQA.
So, most likely it was comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 13, 2019)

never mind...


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> Did a 1:1 comparison against Apple Music for almost 2 hours today. Amazon Music HD sound exactly the same as Apple Music, in regards to frequency response. I did not perceive even slightest tuning on Amazon‘s content, and I‘ve been comparing on multiple albums I‘m very familiar with.
> 
> On a contrary, while the frequency response was identical, Apple‘s content sounded a bit more clinical, while Amazon‘s content was more organic and relaxing. Minor differences though, like comparing two good DACs with one of them being a bit more clinical...
> 
> ...


What DAC were you using? Comparing which format between Apple Music and Amazon = bit/frequency?

thank you


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> A short update for iOS users:
> 
> Amazon released an iOS app update tonight that solves the problem with ‚crashes‘ during Ultra HD playback and with heavy battery drain when playing Ultra HD.
> 
> The crashes are gone now (iOS‘s housekeeping is not killing the app any longer when it moves into background), the playback time of 24/96 content is now close to 5hrs on an iPhone 7 with a fully loaded battery.



which Country are you based? Not received any update on iOS devices here in the UK.

last one was 9 October [version 9.1.3].


----------



## a-LeXx

I‘m in Germany, and got 9.1.4 tonight, so for you this might be a matter of 1-2 days.

I‘m using a DFR as a DAC plus a Fiio A5 amp when it makes sense... SE846/HD600/T5p.2 as headphones...

On Apple Music it‘s always 256kbps AAC with 16/44.1 output. On Amazon, I‘ve been using half 24/96, half 16/44.1 content, with 16/44.1 upsampled to 24/96.


----------



## Brava210

It just sounds horrid.


----------



## a-LeXx

Brava210 said:


> It just sounds horrid.


What it? Amazon Music?

It does with streaming, because on Wifi there is no way to tell it to stream at highest bitrate, it would always do auto-rating, changing to lowest quality in a middle of the song, then to something inbetween. Not usable with streaming...

However for downloaded content, it sounds very nice, as expected from uncompressed and partially HiRes content provider.

So, my simple workaround - when I want to listen to a record, I first download, wait until the first track is completely on a flash, and only then start playback...


----------



## Brava210

a-LeXx said:


> What it? Amazon Music?
> 
> It does with streaming, because on Wifi there is no way to tell it to stream at highest bitrate, it would always do auto-rating, changing to lowest quality in a middle of the song, then to something inbetween. Not usable with streaming...
> 
> ...


I dont think anyone should have to do this.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Oct 13, 2019)

Found some info on Windows Resampler
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/medfound/audioresampler
Just jump to the bottom of the article, "Output Quality"
It can vary from 1 (linear interpolation) to 60, default is 30, so technically client can get higher resampling quality by bumping it up. Not sure if amazon app does that or just relies on default. Wish there were a way to set default globally via some registry change.


----------



## rkw

Soundizer said:


> it almost like the dynamic range is being held back, hence sounds more louder all the time compared to Tidal.


Do you have Loudness Normalization turned on?


----------



## exdmd

The goal is to bypass Windows resampling completely by using Wasapi Exclusive mode. I'll check back in a few months to see if Amazon cares enough about sound quality to provide Exclusive mode in the desktop app or Audirvana integrates Amazon Music HD. I like the depth of Amazon's catalog but can't stand to listen to it. Sticking with Qobuz right now.


----------



## hifi80sman

a-LeXx said:


> What it? Amazon Music?
> 
> It does with streaming, because on Wifi there is no way to tell it to stream at highest bitrate, it would always do auto-rating, changing to lowest quality in a middle of the song, then to something inbetween. Not usable with streaming...
> 
> ...


You can set the streaming quality to HD/Ultra HD Only.


----------



## a-LeXx

hifi80sman said:


> You can set the streaming quality to HD/Ultra HD Only.



Unfortunatelly not, not on the iOS app. Initially I was also thinking that wold work, but the setting applies for cellular data only. It‘s clearly stated that on WiFi, the app would auto-rate depending on a connection quality, and there is no option to force it to stay e.g. at a highest rate. That‘s a real problem, forcing me to download everything. I already made lots of experiments and I see that no matter how good my WiFi is, from time to time this app would fall back to 128kbps, which is even worse than normal SD at 256kbps... 
Those app developers probably have no idea on what they are doing, no interest whatsoever in hifi music. They don‘t have a slightest clue that what works good for video (there, it‘s better to have a bit more blocking artifacts because of reduced data rate than frame drop-outs) is absolutely unacceptable for hifi audio, and they should instead just implement longer buffers...


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 13, 2019)

a-LeXx said:


> Unfortunatelly not, not on the iOS app. Initially I was also thinking that wold work, but the setting applies for cellular data only. It‘s clearly stated that on WiFi, the app would auto-rate depending on a connection quality, and there is no option to force it to stay e.g. at a highest rate. That‘s a real problem, forcing me to download everything. I already made lots of experiments and I see that no matter how good my WiFi is, from time to time this app would fall back to 128kbps, which is even worse than normal SD at 256kbps...
> Those app developers probably have no idea on what they are doing, no interest whatsoever in hifi music. They don‘t have a slightest clue that what works good for video (there, it‘s better to have a bit more blocking artifacts because of reduced data rate than frame drop-outs) is absolutely unacceptable for hifi audio, and they should instead just implement longer buffers...







It‘s in German, but easy to understand. Above, in the WLAN (WiFi) section, there is nothing to select. There is only an explanation, that the app would select an appropriate data rate based on a WiFi signal quality, dynamically.

Below that, there is another section for Mobile Daten (cellular in German), where you can indeed hardcode it to best quality. But unfortunately, this has 0 effect on a playback via WiFi, I ran multiple test to validate it... It would always start with a best quality, but then, in a middle of the track, fall back to the lowest quality possible. Without any real reason for that, as my WiFi coverage is good enough to play multiple HD Video streams simultaneously, and here we are talking about Audio-only...

This might be another bug, maybe they will fix it as well later... But currently, only downloading works reliably...


----------



## grokit (Oct 13, 2019)

Brava210 said:


> I dont think anyone should have to do this.


This is my feeling as well, even though I don't typically listen with a mobile device.

I want to use my streaming service as my very favorite radio station. This means discovering new music with random playlists etc, where downloading 1st would interrupt my listening flow. I do like Amazon's Ultra HD playlist for that, as it includes certain genres that I probably wouldn't otherwise seek out. It seems like they are improving as they go along, almost like it's still in beta.

I need to try Qobuz and Roon soon; when I do Ultra HD and MQA may both be heading for the virtual wastebin. But for now I'll keep playing around with Amazon and Tidal, at least until Amazon starts charging me then I'll have to choose. When I have more time to listen, and to get back into curating my own digital library (2 moves in the last 2 years, surgery upcoming), I will pit the victor against Qobuz and Roon.

_edit: _I have no idea about Roon's compatibility with any of the streaming services. I also don't know how Roon will do against Apple's new Music software, so that's another fun comparison to look forward to.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Oct 13, 2019)

I get a kick out of all the love that MQA gets.  Probably sounds fine but it does in fact involve some lossy compression whereas flat out 24 bit old school PCM for hi res is uncompressed.

I have been playing this from my iphone to a portable DAP (used in DAC mode) and everything sounds just fine to me.  I know there is this brittle theory going on here but I suspect it is related to the DAC in phones etc. and not the music source itself.

My key beef at this point is that every so often I will encounter a track that probably did not download properly and causes glitches in the app.  It seems that the same songs continue to be problems even if removed and put back in; so the source files probably have problems.  One example for me is the alternate version of I Want You (She's So Heavy) in HD from the Abbey Road 50th release.


----------



## hifi80sman

a-LeXx said:


> Unfortunatelly not, not on the iOS app. Initially I was also thinking that wold work, but the setting applies for cellular data only. It‘s clearly stated that on WiFi, the app would auto-rate depending on a connection quality, and there is no option to force it to stay e.g. at a highest rate. That‘s a real problem, forcing me to download everything. I already made lots of experiments and I see that no matter how good my WiFi is, from time to time this app would fall back to 128kbps, which is even worse than normal SD at 256kbps...
> Those app developers probably have no idea on what they are doing, no interest whatsoever in hifi music. They don‘t have a slightest clue that what works good for video (there, it‘s better to have a bit more blocking artifacts because of reduced data rate than frame drop-outs) is absolutely unacceptable for hifi audio, and they should instead just implement longer buffers...


Gotcha.

Yes, it would be nice if they fixed that, however, I personally have not had any issues with either the mobile or WiFi setting, but obviously that's person to person, so it would be good to include it in the app for WiFi specifically.  The fact that you're getting 128kbps or 256kbps on what I assume is your _*home *_WiFi, then something's amiss.  From what I've read, Germany's internet service should be good, so it may actually be Amazon's servers that are overloaded.


----------



## Brava210

originalsnuffy said:


> I get a kick out of all the love that MQA gets.  Probably sounds fine but it does in fact involve some lossy compression whereas flat out 24 bit old school PCM for hi res is uncompressed.
> 
> I have been playing this from my iphone to a portable DAP (used in DAC mode) and everything sounds just fine to me.  I know there is this brittle theory going on here but I suspect it is related to the DAC in phones etc. and not the music source itself.
> 
> My key beef at this point is that every so often I will encounter a track that probably did not download properly and causes glitches in the app.  It seems that the same songs continue to be problems even if removed and put back in; so the source files probably have problems.  One example for me is the alternate version of I Want You (She's So Heavy) in HD from the Abbey Road 50th release.




I listen through an LG V40 with a decent DAC.
Amazon HD sounds sub standard.
I have a few faviurite albums which i am very familiar with. These sound very strange through Amazon not so through Tidal.


----------



## a-LeXx

hifi80sman said:


> Gotcha.
> 
> Yes, it would be nice if they fixed that, however, I personally have not had any issues with either the mobile or WiFi setting, but obviously that's person to person, so it would be good to include it in the app for WiFi specifically.  The fact that you're getting 128kbps or 256kbps on what I assume is your _*home *_WiFi, then something's amiss.  From what I've read, Germany's internet service should be good, so it may actually be Amazon's servers that are overloaded.



That‘s not a problem of my WiFi. I have 50mbps internet connection and full WiFi coverage at my home. When I download an album, it‘s getting downloaded in no time. But when I stream, the behavior I described happens. And this is only this amazon app. Never had any problems neither with Qobuz nor with Tidal when playing HiRes content.
Maybe it happens in your setup as well, but you just do not notice. The yellow badge, saying it‘s  Ultra HD, would not change, but I perceive sudden changes in SQ, and after I click on a badge, I see the reproduction quality changed to Standard instead of HiRes. Then, sometimes after few seconds, sometimes never, the quality starts to climb up again, usually first to 24/48, then to 24/96...


----------



## Soundizer

rkw said:


> Do you have Loudness Normalization turned on?


No i don’t and my music is downloaded at ultra hd. 75mb download wi fi speed.


----------



## Soundizer

Apparently there was an update a few days ago on BlueOS devices which integrates Amazon Music HD. The update as I understand has now addressed the frequency so correctly addressed these issues and no longer upsamples. 

Perhaps then this is indicative that Amazon could potentially fix this upsampling issue on other devices.


----------



## hifi80sman

a-LeXx said:


> That‘s not a problem of my WiFi. I have 50mbps internet connection and full WiFi coverage at my home. When I download an album, it‘s getting downloaded in no time. But when I stream, the behavior I described happens. And this is only this amazon app. Never had any problems neither with Qobuz nor with Tidal when playing HiRes content.
> Maybe it happens in your setup as well, but you just do not notice. The yellow badge, saying it‘s  Ultra HD, would not change, but I perceive sudden changes in SQ, and after I click on a badge, I see the reproduction quality changed to Standard instead of HiRes. Then, sometimes after few seconds, sometimes never, the quality starts to climb up again, usually first to 24/48, then to 24/96...


Fortunately for me, I've had none of those issues. So far, so good.


----------



## maxwillis

Does amazon music keep stopping on A&K players? Or does it run fine in the background when you turn the screen off?


----------



## Brava210




----------



## RickB

Mysteriously, the Mac Amazon Music app suddenly stopped providing bit and sample rate information for each track played, making it impossible to make adjustments in the Audio Midi Setup. Since I only listen to albums, making this adjustment manually wasn't too onerous. Now Amazon makes it impossible to even do that.

I did try restarting the app several times, and then I rebooted the Mac. Still not showing bit/sample rate information. This makes the service useless to me and I cancelled. 

Like has been said countless times before in this thread, Amazon is clueless about what audiophiles want.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Was there app update? Hope they don't follow Deezer steps that removed info on streamed material quality.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Android app was just updated. Bitrate is still there.


----------



## RickB

Andrew_WOT said:


> Was there app update? Hope they don't follow Deezer steps that removed info on streamed material quality.



I didn't get any message about a Mac app update.


----------



## grokit

Bitrate info is also currently available on the Mac desktop app.


----------



## RickB

grokit said:


> Bitrate info is also currently available on the Mac desktop app.



I didn't see it on mine and I couldn't get it to come back by restarting the app or rebooting the Mac.


----------



## grokit

RickB said:


> I didn't see it on mine and I couldn't get it to come back by restarting the app or rebooting the Mac.


I just noticed there's an update available. Let's see...

Okay It's updated. When I click on the 'ultra hd' button, I still get the 'track quality', 'device capability', and 'currently playing at' bitrates in the popup display.
Listening to their Beethoven ultra hd playlist, I'm getting 24 bit / 96 kHz across the board. Sounds pretty good to me


----------



## tomwoo

So disappointed there still isn't exclusive mode in the update


----------



## runssical

As the consensus shifts to Amazon HD being a flop I'm sitting here listening to audio files off my DAP. These streaming services don't seem to check all the boxes for any of us.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 19, 2019)

Well, apart from battery drain and actually broken streaming, I don‘t have much to complain about SQ with Amazon Music HD.
Loaded few hundreds of albums into the iPhone, playing via DFR+Fiio A5 on a HD600 - this is as good as it can get, for me nothing to be desired...

Of course, usability is still an issue. But in exchange they have a huge catalog, price that is close to 50% of what Tidal is asking (with prime membership and yearly payment)... Loading the battery every 5-7 hours is acceptable. As I don‘t stream much anyway, but prefer to listen to full downloaded albums (I actually never even skip a track), it‘s an OK compromise for me for a time being...


----------



## grokit

a-LeXx said:


> Well, apart from battery drain and actually broken streaming, I don‘t have much to complain about SQ with Amazon Music HD.
> Loaded few hundreds of albums into the iPhone, playing via DFR+Fiio A5 on a HD600 - this is as good as it can get, for me nothing to be desired...
> 
> Of course, usability is still an issue. But in exchange they have a huge catalog, price that is close to 50% of what Tidal is asking (with prime membership and yearly payment)... Loading the battery every 5-7 hours is acceptable. As I don‘t stream much anyway, but prefer to listen to full downloaded albums (I actually never even skip a track), it‘s an OK compromise for me for a time being...


That's how I feel as well. I'm going to drop Tidal, and save my personal Amazon vs. Qobuz shootout for when I'm able to devote more time to HD streaming.
I can explore Roon, and I have a neglected digital and vinyl collection of my own that needs tending to in the meantime...


----------



## magicalmouse

I have taken up the 90 day trial and after a week:

1. even when tracks downloaded there is the occasional sd track mixed with the hd/ultra hd on the same album (i've set preferences for hd/ulta hd)

2 the sound quality seems good on the desktop (win10) and is certainly superior to spotify premium by a margin

3 it seems remarkable value with a large catalogue (but still not as complete as spotify for genre music) compared to tidal/quboz

d


----------



## Tooros (Oct 20, 2019)

magicalmouse said:


> 1. even when tracks downloaded there is the occasional sd track mixed with the hd/ultra hd on the same album (i've set preferences for hd/ulta hd)



This. This is the thing that’s driving me up the wall. Why? Why, when Tidal (to pick one) can get a licence for an album, can amazon only get it for some tracks within an album?? It baffles me. Another annoying twist on this is that when searching albums, even if the whole thing is in SD bar one track, the app tells you the album is in HD/UHD when only one track is.


----------



## Soundizer

Is there anyway to search specifically for 24bit/96KHz tracks or albums?

At least these will be played at correct KHz without upsampling to my 24bit/96khz Audioquest Cobalt.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 20, 2019)

Tooros said:


> This. This is the thing that’s driving me up the wall. Why? Why, when Tidal (to pick one) can get a licence for an album, can amazon only get it for some tracks within an album?? It baffles me. Another annoying twist on this is that when searching albums, even if the whole thing is in SD bar one track, the app tells you the album is in HD/UHD when only one track is.



It‘s not like they are only getting a license for 1 track. It‘s just how their database works. They do not store albums, they store tracks. So, if they have the same track from different masters, they store only the highest quality copy.

Now, imagine, there is a standard album that has been taken from an old master, all in SD. And then they license a compilation album, remastered, all tracks in HD. Some tracks of this compilation have the same names and length as the low quality track from the initial full album, so only those higher quality versions are stored, the lower quality versions are deleted.

When you play your original album,  you will get the SD quality for all the tracks but for those coming from the compilation album, those tracks would be HD.
Whether this is good or bad - I guess I would prefer that they store full album versions, because remastered tracks can actually sound differently. But I don‘t think this would ever change, as I don‘t believe they would modify the way how they store data...


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Oct 20, 2019)

I did notice mix of different bitrate tracks, but I really doubt it works as you described, that would be a total chaos. Track from compilation album has different id than the same one from separate release.
https://www.thebalancecareers.com/catalog-number-2460354

So my guess that either they are still filling the gaps or this is some technical or licensing issue.

There is also option 'download duplicates', what is it set to?


----------



## psikey (Oct 20, 2019)

Just signed up for the 90 day trial.

Just tried on my Desktop Media/Gaming rig where I listen at home which has a 24/192 audio capability through a set of KEF LSX speakers which are 24/96 capable.

All sounds great to me.

Currently playing a track and showing:

Track Quality: 24/44.1
Device Capability: 24/192
Currently Playing: 24/44.1

Just listened to a Diana Krall UHD Track (I'm familiar with Tidal MQA version) and sounds just as stunning

Track Quality: 24/96
Device Capability: 24/192
Currently Playing: 24/96

Will try with my LG V30+ and S10+ phones next​


----------



## grokit (Oct 20, 2019)

psikey said:


> Currently playing a track and showing:
> 
> Track Quality: 24/44.1
> Device Capability: 24/96
> Currently Playing: 24/44.1


That's what I get with redbook tracks as well. No upsampling unless the popup is lying.


----------



## psikey (Oct 20, 2019)

psikey said:


> Just signed up for the 90 day trial.
> 
> Just tried on my Desktop Media/Gaming rig where I listen at home which has a 24/192 audio capability through a set of KEF LSX which are 24/96 capable.
> 
> ...



Slight update. If I set the sound card to its max of 24/192 the track still plays at 24/96 (which it should).

Just remembered that my LSX is connected to PC by analogue so if track was a 24/192 it would go out from PC as 24/192 but LSX itself would down-rate 192 tracks to 96.

On my S10+ & V30+ looks like Android converts to 24/48 if higher track rate than 24/48 and as mentioned, no go in UAPP. If a track is 24/44.1 it does show as 24/44.1 (not android scaling to 24/48)

Also, have an old 128GB iPhone 5S put make that can do is 24/48 so 96 tracks played at lower quality of 24/48.

So on my mobiles looks like it will play at 24/48 MAX but doesn't seem to try to upscale 24/44.1 to 24/48 which is fine.

PC and all 3 phones stream perfectly over my AC3200 5Ghz router.

Seems good to me at the lower price than Tidal.

Just found an actual 24/192 track and does feed out of my PC at 24/192 so seems to be perfect for PC playback but limited to 24/48 on Android phones and my iPhone 5S.


----------



## a-LeXx

Andrew_WOT said:


> I did notice mix of different bitrate tracks, but I really doubt it works as you described, that would be a total chaos. Track from compilation album has different id than the same one from separate release.
> https://www.thebalancecareers.com/catalog-number-2460354
> 
> So my guess that either they are still filling the gaps or this is some technical or licensing issue.
> ...



It is total chaos. On about  third of my downloaded albums I have mixed quality. There is no option ‚download duplicates‘ on a iOS app.


----------



## a-LeXx

grokit said:


> That's what I get with redbook tracks as well. No upsampling unless the popup is lying.



popup IS lying. No matter what it says, my DFR always show 24/96. It shows correct sampling rates on any other streaming service, was also showing 44.1 correctly before I upgraded to Music HD. After the upgrade, the app upsamples everything and is lying in the popup about the output sampling rate...


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> popup IS lying. No matter what it says, my DFR always show 24/96. It shows correct sampling rates on any other streaming service, was also showing 44.1 correctly before I upgraded to Music HD. After the upgrade, the app upsamples everything and is lying in the popup about the output sampling rate...


Exactly same here. My Dragon fly Cobalt via iPad USB-C + Chord Mojo via Apple iMac optical. Both DACS show Amazon HD upsamples everything.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Oct 20, 2019)

Popup is not "lying", it shows bitrate that app sends to audio stack, where depending on shared mode bitrate settings, upsampling can take place.
If you set Control panel shared mode sample rate to match your audio material, you will get same sample rate as original on your audio device.

Processing flow:
Amazon Player >>> OS Audio Stack (resamples in shared mode) >>> Audio Device >>> Unhappy Listener


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 21, 2019)

Andrew_WOT said:


> Popup is not "lying", it shows bitrate that app sends to audio stack, where depending on shared mode bitrate settings, upsampling can take place.
> If you set Control panel shared mode sample rate to match your audio material, you will get same sample rate as original on your audio device.
> 
> Processing flow:
> Amazon Player >>> OS Audio Stack (resamples in shared mode) >>> Audio Device >>> Unhappy Listener



iOS never upsamples anything. I‘m talking about an iOS app. It‘s definitively amazon‘s own app that is performing upsampling, even though it is showing output to be in a native data rate. There is no way no avoid this with the new amazon app for iOS. Older versions of the app (8.xxx), before Music HD has been introduced, never upsampled. New version (9.xxx) started upsampling even without Music HD subscription


----------



## Soundizer

I talked to Audioquest about it and they are aware of the upsampling issue via Amazon Music HD. They suggested to stick with TIDAL HIFI because of this issue with Amazon Music HD.


----------



## psikey

More listening and it works perfectly via a PC and Desktop version of Amazon Music HD.

Seems to work fine with phones internal sound chip but to a max of 24/48 on Android.


----------



## robm321

Until they add exclusive mode, Amazon HD is useless to me. I have a 3 month trial and still just listen to Tidal which sounds better.


----------



## grokit (Oct 23, 2019)

I really think Amazon is actively (not AI) monitoring this thread. I'm now missing the little HD/ULTRA HD button, when playing a album that is labeled ULTRA HD; all the songs in the album are individually labeled the same way. But no button to activate the pop-up while the song is playing. This is to me a tacit acknowledgment that it was indeed "lying" with the displayed information. I hope this means they are working on a fix.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Which OS?
Both Android and Windows were updated like yesterday. Windows is  7.8.4.2118 now, Android 16.3.2, both have badge still, but no exclusive option.


----------



## a-LeXx

grokit said:


> I really think Amazon is actively (not AI) monitoring this thread. I'm now missing the little HD/ULTRA HD button, when playing a album that is labeled ULTRA HD; all the songs in the album are individually labeled the same way. But no button to activate the pop-up while the song is playing. This is to me a tacit acknowledgment that it was indeed "lying" with the displayed information. I hope this means they are working on a fix.



Dream on. There is amazon‘s own forum, called amazonforum.com. They are not even monitoring that one. People are complaining since sommer, paying customers, and nothing is happening, bugs are still not fixed. Moderators there suggest to open a call with support for any technical problem, because amazon is NOT monitoring any forums, even not their own. Of course the support turns to be utterly useless as well, as this ‚support‘ is provided by aunties having absolutely no technical understanding, suggesting the same things over and over again, like reinstall the app, clean cache... They neither understand what the customers are telling them, even with detailed written bug descriptions, nor do they follow up with real support...

Amazon shows very little interest in this product, the main value for them is now, they can claim they are better than competitors in terms of data rate. It‘s obvious that product definition and implementation has been done by people having no understanding for what audiophiles need.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

a-LeXx said:


> It‘s obvious that product definition and implementation has been done by people having no understanding for what audiophiles need.


Do audiophiles themselves know what they need?


----------



## Papa253

I have no more patience for Amazon music, I cancel my trial and deleted it.

Good luck to you all, you'll need it!


----------



## grokit (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm sticking with it for now. I did just notice something though.

The ULTRA HD button is back. First I restarted the app to see if that made of a difference. It didn't. Then for no reason, I selected the miniplayer from the view menu. I noticed the ULTRA HD button displayed prominently on the miniplayer so I clicked it. It went to the full-size player, with the pop-up displayed. When I closed the pop-up, the ULTRA HD button was still displayed, ready for me to click on it again and get the pop-up.

Nothing weird about that, nosireee... but I'll take it. Like I said, for now. It sure sounds good to me. I'm using the Mac desktop app.

_edit:_ They did change the info displayed in the pop-up.
Now it says:

Track quality: 24 bit / 44.1 kHz
Device capability: 24 bit / 96 kHz
Currently playing at: 24 bit / 44.1 kHz

At least they're being honest about the playrate now.
But my opinion is that 44.1 kHz should be called HD, not ULTRA HD_ _


----------



## mixman

I just listened to several tracks on Amazon Ultra HD and Tidal. I think a few people mentioned this, but it does seem like the Amazon tracks are brighter than the same tracks at the same bitrate as on Tidal. This leads me to believe they are jacking up the upper treble to make you think there is more detail, but there is actually not. The sound is just more forward, brighter, but in actually it loses some air and detail.


----------



## Soundizer

grokit said:


> I'm sticking with it for now. I did just notice something though.
> 
> The ULTRA HD button is back. First I restarted the app to see if that made of a difference. It didn't. Then for no reason, I selected the miniplayer from the view menu. I noticed the ULTRA HD button displayed prominently on the miniplayer so I clicked it. It went to the full-size player, with the pop-up displayed. When I closed the pop-up, the ULTRA HD button was still displayed, ready for me to click on it again and get the pop-up.
> 
> ...




Are you using an external DAC?
What is your Audio Midi set to?


----------



## grokit (Oct 24, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> Are you using an external DAC?
> What is your Audio Midi set to?


Using a Gungnir A1 d/s, interfacing with a Halide Design USB-Spdif Bridge
Midi set to 24/96


----------



## exdmd (Oct 24, 2019)

Amazon has their own forum with a thread dedicated to Amazon Music HD. I just noticed that the thread was pruned from 16 pages to 9 pages overnight. I see some of the more critical posts were removed. There are still complaints about lack of exclusive mode, but it looks to me like Amazon is censoring their own forum. Their forum of course but may not bode well for changes we would like to see to the service.


----------



## 3Putter

exdmd said:


> Amazon has their own forum with a thread dedicated to Amazon Music HD. I just noticed that the thread was pruned from 16 pages to 9 pages overnight. I see some of the more critical posts were removed. There are still complaints about lack of exclusive mode, but it looks to me like Amazon is censoring their own forum. Their forum of course but may not bode well for changes we would like to see to the service.


I find some albums on Tidal do not sound as good as others to which I attribute to recording/mastering. But even the worst Tidal albums sound better than the same on Amazon HD. Everyone hears differently and we all have different gear. But there have been people on this thread who have done the legwork to prove out what my ears tell me. If Amazon is pruning their own forum shame on them. It reveals much if that is, in fact, happening.


----------



## exdmd

I think Amazon may pay attention to audio forums. They explained today at the Amazon Forum that they split off many posts from the main Amazon Music HD thead to new threads. I no longer think they are actively trying to censor their forum. At least when you search for "Amazon Music HD exclusive mode" you are shown a thread discussing that issue. Actually just complaints from users since Amazon does not really respond to questions on their forum, instead just directing users to send feedback from within the program.


----------



## robm321

mixman said:


> I just listened to several tracks on Amazon Ultra HD and Tidal. I think a few people mentioned this, but it does seem like the Amazon tracks are brighter than the same tracks at the same bitrate as on Tidal. This leads me to believe they are jacking up the upper treble to make you think there is more detail, but there is actually not. The sound is just more forward, brighter, but in actually it loses some air and detail.



Good point. I've noticed the brightness too.


----------



## Soundizer

robm321 said:


> Good point. I've noticed the brightness too.


I was listening for this and observed Amazon Music HD on same tracks to be flatter and so more forward. Which you could say is then brighter due to being less dynamic. It is like the ‘loudness balancing’ is permanently on.


Tidal has more depth and less tiresome to listen. Much better.


----------



## psikey

grokit said:


> I'm sticking with it for now. I did just notice something though.
> 
> The ULTRA HD button is back. First I restarted the app to see if that made of a difference. It didn't. Then for no reason, I selected the miniplayer from the view menu. I noticed the ULTRA HD button displayed prominently on the miniplayer so I clicked it. It went to the full-size player, with the pop-up displayed. When I closed the pop-up, the ULTRA HD button was still displayed, ready for me to click on it again and get the pop-up.
> 
> ...



I thought with Amazon service HD represented FLAC CD quality 16/44.1 and ULTRA HD for all 24 bit stuff 44.1-192


----------



## grokit

psikey said:


> I thought with Amazon service HD represented FLAC CD quality 16/44.1 and ULTRA HD for all 24 bit stuff 44.1-192


Thanks, I didn't realize that. It's not the first time Amazon and I have disagreed


----------



## grokit (Oct 25, 2019)

If anybody is poised to take control of the nascent HD audio streaming world, assuming Amazon is fine with their halfazz budget approach, it would be Apple. They have the music library in their own cloud, and the ability to improve their iDevices' audio hardware capabilities. Amazon has more reach, but if Steve Jobs was alive this would already be happening. Amazon needs competition. Perhaps Qobuz & Tidal will merge with Roon.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

It's either Spotify or Apple Music, Amazon will try to keep their market presence, but will be just as relevant as their Prime Video when everyone is opting for other video streaming services with better content and quality.


----------



## rkw

grokit said:


> it would be Apple. They have the music library in their own cloud


That isn't meaningful. Amazon also have the music library in their own cloud (AWS dominates the cloud provider business, far ahead of competitors).


grokit said:


> if Steve Jobs was alive this would already be happening


Actually Steve Jobs thought customers were perfectly happy with MP3, and Apple was instrumental in popularizing the usage of MP3.


----------



## grokit (Oct 26, 2019)

rkw said:


> That isn't meaningful. Amazon also have the music library in their own cloud (AWS dominates the cloud provider business, far ahead of competitors).
> Actually Steve Jobs thought customers were perfectly happy with MP3, and Apple was instrumental in popularizing the usage of MP3.


Just saying that Apple is one of the few entities that can actually compete on these levels. Plus they're way ahead of the game in hardware, if they want to be.

AFAIK, early iPod/iTunes started with MP3 because it was already popular with Soundjam (which became iTunes). Apple started promoting AAC and ALAC instead, just as soon as they could.






*Steve Jobs was an audiophile.*


----------



## Soundizer

My guess is Apple takes a more holistic approach and am guessing that Apple will introduce a higher quality streaming service post 5G iPhone launch. Also uniquely manufacturer headphone Bluetooth chips so might at the same time introduce a higher quality Bluetooth tech like AptX HD/LDAC.


----------



## Left Channel

Andrew_WOT said:


> Do audiophiles themselves know what they need?



More. By definition, audiophiles need more.


----------



## senorx12562

tradyblix said:


> should everyone chuck their money at amazon tho ? at least tidal is artist owned. amazon already owns too much.


Now this is hilarious.


----------



## tradyblix

senorx12562 said:


> Now this is hilarious.



And why good sir, is it hilarious ? Are you going to back your post up with some actual content, nay, dare I say counterpoint ? Or at least a worthy argument ? Or is it just gonna be a sneer and mudslinging ? Hmmm ?

How is Amazon better than Tidal ?


----------



## senorx12562

tradyblix said:


> And why good sir, is it hilarious ? Are you going to back your post up with some actual content, nay, dare I say counterpoint ? Or at least a worthy argument ? Or is it just gonna be a sneer and mudslinging ? Hmmm ?
> 
> How is Amazon better than Tidal ?


Nah, I will just stick with sneering and mudslinging. Thanks for asking tho. Guess I am not a "good sir" after all, although you didn't really mean that anyway, did you? Cheers.


----------



## Romi54

Does Amazon music sound better than Tidal?


----------



## Brava210 (Oct 27, 2019)

Romi54 said:


> Does Amazon music sound better than Tidal?


NO.......well if you like a bright, harsh, poor detail,
Then yes


----------



## Romi54

Ok thank you!


----------



## Soundizer (Oct 27, 2019)

Romi54 said:


> Does Amazon music sound better than Tidal?


No, TIDAL sounds better. On 16 bit/44/1 there is less difference, but Amazon Music - ULTRA HD vs TIDAL MASTERS I hear a much bigger advantage with TIDAL [depending on the Album].

However Amazon has ULTRA HD Albums which are only available in 16bit/44.1 on Tidal HIFI, such as  many of Michael Jackson Albums. In this case it is hard to say which sounds better on my gear. Audioquest Cobalt to Focal Clear headphones. 

all the above is based on download in highest quality, since Amazon can’t stream in full quality for over 2 minutes. The quality goes to STANDARD which is horrible.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 27, 2019)

grokit said:


> If anybody is poised to take control of the nascent HD audio streaming world, assuming Amazon is fine with their halfazz budget approach, it would be Apple. They have the music library in their own cloud, and the ability to improve their iDevices' audio hardware capabilities. Amazon has more reach, but if Steve Jobs was alive this would already be happening. Amazon needs competition. Perhaps Qobuz & Tidal will merge with Roon.



First thing, Apple is hosting a biggest part of it‘s own iCloud and Apple Music at Amazon‘s AWS cloud. They are paying amazon around 30.000.000 USD monthly for hosting alone. Apple is just now struggling to establish their own cloud storage, a long way to go for them...

Secondly, no iOS device does support more than 24/48 natively in the hardware. And Apple tries to move all audio to BT. There is no point in losless or even hires, if at the end it‘s used for lossy BT. And all BT formats are lossy.

What I‘m trying to say, is - I don‘t believe Apple would go for lossless or hires any time soon, and by soon I mean at least next 5 years...


----------



## a-LeXx

Soundizer said:


> No, TIDAL sounds better. On 16 bit/44/1 there is less difference, but Amazon Music - ULTRA HD vs TIDAL MASTERS I hear a much bigger advantage with TIDAL [depending on the Album].
> 
> However Amazon has ULTRA HD Albums which are only available in 16bit/44.1 on Tidal HIFI, such as  many of Michael Jackson Albums. In this case it is hard to say which sounds better on my gear. Audioquest Cobalt to Focal Clear headphones.
> 
> all the above is based on download in highest quality, since Amazon can’t stream in full quality for over 2 minutes. The quality goes to STANDARD which is horrible.



I already mentioned this in this thread - that is because Tidal‘s MQA masters per definition differ from any other. For MQA they have to re-master, so the chances are high it would sound differently. So, it‘s comparing apples to oranges. Those MQA albums on Tidal can easily sound better to you, but that because they are MQA, and no Big One would ever jump on MQA, they would either stay lossy or offer true lossless.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 27, 2019)

Brava210 said:


> NO.......well if you like a bright, harsh, poor detail,
> Then yes



I cannot confirm this experience on my HW (using iPhone + DFR). Amazon Music HD sounds perfectly fine to me. I compared multiple albums to Apple Music (and I would consider them a golden standard in terms of used masters) doing instant A/B switching, and there was no difference in tonality, it was neither brighter nor darker, also the same dynamic range. While Apple Music has a bit of ‚digital‘ in the sound, Amazon Music sounds absolutely organic.

But we know Amazon‘s apps are still very buggy, so YMMV depending on used HW...


----------



## mixman

a-LeXx said:


> I cannot confirm this experience on my HW (using iPhone + DFR). Amazon Music HD sounds perfectly fine to me. I compared multiple albums to Apple Music (and I would consider them a golden standard in terms of used masters) doing instant A/B switching, and there was no difference in tonality, it was neither brighter nor darker, also the same dynamic range. While Apple Music has a bit of ‚digital‘ in the sound, Amazon Music sounds absolutely organic.
> 
> But we know Amazon‘s apps are still very buggy, so YMMV depending on used HW...


I can also attest to the Amazon jacking up their high end, lacking detail, compared to Qobuz and Tidal. There is a fuzziness in the treble with less detail.


----------



## exdmd

Amazon Music HD sound quality right now just does not compare with Tidal or Qobuz. You can most likely put this down to the program using the Windows audio stack in shared mode. Regardless of the native bit depth and sample rate of the song played in Amazon Music HD Windows up or down samples to the user setting in Sounds. You can confirm this if you have an outboard DAC that shows the sample rate it is being sent. You could go into Windows Sounds and manually adjust for each song but you will still have the files sent through the Windows audio stack with some degradation: you are not getting bit perfect sound. For that you need ASIO or Wasapi exclusive mode. Tidal and Qobuz both offer exclusive mode which bypasses Windows audio and lets the stream be sent bit perfect to the DAC with automatic sample rate changing. 

Amazon has great engineers so it is a mystery why they did not enable Wasapi exclusive mode in the Windows desktop app. If they had and sound quality matched Qobuz or Tidal it would be hard for them to survive. Right now audiophiles are staying with Qobuz and Tidal because they sound better, and if you have money investing in a resolving system an extra $10 a month is small change for the better sound quality. Amazon has gotten plenty of feedback about lack of exclusive mode, now we just wait and see if they care enough about the audiophile market to make changes. If they did not want to update the Windows app they could just open their API to Roon or Audirvana for a licensing fee. I think this is unlikely but we'll see.


----------



## grokit

exdmd said:


> Amazon Music HD sound quality right now just does not compare with Tidal or Qobuz. You can most likely put this down to the program using the Windows audio stack in shared mode. Regardless of the native bit depth and sample rate of the song played in Amazon Music HD Windows up or down samples to the user setting in Sounds. You can confirm this if you have an outboard DAC that shows the sample rate it is being sent. You could go into Windows Sounds and manually adjust for each song but you will still have the files sent through the Windows audio stack with some degradation: you are not getting bit perfect sound. For that you need ASIO or Wasapi exclusive mode. Tidal and Qobuz both offer exclusive mode which bypasses Windows audio and lets the stream be sent bit perfect to the DAC with automatic sample rate changing.


I wonder if the app sounds worse in Windows for these reasons, than it does on the Mac OS. Seems like we could be talking about apples and oranges here.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 27, 2019)

grokit said:


> I wonder if the app sounds worse in Windows for these reasons, than it does on the Mac OS. Seems like we could be talking about apples and oranges here.



I guess we really do, it seems sound quality is really suffering on windows. I do not perceive anything similar on my iOS devices. The app has many problems, SQ is fortunately not among them...


----------



## exdmd

Reports are sound quality is better on macOS than Windows but macOS still suffers from the same up and down sampling as Windows. You have to go into Audio Midi and set the sample rate manually. The Amazon Music HD program still needs exclusive mode enabled on both platforms.


----------



## originalsnuffy

exdmd said:


> Amazon Music HD sound quality right now just does not compare with Tidal or Qobuz. You can most likely put this down to the program using the Windows audio stack in shared mode. Regardless of the native bit depth and sample rate of the song played in Amazon Music HD Windows up or down samples to the user setting in Sounds. You can confirm this if you have an outboard DAC that shows the sample rate it is being sent. You could go into Windows Sounds and manually adjust for each song but you will still have the files sent through the Windows audio stack with some degradation: you are not getting bit perfect sound. For that you need ASIO or Wasapi exclusive mode. Tidal and Qobuz both offer exclusive mode which bypasses Windows audio and lets the stream be sent bit perfect to the DAC with automatic sample rate changing.
> 
> Amazon has great engineers so it is a mystery why they did not enable Wasapi exclusive mode in the Windows desktop app. If they had and sound quality matched Qobuz or Tidal it would be hard for them to survive. Right now audiophiles are staying with Qobuz and Tidal because they sound better, and if you have money investing in a resolving system an extra $10 a month is small change for the better sound quality. Amazon has gotten plenty of feedback about lack of exclusive mode, now we just wait and see if they care enough about the audiophile market to make changes. If they did not want to update the Windows app they could just open their API to Roon or Audirvana for a licensing fee. I think this is unlikely but we'll see.





grokit said:


> I wonder if the app sounds worse in Windows for these reasons, than it does on the Mac OS. Seems like we could be talking about apples and oranges here.



I noticed a thread on the JRiver forums where people were streaming through the Jriver drivers to obtain "exclusive mode" for Amazon HD.  I am technically inept on these matters but maybe somebody here may want to look at that, try it, and report back if it makes a difference.


----------



## grokit

originalsnuffy said:


> I noticed a thread on the JRiver forums where people were streaming through the Jriver drivers to obtain "exclusive mode" for Amazon HD.  I am technically inept on these matters but maybe somebody here may want to look at that, try it, and report back if it makes a difference.


When I was using Windows for audio, I liked Jriver. It's good if you're mildly technically inept (me2), maybe download a demo and give it a try?


----------



## originalsnuffy

grokit said:


> When I was using Windows for audio, I liked Jriver. It's good if you're mildly technically inept (me2), maybe download a demo and give it a try?



I typically play Amazon HD through my phone and primarily through my Shanling M2 as a DAC.  So I have no issues with the service at all; it sounds like regular Redbook FLAC to me.  Must admit the Ultra HD tracks don't sound a whole lot better to me than the HD; but then again I am primarily playing it in a car.

For those who are beefing about the Windows exclusive mode issue I leave it to them to try this workaround.  Its not really an issue for me at all but wanted to offer some more information to those who are not satisfied with the Windows app.  I typically play via the Echo DOT in a home in ceiling speaker system and it sounds great.  I can hook up the PC directly to this sound system also and it sounds about the same to me.  So I am satisfied given the modest price point.  Are there some bugs?  Yep.   Do I find those bugs so intolerable that I won't use the service?  No.  I like the Amazon ecosystem and its good enough for me and I think better than competing services that use lossy formats.  I don't care to fiddle with Tidal etc.; the competition for me is with regular CD rips and HD Tracks purchases.  True, with regard to HD Tracks I typically listen to those on hi res devices not a phone so I can't really offer a well considered or definitive opinion of Amazon HD Ultra vs HD Tracks.


----------



## runssical

robm321 said:


> Until they add exclusive mode, Amazon HD is useless to me. I have a 3 month trial and still just listen to Tidal which sounds better.



I think it's only a 30 day trial. Amazon makes you pay for the base tier $9.99 after 30 days. The HD tier is considered an "add-on" and that part is free for 90 days. It's kinda sneaky on Amazon's part.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

On the latest Win10 (1903) with matched sample rate and special effects disabled, the difference should be only dithering due to audio stack doing float32 and back to integer bit rate conversion. That's in theory, my experience is that version of Win10 and DAC in use can greatly affect the actual outcome.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

runssical said:


> I think it's only a 30 day trial. Amazon makes you pay for the base tier $9.99 after 30 days. The HD tier is considered an "add-on" and that part is free for 90 days. It's kinda sneaky on Amazon's part.


Not sure it's universal, you can click on Account Settings in app and it shows renewal date for base service and separate for HD add on. Mine shows Dec-20th for both.
But thanks for heads up, wouldn't hurt for others to check their due dates.


----------



## Soundizer (Oct 28, 2019)

Anyway Amazon MUSIC HD has just completely failed after October 14th iOS update. After about a minute the quality drops from ‘24bit/96KHz’ to ‘Standard’ [can see this on yellow label and hear it].
And you can easily hear the difference when jt happens. 

This ‘Standard’ quality is much worse than even Spotify or Apple Music. It sounds compressed.

so if they don’t fix this, there is no HD, ULTRA HD, HIGH RES - it’s all mush.


----------



## Soundizer

If you have an iOS device - iPhone/iPad.
Play the track ‘Meet the Family’ from Disney Dumbo Album.
Let it play and after 1minute 32seconds click on ULTRA HD yellow label - it will have changed to STANDARD quality.


----------



## a-LeXx

Soundizer said:


> Anyway Amazon MUSIC HD has just completely failed after October 14th iOS update. After about a minute the quality drops from ‘24bit/96KHz’ to ‘Standard’ [can see this on yellow label and hear it].
> And you can easily hear the difference when jt happens.
> 
> This ‘Standard’ quality is much worse than even Spotify or Apple Music. It sounds compressed.
> ...




That's what I've been complaining about from beginning, it never worked for me, also not before the update. That's why I download music first, then listen. Streaming is completely broken. When they say 'Standard' - it's not even close to their real 'standard' 256kbps. Sounds like 64kbps to me, too many artifacts. Not listenable at all. But downloading and then playing from the internal storage works.


----------



## Soundizer (Oct 28, 2019)

a-LeXx said:


> That's what I've been complaining about from beginning, it never worked for me, also not before the update. That's why I download music first, then listen. Streaming is completely broken. When they say 'Standard' - it's not even close to their real 'standard' 256kbps. Sounds like 64kbps to me, too many artifacts. Not listenable at all. But downloading and then playing from the internal storage works.


How do you know that it really does download in ULTRA HD? That’s my concern. I don’t really care about streaming as I will always download it.

which Country are you in? might be down to AWS Amazon designated Servers inefficiency.

i am in the UK


----------



## Left Channel

grokit said:


> I wonder if the app sounds worse in Windows for these reasons, than it does on the Mac OS. Seems like we could be talking about apples and oranges here.





a-LeXx said:


> I guess we really do, it seems sound quality is really suffering on windows. I do not perceive anything similar on my iOS devices. The app has many problems, SQ is fortunately not among them...



macOS and iOS have similar issues. If you don't perceive any, then I envy you.   Just enjoy!


----------



## a-LeXx

Soundizer said:


> How do you know that it really does download in ULTRA HD? That’s my concern. I don’t really care about streaming as I will always download it.
> 
> which Country are you in? might be down to AWS Amazon designated Servers inefficiency.
> 
> i am in the UK



First, there is an easily audible difference, secondly - the battery consumption is very different for sd vs. hd vs. uhd. Worst are 24/192 albums, 4 albums with a fully loaded battery, and it‘s empty again on my new iPhone 7 with 100% battery health...


----------



## a-LeXx

Left Channel said:


> macOS and iOS have similar issues. If you don't perceive any, then I envy you.   Just enjoy!



As I said, I did not compare to tidal. And you might perceive Amazon HD bright compared to tidal, I cannot say from memory, canceled tidal half a year ago. I did however compare to Apple Music, and there is no difference in brightness there, amazon has less ‚digital glare‘ in a A/B comparison 
with instant switching... so, it might be that it‘s other way around, tidal is ‚softer‘, while Apple Music and Amazon are truer to the original. Difficult to tell what‘s right and what‘s wrong... Or it‘s ‚cable sound’ altogether, one first started this ‚brighter‘, and now everyone is hearing it...


----------



## 3Putter (Oct 28, 2019)

a-LeXx said:


> As I said, I did not compare to tidal. And you might perceive Amazon HD bright compared to tidal, I cannot say from memory, canceled tidal half a year ago. I did however compare to Apple Music, and there is no difference in brightness there, amazon has less ‚digital glare‘ in a A/B comparison
> with instant switching... so, it might be that it‘s other way around, tidal is ‚softer‘, while Apple Music and Amazon are truer to the original. Difficult to tell what‘s right and what‘s wrong... Or it‘s ‚cable sound’ altogether, one first started this ‚brighter‘, and now everyone is hearing it...


Editing my post - I either misread your posts or I don't understand them. I'm glad you like the service sans the battery drain. Enjoy it!


----------



## a-LeXx

3Putter said:


> Truer to the original? Dude, we're talking data here aren't we? How can modified data from Amazon HD that isn't coming through as advertised be truer than Tidal or other true High res music files? But, I'm glad it works for you. I really wanted it to work for me as well. I just couldn't get over the sound quality difference between Tidal and Amazon. Very, very evident.



What modified data are you talking about? A 24/96 album is played exactly as it is - as a 24/96 on my iphone/DFR combo.
And if you are talking about upsampling of non-hd content - well there is no real ‚bit-perfect‘ playback nowadays anyway, unless you are using a NOS dac.

And tidal cannot play real hires anyway, it‘s playing MQA which is a semi-lossy format based on the same sub-band lossy encoding principles as any lossy encoding. Not that it really matter much, as it still sounds good...


----------



## Left Channel

a-LeXx said:


> As I said, I did not compare to tidal. And you might perceive Amazon HD bright compared to tidal, I cannot say from memory, canceled tidal half a year ago. I did however compare to Apple Music, and there is no difference in brightness there, amazon has less ‚digital glare‘ in a A/B comparison
> with instant switching... so, it might be that it‘s other way around, tidal is ‚softer‘, while Apple Music and Amazon are truer to the original. Difficult to tell what‘s right and what‘s wrong... Or it‘s ‚cable sound’ altogether, one first started this ‚brighter‘, and now everyone is hearing it...



I'm not surprised it sounds better than Apple. The primary competitive focus is likely Apple Music and Spotify, so Amazon will be happy to hear your report. 

Since you don't have Tidal it's not possible for you to compare, but most of us would say it's the other way around: Tidal is truer. 

And again, if you do get Tidal and can't hear that, I envy you. Being able to hear a difference is actually a bit of an evil curse.


----------



## exdmd

a-LeXx said:


> What modified data are you talking about? A 24/96 album is played exactly as it is - as a 24/96 on my iphone/DFR combo.
> And if you are talking about upsampling of non-hd content - well there is no real ‚bit-perfect‘ playback nowadays anyway, unless you are using a NOS dac.
> 
> And tidal cannot play real hires anyway, it‘s playing MQA which is a semi-lossy format based on the same sub-band lossy encoding principles as any lossy encoding. Not that it really matter much, as it still sounds good...



Sorry have to disagree. Qobuz using Wasapi exclusive playback mode on their desktop player is bit perfect.


----------



## a-LeXx

Left Channel said:


> I'm not surprised it sounds better than Apple. The primary competitive focus is likely Apple Music and Spotify, so Amazon will be happy to hear your report.
> 
> Since you don't have Tidal it's not possible for you to compare, but most of us would say it's the other way around: Tidal is truer.
> 
> And again, if you do get Tidal and can't hear that, I envy you. Being able to hear a difference is actually a bit of an evil curse.



Well, I canceled tidal because of their catalog, and I wouldn‘t resubscribe just to do the testing, I‘m more interested in listening than comparing 

I don‘t believe Apple and Amazon are applying any EQing, which is exactly the same and affects only treble. If they would do any EQing, they would do it other way around, give some 3dB to a sub-500Hz region, to please the crowd...


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 28, 2019)

exdmd said:


> Sorry have to disagree. Qobuz using Wasapi exclusive playback mode on their desktop player is bit perfect.



It‘s bit-perfect until it reaches your DAC, then the real fun starts. If it’s not a NOS DAC, it would at least do oversampling, more probably even asynchronous sample rate conversion (ASR). Whether it‘s better or worse than upsampling done in the sw depends purelly on implementation. Can be better, can be worse. What I‘m trying to say is - ‘bit perfect‘ is a myth, unless you are using a real old school r2r DAC, that itself is plagued by other problems, e.g. analog output filter that needs to be tuned to one specific cut-off frequency to really sound good and not produce many artifacts, and hence sounds sub-optimal with any other sampling frequency than the one it has been tuned for...


----------



## originalsnuffy (Oct 28, 2019)

a-LeXx said:


> What modified data are you talking about? A 24/96 album is played exactly as it is - as a 24/96 on my iphone/DFR combo.
> And if you are talking about upsampling of non-hd content - well there is no real ‚bit-perfect‘ playback nowadays anyway, unless you are using a NOS dac.
> 
> And tidal cannot play real hires anyway, it‘s playing MQA which is a semi-lossy format based on the same sub-band lossy encoding principles as any lossy encoding. Not that it really matter much, as it still sounds good...



I am primarily  downloading onto my PC and phone respectively; so I can't comment on the streaming quality. I lean to playing HD (and above) and I doubt that its feasible when streaming on the road.  At home I do stream to a in ceiling speaker system and it sounds fine on a third generation DOT which is hi res capable and is feeding an Integra (Onkyo)  receiver.

On the downloads you get information on the exact bitrate if you want.  I did find it helped to set playback specifically at HD rather than use "best available'.   It did default to "standard" on my PC today when I was testing things out.  Standard is bit reduced on some playbacks from downloaded files.  So that is worth looking into in my view.

I don't understand the MQA love as it is in fact a lossy algorithm.   But they have great marketing and that is worth something.


----------



## runssical

Andrew_WOT said:


> Not sure it's universal, you can click on Account Settings in app and it shows renewal date for base service and separate for HD add on. Mine shows Dec-20th for both.
> But thanks for heads up, wouldn't hurt for others to check their due dates.



That's interesting. I wonder why the trial lengths are different between us.


----------



## 435279

a-LeXx said:


> It‘s bit-perfect until it reaches your DAC, then the real fun starts. If it’s not a NOS DAC, it would at least do oversampling, more probably even asynchronous sample rate conversion (ASR). Whether it‘s better or worse than upsampling done in the sw depends purelly on implementation. Can be better, can be worse. What I‘m trying to say is - ‘bit perfect‘ is a myth, unless you are using a real old school r2r DAC, that itself is plagued by other problems, e.g. analog output filter that needs to be tuned to one specific cut-off frequency to really sound good and not produce many artifacts, and hence sounds sub-optimal with any other sampling frequency than the one it has been tuned for...



True, but a bit pedantic, you could also say it's bit-perfect until its converted to analogue for our inefficient, poor quality human ears.

What is needed is a digital bit-perfect brain implant.


----------



## a-LeXx (Oct 29, 2019)

SteveOliver said:


> True, but a bit pedantic, you could also say it's bit-perfect until its converted to analogue for our inefficient, poor quality human ears.
> 
> What is needed is a digital bit-perfect brain implant.




That was not exactly my point. I was trying to explain that bit-perfect is a bit overrated, and upsampling as such is not ruining SQ, bad implementations of it do. Windows has a very bad upsampling implementation, which is nothing more than a pure interpolation calculator. But it's windows. Android used to have terrible upsampling until 6.x, then it was improved. iOS does not upsample by itself at all, so it's actually an Amazon's app that is doing the upsampling on iOS devices. And to my ears it's doing a decent job.
I would also prefer native sample rate output, but on iOS it's not a deal breaker for me with Amazon at the moment...


----------



## Soundizer

I have both TIDAL HIFI and Amazon MUSIC HD  - Audioquest Cobalt and Chord Mojo - DACs / Focal Clear headphones. 

TIDAL MQA for the same album vs Amazon MUSIC HD.
TIDAL in this area sounds better - less harsh, less fatiguing, more depth. 
Don;t care about the BREXIT like arguments pro or against MQA - just with my experience TIDAL Wins. 

i was hoping Amazon Music HD would at least match it as that would save me allot of money. Unfortunately not the case.


----------



## a-LeXx

Soundizer said:


> I have both TIDAL HIFI and Amazon MUSIC HD  - Audioquest Cobalt and Chord Mojo - DACs / Focal Clear headphones.
> 
> TIDAL MQA for the same album vs Amazon MUSIC HD.
> TIDAL in this area sounds better - less harsh, less fatiguing, more depth.
> ...



What was the quality on Amazon? Was it at least 24/96?
Amazon is really screwing it, they are calling anything with more than 16bit Ultra HD...


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> What was the quality on Amazon? Was it at least 24/96?
> Amazon is really screwing it, they are calling anything with more than 16bit Ultra HD...


24bit/96KHz and 24but/192KHz tracks all downloaded.


----------



## FiGuY1017

Tidals 360 audio sounds sweet. The first thing thst came to mind was this sounds like what my system did when i added a Topaz Isolation transformer last week.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

a-LeXx said:


> That was not exactly my point. I was trying to explain that bit-perfect is a bit overrated, and upsampling as such is not ruining SQ, bad implementations of it do. *Windows has a very bad upsampling implementation, which is nothing more than a pure interpolation calculator*. But it's windows. Android used to have terrible upsampling until 6.x, then it was improved. iOS does not upsample by itself at all, so it's actually an Amazon's app that is doing the upsampling on iOS devices. And to my ears it's doing a decent job.
> I would also prefer native sample rate output, but on iOS it's not a deal breaker for me with Amazon at the moment...


Used to be but not the case anymore
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...indows-resampling-not-actually-that-bad.9092/

Also check this info, the default resampling quality is 30 out of 1-60, only 1 is linear interpolation.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/ama...ssless-streaming.905493/page-39#post-15243812


----------



## Steve Wilcox

I'm streaming Amazon HD via Node 2 into Chord Qutest and RNHP, Ether 2 headphones.  I really don't think I can distinguish this stream from Qobuz. 

The Amazon catalogue seems to be a little larger in places - more Van Morrison and Bob Seger, for example.  The albums that are available in Hi Res are largely the same across both services. Presumably this is dictated by the labels?

The BluOS app doesn't yet tell you which Amazon albums are Hi Res (or 'Ultra HD' in Amazon silly speak) until you start playing them which is a bit annoying.  I'm sure they'll eventually sort this out as they did with Qobuz. 

I've 'favourited' a whole bunch of artists in the Amazon app but for the life of me I can't then find a list of these, either in the BlueOS or Amazon apps?

My three month Amazon trial runs until January and I'd say they (and Bluesound) still have some improvements to make to keep me as a paying customer. I should add that I'd really rather not do business with Amazon if it can be avoided following a very poor user experience after my account was fraudulently hacked into a while back, and concerns about their tax practices and treatment of staff.


----------



## Soundizer

Steve Wilcox said:


> I'm streaming Amazon HD via Node 2 into Chord Qutest and RNHP, Ether 2 headphones.  I really don't think I can distinguish this stream from Qobuz.
> 
> The Amazon catalogue seems to be a little larger in places - more Van Morrison and Bob Seger, for example.  The albums that are available in Hi Res are largely the same across both services. Presumably this is dictated by the labels?
> 
> ...



Have you tried TIDAL Masters on Bluesound Node 2? I understand BlueOS can play Tidal MQA.


----------



## Steve Wilcox

Soundizer said:


> Have you tried TIDAL Masters on Bluesound Node 2? I understand BlueOS can play Tidal MQA.


Yes. I thought the MQA streams sounded very good, but not quite as good as the Qobuz Hi Res streams and I have a good cable broadband connection so bandwidth isn't an issue for me. 

I ditched Tidal for Qobuz largely because the latter's musical tastes and presentation are more in tune with mine.


----------



## Soundizer

Steve Wilcox said:


> Yes. I thought the MQA streams sounded very good, but not quite as good as the Qobuz Hi Res streams and I have a good cable broadband connection so bandwidth isn't an issue for me.
> 
> I ditched Tidal for Qobuz largely because the latter's musical tastes and presentation are more in tune with mine.


Do you think Amazon ULTRA HD - 24/192 is on par with Qobuz HI Res?

i am thinking about getting Powernode2i myself.


----------



## originalsnuffy

runssical said:


> That's interesting. I wonder why the trial lengths are different between us.



In my case I did  a  trial of the service a long time ago and at the time it was the same quality as spotify and I was not impressed.  When the HD came out, I took a trial and was only offered one month free and one more month at the regular, non HD rate.  So it may depend on whether you have trialed or used the service in the past.  I can't really complain.

I can't say the ultra HD tracks sound that much different than the HD tracks, but it all sounds pretty good to me so I am keeping the service.  Its really about convenience for me.  I've already given in to Alexa so this is more of the same.


----------



## runssical

I may have had a previous trial of the lossy tier when it first was launched. So that makes sense. 

Seems like an okay service but I'm sticking to downloads and rips. I'm convinced local playback sounds better than any streaming service.


----------



## Steve Wilcox

Soundizer said:


> Do you think Amazon ULTRA HD - 24/192 is on par with Qobuz HI Res?
> 
> i am thinking about getting Powernode2i myself.



Through my Node 2 I really wouldn't be able to distinguish the Amazon an Qobuz streams at the same resolution. But if you can access the 3 month free Amazon trial that should be plenty of time to decide for yourself. 

I've been very pleased with the Node 2 as a streamer but don't use the internal DAC, though it's good, and the DACs in the 2i range are a step up from mine.  I've been thinking of upgrading my streamer to something DACless but not at all sure how better it can get?  Maybe a Moon Neo Mind?


----------



## Soundizer

Steve Wilcox said:


> Through my Node 2 I really wouldn't be able to distinguish the Amazon an Qobuz streams at the same resolution. But if you can access the 3 month free Amazon trial that should be plenty of time to decide for yourself.
> 
> I've been very pleased with the Node 2 as a streamer but don't use the internal DAC, though it's good, and the DACs in the 2i range are a step up from mine.  I've been thinking of upgrading my streamer to something DACless but not at all sure how better it can get?  Maybe a Moon Neo Mind?


NAD M10


----------



## Left Channel

a-LeXx said:


> What was the quality on Amazon? Was it at least 24/96?
> Amazon is really screwing it, they are calling anything with more than 16bit Ultra HD...



Amazon and their competitors are getting away with this because it's been an evolving standard. Common usage is to define "Hi-Res" as anything higher than 16 bits or higher than 44.1 sample rate. The Amazon "Ultra HD" tier is based on that definition. 

The audio hardware industry in Japan started out in 2014 defining their Hi-Res Audio standard as 24/44.1, 24/48, or 24/96 (or higher I suppose), and that was followed the next year by the recording industry in the US defining their Hi-Res Music standard as "greater than CD quality" (which they stated was 20/48 or greater). 

As I understand it, within the last couple of years the Japanese have narrowed the Hi-Res Audio standard to 24/96 or higher. However, at this point most marketers worldwide are ignoring them.


----------



## originalsnuffy

I think the 24 bit distinction matters the most.   I do think the experience of feeling like the air is lifted around the recording starts around 24 - 88.   On the other hand, I have some Beatles from 2009 or so that are 24 bit but only 44 khz and they sound better to me than the standard 16 bit redbook.


----------



## loplop

I signed up for a trial a few weeks ago and found Amazon music fatiguing.  It seemed volume-compensated (even with that feature off) and bright.  It also wouldn't stream HD to DAPs, not recognizing their DACs and resampling everything to 16/44.1 via Android.

That said, I tried it again last night on a whim, and it's now reporting the DAP can stream at 24/176.4* (whereas before it was 24/44.1), and is now streaming up to whatever the track quality is set at.  Initial listening showed much improvement, so I compared it vs Tidal HiFi this morning; through FiiO M11 Pro, I find no difference between Tidal and Amazon Music HD sound quality.  Where I thought I heard a slight difference, Amazon Music HD seemed to come out on top today.  Previously, there was no contest: I preferred Tidal.

I still far prefer Tidal's app, but for SQ, I'm now liking Amazon Music HD.

*I need to try this on my Cayin N6ii to see if it is also recognized as a full-bitrate streamer.


----------



## 435279

loplop said:


> *I need to try this on my Cayin N6ii to see if it is also recognized as a full-bitrate streamer.



Its not on my N6ii 24/44.1 only.


----------



## loplop

SteveOliver said:


> Its not on my N6ii 24/44.1 only.


Darn. Must be a FiiO thing, then?  Maybe Cayin can help...

I should add to my post above: I currently don’t have a DAP that does full Tidal MQA unfold, so Tidal is operating at a slight disadvantage in my quick comparison.


----------



## kdbur

Bit off topic but I wondered if there is a considered view whether listening with BT headphones/BT reciever is any better or worse if you are streaming the track initially from 16/44 vs 320kbps?

Hope my Q makes sense!


----------



## VZWDJ

How is the quality?


----------



## Left Channel

dlilker said:


> How is the quality?



Short answer: audiophiles are not happy with it. 

Long answer: many Apple and Spotify subscribers like it, most Tidal and Qobuz subscribers do not. The Amazon apps allow all sorts of resampling that audiophiles cannot abide.


----------



## bocky

Does anyone want to share a family plan? I am just one person or two and I can be the plan owner or a member. Thanks.


----------



## Scarpad

Got a Dragonfly Black so far used it on my MacBook, windows pc, and IPhone XS Max. I’m pretty impressed on both laptops it has really made the 24bit tracks shine. On the phone it adds extra expansive vocals and punchier mids.

Well worth the $98


----------



## loomisjohnson

conclusions from a spotify acolyte after two months or so of free amazon trial:
1. for critical listening on good gear amazon flat out sounds better--richer/louder/more perceived detail. from memory tidal probably does sound better (i.e. less colored) than amazon, but the difference isn't cost-effective
2. amazon's catalog is there, but its search function is flawed--it will sometimes come up with no results for an artist, then find the same artist when you search by album title.
3. radio stations/playlists are vastly superior on spotify--amazon's are extremely minimal/primitive in comparison. likewise, the recommendation algorithim on amazon is worthless, whereas spotify's is uncannily accurate.
4. amazon's ui isn't intuitive like spotify, but not bad. there is , however, nothing unique or user-friendly about it--they make the listener do too much work in terms of knowing what to listen to, how to find it, etc. 
i'm inclined to keep both, but if i had to choose one it would still be spotify, which i realize offends the purists out there.


----------



## jt25741

I was hoping for exclusive mode on Mac or PC as a minimum requirement for me to move onto this service after the special intro period.   Since that is upon me in a month and nothing so far, I have cancelled now.   I hope Amazon will listen to us audiophiles.... the difference with maintaining integrity of the source resolution vs resample is large..and Im done waiting for now.    If anyone who works for Amazon Music service monitors this stuff.... please fix this.  Ill be back then.


----------



## Scarpad

So has anyone gotten a explanation of the Frankensteining of albums, is it a licensing issue, a technical one?


----------



## Mosauwer

anyone here using this outside of USA? i mean, i stay in Bangladesh, now i want to use this from my country. can i use it using a proper VPN?


----------



## grokit

After some testing I'm convinced that 'loudness normalization", in the Mac desktop app at least, does exactly jack squat.


----------



## areek

Those are thinking of switching from tidal to amazon music, what is the justification? Curious as well as interested. I currently use tidal.


----------



## a-LeXx

areek said:


> Those are thinking of switching from tidal to amazon music, what is the justification? Curious as well as interested. I currently use tidal.



Switched even before Music HD has been launched. 
Justifications:

1. Catalog
2. Easy integration with Amazon Echo (we have 5 of them, also children can easily operate them to play their music)
3. Integration with Bose Soundtouch 10 (doesn't support Tidal, supports Amazon Music and can be voice controlled by Amazon Echo)


----------



## 3Putter

areek said:


> Those are thinking of switching from tidal to amazon music, what is the justification? Curious as well as interested. I currently use tidal.


Had Amazon Unlimited. Loved it for doing outdoor work with a speaker and at the gym. Sound quality was decent. Got into the rabbit hole of good sound and had to try Qobuz. Great sound but limited catalog for my tastes. Tried Tidal, good sound, selection, and UI. Upgraded to Amazon HD and didnt like SQ. It isnt Qobuz or Tidal. Hard to go backwards in SQ so sticking with Tidal.


----------



## Blueshound24

a-LeXx said:


> Switched even before Music HD has been launched.
> Justifications:
> 
> 1. Catalog
> ...




Forgot one. Much better price!


----------



## exdmd (Nov 6, 2019)

*TL;DR*: Amazon Music HD does not sound as good as Tidal or Qobuz on Windows 10. Lack of exclusive mode playback and automatic sample rate changing using an external DAC is a _significant_ disadvantage. The liner notes and credits are almost nonexistent compared to the competition. There is no Roon or Audirvana integration in sight.

Right now Amazon Music HD only plays on Windows using the default shared mode. Regardless of the sample rate and bit depth of the native file on Amazon's server it will be up or down sampled in Windows mixer to your user setting. Windows shared mode is known to degrade sound quality. That is why Qobuz and Tidal allow you to bypass the Windows mixer and stream directly to your DAC. Archimago blogged about why upsampling in the Windows 10 mixer is bad for sound quality.

When I listen to a track in Amazon Music HD then the same in Qobuz I notice a veil is lifted, soundstage opens up in width and depth and imaging is more precise. There is more air around performers and instruments and small details like reverb trails can be heard.

I don't consider the differences subtle and can't enjoy listening to music using Amazon Music HD at present. I believe the sound degradation is primarily caused by shared mode but can't be sure until Amazon enables Wasapi exclusive mode, if they ever do. It may not be a priority for them.

Amazon may have just set up Amazon Music HD in large part to provide 3D audio for their $199 Echo Studio speakers. Sell someone the Echo Studios and they need to subscribe so each Echo Studio continues to make money for Amazon monthly from an Amazon Music HD subscription.

I have had both Tidal and Qobuz and dropped Tidal because I prefer the catalog at Qobuz, it has more of the artists and albums I like to listen to. I also prefer to support a streaming service that does not promote MQA. I like jazz and classical, you may prefer hip hop and rap. If you are a Jay Z fan you need Tidal. Last I checked Jay Z is a minority owner in TIDAL but majority owner of the parent company Aspiro. Tidal also pays artists more than other streaming companies (with the exception of Napster) which is nice.

That being said I think for most audiophiles in the US Tidal HiFi at $19.99/month is probably the best deal for performance/price. Even if you do not own a DAC that is MQA certified the Tidal desktop player does the first unfold to 24/96 and for most audiophiles 24/96 is just fine.

I see no compelling reason to save $5 a month over Tidal switching to Amazon Music HD at this time. The Tidal player is also more mature than Qobuz, which can still stutter and hang up occasionally. I use Audirvana 3.5.0 to stream Qobuz because it is very stable.

Now if six months down the road Amazon updates the desktop app so it supports Wasapi exclusive mode I will be glad to take another listen. I will be cancelling before my free trial runs out. Sorry Amazon audiophiles expected better sound quality from you. Hope to see improvements in 2020.


----------



## areek

@3Putter @a-LeXx @exdmd thank you for the response.


----------



## a-LeXx

Blueshound24 said:


> Forgot one. Much better price!



Well, not exactly this. The decision for us was - do we keep amazon + tidal, or is amazon alone good enough... We decided it‘s good enough.
Now with Music HD it‘s even better on iOS and my decent headphones, on all the loudspeakers it doesn‘t actually matter...


----------



## Blueshound24

a-LeXx said:


> Well, not exactly this. The decision for us was - do we keep amazon + tidal, or is amazon alone good enough... We decided it‘s good enough.
> Now with Music HD it‘s even better on iOS and my decent headphones, on all the loudspeakers it doesn‘t actually matter...




Well that's all fine and good but I'd say Amazon at $12.99/month over Tidal at $20 is a significant savings and well worth it for me.


----------



## 3Putter

If sacrificing SQ is worth $8 a month more power to you. If you feel Amazon SQ is equal or better than Tidal or Qobuz then better still. Enjoy whatever you listen to!


----------



## Blueshound24

Actually I find the sound comparable to Tidal and I am not going to sweat any small perceived difference, if any. And I plan to save even more by getting an annual subscription to Amazon which brings the monthly cost down to $10.75/month. That is significant for me.



> *Get 12 months for the price of 10 when you switch your Amazon Music Unlimited plan to an annual subscription.
> 
> $12.99/month. Or yearly for $129.00/year. That is $10.75 per month.*


----------



## robm321 (Nov 7, 2019)

Tidal has a yearly subscription for $15.99.

Even if the Wasapi exclusive is added later on, the thin, bright sound of Amazon turns me off.


----------



## Blueshound24

robm321 said:


> Tidal has a yearly subscription for $15.99.
> 
> Even if the Wasapi exclusive is added later on, the thin, bright sound of Amazon turns me off.



I did not know that title had a annual discount. That is good to know, thank you.

 I see you have Von Schweikert speakers in your signature. I had the original VR 4 and really loved them. Then of course, always wanting better, I sent them back to Albert to be modified to the newer VR 5. And I was never happy with them after the mod, and wished that I had never had it done. If it's not broke...

If your VR4 Jr is anything like the original VR4 you have an exceptional speaker. Albert sent back with the modified speakers the old parts he removed and I was always going to put them back in but never got around to it.


----------



## 3Putter

Blueshound24 said:


> Actually I find the sound comparable to Tidal and I am not going to sweat any small perceived difference, if any. And I plan to save even more by getting an annual subscription to Amazon which brings the monthly cost down to $10.75/month. That is significant for me.


----------



## 3Putter

I wish I liked the sound. Just hard to go backwards. Just shrill and lacks detail. They have EVERYTHING and that is compelling.


----------



## a-LeXx

Blueshound24 said:


> Well that's all fine and good but I'd say Amazon at $12.99/month over Tidal at $20 is a significant savings and well worth it for me.



For me with yearly payment its 129 (79 + 50 for HD) per year or 10,75 per month...


----------



## grokit (Nov 7, 2019)

I never tried out Amazon Music (Unlimited) before the HD version. But they gave me a free Prime account anyways, that also lets me stream any music cd's that I've purchased over the years. I remember they had a high-quality playback option back then that sounded pretty damn good when engaged, a noticeable difference for sure. Probable about the same as what they're calling HD these days. Just an observation.


----------



## grokit

.


----------



## Soundizer

robm321 said:


> Tidal has a yearly subscription for $15.99.
> 
> Even if the Wasapi exclusive is added later on, the thin, bright sound of Amazon turns me off.


Where have you seen this? I could not find it on TIDAL HI-FI for UK.


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> That's what I've been complaining about from beginning, it never worked for me, also not before the update. That's why I download music first, then listen. Streaming is completely broken. When they say 'Standard' - it's not even close to their real 'standard' 256kbps. Sounds like 64kbps to me, too many artifacts. Not listenable at all. But downloading and then playing from the internal storage works.


It seems like you changed your mind now and prefer Amazon MUSIC HD over TIDAL HIFI?


----------



## Left Channel

Soundizer said:


> Where have you seen this? I could not find it on TIDAL HI-FI for UK.



That one is not Hi-Fi. It's a lower-res "Premium" family plan: https://support.tidal.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003662825-Subscription-Types  But until the Amazon folks fix their resampling issues, there's often not much difference anyway.


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 8, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> It seems like you changed your mind now and prefer Amazon MUSIC HD over TIDAL HIFI?



How did you come to this conclusion? I always said I prefer amazon to tidal, mostly because of catalog. I did say that amazon‘s streaming is completely broken and not usable at all, but I also said that I never stream but always download first, so broken Music HD streaming is of no real problem for me... YMMV of course...

I switched from tidal to amazon music at least half a year ago, if not even earlier... I also never compared Music Hd to tidal, as I can‘t do an A/B comparison and from memory I couldn‘t tell which sounds better. I compared Amazon Music HD to Apple Music though, Music HD  sounds (a bit) better to my ears...


----------



## exdmd

If you are using Amazon Music HD on Windows 10 and have problems with the sound quality try this fix published at Audioholics and see if it works for you. It seems the resampling done in Windows mixer is causing audible aliasing artifacts. I believe Matt Poes is working on an article about sound quality problems in Amazon Music HD. If he shows the aliasing problem in MusicScope it may encourage Amazon to finally add exclusive mode. Of course they could counter that audiophiles are only a small percentage of their customers and Amazon Music HD is good enough as is.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Nov 8, 2019)

I am not really sure if I can hear the difference, but if you enable JRiver as a wdm device, you can play Amazon Music through JRiver.  I have it set for Creative Audigy WDM on Windows 10 sound options.   JRiver is not actually running but its driver seems to be enabled.   I am not sure why; but somehow the output seems to be 24 - 48 even though the track is at 24 - 96.
But it sounds just fine.   So there is that option.  Before I went through these steps; and was not using the JRiver WDM driver,  the Amazon HD App was showing output at 24 - 96 through the soundcard.

I have three person playback scenarios right now.   HTPC; using Jriver driver as discussed above.   Whole home audio; Echo DOT Generation 3 (which is hi res capable) to an Onkyo receiver and from there to a whole home Niles audio system.  That sounds way better than I would have expected and I can control the whole thing from another room using my Echo (orignal) in the kitchen.  Scenario 3 is in the car; iphone through Apple Connecting Kit to a Shanling M2S.   That sounds just like native FLAC tracks on the M2S.   

I have not experimented with streaming as I like the idea of FLAC.

At some point I need to fiddle with playlists on the iphone; right now i just play by artist and album.  That is the same way I use the Shangling M2S when I am not using it as a DAC.


----------



## Left Channel

exdmd said:


> If you are using Amazon Music HD on Windows 10 and have problems with the sound quality try this fix published at Audioholics and see if it works for you. It seems the resampling done in Windows mixer is causing audible aliasing artifacts. I believe Matt Poes is working on an article about sound quality problems in Amazon Music HD. If he shows the aliasing problem in MusicScope it may encourage Amazon to finally add exclusive mode. Of course they could counter that audiophiles are only a small percentage of their customers and Amazon Music HD is good enough as is.



No way am I going into the Sound control panel to make a change every time a track in a different resolution begins. I think that's the only solution on Macs too. And that's not at all what I call enjoying music. Amazon needs to fix this.


----------



## Left Channel

originalsnuffy said:


> I am not really sure if I can hear the difference, but if you enable JRiver as a wdm device, you can play Amazon Music through JRiver.  I have it set for Creative Audigy WDM on Windows 10 sound options.   JRiver is not actually running but its driver seems to be enabled.   I am not sure why; but somehow the output seems to be 24 - 48 even though the track is at 24 - 96.
> But it sounds just fine.   So there is that option.  Before I went through these steps; and was not using the JRiver WDM driver,  the Amazon HD App was showing output at 24 - 96 through the soundcard.



It's resampling — downsampling, in your example — and that's not good. Amazon needs to fix this.


----------



## 3Putter

Seems like an awful lot of work to get something to sound better just to save a few bucks a month but this is pretty cool to see how everyone finds a way to get what they want.


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> How did you come to this conclusion? I always said I prefer amazon to tidal, mostly because of catalog. I did say that amazon‘s streaming is completely broken and not usable at all, but I also said that I never stream but always download first, so broken Music HD streaming is of no real problem for me... YMMV of course...
> 
> I switched from tidal to amazon music at least half a year ago, if not even earlier... I also never compared Music Hd to tidal, as I can‘t do an A/B comparison and from memory I couldn‘t tell which sounds better. I compared Amazon Music HD to Apple Music though, Music HD  sounds (a bit) better to my ears...


Apologies I misunderstood. It was a question and i think I misinterpreted one if your recent posts - my fault. 
I can do A.B tests as currently have both TIDAL HIFI . AMAZON MUSIC HD and TIDAL wins to my ears via my gear.


----------



## jt25741 (Nov 8, 2019)

Qobuz just dropped a bomb on the market and took the gloves off.  $15 for highest teir...head to head with Amazon.  A bit more, library is not quite there yet, but they got the sound working with Audirvana and others (no resample).... so it plays well with others.   I cancelled amazon and went to Qobuz.


----------



## Soundizer

jt25741 said:


> Qobuz just dropped a bomb on the market and took the gloves off.  $15 for highest teir...head to head with Amazon.  A bit more, library is not quite there yet, but they got the sound working with Audirvana and others (no resample).... so it plays well with others.   I cancelled amazon and went to Qobuz.


Where have you seen this? It is still £24.99 a month on the UK site which is very expensive


----------



## Double C

jt25741 said:


> Qobuz just dropped a bomb on the market and took the gloves off.  $15 for highest teir...head to head with Amazon.  A bit more, library is not quite there yet, but they got the sound working with Audirvana and others (no resample).... so it plays well with others.   I cancelled amazon and went to Qobuz.



I just jumped in as well...


----------



## Soundizer

USA only offer


----------



## 3Putter

I liked Qobuz and the sound and UI was solid. They have some quirks. I did notice they cater to people who like Jazz and French music. Not a whole lot in there that I liked. Tidal has a great catalog and I don't listen to Hip Hop. Amazone has an even better catalog. If only their sound and UI were better.


----------



## exdmd (Nov 8, 2019)

Left Channel said:


> No way am I going into the Sound control panel to make a change every time a track in a different resolution begins. I think that's the only solution on Macs too. And that's not at all what I call enjoying music. Amazon needs to fix this.



I completely agree. I think the fix was to prove that there was no problem with the streams coming from Amazon but instead just the default Direct Sound from Windows 10 used in shared mode. Amazon needs to enable Wasapi exclusive mode, even if the setting is off in the desktop player for users without an external DAC.

It looks like current USA Qobuz Hi-Fi subscribers will automatically have their monthly bill dropped to $14.99. Do you really want to deal with no exclusive mode in Amazon Music HD when Qobuz costs the same? Yeah, Prime members can still save two bucks a month. Qobuz is taking the challenge seriously.


----------



## robm321

Blueshound24 said:


> I did not know that title had a annual discount. That is good to know, thank you.
> 
> I see you have Von Schweikert speakers in your signature. I had the original VR 4 and really loved them. Then of course, always wanting better, I sent them back to Albert to be modified to the newer VR 5. And I was never happy with them after the mod, and wished that I had never had it done. If it's not broke...
> 
> If your VR4 Jr is anything like the original VR4 you have an exceptional speaker. Albert sent back with the modified speakers the old parts he removed and I was always going to put them back in but never got around to it.



Von Schweikert is my favorite speaker designer. Yes, the VR4 jr came out after the VR4 and sounds very similar. After the VR4 jr came out, his line up became very expensive, so I'm glad that I got these. I've been happy ever since.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Seems like Qobuz is under pressure. Dropping price to $14.99


----------



## Left Channel

Andrew_WOT said:


> Seems like Qobuz is under pressure. Dropping price to $14.99



Yes we've been discussing this above and in the Qobuz thread. It's clearly a response to Amazon, but they sure didn't sound pressured in their press conference, and it's not only a price drop: they're also making news by doing away with their MP3 tier.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

They are done.


----------



## Left Channel

Andrew_WOT said:


> They are done.



Not necessarily. Their stated goal is 1% of the market. Seems doable, given all the people here and on other forums responding well to this announcement by signing up for new monthly and annual plans. Before releasing the new pricing, they must have done the math. I'd worry more about Tidal.


----------



## Anaz

Left Channel said:


> Not necessarily. Their stated goal is 1% of the market. Seems doable, given all the people here and on other forums responding well to this announcement by signing up for new monthly and annual plans. Before releasing the new pricing, they must have done the math. I'd worry more about Tidal.



I for one jumped ship from Tidal this evening.


----------



## tradyblix

I dont know why everyone is so quick to give amazon yet another revenue stream. they already control almost all online shopping in the US, they put gorgeous bookstores out of business across the country, they now control most of the internet infrastructure game, eventually you will just be 8 of 18, tertiary adjunct to unimatrix zero, Amazon Prime Borg. Support some smaller companies for a change, especially if the service is controlled by the labels anyway and more or less the same.


----------



## Left Channel

Anaz said:


> I for one jumped ship from Tidal this evening.



Thank you. Case closed.


----------



## Left Channel

tradyblix said:


> I dont know why everyone is so quick to give amazon yet another revenue stream. they already control almost all online shopping in the US, they put gorgeous bookstores out of business across the country, they now control most of the internet infrastructure game, eventually you will just be 8 of 18, tertiary adjunct to unimatrix zero, Amazon Prime Borg. Support some smaller companies for a change, especially if the service is controlled by the labels anyway and more or less the same.



I know, right? I make it a point to visit independent bookstores for the same reason. And because they each offer or do something better than Amazon, which is why they're still there. Kind of like Qobuz.


----------



## Soundizer

The deal is in USA only for QOBUZ so it is ridiculously expensive in UK and more than TIDAL HIFI. The deal ends Jan 2020, so what then - back to 24.99 a month.


----------



## robm321 (Nov 9, 2019)

I might actually head over to QOBUZ. They seem to be the only true hi res out there. Tidal is basically MQA which isn't true hi res and limits your DAC options if you want to decode it. And Amazon says its hi res, but you cannot actually stream it unless they add an exclusive output option.

I still have 4-5 months of my Tidal yearly plan, so I have time to see where things will settle. But I am optimistic about QOBUZ even with their limited catalog.


----------



## 3Putter

I had Qobuz and it did sound terrific. Limited catalog is an understatement for my tastes. If you like Euro rock, off beat stuff, classical and symphony, and art house jazz you're in luck. If you like American rock, southern rock or alt country forget it. You'll be out of albums you care about quickly. I grew tired of exploring and finding very little I cared about hearing again. I did find a gal called Caroline Spence on her album 'Mint Condition'  and loved it. Sounded great. When Qobuz went off to find more artists I liked nothing clicked. But when I downloaded the same album on Tidal, listened to it, then allowed Tidal to feed me new music it brought me all kinds of new music I enjoyed.


----------



## brianlg

Qobuz could be the clear winner if they get their catalog updated. And it seems like they are doing this as a lot of what it was missing on my trial is currently there. Still a ways to go. 
Deezer is another service I'm actually enjoying their UI and recommendations. But again, needs more work as you are limited to favoriting 2000 albums and their HiFi service doesn't yet allow you to stream in lossless on mobile.


----------



## Soundizer

robm321 said:


> I might actually head over to QOBUZ. They seem to be the only true hi res out there. Tidal is basically MQA which isn't true hi res and limits your DAC options if you want to decode it. And Amazon says its hi res, but you cannot actually stream it unless they add an exclusive output option.
> 
> I still have 4-5 months of my Tidal yearly plan, so I have time to see where things will settle. But I am optimistic about QOBUZ even with their limited catalog.


I didn’t realise TIDAL has a yearly plan? No such details on TIDAL UK website.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Nov 9, 2019)

Before I had mentioned that I installed the JRiver WDM driver but I was limited to 48 khz.  Turns out that somewhere along the line I messed up the audio card settings.  I had the card set improperly; I reset the default for the card to 24 bit 192 khz.  Now the app is correctly playing back at the upper limit of the tracks.   Thus, a 96 khz song plays at 96 khz, and not 48khz.  The system reports it can go up to 192 khz.  Not many tracks come down at that 192khz resolution however.  Anyway to my ear the sound is fully satisfying.  Is it being resampled or bit perfect?  I have no idea.  But it now sounds full bodied and correct.   In my case I am outputting my old Audigy 2 with an Audigy Rx driver (that is supported under Windows 10 64 bit) to a NAD 710 receiver and from there to PSB Alpha speakers.  And all is sounding very good.

I continue to enjoy the sound from the iphone app through my Shanling M2S in the car also.  That also is 192 khz capable.   The only downside to that is that there is a 20 second lag from when I first choose a song until something starts playing.   There are no lags after that; just the initial start is delayed.

The song catalog is generally good.  Some strange omissions; I could find "It Don't Come Easy" by Ringo Starr in studio format.  The Bob Seger catalog is hit or miss.   But Beatles, Grateful Dead, Phish, the Who. Rolling Stones have pretty good representation.  The Jazz selection was pretty good for the artists I was looking for, but not exhaustive.  Classical may take more work; I can find certain pieces by most composers but good luck on finding multiple versions of the same works.  If you are really into Deutsche Gramaphone vs. Philips or Szell vs. Bernstein vs. Von Karajan for a given piece well good luck.  You kind of get what you get.


----------



## stuartmc

Hmmm....very interesting and enjoyable thread to read - all 51 pages.  I've been giving Amazon HD a spin for the past month and a half and I can now say that 'm more than satisfied with it.  I had a few hiccups early on, but now it's performance is nearly 100% as advertised. I say nearly, because the only minor issue I have is my DAC/headphone amp (Gustard A20H) always shows the PCM stream at 192KHz. The HD label used to be a little buggy when I clicked on it to show: 1) Track Quality 2) Device Capability and 3)Currently playing at.   Now it is spot on every time. "Track Quality" and "Currently playing at"  are now always the same, despite my DAC showing  192KHz.  I have  tracks playing from 16 bit, 44.1khz  all the way up to 24 bit, 192khz. I can detect no extra brightness, other than a little more detail and air on some of the higher resolution tracks.  Perhaps there was an update to the Amazon Music HD application that I'm running on my Ipad.  Sound quality is outstanding and I find the catalog is deeper than Tidal  for the more obscure stuff.  The price differential for the "family plan" makes it an easy decision for me....goodbye Tidal.  I'm running a 2018 Ipad mini into an Uptone Audio Regen via the Apple CCK adaptor, then into a Tanly USB-DDC and finally to the Gustard A20H via I2S connection.  With this setup, Amazon is very satisfying.


----------



## 3Putter

Sorry, friend. Too much evidence here to believe that all of a sudden you, with your impressive list of gear, has 'facts' outside what others find. The price shoppers sure, I get. This, not quite.


----------



## originalsnuffy

3Putter said:


> Sorry, friend. Too much evidence here to believe that all of a sudden you, with your impressive list of gear, has 'facts' outside what others find. The price shoppers sure, I get. This, not quite.



OK, I call foul on that one.   Output from an Apple idevice can in fact sound good when fed through an external DAC.  The brands don't matter; the process does.   And for whatever reason when Apple devices using the Amazon HD app feed data to an external DAC is shows up on the DAC at a high bit rate no matter what the underlying audio bit rate is.  That's just how Apple rolls using the Camera Connecting Kit.

Its likely not bit perfect; but that does not mean it can't sound good.


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 10, 2019)

originalsnuffy said:


> OK, I call foul on that one.   Output from an Apple idevice can in fact sound good when fed through an external DAC.  The brands don't matter; the process does.   And for whatever reason when Apple devices using the Amazon HD app feed data to an external DAC is shows up on the DAC at a high bit rate no matter what the underlying audio bit rate is.  That's just how Apple rolls using the Camera Connecting Kit.
> 
> Its likely not bit perfect; but that does not mean it can't sound good.





stuartmc said:


> Hmmm....very interesting and enjoyable thread to read - all 51 pages.  I've been giving Amazon HD a spin for the past month and a half and I can now say that 'm more than satisfied with it.  I had a few hiccups early on, but now it's performance is nearly 100% as advertised. I say nearly, because the only minor issue I have is my DAC/headphone amp (Gustard A20H) always shows the PCM stream at 192KHz. The HD label used to be a little buggy when I clicked on it to show: 1) Track Quality 2) Device Capability and 3)Currently playing at.   Now it is spot on every time. "Track Quality" and "Currently playing at"  are now always the same, despite my DAC showing  192KHz.  I have  tracks playing from 16 bit, 44.1khz  all the way up to 24 bit, 192khz. I can detect no extra brightness, other than a little more detail and air on some of the higher resolution tracks.  Perhaps there was an update to the Amazon Music HD application that I'm running on my Ipad.  Sound quality is outstanding and I find the catalog is deeper than Tidal  for the more obscure stuff.  The price differential for the "family plan" makes it an easy decision for me....goodbye Tidal.  I'm running a 2018 Ipad mini into an Uptone Audio Regen via the Apple CCK adaptor, then into a Tanly USB-DDC and finally to the Gustard A20H via I2S connection.  With this setup, Amazon is very satisfying.



I have 4 different iPads, including a pro, an iPhone and an ipod touch, all of them show exactly the same behavior: after around 90s of playback, I would notice a very substantial decrease in sound quality, and when clicking on a yellow badge, it would show that playback is done at 'standard'. I have a fast 50mbps internet connection and perfect WiFi coverage at my home, so it's not my internet.

I wonder how you have a different experience, maybe amazon's servers serve different parts of the world differently (I'm in Germany). Downloading however works flawlessly, and at a max. data rate my internet provider is capable of. Only streaming is completely broken...


----------



## 3Putter (Nov 10, 2019)

I primarily use my LG V30. Amazon sounded less than in comparison to my own downloaded music or streamed Tidal. Amazon sounded good and better than other services. But not close to Tidal or Qobuz thinking back to when I had it. If I come through my laptop and Dragonfly Dac same. Its Amazon HD. Sounds ok. It very well could be your ears hear Amazon as your preference. Just not buying some of the justifications for Amazon. Competition is good for the industry to a point. Hopeful Amazon doesnt put what most audiophiles feel is great sound out of the game.


----------



## runssical

Left Channel said:


> Not necessarily. Their stated goal is 1% of the market. Seems doable, given all the people here and on other forums responding well to this announcement by signing up for new monthly and annual plans. Before releasing the new pricing, they must have done the math. I'd worry more about Tidal.



For once I agree with you


----------



## runssical

I predicted this price drop by Qobuz a while back. Only way they can survive. But I do wonder how they can operate at this price. Their margins will probably shrink significantly.


----------



## runssical

I noticed this Qobuz deal is limited to 100,000 customers. So some people are rushing to sign up. It's brilliant marketing. But remember, when Qobuz went bankrupt 3 years ago court documents showed they had only 4,000 or so subscribers to their lossless service at that time. 

Does anyone know how many subs Qobuz currently has in the USA? I'm curious.


----------



## runssical

Oh, and this goes without saying, time to cancel those Amazon HD trials and switch to Qobuz.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Isn't that just intro price?
I liked Qobuz SQ, but catalogue was quite shallow and app very spartan with little to offer with discovery or even specific genre selection. There were some randomv crashes on Android and Windows too.
But Amazon in current state not worth paying for either. They have one more trial month left to fix exclusive mode.


----------



## Left Channel

runssical said:


> Does anyone know how many subs Qobuz currently has in the USA? I'm curious.



As of August 2019, six months after launch: 25,000 in the USA out of 200,000 worldwide. https://variety.com/2019/music/news...roads-six-months-after-u-s-launch-1203302742/



Andrew_WOT said:


> Isn't that just intro price?



The offer is open to the first 100,000 sign-ups or until January 31st, whichever comes first. The offer prices are then locked in, but of course all prices may go up in the future. USA only at this time. https://www.qobuz.com/us-en/music/streaming/offers


----------



## stuartmc

a-LeXx said:


> I have 4 different iPads, including a pro, an iPhone and an ipod touch, all of them show exactly the same behavior: after around 90s of playback, I would notice a very substantial decrease in sound quality, and when clicking on a yellow badge, it would show that playback is done at 'standard'. I have a fast 50mbps internet connection and perfect WiFi coverage at my home, so it's not my internet.
> 
> I wonder how you have a different experience, maybe amazon's servers serve different parts of the world differently (I'm in Germany). Downloading however works flawlessly, and at a max. data rate my internet provider is capable of. Only streaming is completely broken...




That must be frustrating as heck. I don't know what to make of it, but your suggestion that the feed in Germany may be different is a plausible explanation. If I experienced any of this downgrading behavior, I would drop Amazon like a hot rock and not try it again until I knew it was fixed. 

Someone else mentioned that Ipads function a little differently as a USB streaming server and that they might not be "bit perfect."  Using Apple's CCK adapter it will in fact be bit perfect provided your DAC works driverless and its usb input is powered in such a way that it passes the Ipad's power check (you can search Head-Fi and find plenty of threads on this).  This is very hardware/firmware dependent, so that is why I listed my gear and the chain of connection very specifically.  In my case, when I connected the usb cable directly into the Tanly DDC, it didn't work, but when I used the Regen before it, it functioned perfectly. I suspect that the Regen acted like a powered hub that so many Ipad users say they need to get their DAC working.  When I then tried adding an Audioquest jitterbug into the mix, the whole thing was borked again.  I then tried bypassing the Tanly and ran the Ipad's CCK feed into the Regen and then into the Gustard's USB input. Nope, nothing....then removed the Regen and much to my surprise, it worked fine again.  I then added the Jitterbug back in and it continued to work perfectly.   Zut Alors!! 

This is maddening, folks, and the only reason I'm sharing this dribble is to impress upon some that not only is usb playback a persnickety matter that is VERY hardware/firmware dependent, but apparently, so too is the performance of Amazon Music HD.   If you follow the DAP threads like I have, you will know that the functionality and quality of playback on various Fiio, Ibasso and Hiby DAPs varies widely.  (We can reasonably assume that the same holds true for all kinds of playback devices). The Amazon and DAP forums are all over the place on what the real problem is. Some say the DAP software has to be fixed to work with Amazon HD because certain DAPs in their lineup work great with it and others don't. Then there are some DAP manufacturers (Fiio) laying the blame squarely on Amazon's shoulders and still others, like Hiby, that release a firmware upgrade for the R5 that fixes nearly everything.

So, in my (very) particular case, Amazon HD is working quite well in both functionality and sound quality -- enough for me to ditch Tidal and appreciate the savings. Obviously, your mileage may vary.


----------



## Brava210

I have done another evaluation of Qobuz vs Amazon today. The harshness on some of my favourite albums seems to have subsided quite a lot.
Flicking between the same track on the 2 platforms is very similar sound quality through my LG V40 and valve amp into Audio Technica M40 phones
Which I suppose is good news


----------



## brianlg (Nov 10, 2019)

Amazon *NEEDS* to fix the fact that some albums have a mix-match of bit depths/sample rates where the same album has some tracks "ULTRA HD" and others just "HD". That's a huge mess. An album should never vary.


----------



## GlennDS

originalsnuffy said:


> I am not really sure if I can hear the difference, but if you enable JRiver as a wdm device, you can play Amazon Music through JRiver..


Using the WDM driver does not bypass the Windows mixer. The audio goes out from  Amazon Music HD to the Windows mixer, then it goes to JRiver MC. Unless you know of some special integration of WDM, then I would like to know it.


----------



## Scarpad

tradyblix said:


> I dont know why everyone is so quick to give amazon yet another revenue stream. they already control almost all online shopping in the US, they put gorgeous bookstores out of business across the country, they now control most of the internet infrastructure game, eventually you will just be 8 of 18, tertiary adjunct to unimatrix zero, Amazon Prime Borg. Support some smaller companies for a change, especially if the service is controlled by the labels anyway and more or less the same.




yeah i was in the market for a new ereader and i went with a kobo i can convert my books and its not cluttered with ads


----------



## GlennDS

tradyblix said:


> I dont know why everyone is so quick to give amazon yet another revenue stream.


Amazon Music does something that 99% of the other services don't do. They have a radio feature that can mix genres. Amazon's feature is called 'My Soundtrack' which plays various tracks based off of your library and listening history. I listen to several different genres (older and newer hard rock, country, jazz, smooth jazz,etc.) and Amazon & Deezer are the only services that will play an automated mix of tracks.


----------



## 3Putter

GlennDS said:


> Amazon Music does something that 99% of the other services don't do. They have a radio feature that can mix genres. Amazon's feature is called 'My Soundtrack' which plays various tracks based off of your library and listening history. I listen to several different genres (older and newer hard rock, country, jazz, smooth jazz,etc.) and Amazon & Deezer are the only services that will p
> 
> Never had a problem with the My Mix choices on Tidal which uses several of my selected/downloaded artists and plays other suggested artists. I don't stray too far off genres but if you want to get specific I tend to have multiple sub-genres of rock and country music.


----------



## GlennDS (Nov 11, 2019)

3Putter said:


> Never had a problem with the My Mix choices on Tidal


Yes, Tidal's My Mix will make several different pre-made playlists, each based off it's own genre. I'm not looking for multiple pre-made playlists that each have it's own genre, I want an automated stream of tracks with varying genres.


----------



## 3Putter

GlennDS said:


> Yes, Tidal's My Mix will make several different pre-made playlists, each based off it's own genre. I'm not looking for multiple pre-made playlists that each have it's own genre, I want an automated stream of tracks with varying genres.


Pre-Made from what? Some of my tracks some are new artists. I don't think these are pre-made but maybe I don't fully understand. I wouldn't call the songs in each list from the same genre but I guess you could call it that. And I suppose I don't stray too far off Rock or Country. Enjoy Amazon, wish I could abide but this dude can't.


----------



## GlennDS

3Putter said:


> Pre-Made from what? Some of my tracks some are new artists. I don't think these are pre-made but maybe I don't fully understand.


Pre-made means that Tidal has made a playlist for you based off of your library, they will introduce new tracks and new artists. Each of the playlists is based off of a general genre (you are not going to find an old country track mixed in with a new heavy metal track). If there are 15 tracks in your playlist, that's what you get, 15 tracks. Yes the tracks in the My Mix will change every once and a while. You can take the different playlists and put them together but Tidal doesn't make it easy to do depending on which device you are using.

Amazon's 'My Soundtrack' is a radio station based off of all my tracks (including all genres). When I start playing the 'My Soundtrack' station, it will play a continuous stream of mixed music until I stop it, it'll play mixed content for over 12 hours if I wish it to do so.

I get out of bed before 4:30am and that early in the morning I just want to push one button to get my stream of music playing (this is Amazon's My Soundtrack), I do not want to go to several different playlists and have to put them together and mix them myself every few hours (that is Tidal My Mix).

But, to each his own.


----------



## 3Putter

Thanks for the detail. A good way to discover new music and sounds exciting. Enjoy!


----------



## Soundizer

stuartmc said:


> That must be frustrating as heck. I don't know what to make of it, but your suggestion that the feed in Germany may be different is a plausible explanation. If I experienced any of this downgrading behavior, I would drop Amazon like a hot rock and not try it again until I knew it was fixed.
> 
> Someone else mentioned that Ipads function a little differently as a USB streaming server and that they might not be "bit perfect."  Using Apple's CCK adapter it will in fact be bit perfect provided your DAC works driverless and its usb input is powered in such a way that it passes the Ipad's power check (you can search Head-Fi and find plenty of threads on this).  This is very hardware/firmware dependent, so that is why I listed my gear and the chain of connection very specifically.  In my case, when I connected the usb cable directly into the Tanly DDC, it didn't work, but when I used the Regen before it, it functioned perfectly. I suspect that the Regen acted like a powered hub that so many Ipad users say they need to get their DAC working.  When I then tried adding an Audioquest jitterbug into the mix, the whole thing was borked again.  I then tried bypassing the Tanly and ran the Ipad's CCK feed into the Regen and then into the Gustard's USB input. Nope, nothing....then removed the Regen and much to my surprise, it worked fine again.  I then added the Jitterbug back in and it continued to work perfectly.   Zut Alors!!
> 
> ...


I am in the UK and via my iPad/iPhone can see the quality dropping to Standard, but then going back up. It is fine over cellular. 
 Does not happen on my Mac - all fine.

Windows Computer users also reported this problem.


----------



## muski (Nov 11, 2019)

jt25741 said:


> Qobuz just dropped a bomb on the market and took the gloves off.  $15 for highest teir...head to head with Amazon.  A bit more, library is not quite there yet, but they got the sound working with Audirvana and others (no resample).... so it plays well with others.   I cancelled amazon and went to Qobuz.


Last month I switched from Tidal to Amazon HD to Qobuz. I'm very happy with the Qobuz SQ, catalog, apps & their new lower price.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Does anybody know if any portable devices can directly download Amazon HD files other than phones?  It sure would be nice to download files for offline playback on digital audio players.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

originalsnuffy said:


> Does anybody know if any portable devices can directly download Amazon HD files other than phones?  It sure would be nice to download files for offline playback on digital audio players.


Amazon music app supports download on all platforms, including desktop. But obviosly you can play through app only.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Andrew_WOT said:


> Amazon music app supports download on all platforms, including desktop. But obviosly you can play through app only.



Andrew, do you have direct experience downloading to say, a FIIO or Shanling unit or something of that nature?  I am not referring to phones.  I could not get that to work with my Cayin and looking for scenarios that are proven to work; not just for streaming for for download.  I have no issues with using the app for playback.  With the iphone I also need to use an external DAC for full fidelity which is annoying.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Sorry, PCs (Win10) and Android tablets and phones only. 
Not familiar with DAPs you are referring to (thought they are thing from the past). 
What OS do they run, can you install Amazon Music app on them?


----------



## 435279

originalsnuffy said:


> Andrew, do you have direct experience downloading to say, a FIIO or Shanling unit or something of that nature?  I am not referring to phones.  I could not get that to work with my Cayin and looking for scenarios that are proven to work; not just for streaming for for download.  I have no issues with using the app for playback.  With the iphone I also need to use an external DAC for full fidelity which is annoying.



You don't say what Cayin model you have. It would obviously need to be an Android DAP that ideally supported the Play Store. For example the Cayin N6ii that I own, allows me to download music from Amazon Music for offline playback.


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 12, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> I am in the UK and via my iPad/iPhone can see the quality dropping to Standard, but then going back up. It is fine over cellular.
> Does not happen on my Mac - all fine.
> 
> Windows Computer users also reported this problem.



right, cellular works fine, because for cellular you can actually set it accordingly - you just hard code streaming rate to HD/UHD, and it stays like that.
For WiFi, there is no option to select streaming quality, it is always auto-selected by the app.

I have a suspicion that the problem is related to longer ping times from Europe to US-based servers. When I look at the app, how it's populating the buffer, it's always done in small chunks. Fast loading a chunk, than multiple seconds nothing happens. Then a next chunk. At some point of time, usually around 90s, this buffering would suddenly speed up, and the rest of the song will be downloaded in just couple of seconds. When playback reaches that point in the buffer, where it went from slow to fast, the sound quality would drop to 'standard'.

How I see it from a developer point of view: the app has standard size very small windows of few ms to download a chunk of streamed content. When a substantial part of that window is used up by a slow ping, the app would get fewer data than anticipated, even if the data rate is high. Based on that, it makes a decision: this internet connection is flawed, need to reduce the quality and download fast  to fill up the whole buffer with low quality, to keep playback going...

Obviously, this is a bug in the logic. But also obviously, Amazon is not making any attempts to fix it. I opened multiple support tickets, have written this on amazon's own forum, multiple users confirmed this... Still nothing happening...


----------



## originalsnuffy (Nov 12, 2019)

SteveOliver said:


> You don't say what Cayin model you have. It would obviously need to be an Android DAP that ideally supported the Play Store. For example the Cayin N6ii that I own, allows me to download music from Amazon Music for offline playback.


The unit is the orphaned Cayin  N5II.   The Play Store does not seem to be supported on my device.   I sideloaded the app but it freezes before actually working.   The version of Android is supposedly supported but no joy.  Cayin has publicly acknowledged that the unit is at end of software support.   So I am looking for a unit that really works.   Your unit is the first I have heard of that definitely supports the app so thanks for that!

On the downloads with your N6II; does it work on SD cards or only on internal memory?


----------



## 435279

originalsnuffy said:


> The unit is the orphaned Cayin  N5II.   The Play Store does not seem to be supported on my device.   I sideloaded the app but it freezes before actually working.   The version of Android is supposedly supported but no joy.  Cayin has publicly acknowledged that the unit is at end of software support.   So I am looking for a unit that really works.   Your unit is the first I have heard of that definitely supports the app so thanks for that!
> 
> On the downloads with your N6II; does it work on SD cards or only on internal memory?



It gives me the option for both, but at the moment I've saved Amazon offline music onto the internal memory so I can swap around my library of SD cards without affecting the offline music.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Nov 12, 2019)

7.8.6.216 was released for Win10.
Nope, no exclusive mode yet, but my initial impression is that brightness is subdued.
You can download it from here
Don't forget to turn off Loudness optimization and set app volume to 100% after install, it resets everything to defaults.


----------



## tradyblix

Yeah I’m not sure what the difference really is utility between playlists and and a stream. I guess if you run out of the playlist songs early....


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Andrew_WOT said:


> 7.8.6.216 was released for Win10.
> Nope, no exclusive mode yet, but my initial impression is that brightness is subdued.
> You can download it from here
> Don't forget to turn off Loudness optimization and set app volume to 100% after install, it resets everything to defaults.


The quality on Windows is quite impressive now, even with my lesser DAC. 
Doing A/B with ripped flacs, can't say I can hear any difference at all.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Wow, is it new, just noticed?


----------



## brianlg

Curious is any/many of you have cancelled Tidal or Qobuz for Amazon HD? I'm temped to, at least until Tidal drops price or Qobuz gets their catalog on par.


----------



## exdmd

brianlg said:


> Curious is any/many of you have cancelled Tidal or Qobuz for Amazon HD? I'm temped to, at least until Tidal drops price or Qobuz gets their catalog on par.



Depends on how resolving your system and how good your ears are. Amazon Music HD without exclusive mode sounds inferior to Qobuz. With Qobuz now at $14.99 for US residents it is an easy choice. Discover some new music on a service whose priority is the best sound quality of any streaming service.


----------



## Left Channel

brianlg said:


> Curious is any/many of you have cancelled Tidal or Qobuz for Amazon HD? I'm temped to, at least until Tidal drops price or Qobuz gets their catalog on par.



In this thread only one has declared a switch from Qobuz to Amazon. That was before the special Qobuz pricing was announced. 

A few more have said they're switching from Tidal, as Amazon is good enough for them and also cheaper. 

Most have stated they are not switching to Amazon, because Qobuz and Tidal sound better.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

brianlg said:


> Curious is any/many of you have cancelled Tidal or Qobuz for Amazon HD? I'm temped to, at least until Tidal drops price or Qobuz gets their catalog on par.


90 days free trial, try for yourself.


----------



## 435279

Left Channel said:


> In this thread only one has declared a switch from Qobuz to Amazon. That was before the special Qobuz pricing was announced.
> 
> A few more have said they're switching from Tidal, as Amazon is good enough for them and also cheaper.
> 
> Most have stated they are not switching to Amazon, because Qobuz and Tidal sound better.



I dropped our Spotify family plan for the Amazon Music HD family plan, my Qobuz subscription will lapse in January and I won't be renewing it, as Tidal + Amazon Music seem to be the best options for me.

I reckon Amazon are not specifically targeting Tidal and Qobuz subscribers they are looking to steal subscribers from Spotify and so for me at least they seem to have achieved their objective.


----------



## Left Channel

SteveOliver said:


> I dropped our Spotify family plan for the Amazon Music HD family plan, my Qobuz subscription will lapse in January and I won't be renewing it, as Tidal + Amazon Music seem to be the best options for me.
> 
> I reckon Amazon are not specifically targeting Tidal and Qobuz subscribers they are looking to steal subscribers from Spotify and so for me at least they seem to have achieved their objective.



Agreed, Amazon Music HD is primarily targeting the millions of Spotify and Apple Music subscribers out there. Makes sense that you'd switch from Spotify. And I'll count your dropping Qobuz as a preference for Tidal, also totally understandable.


----------



## kdphan

I switched from Tidal to Amazon.
I have a family subscription to Amazon so it's much cheaper and the catalog is about the same for me.


----------



## gooeyrich

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/amazon-giving-away-unlimited-music-200200002.html


----------



## Brava210

I have kind of switched. I am still comparing qobuz with Amazon. I am finding the amazon quality a lot better than when it was rolled out.
I am only comparing albums that are familiar to me and it seems very good.
I also am not noticing the previous volume exaggeration on amazon.


----------



## iridium7777

anyone know if they fixed the iOS app up sampling issue?


----------



## iridium7777

welp, just re-downloaded the app and tested it myself, still an issue.  says song available in 16/44, detects 24/96 dac and says it's playing in 16/44 but my dac output is showing that it's playing at 96KHz.  switching immediately over to tidal the issue of up sampling goes away.  wrote amazon an email but for now deleting the app and still sticking with tidal/spotify.




iridium7777 said:


> anyone know if they fixed the iOS app up sampling issue?


----------



## exdmd

Until Amazon fixes the app so it can work in exclusive mode and allows selection of output device (your external DAC) you are going to have to deal with resampling in both Windows and iOS. Both Tidal and Qobuz allow exclusive mode and selection of output device in their desktop apps for Window and iOS. Since there is basically no customer service for Amazon Music HD we have no idea what Amazon is up to. The best thing they did was cause Qobuz to lower their price in the US. I keep watching to see if Tidal is going to match Qobuz $14.99 monthly pricing.


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 14, 2019)

exdmd said:


> Until Amazon fixes the app so it can work in exclusive mode and allows selection of output device (your external DAC) you are going to have to deal with resampling in both Windows and iOS. Both Tidal and Qobuz allow exclusive mode and selection of output device in their desktop apps for Window and iOS. Since there is basically no customer service for Amazon Music HD we have no idea what Amazon is up to. The best thing they did was cause Qobuz to lower their price in the US. I keep watching to see if Tidal is going to match Qobuz $14.99 monthly pricing.


You are confusing iOS with osx. iOS is an operating system of iphones, ipads and ipods. There is nothing to configure there, also no exclusive modes. It's also not doing any resampling by itself, any resampling is continuously done by the app.
So, people thinking that resampling in Amazon's app on iOS is a bug are thinking wrong, it's how amazon decided to implement it in their iOS app.
Why they've done this is beyond my understanding though...

There was no resampling in place before amazon changed to a 9.xxx version of the iOS app in preparation for Music HD launch. They obviuosly see this upsampling as a feature, basically - dac is always reporting high resolution, that must be pleasing for a user.... They obviously have no idea of what they are actually doing. The unnecessary upsampling just heavily drains battery, without having any positive effects at all...


----------



## 3Putter (Nov 14, 2019)

exdmd said:


> Until Amazon fixes the app so it can work in exclusive mode and allows selection of output device (your external DAC) you are going to have to deal with resampling in both Windows and iOS. Both Tidal and Qobuz allow exclusive mode and selection of output device in their desktop apps for Window and iOS. Since there is basically no customer service for Amazon Music HD we have no idea what Amazon is up to. The best thing they did was cause Qobuz to lower their price in the US. I keep watching to see if Tidal is going to match Qobuz $14.99 monthly pricing.


Amazon HD sounds inferior on Android as well (from my LG V30 for example). Why should Tidal reduce their pricing to match Qobuz? They have as good as sound, maybe better, and they have a much more extensive catalog. Their UI is superior and much easier so I would argue they have a better product. I have competitors all the time market their services at bottom of the barrel rates and guess what customers that attracts? They can have 'em. I am always willing to pay more for something of higher quality, better service/customer service, and a high level of reliability. I can't understand the thinking of price matching for the sake of price matching. If anything, Tidal has something the other two HD services don't and could justify a price increase. And, if downward pricing pressure commoditizes this type of service do you feel the quality will improve?


----------



## brianlg

3Putter said:


> Amazon HD sounds inferior on Android as well (from my LG V30 for example). Why should Tidal reduce their pricing to match Qobuz? They have as good as sound, maybe better, and they have a much more extensive catalog. Their UI is superior and much easier so I would argue they have a better product. I have competitors all the time market their services at bottom of the barrel rates and guess what customers that attracts? They can have 'em. I am always willing to pay more for something of higher quality, better service/customer service, and a high level of reliability. I can't understand the thinking of price matching for the sake of price matching. If anything, Tidal has something the other two HD services don't and could justify a price increase. And, if downward pricing pressure commoditizes this type of service do you feel the quality will improve?



It's not just matching Qobuz, Tidal is the only lossless streaming option at $20/mo (that I know of). Deezer Hifi is $15, Qobuz is $15, Amazon HD is $15. I really hope they lower.


----------



## grokit (Nov 15, 2019)

I'm going to have to give Qobuz an audition with their new pricing structure. I was going to wait until I was more Roon-ready, but I'm okay with this accelerating my plans. I will start the trial tomorrow as I like the 15th as a billing date. I like Amazon HD, but want to try the supposed best. I'll probably give Roon a trial tomorrow as well.

_edit: _It's actually good timing for this, as my Yggdrasil GS is supposed to be delivered tonight. I love new Schiit !
_edit2:_ Oh well on Roon for my music server, it doesn't meet the minimum requirements 
It's an old Mac Mini Core Duo, 1st-gen Intel but no Ivy Bridge. Works for Amazon and Tidal, better check Qobuz; good news all they seem to need is a 16-bit soundcard, not much else but we'll see. I don't want a new Mac Mini. I like this one, but there's always eBay for something in between like an old i5.​


----------



## Soundizer

brianlg said:


> It's not just matching Qobuz, Tidal is the only lossless streaming option at $20/mo (that I know of). Deezer Hifi is $15, Qobuz is $15, Amazon HD is $15. I really hope they lower.


Qobuz is £25 a month - extremely expensive. Not worth it.


----------



## iridium7777

it's funny i contacted the support yesterday from the app directly, again, notifying them of this issue and asking for it to be fixed.  within minutes someone generic from india answered me and asked me to follow a plethora of steps and to send them data log and that he'll then reach out to someone on the technical side.

i'm not going to waste my time doing all of that, but i was going to waste my time and maybe simply replying stating "please forward to developers, they'll know what i'm talking about without any data logs".  but i have no horse in this race and am pretty content with my streaming choices right now sans amazon.




a-LeXx said:


> There was no resampling in place before amazon changed to a 9.xxx version of the iOS app in preparation for Music HD launch. They obviuosly see this upsampling as a feature, basically - dac is always reporting high resolution, that must be pleasing for a user.... They obviously have no idea of what they are actually doing. The unnecessary upsampling just heavily drains battery, without having any positive effects at all...


----------



## Left Channel

Soundizer said:


> Qobuz is £25 a month - extremely expensive. Not worth it.



Apparently @brianlg is referring to the limited-time offer of Qobuz for $15/mo in the USA only. Despite one stray article on the What Hi-Fi website, that offer has not been extended to other countries.

For many in the core Qobuz demographic — most of whom hang out on forums that discuss equipment much more expensive than the average Head-Fi rig — the full price does not seem to be a deterrent. There's not a lot of them out there, but Qobuz is only targeting 1% of the market.


----------



## a-LeXx

iridium7777 said:


> it's funny i contacted the support yesterday from the app directly, again, notifying them of this issue and asking for it to be fixed.  within minutes someone generic from india answered me and asked me to follow a plethora of steps and to send them data log and that he'll then reach out to someone on the technical side.
> 
> i'm not going to waste my time doing all of that, but i was going to waste my time and maybe simply replying stating "please forward to developers, they'll know what i'm talking about without any data logs".  but i have no horse in this race and am pretty content with my streaming choices right now sans amazon.



you lucky b*stard   When I was opening a request for this issue, I‘m always getting a call from an eastern-european aunty who  has no clue, not even how to contact technical support.  You are at least getting a call center in India, might be just few blocks away from where the real developers are...


----------



## mjm2705

Been lurking on thread for a while and dipping in and out of Amazon HD during the 3 month trial.

I have the Spotify family plan at the moment at Amazon HD is tempting as it clearly sounds better in certain environments and as a Prime member, isn't too much more expensive.

Coup!e of qualifications for me though:

1. Most of my listening is via (AptX enabled) BT headphone (various) so the quality jump is marginal (if technically present)

2. The inability to separate HD & Ultra HD in download settings (Android) ... I'm happy to stream UHD at home on wired headphones but don't want to fill my phone / DAP storage with huge UHD files ... I want to download HD but stream UHD, sometimes ... Currently this isn't possible 

Not sure I'll be keeping Amazon.


----------



## a-LeXx

mjm2705 said:


> Been lurking on thread for a while and dipping in and out of Amazon HD during the 3 month trial.
> 
> I have the Spotify family plan at the moment at Amazon HD is tempting as it clearly sounds better in certain environments and as a Prime member, isn't too much more expensive.
> 
> ...



If you are doing most of the listening on aptX headphones, you should not be getting any better SQ on Amazon vs. Spotify. Spotify uses the same data rate as aptX (320kbps), but with a much better adaptive codec. AptX is actually a very old and inefficient codec, so, theoretically, whether the input is compressed or not shouldn‘t actually matter.

I agree that Amazon has a lot to be desired in terms of flexibility, right now it‘s almost unusable at certain scenarios. For your use case, I would stick with Spotify...


----------



## 3Putter

brianlg said:


> It's not just matching Qobuz, Tidal is the only lossless streaming option at $20/mo (that I know of). Deezer Hifi is $15, Qobuz is $15, Amazon HD is $15. I really hope they lower.


Deezer the same as Tidal? C'mon, dude. Qobuz has a fraction of the catalog. Amazon has lesser SQ. Again, tell me why, if I'm Tidal and have a superior service should I lower my price to match the lesser competition? You want the cheapest and that is your right. But what you're saying is 'My Chevy Captiva does everything a Land Rover does, basically, so Land Rover should match GM's price.


----------



## Steve Wilcox

I don't think it's fair to say that Qobuz's catalogue is a fraction of Tidal's.  I think they're comparable overall with Qobuz being better for jazz and classical and Tidal being better in other areas.  Qobuz has a lot more Hi Res content.  I'm paying 25 pounds pm for Qobuz in the UK rather than 20 for Tidal because it's worth it for me. I'm trialling Amazon HD and, if Amazon improve their service in a couple of ways (being able to 'favorite' artists and direct mode from PC) I will find the choice difficult at the end of the free Amazon trial.


----------



## 3Putter

Steve Wilcox said:


> I don't think it's fair to say that Qobuz's catalogue is a fraction of Tidal's.  I think they're comparable overall with Qobuz being better for jazz and classical and Tidal being better in other areas.  Qobuz has a lot more Hi Res content.  I'm paying 25 pounds pm for Qobuz in the UK rather than 20 for Tidal because it's worth it for me. I'm trialling Amazon HD and, if Amazon improve their service in a couple of ways (being able to 'favorite' artists and direct mode from PC) I will find the choice difficult at the end of the free Amazon trial.


No, you're right, track numbers are comparable. I didn't see much High Res in the music I care for in their catalog. Some, sure, but not much. I found alot of Canadian Rock bands I listen to limited in Qobuz. I can listen to any one of ten albums in Tidal but only one or two in Qobuz. But having had two rounds with Qobuz and Tidal, two rounds with Amazon HD and I can say that Tidal, has something better than the rest. The UI is easier, intuitive, and smooth in comparison to Qobuz and Amazon HD. It's faster, too. You couple that with a better selection of artists that I listen to and I can't see why they should lower their price point. If you like the Qobuz library better that is awesome but I would bet that there are more people who like what I like than who care to listen to Jazz and Classical. May mean I'm 'base' but as much as I appreciate those styles of music I just don't get out of it what you might.


----------



## Steve Wilcox

Yeah, this really illustrates why competition and choice are so important (and I'm a socialist).  We all have different tastes and preferences. I listen to some jazz and classical but there's actually more than enough in these genres on all the quality streaming services for me.  I listen mostly to mainstream rock and similar. What I didn't like about Tidal was its highlighting of rap, hip hop and the like.  I've got pretty wide musical tastes but just felt Tidal was catering for 'somone else'.


----------



## GlennDS

Steve Wilcox said:


> ...What I didn't like about Tidal was its highlighting of rap, hip hop and the like.  I've got pretty wide musical tastes but just felt Tidal was catering for 'somone else'.


+1
Exactly why I stopped using them a year ago. Although when I tried again a few weeks ago, it wasn't as bad.


----------



## 3Putter (Nov 15, 2019)

GlennDS said:


> +1
> Exactly why I stopped using them a year ago. Although when I tried again a few weeks ago, it wasn't as bad.


I swear I wrote that about rap/hip hop. I'm not a fan of Jay Z or any closely resembled genre to his music. I respect him to a point. I respect any artist to a point but not a fan of a lot of music Tidal promotes. I feel Tidal still promotes Hip Hop and some of the rap artists more than others but all it takes is a little legwork to find/discover what you do like and the application does well. I wanted to love Qobuz but geez Louise, can't find diddly for what I listen to - rock, southern rock, Alt country, etc etc. I've found a great deal of music I had never heard of before from Tidal. When I go to Amazon HD they have it but it doesn't sound as nice. I check Qobuz and they 'might' have a one or two albums of a particular artist but I found they really are thin at Rock, Country, Alt Country, Alt Rock. And, after using all three services I really, really feel the Tidal UI is much simpler, intuitive, and smooth. Wish I did love RAP and HIP HOP, have you heard how good it sounds on Tidal? I listen to a few tracks here and there just to hear the music. But can't take too much of it, unfortunately. My kids would love it but they think Bose headphones are quality and I'm a huge geek who doesn't know good sound.


----------



## Marlowe

Steve Wilcox said:


> Yeah, this really illustrates why competition and choice are so important (and I'm a socialist).  We all have different tastes and preferences. I listen to some jazz and classical but there's actually more than enough in these genres on all the quality streaming services for me.  I listen mostly to mainstream rock and similar. What I didn't like about Tidal was its highlighting of rap, hip hop and the like.  I've got pretty wide musical tastes but just felt Tidal was catering for 'somone else'.



Frankly, I don't understand this. I don't like rap or hip-hop either (or dance music or almost all contemporary pop), but I never pay any attention to Tidal's home page or suggestions. I listen to a wide range of things, but primarily rock and folk from the '60s through the '90s and Tidal's catalog is pretty good on this. While there are a couple of holes that bug me (Jerry Garcia's '70s solo albums are still missing and there is almost no Four Seasons (though IIRC there was previously), I find what I want more than 95% of the time. 

I took a free trial of Qobuz when it debuted in the US earlier this year, but find huge, dealbreaking holes in their catalog without even looking hard and canceled it. Since I don'y believe there has been any improvement in their catalog for me, I'm not tempted by their price cut. I probably will keep Tidal over cheaper Amazon also even though I find the SQ pretty close. While Amazon does have the albums I mentioned above that are missing on Tidal, it has its own strange omissions (e.g., Ringo, Ringo Starr's best and most popular album, is inexplicably missing from Amazon but is on Tidal) so catalog is pretty much a wash. But while I'd rate the Tidal desktop and mobile apps as only so-so, they are gems compared to Amazon's app, which is just abominable.


----------



## Tooros

I agree with the above. Tidal’s ‘not on the front page’ offering is huge and caters for just about everything I searched for. I do get the sentiments further up though. The front page has almost nothing on it of the slightest interest to me and it does, without doubt, annoy me and feels like it’s pushing content my way that I have zero interest in (Not so much the hip-hop per se, but the swathes of instant pop etc). It did feel as was said ‘not for me.’
I took a leave from tidal to try the 90 day amazon trial and it has exactly the same issue. It’s nearly over and I’m unsure where to go next. I do have Apple Music for all the family and their plethora of devices so I may retire in there. See what happens down the line. I’m not so fired up about the hirez thing. I just want CD quality streaming.


----------



## GlennDS (Nov 16, 2019)

Marlowe said:


> *Frankly, I don't understand this.* I don't like rap or hip-hop either (or dance music or almost all contemporary pop), *but I never pay any attention to Tidal's home page or suggestions.* I listen to a wide range of things,... *I find what I want more than 95% of the time*.


Maybe when I retire I'll have the luxury of extra time for searching for tracks and then making my own playlists. But currently I don't have the time or inclination.

I want the music app to see what music I like and I want it to automatically play songs that I like (similar to Amazons's My Soundtrack radio station or Deezer's Flow radio station). Sure I could just tell the app to play all of the tracks in my own library (I have over 5.000 tracks that I own and have downloaded from CDs, and I have several more thousand tracks that I have 'liked'), but then I am listening to the same tracks over and over, I want the app to introduce me to new tracks that I may like. But the music app needs to be smart enough.


----------



## Soundizer

To my ears there is a significant difference in sound quality between Amazon HD vs TIDAL HIFI for same albums. Tidal wins every time = smoother, less shouty in mids, more depth and just sweeter all round.


----------



## Soundizer

Unfortunately TIDAL Customer service has become a joke. They are taking more than 7 days to reply to my messages. All i am asking for is deal for 12months for HIFI subscription.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

After trying Tidal, Qubuz, Deezer, and Amazon HD, Deezer app was the best with recommendations and flows.
But their hi-fi tier is also shared mode and there is no way to tell if you are getting flac or mp3 as they removed that indicator.


----------



## Left Channel

3Putter said:


> I found alot of Canadian Rock bands I listen to limited in Qobuz.





Marlowe said:


> I took a free trial of Qobuz when it debuted in the US earlier this year, but find huge, dealbreaking holes in their catalog without even looking hard and canceled it.



They've done a lot of licensing agreements in the USA since launch, and I'd be happy to search for a few artists for you. At the launch of Qobuz USA I specifically looked for a couple of Canadian and European artists just to push the envelope, and since then have seen big improvements in filling in the gaps I found. In addition, the USA GM has promised (on another forum) all or most of the remaining missing titles I asked about will show up within a few weeks.


----------



## bfreedma (Nov 16, 2019)

Left Channel said:


> They've done a lot of licensing agreements in the USA since launch, and I'd be happy to search for a few artists for you. At the launch of Qobuz USA I specifically looked for a couple of Canadian and European artists just to push the envelope, and since then have seen big improvements in filling in the gaps I found. In addition, the USA GM has promised (on another forum) all or most of the remaining missing titles I asked about will show up within a few weeks.



If you're willing, could you see if Qobuz has the following artists?  They weren't there when I originally trialed:

The Aristocrats (The Govan/Beller/Minnemann version,  not the older band)
Scale the Summit
Opeth

Modern prog prog/fusion was a pretty big gap.

Much appreciated!


----------



## Left Channel

bfreedma said:


> If you're willing, could you see if Qobuz has the following artists?  They weren't there when I originally trialed:
> 
> The Aristocrats (The Govan/Beller/Minnemann version,  not the older band)
> Scale the Summit
> ...



I found a lot! I've posted my reply in the Qobuz thread, as we're getting OT here: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/qobuz-lossless-streaming-service-thread.856101/page-64#post-15311463


----------



## bfreedma

Left Channel said:


> I found a lot! I've posted my reply in the Qobuz thread, as we're getting OT here: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/qobuz-lossless-streaming-service-thread.856101/page-64#post-15311463



Thanks - much appreciated!


----------



## 3Putter

Left Channel said:


> They've done a lot of licensing agreements in the USA since launch, and I'd be happy to search for a few artists for you. At the launch of Qobuz USA I specifically looked for a couple of Canadian and European artists just to push the envelope, and since then have seen big improvements in filling in the gaps I found. In addition, the USA GM has promised (on another forum) all or most of the remaining missing titles I asked about will show up within a few weeks.


That is interesting. I was looking at The Sheepdogs and one other that Tidal has almost all albums. I appreciate the offer to help. Not sure why I wouldn't be able to find an artist by typing in their name. Is there a way to find more releases of an artist when the first search only shows two albums?


----------



## Left Channel

3Putter said:


> That is interesting. I was looking at The Sheepdogs and one other that Tidal has almost all albums. I appreciate the offer to help. Not sure why I wouldn't be able to find an artist by typing in their name. Is there a way to find more releases of an artist when the first search only shows two albums?



Results for The Sheepdogs on Qobuz, posted in the Qobuz thread: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/qobuz-lossless-streaming-service-thread.856101/page-64#post-15313393


----------



## clerkpalmer

originalsnuffy said:


> Before I had mentioned that I installed the JRiver WDM driver but I was limited to 48 khz.  Turns out that somewhere along the line I messed up the audio card settings.  I had the card set improperly; I reset the default for the card to 24 bit 192 khz.  Now the app is correctly playing back at the upper limit of the tracks.   Thus, a 96 khz song plays at 96 khz, and not 48khz.  The system reports it can go up to 192 khz.  Not many tracks come down at that 192khz resolution however.  Anyway to my ear the sound is fully satisfying.  Is it being resampled or bit perfect?  I have no idea.  But it now sounds full bodied and correct.   In my case I am outputting my old Audigy 2 with an Audigy Rx driver (that is supported under Windows 10 64 bit) to a NAD 710 receiver and from there to PSB Alpha speakers.  And all is sounding very good.
> 
> I continue to enjoy the sound from the iphone app through my Shanling M2S in the car also.  That also is 192 khz capable.   The only downside to that is that there is a 20 second lag from when I first choose a song until something starts playing.   There are no lags after that; just the initial start is delayed.
> 
> The song catalog is generally good.  Some strange omissions; I could find "It Don't Come Easy" by Ringo Starr in studio format.  The Bob Seger catalog is hit or miss.   But Beatles, Grateful Dead, Phish, the Who. Rolling Stones have pretty good representation.  The Jazz selection was pretty good for the artists I was looking for, but not exhaustive.  Classical may take more work; I can find certain pieces by most composers but good luck on finding multiple versions of the same works.  If you are really into Deutsche Gramaphone vs. Philips or Szell vs. Bernstein vs. Von Karajan for a given piece well good luck.  You kind of get what you get.


Hi, can you explain the process of connecting the iPhone to something like the shanling to play amazon music files? Is this basically utilizing the shanling as a usb dac? Any advantages or disadvantages to this versus something like a dragonfly red? Thanks.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Nov 19, 2019)

clerkpalmer said:


> Hi, can you explain the process of connecting the iPhone to something like the shanling to play amazon music files? Is this basically utilizing the shanling as a usb dac? Any advantages or disadvantages to this versus something like a dragonfly red? Thanks.



Connecting an iphone to an external DAC is a bit of black magic.   In general; the most important thing is to obtain the latest generation of the Apple Camera Connecting Kit.   That one has input for external power.  The old kit generally won't work; you will get power error messages.  Keep in mind that you will have to actually power this connector for things to work!

Once you have that wired up; put the device into DAC mode as opposed to USB mode.  That is really it.   Only issue; at least on my phone the first connection of the day takes about 30 seconds.  So you have to be patient.

As far as using a portable DAP in DAC mode vs. a dedicated DAC goes I will offer the famous YMMV comment.   I don't know about the dragonfly; but I know people like it.  The Shanling M2S that I primarily use is just fine to my ear.  But that is a whole 'nuther discussion around here.  I

 have also tried out my Shanling M0 and that worked also but in my car the sound signature of the M2S seems to be a better match.  Also the M2S seems to be less prone to picking up stray electronic noises. 

Keep in mind that I am drawing power from the car's lighter connection which can be a source of noise or ground loops.   I did put a ground loop isolator between the DAP and the car and that helped a very small amount.


----------



## originalsnuffy

It seems that the general opinion here is that Tidal and Qobuz sound better than Amazon HD.  I suspect that if that is objectively provable it would be due to artifacts introduced by the app and not from the source material.  I really doubt Amazon would monkey with the digital files they receive.   

I also have my doubts that the quality concerns are objectively provable.  I bet that in a true blind test most of us could not tell the sources apart.  (Food fight then ensues).


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 23, 2019)

I‘m pleased to report that with an iOS app version 9.3.0 released today all bugs that I reported have been fixed:

1st and most important, streaming works now, the quality no longer drops to ‚standard‘ after about a minute and a half of playback
2nd, iPod touch 6th gen has now enough power to play Ultra-HD content, previously it would be stuttering.
3rd, looks like overall power consumption is now less, to be validated....

At last the app is really usable now.

Edit: confirm the power consumption / battery life is much better now. Even my iPod touch stays absolutely cool while streaming 24/192 UHD content, previously it was getting really hot.


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> I‘m pleased to report that with an iOS app version 9.3.0 released today all bugs that I reported have been fixed:
> 
> 1st and most important, streaming works now, the quality no longer drops to ‚standard‘ after about a minute and a half of playback
> 2nd, iPod touch 6th gen has now enough power to play Ultra-HD content, previously it would be stuttering.
> ...


But it still upsamples everything to an external DAC. This is my main concern.


----------



## a-LeXx

Soundizer said:


> But it still upsamples everything to an external DAC. This is my main concern.



Yes it does. But it doesn't degrade SQ, so I'm ok with that. As I've said previously, this is not a bug, they want it this way, I don't believe they will change it...


----------



## Soundizer (Nov 20, 2019)

a-LeXx said:


> Yes it does. But it doesn't degrade SQ, so I'm ok with that. As I've said previously, this is not a bug, they want it this way, I don't believe they will change it...


Ok. I am not very technical. Do you mind explaining in simple terms how it doesn’t impact sound quality?


Also on a very positive note - since this 9.3.0 update I think the quality has improved on my iPad Pro. Now I struggle to decide which is better between Amazon Music HD vs Tidal HIFI/Masters. Prior to the update Tidal HIFI/Masters always sounded better via my iPadPro to Audioquest Cobalt/Chord Mojo. [iPadPro delivers 24bit/192KHz via USB-C to Mojo which is awesome]. Good news.


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 20, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> Ok. I am not very technical. Do you mind explaining in simple terms how it doesn’t impact sound quality?
> .



Upsampling as such is not bad. It‘s only considered evil by bit-perfect purists who consider Non-oversampling-DACs best thing ever. Most of the dacs today are oversampling anyway, so that bit-perfect is mostly a myth anyway. If it‘s not upsampled by your source, your DAC will most probably do it anyway.
So, if upsampling is implemented correctly (it is on the iOS app), there is no real negative impact. But it still unnecessary consumes computing power on  iOS device and represents an avoidable additional load to the battery. So, I would still prefer if there was no upsampling in the app, but even though it‘s there, the impact is on an economical, not on a SQ side...


----------



## 3Putter

a-LeXx said:


> Upsampling as such is not bad. It‘s only considered evil by bit-perfect purists who consider Non-oversampling-DACs best thing ever. Most of the dacs today are oversampling anyway, so that bit-perfect is mostly a myth anyway. If it‘s not upsampled by your source, your DAC will most probably do it anyway.
> So, if upsampling is implemented correctly (it is on the iOS app), there is no real negative impact. But it still unnecessary consumes computing power on  iOS device and represents an avoidable additional load to the battery. So, I would still prefer if there was no upsampling in the app, but even though it‘s there, the impact is on an economical, not on a SQ side...


I was told on these forums that upsampling does, in fact, affect SQ. I learned from sources here more in the know than I to try UAPP app, run Tidal or Qobuz through it and listen for the difference. I selected Bit Perfect mode when available and I am hearing a noticeable difference in improved SQ. I thought my music sounded good before UAPP but now it sounds great. YMMV


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> Upsampling as such is not bad. It‘s only considered evil by bit-perfect purists who consider Non-oversampling-DACs best thing ever. Most of the dacs today are oversampling anyway, so that bit-perfect is mostly a myth anyway. If it‘s not upsampled by your source, your DAC will most probably do it anyway.
> So, if upsampling is implemented correctly (it is on the iOS app), there is no real negative impact. But it still unnecessary consumes computing power on  iOS device and represents an avoidable additional load to the battery. So, I would still prefer if there was no upsampling in the app, but even though it‘s there, the impact is on an economical, not on a SQ side...


I would rather the DAC in Chord Mojo do the upsampling. Certainly DACS make a massive difference.


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 21, 2019)

3Putter said:


> I was told on these forums that upsampling does, in fact, affect SQ. I learned from sources here more in the know than I to try UAPP app, run Tidal or Qobuz through it and listen for the difference. I selected Bit Perfect mode when available and I am hearing a noticeable difference in improved SQ. I thought my music sounded good before UAPP but now it sounds great. YMMV



Android is not great with upsampling, neither us windows. And the biggest problem on Android is not upsampling, but volume control reducing bit depth and dynamic range - that‘s what you hear when comparing to UAPP, not the upsampling...
When you are not using UAPP, Android is using software volume control, which means, to reduce the volume, it recalculates the numbers, making them smaller. By this, it is reducing the bit depth and the available dynamic range, making soft details fainting. UAPP doesn‘t do that. Instead, it is using a gain control of the DAC to change the volume, so that bit depth of your music stays the same, giving you the same resolution, no matter what the volume is. This is a biggest advantage of UAPP.

iOS with amazon‘s app is a different story.
As I said, upsampling is not bad, it depends on an implementation.


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 22, 2019)

One more positive development with Amazon Music: all my albums with mixed SD/HD tracks have now been updated, all tracks are now HD.
Also few SD albums in my library have been updated to HD. I don‘t have even a single SD album any longer in a library of 250 albums, all of them are at least HD quality.


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> One more positive development with Amazon Music: all my albums with mixed SD/HD tracks have now been updated, all tracks are now HD.
> Also few SD albums in my library have been updated to HD. I don‘t have even a single SD album any longer in a library of 250 albums, all of them are at least HD quality.


Thank you for the update - nice one.
There is a refresh my music option in ios app, not sure if this updates downloaded albums?


----------



## a-LeXx (Nov 22, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> Thank you for the update - nice one.
> There is a refresh my music option in ios app, not sure if this updates downloaded albums?


Nope, that only refreshes your album list from the cloud, in case you are using multiple devices.
To update the album content (tracks) you need to go album by album, and if there are any updates, it will allow you to re-download. Pretty cumbersome, but this needs to be done once only, so I'm ok with that...


----------



## Pentagonal

Is anybody able to confirm whether or not 9.3.0 outputs the native sample rate (fixes the upsampling bug)?


----------



## Soundizer

Pentagonal said:


> Is anybody able to confirm whether or not 9.3.0 outputs the native sample rate (fixes the upsampling bug)?


It does not and perhaps Amazon does not intend to do anything about it. Only Amazon knows.


----------



## Pentagonal

Soundizer said:


> It does not and perhaps Amazon does not intend to do anything about it. Only Amazon knows.


Thanks for checking. Part of me still is hoping that they just "haven't gotten around to it"... Maybe they truly don't intend to do anything about it because they are persuaded their upsampling implementation improves sound quality for their core listeners. Hopefully they add an option or a third party app gives us the bit-streams we're hoping for.


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> Nope, that only refreshes your album list from the cloud, in case you are using multiple devices.
> To update the album content (tracks) you need to go album by album, and if there are any updates, it will allow you to re-download. Pretty cumbersome, but this needs to be done once only, so I'm ok with that...


I certainly think there has been an improvement to audio quality from my iPadPro. Perhaps the 9.3.0 update which addressed the battery exhaustion also resulted in smoother output. I again today tried A/B with TIDAL HIFI in 12second clips and found unable to decide which is better. Where as prior to 9.3.0 sounded much better.


----------



## exdmd

Tidal (previously WiMP in Europe) launched in the US in late 2014 with users complaining of drop outs, erratic playback, all sorts of SQ problems. It was not reliable then while Qobuz was. Except those in the US could only subscribe to Qobuz at that time using a VPN. Jay-Z bought Tidal in early 2015 and exclusive mode was still not available until after MQA support came along in 2016. So there is still hope for improvement in Amazon Music HD.


----------



## Soundizer

exdmd said:


> Tidal (previously WiMP in Europe) launched in the US in late 2014 with users complaining of drop outs, erratic playback, all sorts of SQ problems. It was not reliable then while Qobuz was. Except those in the US could only subscribe to Qobuz at that time using a VPN. Jay-Z bought Tidal in early 2015 and exclusive mode was still not available until after MQA support came along in 2016. So there is still hope for improvement in Amazon Music HD.


Yes, it will have a few hurdles. Even newly launched Disney+ has had issues. 

i just hope they introduce Exclusive mode for Computer Software and stop upsampling.


----------



## grokit

I have Amazon HD, and am currently trialing Qobuz. I like them both but for some reason I am missing Tidal, which I had for a few months. They're all great, and they all suck in some way or another. There is no 'right' answer, but I'm leaning toward just sticking with Amazon HD unless I need Roon integration, which I do not.


----------



## exdmd (Nov 22, 2019)

From reports it seems sound quality for Amazon Music HD is better on Mac or iPhone than Windows 10 or Android even with the re-sampling. I only subscribe to Qobuz now but don't have a problem with Tidal. I know they worked hard to improve their app and streaming. Sound quality of Masters letting the Tidal desktop app do the first unfold to 24/96 was enjoyable when I subscribed and Tidal is from reports more stable than Qobuz right now. I am sure Qobuz will catch up though.

Qobuz is adding so many new albums daily that for me the $14.99 monthly cost is the bargain. I already paid for Audirvana so no issues with playback. If Amazon just added exclusive mode and sound quality matched Qobuz they could take over streaming. Nice to have choices though, I hope Qobuz can survive after cutting prices.


----------



## Soundizer

exdmd said:


> From reports it seems sound quality for Amazon Music HD is better on Mac or iPhone than Windows 10 or Android even with the re-sampling. I only subscribe to Qobuz now but don't have a problem with Tidal. I know they worked hard to improve their app and streaming. Sound quality of Masters letting the Tidal desktop app do the first unfold to 24/96 was enjoyable when I subscribed and Tidal is from reports more stable than Qobuz right now. I am sure Qobuz will catch up though.
> 
> Qobuz is adding so many new albums daily that for me the $14.99 monthly cost is the bargain. I already paid for Audirvana so no issues with playback. If Amazon just added exclusive mode and sound quality matched Qobuz they could take over streaming. Nice to have choices though, I hope Qobuz can survive after cutting prices.


Totally agree.


----------



## brianlg (Nov 23, 2019)

Really enjoying Amazon Music HD. Here's my wishlist:

Need to fix the mix of having HD and Ultra HD on the same album release. This is very sloppy. 

Option for Grid view on all playlists. Especially for Recently Added. It's weird scrolling through my recently added albums in song view. Would also like this for personal playlists. 

Option to click on and enlarge the album artwork in a high res form. 

Better handling of explicit tags. They need to strip them from the album name and song names and make a little icon for them or something to identify explicit version (similar to the icon for Ultra HD)
Ability to change the sort of "Popular Albums" to "Release Date"


----------



## Brava210

Question.
Why does my fiio m6 play tracks at a higher Khz than my LG V40.
It plays a lot of tracks at 24 bit 96khz
LG tops out at 48khz even though device is capable of 196khz.


----------



## Left Channel (Nov 24, 2019)

Brava210 said:


> Question.
> Why does my fiio m6 play tracks at a higher Khz than my LG V40.
> It plays a lot of tracks at 24 bit 96khz
> LG tops out at 48khz even though device is capable of 196khz.



The Amazon app does not make full use of the Quad DAC in your V40, which would require that the app bypass the problem of Android operating system resampling of all music to 16/48. The FiiO M6 contains a customized Android OS that does not resample the music.

For comparison, on your V40 the Tidal app would bypass the resampling for MQA tracks, but not for other tracks. The Qobuz app also allows resampling of all tracks. The UAPP app does bypass that resampling, and supports Tidal and Qobuz, but not Amazon because Amazon does not (yet?) allow UAPP to offer that option. So for Amazon, your FiiO M6 is the best player you have.


----------



## Brava210 (Nov 24, 2019)

Thankyou LC,
 I have been listening to David Bowie on the Fiio today playing at 24bit 192Khz, sounded very good.


----------



## Brava210 (Nov 24, 2019)

So is IOS better for Amazon?
with an external DAC?

The FiiO M6 is an android unit though is it not?
why does Amazon play as it should through this?

Sorry for all the questions.

Gary


----------



## Soundizer

Brava210 said:


> So is IOS better for Amazon?
> with an external DAC?
> 
> The FiiO M6 is an android unit though is it not?
> ...


I don’t think [iOS is better with External DAC] vs the FiiO M6, because there is the problem of upsampling everything for Amazon Music HD iOS App, Tidal HIFI works at correct Rates, but not Amazon Music currently.


----------



## Left Channel (Nov 24, 2019)

Brava210 said:


> The FiiO M6 is an android unit though is it not?
> why does Amazon play as it should through this?
> 
> Sorry for all the questions.
> ...



Because the FiiO M6 contains a customized Android OS that does not resample the music.


----------



## Brava210

Thanks again LC


----------



## tomwoo

Tidal is offering $1.99/4 months for its HiFi tier, streaming war is heating up!


----------



## Left Channel

tomwoo said:


> Tidal is offering $1.99/4 months for its HiFi tier, streaming war is heating up!



They did the same thing for the holiday season last year, though I think it was 3 months. Are they doing it again? I can't find that online anywhere. 

Since it's not new, it's not necessarily a response to Amazon, Qobuz, or others.


----------



## tomwoo

Left Channel said:


> They did the same thing for the holiday season last year, though I think it was 3 months. Are they doing it again? I can't find that online anywhere.
> 
> Since it's not new, it's not necessarily a response to Amazon, Qobuz, or others.


I received the email. Guess it's pretty new. The extra month might be a response to Amazon HD and Qobuz's price drop? Either way, the original $19.99 pricing may not be sustainable anymore.


----------



## Left Channel (Nov 25, 2019)

tomwoo said:


> I received the email. Guess it's pretty new. The extra month might be a response to Amazon HD and Qobuz's price drop? Either way, the original $19.99 pricing may not be sustainable anymore.



It's sad is what it is. None of these services are making money, and now the monopoly power of Amazon could put them out of business, leaving us with no choice except an inferior streaming product that Amazon is using it to boost hardware sales where they do make money.


----------



## 3Putter

Left Channel said:


> It's sad is what it is. None of these services are making money, and now the monopoly power of Amazon could put them out of business, leaving us with no choice except an inferior streaming product that Amazon is using it to boost hardware sales where they do make money.


When you cater to the masses on 'price' without focusing your marketing strategy on the quality of product you lose. I'm in Auto Repair and I can't win a battle with WalMart, big box stores, or any independent shop who markets 'We will beat anyone's price, guaranteed'. That is what the general population believes is the truth. If I'm Qobuz I market on best sound quality. If I'm Tidal I focus on sound quality, ease of operation, and inventory. But I will admit after these forum threads that I'm listening to all three and have become more confused than when I started. I can't have really high end gear and I'm just going to go with what sounds good to me and where I can find the most of what I enjoy.


----------



## Tooros

New users only I guess though.


----------



## Tooros

Tooros said:


> New users only I guess though.


Nope. I’m back in. Same email and PayPal account. Thank you Tidal.


----------



## Gus141

Left Channel said:


> ...the monopoly power of Amazon could put them out of business, leaving us with no choice except an inferior streaming product that Amazon is using it to boost hardware sales where they do make money.


One good thing is that Amazon didn’t adopt MQA, and their “monopoly power” could persuade the studios to stop wasting time (money?) doing MQA mastering/conversion of existing material. When that happens, TIDAL might fall back to normal High-Res audio in order to stay competitive with the services delivering normal high-res material.

In other words, Amazon Music HD could spell the end for MQA. In my opinion, that’s a good thing, and I hope Qobuz survives that shake up (heck, I hope TIDAL survives too, just without MQA).

Cheers,
Gus


----------



## Left Channel

Gus141 said:


> One good thing is that Amazon didn’t adopt MQA, and their “monopoly power” could persuade the studios to stop wasting time (money?) doing MQA mastering/conversion of existing material. When that happens, TIDAL might fall back to normal High-Res audio in order to stay competitive with the services delivering normal high-res material.
> 
> In other words, Amazon Music HD could spell the end for MQA. In my opinion, that’s a good thing, and I hope Qobuz survives that shake up (heck, I hope TIDAL survives too, just without MQA).
> 
> ...



I've no love for MQA, but if Amazon had enough power over the labels to put MQA out of business, that would be an example of why we still have antitrust laws, weakened though they may be. Or worse for us, if they put MQA out of business by putting Tidal out of business, using monopolistic vertical integration to subsidize a money-losing streaming business unit until it kills off the competition, then offering us only an inferior music app with no Exclusive Mode, and probably raising prices after the competition is gone. Don't get me started...


----------



## exdmd

It is not just hard core audiophiles who are unhappy with the sound quality and performance of Amazon Music HD. Spend some time browsing the Amazon Music Forum and there are plenty of complaints. The main problem is Amazon has no customer service and no one seems to know what their roadmap for the future is, other than they are definitely interested in pushing hardware. If you remember how buggy Tidal was three years ago Amazon Music HD actually is arguable a better service now than Tidal was then considering it was just launched two months ago. The sound quality is just not comparable to Qobuz or Tidal. It should not be a big deal for them to enable exclusive mode, they have competent engineers and also have the money to hire anyone they need. All we can do is vote with our credit cards and support Qobuz and Tidal.


----------



## Left Channel

exdmd said:


> It is not just hard core audiophiles who are unhappy with the sound quality and performance of Amazon Music HD. Spend some time browsing the Amazon Music Forum and there are plenty of complaints. The main problem is Amazon has no customer service and no one seems to know what their roadmap for the future is, other than they are definitely interested in pushing hardware. If you remember how buggy Tidal was three years ago Amazon Music HD actually is arguable a better service now than Tidal was then considering it was just launched two months ago. The sound quality is just not comparable to Qobuz or Tidal. It should not be a big deal for them to enable exclusive mode, they have competent engineers and also have the money to hire anyone they need. All we can do is vote with our credit cards and support Qobuz and Tidal.



I was just reading about problems with the Amazon Fire TV Recast. It was launched without many features users take for granted on competing products, and Amazon has been very slow to add any of those features. Amazon has also been slow to fix serious bugs, for example playback of a recorded show freezing on a blank screen when another recording starts, which was first reported last _February_ in a very long thread on their support forum. 

I'm beginning to suspect a trend here...


----------



## tomwoo

Left Channel said:


> I've no love for MQA, but if Amazon had enough power over the labels to put MQA out of business, that would be an example of why we still have antitrust laws, weakened though they may be. Or worse for us, if they put MQA out of business by putting Tidal out of business, using monopolistic vertical integration to subsidize a money-losing streaming business unit until it kills off the competition, then offering us only an inferior music app with no Exclusive Mode, and probably raising prices after the competition is gone. Don't get me started...


Considering what Amazon did to Brick-and-Mortar department stores, I don't think Tidal/Qobuz/Deezer will have any chance against it...Technically they don't any edge over Amazon other than exclusive mode, which is not exactly rocket science.


----------



## Left Channel

tomwoo said:


> Considering what Amazon did to Brick-and-Mortar department stores, I don't think Tidal/Qobuz/Deezer will have any chance against it...Technically they don't any edge over Amazon other than exclusive mode, which is not exactly rocket science.



Specialty brick-and-mortars are surviving against Amazon just fine, as they did against the first wave of re-consolidation — chain stores like Barnes & Noble — and I think Qobuz has a chance at doing the same. I'm more worried about Tidal, as their largest market segments are less specialized and more price-sensitive.


----------



## tomwoo

Left Channel said:


> Specialty brick-and-mortars are surviving against Amazon just fine, as they did against the first wave of re-consolidation — chain stores like Barnes & Noble — and I think Qobuz has a chance at doing the same. I'm more worried about Tidal, as their largest market segments are less specialized and more price-sensitive.


I agree, it would be a shame because Tidal has the best app IMHO.


----------



## Soundizer

tomwoo said:


> Tidal is offering $1.99/4 months for its HiFi tier, streaming war is heating up!


Is that USA only?


----------



## Soundizer (Nov 26, 2019)

There are no deals for Qobuz or Tidal in uk. So you have to pay ridiculous £25 Qobuz or £19.99 TIDAL HIFI.
People will simply ditch that now unless they have Roon and stick with Amazon HD in the UK.

TIDAL HIFI support is a joke in UK. They simply don’t respond to emails or online form questions.

Spotify, Tidal and Qobuz might not be profitable, but doesn’t matter to key Owners/stakeholders as they pay themselves a very high salary and can sell the Company as long as the value is high = subscriber count + subscribers data. Amazon was not profitable for over a decade, but still made the Ceo the richest man.


----------



## Killeen

Subbed Tidal yesterday £1.99 for 4 month in UK .
Amazon HD cancelled .


----------



## Soundizer

Killeen said:


> Subbed Tidal yesterday £1.99 for 4 month in UK .
> Amazon HD cancelled .


How did you get that? Do you have a link.


----------



## Killeen

Recieved an email offer, early Black Friday deal


----------



## exdmd (Nov 26, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> How did you get that? Do you have a link.



This link takes you to the £1.99/4 months in UK offer for Tidal HiFi. It is $1.99 in the US. It is being advertised as a Tidal Black Friday deal at whathifi.com.

Edit: just realized Tidal does have an affiliate program and the original link I posted appears to be one. Changed to the same https://tidal.com/offers/blackfriday @Left Channel posted below, it works both in US and GB only the currency changes. Offer for new users only.


----------



## Soundizer

exdmd said:


> This link takes you to the £1.99/4 months in UK offer for Tidal HiFi. It is $1.99 in the US.


Thank you, found it. But it states i am not eligible. My current trial ends 10 of December and had cancelled it due to arrival of Amazon. 

It states i am not eligible.


----------



## exdmd

Well sorry to hear that. You probably aren't eligible since you already cancelled a trial.


----------



## Left Channel

Found the US link: https://tidal.com/offers/blackfriday


----------



## greenblured (Nov 26, 2019)

Qobuz-subscriber here. Why? The best sound quality . Simple, saving pennys (or say 100 £) a year for less sound quality is a no go for me. I want the best possible sound quality and will pay premium for that! And I h*** Amazone.


----------



## Brava210

Just use a different email address to re register?
Ive done this in the past with tidal


----------



## Soundizer

greenblured said:


> Qobuz-subscriber here. Why? The best sound quality . Simple, saving pennys (or say 100 £) a year for less sound quality is a no go for me. I want the best possible sound quality and will pay premium for that! And I h*** Amazone.


I am always interested in the best Sound Quality, but how can you be sure Qobuz is best? To me TIDAL sounds better than Amazon Music HD, but not tried Qobuz. Qobuz doesn’t discount in UK and charged a massive £25 a month.


----------



## Soundizer

Brava210 said:


> Just use a different email address to re register?
> Ive done this in the past with tidal


Thank you, nice one. Just did that and got the deal you are a SuperStar


----------



## brianlg

On the Desktop app, has anyone selected the *Automatically Import Music From [folder]* in settings? I'm wondering if this messes with tags in any way..


----------



## itchyears

Soundizer said:


> Thank you, nice one. Just did that and got the deal you are a SuperStar




People have been doing this for many years, its not difficult to register a new email address and re-register a new nick name and password. You can also close your account down that way you delete any info about your old account. Use different cc or paypals.

You can do this on spotify, deezer and tidal I believe. Check hotuk deals and ebay out you see 99p deals or £1.99 popping up time to time and I also believe ebay do tidal hi-fi accounts for 99p for 1-2 months sometimes.

You can also import your playlist to the new accounts or any platform say tidal to deezer:

https://tidal.com/import-playlist

I use this one also:

https://www.playlist-converter.net/#/

you can import to plain text so its universal in that way even a years time if you had no accounts when you sign up just import your plain text playlist onto any platform.


So far I prefer deezer hifi, tidal hi fi is very good quality though but I am not seeing as great searches with it not tried Amazon hd out but I know they showed some promos recently here:


https://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/4-...or-099-new-subscribers-only-at-amazon-3330260


----------



## originalsnuffy

Android type question here.   As I understand it, Android left to its own devices is limited to 24 bit 48 khz.   is there a way to overcome that for use with Amazon HD?  Like Neutron or UAPP or ??

I was looking for a way to feed music from this app to my DAP.   I am able to connect via the iphone, but there is a long delay in connecting to the DAP in DAC mode.  So I thought it would be fun to experiment with Android.    What I was able to do was connect to my Shanling M0 from a Kindle Fire 8 (2018 version).  Used an OTG cable to make the connection.  Everything fired up properly in the Fire 8 without any settings at all; thought I would have to go in to the USB settings but in fact those automatically greyed out when connected.

But, and there is always a catch, the unit seems to be limiting the output to 24 bit 48khz.  In fact the M0 says it was gettting 24 bit 44 khz.  But the track says it was downloaded at a higher resolutionto I am trying to figure out a way to get that going.   

Probably a stopgap project until I just pick up a DAP that has all the features I want but in the meantime this makes sense.


----------



## Left Channel

originalsnuffy said:


> Android type question here.   As I understand it, Android left to its own devices is limited to 24 bit 48 khz.   is there a way to overcome that for use with Amazon HD?  Like Neutron or UAPP or ??
> 
> I was looking for a way to feed music from this app to my DAP.   I am able to connect via the iphone, but there is a long delay in connecting to the DAP in DAC mode.  So I thought it would be fun to experiment with Android.    What I was able to do was connect to my Shanling M0 from a Kindle Fire 8 (2018 version).  Used an OTG cable to make the connection.  Everything fired up properly in the Fire 8 without any settings at all; thought I would have to go in to the USB settings but in fact those automatically greyed out when connected.
> 
> ...



There's no solution unless and until Amazon allows the developers of apps like Neutron and UAPP to access the Amazon API.


----------



## Gus141

Left Channel said:


> There's no solution unless and until Amazon allows the developers of apps like Neutron and UAPP to access the Amazon API.


When Amazon HD first came out, I thought, oh no this is the end of Qobuz and TIDAL. But Amazon’s lack of basic support for audiophile expectations (e.g. exclusive mode on desktop, or bit perfect to mobile DACs) is the best thing to happen to Qobuz and TIDAL. We can still vote with our wallets.


----------



## tomwoo

Gus141 said:


> When Amazon HD first came out, I thought, oh no this is the end of Qobuz and TIDAL. But Amazon’s lack of basic support for audiophile expectations (e.g. exclusive mode on desktop, or bit perfect to mobile DACs) is the best thing to happen to Qobuz and TIDAL. We can still vote with our wallets.


Can't believe they let a bunch of amateurs run it...


----------



## 435279

People using tricks to get multiple free or low price trials are probably the main reason why Tidal and similar services are loosing money. We shouldn't do this because in the long-term its only hurting us.

The temptation is high I know but its whatever way you spin it its legalised piracy, please don't do it folks.

Steps off soapbox


----------



## rkw

SteveOliver said:


> People using tricks to get multiple free or low price trials are probably the main reason why Tidal and similar services are loosing money.


You make a valid point about ethics. However losses are, by far, due to music licensing fees.


----------



## Soundizer

itchyears said:


> People have been doing this for many years, its not difficult to register a new email address and re-register a new nick name and password. You can also close your account down that way you delete any info about your old account. Use different cc or paypals.
> 
> You can do this on spotify, deezer and tidal I believe. Check hotuk deals and ebay out you see 99p deals or £1.99 popping up time to time and I also believe ebay do tidal hi-fi accounts for 99p for 1-2 months sometimes.
> 
> ...






_*thank you.

you are a MEGA SUPER STAR LASER LIGHT KING.

I have copied your post to my notes - that’s how much i like it. 

how do you close an old account? *_


----------



## Soundizer

Gus141 said:


> When Amazon HD first came out, I thought, oh no this is the end of Qobuz and TIDAL. But Amazon’s lack of basic support for audiophile expectations (e.g. exclusive mode on desktop, or bit perfect to mobile DACs) is the best thing to happen to Qobuz and TIDAL. We can still vote with our wallets.



totally agree. 

i was very excited about Amazon Music HD and at a fair price. 

1. No exclusive mode on desktop. 
2. bit perfect to mobile DACs not supported. 

i was only listening to 24bit/96khz tracks deliberately so that no upsampling happens. Not good.


----------



## Soundizer (Nov 28, 2019)

SteveOliver said:


> People using tricks to get multiple free or low price trials are probably the main reason why Tidal and similar services are loosing money. We shouldn't do this because in the long-term its only hurting us.
> 
> The temptation is high I know but its whatever way you spin it its legalised piracy, please don't do it folks.
> 
> Steps off soapbox


If TIDAL offered a fair market price then people would not do this so much. I used Spotify for 3 years and never hunted for deals, just kept same £10/month account going.

£12 to £15 might be a more fair price. Netflix streams HDR/ATMOS for only £11.

TIDAL Executives are getting well paid regardless of Business Profitability, they pay themselves a fat salary and main goal is to increase the Company Market Value. Same with Spotify which hardly makes any real profit, but Company Value is astronomical now.


----------



## itchyears

Soundizer said:


> _*thank you.
> 
> you are a MEGA SUPER STAR LASER LIGHT KING.
> 
> ...




Its different for each platform I tend to google how to close "spotify" account permanently and follow the links and guides on how to do it, you can replace spotify with deezer or tidal etc
It changes also so usually best to google it or bookmark these links:

https://community.spotify.com/t5/Ac...delete-my-Spotify-account/m-p/1294077#M188877

https://support.deezer.com/hc/en-gb/articles/201168742-Delete-your-account

https://blogcheater.com/how-to-delete-tidal-account/


----------



## itchyears

SteveOliver said:


> People using tricks to get multiple free or low price trials are probably the main reason why Tidal and similar services are loosing money. We shouldn't do this because in the long-term its only hurting us.
> 
> The temptation is high I know but its whatever way you spin it its legalised piracy, please don't do it folks.
> 
> Steps off soapbox




Think of it another way though, how many people are willing to pay £15 per month or 99p per month, there is a reason why spotify, deezer and tidal offer 99p and £1.99 or free monthly trials every other week, they probably make there money back or make even more money.

If they were losing money it would never have been offered in the first place.

Technology and the internet boom changed the streaming perception along with youtube, we have the regularly paying customers and the folk who still want it but can't quite afford it or believe it should actually be 99p per month anyhow since its free on youtube already or they don't want to spent £100+ per month of multiple streaming platforms. I think its brilliant everyone wins and no one loses, everyone gets paid and gets what they want.

It reminds me of Microsofts business model in India, no one in india even used a genuine copy of windows really so they simply offered pirated windows owners a discounted genuine license code for $3 and it worked 100,000s customers signed up to it within weeks.


----------



## 435279

itchyears said:


> Think of it another way though, how many people are willing to pay £15 per month or 99p per month, there is a reason why spotify, deezer and tidal offer 99p and £1.99 or free monthly trials every other week, they probably make there money back or make even more money.
> 
> If they were losing money it would never have been offered in the first place.
> 
> ...



OK point noted, this is probably not the right place to be discussing business economics and I probably shouldn't have posted what I wrote above so I wont say anymore.


----------



## Soundizer

*AMAZON MUSIC HD - audio quality comparison to TIDAL HIFI*

...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
*Source Hardware Device:*
iPadPro 12.9inch 2019.
Supports 24bit/192Khz via USB-C output.
Latest iOS version as of 28 Nov, 2019.
*Audio Music - Apps/Software: *
Amazon Music HD [iOS APP - version 9.3.2]
TIDAL HIFI [iOS APP - version 2.8.4].
Both Apps are the Latest iOS version as of 28 Nov, 2019.
*External DAC*: Audioquest Cobalt [24bit/96Khz, MQA renders].
*Headphones*: Focal Clear
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
_+ALL ALBUMS WERE DOWNLOADED TO IPAD PRO IN ULTRA HD. 
+LOUDNESS NORMALISATION, GAPLESS PLAYBACK AND OPTIMISED PLAYBACK ALL WERE SWITCHED OFF. 
+IPAD PRO SWITCHED TO AIRP PLANE MODE WITH WIFI/BLUETOOTH OFF - TO MINIMISE ANY INTERFERENCE. 
+BOTH AMAZON MUSIC HD AND TIDAL HIFI APPS WERE SET IN OFFLINE MODE WHEN PLAYING BACK. 
+Fortunately I could listen in a very quiet room without any audible background sounds. _

Notes: The comparison Albums included are all 24bit.
On Amazon Music HD iOS APP there is upsampling happening. So for anything less then 96Khz it upsamples to 96Khz. If however Album is 96Khz it will play correctly as DAC is 96Khz - so in this case no upsampling happens. See below for Album details and I state if it is being upsampled.
Tidal plays at correct bit rate upto 96Khz in this set up - using Cobalt DAC.
For TIDAL HIFI - I have selected Master version of the Albums, because this according to TIDAL is the best quality available [according to TIDAL]. Tidal iOS APP decodes Master MQA on iPadPro and Cobalt will render it upto 96Khz. Some Albums might be 44.1, 48, 88 Khz - unable to see what Khz they are via iPadPro App/Cobalt.
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

*ALBUM 1: “Paul Weller - True Meanings”*
Amazon Music HD - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/44.1Khz]. UPSAMPLED TO 96Khz.
TIDAL - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/Master].
Audio Comparison:
+ TIDAL ADVANTAGE. Tidal wins for me as it is less brittle.
+ TIDAL ADVANTAGE. Tidal is slightly smoother, but without losing any resolution.
+ TIDAL ADVANTAGE. Amazon is bit more mid forward, which seems to be a flatter sound and less depth compared to Tidal.

*ALBUM 2: “Spectre - James Bond Movie Soundtrack”*
Amazon Music HD - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/44.1Khz]. UPSAMPLED TO 96Khz.
TIDAL - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/Master].
Audio Comparison:
+ TIDAL ADVANTAGE. Tidal is slightly smoother, but without losing any resolution.

*ALBUM 3: “TALKING HEADS: 77”*
Amazon Music HD - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/96Khz]. CORRECT BIT RATE PLAYED
TIDAL - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/Master].
Audio Comparison:
They sound slightly different, with Amazon a bit more forward in mids yet not in a negative way. No advantage in my opinion and both are equal.

*ALBUM 4: “PETER GABRIEL - SO (SPECIAL EDITION)”*
Amazon Music HD - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/96Khz]. CORRECT BIT RATE PLAYED
TIDAL - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/Master].
Audio Comparison:
Sound similar. No one has an advantage.

*ALBUM 5: “ICONOLOGY - MISSY ELLIOT”*
Amazon Music HD - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/96Khz]. CORRECT BIT RATE PLAYED
TIDAL - iOS APP [Album format = 24bit/Master].
Audio Comparison:
+TIDAL ADVANTAGE. Slightly more low end sub base picked up on Focal Clear.



*CONCLUSION*
There seems to be a more distinctive advantage to Tidal on the Albums where Amazon is applying upsampling - based on the above 5 Albums tested. For other Albums there is very little difference. 

I hope Amazon decides to play bit perfect and I don’t see why it can’t, since it is able to show us correct information on both track resolution aswell as connected DAC capability. Yet the actual playing resolution it shows is incorrect when using an external DAC. I got same results with my Chord Mojo where everything was upsampled to 192Khz, yet the yellow label incorrectly stated a lower track playing resolution.

For Amazon Music, If using External DAC I would not risk using anything higher than 96Khz, such as a 192khz DAC as the upsampling would be too much - taking 44.1 tracks all the way to 192khz. And there are plenty of 44.1 tracks on Amazon.

A horribly inconvenient solution which is a massive compromise is to only listen to 24bit/96khz tracks when using a 24bit/96khz DAC - such as Audioquest Cobalt would then all be played correctly.


----------



## grokit

I'm digging the Thanksgiving Dinner Party playlist, for the most part.


----------



## Brava210

Soundizer said:


> *AMAZON MUSIC HD - audio quality comparison to TIDAL HIFI*
> 
> ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
> *Source Hardware Device:*
> ...





Soundizer said:


> *AMAZON MUSIC HD - audio quality comparison to TIDAL HIFI*
> 
> ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
> *Source Hardware Device:*
> ...



So using my Fiio which plays all files correctly i should be all good with Amazon?


----------



## 435279

Brava210 said:


> So using my Fiio which plays all files correctly i should be all good with Amazon?



Well you should do your own comparisons to be sure but I would say yes. Which Fiio is that BTW?


----------



## Brava210 (Nov 29, 2019)

Fiio M6 which always plays tracks at the correct bitrate/Khz because its a modified operating system apparently.


----------



## Brava210




----------



## Andrew_WOT

MQA is lossy compression, there will be difference.
Try to compare flac vs flac bypassing upsampling.


----------



## 435279

Andrew_WOT said:


> MQA is lossy compression, there will be difference.
> Try to compare flac vs flac bypassing upsampling.



What does that have to do with Amazon Music, did you post in the wrong thread?


----------



## GlennDS

SteveOliver said:


> What does that have to do with Amazon Music, did you post in the wrong thread?


He might be referring to Soundizer's comparison between Amazon Music HD and Tidal.


----------



## 435279

GlennDS said:


> He might be referring to Soundizer's comparison between Amazon Music HD and Tidal.



Maybe, your guess is as good as mine, perhaps if @Andrew_WOT had quoted the OP's message we would have been able to join in the discussion.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

SteveOliver said:


> Maybe, your guess is as good as mine, perhaps if @Andrew_WOT had quoted the OP's message we would have been able to join in the discussion.


It was too long of a post to quote. But yeah, it was in reference to that comparison.


----------



## 435279

Andrew_WOT said:


> It was too long of a post to quote. But yeah, it was in reference to that comparison.



OK thanks for clearing that up, it was a long post I agree.  shh don't tell Soundizer but I speed read most of it.


----------



## itchyears

Just in case anyone missed it, Tidal are doing 4 months for £1.99 and Deezer Hifi free 3 months trial via these links:


https://tidal.com/offers/blackfriday

https://www.deezer.com/en/offers/hifi


----------



## tomwoo

itchyears said:


> Just in case anyone missed it, Tidal are doing 4 months for £1.99 and Deezer Hifi free 3 months trial via these links:
> 
> 
> https://tidal.com/offers/blackfriday
> ...


Already signed up TIDAL's $1.99 for 4 month offer, couldn't pass on it  
I'll let Amazon Music HD free trial run itself out in one month. Not coming back unless they add exclusive mode in 4 months (doubt they will ever do that)... The app itself needs some streamlining too, right now it's too messy to my taste.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

How long business giving stuff away for free will last, I wonder?

Windows Amazon app was updated, btw, 7.8.72132 now. No idea what changed, seems like Amazon SW engineers are complete strangers to release notes thing.


----------



## a-LeXx (Dec 3, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> *AMAZON MUSIC HD - audio quality comparison to TIDAL HIFI*
> 
> ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
> *Source Hardware Device:*
> ...



Hmm, you compared MASTER albums on Tidal (which means, they are at least 24/96)  to only slightly a bit over CD-Quality albums on Amazon (24 bit vs 16 bit is not a big deal,barely any DAC used in mobile applications can physically resolves more than 16-18 bits anyway) . Not a very fair comparison. The problems related to a sample frequency of 44.1kbps are all related to the filtering and fidelity at frequencies around the cut-off frequency of the filter. Exactly those problems are eliminated with true HiRes material, or at least semi-true (MQA), because the cut-off frequency is at least at 48kHz with those, and no human being can hear anything at those ultrasonic frequencies, while artifacts created by filtering at 22kHz (used with 44.1kbps material) can still be audible...


----------



## itchyears

Andrew_WOT said:


> How long business giving stuff away for free will last, I wonder?
> 
> Windows Amazon app was updated, btw, 7.8.72132 now. No idea what changed, seems like Amazon SW engineers are complete strangers to release notes thing.



I think it maybe a bit like amazon giving prime free every few months, amount of people that must either pay 99p might be in the millions or forget to cancel towards the expiry date, defiantly not complaining


----------



## itchyears

tomwoo said:


> Already signed up TIDAL's $1.99 for 4 month offer, couldn't pass on it
> I'll let Amazon Music HD free trial run itself out in one month. Not coming back unless they add exclusive mode in 4 months (doubt they will ever do that)... The app itself needs some streamlining too, right now it's too messy to my taste.



Is exclusive mode that important ? I enabled it in my Tidal Hifi settings but deezer hi-fi does not have it sadly, I don't think I noticed any difference in audio quality. 

I am still playing around with Tidal and Deezer hifi but I think Deezer edges it due to the search and popular ranked songs listings, it just makes music searching and picking the top 10 or 50 more easier but I do like Tidal still.


----------



## exdmd (Dec 3, 2019)

itchyears said:


> Is exclusive mode that important ? I enabled it in my Tidal Hifi settings but deezer hi-fi does not have it sadly, I don't think I noticed any difference in audio quality.



Both Qobuz and Tidal would not have exclusive mode if it was not audibly superior to shared mode.

Whether you can hear the difference between Qobuz in exclusive mode and Amazon Music HD in shared mode depends on how resolving your system is, also how critical a listener you are. I cancelled Amazon Music HD and kept Qobuz.

I also had Tidal for a while and had no problem with the sound quality, just did not like the emphasis on MQA and genres I don't listen to. Qobuz at $14.99 a month now in the US is a no brainer for me. I hope our friends in UK and EU also get a discount soon.


----------



## itchyears

exdmd said:


> Both Qobuz and Tidal would not have exclusive mode if it was not audibly superior to shared mode.
> 
> Whether you can hear the difference between Qobuz in exclusive mode and Amazon Music HD in shared mode depends on how resolving your system is, also how critical a listener you are. I cancelled Amazon Music HD and kept Qobuz.
> 
> I also had Tidal for a while and had no problem with the sound quality, just did not like the emphasis on MQA and genres I don't listen to. Qobuz at $14.99 a month now in the US is a no brainer for me. I hope our friends in UK and EU also get a discount soon.




Exclusive it is, may have to give Qobuz studio a try they do have a free 1 month trial also:

https://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/music/streaming/offers


----------



## tomwoo

itchyears said:


> Is exclusive mode that important ? I enabled it in my Tidal Hifi settings but deezer hi-fi does not have it sadly, I don't think I noticed any difference in audio quality.
> 
> I am still playing around with Tidal and Deezer hifi but I think Deezer edges it due to the search and popular ranked songs listings, it just makes music searching and picking the top 10 or 50 more easier but I do like Tidal still.


Qobuz and TIDAL w/ exclusive mode sound better to me. Maybe it's just placebo effect. Who knows.


----------



## exdmd (Dec 3, 2019)

tomwoo said:


> Qobuz and TIDAL w/ exclusive mode sound better to me. Maybe it's just placebo effect. Who knows.



I don't believe It is placebo. Windows sound mixer is known to degrade sound quality and without exclusive mode Amazon Music HD is not giving you bit perfect playback. Using exclusive mode the Windows sound kernel is bypassed and the streamed file goes straight to your external DAC without up or down sampling.

Wasapi exclusive mode is built in to Windows 10 for heavens sake, all Amazon's engineers had to do was code the app to take advantage of it. They could also open their API to aftermarket players like Roon or Audirvana if they did not want to make changes. Considering the poor GUI, mismatched tracks on albums and lack of exclusive mode it looks like they are just providing a product that is "good enough" for their Echo Studio speakers.

Even though Qobuz has been around longer than Tidal their Windows desktop app occasionally hangs up or stutters on playback. This seems to be somewhat computer dependent. Tidal used to be notorious for buggy playback especially on MQA files. Right now it seems there are fewer complaints about the Tidal desktop app than Qobuz. Regardless, if you are having playback problems with either Tidal or Qobuz all you need is the $75 Audirvana player which is rock solid.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 3, 2019)

The Amazon HD experience is quite different depending on your platform.  

My primary platform is the Apple iphone.   On that, it generally works OK but not great.   Downloads are fairly finicky.   The biggest issue is that every time that app starts up there is a big lag until the first song plays.

On the Fire 8 platform, the app is terrible when it comes to downloads.   It hangs all the time with network errors even though the wifi is just fine.

On the PC, everything is pretty straightforward.   I am not trying for critical listening on that unit, but everything sounds just fine.

The craziest thing is that there is no way to contact their developers as far as I know.  They should be getting this feedback.


----------



## exdmd

originalsnuffy said:


> The Amazon HD experience is quite different depending on your platform...
> 
> The craziest thing is that there is no way to contact their developers as far as I know.  They should be getting this feedback.


Amazon has a forum but no one knows if the developers even read it. On the forum it is recommended to leave feedback from within the app using the drop down under your name: Help > Tell us how we are doing. I agree it is unfortunate Amazon does not have better customer service. At least for Qobuz the US Manager is active on a thread at Audiophile Style and you can get questions answered.


----------



## robm321

Once my Amazon trial is finished, I'm getting Qobuz.


----------



## tomwoo

exdmd said:


> Amazon has a forum but no one knows if the developers even read it. On the forum it is recommended to leave feedback from within the app using the drop down under your name: Help > Tell us how we are doing. I agree it is unfortunate Amazon does not have better customer service. At least for Qobuz the US Manager is active on a thread at Audiophile Style and you can get questions answered.


Amazon simply doesn't care. They are not expecting its music streaming service make money anytime soon. As long as it helps they sell other products, they are more than happy.


----------



## TK33

Interestingly, I went into settings-->Music Settings to check my renewal last night and my Individual HD subscription is set to renew on Dec 16 @ 8.99/month (3.99 unlimited + 5 for HD).  I don't recall seeing any promos recently for renewals but I'll probably keep it at a lower rate for another month and hope they resolve some of the issues I've been having with the android app.


----------



## grokit (Dec 4, 2019)

robm321 said:


> Once my Amazon trial is finished, I'm getting Qobuz.


I have been trialing Qobuz and I recently found a new album, "Pink Floyd the Later Years" quite fatiguing with a high-frequency bump. Then I realized that I can have both Qobuz and Amazon Music HD apps running simultaneously on my Mac Mini, so I went back and forth for the first few songs. This treble bump was non-existent with the Amazon app, that's where I finished listening to the album, and my Qobuz trial is over.

I realize this is just one listener's experience with one album, but it makes me think that Qobuz might be trying a little too hard to impress. Since none of the streaming services are perfect, I'll go with the biggest music library for the least amount of $. If I am ever able to separate myself from the Prime ecosystem, I will re-visit the competition. But for now I don't see a reason to continue the Qobuz trial for a couple more weeks.


----------



## Richter Di

grokit said:


> I have been trialing Qobuz and I recently found a new album, "Pink Floyd the Later Years" quite fatiguing with a high-frequency bump. Then I realized that I can have both Qobuz and Amazon Music HD apps running simultaneously on my Mac Mini, so I went back and forth for the first few songs. This treble bump was non-existent with the Amazon app, that's where I finished listening to the album, and my Qobuz trial is over.
> 
> I realize this is just one listener's experience with one album, but it makes me think that Qobuz might be trying a little too hard to impress. Since none of the streaming services are perfect, I'll go with the biggest music library for the least amount of $. If I am ever able to separate myself from the Prime ecosystem, I will re-visit the competition. But for now I don't see a reason to continue the Qobuz trial for a couple more weeks.



For my personal taste Qobuz always sounds better compared to Amazon Music HD.


----------



## grokit

Richter Di said:


> For my personal taste Qobuz always sounds better compared to Amazon Music HD.


That what I thought too. Try the album I mentioned on both players and compare for yourself.


----------



## Richter Di

grokit said:


> That what I thought too. Try the album I mentioned on both players and compare for yourself.


Can not do it properly. My FiiO M11 player just takes ages after I used Amazon Music HD to start any track on Qobuz. Only using Amazon is fine (most of the times, I have to kickstart it with the HiBy player playing a hires song), only Qobuz also fine. But one after the other impossible. I can try it via the two apps with my Samsung Smart Phone and the @Jan Meier Soul. Let me try tomorrow.


----------



## grokit

Richter Di said:


> Can not do it properly. My FiiO M11 player just takes ages after I used Amazon Music HD to start any track on Qobuz. Only using Amazon is fine (most of the times, I have to kickstart it with the HiBy player playing a hires song), only Qobuz also fine. But one after the other impossible. I can try it via the two apps with my Samsung Smart Phone and the @Jan Meier Soul. Let me try tomorrow.


It's harder to compare between different mobile apps, I think it's probably easier on a desktop. This may also explain differing results.


----------



## Left Channel

grokit said:


> I have been trialing Qobuz and I recently found a new album, "Pink Floyd the Later Years" quite fatiguing with a high-frequency bump. Then I realized that I can have both Qobuz and Amazon Music HD apps running simultaneously on my Mac Mini, so I went back and forth for the first few songs. This treble bump was non-existent with the Amazon app, that's where I finished listening to the album, and my Qobuz trial is over.
> 
> I realize this is just one listener's experience with one album, but it makes me think that Qobuz might be trying a little too hard to impress. Since none of the streaming services are perfect, I'll go with the biggest music library for the least amount of $. If I am ever able to separate myself from the Prime ecosystem, I will re-visit the competition. But for now I don't see a reason to continue the Qobuz trial for a couple more weeks.



What you heard on Qobuz is how that album actually sounds (to you, via your own system, of course). What you heard through Amazon is something else. Regardless, clearly Amazon is best for your system and your ears, and that's fine. In fact it saves you money, so I'm jealous.


----------



## grokit (Dec 4, 2019)

Left Channel said:


> What you heard on Qobuz is how that album actually sounds (to you, via your own system, of course). What you heard through Amazon is something else. Regardless, clearly Amazon is best for your system and your ears, and that's fine. In fact it saves you money, so I'm jealous.


My system may be too resolving to 'recover' from poor mastering of the album. If this is the case, then I appreciate whatever Amazon is doing to smooth it out. Have you personally compared the album via both services?


----------



## Left Channel

grokit said:


> My system may be too resolving to 'recover' from poor mastering of the album. If this is the case, then I appreciate whatever Amazon is doing to smooth it out. Have you personally compared the album via both services?



What's good for you and your system is what's good. My systems are "smoothing" not resolving, so may not be the best comparison. But anyway I don't have Amazon. I used up a free trail on an earlier version of their service, and won't be trying Music HD unless they add WASAPI Exclusive and etc.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 4, 2019)

I find it really hard to believe that Qobuz, Tidal, Deezer, or Amazon has the time or inclination to change the EQ of their music.  I think we are all hearing artifacts of the playback approach inherent in the apps from each of the vendors. 

Because Tidal does not resample (either up or down) it does sound slightly different than the Amazon HD app on my iphone.  I am feeding the iphone to my Shanling M2S and from there to my car's auxiliary input.  The car has a really good audio system (Meridian) so its not a feeble test.  

Even with resampling, I really can't distinguish between my Redbook rips and the redbook equivalent from Amazon (shown as HD).   The Ultra HD material that I already own from HDTracks like Crosby Still and Nash (the first album; "couch") sounds just about the same from Amazon.   I know the Steve Hoffman Forums people don't like that mastering but I am perfectly happy with it.

These tests become somewhat meaningless if you are testing MQA tracks.   Whether you think MQA is the second coming of hifi or a joke pawning off compressed music as superior is up to you.  But you really can't compare MQA to HiRes or Redbook; it is simply different.


----------



## Pro-Jules

Richter Di said:


> Can not do it properly. My FiiO M11 player just takes ages after I used Amazon Music HD to start any track on Qobuz. Only using Amazon is fine (most of the times, I have to kickstart it with the HiBy player playing a hires song), only Qobuz also fine. But one after the other impossible. I can try it via the two apps with my Samsung Smart Phone and the @Jan Meier Soul. Let me try tomorrow.



I have been tearing my out with Qobuz performance on fiio m9 and Hiby R6 Pro. 

I am getting a new Sony 507b Friday to see how that goes.


----------



## a-LeXx

After Amazon has fixed the ugliest bugs, I'm pretty happy with music hd. It's about as good as it can get on my HW. Using iPhone as a source, DFR as DAC + Fiio A5 whenever required. Headphones in rotation : SE846, T5p.2 and HD600. Maybe they are all a bit dated, but for me still damn good...


----------



## Steve Wilcox

grokit said:


> I have been trialing Qobuz and I recently found a new album, "Pink Floyd the Later Years" quite fatiguing with a high-frequency bump. Then I realized that I can have both Qobuz and Amazon Music HD apps running simultaneously on my Mac Mini, so I went back and forth for the first few songs. This treble bump was non-existent with the Amazon app, that's where I finished listening to the album, and my Qobuz trial is over.
> 
> I realize this is just one listener's experience with one album, but it makes me think that Qobuz might be trying a little too hard to impress. Since none of the streaming services are perfect, I'll go with the biggest music library for the least amount of $. If I am ever able to separate myself from the Prime ecosystem, I will re-visit the competition. But for now I don't see a reason to continue the Qobuz trial for a couple more weeks.


I listened to this on Qobuz in HR and was really disappointed in the sound quality.  This is very much an exception to the usually excellent Qobuz quality though. I'm not sure what's gone wrong here?


----------



## grokit

Steve Wilcox said:


> I listened to this on Qobuz in HR and was really disappointed in the sound quality.  This is very much an exception to the usually excellent Qobuz quality though. I'm not sure what's gone wrong here?


I'm glad it's not just me! The easy answer is poor mastering, which happens on some compilation albums.

But this would seem to beg the question, why does it sound better on Amazon HD?


----------



## originalsnuffy

Is it confirmed that it sounds better on Amazon HD?  I have the download from Amazon and it sounds fine; but that tells us nothing about Qobuz of course.   In general, I am super critical of the concept that different versions of albums are going out to different providers.   I would be willing to bet that the various subscription services get huge FTP downloads at pretty much the same time and then add it to their systems without much futzing about.


----------



## grokit

originalsnuffy said:


> Is it confirmed that it sounds better on Amazon HD?  I have the download from Amazon and it sounds fine; but that tells us nothing about Qobuz of course.


Keeping score of those that have heard both albums both ways, this makes two of us have that have found the Qobuz version objectionable, and two of us that have found the Amazon HD version at least "fine".


----------



## greenblured

grokit said:


> I have been trialing Qobuz and I recently found a new album, "Pink Floyd the Later Years" quite fatiguing with a high-frequency bump. Then I realized that I can have both Qobuz and Amazon Music HD apps running simultaneously on my Mac Mini, so I went back and forth for the first few songs. This treble bump was non-existent with the Amazon app, that's where I finished listening to the album, and my Qobuz trial is over.
> 
> I realize this is just one listener's experience with one album, but it makes me think that Qobuz might be trying a little too hard to impress. Since none of the streaming services are perfect, I'll go with the biggest music library for the least amount of $. If I am ever able to separate myself from the Prime ecosystem, I will;  re-visit the competition. But for now I don't see a reason to continue the Qobuz trial for a couple more weeks.


The hard facts imo re streaming is Qobus id def the best re pure soundq. Refering to one recording that´s no good and conclude Qobus is bad is.... stupid. Try a BrandX(the band) album (Whitch have extreme dynamic range) and compare Amazone/Qobus. .


----------



## grokit (Dec 5, 2019)

greenblured said:


> The hard facts imo re streaming is Qobus id def the best re pure soundq. Refering to one recording that´s no good and conclude Qobus is bad is.... stupid. Try a BrandX(the band) album (Whitch have extreme dynamic range) and compare Amazone/Qobus. .


"Hard facts" are different from "imo", last time I checked. Qobuz has its own thread. Please add something constructive, like which album you have listened to from both services.


----------



## greenblured

sorry, was not aware this is a Amazone fan boy tread.


----------



## grokit

greenblured said:


> sorry, was not aware this is a Amazone fan boy tread.


I am not defending Amazon as a company, just wondering why you're here if not to troll.


----------



## greenblured

Not a troll. Comenting your opinion on on one recording you feel Amazon beats Qobus.


----------



## originalsnuffy

I am not necessarily an Amazon Fan Boy.  In fact I am testing out Tidal also right now.   But the Amazon ecosystem is pretty helpful for my use case.


----------



## 3Putter

I have used all three services. They all sound good to me. Differences exist but I was becoming so involved in finding differences it detracted from my enjoyment. So, I decided to give Amazon a try. Had anything I wanted and more. Qobuz sounds great but not enough there. Used Amazon for a week and ran into tech glitches and inconsistent SQ. Went right back to Tidal. It is consistent, great at discovery, nice SQ. I dont care that others poo poo MQA. I can navigate easily, have a great personal series of lists to access and I'm back enjoying music. Had Qobuz had more for me I could gladly have stayed. Amazon's UI was awful. Converting SD to HD was a pain. Downloads would duplicate songs within an album. Other glitchy stuff...


----------



## funkle II

Roon has been such a godsend for me that any streaming service I subscribe to needs to have Roon integration, so Amazon is off the table until that happens. I do subscribe to Tidal & Qobuz HR services, and find Qobuz 16/44 files to sound substantially better than Tidal 16/44.


----------



## GlennDS

muski said:


> Has anyone tried an Amazon Echo Link? I assume it's for streaming Amazon HD? *Strangely, it only does 16/48!*
> 
> From their help pages:
> 
> ...


I bought the Echo Link for my mom and decided to try it out.
"..._*but it will downsample everything before playing it internally, or sending out the digital outputs to an external DAC..."  *_Using the digital output, not only does it downsample everything to 48kHz, but it also upsamples everything to 48kHz. It does the same as all other media streaming devices (FireTV pendant, Roku, Nvidia Shield, and Google Chromecast), the Link converts all input signals to 48kHz. 
I guess I'm not buying one for myself.


----------



## originalsnuffy

The Echo Dot  (3rd generation) is capable of hi res FWIW.  I use the 3.5mm output to a receiver that is in turn hooked to a whole home speaker system (Niles).   Sounds great.


----------



## a-LeXx

One of the reasons to drop tidal for me was absence of Chesky Records content. On Amazon, everything from Chesky Records is available. Listened to the new Anna Nalick‘s album ‚The Blackes Crow‘ on amazon yesterday, just beautiful after a stressful week, perfect SQ, even though it‘s ‚just‘ CD-quality.


----------



## Pro-Jules

I have Tidal working well on my Hiby R6 pro - but Amazon music didn't work very well (would hang, not start etc)

So *unless there are tips to get it working well* - I guess I am out - shame as there was more hi-res Rolling Stones for me on Amazon...


----------



## Pro-Jules

stuartmc said:


> ..... If you follow the DAP threads like I have, you will know that the functionality and quality of playback on various Fiio, Ibasso and Hiby DAPs varies widely.  (We can reasonably assume that the same holds true for all kinds of playback devices). The Amazon and DAP forums are all over the place on what the real problem is. Some say the DAP software has to be fixed to work with Amazon HD because certain DAPs in their lineup work great with it and others don't. Then there are some DAP manufacturers (Fiio) laying the blame squarely on Amazon's shoulders and still others, like Hiby, that release a firmware upgrade for the R5 that fixes nearly everything.
> 
> So, in my (very) particular case, Amazon HD is working quite well in both functionality and sound quality -- enough for me to ditch Tidal and appreciate the savings. Obviously, your mileage may vary.



Dang! That has peaked my interest. 

I have Hiby R6 Pro (the build is so sturdy!) 

I am just sending back a SONY NW-ZX500 (really wanted to like it, its super light weight  and cool looking - but it annoyed me that 3rd party streaming apps are restricted to 48k) 

I am always interested in better firmware / smoother operation (Trying to get Qobuz to work well drove me mad) and I think there are more hi-res choices for my tastes on Amazon Music 

So does anyone recommend a move from R6 Pro to R5? (I see MQA and Amazon badges on Hiby's R5  promo art work)

Thanks in advance


----------



## magicrandy

Pro-Jules said:


> Dang! That has peaked my interest.
> 
> I have Hiby R6 Pro (the build is so sturdy!)
> 
> ...


HiBy support told me there is now a firmware update for the R6 Pro and "The support for Amazon Music Ultra HD at 192kHz on HiBy R6 Pro is the same as for HiBy R5".


----------



## Pro-Jules

Oh Cool!!


----------



## originalsnuffy

How is the sound of Amazon HD on the HiBy R5?   I am looking seriously at the new Shanling M6; but the R5 looks like a reasonable cost alternative.   I was not impressed with the R3 but I gather the R5 and R6 pro were better sounding units.


----------



## Pro-Jules

Sounds fantastic on the R6 Pro but I've had too many freezes with Amazon to confidently move forward with it. I am getting advice.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Do you get freezes when you have downloaded the music or just when streaming?  I would primarily be downloading; streaming HD seems more challenging to me.


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> After Amazon has fixed the ugliest bugs, I'm pretty happy with music hd. It's about as good as it can get on my HW. Using iPhone as a source, DFR as DAC + Fiio A5 whenever required. Headphones in rotation : SE846, T5p.2 and HD600. Maybe they are all a bit dated, but for me still damn good...


Which ugliest bugs are you referring to?


----------



## 435279

Soundizer said:


> Which ugliest bugs are you referring to?


----------



## Pro-Jules (Dec 9, 2019)

Hiby R6 Pro 

Latest firmware 1.6

I am going to try again.

A 192k 24bit version of Beggars Banquet album by the rolling stones froze up the app and needed a restart to do anything next.


----------



## a-LeXx (Dec 9, 2019)

Soundizer said:


> Which ugliest bugs are you referring to?



Well, I couldn‘t use my iPod touch with UHD content at all, it would stutter and overheat.
Then, with an iphone, it would overheat and play around 3-4 hours with a fully charged battery until it would  go flat.
Then the infamous bug with streaming not working and quality dropping to smth. around 64kBps with unlistenable artifacts in a middle of the song.

Those rendered the app partially or completely unusable on my iOs devices.

All of those have been fixed, I consider the remaining things (e.g. non-defeatable upsampling) cosmetics or nice to have....


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 9, 2019)

I don’t  know if this is a common problem or not, but when I start playback on a downloaded hi res song on my iphone it takes about one minute before the app starts playing music.  For a long time the wheel around the playback button just spins.  It does not make a difference if I am playing the song directly on the phone or via an external DAP/DAC.  That would qualify as a bug in my book.


----------



## Pro-Jules

originalsnuffy said:


> I don’t  know if this is a common problem or not, but when I start playback on a downloaded hi res song on my iphone it takes about one minute before the app starts playing music.  For a long time the wheel around the playback button just spins.  It does not make a difference if I am playing the song directly on the phone or via an external DAP/DAC.  That would qualify as a bug in my book.



What device?

Seems to be going OK on my Hiby R6 Pro but early days


----------



## originalsnuffy

The post mentioned an iphone as the device....


----------



## Pro-Jules

Oops. Sorry.


----------



## Pro-Jules

I might smell a rat. 

How come I see a 192k sample rate for so many Rolling Stones albums?

I know a few are at that res but all of them? 

I'm not sure that can be right?


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> Well, I couldn‘t use my iPod touch with UHD content at all, it would stutter and overheat.
> Then, with an iphone, it would overheat and play around 3-4 hours with a fully charged battery until it would  go flat.
> Then the infamous bug with streaming not working and quality dropping to smth. around 64kBps with unlistenable artifacts in a middle of the song.
> 
> ...


The reduction to standard quality bug has not been fixed for everyone, so it might even return.


----------



## Ken G

Pro-Jules said:


> I might smell a rat.
> 
> How come I see a 192k sample rate for so many Rolling Stones albums?
> 
> ...



As you can probably tell from my profile pic I'm a big fan of the Stones and on Qobuz they only offer 3 albums at 192k sample rate:

Beggars Banquet
Let It Bleed
The Rolling Stones Rock and Roll Circus.
The rest are mastered at 96k or some variation of 44k (with some at 88k and 176k). Perhaps Amazon has some other stash but I think Tidal had similar resolutions to Qobuz but with MQA of course. I know for fact that Beggars Banquet was at 192K if your DAC is capable of the last fold of MQA.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 9, 2019)

The entire Rolling Stones ATCO catalog was remastered to DSD around 2002.   From there the tracks can be converted to just about anything.   I think most other albums have had SACD (DSD) conversions also.   As I understand it, its best to go 24 bit 88 kHz with SACD conversions to PCM but it looks cool to go to 192 kHz.

I think some albums were recently remastered again to SACD for their 50th anniversaries.

On Amazon many albums have a mix of ultra HD and old fashioned HD tracks.   It’s pretty rare that one can tell the difference but that is a whole different matter.


----------



## Pro-Jules (Dec 9, 2019)

originalsnuffy said:


> The entire Rolling Stones ATCO catalog was remastered to DSD around 2002.   From there the tracks can be converted to just about anything.   I think most other albums have had SACD (DSD) conversions also.   As I understand it, its best to go 24 bit 88 kHz with SACD conversions to PCM but it looks cool to go to 192 kHz.
> 
> I think some albums were recently remastered again to SACD for their 50th anniversaries.
> 
> On Amazon many albums have a mix of ultra HD and old fashioned HD tracks.   It’s pretty rare that one can tell the difference but that is a whole different matter.



Pretty damn amazing.

But pretty much EVERYTHING I am playing back from download displays 192k. (Like Hysteria - def leopard)

this displays “HD”

but the sample rate to the DAC on the HiBy R6 Pro displays 192k (so should be badged “HD Ultra” right?) but on Qobuz this is 44.1 16bit. 
Confusing....

it sounds PRISTINE though. 

I had Tidal open and was downloading about 50 albums on Amazon HD and searching and playing hi-res back - ok my player got a little warm but to me this is amazing. Where’s the catch?

Ok the transport forward and back next track buttons don’t function. Those are screen taps only.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 9, 2019)

I can't speak to Qobuz; but as we have overdiscussed here, if you output from Amazon HD on an iphone  to an external DAC/DAP it upsamples everything to 192 khz.  So its possible something similar is happening on your HiBy unit (but I am just guessing at that).  And on the iphone, which can only go to 24 bit 48 khz, there is downsampling I presume for some hi res tracks if you play music natively.  Which probably explains why there is a big lag when selecting the first track one the happ has started up and playing that track.  It takes a while for all those hamsters in the microprocessor to get going.


----------



## chef8489

Yet music you buy still is less than 320kbps from amazon. I dont understand why they dont offer flac for purchases.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 9, 2019)

chef8489 said:


> Yet music you buy still is less than 320kbps from amazon. I dont understand why they dont offer flac for purchases.



To each their own but if I want to purchase FLAC it is generally cheapest to buy a new or used CD.  And for hi res you can pick you favorite vendor; mainly HDTracks for me.

But with "music as a service" I find I am buying less and less.  For example; I might have purchased the new Who CD at one time.  But now I downloaded it.  And am likely to clear it out of my device as it kind of bores me.   Similarly the sampler from PInk Floyd's Later Years.   Just clicked on it rather than buy it.  That one is pretty good but not truly essential.  Perfect for a download but not necessarily a purchase.   Even better; downloaded boxed sets from the Kinks and a recent Steve Miller collection.  The Steve Miller collection left me cold; glad it was just a download on the service and not a purchase.  The Kinks box was cool; but I am likely to just keep a few tracks on my device.

It is also a great way to hear the bonus tracks on various albums that have been re-released.  Most of the time I play the bonus tracks once and never go back to them again.

The only bonus tracks recently that really got my continued interest were the ones from Sticky Fingers (some good live material and Brown Sugar with Clapton is cool) and Abbey Road deluxe has a few cool things ("the Long One" which has Her Majesty reinserted to its original place and the run through of She's So Heavy with fun banter between John and George Martin).


----------



## chef8489

originalsnuffy said:


> To each their own but if I want to purchase FLAC it is generally cheapest to buy a new or used CD.  And for hi res you can pick you favorite vendor; mainly HDTracks for me.
> 
> But with "music as a service" I find I am buying less and less.  For example; I might have purchased the new Who CD at one time.  But now I downloaded it.  And am likely to clear it out of my device as it kind of bores me.   Similarly the sampler from PInk Floyd's Later Years.   Just clicked on it rather than buy it.  That one is pretty good but not truly essential.  Perfect for a download but not necessarily a purchase.   Even better; downloaded boxed sets from the Kinks and a recent Steve Miller collection.  The Steve Miller collection left me cold; glad it was just a download on the service and not a purchase.  The Kinks box was cool; but I am likely to just keep a few tracks on my device.
> 
> ...


I do wind up purchasing the CD. amazon adds them to your library and would have been nice if they offered flac downloads. No worries as I have the cds shortly after.


----------



## magicrandy (Dec 9, 2019)

Pro-Jules said:


> I might smell a rat.
> 
> How come I see a 192k sample rate for so many Rolling Stones albums?
> 
> ...


HiBy support told me that with the latest firmware update both the R5 and R6 Pro now support Amazon Music HD however they mentioned a key point to be aware of:

"Indicated system sample when playing Amazon Music will now be 192kHz--always, because Amazon Music does not discriminate between different source music sample rates"

This sounds like what you are experiencing. Have you looked in the Amazon Music app to see what it show?


----------



## Pro-Jules (Dec 10, 2019)

Thanks

That makes sense now

Yes, it often has a different sample rate label (not 192k))

This means I can't see the 88.2 rate for example (that I KNOW some of the music I have downloaded is)

Hope they can fix this!

Is this across all DAPs? Or just some.

discriminating" is key if your platform has the banner "HD". IMHO!


----------



## magicrandy

Pro-Jules said:


> Thanks
> 
> That makes sense now
> 
> ...


I’d like to know how each DAP works with Amazon Music HD. It appears to be a moving target. The HD service from Amazon is only a few months old. Amazon makes changes to their app. They are probably also making changes at the back end systems. Some of the DAP players are making changes.


----------



## Brava210

magicrandy said:


> I’d like to know how each DAP works with Amazon Music HD. It appears to be a moving target. The HD service from Amazon is only a few months old. Amazon makes changes to their app. They are probably also making changes at the back end systems. Some of the DAP players are making changes.



The fiio M6 plays everything at the correct sample rate. Works well and sounds good too.


----------



## magicrandy

Brava210 said:


> The fiio M6 plays everything at the correct sample rate. Works well and sounds good too.


Good to know. Thanks...

Can anyone else confirm DAPs that work well?


----------



## Pro-Jules (Dec 10, 2019)

Hiby always shows 192k. Needs to be fixed.

Sounds great though and works over chromecast audio

But spif 3.5 to coax stutters on off v quickly


----------



## a-LeXx

Soundizer said:


> The reduction to standard quality bug has not been fixed for everyone, so it might even return.


I suspect those who still see the issue are either on a different platform (not iOs), as it also reportedly affected osx users,or did not upgrade to the latest app version. The issue was gone for me at the moment I updated the ios app, never has returned. Before that, it was not sporadic, but 100% persistent with any content.  So I consider this solved on iOS  Any bug can return, but I hope amazon knows at least how to spell ‚regression testing‘ and has a regression test for every fixed bug....


----------



## a-LeXx

originalsnuffy said:


> I don’t  know if this is a common problem or not, but when I start playback on a downloaded hi res song on my iphone it takes about one minute before the app starts playing music.  For a long time the wheel around the playback button just spins.  It does not make a difference if I am playing the song directly on the phone or via an external DAP/DAC.  That would qualify as a bug in my book.



that‘s probably because your internal database is screwed, you‘d need to uninstall the app and re-download everything again. For me, the playback starts almost immediately, with around 80 GB of downloaded music...


----------



## Whitigir

When I tried buying a song from this Amazon app, I could only download MP3.... which is so freaking sad.

has anyone been checking the spectrums to see if the streamed files are really high res yet


----------



## a-LeXx (Dec 10, 2019)

Whitigir said:


> When I tried buying a song from this Amazon app, I could only download MP3.... which is so freaking sad.
> 
> has anyone been checking the spectrums to see if the streamed files are really high res yet



With purchased albums it works like this: whenever you purchase an album, it‘s an mp3 version only. Real mp3. This version is being downloaded into your library. You can always manually remove this downloaded album and re-download HD/UHD version of the album if it‘s offered for streaming, but it will be gone after your subscription expires. In this case, you can re-download your purchased mp3 version again.

Amazon never said it‘s selling CD or HiRes quality albums, they are clearly saying they are selling mp3 versions of the albums.

It was even the same before Music HD launch. All the streamed content was streamed/downloaded in AAC, while purchased content was still real mp3. So, you were/are definitively getting what you are paying for...

Btw, it‘s often cheaper to buy a CD on amazon and get an mp3 version as auto-rip for free, than just to purchase an mp3 album. Sounds crazy, but is true for many albums, at least on German amazon...


----------



## Whitigir (Dec 10, 2019)

a-LeXx said:


> With purchased albums it works like this: whenever you purchase an album, it‘s an mp3 version only. Real mp3. This version is being downloaded into your library. You can always manually remove this downloaded album and re-download HD/UHD version of the album if it‘s offered for streaming, but it will be gone after your subscription expires. In this case, you can re-download your purchased mp3 version again.
> 
> Amazon never said it‘s selling CD or HiRes quality albums, they are clearly saying they are selling mp3 versions of the albums.
> 
> ...




Well, the question would be, does AmaZonHD really offer High Res streaming ? Or are they fake re-sampled from MP3 sources ?

If they have high res original as a source, why would they not be selling Highres files ?

the next question would be, could anyone check the analyzers and see if the contents being streamed is really HD or whatever Amazon is claiming it out to be ?


----------



## a-LeXx

Whitigir said:


> Well, the question would be, does AmaZonHD really offer High Res streaming ? Or are they fake re-sampled from MP3 sources ?
> 
> If they have high res original as a source, why would they not be selling Highres files ?
> 
> the next question would be, could anyone check the analyzers and see if the contents being streamed is really HD or whatever Amazon is claiming it out to be ?



I assume for the most content they have real hires, few are probably upsampled... They probably do not see much of a potential in selling hires, as the pricing would be much higher and they would be serving a very niche market. That’s peanuts for amazon, they are simply not interested, the are into volume sales...


----------



## Soundizer

a-LeXx said:


> I suspect those who still see the issue are either on a different platform (not iOs), as it also reportedly affected osx users,or did not upgrade to the latest app version. The issue was gone for me at the moment I updated the ios app, never has returned. Before that, it was not sporadic, but 100% persistent with any content.  So I consider this solved on iOS  Any bug can return, but I hope amazon knows at least how to spell ‚regression testing‘ and has a regression test for every fixed bug....


I know of someone who has latest version on iPhone and it is still happening.


----------



## Pro-Jules

Is it this?

The 4G has plenty of bars? 

I don't get it


----------



## Soundizer

Pro-Jules said:


> Is it this?
> 
> The 4G has plenty of bars?
> 
> I don't get it


As far as I understand it only happens via wi-fi. Not 4G.


----------



## originalsnuffy

I wonder if the version for Amazon devices is seriously messed up.   I have trouble completing downloads on my Fire HD 8 (2018 version).

My Fire cube (gen 1) states that my receiver is limited to 16 bit 48 khz even though it can go well over 192khz and 24 bit (even does native DSD/SACD).


----------



## senorx12562

originalsnuffy said:


> I wonder if the version for Amazon devices is seriously messed up.   I have trouble completing downloads on my Fire HD 8 (2018 version).
> 
> My Fire cube (gen 1) states that my receiver is limited to 16 bit 48 khz even though it can go well over 192khz and 24 bit (even does native DSD/SACD).



I have a Fire stick (3 mos. old or so) and it will not transmit anything higher than 16/48 to my dac either. The limitation reported by Amazon refers to the weakest (so to speak) link in your chain. In my case, I am not sure whether it is actually a limitation of the Fire stick (which sends audio via hdmi to my tv, then from TV to dac via toslink) or the tv, or both. 16/48 is fine for me for casual listening, and still sounds better than spotify. If I want to take full advantage of what is available, I just use my pc, which uses the same tv as a monitor anyway, and send audio via USB or toslink (rarely) directly to the dac without going through the tv. I have not attempted to download any tracks for offline listening via the Fire stick, although I imagine there would be a storage problem.


----------



## originalsnuffy

senorx12562 said:


> I have a Fire stick (3 mos. old or so) and it will not transmit anything higher than 16/48 to my dac eithe.



I think the culprit is some serious coding errors.   I suspect the app is not properly interrogating the Fire devices as to their capabilities.


----------



## Pro-Jules (Dec 11, 2019)

On my iPhone I had to  scroll down though all my apps and indevidually activate cellular on Amazon Music. 

I've never had an app where I had to do that!

It took me a few days to figure it out - Doh!


----------



## rkw

Whitigir said:


> If they have high res original as a source, why would they not be selling Highres files ?


This is a quirk of the music industry. The music labels operate streaming and download sales like separate businesses. When you purchase a file, it comes from a separate server and database dedicated only to download sales. It doesn't come from the same source used for streaming.


----------



## senorx12562

originalsnuffy said:


> I think the culprit is some serious coding errors.   I suspect the app is not properly interrogating the Fire devices as to their capabilities.


Yeah, I am sure that''s it. Amazon''s coders can figure out how to integrate with all of my other equipment, but can't figure out their own equipment.


----------



## exdmd

At this point I am afraid we can forget about exclusive mode for Amazon Music HD. I might be wrong but Amazon's silence on the issue seems troubling.


----------



## richsto

Nearing the end of my three month trial and am dropping Amazon Music like a hot potato:

1. No exclusive mode - hard for me to consider it “HD” if I can’t even send the unaltered steam to my DAC 

2. Doesn’t work with my VPN - and yes I have a very fast connection with no resolution despite constant discussion with Amazon

3. Constant freezes, dropouts, crashes, and endless spinning blue circles - completely unreliable for me on phone and desktop; always waiting and futzing with it.  

Completely disappointing. Just my experience and two cents.


----------



## tomwoo

richsto said:


> Nearing the end of my three month trial and am dropping Amazon Music like a hot potato:
> 
> 1. No exclusive mode - hard for me to consider it “HD” if I can’t even send the unaltered steam to my DAC
> 
> ...


Lack of exclusive mode is also a dealbreaker for me.


----------



## Marlowe

My three month free trial with Amazon ends on Monday and I cancelled earlier this week. Truthfully, even with fairly good gear I was generally unable to find much if any difference in SQ between Amazon and Tidal, even when switching back and forth in the same track. (In a few cases I thought I heard a slight difference, and it was always in Tidal's favor, but it was small and could well be a placebo effect. Admittedly my ears are fairly old and not well trained.) Nonetheless, the lack of an exclusive mode--an apparently easy feature to add if Amazon was not transparently indifferent to its relatively small base of audiophile listeners--was the primary reason and a truly horrid UI was a large factor as well. (Tidal's UI is no paragon, though it has slowly improved over the years, but it is wonderful compared to Amazon). Library was not a huge factor in my decision. Although Amazon plugged a couple of nagging gaps in Tidal's library (the Four Seasons, Jerry Garcia's '70s solo albums), it also had a couple of troubling gaps that Tidal has (Ringo Starr's best album "Ringo"); in the end there was a well over a 95% commonality between the two services for what I listen to (primarily almost every genre of rock, R&B, and folk since the '50s; I don't listen to much jazz and never to classical, hip hop or EDM).


----------



## Pro-Jules (Dec 13, 2019)

Hmmmm...

I liked the Amazon search function better than Tidal's - I like rock but also early music, Baroque and monastic chanting (!) . I felt classical music 'discovery' was visually better on Amazon.

BUT amazon music isn't playing ball well with my Hiby DAP, the next track / back buttons dont work, and the USB digital out doesn't work. So I am back to Tidal.. I must have deleted and re-downloaded all my favourites 2 or 3 times now.... its been a journey! 

Perhaps in a year or so Amazon Music will be the one to go for.

*A question for those sending Tidal to DAC'*s do you see changes in sample rates per album? Like 44.1k / 96k / 192k ?? I am playing out from my Hiby R6 Pro DAP to my home hifi rig (see below in signature) and when playing ANYTHING Tidal displays 96K no mater what's playing. Is that normal?

Thanks


----------



## Brava210

Well It all works as it should on Fiio M6, I use it line out to an Arcam Headphone amp. Sounds very good


----------



## Brava210 (Dec 13, 2019)

Listening to Sister Sledge, sounds really good


----------



## Soundizer

Brava210 said:


> Listening to Sister Sledge, sounds really good


Your [Currently playing at] might not be correct. 

It certainly is incorrect when I connect Audioquest cobalt or Chord Mojo to either my Mac, iPadPro, iPhone.

the only way to know what is being played is if your dac has an indication to show what is being received.


----------



## GlennDS

Soundizer said:


> Your [Currently playing at] might not be correct.
> .... the only way to know what is being played is if your dac has an indication to show what is being received.


The way I see it, if he is using the LINE OUT from his player (which I believe would be analog), then his player is the DAC and the CURRENTLY PLAYING AT info should be correct.
If he were using a digital out from his player, then the CURRENTLY PLAYING AT may not match what is being DACed.

_Pro-Jules_:
It's been awhile since I've tested Tidal, but with my system I think the DAC in my Onkyo AVR matched/changed as Tidal's bitrate changed. My system is PC Windows 10 out with HDMI to Onkyo AVR (using exclusive mode (come on Amazon!)).


----------



## exdmd (Dec 14, 2019)

Pro-Jules said:


> *A question for those sending Tidal to DAC'*s do you see changes in sample rates per album? Like 44.1k / 96k / 192k ?? I am playing out from my Hiby R6 Pro DAP to my home hifi rig (see below in signature) and when playing ANYTHING Tidal displays 96K no mater what's playing. Is that normal?
> 
> Thanks



No changes here. On Windows Amazon Music HD *always* uses shared mode and sends the DAC the sample rate and bit depth you chose in Windows Sounds. It cannot use exclusive mode even if asked to. I assume same applies to DAPs.


----------



## Brava210

GlennDS said:


> The way I see it, if he is using the LINE OUT from his player (which I believe would be analog), then his player is the DAC and the CURRENTLY PLAYING AT info should be correct.
> If he were using a digital out from his player, then the CURRENTLY PLAYING AT may not match what is being DACed.
> 
> Correct. I am using the M6 as a DAC. It doesn't always show playing at maximum capacity.
> ...


----------



## GlennDS

New gripe with Amazon Music:
Unhappy with the My Soundtrack station. I want a music app that will see that I like mostly hair metal and hard rock, a bit of country, a smaller bit of jazz, a smaller bit of pop, and little to none of R&B and Rap. 
The service started well with almost all hard rock, but played very very little of anything else. I figured as I skipped tracks and thumbed up and thumbed down tracks, it would learn what I wanted to hear. After a few weeks it got better, playing more and more variety of genres. But now it plays 98% pop, rap, R&B, and plays maybe 1% rock and country, and less than 1% hair metal. I try to fast forward and thumb down tracks that I don't want it to play and for the last three days it just keeps playing the same tracks over and over (even ones that I have thumbed down). In the last three days it has played one hair metal track (from Guns and Roses) which it keeps trying to play over and over.

Tidal was the opposite experience where at first it kept trying to force thug rap down my throat, but it started playing more and more rock and country.


----------



## exdmd

Well Jay-Z is the majority owner. I have to give Tidal credit as they have steadily improved the stability of their Windows desktop player. It was horrible back in 2014 - 2016. Qobuz has been doing the same but still slightly lags behind Tidal in stability. Which is not a problem at all if you use Audirvana player.


----------



## Pro-Jules (Dec 14, 2019)

OK more research shows

USB output - Tidal is seen as a fixed @ 96k sample rate on my dac
SPDF output - changes sample per album on my dac

I have a bunch of gear that can be connected in a lot of different ways so I am actually having fun with it all.

Hiby R6 Pro - has spdif @ USB digital out
Mutec USB 3+ re-clocker (Multiple. i/o)
Grace 903 dac (Multiple. i/o)
Finalizer Plus 96k (Multiple. i/o)


----------



## kdphan

Has UAPP started integration with amazon HD yet?


----------



## exdmd

kdphan said:


> Has UAPP started integration with amazon HD yet?



Nope only Qobuz and Tidal work with UAPP right now sorry.


----------



## Left Channel

kdphan said:


> Has UAPP started integration with amazon HD yet?





exdmd said:


> Nope only Qobuz and Tidal work with UAPP right now sorry.



And it has not started because Amazon has only released the API to hardware partners. The API is not public, and it is not yet available to app developers.


----------



## exdmd

Left Channel said:


> And it has not started because Amazon has only released the API to hardware partners. The API is not public, and it is not yet available to app developers.



Yes and I also think the chances of Amazon allowing integration into Roon and Audirvana are slim to none. They want a closed system. They could possibly put one or both Qobuz and Tidal in serious trouble of going under if they did open their API so putting them out of business does not seem to be a priority for Amazon, just selling hardware from their partners.


----------



## magicrandy

I’m looking for a good DAP with proper support for Amazon Music HD. 

Important considerations:

plays at the same quality as the source files - up to 192/24
balanced output
good sound quality
I’m considering the following:

Hiby R6 Pro
FiiO M11 Pro
iBasso DX220
Any comments on these devices, or other recommendations, welcome.

Randy


----------



## Pro-Jules

IMHO Amazon HD may be too new to expect a DAP to work 100% perfectly with. 

I advise a waiting period before getting married to Amazon Music. 

Use something more reliable until then?


----------



## magicrandy

Pro-Jules said:


> IMHO Amazon HD may be too new to expect a DAP to work 100% perfectly with.
> 
> I advise a waiting period before getting married to Amazon Music.
> 
> Use something more reliable until then?


From what I'm reading it does look too new to expect anything to work perfectly. I have a ZX300 and some Pono players with lots of FLAC files, so I can playback hi-res without a problem. My hope with Amazon Music HD was to get a wide selection of hi-res via streaming.


----------



## Pro-Jules

Yes we all want that but hope doesn't nesdearily make electronics and apps do what we want.


----------



## magicrandy

Pro-Jules said:


> Yes we all want that but hope doesn't nesdearily make electronics and apps do what we want.


I think Amazon Music HD will evolve over time. So my gamble is what DAP is the best based on the current situation.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Cancelling subscription after trial with "No exclusive mode" reason, could be a good message to the deaf Amazon ears, they only understand money.
What is the annual sub for Qobuz right now?


----------



## Ken G

Andrew_WOT said:


> Cancelling subscription after trial with "No exclusive mode" reason, could be a good message to the deaf Amazon ears, they only understand money.
> What is the annual sub for Qobuz right now?


$150


----------



## Pro-Jules

I'v settled on Tidal for the moment.


----------



## magicrandy

Pro-Jules said:


> I'v settled on Tidal for the moment.


Are you using HiBy for Tidal? How does it work with Tidal compared to Amazon?


----------



## Marlowe

Andrew_WOT said:


> Cancelling subscription after trial with "No exclusive mode" reason, could be a good message to the deaf Amazon ears, they only understand money.


Doubtful. I'm not even sure that subscribers who care about exclusive mode even amount to the proverbial rounding error for Amazon. (And FWIW, when I canceled my free trial last week I cited exclusive mode as the primary reason, plus the awful UI.)


----------



## a-LeXx (Dec 16, 2019)

magicrandy said:


> I’m looking for a good DAP with proper support for Amazon Music HD.
> 
> Important considerations:
> 
> ...



I suggest to get an ipod touch or a small iphone + a mobile dac of your choice, this works fine for me. I don't believe in those DAPs, hiby r6 pro measured like junk on audio science reviews... I semi-permanently attached a dac to the phone with a velcro tape, so there is not much of a difference to a 'real' dap, but it's modular an I can exchange components to my liking...

Here is my current Amazon Music machine, even with a Fiio amp. Everything holding together with velcro tape, still mobile enough to put it into a pocket when moving around the house...


----------



## senorx12562

a-LeXx said:


> I suggest to get an ipod touch or a small iphone + a mobile dac of your choice, this works fine for me. I don't believe in those DAPs, hiby r6 pro measured like junk on audio science reviews... I semi-permanently attached a dac to the phone with a velcro tape, so there is not much of a difference to a 'real' dap, but it's modular an I can exchange components to my liking...
> 
> Here is my current Amazon Music machine, even with a Fiio amp. Everything holding together with velcro tape, still mobile enough to put it into a pocket when moving around the house...


You obviously have big pockets and a good belt.


----------



## a-LeXx

senorx12562 said:


> You obviously have big pockets and a good belt.



Well, this whole thingy is still less than 300g, the largest conponent is a standard size iphone 7. It fits easily into a pocket of my sweatpants and can drive any headphone, from an SE846 to most demanding phones out there (fiio can drive insane for a mobile amp 800mW into 32ohm, single ended)


----------



## magicrandy

a-LeXx said:


> I suggest to get an ipod touch or a small iphone + a mobile dac of your choice, this works fine for me. I don't believe in those DAPs, hiby r6 pro measured like junk on audio science reviews... I semi-permanently attached a dac to the phone with a velcro tape, so there is not much of a difference to a 'real' dap, but it's modular an I can exchange components to my liking...
> 
> Here is my current Amazon Music machine, even with a Fiio amp. Everything holding together with velcro tape, still mobile enough to put it into a pocket when moving around the house...


Thanks for the response.

My current mobile setup is similar. I use an iPhone with a FiiO Q5 external DAC and it works good with Amazon Music HD. I was hoping for a more compact solution which is why I've been looking at DAPs. But I cannot find anyone who speaks highly of the DAPs I've been looking. Maybe I need to stick with my current rig until the Amazon Music HD service & hardware support matures.

If there are better options than the ones I've listed I'm open to suggestions. 

Randy


----------



## a-LeXx

magicrandy said:


> Thanks for the response.
> 
> My current mobile setup is similar. I use an iPhone with a FiiO Q5 external DAC and it works good with Amazon Music HD. I was hoping for a more compact solution which is why I've been looking at DAPs. But I cannot find anyone who speaks highly of the DAPs I've been looking. Maybe I need to stick with my current rig until the Amazon Music HD service & hardware support matures.
> 
> ...



Well, I'm afraid DAPs will always suffer compatibility problems, to a larger or a smaller extent. While no big streaming provider can ignore something like ios platform, those small android-based daps with their non-stadard hw and sw implementations will always potentislly run into issues, sooner or later. My opinion is - daps are a bad investment for streaming. Too many variables that can turn your dap into a paperweight if your intended usage is to pair it with a particular streaming service...


----------



## magicrandy

a-LeXx said:


> Well, I'm afraid DAPs will always suffer compatibility problems, to a larger or a smaller extent. While no big streaming provider can ignore something like ios platform, those small android-based daps with their non-stadard hw and sw implementations will always potentislly run into issues, sooner or later. My opinion is - daps are a bad investment for streaming. Too many variables that can turn your dap into a paperweight if your intended usage is to pair it with a particular streaming service...



Thanks for the response.

My primary goal is to make Amazon Music HD work. That in itself simplifies a lot for me. The good news is I'm mostly there if I stop chasing DAPs. It works well with my MAC (using an external DAC). It works well with my home theater system (using HEOS). It works well with streaming (if I use an iPhone/DAC combination). So maybe the best approach is stick with what I already have until the service and hardware support catch up.

Randy


----------



## a-LeXx

magicrandy said:


> Thanks for the response.
> 
> My primary goal is to make Amazon Music HD work. That in itself simplifies a lot for me. The good news is I'm mostly there if I stop chasing DAPs. It works well with my MAC (using an external DAC). It works well with my home theater system (using HEOS). It works well with streaming (if I use an iPhone/DAC combination). So maybe the best approach is stick with what I already have until the service and hardware support catch up.
> 
> Randy


I think your iphone+q5 combination is as good as it can get currently... why do you want a dap? If you need to use your iphone as a phone, just get an ipod touch, it‘s much smaller. Stack it with your Q5 with velcro tape, and you have a most universal dap... the only downside - you‘d need to charge 2 units...


----------



## magicrandy

a-LeXx said:


> I think your iphone+q5 combination is as good as it can get currently... why do you want a dap? If you need to use your iphone as a phone, just get an ipod touch, it‘s much smaller. Stack it with your Q5 with velcro tape, and you have a most universal dap... the only downside - you‘d need to charge 2 units...


Thanks for the suggestion.

I took your advice and ordered a new iPod Touch. I did not know that they are so small. I also get 1 year free Apple TV+ with the new iPod.

I was wondering if I should upgrade my FiiO Q5 to the Q5s but it does not look like it adds anything when combining it with a iPod Touch. So I'll stay with what I have.

Randy


----------



## Brava210

magicrandy said:


> Thanks for the response.
> 
> My primary goal is to make Amazon Music HD work. That in itself simplifies a lot for me. The good news is I'm mostly there if I stop chasing DAPs. It works well with my MAC (using an external DAC). It works well with my home theater system (using HEOS). It works well with streaming (if I use an iPhone/DAC combination). So maybe the best approach is stick with what I already have until the service and hardware support catch up.
> 
> Randy



Like I have said before the Fiio M6 works as it should with Amazon and has line out too.
24 bit 192khz max.


----------



## a-LeXx

magicrandy said:


> Thanks for the suggestion.
> 
> I took your advice and ordered a new iPod Touch. I did not know that they are so small. I also get 1 year free Apple TV+ with the new iPod.
> 
> ...


Right, they are very small and thin and just around 80g in weight, with a year of apple TV+ actually a good value. I  got me a new (it was a still sealed unit) iPhone 7  just for music a few months ago, got it for less than a comparable ipod touch, so I figured why not, although it‘s substantially larger and heavier than an ipod touch. Kind of still missing that form factor of an ipod touch, but well... the screen is larger and I saved 100 Euro compared to an ipod, so it‘s ok


----------



## magicrandy

Brava210 said:


> Like I have said before the Fiio M6 works as it should with Amazon and has line out too.
> 24 bit 192khz max.



Thanks. It looks like a nice device but I'm looking for something with balanced output.


----------



## Scarpad

So why no Hiby M3 support?


----------



## rkw

Scarpad said:


> So why no Hiby M3 support?


Same reason for Amazon as for Spotify and Apple Music. These streaming services will not allow it for business reasons.


----------



## Scarpad

rkw said:


> Same reason for Amazon as for Spotify and Apple Music. These streaming services will not allow it for business reasons.


Then why is it on the m6


----------



## rkw (Dec 21, 2019)

Scarpad said:


> Then why is it on the m6


The M6 runs Android. It can run the Amazon Music app.


----------



## Brava210

rkw said:


> The M6 runs Android. It can run the Amazon Music app.


It runs a modified Android OS which is why it's able to stream at the correct sample rate unlike standard Android.


----------



## McCol

Brava210 said:


> It runs a modified Android OS which is why it's able to stream at the correct sample rate unlike standard Android.



It is probably using its own drivers to bypass the android drivers that normally do the sample rates.

Not the best explanation but best I can describe it!


----------



## rkw (Dec 22, 2019)

Brava210 said:


> It runs a modified Android OS which is why it's able to stream at the correct sample rate unlike standard Android.


I was addressing @Scarpad's question about why the M6 can stream Amazon Music but the Hiby M3 cannot. The answer is that unlike the M6, the Hiby M3 does not run Android and cannot install and run the Amazon Music app.


----------



## Brava210

rkw said:


> I was addressing @Scarpad's question about why the M6 can stream Amazon Music but the Hiby M3 cannot. The answer is that unlike the M6, the Hiby M3 does not run Android and cannot install and run the Amazon Music app.


Yes i


rkw said:


> I was addressing @Scarpad's question about why the M6 can stream Amazon Music but the Hiby M3 cannot. The answer is that unlike the M6, the Hiby M3 does not run Android and cannot install and run the Amazon Music app.


I understand.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 26, 2019)

I wonder if the users of this service could somehow collectively convince Amazon to have forums to discuss needed technical/architectural changes to the playback software on various platforms.  Forums that are read by product managers and the engineers.  We also need a way to let Amazon know when certain audio tracks are problematic.

For example, I would want to lobby to have the Android app know how to look at the underlying hardware and determine if there are measures in place to bypass the typical limit of android to 24 bit 48 khz.  For example, playback on the Amazon Fire Cube is limited to 16 bits even if the music is 24 bits.   And the Amazon Fire HD 8 can't send anything higher than 24 bit 48 khz to external DACs.  And the app completely fails to work on my Cayin N5II.  But it does not have to be that way.

Similarly, the app takes a long time to load on my iphone.   I tried clearing out the music and downloading the music again, but that did not solve the problem.

And of course it would be nice to have exclusive mode on Windows.

On another note, one of the songs on the Led Zeppelin Presence album (Achilles Last Stand) simply can't be downloaded.


----------



## clerkpalmer

Has anyone noticed a change/drop off in Amazon music over iOS?  Volume has decreased and everything just seems "off".  In fact, switching over to Apple Music provides a massive improvement.  There is no punch in AM and treble seems rolled off completely.  I've check my settings and everything is right but the sound is dull, almost veiled.  Trying to figure out what may have happened.


----------



## originalsnuffy

clerkpalmer said:


> Has anyone noticed a change/drop off in Amazon music over iOS?  Volume has decreased and everything just seems "off".  In fact, switching over to Apple Music provides a massive improvement.  There is no punch in AM and treble seems rolled off completely.  I've check my settings and everything is right but the sound is dull, almost veiled.  Trying to figure out what may have happened.



Are you downloading your music or streaming?  If you are streaming; the sound you are describing would be a drop from hi res to standard (which is compressed).


----------



## exdmd

originalsnuffy said:


> I wonder if the users of this service could somehow collectively convince Amazon to have forums to discuss needed technical/architectural changes to the playback software on various platforms.  Forums that are read by product managers and the engineers.  We also need a way to let Amazon know when certain audio tracks are problematic.
> 
> For example, I would want to lobby to have the Android app know how to look at the underlying hardware and determine if there are measures in place to bypass the typical limit of android to 24 bit 48 khz.  For example, playback on the Amazon Fire Cube is limited to 16 bits even if the music is 24 bits.   And the Amazon Fire HD 8 can't send anything higher than 24 bit 48 khz to external DACs.  And the app completely fails to work on my Cayin N5II.  But it does not have to be that way.
> 
> ...



Great idea but I doubt Amazon is interested. They have zero customer service for the Amazon Music HD service so far. 

There is a thread on Amazon Music HD at the Amazon Forums but there is no interaction with anyone from customer service. The thread really serves no purpose except maybe to advertise. There are some moderators who are loosely affiliated with Amazon and their standard answer to complaints is to leave feedback from within the app. 

So no one knows what is going on behind the scenes and Amazon Music HD is a take it or leave it proposition. Contrast with Qobuz who have an active thread at Audiophile Style where complaints and problems get addressed. 

If you aren't happy with the state of Amazon Music HD it seems the best course is to just drop it and use Qobuz or Tidal. 

Mass exodus of users might get Amazon to pay some attention to complaints but I actually doubt it. I dropped it before the free trial ended, left feedback and got no response. Again, take it or leave it. Amazon does not seem to care one whit.


----------



## clerkpalmer

originalsnuffy said:


> Are you downloading your music or streaming?  If you are streaming; the sound you are describing would be a drop from hi res to standard (which is compressed).


Thanks.  Streaming but all settings are at Hi-Res.  Songs are showing HD and Ultra HD.  Still sounds like crap compared to Apple Music.  Maybe I'll delete and reinstall.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 26, 2019)

clerkpalmer said:


> Thanks.  Streaming but all settings are at Hi-Res.  Songs are showing HD and Ultra HD.  Still sounds like crap compared to Apple Music.  Maybe I'll delete and reinstall.



I suspected you were streaming.   Maybe setting the app to low res streaming then going back to hi res might work.   I had to do something like that occur once in my car.   Or a reinstall as you indicated might do the trick.  I think this problem can be solved.  When this app drops to a lower resolution things sound pretty bad on a comparative basis; because the hi res sounds quite good.


----------



## a-LeXx (Dec 27, 2019)

clerkpalmer said:


> Thanks.  Streaming but all settings are at Hi-Res.  Songs are showing HD and Ultra HD.  Still sounds like crap compared to Apple Music.  Maybe I'll delete and reinstall.



Even if the song is showing yellow hires badge while streaming, it doesn‘t mean it‘s streaming in hires, only that it‘s available in hires. It could be streaming in standard, means heavily compressed (64kbps), because the bandwidth allocation is done dynamically based on a quality of the network connection.


----------



## praxis22

I have read a lot/most of the thread, and what I don't understand, (as a computer geek) is why anyone would use a Windows PC to stream music? Unless you've all spent the money, time and effort to make your PC quiet. Mine sounds like a hurricane when it's running. Then there are the issues (presumably the "exclusive mode" people are talking about) with the Windows kernel not being a true task switching system, etc. Though MacOS should have an advantage in both system quietness and The OS' Grand Central scheduler. Given it's a UNIX OS based on Free BSD.

I have AmazonHD on my Android Phone, a OnePlus 7t (as far as I can tell the same Audio chip as in my old OnePlus 6 24/196) I was frustrated with the 7t that they'd taken the audio jack away, which is what I as listening to AmazonHD with, as it doesn't support an external DAC. So I bought the OnePlus Audio USB C dongle/DAC which worked OK (emulates a jack.) I had also noticed that since they removed the audio jack I no longer need to switch on USB OTG mode to get it working. Then I discovered the updated Earstudio ES100 MK2. Allegedly the world's first Studio Quality 24bit Bluetooth receiver. twin DAC, 3.5" and 2.5" balanced, AptX Sony LDAC, etc. Amazing App. (www.radsone.com/earstudio for details) That plays AmazonHD just fine. Also a boost in details seemingly over my Hidizs Sonata HD 2  USBC DAC. I do have UAPP with all the bells and whistles, but I have it route traffic to Bluetooth for better audio quality, without touching the Android volume system, and I peg that at max, to allow me to control the analogue volume from the Es100's buttons. (This is the recommendation.) Which gives me manual control without having to take my phone out of my pocket, and cures the occasional signal drops I used to get out of my USB C DAC. Still haven't tried it with the Little Bear B4-X Tube amp in series though. On it's own the ES100 will easily drive the Tin Hifi P1 loud. Which near stock Android will not do by default, and UAPP needs to be at 85-90% hardware volume to manage comfortably. I've also yet to hook it up to any of my Headphones, or the 789. I'm just running a range of IEM's through it via 3.5" SE

I do notice a difference between 16bit (HD) and 24bit (HD plus) though the sound is pretty good regardless. Has anyone bought/Tried the Amazon Echo Studio yet? at 200 currency units it looks like a fairly good deal, provided I can fit a hardware mic mute. I do have a full surround rig, but the Mrs. appears allergic to cables and speakers. So I might be able to remove the amp, center the TV and flank it with a couple of Echo studio's. Anyone tried anything like that? That would seem to be an idea setup as I can latch it onto 5Ghz Wifi Though I do wonder if it can integrate with the Chromecast or the TV Anyone experimented?


----------



## rkw

praxis22 said:


> why anyone would use a Windows PC to stream music? Unless you've all spent the money, time and effort to make your PC quiet. Mine sounds like a hurricane when it's running.


What makes your PC so noisy? Did you build your own gaming PC? I have both Mac and PC laptops, and both are quiet. Most  desktop PCs I've encountered lately are also quiet.


----------



## stuck limo

Has anyone ever found a 3D album in full on Amazon or is it just particular songs for some reason they decided to remaster in 3D?


----------



## cjar

About a week ago or so I signed up for both Tidal HiFi (Masters) (5 months for $5) and Amazon HD (4 months for $0.99) trials. 

On my home system Amazon HD sounds better. One problem with Tidal is my receiver/DAC does not decode MQA so everything on Tidal streams at 16bit/44.1k FLAC (which is OK), while Amazon HD is 'bit-perfect' up to whatever the file happens to be, and I hear the difference. My receiver has the HEOS tech built-in which has all the different streaming services integrated in the system. At home I use Amazon HD. 
BTW, By accident I compared an uncompressed audio file to the same song FLAC-compressed, I know you are not supposed to hear a difference but I did. As a result, I am now ripping my massive collection of un-ripped CD's to uncompressed AIFF (I have the HD space).

On Android, which I mainly use in my car, I can confirm when using both the Amazon and Tidal apps the audio stream is re-sampled to 24bit/48k even when connected to my external Dragonfly Cobalt DAC, regardless of the Amazon yellow badge or the Tidal badge. I can only get 'bit-perfect' and MQA with Tidal through UAPP (USB Audio Player Pro) app to my Cobalt DAC. The Dragonfly Cobalt does decode MQA as well. On Android, while I can usually detect differences between Amazon HD and Tidal, I have not yet determined if one has better sound quality than the other. In the car I mainly use Tidal via UAPP, when not testing sound quality differences. 
In the UAPP forum, in regards to adding the Amazon HD service to their android app; in September they said they could not comment on it. In October they said "It is not possible, sorry."

I rarely if ever listen to music via a computer, but I have confirmed the Win10 Amazon app not being able to use exclusive mode, and streaming audio at whatever is set in Properties of the sound device in use. So if the Tidal app can...

So far Amazon HD seems to have more in their catalog. I have 4 or 5 more months to decide to keep one or the other or both. It could depend on whether Amazon codes into their app a 'bit-perfect' work around to the Android audio system limitation. At least keep a 44.1k stream at 44.1, and only down-sample 192 or 96k to 48k and 176 or 88.2 to 44.1k.


----------



## thelastwaltzuk (Jan 2, 2020)

I’ve just read through all 71 pages of a really interesting thread. I really wanted Amazon Music HD to be great. I love Tidal (I’ve been a subscriber since before JayZ bought it), I just don’t really buy in to the current MQA obsession (though I remain open to being convinced). It would be great to have a 24/192 flac-based streaming service that would force Tidal to a) drop it’s obsession with MQA (as I suspect it’s just another bit of chicanery), and/or b) force Tidal to lower the price of the Hi-Fi plan.

Just in terms of my own subjective experiences, I’ve done some comparing of albums played from Tidal (Master) vs Amazon Music (UHD) and in all cases the Amazon tracks seem, as suggested by others, overly-compressed, even with loudness turned off. When swapping A-B I had to reduce the volume of Amazon Music a couple of clicks to be on the same level as Tidal. To my ears, Tidal sounds softer, warmer and more pleasing for longer durations. Amazon is like it’s on steroids - it first seems wider and livelier, but after a couple of minutes it’s too fatiguing to listen to.

All this on an old iPad Air 2, played through a JDS C5D through Grado SR325e headphones, so I know I’m not getting either the full MQA image or the full UHD image. Having said that, one of the albums I compared is Beck’s latest album and is only 24/44 anyway, so my setup can handle that. Other albums by Billy Eilish, Miike Snow were also compared. Not exhaustive by any means, but enough of a range to get a picture.

To my ears, Tidal still has more for me at the moment and I’ll remain a customer. I really hope Amazon Music HD is a success though, even though I’ll not use it when the trial has finished. As a user of Apple stuff mostly I really hope Apple are now forced into offering an ‘up to 24/192’ subscription to iTunes at a sensible price, maybe dropping the cost of their current non-HD offering by half as an entry point (I realise that it may be a vain hope). If Amazon Music HD doesn’t succeed, I cannot see anyone else bothering to offer any competition for HD streaming and there will be no incentive for Tidal to lower their silly, outdated prices. No doubt Tidal are banking on the failure of Amazon Music HD - otherwise the only USP they have will be MQA, which I guess for most of us is not enough of a temptation. Time will tell - but at least it’s good to see the further evolution of the HD audio market after a couple of years of relative stability.

Thanks for reading my first post


----------



## GlennDS

praxis22 said:


> .... and what I don't understand, (as a computer geek) is why anyone would use a Windows PC to stream music?... Mine sounds like a hurricane when it's running.


 I use an HDMI cable to connect my Windows PC to my Onkyo AVR. My Windows PC is not loud and it is located in a separate room.




praxis22 said:


> Then there are the issues (presumably the "exclusive mode" people are talking about) with the Windows kernel not being a true task switching system, etc.


 I couldn't tell from your post, are you getting bit perfect streaming using your Android phone (you mention UAPP but that app doesn't work with Amazon HD music)?


----------



## Pentagonal

Wondering if anybody can check for me - is Amazon Music still resampling everything to ~192khz? Thank you!


----------



## originalsnuffy

For the person that has a noisy pc, my question is how old is it?   Usually a can of compressed air can do a world of good for the various fans in a PC.   I personally upgraded the power supply to a quiet unit; also put in a quiet  system fan and replaced the video card with fanless unit.

The result:  a reasonably quiet unit.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Pentagonal said:


> Wondering if anybody can check for me - is Amazon Music still resampling everything to ~192khz? Thank you!



Depends on the platform.   On IOS; yes as far as I know.   Windows 10?   Unclear but probably.   Android; seems to be related to the firmware in your phone or DAP.   Some newer DAP units can bypass Android audio limits and those may well be bit perfect.


----------



## Pentagonal

originalsnuffy said:


> Depends on the platform.   On IOS; yes as far as I know.   Windows 10?   Unclear but probably.   Android; seems to be related to the firmware in your phone or DAP.   Some newer DAP units can bypass Android audio limits and those may well be bit perfect.



Thank you - I guess Tidal continues to be the safe bet for now.


----------



## TK33

originalsnuffy said:


> For the person that has a noisy pc, my question is how old is it?   Usually a can of compressed air can do a world of good for the various fans in a PC.   I personally upgraded the power supply to a quiet unit; also put in a quiet  system fan and replaced the video card with fanless unit.
> 
> The result:  a reasonably quiet unit.



Agree. My old PC was developing a noise issue and it turned out the video card fan was the culprit.  I replaced the video card with a cheap model that still had a fan and it was still pretty quiet and lasted me a few more years.  I finally replaced that desktop PC which was over 9 years old last year with a new Windows desktop (i7-9700k CPU and RTX 2060 video card) and it is dead silent (it came with an all-in-one liquid cooling system which you only really hear when it boots up and a 750W platinum efficiency PSU which probably helps) and cost me < $1,500 shipped.  Once I got it, I did upgrade the RAM and added a 2TB SSD for another $400 but that wouldn't have helped with noise.  It is in our bedroom and we have to check the light to see if it is on.  Technology has advanced quite a bit and if you find some good deals, you can get a good system without spending thousands..

Now if only Amazon would enable exclusive mode....


----------



## 435279

@thelastwaltzuk Great first post, thank you for sharing your thoughts and welcome to Head-Fi


----------



## praxis22

rkw said:


> What makes your PC so noisy? Did you build your own gaming PC? I have both Mac and PC laptops, and both are quiet. Most  desktop PCs I've encountered lately are also quiet.



Watercooling on medium high to keep my OC below 60 Degrees, though most computers make noise, especially if you have a modern GPU,  the new Nvidia 20x series is especially bad at injecting system noise and distortion to the ground rail. That said there is much about modern audio that I do not understand. Like the fascination with gapless streaming. I always figured the gasp were part of the experience.  Using a PC, you're also going to need an interface. Unless you splurge for an automation product etc. Meanwhile you have a phone. One you can take anywhere, which comes with a GUI, and doesn't have the issues that the PC platform has. Odd.


----------



## praxis22 (Jan 3, 2020)

rkw said:


> What makes your PC so noisy? Did you build your own gaming PC? I have both Mac and PC laptops, and both are quiet. Most  desktop PCs I've encountered lately are also quiet.



Bugger, replied to the wrong message, this is what happens when you read the questions in email  Though to the person who asked, yes I do use bit perfect in UAPP.


----------



## GlennDS (Jan 3, 2020)

praxis22 said:


> Though to the person who asked, yes I do use bit perfect in UAPP.


As far as I know, UAPP doesn't support Amazon Music for bit perfect (Amazon doesn't allow it).

And gapless playback is a big part of some music where one track bleeds into the next without a gap.

And... when using my PC I can use my phone as the interface by using Remote Desktop, so I can control my PC from anywhere.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Why PC is noisy under normal use?
Both my gaming rigs are pretty quiet unless gaming or benchmarking. Both overclocked.


----------



## rkw

praxis22 said:


> there is much about modern audio that I do not understand. Like the fascination with gapless streaming. I always figured the gasp were part of the experience.


There are many albums where the audio should run continuously without interruption, such as complete live concerts and albums such as Pink Floyd The Wall. Played on a CD, the audio does run continuously on these albums even while crossing tracks. However, on some streaming services there is a gap between tracks that spoils the listening experience. An especially bad case is on classical works such as Mahler symphonies where a long movement may be split up into multiple tracks. The music will play continuously on a CD, but without gapless there are periodic interruptions in the middle of the music.


----------



## cjar

Hiby R6/R6 Pro and iBasso DX220 can stream with the Amazon HD app, but do they resample? Are they bit perfect? Are there others?


----------



## GlennDS (Jan 5, 2020)

praxis22 said:


> .... Then I discovered the updated Earstudio ES100 MK2. Allegedly the world's first *Studio Quality 24bit Bluetooth receiver. ..AptX, LDAC *... That plays AmazonHD just fine. I do have UAPP with all the bells and whistles, *but I have it route traffic to Bluetooth for better audio quality*,..


You try to make it sound as if using Android mobile device with Bluetooth is better than PC because of PCs limitations (no exclusive mode), but do you understand that the highest quality available through Bluetooth is lossy 24bit/*94kHz  (yes, a lossy signal... and yes, *94kHz, not 96kHz).

** EDIT:* 94kHz seems like an odd rate to me, but I've seen it written as both 94 and 96kHz. I'll assume it is actually 96kHz.

Also, the OnePlus 7t phone only has AptX HD which is not the highest quality Bluetooth, it is "near CD quality." LDAC is the "higher quality" Bluetooth codec.


----------



## Brava210 (Jan 5, 2020)

cjar said:


> Hiby R6/R6 Pro and iBasso DX220 can stream with the Amazon HD app, but do they resample? Are they bit perfect? Are there others?


Fiio M6 works as it should.
It does not resample. I use it in line out mode to my Arcam headphone amp


----------



## senorx12562 (Jan 5, 2020)

Brava210 said:


> Fiio M6 works as it should.
> It does not resemble. I use it in line out mode to my Arcam headphone amp



The Fiio M9 also doesn't appear to resample, (although the light color for 96kHz and 192 kHz is the same so...) and it seems to transmit the native rate digitally to the dac I have that has a readout of sample rate. The app correctly reports the M9 as being capable of up to 192kHz, which of course is the highest rate the app is capable of streaming. On the desktop app with a W10 pc, it does not up sample to 192kHz, but what it does do (because of the lack of "exclusive " mode) is force one to go through the windows audio stack which results in resampling to match whatever is chosen as the sample rate in the audio control panel in Windows. None of this means anything is "bit-perfect" which is something I cannot measure regardless of sample rate.

As a practical matter, the hardware in the M9 is barely capable of streaming, although Tidal works better than Amazon. This is presumably a result of the reduced data rate required by MQA (which, if I understand it, means that it maxes out at approximately that of redbook, vs the native rates of Amazon's catalog.) This would also explain why the M9 will stream and play up to 96 kHz without many problems, but struggles with 192kHz material with artifacts and buffering, and my network is pretty robust. If streaming, especially Amazon or Qobuz, is one's primary use-case, I wouldn't recommend the M9, although Spotify probably works fine, though I haven't tried it. Thankfully, streaming isn't my primary use, and I think it is excellent for local file playback.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

praxis22 said:


> I have read a lot/most of the thread, and what I don't understand, (as a computer geek) is why anyone would use a Windows PC to stream music? Unless you've all spent the money, time and effort to make your PC quiet. Mine sounds like a hurricane when it's running.



I have a Fractal Design Define Nano computer case, which cost me $65. It's less than 3 feet from where I sit, and I can't hear it. I have to put my ear a few inches from one of the side vents to hear it faintly.


----------



## Brava210

senorx12562 said:


> The Fiio M9 also doesn't appear to resample, (although the light color for 96kHz and 192 kHz is the same so...) and it seems to transmit the native rate digitally to the dac I have that has a readout of sample rate. The app correctly reports the M9 as being capable of up to 192kHz, which of course is the highest rate the app is capable of streaming. On the desktop app with a W10 pc, it does not up sample to 192kHz, but what it does do (because of the lack of "exclusive " mode) is force one to go through the windows audio stack which results in resampling to match whatever is chosen as the sample rate in the audio control panel in Windows. None of this means anything is "bit-perfect" which is something I cannot measure regardless of sample rate.
> 
> As a practical matter, the hardware in the M9 is barely capable of streaming, although Tidal works better than Amazon. This is presumably a result of the reduced data rate required by MQA (which, if I understand it, means that it maxes out at approximately that of redbook, vs the native rates of Amazon's catalog.) This would also explain why the M9 will stream and play up to 96 kHz without many problems, but struggles with 192kHz material with artifacts and buffering, and my network is pretty robust. If streaming, especially Amazon or Qobuz, is one's primary use-case, I wouldn't recommend the M9, although Spotify probably works fine, though I haven't tried it. Thankfully, streaming isn't my primary use, and I think it is excellent for local file playback.




I don't have any issues streaming at 192 KHz on the M6


----------



## senorx12562

Brava210 said:


> I don't have any issues streaming at 192 KHz on the M6


I get buffering after about 1-2 minutes of a song, and then it takes at least 20-30 seconds to restart, if it does at all. It has never happened with 96 kHz or below. Ironically, it got worse after installing the latest update to the app. I went back to the previous version, and it improved , but the last time I tried it, it still buffered mid-song. I have actually encountered very few albums at 192 kHz in Amazon's catalog anyway, so not a big deal. As a practical matter, I don't have a data plan I could use to access the Web on a dap via a 4/5G cellular network (in fact I don't even know how that would work without a sim card for the dap), and at home I can use one of my pcs and the desktop app, which work perfectly. I would think that the M9 would be better than the M6, including for streaming, but apparently I would be wrong.


----------



## cjar

cjar said:


> Hiby R6/R6 Pro and iBasso DX220 can stream with the Amazon HD app, but do they resample? Are they bit perfect? Are there others?





Brava210 said:


> Fiio M6 works as it should.
> It does not resample. I use it in line out mode to my Arcam headphone amp





senorx12562 said:


> The Fiio M9 also doesn't appear to resample, (although the light color for 96kHz and 192 kHz is the same so...) and it seems to transmit the native rate digitally to the dac I have that has a readout of sample rate. The app correctly reports the M9 as being capable of up to 192kHz, which of course is the highest rate the app is capable of streaming. On the desktop app with a W10 pc, it does not up sample to 192kHz, but what it does do (because of the lack of "exclusive " mode) is force one to go through the windows audio stack which results in resampling to match whatever is chosen as the sample rate in the audio control panel in Windows. None of this means anything is "bit-perfect" which is something I cannot measure regardless of sample rate.



What I've found so far...

The Hiby R5/R6/R6 Pro, Cayin N6ii/N8 and all recent Fiio Android DAPs are able to bypass the Android audio limitation. I think for streaming apps as well. iBasso DX220 does bypass the audio limitation, but I am not sure about streaming apps. Hiby, Cayin and iBasso user experience with the Amazon HD app seems to be 44.1 output only. This seems like an Amazon app issue. Although, I've come across two users who say their R5 does Amazon HD with 'bit-perfect' output.

According to Fiio all recent Android DAPs bypass the Android audio limitation for all audio including all audio streaming apps. They recently released a firmware update to the M11/M11 Pro that fixes the Amazon HD app not playing issue. So the M6/M9 don't appear to 'resample'. I don't know about the M11/M11Pro yet. Will the M15...

The Sony NW-ZX500/A105 are limited by Android audio with the Amazon HD app and all other apps. Sony confirms that only their custom player bypasses the Android audio system. There is a question about whether UAPP is actually bit-perfect on the new Sony models.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Jan 5, 2020)

I believe that Shanling M6 and the HiBy R5, R6, and R6 pro all have system wide capabilities of bypassing the Android 24 bit 48khz limit.   I am using Amazon HD on the HiBy R5 and with the latest firmware update the app runs correctly.   The key point here is that the system wide bypass of Android limits was only available if you have the latest firmware update.  

iBasso and FIIO may also do this; but HiBy and Shanling have confirmed this operation whereas I did not confirm it with the other vendors.  I have heard various misgivings about the wifi performance of certain FIIO and iBasso units.   Since that is the only way to get Amazon HD files into the machines I focused on vendors where I did not see concerns about wifi.  I must admit the FIIO M6 was appealing due to its modest price point and I was/am tempted to own it for the purpose of leaving it full time in my car.


----------



## Brava210

senorx12562 said:


> I get buffering after about 1-2 minutes of a song, and then it takes at least 20-30 seconds to restart, if it does at all. It has never happened with 96 kHz or below. Ironically, it got worse after installing the latest update to the app. I went back to the previous version, and it improved , but the last time I tried it, it still buffered mid-song. I have actually encountered very few albums at 192 kHz in Amazon's catalog anyway, so not a big deal. As a practical matter, I don't have a data plan I could use to access the Web on a dap via a 4/5G cellular network (in fact I don't even know how that would work without a sim card for the dap), and at home I can use one of my pcs and the desktop app, which work perfectly. I would think that the M9 would be better than the M6, including for streaming, but apparently I would be wrong.



I did search out a few 192 KHz albums to test the M6 and they all worked fine. Took maybe 2 seconds to start playback.


----------



## Brava210

Just quickly found and played this no problem.


----------



## 435279

cjar said:


> What I've found so far...
> 
> The Hiby R5/R6/R6 Pro, Cayin N6ii/N8 and all recent Fiio Android DAPs are able to bypass the Android audio limitation. I think for streaming apps as well. iBasso DX220 does bypass the audio limitation, but I am not sure about streaming apps. Hiby, Cayin and iBasso user experience with the Amazon HD app seems to be 44.1 output only. This seems like an Amazon app issue. Although, I've come across two users who say their R5 does Amazon HD with 'bit-perfect' output.
> 
> ...



Cayin N6ii does not currently work properly, according to the sample rate indicator in the status bar everything is played at 192K. Not ideal but I suppose its better than the way it works for some devices.


----------



## Soundizer

Is there a special label pop up for Dolby Atmos?
Is it supported on the Atmos capable iPhones/iPad’s?


----------



## magicrandy (Jan 14, 2020)

DAP recommendations

Now that Amazon Music HD has been out awhile with their software updates and software/firmware updates from the DAP suppliers it may be time to get a new DAP.  In addition to audio quality, the main things I'm looking for in the ideal DAP include:

Amazon Music HD for Ultra HD streaming
- support for up to 192/24 with no down/up sampling
- accurate display of the quality of the track being played (e.g. 192/24, 96/24, 44.1/16, etc.)

4.4mm balanced outputs for wired headphones
LDAC, aptX HD for HD bluetooth headphones
OTA software & firmware updates

Price less than $1500 USD

Any suggestions that meet or come close to this spec appreciated.

Randy


----------



## exdmd

magicrandy said:


> DAP recommendations
> 
> Now that Amazon Music HD has been out awhile with their software updates and software/firmware updates from the DAP suppliers it may be time to get a new DAP.  In addition to audio quality, the main things I'm looking for in the ideal DAP include:
> 
> ...



Doesn't exist with Amazon Music HD at present. Consider Qobuz or Tidal instead.


----------



## magicrandy

exdmd said:


> Doesn't exist with Amazon Music HD at present. Consider Qobuz or Tidal instead.


Thanks for the reply.

I already have Amazon Music HD working on my home theater system. I also have a mobile solution working using a iPod 7 with an external FiiO Q5 dac but it is more bulky than a dedicated DAP and I can't use wireless headphones.

Maybe nothing is available yet so I may continue to wait or compromise on my ideal spec.

Randy


----------



## originalsnuffy

exdmd said:


> Doesn't exist with Amazon Music HD at present. Consider Qobuz or Tidal instead.



I strongly disagree.  The HiBy R5 is $300 right now on Amazon via MusicTeck.  Does pretty much what was asked for with Amazon HD.
FIIO has a number of machines that have similar specs and the Shanling M6 is still evolving but should do everything on that list.  iBasso is also a contender.

I own the R5 and it takes a bit of getting used to but does pretty much everything that was requested.  Just to clarify; I do in fact use it with Amazon HD.   Sorry it does not cost 5x as much however.   I know good values are a problem....


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Jan 15, 2020)

I think do not exist response was to the request of
"- support for up to 192/24 *with no down/up sampling*"
But it's amazon client issue, not hw.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Andrew_WOT said:


> I think do not exist response was to the request of
> "- support for up to 192/24 *with no down/up sampling*"
> But it's amazon client issue, not hw.



All of these units have software that bypasses standard Android audio.   The HiBy bills itself as bit perfect; to my knowledge the FIIO, Shanling, and iBasso units do the same thing.

I just don't think it is correct to blanket state that the objective can't be met when it both can and HAS been met.


----------



## ghualmr

@thelastwaltzuk - perfect write up. I too share exactly the same observations. I also had Qobuz trial membership which is comparable to Amazon price if you subscribe for a year. In addition to your observations I noticed that Qobuz was the best sounding as far as SQ. Interestingly their catalog is pretty extensive as well and growing. I listen to a large range of music genre depending if I am in my office or at the gym or in my dedicated listening room with or without family. Aamzon Music HD though promising does not offer bit perfect solution and to your point sounds a little compressed and sharp. I have tried running it through my PC or dedicated streamer via external DAC's (Benchmark, OPPO 205, Ayre) still the same sound. Tidal on the other hand is expensive. My thoughts are that the streaming industry is not mature yet and has a lot of growing up to do with possible mergers or even acquisitions. Roon complements Qobuz really well but itself has limitations (will not let you add songs to Qobuz playlists for remote listening). Maybe it's just best to select a mid tier cheaper option like Amazon for now and wait it out to see what happens to the likes of Qobuz, Tidal and Roon or if Amazon makes improvements this year.


----------



## praxis22 (Jan 16, 2020)

GlennDS said:


> You try to make it sound as if using Android mobile device with Bluetooth is better than PC because of PCs limitations (no exclusive mode), but do you understand that the highest quality available through Bluetooth is lossy 24bit/*94kHz  (yes, a lossy signal... and yes, *94kHz, not 96kHz).
> 
> ** EDIT:* 94kHz seems like an odd rate to me, but I've seen it written as both 94 and 96kHz. I'll assume it is actually 96kHz.
> 
> Also, the OnePlus 7t phone only has AptX HD which is not the highest quality Bluetooth, it is "near CD quality." LDAC is the "higher quality" Bluetooth codec.



The E100Mk2 has LDAC, you need it enabled by default. Actually I think Bluetooth is better because of convenience. I used to have my phone connected to my USB DAC which was routed through my portable Tube amp, into which I plugged my phones. This made using the phone practically impossible and the DAC kept dropping out in my pocket, etc. Thus I bought the E100MK2 as it does a lot of what I wanted. Simple intuitive, works well with the tube amp, (minus some annoying bleeps during silence where the tubes are microphonic as regards the Bluetooth signal, etc.) Practically however, it's a lot better sound wise than my USB DAC. With Bluetooth, I can now do the same with AmazonHD. As well as using my phone normally. At Home I plug my phone via OTG into the SMSL M100 DAC, which connects to the THX 789 and if I feel like it the SMSL SP100 tube. Having all my music with me at any point is also a key feature.

For the PC comment I was more referring to simple electrical noise coming from the motherboard. The average PC is full of electrical interference. This is especially true if you have a Modern Nvidia 20xx Series card as they dump a huge amount of electrical noise into the bus via the PCI slot. This is actually the main selling point of the new Creative Labs sound blaster, (remember them) with it's breakout box and electrical line filtering much like the Dragonfly Cobalt. Which I bought but sent back as I didn't like what it did to the sound.

Seriously, the Tin HiFi P1 Planar, (hard to drive at the best of times) has a new lease of life with the E100Mk2 I can drive it hard, max out the volume on the phone and analogue via the E100Mk2, then tube it. Thus I can use the tube as the final arbiter of volume. I finally get a wide sound stage, and a massive amount of detail retrieval. I though it was clipping this morning. Turns out it was the guitarist was just pulling the strings, not letting them reverb. it's only a 16bit FLAC file. Practically I cannot tell the difference between a 24bit track and a 16bit track anyway.

EDIT: In Developer Options on Android you can chose your system default Bluetooth audio codec, I selected LDAC, it didn't complain.


----------



## rkw

praxis22 said:


> In Developer Options on Android you can chose your system default Bluetooth audio codec, I selected LDAC, it didn't complain.


Developer Options doesn't set the default codec. It only sets the codec for the current Bluetooth session and will reset at the next reconnection.

To set LDAC as default, use the setting in the Bluetooth pairing list:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/radsone-earstudio-es100.867366/page-243#post-14689093


----------



## magicrandy

magicrandy said:


> DAP recommendations
> 
> Now that Amazon Music HD has been out awhile with their software updates and software/firmware updates from the DAP suppliers it may be time to get a new DAP.  In addition to audio quality, the main things I'm looking for in the ideal DAP include:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the input. 

It does not look like any DAP meets what I'm looking for 100% but the Hiby R6 Pro appears to be the closest. So I'm going to order one of those.

Thanks again...
Randy


----------



## TK33 (Jan 16, 2020)

Has anyone renewed their Amazon Music HD membership at an annual rate for Amazon Music HD Individual?  I selected Amazon Music HD Individual (annual plan) which shows up as $129/year but when my subscription renewed today, I was charged $84, which is Amazon Music Unlimited @ $79/year + $5/month for HD.  I contacted Amazon about this a few days ago and the rep I spoke with is supposed to call me back tomorrow but curious if anyone else had this issue upon renewal.  Seems like they can't even get their billing right.  We checked in the app and on the website and both showed there was an Individual HD annual plan @ $129 but this is not what I am being charged.


----------



## GlennDS

praxis22 said:


> The E100Mk2 has LDAC.... Actually I think Bluetooth is better because of convenience.... For the PC comment I was more referring to simple electrical noise coming from the motherboard. The average PC is full of electrical interference. .


I agree that Bluetooth is very convenient but I had been avoiding it until your mention of the E100Mk2 earlier. You peaked my interest in DACs with Bluetooth, so I checked it out. I ended up ordering the new Fiio BTR5 which arrives tomorrow.

I know that PCs are supposed to be full of electrical noise but I don't notice anything through my HDMI output. Either I don't know what to listen for, or it is there but too minor to hear.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Jan 16, 2020)

The only noise you can get over USB is ground loop, and it's easy to fix. Most high end USB DACs have isolation circuit just for that.


----------



## GlennDS

Andrew_WOT said:


> The only noise you can get over USB is ground loop....


Do you know if HDMI connection is affected by electrical noise inside the PC?


----------



## praxis22

rkw said:


> Developer Options doesn't set the default codec. It only sets the codec for the current Bluetooth session and will reset at the next reconnection.
> 
> To set LDAC as default, use the setting in the Bluetooth pairing list:
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/radsone-earstudio-es100.867366/page-243#post-14689093



Turns out I already had that enabled as the App talks you through setting that up. But having written my post I had a spellunk through my phone's settings just to see what it was actually set too.


----------



## praxis22 (Jan 17, 2020)

GlennDS said:


> I agree that Bluetooth is very convenient but I had been avoiding it until your mention of the E100Mk2 earlier. You peaked my interest in DACs with Bluetooth, so I checked it out. I ended up ordering the new Fiio BTR5 which arrives tomorrow.
> 
> I know that PCs are supposed to be full of electrical noise but I don't notice anything through my HDMI output. Either I don't know what to listen for, or it is there but too minor to hear.



Yes, I saw the Fiio, but I was more interested in the Mk2 due to the (P)EQ built in. I saw a video by Oluv's gadgets where he was comparing a HE4xx, Elex and the Sen 820 and he was using the Mk2, so he provided a (P)EQ to make the HE4xx, (which I have) similar to the Elex. Then I bought an Elex...

Anyway... I personally have no problem with the noise of a PC, but I don't use it as the PC itself is noisy. I have the HE4xx plugged into the Dragonfly black on the PC.  But knowing how anal people are about signal purity that would remove it from the equation if I was so inclined. A deeper issue is one of control. You can install Foobar2000 and have the Android app. But that requires a lot of setup. Especially when you can just use your phone, and have it all at your fingertips. I was actually looking this up yesterday and they was a study at a university in the US somewhere and 25 students could, (mostly) not tell the difference between a DAC @48KHz and 96Khz. It all becomes a numbers game at some point, how many angels can you fit on the head of a pin.

That said, the Elex arrived yesterday and via the SMSL DAC when hooked up via OTG was registering both 48KHz and 96KHz when running Amazon Music HD, on the music I tried on my phone. UAPP was actually only clocking in at 44KHz but I have it running in Bit Perfect mode and optimised for Bluetooth handoff not Android native, so that may account for that. I'm all for tweaking, but only so far as I get appreciable gains. My PC is water-cooled and I run a hardware overclock on the CPU, but I'm not interested in maxing out the Memory timings as that is just too fiddly and too much of a moving target. The Mk2 is an upgrade over the USB DAC I had before, as that was an upgrade over the Dragonfly black.  But having seen what Foobar would require, and then I'd have to make my PC quiet. Meh.


----------



## ForSerious

Sorry I don't have time to read all 74 pages.
I've been using using the desktop app for about two months with the bit accurate option enabled on my sound card. It's supposed to activate ASIO every time it gets fed a lossless source. Not sure if it works with the app, but I can usually tell when it's off while playing from Foobar. Haven't bothered to test with Amazon.

Anyway, I have found that about three in ten of the normal HD tagged albums have a nasty swishing sound added to them. You can listen for yourselves from the zip file uploaded here. I have not noticed that swishing noise with any of the Ultra HD songs. Just a note: The swishing existed before in mp3s purchased from Amazon music as far back as 2013. I would guess they are using the same sources as back then for most of their CD quality tracks. Maybe that's what they were given.

By now I'm pretty sure that they only have one copy of most songs in their database. So even though the track may appear in many albums, it's always the same file that gets played unless it has another name. Sometimes it will even play the wrong version of a song if it has a similar name. Though that only happened once. Maybe it was a fluke because I got it to play the right version the next day.
One time I found an album that has the titles tagged wrong (Like track five plays track 7). They are very reluctant to accept the idea that they are mistaken, so that may never get fixed.

P.S. It makes me laugh that anything 24 bit gets tagged as Ultra HD but 16 bit 48kHz is just HD.


----------



## psikey

GlennDS said:


> I agree that Bluetooth is very convenient but I had been avoiding it until your mention of the E100Mk2 earlier. You peaked my interest in DACs with Bluetooth, so I checked it out. I ended up ordering the new Fiio BTR5 which arrives tomorrow.
> 
> I know that PCs are supposed to be full of electrical noise but I don't notice anything through my HDMI output. Either I don't know what to listen for, or it is there but too minor to hear.


Excellent choice. Loving mine with balanced SE846's at 990kbps LDAC. Even slightly better as a wired DAC/AMP.

Just sold my Dragonfly Cobalt DAC and Sony A105 walkman I'm that impressed with the BTR5.

Also sounds better than the Fiio X5III or M11 I had too.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

GlennDS said:


> Do you know if HDMI connection is affected by electrical noise inside the PC?


Same thing, only optical is isolated, but it has other issues. 
BTW, ground loop is not PC specific issue and can affect any sort of equipment sharing common ground.


----------



## 435279

psikey said:


> Excellent choice. Loving mine with balanced SE846's at 990kbps LDAC. Even slightly better as a wired DAC/AMP.
> 
> Just sold my Dragonfly Cobalt DAC and Sony A105 walkman I'm that impressed with the BTR5.
> 
> Also sounds better than the Fiio X5III or M11 I had too.



What kind of battery life are you getting in that combination? I'm only getting around 4-5 hours Balanced->LDAC, which is probably about right by Fiio's estimate but I would have liked a bit more say 5-6h


----------



## psikey

SteveOliver said:


> What kind of battery life are you getting in that combination? I'm only getting around 4-5 hours Balanced->LDAC, which is probably about right by Fiio's estimate but I would have liked a bit more say 5-6h


Not run more than 4hrs without a recharge and think it showed 30% remaining. SE846's only need volume at ~19 on low gain.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Hey, is anybody using Amazon HD on Android?   I have a HiBy R5 and on that unit I get into a mode fairly easily where no music will play until the app checks in with Amazon to see if it authorized.  Seems like you should be able to go for at least a week before that should happen; and sometimes it happens within hours.  Any thoughts?

It also seems like Amazon updates the Android app far less often than on IOS.   I wonder why that would be?


----------



## loomisjohnson

i finally pulled the plug on amazon hd and went back to spotify. unlike many here i actually like the sound quality on amazon and found the catalog to be around 95% as comprehensive as spotify. however, the lack of playlists, radio stations and meaningful recommendations were deal killers for me--there's no new discovery and i found myself compelled to choose music with which i'm already familiar.


----------



## GlennDS

I also just quit Amazon Music and went back to Deezer.
Amazon Music has a 'radio' feature which is what I use 95% of the time, I don't want to spend time searching for songs or playlists to curate, I want to press one 'radio' button and have it play a variety of music tailored for me. Amazon Music started out well but over time kept playing the same set of songs over and over like it was a finite playlist instead of a true 'radio' feature.


----------



## runssical

I quit Amazon HD within 24 hours of using it. After several months of prelaunch hype of a cheap Hi Res alternative to Tidal and Qobuz, Amazon HD was a big disappointment. One bright spot is that Qobuz lowered it's price.


----------



## Eddie Knows

loomisjohnson said:


> i finally pulled the plug on amazon hd and went back to spotify. unlike many here i actually like the sound quality on amazon and found the catalog to be around 95% as comprehensive as spotify. however, the lack of playlists, radio stations and meaningful recommendations were deal killers for me--there's no new discovery and i found myself compelled to choose music with which i'm already familiar.



Unfortunately, this is the only reason keeping me from going to all the other services with better quality audio. None can recommend music to me as consistently as Spotify, its unfortunate


----------



## 435279

Eddie Knows said:


> Unfortunately, this is the only reason keeping me from going to all the other services with better quality audio. None can recommend music to me as consistently as Spotify, its unfortunate



I use a music related internet search for that and then play the music I find in either Tidal or Amazon music, works well for me but I can understand why its not for everybody.


----------



## botherly

Just tried then immediately quit Amazon HD. Sound quality is pretty bad. And it's hard to justify giving Amazon more money. Although I do like having all the music from all the records I've bought over the years right there digitally and already added to my music.

Did anyone else experience some weird chirping sound at the beginning of every new song? It was this odd artifacting noise I've heard before in other places, happened on every new song play. Very off-putting. 

Oh well. I'll stick with Qobuz for now. Sounds the best by far IMO, even though their app is hot garbage and there's basically no recommendation system at all.


----------



## TK33 (Jan 28, 2020)

botherly said:


> Just tried then immediately quit Amazon HD. Sound quality is pretty bad. And it's hard to justify giving Amazon more money. Although I do like having all the music from all the records I've bought over the years right there digitally and already added to my music.
> 
> Did anyone else experience some weird chirping sound at the beginning of every new song? It was this odd artifacting noise I've heard before in other places, happened on every new song play. Very off-putting.
> 
> Oh well. I'll stick with Qobuz for now. Sounds the best by far IMO, even though their app is hot garbage and there's basically no recommendation system at all.



I used Amazon HD for four months and never had those chirping sounds (I have had many other issues though).  I recently downgraded back to Amazon Music Unlimited (I was using this before Amazon Music HD) because I like the Alexa/HEOS integration and Qobuz, which is what I use for myself, does not have music for toddlers. 

I really wanted to like Amazon Music HD but got fed up because I kept finding songs on my playlists that were replaced with instrumental versions (previously working properly and not even labeled as an instrumental/singalong version) and I never got the offline download portion to work properly.  Hopefully they can work out the kinks as I really did like having access to the larger streaming catalog Amazon offers but it is not worth the extra money if it does not work properly and causes more aggravation than enjoyment.

btw...for recommendations, you can always use something like soundiiz to import playlists from other platforms to Qobuz.


----------



## botherly

TK33 said:


> I used Amazon HD for four months and never had those chirping sounds (I have had many other issues though).  I recently downgraded back to Amazon Music Unlimited (I was using this before Amazon Music HD) because I like the Alexa/HEOS integration and Qobuz, which is what I use for myself, does not have music for toddlers.
> 
> I really wanted to like Amazon Music HD but got fed up because I kept finding songs on my playlists that were replaced with instrumental versions (previously working properly and not even labeled as an instrumental/singalong version) and I never got the offline download portion to work properly.  Hopefully they can work out the kinks as I really did like having access to the larger streaming catalog Amazon offers but it is not worth the extra money if it does not work properly and causes more aggravation than enjoyment.
> 
> btw...for recommendations, you can always use something like soundiiz to import playlists from other platforms to Qobuz.



Music for toddler is exactly why I still have a Spotify subscription too. 

Thanks for the soundiiz suggestion, I think I'll check that out.


----------



## Ken G

Just curious, has anyone used the SoundSource software to get bit perfect playback on Amazon HD on a Mac? It seems like that solution might work for $30.


----------



## Deolum

Is there any way to stream amazon music hd with max quality to chord poly?


----------



## gimmeheadroom

GlennDS said:


> I also just quit Amazon Music and went back to Deezer.
> Amazon Music has a 'radio' feature which is what I use 95% of the time, I don't want to spend time searching for songs or playlists to curate, I want to press one 'radio' button and have it play a variety of music tailored for me. Amazon Music started out well but over time kept playing the same set of songs over and over like it was a finite playlist instead of a true 'radio' feature.



I have Deezer hifi and the sound quality is fine but the paging has been broken on the Windows app for months. The UI is essentially unusable... are you using a tablet or phone? I'm almost ready to cancel Deezer. I don't use anything from scamazon.


----------



## buonassi

I just took the plunge and signed up for the trial to find out Amazon music HD still can't directly communicate with DACs!  This is just unreal to not have WASAPI or ASIO exclusive, (and CoreAudio support if you're on a MAC).   Why in the world would anyone want hires music that's going to have its bitstream mangled by the operating system mixer via SRC?  Or have to manually change sample rates?  Or have to put up with system sounds interrupting their listening?  Android, I get it - you're stuck with the mixer.  But on a Mac or PC?  C'mon!

The price is right, and selection is great, no doubt.  But this amateur hour crap from one of the worlds largest multinational conglomerates is beyond off-putting.  I simply can't comprehend how they haven't incorporated correct computer support as of yet.


----------



## GlennDS (Feb 17, 2020)

gimmeheadroom said:


> I have Deezer hifi and the sound quality is fine but the paging has been broken on the Windows app for months. The UI is essentially unusable... are you using a tablet or phone? I'm almost ready to cancel Deezer. I don't use anything from scamazon.


For Windows PC use I use the Deezer webpage because it does HiFi (***as far as I know, the Deezer Windows App doesn't do HiFi, unless that has changed recently***). For portable use I use phone with the Android Deezer App.
Both (the Windows webpage, and Android App) have always worked properly for me.

*** I had that backwards, the Windows app offered HiFi first and recently HiFi was added to the web player.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

GlennDS said:


> For Windows PC use I use the Deezer webpage because it does HiFi (as far as I know, the Deezer Windows App doesn't do HiFi, unless that has changed recently). For portable use I use phone with the Android Deezer App.
> Both (the Windows webpage, and Android App) have always worked properly for me.



That doesn't make any sense. How can a browser provide better sound quality than the app? The app certainly streams hifi, the only problem is the UI is worse than Tidal!


----------



## rkw

GlennDS said:


> For Windows PC use I use the Deezer webpage because it does HiFi (as far as I know, the Deezer Windows App doesn't do HiFi, unless that has changed recently).


The Deezer Windows App supported HiFi (CD quality lossless) when I had a Deezer trial subscription a couple of years ago. I think their Windows app always supported HiFi. Lossless for mobile devices wasn't added until last year.
https://www.deezer.com/en/devices


----------



## GlennDS

I had that backwards. I first used the Deezer Windows app for HiFi, but recently switched to the Deezer web player when it offered HiFi. Anyway, the web player has been working well for me.


----------



## USAudio (Feb 21, 2020)

(deleted)


----------



## Tooros

Just wondering if anyone is now happy using Amazon HD on a DAP. I need to finally decide between the big three lossless. My HIBY R6 doesn’t do MQA so it streams masters on tidal at 96 max (which is absolutely fine by me) Qobuz sounds good but it’s extremely pedantic on searches and recommendations seem very odd. I listen to a lot of ambient music and to Qobuz that means Xmas Karaoke Classics??!  Amazon worked well last time I tried it, streamed up to 192 and sounded fine but, I have serious objections to a mix of UHD and HD tracks on the same album. It’s just wrong. Did they fix that?


----------



## PlantsmanTX

Tooros said:


> Just wondering if anyone is now happy using Amazon HD on a DAP. I need to finally decide between the big three lossless. My HIBY R6 doesn’t do MQA so it streams masters on tidal at 96 max (which is absolutely fine by me) Qobuz sounds good but it’s extremely pedantic on searches and recommendations seem very odd. I listen to a lot of ambient music and to Qobuz that means Xmas Karaoke Classics??!  Amazon worked well last time I tried it, streamed up to 192 and sounded fine but, I have serious objections to a mix of UHD and HD tracks on the same album. It’s just wrong. Did they fix that?


No, they didn't fix that.


----------



## buonassi (Mar 9, 2020)

Tooros said:


> if anyone is now happy using Amazon HD on a DAP.



on DX160 and DX150 it all works well - with one caveat:  Sample rate is preserved up to 192 (following the source file frequency perfectly), but the stream is only 16 bit being sent to the DAC.  So if you're trying to get ULTRA HD 24 bit files, 8 of the least significant bits are being stripped from the stream - defeats the whole point of ultra HD.  Same happens with Qobuz on these two DAPs.  Therefore, i set it to only download "HD" which is just 16 bit CD quality.  Of course this only works with downloads (not streaming).  You don't have the option to stream "HD" for whatever reason. It's either ULTRA HD (24 bit) or SD (Opus crap sounding files) when you stream.


----------



## Pro-Jules

Tooros said:


> Just wondering if anyone is now happy using Amazon HD on a DAP. I need to finally decide between the big three lossless. My HIBY R6 doesn’t do MQA so it streams masters on tidal at 96 max (which is absolutely fine by me) Qobuz sounds good but it’s extremely pedantic on searches and recommendations seem very odd. I listen to a lot of ambient music and to Qobuz that means Xmas Karaoke Classics??!  Amazon worked well last time I tried it, streamed up to 192 and sounded fine but, I have serious objections to a mix of UHD and HD tracks on the same album. It’s just wrong. Did they fix that?


I haven’t noticed that - I like using amazon music HD on my R6 Pro - a lot.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Mar 9, 2020)

Am I satisfied with Amazon HD?  Reasonably so.   Do I have beefs.  Sure I do but would probably have those with Tidal.

The good--fairly deep catalog.

The bad-I spent some time with a friend and played the same title in the highest possible quality format from Amazon, Tidal, and the original CD (Jazz title).   The Amazon had a slightly lower level of resolution but you would only know that doing this kind of comparison.

The bad - some titles are only in SD (Procol Harum Live and Salty Dog), some tracks in individual albums are a mix of formats (some HD, some ultra HD), somewon't download at all (Led Zeppelin Achilles Last Stand).  It seems like Amazon stores music by track then overlays information on Albums and Collections on the tracks.  I have also come to appreciate that the distance between SD and HD is much greater than betweeen HD and Ultra HD.  Uncompressed is a very big deal compared to moving to Hi Res from Redbook.

The bad - sometimes the software seems to be rebuilding a database and takes a while to start playing.   Typically this is after the app has been closed then re-opened.

Overall - The R3 is a good unit for Amazon HD and overall I am happy   It makes it really easy to check out music being discussed in a review or recommended from various sources.   Just click and listen.  And in my case its is fun to be able to simply access so much music on the whole home in ceiling speaker system.   I use my iphone even more for this app as my wife's car has CarPlay and the Android equivalent is not supported on her model and lately we are using her car quite a bit.


----------



## scotto

Has anyone with Hiby R6 Pro's tried SPDIF out to another DAC from Amazon Music HD?  Is the output preset to 192k for the R6 Pro with this app?  I tried SPDIF out from Amazon HD and not getting a lock with my Mojo, just wondering what anyone else's experience with this is?
Thanks!!


----------



## Tooros (Mar 10, 2020)

scotto said:


> Has anyone with Hiby R6 Pro's tried SPDIF out to another DAC from Amazon Music HD?  Is the output preset to 192k for the R6 Pro with this app?  I tried SPDIF out from Amazon HD and not getting a lock with my Mojo, just wondering what anyone else's experience with this is?
> Thanks!!


Are you using the cable that came in the box? It’s huge and unwieldy but I did get it work. I don’t have a mojo but tried it with a Fiio aspen (more for fun of it really) - the Fiio did change its reported input value when I tried different sources so it was functioning.
I gave up at that point though because the cable is useless for a portable set up and my aspen added nothing to the mix really.
I’d be interested to know about your cable solution if possible though. Cheers.


----------



## scotto

Tooros said:


> Are you using the cable that came in the box? It’s huge and unwieldy but I did get it work. I don’t have a mojo but tried it with a Fiio aspen (more for fun of it really) - the Fiio did change its reported input value when I tried different sources so it was functioning.
> I gave up at that point though because the cable is useless for a portable set up and my aspen added nothing to the mix really.
> I’d be interested to know about your cable solution if possible though. Cheers.



Yes, have been using the included cable   The mojo adds quite a bit, with spdif especially.  Someone else just suggested to try a different cable.  And I found a post that Amazon Music HD is outputting everything now in 192k, if your device is able to, or less if your device isn't.  I have been mostly adding music via HDTracks over the last several years.  Newer to Amazon Music HD, noticed the actual bits flowing through are not AIFF density on Amazon.  Not sure if it's truly lossless?  I may try a couple of cables from Amazon, and another from Dyson Audio on eBay for spdif options.- I picked up one of Dyson's pure silver cables for some ZMF headphones reasonably   They have worked very well!


----------



## rgs9200m

Wow, I am a bit shocked how good the Amazon Music HD sound quality is! I just tried it with my Chord DAVE and Meze Empyreans and it's really good, with a nice spacious sound and good deep defined bass. It is sort of up there with my ripped CDs in Jriver, and some songs that were disappointing in sound quality from my rips are even better. I spent a long time last night hunting and gathering songs and actually found a lot of rare live stuff and interesting re-mastered versions. So a big thumbs up.

The negatives were that the browser is sort of primitive for finding albums, and I'm not sure how to save albums. You kind of have to know what you are looking for by asking for a specific song or artist, but once you do, you can find more great hidden stuff.
And playlist creation is a bit clunky.

But the sound quality of HD is just superb to my ears.


----------



## 3Putter

Interesting. Having used Quboz, Tidal, and Amazon HD extensively I found QB the best in sound but lacking for my titles. Tidal has the best sound to title ratio based on my tastes. Amazon was strong title-wise but their sound and glitchy app were deal breakers. But we all hear things differently, use different equipment so it is relative. Good on you getting Amazon to meet your needs. I wanted to but couldn't get over the poor sound quality experienced compared to QB or Tidal.


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 9, 2020)

Yeah, I found Amazon to sound mediocre due to lack of 'exclusive mode' or bit-perfect mode.  I find Tidal to be the best.

Just raising the sampling rate on the OS doesn't help.  I prefer original bit-rate of the content.  Amazon is processed by the OS and notice the lower quality.


----------



## originalsnuffy

My biggest issue with Amazon is that there is no reliable way to get feedback to the development team about various issues.   If they peruse their forums or this forum they certainly are not letting on to it.

It may well be that Tidal or Qobuz sounds a bit better but I think the sound is pretty good.

My main complain right now is that the app can take a while to play a song from a downloaded library the first time the app is fired up.  Also sometimes songs are glitchy but that can be fixed usually by deleting the song and downloading it again.  Some tunes are missing from the library but I presume that will improve over time.


----------



## Guidostrunk

Have to agree with you. I'm extremely happy with HD. Every once in a while you'll run into HDUltra and 3D formats. Definitely prefer it to Tidal and Qbuzz. 


rgs9200m said:


> Wow, I am a bit shocked how good the Amazon Music HD sound quality is! I just tried it with my Chord DAVE and Meze Empyreans and it's really good, with a nice spacious sound and good deep defined bass. It is sort of up there with my ripped CDs in Jriver, and some songs that were disappointing in sound quality from my rips are even better. I spent a long time last night hunting and gathering songs and actually found a lot of rare live stuff and interesting re-mastered versions. So a big thumbs up.
> 
> The negatives were that the browser is sort of primitive for finding albums, and I'm not sure how to save albums. You kind of have to know what you are looking for by asking for a specific song or artist, but once you do, you can find more great hidden stuff.
> And playlist creation is a bit clunky.
> ...


----------



## Pro-Jules

Guidostrunk said:


> Have to agree with you. I'm extremely happy with HD. Every once in a while you'll run into HDUltra and 3D formats. Definitely prefer it to Tidal and Qbuzz.


DITTO

AND THE SCROLLING LYRICS A BONUS!


----------



## Marlowe

Although the price was right since I am a Prime member, I ditched Amazon HD as soon as the free trial was up. While the sound was OK (with very critical A/B comparisons, I thought it was roughly equal to Tidal on most material but that Tidal was very slightly better on some songs, but that could have been bias), I didn't find the vaunted Amazon catalog to be any real improvement for me over Tidal (almost every major hole in Tidal's catalog remained a hole in Amazon's, which was missing a few great albums that are on Tidal), and to call Amazon's UI a train wreck is unfair to train wrecks--I found it virtually unusable.


----------



## buonassi

3Putter said:


> Having used Quboz, Tidal, and Amazon HD extensively I found QB the best in sound but lacking for my titles


Qobuz does have the edge to me and is most like my ripped CDs.  I too have spent time with all three.  Qobuz was also lacking in my preferred genre of progressive rock/metal.


SilverEars said:


> I found Amazon to sound mediocre due to lack of 'exclusive mode' or bit-perfect mode.


no doubt.


----------



## tmb821

While I haven’t used any of the others. I have no issues with hd. Works for my whole family to have one service. We can all share music, discover new stuff, enjoy together. I’m the only audio nerd, the rest of the family could care less about hd or otherwise. So, bonus for me.


----------



## Soundizer

Just checking here. Has Amazon Music HD introduced Exclusive mode or bit perfect yet?


----------



## jambaj0e (Apr 16, 2020)

Soundizer said:


> Just checking here. Has Amazon Music HD introduced Exclusive mode or bit perfect yet?



Woke up this morning and Amazon Music HD now has that speaker button to enable Exclusive Mode. So naturally I turn it on.  While it DEFINITELY takes it to Exclusive Mode (I turned on Tidal, but it says that "device is in use by a different user, device or service". I can't even playback Youtube on Chrome when Exclusive Mode is on.

Strangely, I'm still not sure if bit-perfect is happening, since the color indicator of my Chord Qutest doesn't change from where file-quality to file-quality.

Hopefully they will get bit-perfect sorted out, but man, finally! Exclusive Mode!


----------



## Soundizer

jambaj0e said:


> Whoa! I got it! But it's not actually changing into Exclusive Mode and bit-perfect on my Chord Qutest:


When did Amazon add this functionality? I might subscribe again.


----------



## jambaj0e

Soundizer said:


> When did Amazon add this functionality? I might subscribe again.



Just happened today!


----------



## tmb821

Is this on pc only? Don’t see those options on iPhone...


----------



## jambaj0e

tmb821 said:


> Is this on pc only? Don’t see those options on iPhone...



Yes, it's only for desktops. I have it for Windows 10, it should be available for Mac, too.


----------



## tmb821

jambaj0e said:


> Yes, it's only for desktops. I have it for Windows 10, it should be available for Mac, too.



Ok, cool. Will have to okay around with it when I get home this weekend.


----------



## rgs9200m

Thanks for the info, but I don't have the speaker button on the app on my Windows 10 machine. Should I delete the app and reinstall it? I don't see anything about Update Available in the app. Thx.


----------



## jambaj0e (Apr 16, 2020)

rgs9200m said:


> Thanks for the info, but I don't have the speaker button on the app on my Windows 10 machine. Should I delete the app and reinstall it? I don't see anything about Update Available in the app. Thx.



I didn't have to install or uninstall. Last night, I definitely did not have the new 7.11.3.2198 version with the Exclusive Mode, but when I turned on my computer this morning, it has it. Funny thing, it didn't asked me to upgrade. It just has it available.


----------



## davesa (Apr 16, 2020)

Hmmm, maybe not everywhere yet - I am not seeing a newer version. I am on Win10, and I even Uninstalled / Reinstalled. Hope it is just a delayed rollout and I will see it soon. The Windows Store is where the updates for these apps come from ( not in the individual app ).


----------



## rgs9200m

OK, thanks again. I'll play around or ask on the amazon hd music forums.


----------



## Marlowe (Apr 16, 2020)

davesa said:


> Hmmm, maybe not everywhere yet - I am not seeing a newer version. I am on Win10, and I even Uninstalled / Reinstalled. Hope it is just a delayed rollout and I will see it soon. The Windows Store is where the updates for these apps come from ( not in the individual app ).


I don't have an HD subscription ATM (I cancelled after the free trial) but I do have access to the basic Prime Music that is free to all Prime members. I also uninstalled and reinstalled and I have the same version (albeit without the "a" at the end, which probably denoted the paid version) and no exclusive mode--though exclusive mode might well not ever appear on my free non-HD version. The single post on the Amazon forums concerning this is apparently from the same poster here who is the only person to see exclusive mode. It seems strange. If it does appear generally, I may give it a try agan.


----------



## jambaj0e

Marlowe said:


> I don't have an HD subscription ATM (I cancelled after the free trial) but I do have access to the basic Prime Music that is free to all Prime members. I also uninstalled and reinstalled and I have the same version (albeit without the "a" at the end, which probably denoted the paid version) and no exclusive mode--though exclusive mode might well not ever appear on my free non-HD version. The single post on the Amazon forums concerning this is apparently from the same poster here who is the only person to see exclusive mode. It seems strange. If it does appear generally, I may give it a try agan.



yeah, I saw that one single poster, so I'm surprised that I got it. It probably is a rolling update, and not everyone is getting it right now. What I hate is the lack of transparency from Amazon. It's not like this is a super-secret mode that only Amazon would have. Their closest competitors already have it!


----------



## buonassi

doesn't seem to be available on mac yet.   I just manually installed the latest version from their web downloads.  No exclusive mode.


----------



## Monahans67

I also don't have it.  Also uninstalled and reinstalled and all that jazz.  I wonder if since some of us are on the 3 months free even if we have put in our CC for the monthly/annual fee if that is the problem.  I have version 7.10.1.2195 and I need 7.11.3.2198 . All I can do is give it time and see what happens.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Manually downloaded PC player from https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=16962657011, still 7.10.1.2195


----------



## Monahans67

Unfortunately you can't call Amazon they say you have to use chat due to the virus.  LOL  Anyway I finally got with chat and I think they thought I was speaking in Chinese or something.  All they said was that if some got it and some didn't then you just have to wait.  I don't think the lady really understood what I was asking.


----------



## tmb821

How do I see what version I have? I don’t have the speaker icon,  but just curious.


----------



## Marlowe

tmb821 said:


> How do I see what version I have? I don’t have the speaker icon,  but just curious.


Click your name in the upper right of the UI, click help, click About Amazon Music. That will bring up the box with the version number.


----------



## tmb821

Marlowe said:


> Click your name in the upper right of the UI, click help, click About Amazon Music. That will bring up the box with the version number.


Thanks. Still have the non super special awesomely nifty version...


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Andrew_WOT said:


> Manually downloaded PC player from https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=16962657011, still 7.10.1.2195


The new one downloaded from this link today.
But guess Exclusive functionality is only available for HD subscribers as I can't see it as pictured.


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 18, 2020)

Funny thing.  I actually came to check on this, and it's happening! Wow.

I need to test this out, compare with Tidal.  I'm interested in Amazon since it should have larger collection.  I hope their music recommendation algorithm is good.

Update:  I don't have the speaker icon either.  It looks like it's from auto-update.  

The question is, when will it get updated?  This is so stupid!


----------



## jambaj0e

SilverEars said:


> Funny thing.  I actually came to check on this, and it's happening! Wow.
> 
> I need to test this out, compare with Tidal.  I'm interested in Amazon since it should have larger collection.  I hope their music recommendation algorithm is good.



yeah, I cancelled my Tidal after this. While Tidal has a smoother sound (at times vocal harmonies are more distorted on Amazon Music HD), its sound is a little too small and polished. It doesn't have the raw musicality that Amazon HD seems to have, especially now w/ the Exclusive Mode.

The Exclusive Mode does make music sound a bit smoother and clearer on Amazon HD now.


----------



## jambaj0e

Andrew_WOT said:


> The new one downloaded from this link today.
> But guess Exclusive functionality is only available for HD subscribers as I can't see it as pictured.



Yes, it's most likely only for HD subscriber, since we do have access to the HD and UltraHD content where you need and want that. I highly suggest getting it, especially with the cheaper Annual Plan.


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 18, 2020)

jambaj0e said:


> yeah, I cancelled my Tidal after this. While Tidal has a smoother sound (at times vocal harmonies are more distorted on Amazon Music HD), its sound is a little too small and polished. It doesn't have the raw musicality that Amazon HD seems to have, especially now w/ the Exclusive Mode.
> 
> The Exclusive Mode does make music sound a bit smoother and clearer on Amazon HD now.


I still don't have exclusive mode.  It must be some sort of auto-update.  This is really stupid that the update is randomly chosen.

Waiting for the app to update to 7.11.3.2198 to get the exclusive mode.


----------



## Monahans67

I just uninstalled and installed and still get the old version.  What am I doing wrong.  Tried it twice.


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 18, 2020)

Monahans67 said:


> I just uninstalled and installed and still get the old version.  What am I doing wrong.  Tried it twice.


It's not what you are doing wrong, it's the way Amazon is handling this.  When you install, it will install to version 7.10.1.2195

The exclusive mode is on version 7.11.3.2198  and you can only get it through the Amazon server deciding to update your app, and you cannot control it, which is stupid.


Andrew_WOT said:


> Manually downloaded PC player from https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=16962657011, still 7.10.1.2195


That version doesn't have the exclusive mode.  Just wait for the app to update itself, and who knows when?  I don't understand why we can't download the latest version with exclusive mode?


----------



## Monahans67

SilverEars said:


> It's not what you are doing wrong, it's the way Amazon is handling this.  When you install, it will install to version 7.10.1.2195
> 
> The exclusive mode is on version 7.11.3.2198  and you can only get it through the Amazon server deciding to update your app, and you cannot control it, which is stupid.
> That version doesn't have the exclusive mode.  Just wait for the app to update itself, and who knows when?  I don't understand why we can't download the latest version with exclusive mode?


Yeah I know but it is frustrating.  I actually like Amazon HD and UHD .  I have tried Tidal,and the one starts with Q (brain fart) and I like the sound of Amazon the best right now even without the update.  Just think the update will improve things even more.  One thing I have found after being retired is that there is no shortage of impatients. LOL


----------



## Guidostrunk

It's probably in the process of updating everyone. I haven't seen the update yet myself but I'm willing to wait it out for a few days before I get all worked up lol. I'm willing to bet by the end of the weekend everyone will be updated


----------



## Andrew_WOT

SilverEars said:


> It's not what you are doing wrong, it's the way Amazon is handling this.  When you install, it will install to version 7.10.1.2195
> 
> The exclusive mode is on version 7.11.3.2198  and you can only get it through the Amazon server deciding to update your app, and you cannot control it, which is stupid.
> That version doesn't have the exclusive mode.  Just wait for the app to update itself, and who knows when?  I don't understand why we can't download the latest version with exclusive mode?


Manual or auto update, you still get the same version now. 
Manually downloaded.


----------



## Monahans67

Andrew_WOT said:


> Manual or auto update, you still get the same version now.
> Manually downloaded.
> 
> [/QDid UOTE]
> Did you have to uninstall the existing and then download.


----------



## Monahans67

Did you have to uninstall the current version and then re-install.


----------



## jambaj0e

Monahans67 said:


> Did you have to uninstall the current version and then re-install.



I didn't. Unlike other times, mine just updated itself


----------



## SilverEars

Andrew_WOT said:


> Manual or auto update, you still get the same version now.
> Manually downloaded.


Mine hasn't updated yet, and now I'm sure the version is not related to the install file.  There must be something Amazon puts on the computer when it updates via the app.  The install file only initiates installtion with the server.  

I saw this on a Japanse blog.  It seems the app updates while you are listening, and it pops up as a blue bar at the top.  This is rediculous and stupid, and driving me nuts.

http://blog.livedoor.jp/sumi_live_door/archives/6188648.html


----------



## rkw

SilverEars said:


> This is really stupid that the update is randomly chosen.


No it isn't stupid. It is standard practice throughout the software industry. Start rolling out an update to say 10% of users, usually chosen at random. Wait a few days and see if crashes or other problems are happening. If there are problems, stop the rollout and fix the issues before updating more users. Otherwise increase the rollout to say 25%, and repeat the process a few times to get to 100%.

I guarantee that this update isn't just for exclusive mode and also includes other software changes. Any of the changes can be a problem that causes the entire rollout to stop.


----------



## Monahans67

rkw said:


> No it isn't stupid. It is standard practice throughout the software industry. Start rolling out an update to say 10% of users, usually chosen at random. Wait a few days and see if crashes or other problems are happening. If there are problems, stop the rollout and fix the issues before updating more users. Otherwise increase the rollout to say 25%, and repeat the process a few times to get to 100%.
> 
> I guarantee that this update isn't just for exclusive mode and also includes other software changes. Any of the changes can be a problem that causes the entire rollout to stop.


Makes sense to me.


----------



## Monahans67

Anymore news on the update?


----------



## buonassi

SilverEars said:


> I still don't have exclusive mode. It must be some sort of auto-update.



me either, windows and mac both are still not updated for the two computers I have.


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 20, 2020)

buonassi said:


> me either, windows and mac both are still not updated for the two computers I have.


I still don't have it either.  It's annoying.  I did some searching and I saw a post from 3 months ago that somebody gotten the update (Vietnam?)?  Can't they just put the feature on there for everyone? This is stupid.

I just want to find out if it makes a difference and worthwhile.  I don't find the sound of Amazon App as good as Tidal.  I heard that it's not really bit-perfect since the Chord DACs do not change color from the different bit-rate formats.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Andrew_WOT said:


> Manual or auto update, you still get the same version now.
> Manually downloaded.


Signing up to HD and relogin all it took for this to show up


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Apr 20, 2020)

BTW, it does not seem like actually functioning as bit rate shown on DAC is still what selected in Sounds in Control Panel, saving these setting between restart doesn't seem to work either.

EDIT: All it does at the moment is disables in app volume control. Guess still WIP, at least some movement in the right direction.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

And yes, I am not imagining things

Seems like it's visual enhancement for now.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

Andrew_WOT said:


> And yes, I am not imagining things
> 
> Seems like it's visual enhancement for now.


You don't hear any difference?


----------



## Andrew_WOT

PlantsmanTX said:


> You don't hear any difference?


The only difference one can hear is from disabled in app volume control if they didn't have it maxed out before.


----------



## Monahans67

Delete


----------



## scottcw

Andrew_WOT said:


> Signing up to HD and relogin all it took for this to show up



Where are you finding this screen? I've looked in Preferences and Account Settings in the app and don't see it.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

scottcw said:


> Where are you finding this screen? I've looked in Preferences and Account Settings in the app and don't see it.


Click on speaker icon
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/ama...ssless-streaming.905493/page-77#post-15562323


----------



## jambaj0e

I


scottcw said:


> Where are you finding this screen? I've looked in Preferences and Account Settings in the app and don't see it.



On the right side next to the Volume Icon


----------



## scottcw

I'm still stuck on the previous version, so I still don't have that option.


----------



## Monahans67

scottcw said:


> I'm still stuck on the previous version, so I still don't have that option.


Me too.  Maybe with my old age I hear things differently but I think the quality of sound in HD and UHD is very good.  I'll just wait and enjoy it until they get all the bugs worked out for exclusive mode.


----------



## scottcw

Monahans67 said:


> Me too.  Maybe with my old age I hear things differently but I think the quality of sound in HD and UHD is very good.  I'll just wait and enjoy it until they get all the bugs worked out for exclusive mode.



Agreed on the sound except for lack of exclusive mode. I'm hoping that will stop the occasional interference I get from using Windows' sound mixer.


----------



## james__bean (Apr 23, 2020)

I have a trial with Amazon that is about to expire.  I'm probably sticking with Tidal anyway, but I do want to at least try out the exclusive mode.  However, my client isn't updating to the 2198 build.  Went through some of the client logs and there is actually a separate updater application that runs each time you start the desktop app. 

The command line options that are used are actually logged in this log:
%localappdata%\Amazon Music\Logs\AmazonMusic.log

Can some who has successfully updated open that log and look for this entry and post it here?

```
200423:025421      Browser INFO in UpdateInstaller line 434, function Morpho::UpdateInstaller::runAutoUpdater : Successfully launched autoUpdater--check_for_updates,1,--mode,unattended,--unattendedmodebehavior,download,--unattendedmodeui,none,--url,https://www.amazon.com/gp/dmusic/cloud/mp3/update.xml?platformOverride=NATIVE_WIN_7_PLUS,--update_download_location,C:\Users\user\AppData\Local\Amazon Music\Updater,--version_id,710012195,--debuglevel,4
```

I assume the clients that update go to a different URL so maybe I can get this thing updated if I know what that URL is.


----------



## scottcw

I doubt you are going to be able to force an update. If you read back, it seems Amazon is updating on a rolling basis. You will get it when you get it.

I ditched Tidal in favor of Amazon HD. Higher rez files and $7 a month less.


----------



## james__bean

At the end of the day, the updated version of the application still needs to be downloaded and installed by Windows.  I had an old version of the app so I installed it and watched the logs.  It goes through an update check process by checking a json online and then lists the download URL in the logs:  


```
200423:035327 MorphoBrowser : I main : JsConsole : line = 106153 : Comment In Log:     UpdateManager: Starting to poll for updates
200423:035327     Renderer INFO in UpdaterProxy line 61, function Morpho::UpdaterProxy::getUpdaterPath : Morpho updater staging area path: C:\Users\James\AppData\Local\Amazon Music\Updater\Updater.exe
200423:035327 MorphoBrowser : I main : JsConsole : line = 106153 : Comment In Log:     UpdateManager: poll
200423:035327 MorphoBrowser : I main : JsConsole : line = 106153 : Comment In Log:     UpdateManager: fetchVersion
200423:035327 MorphoBrowser : I main : JsConsole : line = 106153 : Comment In Log:     AjaxRequest: Request /gp/dmusic/cloud/mp3/update.json completed in 168ms
200423:035327 MorphoBrowser : I main : JsConsole : line = 106153 : Comment In Log:     BaseMetric: cleanUpMetricsData removing invalid value for key: url
200423:035327 MorphoBrowser : I main : JsConsole : line = 106153 : Comment In Log:     UpdateManager: confirmVersion: retrievedVersionSpec: {
      "WebLabs": {},
      "Native": {
       "version": "7.10.1.2195",
       "url": "https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/digital/music/morpho/installers/20200326/05022608d8/AmazonMusicInstaller.exe"
      },
      "version": 7230,
      "FeaturesAvailable": {
       "SHOW_PRIME_UX_ID": true
      },
      "Webapp": {
       "buildHash": "20170418/2017492076",
       "version": "5.4.2.632"
      }
     }
```

Once you get the prompt in the app that an update is available, you can go check the log and the download URL for the new version will be listed.  For example, the 2195 installer is at the URL above.


----------



## jpkrautw (Apr 23, 2020)

scottcw said:


> I ditched Tidal in favor of Amazon HD. Higher rez files and $7 a month less.



I will do the same as soon as exclusive mode is widely available and bit-perfect playback is confirmed working.

Otherwise, if you're just cramming hi-res audio through the windows audio subsystem where it's re-sampled at a fixed bitrate/frequency, what's the point?


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 23, 2020)

jpkrautw said:


> I will do the same as soon as exclusive mode is widely available and bit-perfect playback is confirmed working.
> 
> Otherwise, if you're just cramming hi-res audio through the windows audio subsystem where it's re-sampled at a fixed bitrate/frequency, what's the point?


That's the thing.  Exclusive mode doesn't mean bit-perfect.  Exclusive mode means one app is exclusively utilizing the sound output hardware, and no other software are allowed to do so.  Bit-perfect is more specific than that. It is when the sound output hardware is selected exclusively for the software and the stream gets fed directly to the DAC unperturbed (doesn't go through the OS software, but directly to the DAC).  If 16/44 stream, the DAC takes in 16/44, if 24/192, DAC takes in 24/192 without going through the OS, or being processed in anyway by the OS such as upsampling, or EQ, etc.. Original recording's bit-depth and sampling rate in bit-perfect format.  This is what we ultimately want.

This is why we must see the correct bit-rate being detected on DACs such as Chord devices with led color indication of bit-rate.

As far as I see it, this Ultra HD or HD is meaningless without bit-perfect if the stream is processed by the OS.


----------



## jpkrautw

Thanks for the clarification; as far as I know Tidal’s “exclusive mode” option is bit-perfect, so I had just assumed.  Pretty frustrating that Amazon would even launch this service on Windows at all if there’s no way to actually use it.


----------



## buonassi

jpkrautw said:


> Otherwise, if you're just cramming hi-res audio through the windows audio subsystem where it's re-sampled at a fixed bitrate/frequency, what's the point?


exactly


SilverEars said:


> This is why we must see the correct bit-rate being detected on DACs such as Chord devices with led color indication of bit-rate.


I think you mean sample rate.  SRC or sample rate conversion is what you want to avoid.  Bit depth, provided it is not truncated, is still considered "bit perfect" and preserves resolution.  


jpkrautw said:


> as far as I know Tidal’s “exclusive mode” option is bit-perfect


yes, it will change the sample rate sent to the DAC based on the file if configured correctly.


----------



## scottcw (Apr 24, 2020)

I just launched the update and, bit perfect or not, exclusive mode eliminates the noise interference I was getting from other processes on my computer. No intermittent pops or crackles is a win for my ears.

Edit to add... I didn't realize how much the noise caused by other computer processes was putting me on edge. One album in with exclusive mode and I am totally relaxed and at ease while listening.


----------



## H-Money

Also just got the update.


----------



## james__bean

Someone on reddit was able to get the URL from the log for me.  You can download the update directly from here:  

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.../20200415/01222531e3/AmazonMusicInstaller.exe


----------



## SilverEars

james__bean said:


> Someone on reddit was able to get the URL from the log for me.  You can download the update directly from here:
> 
> https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.../20200415/01222531e3/AmazonMusicInstaller.exe


I knew you were a smart dude!  Thanks!


----------



## jpkrautw

Good to know for future updates, but if you leave the Amazon Music app open for a few min the update now seems to be rolling out to everyone.


----------



## magicrandy (Apr 24, 2020)

Does the Exclusive Mode apply to a Mac or just the Windows PC?

EDIT: I guess it does. I just got an update to the Amazon Music app (Version: 7.11.3.2198) and I see the Exclusive Mode option.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

jpkrautw said:


> Good to know for future updates, but if you leave the Amazon Music app open for a few min the update now seems to be rolling out to everyone.


I wonder if that means it actually matches the bitrates of the songs now.


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 24, 2020)

PlantsmanTX said:


> I wonder if that means it actually matches the bitrates of the songs now.


My impression is that the exclusive mode doesn't sound much different from non-exclusive.  I would pretty much say, not at all different.  Amazon music doesn't sound that good to me.  Not as good as Tidal.  Maybe they wil do a true bit-perfect, not just exclusive mode.  I will try it once they implement that, but I'm not impressed with the sound of Amazon music, exclusive mode or not.

Ultra HD doesn't matter if it doesn't sound good.

The biggest difference from a setting that you all will notice will be from turning off loudness normalization.


----------



## james__bean (Apr 24, 2020)

So it looks like when you enable exclusive mode in both Tidal and Amazon Music, it uses kernel streaming and not wasapi.  (audiokse.dll)


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 24, 2020)

james__bean said:


> So it looks like when you enable exclusive mode in both Tidal and Amaon Music, it uses kernel streaming and not wasapi.  (audiokse.dll)


I thought Tidal exclusive mode was WASAPI.  What is the difference from kernel streaming?  Chord DACs do respond to sampling rate changes as does the Schiit multibit DACs as they make the relay sounds when the sampling rate changes.  Amazon music doesn't.  Which tells me that Amazon music streams are not changing sampling rate when you transition SD, HD, or ultra HD.


----------



## james__bean

Kernel Streaming is legacy tech that I believe has been around since Windows XP.  Someone else will have to speak to any technical differences between the two.  However, in terms of the difference between Tidal and Amazon Music, I'm experiencing the same thing as you.  With Amazon Music, playback is whatever is set in Windows regardless of what the sample rate of the file is. 

Windows setting:




Amazon Music reports playback at 96kHz:




My drivers say otherwise:




Tidal doesn't report the sample rate of their files, but playback changes based on what I'm playing:


----------



## SilverEars

james__bean said:


> Kernel Streaming is legacy tech that I believe has been around since Windows XP.  Someone else will have to speak to any technical differences between the two.  However, in terms of the difference between Tidal and Amazon Music, I'm experiencing the same thing as you.  With Amazon Music, playback is whatever is set in Windows regardless of what the sample rate of the file is.
> 
> Windows setting:
> 
> ...


Yup, Amazon music is fixed at the OS sampling rate.  Which tells me it's not bit-perfect or the stream is directly going to the DAC, but going through the OS still.  It's techically can be called exclusive mode if the music is played out of the hardware only from the app exclusively.  Tidal on the other hand does changes sampling rate depending on the stream.  Tidal tells you if it's CD quality, 16/44, and the sampling of the DAC changes accordingly.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

SilverEars said:


> My impression is that the exclusive mode doesn't sound much different from non-exclusive.  I would pretty much say, not at all different.  Amazon music doesn't sound that good to me.  Not as good as Tidal.  Maybe they wil do a true bit-perfect, not just exclusive mode.  I will try it once they implement that, but I'm not impressed with the sound of Amazon music, exclusive mode or not.
> 
> Ultra HD doesn't matter if it doesn't sound good.
> 
> The biggest difference from a setting that you all will notice will be from turning off loudness normalization.


Amazon HD sounds pretty good to me. I tried the Tidal trial some time back, and I thought there was a small difference in the sound but it wasn't necessarily better than Amazon.


----------



## Monahans67

Got it, I think it sounds great.  Happy and will stay with Amazon Music.


----------



## Monahans67

Did anybody else notice that every time you close out Amazon Music that you have to go back in and set exclusive mode on again.  Is there anyway to keep it on.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

Monahans67 said:


> Did anybody else notice that every time you close out Amazon Music that you have to go back in and set exclusive mode on again.  Is there anyway to keep it on.


Yes, I noticed that, and as far as I can tell, there's no way to keep it on.


----------



## magicrandy

Monahans67 said:


> Did anybody else notice that every time you close out Amazon Music that you have to go back in and set exclusive mode on again.  Is there anyway to keep it on.


Same behavior on a Mac.


----------



## tmb821

Is there some magic to getting the update, or just waiting?


----------



## Monahans67

Go to preferences/help/about check your version. Last night it told me update available where you see the version.


----------



## SilverEars

tmb821 said:


> Is there some magic to getting the update, or just waiting?


You can download with this link.


james__bean said:


> Someone on reddit was able to get the URL from the log for me.  You can download the update directly from here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Please read the threads before asking questions of stuff that has been put out.


----------



## tmb821 (Apr 25, 2020)

sorry, went and got it.  Doesn't really do much for me.  I use the Boom 3d app for the equalizer, so its feeding through that as the default player.  Can't tell a difference when I switch it to my k3.  And when I click on exclusive mode, I lose all output.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

tmb821 said:


> sorry, went and got it.  Doesn't really do much for me.  I use the Boom 3d app for the equalizer, so its feeding through that as the default player.  Can't tell a difference when I switch it to my k3.  And when I click on exclusive mode, I lose all output.


It's the same with Tidal and Qobuz. Switching to exclusive mode deactivates EQ.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Apr 26, 2020)

This exclusive only prevents other apps accessing audio endpoint, so you won't get system sounds, etc, it still goes through the Windows Mixer and subject to sample rate conversion, volume control, special effects.
What we need is WASAPI exclusive that bypasess mixer altogether and sends stream directly to HW driver untouched (bit-perfect).

Don't understand why it takes that long to make it right and why we've got that pseudo exclusive mode at all, it doesn't buy much. But at least we see some sign of movement in the right direction.

But still even with current limitations, with volume maxed out in mixer and Sound settings bitrate matching material, it's very close to bit-perfect as resampling doesn't take place.
If anyone can hear the difference between ripped CDs and Amazon with everything set up right, you must have unique golden bat ears.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

Andrew_WOT said:


> This exclusive only prevents other apps accessing audio endpoint, so you won't get system sounds, etc, it still goes through the Windows Mixer and subject to sample rate conversion, volume control, special effects.
> What we need is WASAPI exclusive that bypasess mixer altogether and sends stream directly to HW driver untouched (bit-perfect).
> 
> Don't understand why it takes that long to make it right and why we've got that pseudo exclusive mode at all, it doesn't buy much. But at least we see some sign of movement in the right direction.
> ...


Are the source and Windows bitrates matching for you?


----------



## SilverEars

PlantsmanTX said:


> Are the source and Windows bitrates matching for you?


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/usb...ort-for-android.704065/page-249#post-15578295


----------



## Andrew_WOT

PlantsmanTX said:


> Are the source and Windows bitrates matching for you?


To get the most out of current unfortunate auto resampling situation you need to match material with sound settings in Windows. Manually.
Mixer resampling degradation on modern Win10 is blown out of proportion mostly based on some old tests, recent studies suggest it's not actually THAT bad.
So you can just keep it at 24/96 and forget about flipping bitrate back and forth.

Still not an excuse for Amazon for not having bit-perfect implemented yet. Shame really.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

Andrew_WOT said:


> To get the most out of current unfortunate auto resampling situation you need to match material with sound settings in Windows. Manually.
> Mixer resampling degradation on modern Win10 is blown out of proportion mostly based on some old tests, recent studies suggest it's not actually THAT bad.
> So you can just keep it at 24/96 and forget about flipping bitrate back and forth.
> 
> Still not an excuse for Amazon for not having bit-perfect implemented yet. Shame really.


Ok. I figured you meant setting the Windows bitrate manually, but I wasn't sure. Good idea. The upside of that is if you're using EQ, your settings aren't deactivated.


----------



## a-LeXx

I doubt Amazon will ever implement bit perfect mode.
I think they see upsampling as a feature, not a bug.
Even on iOS, which perfectly supports native bit rates and doesn‘t upconvert everything to a single data rate as Android does, they upconvert everything to a highest bit rate of an attached DAC. Their previous app, before the HD introduction, didn‘t do that, 44.1 was still 44.1.
This changed with an introduction of the app version 9.x


----------



## rkw (Apr 27, 2020)

a-LeXx said:


> I doubt Amazon will ever implement bit perfect mode.


The thought may be disheartening to audiophiles, but this is a very real possibility. If Amazon Music were to survey their users, they would find interest in bit perfect to be extremely low, probably less than one half of one percent of the overall 55 million users. Contrast with exclusive mode, which is an actual benefit for many users (who don't want their music disturbed by other sounds on the system).


----------



## a-LeXx (Apr 27, 2020)

rkw said:


> The thought may be disheartening to audiophiles, but this is a very real possibility. If Amazon Music were to survey their users, they would find interest in bit perfect to be extremely low, probably less than one half of one percent of the overall 55 million users. Contrast with exclusive mode, which is an actual benefit for many users (who don't want their music disturbed by other sounds on the system).



Agree. Anyway, I opened a support ticket explaining why bit perfect on iOS would be beneficial, alone from the power consumption point of view, as both upsampling and sending more data to DAC consumes much more power, also SQ would be better... People from support replied to me, confirming that a CR has been filed and sent to the SW development team... One problem of Amazon Music is that it's still a power hog. A fully loaded iPhone 7 with 100% battery health (battery had less than 50 full cycles) is good to play 7 to 9 hrs with Amazon, from stored library. With online streaming, it's even less... And upsampling is one of the things causing this behaviour, it used to be much better with old non-upsampling app prior to Music HD introduction.

And better battery life is always on a wish list of everyone. Let's see whether anything happens...


----------



## james__bean

So from reading Windows documentation, it seems like Amazon Music isn't properly querying the endpoint device for supported frequencies.  I don't have access to their code or anything, but just based on what I was seeing the application do, I think it is just pulling whatever frequency Windows is set to and using that.  





> The *PKEY_AudioEngine_DeviceFormat* property specifies the device format, which is the format that the user has selected for the stream that flows between the audio engine and the audio endpoint device when the device operates in shared mode. *This format might not be the best default format for an exclusive-mode application to use. Typically, an exclusive-mode application finds a suitable device format by making some number of calls to the IAudioClient::IsFormatSupported method.* For more information, see Device Formats.



https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/coreaudio/pkey-audioengine-deviceformat

Tidal does this part properly so I'll be sticking with Tidal for now.


----------



## Monahans67

james__bean said:


> So from reading Windows documentation, it seems like Amazon Music isn't properly querying the endpoint device for supported frequencies.  I don't have access to their code or anything, but just based on what I was seeing the application do, I think it is just pulling whatever frequency Windows is set to and using that.
> 
> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/coreaudio/pkey-audioengine-deviceformat
> 
> Tidal does this part properly so I'll be sticking with Tidal for now.


As much as I wanted to stay with Amazon I have changed back to Tidal.  Being Military Retired I get it for 11.99 a month so can't complain.  If Amazon ever gets the Exclusive Mode to match what I am hearing from Tidal then we will see.  I honestly think even my old ears can hear a difference between UHD and Tidals' Master.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

And Tidal MQA is bit perfect?


----------



## rkw (Apr 28, 2020)

Andrew_WOT said:


> And Tidal MQA is bit perfect?


Output from the Tidal app is bit perfect when exclusive mode is turned on. Bit perfect means that the operating system does not alter (resample or mix) the output stream from the player app.

For MQA, the Tidal app creates a lossy decoded upsample that will be sent bit perfect to the DAC. Or if you have an MQA enabled DAC and turn on the Passthrough MQA option, the original undecoded FLAC will be sent bit perfect.


----------



## a-LeXx

Monahans67 said:


> As much as I wanted to stay with Amazon I have changed back to Tidal.  Being Military Retired I get it for 11.99 a month so can't complain.  If Amazon ever gets the Exclusive Mode to match what I am hearing from Tidal then we will see.  I honestly think even my old ears can hear a difference between UHD and Tidals' Master.



You will always hear a difference between Tidal's Master and anything else. It's there per definition: Tidal Master is MQA and MQA per definition uses their own masters, created specially for MQA. So it's always a different master, no matter whether the other platform is HD or not, the masters used for MQA will be always different from the rest of the world.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Apr 29, 2020)

Transfer from app to device is bit perfect but MQA is lossy compression that lost its bitperfectness at the time of encoding.
If anything Qobuz should provide the best of both worlds as does both, lossless FLAC and bit perfect output to audio device.
Amazon for now is half way there, we have lossless material (FLAC), exclusive access to audio stream, and technically bit perfect output IF Sound settings in Control panel match source material.
The last part is nuisance, I know, hope that's just a temporary workaround.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

rkw said:


> Or if you have an MQA enabled DAC and turn on the Passthrough MQA option, the original undecoded FLAC *MQA *will be sent bit perfect.


----------



## SilverEars (Apr 29, 2020)

Andrew_WOT said:


> Transfer from app to device is bit perfect but MQA is lossy compression so it lost its bitperfectness at the time of encoding.
> If anything Qobuz should provide the best of both worlds as does both, lossless FLAC and bit perfect output to audio device.
> Amazon for now is half way there, we have lossless material (FLAC), exclusive access to audio stream, and technically bit perfect output IF Sound settings in Control panel match source material.
> The last part is nuisance, I know, hope that's just a temporary workaround.


For some reason, I don't like the sound of Qobuz even if it's bit-perfect (or is it or is it exclusive mode only as well?).  I compared an album between Tidal and Qobuz, and Tidal sounded better.  This maybe due to Tidal having the better music masterings in their server.  I am able to hear differences between certain streaming services, and likely from the help of my system setup.  I can tell difference from DAC getting digital feeds from a Mac vs Windows PC even.  If one cannot tell the difference, that's good, you are better off.  No point of pulling hairs, but go with the cheapest option.

Personally, I don't believe the format being 24bit or excessively high sampling rate has anything to do with what sounds better.  I prefer CD quality of 16/44, and I'm sure it's because majority was originally digitized to that bit-depth and sampling rate.

I tried the Chord M-scalar and hated what it does to the sound when excessively over-sampled.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

SilverEars said:


> For some reason, I don't like the sound of Qobuz even if it's bit-perfect (or is it or is it exclusive mode only as well?).  I compared an album between Tidal and Qobuz, and Tidal sounded better.  This maybe due to Tidal having the better music masterings in their server.  I am able to hear differences between certain streaming services, and likely from the help of my system setup.  I can tell difference from DAC getting digital feeds from a Mac vs Windows PC even.  If one cannot tell the difference, that's good, you are better off.  No point of pulling hairs, but go with the cheapest option.
> 
> Personally, I don't believe the format being 24bit or excessively high sampling rate has anything to do with what sounds better.  I prefer CD quality of 16/44, and I'm sure it's because majority was originally digitized to that bit-depth and sampling rate.
> 
> I tried the Chord M-scalar and hated what it does to the sound when excessively over-sampled.


Qobuz is bit-perfect in exclusive mode. I did the trial, and the sampling rate displayed in the DAC's control panel matched that of the track being played.


----------



## jambaj0e

Is anyone using Amazon Music HD on Node 2i or any BluOS streaming devices? Are they bit-perfect? I'm interested to see how it is when you go Node to a DAC, then out to the amp and headphone, to see if it's as good or better than computer USB to DAC, etc.


----------



## rkw

Andrew_WOT said:


> rkw said:
> 
> 
> > Or if you have an MQA enabled DAC and turn on the Passthrough MQA option, the original undecoded FLAC *MQA *will be sent bit perfect.


The original undecoded MQA is a FLAC file.


----------



## Andrew_WOT (Apr 30, 2020)

Even it it uses FLAC as container the material inside is MQA encoded that is lossy.
Had no idea that it actually does that, thanks for pointing out.
Good read btw.
https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/8itd0z/mqa_vs_plain_old_flac/


----------



## jambaj0e (Apr 30, 2020)

Qobuz vs Tidal (vs Amazon HD) - Frequency Spectrum Analysis

This is a good example of how much frequency is lost between Tidal, Qobuz, and Amazon Music HD compared to the original track of Daft Punk - Get Lucky

* “Original” track @ 24 bit 88.2 kHz *






*Tidal Master: Daft Punk – Get Lucky @ MQA





Qobuz: Daft Punk – Get Lucky @ 24 bit 88.2 kHz 





Amazon UltraHD desktop player (track listed as 24-bit 48 kHz) *


----------



## james__bean

While certainly interesting, I doubt many people can actually hear anything above 20,000Hz.  (Personally I can't hear anything at 18kHz.)

Feel free to test yourself.  (Note you should have the volume very low on your first run.) 
https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php

However, given the graphs that you've shown, my first thought is that none of the streaming services are actually providing bit perfect 24/88 (or better) flac.  Given this, it seems like the more important factor in playback quality would be whether the application can do bit perfect playback of whatever source file it provides. 

I haven't actually tried Qobuz yet, but from a pure playback perspective it seems like it would be the best. Maybe I'll give it a go this month.


----------



## james__bean

Welp, decided to pour myself some bourbon and try out Qobuz tonight.  So first of all, I was wrong about audiokse.dll.  Turns out, Wasapi in exclusive mode can be run through audiokse.dll and this is what Qobuz uses.





Second, this desktop app is the best in terms bit perfect playback support.  Not only does it offer Wasapi and Wasapi exclusive mode, it also loaded the ASIO drivers for my HDV 820.


----------



## SilverEars

james__bean said:


> Welp, decided to pour myself some bourbon and try out Qobuz tonight.  So first of all, I was wrong about audiokse.dll.  Turns out, Wasapi in exclusive mode can be run through audiokse.dll and this is what Qobuz uses.
> 
> 
> 
> Second, this desktop app is the best in terms bit perfect playback support.  Not only does it offer Wasapi and Wasapi exclusive mode, it also loaded the ASIO drivers for my HDV 820.


What does it mean when it runs through audiokse dll?  How does Tidal run in comparison?


----------



## james__bean (May 5, 2020)

SilverEars said:


> What does it mean when it runs through audiokse dll?  How does Tidal run in comparison?



Audiokse stands for Audio KS Endpoint which I assumed meant it was for kernel streaming.  Its just a Microsoft library the application uses.  Based on the name, I was assuming it was for kernel streaming but apparently it can be used for Wasapi.  I have no idea about the differences between Tidal, Amazon Music, and Qobuz in terms of their actual implementation of exclusive mode.  You would need code access to know that.  I only know based on testing that Amazon music doesn't playback files at the proper frequency of the file, it uses whatever frequency Windows Audio Mixer is configured to.


----------



## jambaj0e

james__bean said:


> Audiokse stands for Audio KS Endpoint which I assumed meant it was for kernel streaming.  Its just a Microsoft library the application uses.  Based on the name, I was assuming it was for kernel streaming but apparently it can be used for Wasapi.  I have no idea about the differences between Tidal, Amazon Music, and Qobuz in terms of their actual implementation of exclusive mode.  You would need code access to know that.  I only know based on testing that Amazon music doesn't playback files at the proper frequency of the file, it uses whatever frequency Windows Audio Mixer is configured to.



Wait, so when you use Audio KSe, you can see that when you enable Exclusive Mode in Amazon Music HD, it's not actual Exclusive Mode, but still Windows Mixer?


----------



## PlantsmanTX

jambaj0e said:


> Wait, so when you use Audio KSe, you can see that when you enable Exclusive Mode in Amazon Music HD, it's not actual Exclusive Mode, but still Windows Mixer?



I can see that with the XMOS driver for my dac.


----------



## jambaj0e

PlantsmanTX said:


> I can see that with the XMOS driver for my dac.



Oh, what does it say? Can you post a photo?


----------



## rkw (May 6, 2020)

I thought we've already concluded that Amazon exclusive mode is in fact "exclusive" (other sources are blocked from outputting to the device simultaneously, and therefore mixer is not involved), but not bit perfect (Windows may resample the stream).

The discussion about audiokse.dll is idle speculation and going nowhere. I'm speaking as a former Windows developer (transitioned to mobile long ago).
P.S. I Googled, and there is documentation about audiokse.dll here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/audio/introduction-to-port-class (search "audiokse" in the page).


----------



## PlantsmanTX

jambaj0e said:


> Oh, what does it say? Can you post a photo?


It doesn't show much, just that with exclusive mode on and a 24/192 track playing, the sampling rate doesn't change from 44100, which is where I have the Windows setting.


----------



## jambaj0e

PlantsmanTX said:


> It doesn't show much, just that with exclusive mode on and a 24/192 track playing, the sampling rate doesn't change from 44100, which is where I have the Windows setting.



Well that doesn't show that it's NOT in Exclusive mode, just shows it's not Bit-Perfect.


----------



## james__bean

rkw said:


> I thought we've already concluded that Amazon exclusive mode is in fact "exclusive" (other sources are blocked from outputting to the device simultaneously, and therefore mixer is not involved), but not bit perfect (Windows may resample the stream).
> 
> The discussion about audiokse.dll is idle speculation and going nowhere. I'm speaking as a former Windows developer (transitioned to mobile long ago).
> P.S. I Googled, and there is documentation about audiokse.dll here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/audio/introduction-to-port-class (search "audiokse" in the page).



Correct on all counts.


----------



## clarkydaz

if i purchase a digital album on amazon HD, which is labelled 16,44 will it be exactly like a CD file or will it have any compromise like the streaming service?


----------



## SilverEars

clarkydaz said:


> if i purchase a digital album on amazon HD, which is labelled 16,44 will it be exactly like a CD file or will it have any compromise like the streaming service?


If you purchased it, you can play it on other players like Foobar, no?  If so, you can get bit perfect like any other file.

Only the Amazon HD app is gimped, anything played throught the stupid app.


----------



## TK33 (May 10, 2020)

clarkydaz said:


> if i purchase a digital album on amazon HD, which is labelled 16,44 will it be exactly like a CD file or will it have any compromise like the streaming service?



I thought Amazon HD and the digital music store were separate and purchased music downloads in mp3 quality. This was the case when the service first launched and I had to constantly delete the mp3 versions of songs on my phone to get Amazon Music HD to play CD quality or Ultra HD versions of tracks I had previously purchased.  This was one of the reasons I went to Qobuz and downgraded to Amazon Music Unlimited (got too annoying).  Has Amazon changed this and do they now allow you to download FLAC versions of purchased music? If the download is mp3 like it used to be, you are not getting the CD quality/lossless file.


----------



## clarkydaz

TK33 said:


> I thought Amazon HD and the digital music store were separate and purchased music downloads in mp3 quality. This was the case when the service first launched and I had to constantly delete the mp3 versions of songs on my phone to get Amazon Music HD to play CD quality or Ultra HD versions of tracks I had previously purchased.  This was one of the reasons I went to Qobuz and downgraded to Amazon Music Unlimited (got too annoying).  Has Amazon changed this and do they now allow you to download FLAC versions of purchased music? If the download is mp3 like it used to be, you are not getting the CD quality/lossless file.


ok i bought a single track just to check, and yes indeed if you purchase a song its only mp3. Thats a poor show as if you listen to an album in amazon HD which is clearly stated as HD/ULTRA, then click the link to buy the exact album you are listening to, you get it in mp3 format with no confirmation of format what it is when purchasing. Naughty


----------



## N0sferatu (May 10, 2020)

Okay stupid question, I'm enjoying the sound of Amazon Music HD (was using Spotify Premium).  I enabled Exclusive mode and it works as intended.  I also heavily rely on Peace (EqualizerAPO) for my music on my PC.  Having this bit-streaming that everyone here is craving would in effect negate my EQ since it's bypassing any processing by the OS correct?  If that's the case I'm happy with Amazon Music as is. 

I'm assuming it's like with my local content I use AIMP.  If I used WASAPI I could use my EQ but the second I put it to WASAPI Exclusive or ASIO that was it no EQ no control in Windows (effectively a direct output to the DAC).

EDIT: I just restarted computer and exclusive mode punts my EqualizerAPO out of commission.  That's a bummer.  Make sense I suppose....


----------



## PlantsmanTX

N0sferatu said:


> Okay stupid question, I'm enjoying the sound of Amazon Music HD (was using Spotify Premium).  I enabled Exclusive mode and it works as intended.  I also heavily rely on Peace (EqualizerAPO) for my music on my PC.  Having this bit-streaming that everyone here is craving would in effect negate my EQ since it's bypassing any processing by the OS correct?  If that's the case I'm happy with Amazon Music as is.
> 
> I'm assuming it's like with my local content I use AIMP.  If I used WASAPI I could use my EQ but the second I put it to WASAPI Exclusive or ASIO that was it no EQ no control in Windows (effectively a direct output to the DAC).
> 
> EDIT: I just restarted computer and exclusive mode punts my EqualizerAPO out of commission.  That's a bummer.  Make sense I suppose....


Yes, that's right. I had read somewhere that the VB-CABLE Virtual Audio Device application was supposed to allow you to engage exclusive mode and preserve EQ. I tried it and it didn't work.


----------



## rays12 (May 18, 2020)

I do like Amazon HD but due to years as a member & the whole use scenario, if Spotify drop HD tracks at a similar price I'd still stick with Spotify here. They have 2.5mths to get their arse into gear  (Car, TV and speaker system works with Spotify Connect)


----------



## Marlowe

rays12 said:


> I do like Amazon HD but due to years as a member & the whole use scenario, if Spotify drop HD tracks at a similar price I'd still stick with Spotify. They have 2.5mths to get their arse into gear  (Car, TV and speaker system works with Spotify Connect)


Good luck. Spotify has supposedly been "looking" into a lossless tier for years. Nothing close to concrete has emerged yet.


----------



## Alcophone (May 22, 2020)

Forgive me if this is not the best place to ask. I'm looking for a streamer that allows me to create a playlist containing local FLAC and MP3 files stored on a USB drive, as well as tracks from streaming services like Amazon Music HD, Qobuz, Tidal, and Spotify Premium. It also has to have TOSLINK out (bitperfect up to 24/192), a display to show what is being played (or HDMI video out), and infrared support (so that I can control it with my Harmony 665).
I'd use it to digitally feed my DAC, so I don't care about analog capabilities.

I think the Bluesound Node 2i comes close, but as far as I know it's just a sort of renderer for Amazon Music HD and Spotify, rather than something that can tap into them at will for playlists, is that right? While I'd want that, too (as a replacement for my Chromecast Audio), I'd wish a $$$ streamer would integrate things a bit better. Of course there's Roon, but that doesn't support Amazon Music HD and Spotify, right?

Thanks for any pointers!


----------



## Scarpad

Hey is the frankensteining of albums still there with the mix of HD and ultra hd tracks? I went back to Apple Music while Amazon sounds better thru my Dragonfly I just prefer Apple Music’s interface. And as time goes on my ears are starting to move less and less


----------



## a-LeXx

Scarpad said:


> Hey is the frankensteining of albums still there with the mix of HD and ultra hd tracks? I went back to Apple Music while Amazon sounds better thru my Dragonfly I just prefer Apple Music’s interface. And as time goes on my ears are starting to move less and less


Yes, still there. Mixture of HD/UHD is not even worst thing. Sometimes they mix album/live versions, sometimes a version from a different album with different volume levels, making everything unlistenable. Happens not that often though...


----------



## jambaj0e

So after having "Exclusive Mode" for several weeks, I'm not sure there's that big of a jump on sonic improvement over non-Exclusive Mode. This may also be because of the lack of bit-perfect. How about you guys?

Do you hear any improvements and in what ways?


Very noticeable improvement in quality
Small improvement in quality
No to almost no improvement in quality
Small drop in quality
Big drop in quality


----------



## a-LeXx

jambaj0e said:


> So after having "Exclusive Mode" for several weeks, I'm not sure there's that big of a jump on sonic improvement over non-Exclusive Mode. This may also be because of the lack of bit-perfect. How about you guys?
> 
> Do you hear any improvements and in what ways?
> 
> ...


Exclusive mode is doing exactly NOTHING for the sound quality. The only meaning and benefit of it - it‘s blocking other apps, so e.g. you are not getting system sounds or email notifications during music playback, that‘s all.


----------



## jambaj0e

a-LeXx said:


> Exclusive mode is doing exactly NOTHING for the sound quality. The only meaning and benefit of it - it‘s blocking other apps, so e.g. you are not getting system sounds or email notifications during music playback, that‘s all.



I feel the same way. There very little, if any, difference, and I'd really have to be listening hard, to a point it feels it's probably my brain tricking myself.


----------



## a-LeXx

jambaj0e said:


> I feel the same way. There very little, if any, difference, and I'd really have to be listening hard, to a point it feels it's probably my brain tricking myself.


It‘s not what I feel, it‘s what it is, technically. There is no way how exclusive mode would affect sound quality, it‘s just a flag that would either permit or forbid to mix additional sounds into the output from the music app...


----------



## PlantsmanTX

jambaj0e said:


> I feel the same way. There very little, if any, difference, and I'd really have to be listening hard, to a point it feels it's probably my brain tricking myself.


Even in the case of Qobuz, where exclusive mode _does_ leave the sample rate unchanged, can anyone hear the difference?


----------



## Andrew_WOT

a-LeXx said:


> Exclusive mode is doing exactly NOTHING for the sound quality. The only meaning and benefit of it - it‘s blocking other apps, so e.g. you are not getting system sounds or email notifications during music playback, that‘s all.


It also disables in player volume control which is not maxed out by default making it sound muffled. So for somebody at default volume settings there will be sonic improvement.


----------



## jambaj0e

PlantsmanTX said:


> Even in the case of Qobuz, where exclusive mode _does_ leave the sample rate unchanged, can anyone hear the difference?



Wait, I thought Qobuz is bit-perfect, and you can see the change on the DAC as the song's bit-rate and sampling rate changes


----------



## PlantsmanTX

jambaj0e said:


> Wait, I thought Qobuz is bit-perfect, and you can see the change on the DAC as the song's bit-rate and sampling rate changes


Yes, it leaves the sample rate _of the source_ unchanged.


----------



## N0sferatu

So how does TIDAL compare to Amazon HD for those who have used both.  I got a free 45 days for TIDAL HiFi (T-Mobile Tuesday promo).  It looks like I have option for Hifi (in green) but master is in orange.  I select it but I'm assuming it's not usable on my DAC (Topping D30).  

I definitely feel the Tidal interface is like Spotify.  It's easier to navigate but how do others feel the sound quality is?  There's no doubt Amazon Music HD smokes Spoitfy on the quality standpoint but how does TIDAL compare?  I've only got about 10 minutes into my trial so not much for me to tell yet.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

I don't understand how different music services can have better or worse sound. If they're serving real 16/44.1 or better the only difference is the mastering.

I like MQA but I have MQA hardware. I haven't done a comparison with how MQA sounds with software decoding vs. hardware.


----------



## jambaj0e

N0sferatu said:


> So how does TIDAL compare to Amazon HD for those who have used both.  I got a free 45 days for TIDAL HiFi (T-Mobile Tuesday promo).  It looks like I have option for Hifi (in green) but master is in orange.  I select it but I'm assuming it's not usable on my DAC (Topping D30).
> 
> I definitely feel the Tidal interface is like Spotify.  It's easier to navigate but how do others feel the sound quality is?  There's no doubt Amazon Music HD smokes Spoitfy on the quality standpoint but how does TIDAL compare?  I've only got about 10 minutes into my trial so not much for me to tell yet.



How strange, I just checked my T-Mobile Tuesday Promo, but I don't see this.


----------



## N0sferatu

gimmeheadroom said:


> I don't understand how different music services can have better or worse sound. If they're serving real 16/44.1 or better the only difference is the mastering.
> 
> I like MQA but I have MQA hardware. I haven't done a comparison with how MQA sounds with software decoding vs. hardware.



Since I mostly jam with Hifiman Arya headphones I can certainly tell a difference when it comes to Spotify vs Tidal/Amazon HD.  My gripe is the Amazon HD GUI I think sucks.  Tidal seems to look like Spotify just with the Amazon HD sound.  I'm not a super critical listener (it's background for me while I work on laptop) but both these services have ruined Spotify for me.  I'm a Prime subscriber so it makes sense financially to use Amazon Music HD but for my limited time on Tidal thus far I'm digging the interface a lot more.  

I have free trials for both of them still active along with YouTube Music (which I used all of maybe 10 minutes).  Amazon expires in just under 3 weeks and I have Tidal until mid July to figure this one out.


----------



## N0sferatu

jambaj0e said:


> How strange, I just checked my T-Mobile Tuesday Promo, but I don't see this.



It was from a few weeks ago.  Last night was the last day to "redeem" it.  I stalled until last night because I still have the Amazon Music HD still active.  It was 3 months free of standard but if you upgrade to Hifi it cut the trial in half to 45 days.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

The Tidal UI has been really bad for a long time. Until I had deezer hifi...which was even worse to the point I cancelled it even though the sound and selection was great. I don't think I have seen anybody equate Tidal's UI with Spotify. Mostly they say the search and suggestions on Spotify smoke Tidal. I don't use that so for me it doesn't matter. What I don't like is they have some incomplete albums missing a song or two. It's really annoying.

Tidal is getting better. UI is more stable lately, features have been introduced non-disruptively unlike in the past. I think it could come down to whether a given service has the music you like and whether the discovery and suggestions are useful. For the price here Tidal hifi is a no-brainer even though the support sucks and the UI has been horrible and buggy at times. I don't Scamazon with a thousand meter pole so I have no opinion on their music service.

I bought some MQA hardware and I am sure some of the MQA albums sound much better than the non-MQA versions. I don't know whether they are using hand-picked masters or if it's MQA itself. But a lot of them are simply fantastic.


----------



## rkw

N0sferatu said:


> So how does TIDAL compare to Amazon HD for those who have used both.  I got a free 45 days for TIDAL HiFi


Amazon HD also has a 30 day free trial. You can compare and decide for yourself.


----------



## N0sferatu

rkw said:


> Amazon HD also has a 30 day free trial. You can compare and decide for yourself.



Did u not read my post?  I'm on multiple free trials (90 day Amazon and 45 day Tidal as we speak).  I'm trying to see what other's opinions were who used both as I just started Tidal this morning.


----------



## a-LeXx

gimmeheadroom said:


> I bought some MQA hardware and I am sure some of the MQA albums sound much better than the non-MQA versions. I don't know whether they are using hand-picked masters or if it's MQA itself. But a lot of them are simply fantastic.



MQA is not using hand-picked masters, MQA per definition of MQA has to use new masters created with MQA filters for MQA. All those MQA masters are ‚special‘...


----------



## a-LeXx (Jun 2, 2020)

N0sferatu said:


> Did u not read my post?  I'm on multiple free trials (90 day Amazon and 45 day Tidal as we speak).  I'm trying to see what other's opinions were who used both as I just started Tidal this morning.



I have both. Sound quality is the same to my ears, apart from some MQA albums, but that‘s the nature of MQA using their own masters, so differences are expected to any other non-MQA version. Apart from that, I like to use Tidal for new music  discovery. I usually just use an ‚endless‘ playback mode, so it will continue playing similar music when an album ends, by this I‘m running into new pearls from time to time. On Amazon, I never manage to find new music, so I‘m only listening to albums that I already know.

Amazon has a habit of screwing albums, they sometime would mix live versions into a studio album, or use different versions from different albums in one album... They seem to store tracks, not albums, and their indexing seems not always to work correctly, so as a result you are sometimes presented with an unlistenable ‚frankenstein‘ album consisting of different performances recorded at different volumes


----------



## N0sferatu

a-LeXx said:


> Amazon has a habit of screwing albums, they sometime would mix live versions into a studio album, or use different versions from different albums in one album... They seem to store tracks, not albums, and their indexing seems not always to work correctly, so as a result you are sometimes presented with an unlistenable ‚frankenstein‘ album consisting of different performances recorded at different volumes



Is the MQA really a deal breaker?  They seem to be as rare as the Ultra-HD tracks on Amazon.  I mostly listen to electronic dance which is mostly 16bit/44.1Khz.  There's a few mainstream things I jam too but I'm not your audiophile that'll listen to elevator snooze music like Diana Krall and the like.  

I agree with Amazon in that I love the sound quality but man it's awful in finding new music, there's a mix of sound quality (some are HD some are Ultra-HD) and the albums aren't really complete.  That's not the case on Spotify.  Is Tidal more like Spotify in that regard?  Like I said I just started Tidal today so I'm just listening to stuff I'm "familiar" with to see what I think of the quality.  So far I set it to software decode the MQA to feed my Topping.  Comparing Amazon "UltraHD" versus HiFi on Tidal I'm not hearing anything significantly different.


----------



## gimmeheadroom (Jun 2, 2020)

N0sferatu said:


> Is the MQA really a deal breaker?  They seem to be as rare as the Ultra-HD tracks on Amazon.  I mostly listen to electronic dance which is mostly 16bit/44.1Khz.  There's a few mainstream things I jam too but I'm not your audiophile that'll listen to elevator snooze music like Diana Krall and the like.
> 
> I agree with Amazon in that I love the sound quality but man it's awful in finding new music, there's a mix of sound quality (some are HD some are Ultra-HD) and the albums aren't really complete.  That's not the case on Spotify.  Is Tidal more like Spotify in that regard?  Like I said I just started Tidal today so I'm just listening to stuff I'm "familiar" with to see what I think of the quality.  So far I set it to software decode the MQA to feed my Topping.  Comparing Amazon "UltraHD" versus HiFi on Tidal I'm not hearing anything significantly different.



There are tons of MQA albums. It's just not easy to find them. Usually I stumble on them when they're added to the artists I have saved.

Check out Elton John's Captain Fantastic album in MQA. To me it sounds exactly like the vinyl album I bought when it first came out and played hundreds if not thousands of times. Especially the track called Writings. Superb. A lot of Van Morrison MQA albums are super but his recordings are generally excellent anyway.

I guess that how good MQA does or doesn't sound comes down to how resolving your system and ears are. But there are millions of non MQA tracks if you don't like MQA.


----------



## a-LeXx

N0sferatu said:


> Is the MQA really a deal breaker?  They seem to be as rare as the Ultra-HD tracks on Amazon.  I mostly listen to electronic dance which is mostly 16bit/44.1Khz.  There's a few mainstream things I jam too but I'm not your audiophile that'll listen to elevator snooze music like Diana Krall and the like.
> 
> I agree with Amazon in that I love the sound quality but man it's awful in finding new music, there's a mix of sound quality (some are HD some are Ultra-HD) and the albums aren't really complete.  That's not the case on Spotify.  Is Tidal more like Spotify in that regard?  Like I said I just started Tidal today so I'm just listening to stuff I'm "familiar" with to see what I think of the quality.  So far I set it to software decode the MQA to feed my Topping.  Comparing Amazon "UltraHD" versus HiFi on Tidal I'm not hearing anything significantly different.



MQA is not a deal breaker for me, especially when you have amazon with tons of UHD content. I didn‘t say MQA sounds better. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn‘t. Often it sounds a bit softer compared to UHD on amazon. It‘s like a bit different flavor, like with headphones. You listen to a song with one set of cans, thinking it sounds amazing. Than you grab different cans with a completely different sound signature, and the song sounds amazing again, just differently...

I‘m actually on amazon, the only reason I went for a promo tidal trial (4 month for 4Euro) is to discover more new music. I was on tidal previously, then switched to amazon...


----------



## N0sferatu (Jun 2, 2020)

gimmeheadroom said:


> There are tons of MQA albums. It's just not easy to find them. Usually I stumble on them when they're added to the artists I have saved.
> 
> Check out Elton John's Captain Fantastic album in MQA. To me it sounds exactly like the vinyl album I bought when it first came out and played hundreds if not thousands of times. Especially the track called Writings. Superb. A lot of Van Morrison MQA albums are super but his recordings are generally excellent anyway.
> 
> I guess that how good MQA does or doesn't sound comes down to how resolving your system and ears are. But there are millions of non MQA tracks if you don't like MQA.



Well here's the nail in the coffin so far for me on Amazon Music HD.  My two receivers (Yamaha and Anthem) in my living room and movie room have Nvidia Shield and for both devices when I pick MQA tracks the receiver shows a 96Khz signal where the others are in 44.1 or 48Khz.  Therefore it successfully plays the high reesolution audio.  Amazon HD doesn't have a working android app to play HD audio.  You can try and sideload the mobile app to the shield but it's glitchy and doesn't look or operate properly with a remote control.  This may be game over for me for Amazon.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

N0sferatu said:


> Well here's the nail in the coffin so far for me on Amazon Music HD.  My two receivers (Yamaha and Anthem) in my living room and movie room have Nvidia Shield and for both devices when I pick MQA tracks the receiver shows a 96Khz signal where the others are in 44.1 or 48Khz.  Therefore it successfully plays the high reesolution audio.  Amazon HD doesn't have a working android app to play HD audio.  You can try and sideload the mobile app to the shield but it's glitchy and doesn't look or operate properly with a remote control.  This may be game over for me for Amazon.



Yeah I read some complaints that the amazon apps are horrible. Tidal is better than average since the desktop app seems to be able to recognize and use whatever DAC drivers you have installed and bypass the windows audio stack. tbh I almost never use the Android app for Tidal.


----------



## a-LeXx

N0sferatu said:


> Well here's the nail in the coffin so far for me on Amazon Music HD.  My two receivers (Yamaha and Anthem) in my living room and movie room have Nvidia Shield and for both devices when I pick MQA tracks the receiver shows a 96Khz signal where the others are in 44.1 or 48Khz.  Therefore it successfully plays the high reesolution audio.  Amazon HD doesn't have a working android app to play HD audio.  You can try and sideload the mobile app to the shield but it's glitchy and doesn't look or operate properly with a remote control.  This may be game over for me for Amazon.



Well, think twice. Theoretically, MQA is optimized to work with specific filters, the type of the filter is hardcoded in the content itself. A proper MQA decoder would get this information and use a corresponding filter. Even if we ignore the second unfold, which to my knowledge wouldn‘t do anything for the sound quality... But your receivers have no knowledge of MQA filters, they use a standard filter specified somewhere (might be user selectable, most probably not). Which is not how MQA decoding is supposed to work, so most probably it will sound not as intended on your receiver. It‘s not only the bit rate, it‘s a combination of a bit rate plus an appropriate digital filter which should make MQA sound like MQA...


----------



## Pro-Jules

MQA seems like PITA to me.


----------



## Pro-Jules

I can't seem to broadcast chromecast out from AM on my iPhone. I don't know why. 

So I have to use Spotify (and would rather not)


----------



## Sandifop

Qobuz. Because.

I find Qobuz has a bit different catalog. (By my searches) Long live the difference.


----------



## N0sferatu

a-LeXx said:


> Well, think twice. Theoretically, MQA is optimized to work with specific filters, the type of the filter is hardcoded in the content itself. A proper MQA decoder would get this information and use a corresponding filter. Even if we ignore the second unfold, which to my knowledge wouldn‘t do anything for the sound quality... But your receivers have no knowledge of MQA filters, they use a standard filter specified somewhere (might be user selectable, most probably not). Which is not how MQA decoding is supposed to work, so most probably it will sound not as intended on your receiver. It‘s not only the bit rate, it‘s a combination of a bit rate plus an appropriate digital filter which should make MQA sound like MQA...



Amazon Music HD doesn't even do lossless on the Android TV app it's lossy so I was limited to using it just on my PC to get the most out of it.  

As for Tidal Master, I listened to Star Wars and Stevie Wonder - Superstition which are "master" files and they sounded great to my ears on my main 2.1 setup (Anthem MRX 720 --> Emotiva XPA-3 --> Monitor Audio Platinum PL200 + Seaton Submerssive HP+).  What would I be "missing?"  I feel like Tidal is well aware the "average consumer" isn't going to know the difference between MQA and non-MQA so I feel it would still work appropriately no?  Even if it's not I can just toggle down to Hifi and still have better quality than the other two services on my other sources other than the PC


----------



## Pro-Jules

I think I saw an eq built into Amazon Music on my Sony 507 (Android) DAP. But not on my iPhone - was I dreaming?


----------



## a-LeXx

Pro-Jules said:


> I think I saw an eq built into Amazon Music on my Sony 507 (Android) DAP. But not on my iPhone - was I dreaming?


I also have an EQ in my android phone Amazon Music app, but not in the iOS app.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Sandifop said:


> Qobuz. Because.
> 
> I find Qobuz has a bit different catalog. (By my searches) Long live the difference.



But unfortunately not available in a lot of the world.


----------



## Sandifop

I’ll like your comment without liking QOBUZ having limited distribution. It was not available here for years and I had to create an account through a vpn.  



gimmeheadroom said:


> But unfortunately not available in a lot of the world.


----------



## Pro-Jules (Jun 3, 2020)

a-LeXx said:


> I also have an EQ in my android phone Amazon Music app, but not in the iOS app.


Thank you! Thought was losing my marbles!


----------



## Pro-Jules

Sandifop said:


> I’ll like your comment without liking QOBUZ having limited distribution. It was not available here for years and I had to create an account through a vpn.


I was a huge fan of Qobuz for many years but it performed terribly on several DAPS. I now prefer the catalog and scrolling lyrics on AM now.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Sandifop said:


> I’ll like your comment without liking QOBUZ having limited distribution. It was not available here for years and I had to create an account through a vpn.



Understood, thank you. I know, it seems dumb how long they took to get to major markets. And why some countries in EU can get Qobuz and others not? It doesn't make any sense...


----------



## TK33 (Jun 3, 2020)

Pro-Jules said:


> I was a huge fan of Qobuz for many years but it performed terribly on several DAPS. I now prefer the catalog and scrolling lyrics on AM now.



I really like Qobuz as well. I downgraded my Amazon HD to just Amazon Unlimited and subscribed to Qobuz.  UAPP integration is great but the Windows app is unreliable (constantly hangs up while playing).  In my opinion, Discovery is worse than Amazon but luckily I have both. I do like the x-ray lyrics feature on Amazon and the Alexa integration.

I recently dusted off my old Logitech Squeezebox Touch and use that for my desktop setup instead of my PC. Has been working well so far.


----------



## ChoColostrum

I just use Tidal on pc since I don't have to use VPN to install. On mobile phones I have no choice but to use spotify, If I don't have that song on my DAP.


----------



## originalsnuffy

a-LeXx said:


> I have both. Sound quality is the same to my ears, apart from some MQA albums, but that‘s the nature of MQA using their own masters, so differences are expected to any other non-MQA version. Apart from that, I like to use Tidal for new music  discovery. I usually just use an ‚endless‘ playback mode, so it will continue playing similar music when an album ends, by this I‘m running into new pearls from time to time. On Amazon, I never manage to find new music, so I‘m only listening to albums that I already know.
> 
> Amazon has a habit of screwing albums, they sometime would mix live versions into a studio album, or use different versions from different albums in one album... They seem to store tracks, not albums, and their indexing seems not always to work correctly, so as a result you are sometimes presented with an unlistenable ‚frankenstein‘ album consisting of different performances recorded at different volumes


I can't hear any difference between Tidal in HD mode vs. Amazon HD but a friend who is a musician thought Tidal sounded better.   For what its worth.

As for the comment on messing with tracks; that is a very real thing.    With a bit of hunting I can often find the correct tracks for albums and create a custom playlist.   But that is a real issue and one I hope Amazon eventually gets correct.


----------



## SeniorBrother

One thing I hate about desktop Amazon HD is the False negative error messages. Out of nowhere i will get error messages for no reason. Especially when I download music. 

One thing i hate about the Mobile App is that I have to restart the app every time I want to go into offline mode or else my sd-card cannot be read.


----------



## jambaj0e

I just got updated on Amazon Music HD to version 7.12.0.2203, which is one more higher than the one that enabled Exclusive Mode. Alas, still no bit-perfect. Anyone has this version? Any idea what's been changed/fixed/added?


----------



## cgb3

SeniorBrother said:


> One thing I hate about desktop Amazon HD is the False negative error messages. Out of nowhere i will get error messages for no reason. Especially when I download music.
> 
> One thing i hate about the Mobile App is that I have to restart the app every time I want to go into offline mode or else my sd-card cannot be read.


I've listened to Amazon HD (desktop) almost nightly since it's inception. I can't recall ever receiving an error message, other than an album no longer being available.

I relate this in hopes you'll be able to find the cause of your problem, whether it's OS or hardware.


----------



## disastermouse

I switched from running both Tidal Premium and Spotify Premium to just using Amazon Music Unlimited HD for a few reasons—it has the best library missing the fewest items and allows me (on desktop) to at least buy CD quality tracks to use with the HD Unlimited, so my playlists aren't missing as much. Another reason is cost. The third is Ultra HD FOR that cost.

But... I'm looking for a DAP that will run it well, and it looks like M12 Pro, M15, and Hiby R6 Pro are the best. I'm also looking for a player that will play all my owned music that's on my Mac in playlists WITH Amazon Music Unlimited HD, as well as any Hi-Fi DSD quality tracks I purchase and download in the future.

Is there a player that lets me have mixed source playlists with a universal EQ? Is there one that supports Tidal or another high-rez streaming service? I'll switch back if I can simply find a player that lets me mix my own local files with hi-rez streaming with a universal EQ.


----------



## acs236

Is there a way to see what is in the Amazon HD and Ultra HD catalog without signing up first?


----------



## a-LeXx

acs236 said:


> Is there a way to see what is in the Amazon HD and Ultra HD catalog without signing up first?



Nope. But almost everything‘s at least HD. In my collection of around 300 Albums less than 10 are standard, means compressed. Ultra HD is around 5% of my albums...


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

Hey, friends put together a quick video for a new series I launched on my YouTube Favorite Content Fridays, first one is on AmazonMusicHD and some new features they have added and some stuff they are working on! I still use Qobuz and love them!!!! AmazonMusicHD is fun too, I hope you enjoy it!


----------



## buonassi

I'm out - cancelled my amazon HD sub.  Clearly they aren't targeting audiophiles (at least informed audiophiles) as their main consumers .  

Exclusive mode means nothing to me.  If they can't integrate bit perfect into OSX or WIN10 they don't get my $$$.


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

buonassi said:


> I'm out - cancelled my amazon HD sub.  Clearly they aren't targeting audiophiles (at least informed audiophiles) as their main consumers .
> 
> Exclusive mode means nothing to me.  If they can't integrate bit perfect into OSX or WIN10 they don't get my $$$.



I agree they must add Bit Perfect and Roon integration to be taken seriously by the majority of us in this hobby!  I think they are working on both.  I love Qobuz for its awesome bit-perfect playback, especially through Audirvana or Roon.


----------



## jambaj0e

MRphotography said:


> I agree they must add Bit Perfect and Roon integration to be taken seriously by the majority of us in this hobby!  I think they are working on both.  I love Qobuz for its awesome bit-perfect playback, especially through Audirvana or Roon.



The problem is unlike Tidal and Qobuz, they don't have a "face", a person who we can see publicly to be in charge, or would go interview on podcasts, at shows, or on websites/publications. We don't know who's in charge, all we see is an anonymous organization. Heck, they don't even have update release notes, so we don't even know what's been improved on each update release.


----------



## exdmd

Yes, Amazon has no real customer service for Amazon Music HD. Their "exclusive mode" seems to be a bone thrown to all those who were asking for it, but it is not really useful since it is not bit perfect. If you follow the Roon forum there does not seem to be any progress made toward integration. Frankly I doubt they are even working on it. Audiophiles aren't their target audience. I just enjoy Qobuz nowadays.


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

exdmd said:


> Yes, Amazon has no real customer service for Amazon Music HD. Their "exclusive mode" seems to be a bone thrown to all those who were asking for it, but it is not really useful since it is not bit perfect. If you follow the Roon forum there does not seem to be any progress made toward integration. Frankly I doubt they are even working on it. Audiophiles aren't their target audience. I just enjoy Qobuz nowadays.


 
They must implement bit perfect playback for sure, I agree.


----------



## Dyl2525

Tidal has still proven to be better sadly although any competition for tidal in my eyes is a good thing


----------



## jambaj0e

Dyl2525 said:


> Tidal has still proven to be better sadly although any competition for tidal in my eyes is a good thing



I've been wanting to jump on the Qobuz train instead of Tidal, especially since I do have a HUGO TT2 dac,so it doesn't handle MQA in the hardware level. Plus, I do like having the higher bit-rate/sample rate with Qobuz and Amazon Music HD.


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

jambaj0e said:


> I've been wanting to jump on the Qobuz train instead of Tidal, especially since I do have a HUGO TT2 dac,so it doesn't handle MQA in the hardware level. Plus, I do like having the higher bit-rate/sample rate with Qobuz and Amazon Music HD.



Qobuz is awesome!  I really enjoy it for all my bit perfect playback.


----------



## originalsnuffy

I am not convinced Tidal is provably better.   When I ran a test is seemed pretty similar to Amazon HD.   I ended up with Amazon because I like the ecosystem.


----------



## Marlowe (Jun 28, 2020)

MRphotography said:


> Qobuz is awesome!  I really enjoy it for all my bit perfect playback.


I used my Qobuz free trial last year and stuck with Tidal because Qobuz had many dealbreaking holes in its catalog. I've heard its improved this a lot, so I was trying to browse and was reminded of another reason I dropped Qubuz: the UI is a hot mess. Now, maybe I am missing something (in which case, I'd appreciate enlightenment) but I find it incredibly difficult to browse because Quobuz tosses the kitchen sink into an artist's library--albums, singles, even covers of the artist's material by other artists with no way that I can see to productively filter it or to even tell which is which. Generally, I only want to see albums. (The only thing I see is an option to sort by relevance or release date, neither of which really work.)

Tidal's UI is no gem, but it's far better than Qubuz and has slowly improved over the years. And as for Amazon Music HD? Qubuz's UI is perfection itself next to Amazon; I just can't deal with it.


----------



## jibberish

Marlowe said:


> I used my Qobuz free trial last year and stuck with Tidal because Qobuz had many dealbreaking holes in its catalog. I've heard its improved this a lot, so I was trying to browse and was reminded of another reason I dropped Qubuz: the UI is a hot mess. Now, maybe I am missing something (in which case, I'd appreciate enlightenment) but I find it incredibly difficult to browse because Quobuz tosses the kitchen sink into an artist's library--albums, singles, even covers of the artist's material by other artists with no way that I can see to productively filter it or to even tell which is which. Generally, I only want to see albums. (The only thing I see is an option to sort by relevance or release date, neither of which really work.)
> 
> Tidal's UI is no gem, but it's far better than Qubuz and has slowly improved over the years. And as for Amazon Music HD? Qubuz's UI is perfection itself next to Amazon; I just can't deal with it.


+1 on Qobuz's filtering/browsing being a mess. I actually started a trial yesterday, and their UI makes it impossible to browse through the albums of someone like Bob Dylan, since it includes every album that's got a Dylan cover on it, lol


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

Marlowe said:


> I used my Qobuz free trial last year and stuck with Tidal because Qobuz had many dealbreaking holes in its catalog. I've heard its improved this a lot, so I was trying to browse and was reminded of another reason I dropped Qubuz: the UI is a hot mess. Now, maybe I am missing something (in which case, I'd appreciate enlightenment) but I find it incredibly difficult to browse because Quobuz tosses the kitchen sink into an artist's library--albums, singles, even covers of the artist's material by other artists with no way that I can see to productively filter it or to even tell which is which. Generally, I only want to see albums. (The only thing I see is an option to sort by relevance or release date, neither of which really work.)
> 
> Tidal's UI is no gem, but it's far better than Qubuz and has slowly improved over the years. And as for Amazon Music HD? Qubuz's UI is perfection itself next to Amazon; I just can't deal with it.



Are you using Qobuz from a mobile device or computer?


----------



## TK33

Marlowe said:


> I used my Qobuz free trial last year and stuck with Tidal because Qobuz had many dealbreaking holes in its catalog. I've heard its improved this a lot, so I was trying to browse and was reminded of another reason I dropped Qubuz: the UI is a hot mess. Now, maybe I am missing something (in which case, I'd appreciate enlightenment) but I find it incredibly difficult to browse because Quobuz tosses the kitchen sink into an artist's library--albums, singles, even covers of the artist's material by other artists with no way that I can see to productively filter it or to even tell which is which. Generally, I only want to see albums. (The only thing I see is an option to sort by relevance or release date, neither of which really work.)
> 
> Tidal's UI is no gem, but it's far better than Qubuz and has slowly improved over the years. And as for Amazon Music HD? Qubuz's UI is perfection itse



Qobuz on Windows is horrible (constantly freezes and hangs up for me) and agree their catalog is a mess. You have to know what you are looking for. It is also horrible for discovery. However, their SQ with exclusive mode and UAPP integration is awesome and why I signed up for an annual Qobuz subscription even before my trial ended (and downgraded to Amazon Unlimited).  I also recently discovered Qobuz works on my Logitech Squeezebox Touch, which allows me to bypass the Windows app and listen on my desktop setup while working at home. 

Also, if you have issues, Qobuz will at least respond to your concerns/emails...unlike Amazon.


----------



## Dyl2525

jambaj0e said:


> I've been wanting to jump on the Qobuz train instead of Tidal, especially since I do have a HUGO TT2 dac,so it doesn't handle MQA in the hardware level. Plus, I do like having the higher bit-rate/sample rate with Qobuz and Amazon Music HD.


Yeah I dont have a mqa dac either, thats why tidal needs competition plus just imo tidal is a little pricey


----------



## Marlowe

MRphotography said:


> Are you using Qobuz from a mobile device or computer?


Windows. I assume mobile is worse (both Tidal and Amazon mobile apps are).


----------



## dharmasteve

I run Tidal M and Amazon HD from a little FiiO M6 and from a LG V30 and a Samsung S9 plus, and to me are fairly simple to use once you get used to them. They both sound great. Today I'm getting a Hiby R5 and already have good balanced cable, an ISN S16 (with a 2.5 to 4.4 adaptor). IMHO Amazon Ultra and Tidal Masters sound of equally good quality. They sound great using Urbanfun iss014, Moodrop Starfield or Blon 03s, upcabled and with Spiral Dot's large. Letting go and listening to the music sounds so really good, as music should be. I have no complaints about either platform or app.... they sound really high quality.


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

Marlowe said:


> Windows. I assume mobile is worse (both Tidal and Amazon mobile apps are).




Try the free trial of Audirvana with Qobuz and then let me know what you think of Qobuz.  That’s what I use for desktop 🖥.


----------



## N0sferatu (Jul 1, 2020)

My understanding with Tidal without MQA DAC you're getting 24bit/96khz max whereas if you have MQA you'll get the 24bit/192Khz correct?  Honestly, I'm not splitting hairs over that.  I appreciate the 24bit for more dynamic range but with human hearing from 20-20k Hz technically 48Khz is sufficient.  I enjoy my audio but I'm not that OCD.  Just using a Hifiman Arya and it's night and day using both Tidal and Amazon Music HD when compared to the compressed stuff like Spotify and YouTube Music even without an MQA DAC.


----------



## Neweymatt

I've been keen to trial Amazon Music HD vs Tidal HiFi, and just after I recently bought something on Amazon, I received an invite to trial Amazon Music Unlimited 90 days for free. Must be all of my recent searches for various audio gear lol.

Will AM 'Unlimited' let me trial the HD stuff? Or is that different again?


----------



## jibberish

Neweymatt said:


> I've been keen to trial Amazon Music HD vs Tidal HiFi, and just after I recently bought something on Amazon, I received an invite to trial Amazon Music Unlimited 90 days for free. Must be all of my recent searches for various audio gear lol.
> 
> Will AM 'Unlimited' let me trial the HD stuff? Or is that different again?


I do not think you'd get access to HD content with that plan, Amazon Unlimited HD is a separate and more expensive plan that offers the HD and "Ultra HD" tracks.


----------



## TK33

Neweymatt said:


> I've been keen to trial Amazon Music HD vs Tidal HiFi, and just after I recently bought something on Amazon, I received an invite to trial Amazon Music Unlimited 90 days for free. Must be all of my recent searches for various audio gear lol.
> 
> Will AM 'Unlimited' let me trial the HD stuff? Or is that different again?



Its separate. HD costs $5/ month on top of whichever plan you have.  Not sure if Amazon will let you add HD to a trial but doesn't hurt to call them up and ask them (worst they can say is no right?).  When HD first came out, I was on an Amazon Unlimited trial and I was able to sign up for the HD trial anyway.  I had too many issues with Amazon Music HD so I downgraded back to Amazon Unlimited a few months after my trial ended and got Qobuz (Amazon actually refunded my annual fee but let me keep my Amazon Unlimited service for my troubles).  Hopefully they have addressed a lot of the issues. Their product may not quite be there yet but their customer service is great if you get the right people.


----------



## Neweymatt

TK33 said:


> Its separate. HD costs $5/ month on top of whichever plan you have.  Not sure if Amazon will let you add HD to a trial but doesn't hurt to call them up and ask them (worst they can say is no right?).  When HD first came out, I was on an Amazon Unlimited trial and I was able to sign up for the HD trial anyway.  I had too many issues with Amazon Music HD so I downgraded back to Amazon Unlimited a few months after my trial ended and got Qobuz (Amazon actually refunded my annual fee but let me keep my Amazon Unlimited service for my troubles).  Hopefully they have addressed a lot of the issues. Their product may not quite be there yet but their customer service is great if you get the right people.


Hmmm, interesting, what was it a about HD that you didn’t like, but was ok with Unlimited? Are they not the same, just HD gives you access to HD versions of the same music?

Qobuz is not yet an option in Australia, so Amazon HD seems the only real alternative to Tidal HiFi.  Not that I don't like Tidal, just keen to test out whatever I can..


----------



## TK33 (Jul 18, 2020)

Neweymatt said:


> Hmmm, interesting, what was it a about HD that you didn’t like, but was ok with Unlimited? Are they not the same, just HD gives you access to HD versions of the same music?
> 
> Qobuz is not yet an option in Australia, so Amazon HD seems the only real alternative to Tidal HiFi.  Not that I don't like Tidal, just keen to test out whatever I can..



Probably posted about it here back then but to sum up a few things that I remember (this was when Amazon HD first launched):

1. Amazon HD cannot do bit perfect (I understand they have since tried to implement some form of exclusive mode but no idea if it works since that was not available then). It could not bypass Android resamlling or Wkndows sound mixer and there was no UAPP, Audirvana or Roon integration to get around it.
2. Anytime I tried to download an offline playlist, songs would be missing and I would have to constantly delete, clear data/cache, uninstall/reinstall on my phone or manually compare and recreate playlists.  After multiple conversations with Amazon support, I was told HD did not play nice with mp3s I purchased from Amazon (never had an issue on non HD version) so I had to delete duplicates of songs in the app to get the Android app to download the correct versions and sometimes I was only able to get mp3 versions.
3. Amazon kept messing with the catalog and a lot of music my toddler would listen to kept changing to instrumental versions. The only way I could get the actual song (and not the sing a long version) to play was to buy the mp3 (since Amazon would play the mp3 version that I owned and not the incorrect HD version, although offline downloads still did not work well).  A 2 year old does not understand this was a new platform and there could be some growing pains...just disappointment and confusion when his favorite songs suddenly stopped working the next day.
4. It appears Amazon was trying to consolidate music by keeping only 1 version of the song. That was not great for just listening to a specific album. I also found I had to keep fixing my playlists because music became unavailable or was changing.
5. Amazon had a habit of mixing Ultra HD and HD tracks in a single album which was very annoying (don't know if this has been resolved).
6. I have HEOS (receiver and some speakers) and Amazon is limited to only their playlists (not your own playlists or library).  With Qobuz, I have many options for multi room music including BubbleUPnP and my Logitech Squeezebox Touch (LMS works with Qobuz).  I did notice BluOS has Amazon integration so whenever I pick up a Node 2i I may give it a try.

Between all of the above and the resulting messaging with Amazon support at least once every other week, using Amazon HD became a chore and I found listening to music became less enjoyable and more like work. This just became increasingly aggravating over time.  I hope they have fixed these issues and may consider giving it another shot when my annual Qobiz subscription is up (which is why I still follow this thread). For now, the only reason I am keeping Amazon Unlimited is because they have a great library, especially for my toddler (Qobuz does not). Qobuz has it's own issues but it is fantastic with UAPP.  I am doing a trial of Roon now and will try a Node 2I next. For SQ, I am happy with Qobuz and hope Qobuz can continue to grow and expand.


----------



## Neweymatt

TK33 said:


> Probably posted about it here back then but to sum up a few things that I remember (this was when Amazon HD first launched):
> 
> 1. Amazon HD cannot do bit perfect (I understand they have since tried to implement some form of exclusive mode but no idea if it works since that was not available then). It could not bypass Android resamlling or Wkndows sound mixer and there was no UAPP, Audirvana or Roon integration to get around it.
> 2. Anytime I tried to download an offline playlist, songs would be missing and I would have to constantly delete, clear data/cache, uninstall/reinstall on my phone or manually compare and recreate playlists.  After multiple conversations with Amazon support, I was told HD did not play nice with mp3s I purchased from Amazon (never had an issue on non HD version) so I had to delete duplicates of songs in the app to get the Android app to download the correct versions and sometimes I was only able to get mp3 versions.
> ...


Yeah, that all sounds very annoying, especially the random swapping of different versions of tracks. And if it’s a struggle to get the HD versions playing on your gear then what’s the point. I wouldn’t have any MP3 versions of anything, so I should be able to avoid that madness at least.

Appreciate your feedback, can’t hurt for me to give it a go myself, now I know what to look out for


----------



## Andrew_WOT

TK33 said:


> Probably posted about it here back then but to sum up a few things that I remember (this was when Amazon HD first launched):
> 
> 1. Amazon HD cannot do bit perfect (I understand they have since tried to implement some form of exclusive mode but no idea if it works since that was not available then). It could not bypass Android resamlling or Wkndows sound mixer and there was no UAPP, Audirvana or Roon integration to get around it.
> 2. Anytime I tried to download an offline playlist, songs would be missing and I would have to constantly delete, clear data/cache, uninstall/reinstall on my phone or manually compare and recreate playlists.  After multiple conversations with Amazon support, I was told HD did not play nice with mp3s I purchased from Amazon (never had an issue on non HD version) so I had to delete duplicates of songs in the app to get the Android app to download the correct versions and sometimes I was only able to get mp3 versions.
> ...


How one person can run into so many issues, just crazy?
My ride was relatively bump free, and experience keeps steadily improving, the only thing I am really missing is bit-perfect output. 
Love the music selection, seems like they have anything you could think of, suggestions and recommended artists and albums are getting better, exclusive mode works really well. 
Has all the potential to become streaming industry leader.


----------



## dharmasteve (Jul 30, 2020)

Very annoying thing happening with my Hiby R5. With Amazon HD the play/pause button on the right side of the unit, the middle button between forwards and backwards, has stopped working when the lockscreen is on. So now I cannot pause the music without opening Amazon, looking at the screen and pressing the pause button. Lockscreen settings are properly on....so I don't quite know why the button doesn't respond as it used to. On Tidal they all work perfectly, even track forward and track backward. This is quite a nuisance as I cannot stop/start a track without opening Amazon HD and visually pressing the pause on screen. Bloody...nuisance. I may well have to cancel Amazon and use Tidal after the Tidal trial is up. Is this a problem with the latest Amazon HD software....anyone?


----------



## jambaj0e

How many of you guys find any improvements going to Exclusive Mode, and to what degree?

I feel that I barely notice any, if any, improvement, which I suspect it's because it's still getting upsampled via Windows Mixer


----------



## blse59

Tidal is way better. It feels like it is actually run by people who are audiophiles or who know audio. The exclusive mode in Tidal actually does something. I notice the hi-res light on my dac/amp lighting up when I play hi-res files which is what it's supposed to do. Amazon HD has a check box for exclusive mode but it doesn't seem to do anything on my system. And when I exit the software and start it up again, the box is unchecked.


----------



## Eric M

jambaj0e said:


> How many of you guys find any improvements going to Exclusive Mode, and to what degree?
> 
> I feel that I barely notice any, if any, improvement, which I suspect it's because it's still getting upsampled via Windows Mixer


I suspect the same. The Amazon app isn't doing WASAPI afaik, so if your current Windows output sample rate doesn't match the track's sample rate, Windows is going to resample it, even in exclusive mode, to the best of my knowledge.


----------



## SoundBytes

Not sure if anyone noticed for some reason AK SP1000 is read by Amazon APK displaying capability of only 24/48kHZ even when playing a track of 24/192kHZ.  I spent like over an hour chatting with Amazon support and no solution.  Perhaps my SP1000 it is actually playing the higher quality but the Amazon app is reporting capability of my device at only 24/48kHZ.  Anyone run into this?


----------



## jambaj0e

By the way, has anyone compared how Amazon Music HD sound when streaming from the laptop/computer to a DAC vs Blusound to a DAC? I'm curious to see if I want to get that BlueSode Node 2i streamer into my Chord Hugo TT2 instead of from my computer.


----------



## rlw6534 (Jul 31, 2020)

SoundBytes said:


> Not sure if anyone noticed for some reason AK SP1000 is read by Amazon APK displaying capability of only 24/48kHZ even when playing a track of 24/192kHZ.  I spent like over an hour chatting with Amazon support and no solution.  Perhaps my SP1000 it is actually playing the higher quality but the Amazon app is reporting capability of my device at only 24/48kHZ.  Anyone run into this?




On my SR15, if I play a local file from my SD that is 24/192 prior to starting Amazon Music, I get 24/192 as the "device capability" and the tracks indicate that they are playing at the higher rates.  Maybe worth a try.


----------



## SoundBytes

rlw6534 said:


> On my SR15, if I play a local file from my SD that is 24/192 prior to starting Amazon Music, I get 24/192 as the "device capability" and the tracks indicate that they are playing at the higher rates.  Maybe worth a try.


Dude, thanks that did it!  Wow... what the H.... lol... seriously, you have to start a 24/192kHZ song from your Library THEN launch Amazon Music HD then play the 24/192kHZ song you wanted to so Amazon registers your device as able to play the highest quality song.  From there you can play everything else fine.  On initial startup you have to do this or it will default to 24/48kHZ for the entire Amazon library.


----------



## rlw6534

SoundBytes said:


> Dude, thanks that did it!  Wow... what the H.... lol... seriously, you have to start a 24/192kHZ song from your Library THEN launch Amazon Music HD then play the 24/192kHZ song you wanted to so Amazon registers your device as able to play the highest quality song.  From there you can play everything else fine.  On initial startup you have to do this or it will default to 24/48kHZ for the entire Amazon library.




I figured it out by chance when I had started Amazon Music and my SR15 was showing 24/192 rather than 24/48 which was what it usually indicated.  After a couple of trial and error attempts to recreate, I hit on the sequence.  Glad to help!


----------



## lgcubana

FYI, Amazon has bumped the 30 day trial of Amazon Music HD back to 90 days.  ***If you choose to continue with the service (after the trial period), you can go into your music settings and change to the annual payment, to save the cost of another 2 months.




**link*


----------



## gimmeheadroom

jambaj0e said:


> By the way, has anyone compared how Amazon Music HD sound when streaming from the laptop/computer to a DAC vs Blusound to a DAC? I'm curious to see if I want to get that BlueSode Node 2i streamer into my Chord Hugo TT2 instead of from my computer.



What you get with the node 2i is pretty nice software that makes it easier to manage multiple streaming subscriptions from one app rather than multiple desktop apps on a tablet or PC. You can control the node 2i from a tablet, pc, or phone though. And the other thing is the MQA support which was the reason I selected it instead of something else.

The internal DAC is good. It is not as good as a Hugo...

But, I believe the coax out is limited to 24/96 so if you use MQA passthrough you will need a DAC that can do full unfold. I realize this is amazon HD thread not Tidal, but the node 2i is kinda superb for streaming Tidal on a budget.


----------



## jambaj0e

gimmeheadroom said:


> What you get with the node 2i is pretty nice software that makes it easier to manage multiple streaming subscriptions from one app rather than multiple desktop apps on a tablet or PC. You can control the node 2i from a tablet, pc, or phone though. And the other thing is the MQA support which was the reason I selected it instead of something else.
> 
> The internal DAC is good. It is not as good as a Hugo...
> 
> But, I believe the coax out is limited to 24/96 so if you use MQA passthrough you will need a DAC that can do full unfold. I realize this is amazon HD thread not Tidal, but the node 2i is kinda superb for streaming Tidal on a budget.



What's the limit for Amazon Music HD?


----------



## gimmeheadroom

jambaj0e said:


> What's the limit for Amazon Music HD?



Sorry, I didn't understand what you are asking.


----------



## jambaj0e

gimmeheadroom said:


> Sorry, I didn't understand what you are asking.



I meant


gimmeheadroom said:


> Sorry, I didn't understand what you are asking.




The sample and bit-rate limitation when using Amazon HD through Coax to an external DAC. Is it also 24/96 like Tidal?


----------



## gimmeheadroom

jambaj0e said:


> I meant
> 
> 
> 
> The sample and bit-rate limitation when using Amazon HD through Coax to an external DAC. Is it also 24/96 like Tidal?



Coax is good for 24/192 as far as I know. Tidal is not limited to 24/96, lots of confusion


----------



## zotjen

I just signed up for the Amazon Music HD trial (which is back down to 30 days) and I'll be doing a lot of comparisons to Spotify premium. Aside from Amazon being louder, my initial impression is that there is something that sounds a little different about it but I don't know if it is necessarily better. I'll try to report back my findings once I've had more time to compare.


----------



## lilbukka

All of these hi res services need to steal from apple and sererate albums,songs,and eps. Add dates in chronological order. Amazon HD has the best stations feature and qobuz has none. Amazon HD adds lyrics which I love. But qobuz is more elegant and includes liner notes big plus. I haven’t mentioned tidal much because of the price difference. they might have a larger catalog of more popular stuff but I believe qobuz could be just as vast in no time. I’d prefer not to select Amazon HD because I think they’re an evil company. They’re not good for small businesses and I d think they sound as good as qobuz or tidal.


----------



## N0sferatu

Aa for price on Tidal since you mentioned it there's ways to pay less.  I am in the USA and have a USA account and after all taxes and whatnot paying a year at a time I'm at $9.50/mo and that's for the HiFi/Master tier.


----------



## lilbukka

N0sferatu said:


> Aa for price on Tidal since you mentioned it there's ways to pay less.  I am in the USA and have a USA account and after all taxes and whatnot paying a year at a time I'm at $9.50/mo and that's for the HiFi/Master tier.


What are some of those ways?


----------



## rlw6534 (Sep 11, 2020)

lilbukka said:


> What are some of those ways?



Best Buy Tidal is $99/year for HIFI/Master tier...

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/brands/tidal/pcmcat1588098319072.c?id=pcmcat1588098319072


----------



## ThePeave

rlw6534 said:


> Best Buy Tidal is $99/year for HIFI/Master tier...
> 
> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/brands/tidal/pcmcat1588098319072.c?id=pcmcat1588098319072




And I think it’s been stated before, but the  yearly Tidal subscription through Best Buy works for current Tidal subscribers as well without the need to create a new account with a new email. You have to cancel the current Tidal subscription and wait for it to expire, then purchase the annual membership from BestBuy to reactivate the expired account. I can confirm this method keeps all saved playlists and saved artists intact.


----------



## rlw6534

ThePeave said:


> And I think it’s been stated before, but the  yearly Tidal subscription through Best Buy works for current Tidal subscribers as well without the need to create a new account with a new email. You have to cancel the current Tidal subscription and wait for it to expire, then purchase the annual membership from BestBuy to reactivate the expired account. I can confirm this method keeps all saved playlists and saved artists intact.



Agreed, that's exactly what I did...  Cancelled on July 31 and added back on August 1 with no issues, same account.


----------



## Marlowe

rlw6534 said:


> Best Buy Tidal is $99/year for HIFI/Master tier...
> 
> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/brands/tidal/pcmcat1588098319072.c?id=pcmcat1588098319072


I wasn't aware of this and may try it. But the link quotes $119/year for HiFi, unless there's a additional available discount. That's still half of the $20/month I currently pay. TBH, I don't understand anyone griping about Tidal's price--even at $20 for unlimited access to high quality recordings of roughly 95% of the music I want to hear, Tidal is a bargain IMO. (And it's not because I have money to burn--I'm retired on a fixed income, the vast majority of which is just Social Security.)


----------



## rlw6534

Marlowe said:


> I wasn't aware of this and may try it. But the link quotes $119/year for HiFi, unless there's a additional available discount. That's still half of the $20/month I currently pay. TBH, I don't understand anyone griping about Tidal's price--even at $20 for unlimited access to high quality recordings of roughly 95% of the music I want to hear, Tidal is a bargain IMO. (And it's not because I have money to burn--I'm retired on a fixed income, the vast majority of which is just Social Security.)



If you create a free Best Buy account (or log in) it should drop to $99/year.


----------



## lilbukka

rlw6534 said:


> Best Buy Tidal is $99/year for HIFI/Master tier...
> 
> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/brands/tidal/pcmcat1588098319072.c?id=pcmcat1588098319072


Thanks!


rlw6534 said:


> Agreed, that's exactly what I did...  Cancelled on July 31 and added back on August 1 with no issues, same account.


----------



## lilbukka

That’s exactly correct. When I signed into my best buy account it dropped to $99


----------



## N0sferatu

Others kinda commented already...

Yes it's via Best Buy
Yes have an account it drops to $99.  Tax and fees and junk were awful for me ($15 worth) but still came out to $9,50/mo (~$114).


----------



## lgcubana

Heads up on Tidal:

Last time that I subscribed was over 2 years ago. The Interface wasn't (at the time) to my liking, but I figured I'd give it another shot.  So I signed up for a 30 day trial of HiFi.  Tidal charged my PP acct. the monthly $19.99.

When I emailed their customer support, I got an automatic reply, telling me to check their FAQ page.  I've opened a dispute with PP.


----------



## 529128

Does anyone know anything about Amazon's rollout plan? I live in Denmark and there's no news about A HD yet it seems...


----------



## domiji

SoundBytes said:


> Not sure if anyone noticed for some reason AK SP1000 is read by Amazon APK displaying capability of only 24/48kHZ even when playing a track of 24/192kHZ.  I spent like over an hour chatting with Amazon support and no solution.  Perhaps my SP1000 it is actually playing the higher quality but the Amazon app is reporting capability of my device at only 24/48kHZ.  Anyone run into this?



I have the same problem. My sony 507 is only limited to 24 bit 48 khz.

The little trick doesn't work for me 

Does anyone may have another advice for me?

Thanks


----------



## rlw6534

domiji said:


> I have the same problem. My sony 507 is only limited to 24 bit 48 khz.
> 
> The little trick doesn't work for me
> 
> ...



It works fine on my 507, no tricks needed.  Are you sure you have high-res streaming turned on (settings, sound, high-res streaming)?


----------



## rkw

lgcubana said:


> Heads up on Tidal:
> 
> Last time that I subscribed was over 2 years ago. The Interface wasn't (at the time) to my liking, but I figured I'd give it another shot.  So I signed up for a 30 day trial of HiFi.  Tidal charged my PP acct. the monthly $19.99.
> 
> When I emailed their customer support, I got an automatic reply, telling me to check their FAQ page.  I've opened a dispute with PP.


Were you trying to use the same e-mail account as last time? I suspect the problem is that they only allow free trials for brand new accounts.


----------



## domiji

rlw6534 said:


> It works fine on my 507, no tricks needed.  Are you sure you have high-res streaming turned on (settings, sound, high-res streaming)?





rlw6534 said:


> It works fine on my 507, no tricks needed.  Are you sure you have high-res streaming turned on (settings, sound, high-res streaming)?



HiRes Streaming turned on but no chance to get it work. Switched on and off many times and reinstall the Amazon App but no way.


----------



## rlw6534

domiji said:


> HiRes Streaming turned on but no chance to get it work. Switched on and off many times and reinstall the Amazon App but no way.



I just updated Amazon Music from the Play Store (16.17.3) and now I have the same issue (24/48 Device Capability).   It was working perfectly yesterday.  If I roll back to version 16.16.1 it starts working again...   I guess Amazon screwed something with the update.


----------



## davidmolliere

Hmm that might explain my 24/48 issue then... thanks for the heads up!


----------



## domiji

rlw6534 said:


> I just updated Amazon Music from the Play Store (16.17.3) and now I have the same issue (24/48 Device Capability).   It was working perfectly yesterday.  If I roll back to version 16.16.1 it starts working again...   I guess Amazon screwed something with the update.



Thanks for the update 🤘🏻
Is it possible to install old versions of the app over the app store?


----------



## rlw6534

domiji said:


> Thanks for the update 🤘🏻
> Is it possible to install old versions of the app over the app store?



No.  I'm pretty sure you have to delete the app to go back to an old version (unlike updates).   I got 16.16.1 from apkpure.  Version 16.17.1 did not work for me above 24/48 either.


----------



## domiji

Thanks for your help. It think it is a problem of the new version. It sounds great anyway but just for the good feeling and want 24/192   

Has anyone compared Amazon Music HD with Tidal? I have both at the moment but Tidal sounds much flatter and totally lacks dynamics on my zx507.

Does anyone have some experience with both services?


----------



## dharmasteve

domiji said:


> Thanks for your help. It think it is a problem of the new version. It sounds great anyway but just for the good feeling and want 24/192
> 
> Has anyone compared Amazon Music HD with Tidal? I have both at the moment but Tidal sounds much flatter and totally lacks dynamics on my zx507.
> 
> Does anyone have some experience with both services?


I had both on my HiBy R5 for a couple of months. At their best quality I couln't hear an iota of difference between Tidal Masters or Amazon Ultra. I've kept Amazon because it is discounted in the UK with Prime but Tidal is not.


----------



## audiobomber

HD now available in Canada.
https://www.amazon.ca/music/unlimit...&pd_rd_r=618f737d-3ab7-4e43-a645-ffc4d979b421

I did a search in this thread for "Canada" and didn't see whether anyone had made the announcement.


----------



## KutuzovGambit (Sep 21, 2020)

Amazon's UI is a hot mess (they REALLY need to separate albums, EPs/singles, and compilations on artist pages, and allow sorting by release date). But the main issue that that their Windows WASAPI exclusive mode is, as far as I can tell, still broken, which makes hi-res pretty pointless if it's going to be mangled by the Windows mixer anyway (Deezer has the same issue).

On the other hand, Amazon's catalog seems to be more comprehensive than Tidal and definitely more comprehensive than Qobuz. Qobuz is out for me because it's missing too much music, Tidal is a buggy mess on iOS but it's still tempting with the Best Buy pricing, even though I have no interest in MQA and would only be using it for FLAC. It's missing a handful of albums from my Spotify library, but it may be the best of a bad set of options. Of course, knowing my luck, I'll buy a year subscription via Best Buy and then they'll announce they're going out of business a month later.

Like so many people, I just wish Spotify would offer lossless. I'm 99% sure Apple Music will never go lossless, since they seem bent on removing all physical ports on the 2021 iPhones and therefore their music streaming on their premier device will be limited to 256kb AAC via Bluetooth.


----------



## N0sferatu

KutuzovGambit said:


> Amazon's UI is a hot mess (they REALLY need to separate albums, EPs/singles, and compilations on artist pages, and allow sorting by release date). But the main issue that that their Windows WASAPI exclusive mode is, as far as I can tell, still broken, which makes hi-res pretty pointless if it's going to be mangled by the Windows mixer anyway (Deezer has the same issue).
> 
> On the other hand, Amazon's catalog seems to be more comprehensive than Tidal and definitely more comprehensive than Qobuz. Qobuz is out for me because it's missing too much music, Tidal is a buggy mess on iOS but it's still tempting with the Best Buy pricing, even though I have no interest in MQA and would only be using it for FLAC. It's missing a handful of albums from my Spotify library, but it may be the best of a bad set of options. Of course, knowing my luck, I'll buy a year subscription via Best Buy and then they'll announce they're going out of business a month later.
> 
> Like so many people, I just wish Spotify would offer lossless. I'm 99% sure Apple Music will never go lossless, since they seem bent on removing all physical ports on the 2021 iPhones and therefore their music streaming on their premier device will be limited to 256kb AAC via Bluetooth.



Your summary mirrored mine.  

Spotify is the best for music finding and catalog.   
Amazon Music HD I enjoyed my time with it but crappy Windows and Android app.  
Qobuz never interested me given the library lacking.
Tidal looks like Spotify in terms of UI and the sound quality is SIGNIFICANTLY better.  I don't use an MQA DAC so it's either FLAC CD quality (Hifi) which is what most tracks are anyways or 24bit/88Khz or 24kbit/96Khz with MASTER tracks.  That's more than plenty.  Anything beyond (24bit/192khz) is overkill and ridiculous in my opinion.  

Cycling back to Tidal for less than $10/mo it fit the deal for me.  I'd love to use Amazon Music HD (as I have a Prime account) but man that UI is so piss poor it kills me.


----------



## audiobomber (Sep 22, 2020)

I have a few grievances with Amazon HD that will most likely be deal killers after the free trial period.

- I agree with others, the app is terrible; limited in capability and clumsy
- Even Ultra HD content does not sound as good as zero compression FLAC at 16/44 from my NAS, through the same playback chain
- Amazon canned playlists are not as interesting or comprehensive as Google Play Music and YouTube Music offer, and I sorely miss the music videos that the other two provide.
- Amazon Music is not compatible with BubbleSoft UPnP, so I can't stream Amazon HD to any of my better renderers (exaSound Playpoint, SOtM sMS-200, Raspberry Pi 3B+). I am limited to Chromecast Audio, which is not bad when connected via Toslink to a good DAC, but definitely not first rank. The advantage of HD is lost.


----------



## N0sferatu

Oh meant to add... using Android TV (via NVIDIA Shield 2019 Pro) the Amazon app streams lossy without any option for lossless.  Tidal plays master at 24bit/88hz or 24bit/96khz.  Another Amazon HD grievance.


----------



## audiobomber (Sep 22, 2020)

audiobomber said:


> I am limited to Chromecast Audio, which is not bad when connected via Toslink to a good DAC, but definitely not first rank. The advantage of HD is lost.


It appears that Amazon HD is lossy via Chromecast Audio. So the only way to get HD is via Windows laptop in my headphone system. My other three systems, all wi-fi, are not compatible with Amazon HD.


----------



## John Blackshear

Anybody know why the dropped the Ultra HD bit/khz rate in the latest updates?


----------



## Lu88

John Blackshear said:


> Anybody know why the dropped the Ultra HD bit/khz rate in the latest updates?



I think you are talking about the Android app. It seems a software bug. I'm contacting Amazon support (I've provided them debug logs.) and waiting for the reply.

Delete the latest version and download v16.16.1 to get 24bit/192kHz playback.


----------



## John Blackshear

Lu88 said:


> I think you are talking about the Android app. It seems a software bug. I'm contacting Amazon support (I've provided them debug logs.) and waiting for the reply.
> 
> Delete the latest version and download v16.16.1 to get 24bit/192kHz playback.


Got it. Thanks!


----------



## Tjhfirefighter

Lu88 said:


> I think you are talking about the Android app. It seems a software bug. I'm contacting Amazon support (I've provided them debug logs.) and waiting for the reply.
> 
> Delete the latest version and download v16.16.1 to get 24bit/192kHz playback.


Thanks a lot for that. Downloaded old version as suggested and solved all the problems. Sent message to Amazon and got cookie cutter email without suggestions to fix that were useless as it is a programing problem. Both android 7.1 and 8.1 daps had circle of death problems; amazon would only register dacs as 24/48, and when it did play songs would either not play, play without sound, or cause a jitter that didn’t stop unless app was closed. It is my go to app for streaming as I don’t have a Hires library and I love the sound quality, in my opinion, but there programming sucks.


----------



## KutuzovGambit

Tjhfirefighter said:


> Thanks a lot for that. Downloaded old version as suggested and solved all the problems. Sent message to Amazon and got cookie cutter email without suggestions to fix that were useless as it is a programing problem. Both android 7.1 and 8.1 daps had circle of death problems; amazon would only register dacs as 24/48, and when it did play songs would either not play, play without sound, or cause a jitter that didn’t stop unless app was closed. It is my go to app for streaming as I don’t have a Hires library and I love the sound quality, in my opinion, but there programming sucks.


It boggles my mind that they have over 50 million subscribers with apps that are such junk.


----------



## stimuz

KutuzovGambit said:


> It boggles my mind that they have over 50 million subscribers with apps that are such junk.



The my soundtrack thing they have is actually pretty neat for narrowing down genres you like, been using it almost exclusively lately. That said, when I first tried HD when it first came out I couldn't tell a difference, could have been bad windows settings. I tried it again yesterday and I actually do hear a difference. So either my settings were wrong, or they are gimping standard amazon music unlimited to sell this.


----------



## grokit

lilbukka said:


> That’s exactly correct. When I signed into my best buy account it dropped to $99


It renews at $119 though. Still a great deal, I just re-joined on impulse.


----------



## jivex5k

It's too bad Spotify doesn't offer lossless, I'm stuck with Amazon HD because TIDAL doesn't let you download for offline playback. When I'm on my work VPN it eats up too much bandwidth and suffers.

As soon as Spotify decides it's worth offering HD I'm jumping ship.


----------



## Marlowe

jivex5k said:


> TIDAL doesn't let you download for offline playback.


Sure it does. I do it all the time.


----------



## rkw

Marlowe said:


> Sure it does. I do it all the time.


He was referring to the TIDAL desktop Win/Mac apps, which do not have offline playback (the mobile apps do).


----------



## Marlowe

rkw said:


> He was referring to the TIDAL desktop Win/Mac apps, which do not have offline playback (the mobile apps do).


Ahh, OK. Sorry then. My downloads are on my phone for use while I walk since the cellular signal is sometimes good, sometimes bad (in the exact same spot). Since my PC is hard wired to my router via ethernet and the signal is always great, it's never even occurred to me to DL anything on the Windows app.


----------



## jivex5k

Yeah, they have strangely omitted the desktop app from allowing offline play. Maybe I should start buying directly from artists and just stick it on my media server.


----------



## Lu88

Amazon Music App v16.18.0 has been released. I've just confirmed that I can enjoy 24bit/192kHz playback on my Android DAP (DX220Max) again!


----------



## audiobomber

Lu88 said:


> Amazon Music App v16.18.0 has been released. I've just confirmed that I can enjoy 24bit/192kHz playback on my Android DAP (DX220Max) again!


I'm getting a warning that this file could cause harm.


----------



## jivex5k

Hm, just realized my interface was set at 96kHz, fixed now. I can't find very much music that's been encoded at 192 on Amazon though, seems to be mostly 48, with some 96.


----------



## dharmasteve

jivex5k said:


> Hm, just realized my interface was set at 96kHz, fixed now. I can't find very much music that's been encoded at 192 on Amazon though, seems to be mostly 48, with some 96.


On my HiBy R5 nearly all the music shows as 192. I have no idea if that is accurate or not, but it sounds pretty good.


----------



## jivex5k

dharmasteve said:


> On my HiBy R5 nearly all the music shows as 192. I have no idea if that is accurate or not, but it sounds pretty good.


Hmm, could you name a song or two that you have at 192? Maybe there's a setting I'm missing that's maxing it out at 96.


----------



## dharmasteve

jivex5k said:


> Hmm, could you name a song or two that you have at 192? Maybe there's a setting I'm missing that's maxing it out at 96.




Everything shows 192. Just arbitrarily...Whisky in The Jar, Thin Lizzy...shows in Amazon as HD and plays at 192. The Trip to Pirates Cove, Tom Petty, shows as Ultra HD, and plays at 192.


----------



## jivex5k (Oct 1, 2020)

dharmasteve said:


> Everything shows 192. Just arbitrarily...Whisky in The Jar, Thin Lizzy...shows in Amazon as HD and plays at 192. The Trip to Pirates Cove, Tom Petty, shows as Ultra HD, and plays at 192.


Thanks 

I think it's just showing you device capability then. Or maybe the android app uses a different source file.

When I click the ultra HD badge on Pirates Cove it shows it recorded at 48khz. I've seen most at that value, some at 96, but none at 192.


----------



## dharmasteve (Oct 1, 2020)

jivex5k said:


> Thanks
> 
> I think it's just showing you device capability then. Or maybe the android app uses a different source file.
> 
> When I click the ultra HD badge on Pirates Cove it shows it recorded at 48khz. I've seen most at that value, some at 96, but none at 192.


I have seen a few songs show 48 but they don't tend to be HD or Ultra HD. I don't have full understanding, but 192 does show in the horizontal bar at the top but I have seen other numbers.
Others will understand how the Android version works better than me.


----------



## dharmasteve

dharmasteve said:


> I have seen a few songs show 48 but they don't tend to be HD or Ultra HD. I don't have full understanding, but 192 does show in the horizontal bar at the top but I have seen other numbers.
> Others will understand how the Android version works better than me.


Yes seen it. Pressing the HD or Ultra HD button shows the recording and playing rate.


----------



## kgb3366

Tried all afternoon to get the app playing on my iPhone XR , Lets me log in then kicks me out again , works fine on the MacBook Pro with desk top app ?!  From what I've seen so far on the MacBook it looks and sounds great , Coming from a Tidal hifi subscriber ...


----------



## TK33

dharmasteve said:


> Everything shows 192. Just arbitrarily...Whisky in The Jar, Thin Lizzy...shows in Amazon as HD and plays at 192. The Trip to Pirates Cove, Tom Petty, shows as Ultra HD, and plays at 192.



Sounds like you are just seeing device capability.  i don't have Amazon HD anymore but was hoping this was one of the issues they fixed since my Qobuz subscription is coming up for renewal soon.  When I had Amazon Music HD, it only showed device capability and what the sample rate of the recording was but not the actual sample rate it was playing at (at least within the Amazon app).  You basically need a DAC that can show you the actual sample rate to see if you are getting the correct sample rate.


----------



## TK33

jivex5k said:


> Thanks
> 
> I think it's just showing you device capability then. Or maybe the android app uses a different source file.
> 
> When I click the ultra HD badge on Pirates Cove it shows it recorded at 48khz. I've seen most at that value, some at 96, but none at 192.



If I recall correctly, I think some of the Norah Jones stuff is available at 192.


----------



## dharmasteve

TK33 said:


> Sounds like you are just seeing device capability.  i don't have Amazon HD anymore but was hoping this was one of the issues they fixed since my Qobuz subscription is coming up for renewal soon.  When I had Amazon Music HD, it only showed device capability and what the sample rate of the recording was but not the actual sample rate it was playing at (at least within the Amazon app).  You basically need a DAC that can show you the actual sample rate to see if you are getting the correct sample rate.


Yes you are right. In defence of Amazon and Tidal, I have used both and they both sound great and it's the enjoyment factor that makes music such a special thing.


----------



## jivex5k

TK33 said:


> Sounds like you are just seeing device capability.  i don't have Amazon HD anymore but was hoping this was one of the issues they fixed since my Qobuz subscription is coming up for renewal soon.  When I had Amazon Music HD, it only showed device capability and what the sample rate of the recording was but not the actual sample rate it was playing at (at least within the Amazon app).  You basically need a DAC that can show you the actual sample rate to see if you are getting the correct sample rate.


Is there any benefit to playing something recorded at 96khz at 192khz? I know the actual playback is 192, I can see it in the windows settings for my interface. I just figured there would be no benefit if the audio was recorded at a lower sample rate.

Common sense tells me, no, nothing can improve audio quality beyond the original recording's quality, unless you are mastering it with audio processing tools.


----------



## TK33

jivex5k said:


> Is there any benefit to playing something recorded at 96khz at 192khz? I know the actual playback is 192, I can see it in the windows settings for my interface. I just figured there would be no benefit if the audio was recorded at a lower sample rate.
> 
> Common sense tells me, no, nothing can improve audio quality beyond the original recording's quality, unless you are mastering it with audio processing tools.



If you are looking at the Windows sound settings, Windows will allow you to choose the sample rate your DAC will play at but everything will be resampled to the sample rate you select. To me, it definitely sounded different.  Whether upsampling sounds the same, better or worse to you is something only you can decide for yourself after you have tried changing the settings.  To bypass the Windows resampling, you would need to manually set the sample rate in Windows to match the track you are listening to (too much work for me personally, unless you are listening to an album with the same sample rates for every track) or need WASAPI Exclusive Mode support which I understand Amazon has not implemented. With WASAPI exclusive mode, my DAC will show I am getting 44.1 when I play a file that is 44.1 and 192 when I play something that is 192, without having to mess around with Windows settings.


----------



## TK33

dharmasteve said:


> Yes you are right. In defence of Amazon and Tidal, I have used both and they both sound great and it's the enjoyment factor that makes music such a special thing.



Agreed regarding enjoyment factor.  Unfortunately, I canceled because I had a ton of issues with Amazon Music HD and there was more aggravation than enjoyment factor.  I previously posted them here so I wont get into it.  I continue to follow this thread because I am hoping Amazon Music HD resolves some of their issues at which point I will give them another shot.  For now, I continue to maintain my playlists in both Qobuz and Amazon Unlimited hoping that day will come soon.


----------



## Lu88

audiobomber said:


> I'm getting a warning that this file could cause harm.



When you install any apk files directly, you will see the same warning message.
Install it via APKPure app, then you don't have the warning. If you expect the maximum safty, it's better to install via Google Play Store, though.


----------



## dharmasteve

TK33 said:


> Agreed regarding enjoyment factor.  Unfortunately, I canceled because I had a ton of issues with Amazon Music HD and there was more aggravation than enjoyment factor.  I previously posted them here so I wont get into it.  I continue to follow this thread because I am hoping Amazon Music HD resolves some of their issues at which point I will give them another shot.  For now, I continue to maintain my playlists in both Qobuz and Amazon Unlimited hoping that day will come soon.


I think Amazon take it for granted they will get their Prime customers. They also don't purely specialise in their music so we get an app that has not been created to be perfect. I did start on Spotify which I liked but as my ear became more focused I realised Amazon HD sounded better. It's a very imperfect app, but for the monthly cost it's value for me. Amazon need a kick up their backside to really create the app of apps....it's not like they don't have funds.


----------



## KutuzovGambit

dharmasteve said:


> I think Amazon take it for granted they will get their Prime customers. They also don't purely specialise in their music so we get an app that has not been created to be perfect. I did start on Spotify which I liked but as my ear became more focused I realised Amazon HD sounded better. It's a very imperfect app, but for the monthly cost it's value for me. Amazon need a kick up their backside to really create the app of apps....it's not like they don't have funds.


I just wish Qobuz would fill the gaping holes in their (US) catalog. I would gladly support them if it didn’t mean sacrificing a bunch of the music I’m trying to listen to.


----------



## audiobomber (Oct 2, 2020)

jivex5k said:


> Is there any benefit to playing something recorded at 96khz at 192khz? I know the actual playback is 192, I can see it in the windows settings for my interface. I just figured there would be no benefit if the audio was recorded at a lower sample rate.
> 
> Common sense tells me, no, nothing can improve audio quality beyond the original recording's quality, unless you are mastering it with audio processing tools.


There is a potential benefit in playing back at a higher sample rate, because the DAC may use a more gradual filter. However IME the sonic difference for 96 vs. 192kHz sampling is vanishingly small, probably imperceptible.


----------



## rkw (Oct 2, 2020)

jivex5k said:


> Is there any benefit to playing something recorded at 96khz at 192khz? I know the actual playback is 192, I can see it in the windows settings for my interface. I just figured there would be no benefit if the audio was recorded at a lower sample rate.


The common advice for many years has been that Windows resampling isn't high quality, and it is better to let the DAC handle the original data. Most DACs already upsample internally during their D to A processing.


----------



## jivex5k (Oct 2, 2020)

rkw said:


> The common advice for many years has been that Windows resampling isn't high quality, and it is better to let the DAC handle the original data. Most DACs already upsample internally during their D to A processing.


Hm, after a bit of research it turns out Windows is probably upsampling anything not 192 from Amazon's player. This is due to a lack of ASIO/WASAPI support, as TK33 mentioned.

Sounds good to me still. I'm going to do some comparisons to Tidal or Qobuz, I read that they both have support for ASIO/WASAPI.

Edit -

Yep, Qobuz uses ASIO, locks in the sample rate. Probably a placebo effect here, but it sounds brighter without the windows upsampling. Also, it looks like it has caching, which will solve the network bandwidth issue on my VPN. I'm going to switch over.

Weird that Amazon's HD doesn't have more robust audio support.

Edit 2 -
It seems like even switching from WASAPI to ASIO results in a brighter sound. Could be in my head, but hey, perception is reality. Pretty neat to find ASIO support, thanks for the tips!


----------



## dharmasteve

jivex5k said:


> Hmm, could you name a song or two that you have at 192? Maybe there's a setting I'm missing that's maxing it out at 96.




Found the Holy Grail 24/192 playback on Amazon HD....."If not for you" Bob Dylan.


----------



## TubeStack

Okay, I’ve decided Amazon HD sucks.

I was initially excited and even cancelled my Tidal subscription (have since renewed it), but after a few days I’m very disappointed with Amazon.

First, you have to keep checking to see if you’re actually receiving an Ultra HD stream, as they’re constantly changing/downgrading it based on “network conditions.” Second, many of the albums advertised as UHD don’t have all the songs at that quality level.   For some, it’s as low as one single song at UHD and the rest HD, which is laughable (Alice In Chains' Dirt, for example).  And lastly, to me, Tidal just sounds better.  

I will pay the extra money to have a reliable streaming quality and complete albums at consistent Hi Res levels and an overall preferable sound, to me.


----------



## dilupus

TubeStack said:


> First, you have to keep checking to see if you’re actually receiving an Ultra HD stream, as they’re constantly changing/downgrading it based on “network conditions.” Second, many of the albums advertised as UHD don’t have all the songs at that quality level.   For some, it’s as low as one single song at UHD and the rest HD, which is laughable (Alice In Chains' Dirt, for example).  And lastly, to me, Tidal just sounds better.



I'm not going to try and sell you on Amazon Music HD. I use it, but it's personal preference as both Tidal and Qobuz have huge holes in their library where I am sorely missing content I can find on Amazon. I'm replying to say that there is a setting that forces HD streaming. It defaults to choose best available, depending on your network connection, but it's just a checkbox in the settings.

Second, and this is completely irrelevant, but the only song on Dirt that is listed as Ultra HD on Amazon (which, yes, the album is listed as Ultra-HD despite this,) is "Would." "Would" is possibly UHD thanks to a 2017 remaster, though I don't know why they would bother switching out the track.


----------



## TubeStack (Oct 19, 2020)

dilupus said:


> I'm not going to try and sell you on Amazon Music HD. I use it, but it's personal preference as both Tidal and Qobuz have huge holes in their library where I am sorely missing content I can find on Amazon. I'm replying to say that there is a setting that forces HD streaming. It defaults to choose best available, depending on your network connection, but it's just a checkbox in the settings.
> 
> Second, and this is completely irrelevant, but the only song on Dirt that is listed as Ultra HD on Amazon (which, yes, the album is listed as Ultra-HD despite this,) is "Would." "Would" is possibly UHD thanks to a 2017 remaster, though I don't know why they would bother switching out the track.




Yes, but that forced HD setting only forces HD/Ultra - there's no forced Ultra-only - so it will still downgrade Ultra to HD.  For me, it’s all about the Ultra, so to be unpredictably downgraded is unacceptable.

Also, I just flipped though 5 random “Ultra“ albums and 3 of them contained several HD tracks.  That's not something I want to deal with, either.  Will gladly pay more for entire albums properly labelled.


----------



## XeNoNF50

Been considering / trialling Amazon Music HD. Partly for the cost saying from £20 with Tidal to £13 with Amazon. I'm guessing the bit perfect on PC hasn't been resolved yet and there's no 3rd party software that may be able to achieve this? 

I know Node 2i is bit perfect and luckily I already have one in one of my set ups. 

In terms of the streaming, on the Amazon site it says the HD streams are up to 850kbps bitrate 16 bit 44.1khz. Isn't that lower than Tidal/Qobuz who are up to 1411kbps bitrate on 16 bit 44.1khz? Or have I totally misunderstood and it is the same? I know the Ultra HD is much higher than Tidal but wondering if the HD is lower?


----------



## TK33 (Oct 20, 2020)

Deleted as I misunderstood the question.


----------



## N0sferatu

TubeStack said:


> Yes, but that forced HD setting only forces HD/Ultra - there's no forced Ultra-only - so it will still downgrade Ultra to HD.  For me, it’s all about the Ultra, so to be unpredictably downgraded is unacceptable.
> 
> Also, I just flipped though 5 random “Ultra“ albums and 3 of them contained several HD tracks.  That's not something I want to deal with, either.  Will gladly pay more for entire albums properly labelled.



I use Tidal over Amazon HD but let's compare "apples to apples" here.  Tidal pulls the same thing.  You can set it to Master (Ultra HD equivalent) and it's going to play you the Hifi (HD equivalent) tracks unless there's a Master (Ultra HD equivalent) available.  

Otherwise I agree I hated the interface on Amazon HD and I found Tidal looks like Spotify with the Amazon HD sound and that's what won me over.


----------



## kgb3366

I’ve been with tidal for some time and decided to try Amazon on a 90 day trial , needless to say I’m back with Tidal , you just get what it says on the tin . Unlike Amazon were you don’t really know what you’re getting.


----------



## TubeStack (Oct 20, 2020)

N0sferatu said:


> I use Tidal over Amazon HD but let's compare "apples to apples" here.  Tidal pulls the same thing.  You can set it to Master (Ultra HD equivalent) and it's going to play you the Hifi (HD equivalent) tracks unless there's a Master (Ultra HD equivalent) available.



Different point.  I'm talking about how Amazon will unpredictably change the quality of an Ultra track to a lower one.

If you play MQA with Tidal, you get MQA, it doesn't randomly change an MQA track to a lower quality.


----------



## subguy812

I think the UI is the biggest trouble with Amazon. I use them, Qobuz and Tidal(on and off). I have also tried Deezer and Spotify. If Spotify had HD they would probably crush it.


----------



## gimmeheadroom (Oct 20, 2020)

TubeStack said:


> Different point.  I'm talking about how Amazon will unpredictably change the quality of an Ultra track to a lower one.
> 
> If you play MQA with Tidal, you get MQA, it doesn't randomly change an MQA track to a lower quality.



Well there have been numerous screwups in the Tidal desktop app where they changed the setting from Master to High on several app updates. But yeah. And this is also why I bought a DAC that shows me the sample rate and bit depth. I wanna know what I'm paying for. Tidal seems better than average in this regard but you still have some work to do if you want to know any streaming service isn't just pumping you with upsampled mp3s.



subguy812 said:


> I think the UI is the biggest trouble with Amazon. I use them, Qobuz and Tidal(on and off). I have also tried Deezer and Spotify. If Spotify had HD they would probably crush it.


It is baffling that Spotify doesn't have a hires tier. I just can't understand this at all.

I eventually ditched Deezer because of the fact every desktop app update lost my password and then you have to spend 5 minutes with google captcha games to log on again. I thought the sound quality on Deezer was excellent and they had some fills of albums where Tidal was missing songs. In the end too frustrating to deal with Deezer.


----------



## rkw

gimmeheadroom said:


> It is baffling that Spotify doesn't have a hires tier. I just can't understand this at all.


Spotify have been doing market surveys (a couple of years ago, and again last month), asking random customers if they would subscribe to a lossless/hires tier at $X/month. Their action will be based on demand and profitability.

I would love to see Spotify offer lossless/hires, but the fact is that it is a tiny niche market. Tidal and Qobuz combined have less than 2% of the streaming market share. If Spotify captures every Tidal and Qobuz customer, it would increase their subscribers and revenue by only a few percent.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

rkw said:


> Spotify have been doing market surveys (a couple of years ago, and again last month), asking random customers if they would subscribe to a lossless/hires tier at $X/month. Their action will be based on demand and profitability.
> 
> I would love to see Spotify offer lossless/hires, but the fact is that it is a tiny niche market. Tidal and Qobuz combined have less than 2% of the streaming market share. If Spotify captures every Tidal and Qobuz customer, it would increase their subscribers and revenue by only a few percent.


I didn't know the numbers. Still, given Spotify has a free tier and Qobuz and most others don't it would seem like a good idea to get some paying subscribers.

I don't see any reason to pay for 320 Vorbis but I would pay for Redbook or better.


----------



## grokit (Oct 21, 2020)

I tried all three HD streaming services for a time, and decided there wasn't a clear winner. So I went with Amazon because of price. Qobuz was cheaper when I had that trial going last year, but I ended it. Now Tidal is the price Qobuz was, and I have decided I want ROON in my life as I start re-curating my physical digital collection.

So I am changing over to ROON soon, with Tidal for streaming. Because of poor planning, I will also have Amazon HD for quite a while, obviously not with ROON.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

grokit said:


> I tried all three HD streaming services for a time, and decided there wasn't a clear winner. So I went with Amazon because of price. Qobuz was cheaper when I had that trial going last year, but I ended it. Now Tidal is the price Qobuz was, and I have decided I want ROON in my life as I start re-curating my physical digital collection.
> 
> So I am changing over to ROON soon, with Tidal for streaming. Because of poor planning, I will also have Amazon HD for quite a while, obviously not with ROON.


I don't think it's a waste of money to pay for more than one service. We get Tidal here for a good price but many Tidal albums are missing songs. When I had another subscription I was able to get the missing songs. Even though most of the services have huge catalogs you often find something you want is missing from one but is available on the other one. If Qobuz ever comes here at a good price I'll it. More of a chance to make sure you have everything you like available.


----------



## rkw

gimmeheadroom said:


> I don't think it's a waste of money to pay for more than one service.
> ...
> Even though most of the services have huge catalogs you often find something you want is missing from one but is available on the other one.


This has been frustrating for me. For example, the Sony Classical catalog is on Spotify, Tidal, and Qobuz. I subscribe to all three but I occasionally I run into a random Sony Classical album that is on one service but not another.


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

gimmeheadroom said:


> I don't think it's a waste of money to pay for more than one service. We get Tidal here for a good price but many Tidal albums are missing songs. When I had another subscription I was able to get the missing songs. Even though most of the services have huge catalogs you often find something you want is missing from one but is available on the other one. If Qobuz ever comes here at a good price I'll it. More of a chance to make sure you have everything you like available.



I have amazon music Hd, Spotify, and Qobuz and use them all... each has their benefits and weaknesses but together they form up like Voltron


----------



## Claypole

Since Amazon launched their HD service, has anybody noticed a drop in quality of their regular 'Amazon Prime' music streaming? I hadn't listened to it for quite a while  (I mainly use Tidal), but last night I tried it in on my iPad and the quality was awful. Quality was set to highest level, but it sounded as if the bit rate was comfortably below 100kb/sec.

I tried it on Android tablet, and my iPhone, and they all sounded the same. The regular Tidal service sounded decent, like it always does. All these devices have the latest version of the Amazon Music app on them, so I tried my Fiio M6 which has an older version of Amazon Music on it. It sounded much better, like a night/day difference. The music no longer sounded like it was being poured down a babbling brook.

I then remembered that the apps on my other devices had all been updated since Amazon launched their HD service, so the cynic in me got suspicious. Did Amazon deliberately hobble the regular service in a bid to push people towards their HD service?

Has anybody else noticed this drop in quality with the latest version of the apps?


----------



## ampur2

Hi, I am subscribed to Spotify and just knew about Amazon Music HD is available at Japan. I am on 30-days trial right now and I already decided to move to Amazon Music HD just by listening to their HD and Ultra HD songs.
I am using Hifiman HE400 and Sony WF-1000XM3.
I thought I won't be noticing any differences on wireless earphone but how wrong I was, the song on Amazon is much more spacious than Spotify and it's very noticeable.

I sold my DAC few years ago due to marriage and having a child, I am looking for a USD200~300 DAP that could add 3rd party software and BT connectivity.
If you folks have any recommendation please help this poor fella.
I am looking at FiiO M9 but not sure if it's the best option or if there are any alternatives to it.


----------



## dharmasteve

ampur2 said:


> Hi, I am subscribed to Spotify and just knew about Amazon Music HD is available at Japan. I am on 30-days trial right now and I already decided to move to Amazon Music HD just by listening to their HD and Ultra HD songs.
> I am using Hifiman HE400 and Sony WF-1000XM3.
> I thought I won't be noticing any differences on wireless earphone but how wrong I was, the song on Amazon is much more spacious than Spotify and it's very noticeable.
> 
> ...


I had the FiiO M9 for a long time.....it's rather slow, but I liked it. I accidently damaged it so had to buy another DAP. I waited for the HiBy store sale on AliExpress and bought the HiBy R5. Exactly the same form factor except the HiBy is far better, faster, better equaliser, good battery etc etc etc.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

They've just made a made a major (to say the least) visual upgrade. At first glance, I like the way it looks. I hope it works better.


----------



## MacInTheNet (Nov 6, 2020)

Hi guys, this is my first post and I hope you can answer me about this 
I own a set of Shure SE846 and just started my trial with Amazon Music HD.
My phone is a Samsung Note 8.
From a hardware point of view, my phone is ok and might support even higher limits than the best ones Amazon can offer but their service  forces you to "use" Android (instead of the real hardware parameters) and doesn't support an external DAC (while on iOS it's supported).
So I have to be ok with 24 bit / 48 kHz because of Android 9 (that it's ok, I know but I am just asking  ).
Now, what I was wondering is: would a bluetooth receiver with LDAC like BR5 allow me to go higher on those limits?
Would Amazon "see" it and recognize its limits or not?
Has anybody tried it?
Thanks in advance


----------



## senorx12562

MacInTheNet said:


> Hi guys, this is my first post and I hope you can answer me about this
> I own a set of Shure SE846 and just started my trial with Amazon Music HD.
> My phone is a Samsung Note 8.
> From a hardware point of view, my phone is ok and might support even higher limits than the best ones Amazon can offer but their service  forces you to "use" Android (instead of the real hardware parameters) and doesn't support an external DAC (while on iOS it's supported).
> ...


Nobody can tell you what you think sounds better between two different music/hardware combinations,  but in terms of actual effective bitrate, even LDAC is lossy compression and will be playing at a lower bitrate than cd, which maxes out at just over 1400kbps, where LDAC is just under 1000 iirc. Whether the difference is audible or not, honestly, using a phone, probably not. But i'd bet the transducers matter far more than that difference in bitrate in any event.


----------



## MacInTheNet

Hi, thank you for you answer.
I was curious because of LDAC's limits (24 bit / 96 kHz) so I was just wondering whether that's gonna work or not in my case.
But perhaps it's pointless, I understand


----------



## rkw

MacInTheNet said:


> I was curious because of LDAC's limits (24 bit / 96 kHz)


It is all marketing fluff. If you examine it closely, Sony only claims that LDAC can deliver "sound quality that is equivalent to" 24/96. The fact is that Bluetooth cannot even deliver lossless 16/44 resolution.
https://darko.audio/2020/11/no-bluetooth-cannot-deliver-hi-res-audio/


----------



## MacInTheNet

Thanks man, I suppose you think the same about LHDC right?


----------



## rkw

MacInTheNet said:


> Thanks man, I suppose you think the same about LHDC right?


None of the codecs can overcome the limitations of current Bluetooth technology, which doesn't have enough bandwidth to deliver HD resolution.


----------



## MacInTheNet

Well... with 5 the limit should be 25 Mbit/s so who knows what they are developing


----------



## dharmasteve (Nov 7, 2020)

Let's get into actually listening into this LDAC. Bluetooth is not lossless, but having had the first Aptx receivers, then Aptx-Hd receivers, and then LDAC receivers....both desktop and DAP, the listening quality has improved dramatically and I have listened with a critical ear. By it's present definition it is not lossless but does it sound good......yes it does! We want the best tech, but music will always be for listening to and experiencing. Can we mentally and emotionally connect and get satisfaction, some don't do satisfaction/happiness that well. Some seem to listen to numbers and not music. Ask those that own the FiiO BTR5 or Radsone ES100 what they think of LDAC......they will be happy as a sandman.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

MacInTheNet said:


> Hi guys, this is my first post and I hope you can answer me about this
> I own a set of Shure SE846 and just started my trial with Amazon Music HD.
> My phone is a Samsung Note 8.
> From a hardware point of view, my phone is ok and might support even higher limits than the best ones Amazon can offer but their service  forces you to "use" Android (instead of the real hardware parameters) and doesn't support an external DAC (while on iOS it's supported).
> ...


The bluetooth receiver can't go any higher than the source...I wouldn't think, anyway.


----------



## MacInTheNet

Well, if I got what you mean, they must have the same technology obviously


----------



## jambaj0e (Nov 8, 2020)

Well a new interface is out (v8.0.2229)  and it feels a bit more like Tidal  and looks nicer, BUT the WORST thing is that there's still no Bit-perfect. And they seem to have removed the side bar for playlist which sucks.

What are you doing, Amazon?!? Are you not going take this seriously by still not including bit-perfect?

*ARTIST VIEW*







*HOME SCREEN*




​*ALBUM VIEW*

*

*​

*PLAY QUEUE*

*

*​
*PLAYLIST VIEW*

*



PLAYLIST VIEW*​


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

jambaj0e said:


> Well a new interface is out (v8.0.2229)  and it feels a bit more like Tidal  and looks nicer, BUT the WORST thing is that there's still no Bit-perfect. And they seem to have removed the side bar for playlist which sucks.
> 
> What are you doing, Amazon?!? Are you not going take this seriously by still not including bit-perfect?
> 
> ...



this is disappointing to hear they still haven’t added bit perfect!  I know I have requested it along with probably thousands of other people at this point.  That and Roon implementation are what’s holding it back from being one of the best services right now.  😕


----------



## audiobomber (Nov 8, 2020)

MRphotography said:


> this is disappointing to hear they still haven’t added bit perfect!  I know I have requested it along with probably thousands of other people at this point.  That and Roon implementation are what’s holding it back from being one of the best services right now.  😕


The main issue for me is that I can't stream Amazon HD to any of my devices; Playpoint, sMS-200, Raspberry Pi, Chromecast Audio. Chromecast plays a lossy version, the others get nothing.


----------



## nasty nate

Recently I noticed that certain songs on certain albums are either being up-sampled to _24/96_ (or) _24/192_, or the full version of the file is uploaded later than other songs on the album. It was annoying to have an album with mixed rates - especially since bit-perfect does not exist, and I have to manually change my Bifrost 2's settings. 

For example - *Chicago II - Steven Wilson Mix*, about a week ago, some of those songs were only redbook quality, now the whole album is one matching depth/rate. 

Has anyone else noticed this? Is this common for streaming sites to slowly upsample / upload these files?


----------



## Brava210

Anyone else noticed that Gapless isn't working on the App?


----------



## Deolum

Hello guys is there now any possibility to stream Amazon Music HD with any streamer apart from those very few that run with BluOS?

As far as i know it doesn't work with eunhasu, with lightning ds, with volumio, with rasperry pi, with bubble upnp, with mconnect. Is that still the case?

I can't believe that musk shoots a bunch of satellites in space and meanwhile there's no way to stream Amazon music apart from buying a measily bluesound node2?


----------



## Pro-Jules (Nov 24, 2020)

Ha!  I think they are great but I sent mine back. They have no wordclock in and the eq was too basic for me. I have gone back to using my Mac.

AM upsampling is starting to bug me too. I love the interface but after a careful night of testing I think I am moving back to Qobuz.


----------



## senorx12562

Deolum said:


> Hello guys is there now any possibility to stream Amazon Music HD with any streamer apart from those very few that run with BluOS?
> 
> As far as i know it doesn't work with eunhasu, with lightning ds, with volumio, with rasperry pi, with bubble upnp, with mconnect. Is that still the case?
> 
> I can't believe that musk shoots a bunch of satellites in space and meanwhile there's no way to stream Amazon music apart from buying a measily bluesound node2?


I am quite pleased with my Node 2i, so would be curious as to why you refer to it as "measily?" I mean, I didn't design it or anything so it is ultimately no skin off my nose, but I think it punches way above its price in terms of sq and functionality. And as far as I know, the Lenbrook group products are still it as far as Amazon support for streamers.


----------



## senorx12562

Pro-Jules said:


> Ha!  I think they are great but I sent mine back. They have no wordclock in and the eq was too basic for me. I have gone back to using my Mac.
> 
> AM upsampling is starting to bug me too. I love the interface but after a careful night of testing I think I am moving back to Qobuz.



Ironic in light of this: https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/bits-and-bytes/update-amazon-music-hd-is-still-lossy-r961/


----------



## Deolum

senorx12562 said:


> I am quite pleased with my Node 2i, so would be curious as to why you refer to it as "measily?" I mean, I didn't design it or anything so it is ultimately no skin off my nose, but I think it punches way above its price in terms of sq and functionality. And as far as I know, the Lenbrook group products are still it as far as Amazon support for streamers.


It doesn't have the connectors i'm looking for like AES output. It's also not bad sounding but i wouldn't say it comes close to something like a Sotm Sms-200 Neo Ultra. So for the price it's not bad but it's measily because it seems to be the only option.


----------



## senorx12562

Deolum said:


> It doesn't have the connectors i'm looking for like AES output. It's also not bad sounding but i wouldn't say it comes close to something like a Sotm Sms-200 Neo Ultra. So for the price it's not bad but it's measily because it seems to be the only option.


Now I understand. You want to be in a part of the market that is way beyond my personal limit for diminishing returns.


----------



## MRHiFiReviews

Deolum said:


> Hello guys is there now any possibility to stream Amazon Music HD with any streamer apart from those very few that run with BluOS?
> 
> As far as i know it doesn't work with eunhasu, with lightning ds, with volumio, with rasperry pi, with bubble upnp, with mconnect. Is that still the case?
> 
> I can't believe that musk shoots a bunch of satellites in space and meanwhile there's no way to stream Amazon music apart from buying a measily bluesound node2?



lol the only ones I stream it through right now are IOS devices, bluesound node2i (Which I actually enjoy in my 2 Channel setup) l, Amazon Firestick, and Android TV.  I still enjoy it but since adding Roon last night I am never going to really LOVE Amazon music HD until they allow implementation with Roon. I feel like Amazon Music is my relaxed playing in the background type ofe music  service or streaming through the TV where all my serious music listening is done through Qobuz.  Maybe one day Amazon will implement bit-perfect and Roon implementation...


----------



## senorx12562

MRphotography said:


> lol the only ones I stream it through right now are IOS devices, bluesound node2i (Which I actually enjoy in my 2 Channel setup) l, Amazon Firestick, and Android TV.  I still enjoy it but since adding Roon last night I am never going to really LOVE Amazon music HD until they allow implementation with Roon. I feel like Amazon Music is my relaxed playing in the background type ofe music  service or streaming through the TV where all my serious music listening is done through Qobuz.  Maybe one day Amazon will implement bit-perfect and Roon implementation...


Apparently, (see the link I posted above from audiophile style) the Bluesound app is the only current way to get bit perfect output from AM, including its own apps. I have no way to test this as none of my dacs display sample rates. Not that I care as much as most around here seem to anyway. I am certain that my old, cloth ears, from my midfi gear,  cannot tell the difference. For me to worry about that would definitely be straying into nervosa territory.


----------



## MRHiFiReviews (Nov 24, 2020)

senorx12562 said:


> Apparently, (see the link I posted above from audiophile style) the Bluesound app is the only current way to get bit perfect output from AM, including its own apps. I have no way to test this as none of my dacs display sample rates. Not that I care as much as most around here seem to anyway. I am certain that my old, cloth ears, from my midfi gear,  cannot tell the difference. For me to worry about that would definitely be straying into nervosa territory.



Not sure if AmazonMusicHD bit perfect is supported on any device, I will check the link!  EDIT:  Just read the link, that is pretty cool if Bluesound has found a way to do it.  LOL amazon's own software can't....


----------



## TK33

MRphotography said:


> Not sure if AmazonMusicHD bit perfect is supported on any device, I will check the link!  EDIT:  Just read the link, that is pretty cool if Bluesound has found a way to do it.  LOL amazon's own software can't....



This has been the case ever since Amazon Music HD launched. I recall there were people who confirmed this back then.  It is sad to see that this is still the case a year later.


----------



## patent guy

Noob question:  Has anyone tried Amazon's Echo Link streamer as a dedicated headphone amp when listening to Amazon's "Ultra HD" content?


----------



## senorx12562

TK33 said:


> This has been the case ever since Amazon Music HD launched. I recall there were people who confirmed this back then.  It is sad to see that this is still the case a year later.


The latest version of the Windows app does have "exclusive mode," which, if you have the right settings in the sound control panel should avoid Windows processing and allow playback at the files' bit depth/sample rate, but Connaker (Audiophile Style proprietor) tested it and it still was not bit perfect, so it apparently is not implemented properly. Not a big deal to me, but it certainly is to some.


----------



## audiobomber

senorx12562 said:


> The latest version of the Windows app does have "exclusive mode," which, if you have the right settings in the sound control panel should avoid Windows processing and allow playback at the files' bit depth/sample rate, but Connaker (Audiophile Style proprietor) tested it and it still was not bit perfect, so it apparently is not implemented properly. Not a big deal to me, but it certainly is to some.


I use Windows 10, it is definitely not bit perfect with Amazon HD. The computer allows me to choose the output (i.e. from 16/44 up to 24/192), but once selected it never changes. Exclusive Mode has no impact on processing, it just blocks other apps from playing or making sounds.


----------



## TK33

senorx12562 said:


> The latest version of the Windows app does have "exclusive mode," which, if you have the right settings in the sound control panel should avoid Windows processing and allow playback at the files' bit depth/sample rate, but Connaker (Audiophile Style proprietor) tested it and it still was not bit perfect, so it apparently is not implemented properly. Not a big deal to me, but it certainly is to some.



My understanding is that their version of "Exclusive Mode" is not the same Exclusive Mode that people, including myself, have been requesting from Amazon.  As I understand it, Amazon's Windows app does not bypass the Windows mixer and does not pass through bit perfect data to external DACs.    Qobuz has its own faults and problems but this is something that does work on the Qobuz Windows app.  Hopefully Amazon can get its act together but they are probably more interested in selling their devices than making me happy.


----------



## senorx12562

TK33 said:


> My understanding is that their version of "Exclusive Mode" is not the same Exclusive Mode that people, including myself, have been requesting from Amazon.  As I understand it, Amazon's Windows app does not bypass the Windows mixer and does not pass through bit perfect data to external DACs.    Qobuz has its own faults and problems but this is something that does work on the Qobuz Windows app.  Hopefully Amazon can get its act together but they are probably more interested in selling their devices than making me happy.


I would have Qobuz if there weren't so many gaps in their music selection for my tastes. That is ultimately far more important to me than whether it is bit perfect or not. Since I got the Node, I haven't used the apps much. My m9 appears to play AM bit perfect as well.


----------



## TK33

senorx12562 said:


> Since I got the Node, I haven't used the apps much.



I hear you and I was the same way until Bluesound managed to break my Node 2i digital outputs with the last few firmware updates.  Now I lose the first few seconds of the track whenever the bit depth or sample rate changes.  Oddly, this only happens (via both Toslink and coax) with my NAD D 3045 or if I use my IFI SPIDIF iPurifier2 in the chain but not direct to my Denon AVR, Grace m900 or Aurender Flow.  Analog output still works fine though at least. All Bluesound could suggest was the Audio Clock Trim toggle, which did not help. That is why I care about the apps.  I will also care more when I start commuting into the city again (likely next year).

Btw, I find Qobuz and Amazon complement each other nicely and am hopeful Amazon will improve their service.  For now, I wait...


----------



## audiobomber

I just cancelled Amazon HD because it cannot stream via DLNA to any of my three devices, and Chromecast Audio only casts MP3. The only time I get HD is when I am in front of my computer, which is insufficient coverage.


----------



## Pro-Jules (Nov 28, 2020)

Dang!

That's very educational re Amazon Music and I must admit the lights were jumping about on my DAC via thr Node 2i also as described. Via my Sony DAP they remain fixed @ 192)

I may come crawling to back to Node 2i

My quest is for a parametric eq in my chain. (I need it for my midrange hearing loss) Bluesound doesn't offer it. 

The Auralic Ares G1 has that (and so does a Weiss item I am looking at)

Onwards and upwards...

I am keeping subs for Qobuz and AM HD going for the time being.

Thanks to all in this thread.


----------



## RONJA MESCO

I may crawl back to Amazon HD soon too...the sound is incredible for streaming...but as always, results may vary depending on your system


----------



## Deolum

Just canceled Amazon HD because of no implementation into streaming services except for one brand and DLNA. Stick to Qobuz for now.


----------



## Sterling2

Amazon HD does not impress, my Apple Music subscription does, for a multitude of reasons.


----------



## Guidostrunk

Anyone get the update this past week? I did 3 days ago and the music is unplayable. I get pops, crackles, pauses , all kinds of garbage in the music now. Was wondering if anyone else is experiencing this?

Cheers!


----------



## hmscott (Dec 12, 2020)

Guidostrunk said:


> Anyone get the update this past week? I did 3 days ago and the music is unplayable. I get pops, crackles, pauses , all kinds of garbage in the music now. Was wondering if anyone else is experiencing this?
> 
> Cheers!


I was on Windows yesterday playing Tidal and Amazon HD back and forth many times, and Amazon HD didn't have audible problems... maybe mine hasn't updated yet... I do get lots of problems adding things to playlists - occasionally to the point of losing a whole playlist I then have to recreate.  I get a lot of those "contact Amazon Support" type messages right after the failure.  They gots no clue 

The sound though is great, sometimes as good as Tidal - and between the two I have coverage for all the music I am looking for - mostly.  I've found it's good to have a backup should one or the other service go down or otherwise be unavailable.

I'll check back on Windows later to see if I now have problems with Amazon HD too.

*Update: *First time loading Amazon Music HD on MacOS, *new M1 Macbook Pro*, and the audio sounds great from the USB Audio 24bit/96k out of the *Hyperdrive Gen2 16-Port Thunderbolt Dock*.  I'll connect up the D90 MQA via Toslink and USB later.

Maybe the Amazon Music HD MacOS app will be better behaved with regard to creating and adding to playlists, I hope so.

I like the look of the Macintosh Amazon HD app better too:
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B07XP4QD42





Update: Now I've installed and configured Tidal on the Macbook Pro M1, I've got to say that I am further impressed with the Hyperdrive Thunderbolt 16-port 3.5mm audio port - such deep and sustained - controlled - sub-bass and bass frequencies - it's sounds stunning in these DT-770 16 ohm headphones.

IDK if it's Tidal adding to the power control - the Tidal Exclusive setting for Hifi / Masters on the USB Advanced Audio Device is enabled, but MQA is not being fully unfolded because the dock doesn't support it, and I don't have Force Volume enabled for this device as there are no hardware volume controls, but the sound is "majestic" as I would expect from John Williams:




It's so hard to tell sometimes which is better on non-Master MQA tracks as Amazon HD Music sounds great - sometimes better than the non-Master tracks on Tidal.  Most of the time Tidal wins out for me because I am on the Hifi Subscription for both, but Tidal has higher bit rate recordings inside of MQA recordings that the Topping D90 MQA and FiiO M15 + UAPP + Tidal unfold fully.

Either way, both are winners.

If you are still getting distortions in your audio on your Amazon app, perhaps try the Web browser and see if you are still hearing the distortion there?  Maybe a coincidental change happened elsewhere to cause the distortions?  Windows update?  Audio driver on your motherboard update?  

Please come back and let us know what you found was the root cause for the distortion.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Can you use the Bluesound app to play Amazon bit perfect over a desktop DAC?


----------



## senorx12562

gimmeheadroom said:


> Can you use the Bluesound app to play Amazon bit perfect over a desktop DAC?


Link in post 1458 above?


----------



## jambaj0e

I just got the update to version 8.0.0.2229 on Windows 10 and so far it sounds just the same via my Chord Hugo TT2 DAC in both Exclusive and non-Exclusive mode. Sadly, still no bit-perfect, ugh.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

senorx12562 said:


> Link in post 1458 above?


I'm not sure that answers my question. My question was can you play Amazon bit perfect over a desktop DAC using the Bluesound app. I did not mean the node 2i, I mean the app. Spotify and Tidal have the Connect feature. I was wondering if you subscribe to Amazon and you have the Bluesound app whether there is "Amazon connect" so that you can play over some other device.

I'm not sure it's worth buying another node 2i just to play scamazon bit perfect. If there is no way without additional hardware I'll pass on this.


----------



## TK33

gimmeheadroom said:


> I'm not sure that answers my question. My question was can you play Amazon bit perfect over a desktop DAC using the Bluesound app. I did not mean the node 2i, I mean the app. Spotify and Tidal have the Connect feature. I was wondering if you subscribe to Amazon and you have the Bluesound app whether there is "Amazon connect" so that you can play over some other device.
> 
> I'm not sure it's worth buying another node 2i just to play scamazon bit perfect. If there is no way without additional hardware I'll pass on this.


Isnt the Bluesound app basically just a remote to control your BluOS compatible device? I dont think anything is actually getting streamed through the app so you would need a Node 2i or a BluOS compatible speaker or amp to actually play the music.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

TK33 said:


> Isnt the Bluesound app basically just a remote to control your BluOS compatible device? I dont think anything is actually getting streamed through the app so you would need a Node 2i or a BluOS compatible speaker or amp to actually play the music.


I think you're right but I can't remember. This "Connect" feature seems to be from the separate desktop apps rather than the Bluesound app. Too much work, not enough beer.


----------



## senorx12562 (Dec 13, 2020)

gimmeheadroom said:


> I'm not sure that answers my question. My question was can you play Amazon bit perfect over a desktop DAC using the Bluesound app. I did not mean the node 2i, I mean the app. Spotify and Tidal have the Connect feature. I was wondering if you subscribe to Amazon and you have the Bluesound app whether there is "Amazon connect" so that you can play over some other device.
> 
> I'm not sure it's worth buying another node 2i just to play scamazon bit perfect. If there is no way without additional hardware I'll pass on this.


The bluesound app does not play anything by itself. You have to have a bluesound enabled device, whether it is a bluesound branded device, or nad, or some other streaming device from Lenbrook, the bluesound app is not playback software, merely a controller for bluesound enabled streaming devices. My answer was based on the assumption that you knew this. My bad. Would it be worth it to buy a new device JUST to get bitperfect playback of Amazon HD? Of course not, for me at least. But I assure you that is not all the node does.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

senorx12562 said:


> The bluesound app does not play anything by itself. You have to have a bluesound enabled device, whether it is a bluesound branded device, or nad, or some other streaming device from Lenbrook, the bluesound app is not playback software, merely a controller for bluesound enabled streaming devices. My answer was based on the assumption that you knew this. My bad. Would it be worth it to buy a new device JUST to get bitperfect playback of Amazon HD? Of course not, for me at least. But I assure you that is not all the node does.


See above- too much work and not enough beer 
Thank you, sorry, ttyl...


----------



## Guidostrunk

Well..... I'm officially dumping HD for Tidal. After the first update like I mentioned. There was so much popping and crackling in the music. Got another update 2 days ago and I'm not sure what the hell Amazon is doing but the crackling and popping is gone but the music sounds extremely boosted in the treble and everything sounds closed in and compressed. One big garbled mess right between the eyes. No extension away from the head. 

When switching to Tidal things sound absolutely fantastic. Dimensional, detailed , great bass extension and slam. 

Hopefully HD gets it together. Because before the updates everything was great and Tidals catalog of music is terrible unless you love rap music lol.


----------



## Harmonyx

Android update:
Amazon Music HD is now sending full high Res files to my DAC from my phone via USB. 
My phone is a Samsung Galaxy S9 and I've tested on a Topping D70 and XDUOO XD-05+. Previously, Amazon was capping all tracks at a max of 24 bits / 48khz. 
Now it is recognising the DAC's true capability and sending up to 24 / 192 (if available). 
I checked on the Topping D70 and it does report back as receiving 192khz.


----------



## senorx12562

Harmonyx said:


> Android update:
> Amazon Music HD is now sending full high Res files to my DAC from my phone via USB.
> My phone is a Samsung Galaxy S9 and I've tested on a Topping D70 and XDUOO XD-05+. Previously, Amazon was capping all tracks at a max of 24 bits / 48khz.
> Now it is recognising the DAC's true capability and sending up to 24 / 192 (if available).
> I checked on the Topping D70 and it does report back as receiving 192khz.


This is interesting. I wonder if they have figured out bypassing the Windows audio stack as well.


----------



## TK33

Harmonyx said:


> Android update:
> Amazon Music HD is now sending full high Res files to my DAC from my phone via USB.
> My phone is a Samsung Galaxy S9 and I've tested on a Topping D70 and XDUOO XD-05+. Previously, Amazon was capping all tracks at a max of 24 bits / 48khz.
> Now it is recognising the DAC's true capability and sending up to 24 / 192 (if available).
> I checked on the Topping D70 and it does report back as receiving 192khz.


Interesting...does it upsample everything to 24/192 or does 16/44.1 still get sent as 16/44.1? Your post seems to indicate the latter but just want to confirm.


----------



## Harmonyx

Apologies if unclear. It didn't upsample. 16/44.1 will remain as 16/44.1


----------



## Harmonyx

senorx12562 said:


> This is interesting. I wonder if they have figured out bypassing the Windows audio stack as well.



Yeah, I'm really happy with this development.
It means I'll be able to connect an android tablet to my living room set up (Musical Paradise DAC) and get the full quality.


----------



## TK33

Harmonyx said:


> Apologies if unclear. It didn't upsample. 16/44.1 will remain as 16/44.1


Thanks.  My Qobuz membership is up for renewal.  May need to switch back and give Amazon another shot.


----------



## Harmonyx

TK33 said:


> Thanks.  My Qobuz membership is up for renewal.  May need to switch back and give Amazon another shot.



I haven't tried Qobuz but I hear its top notch. Amazon Music has a few flaws but, if u can live with them, it's pretty great sound quality (up to 24/192 FLAC) and a massive library. 
I loved using Tidal for a while but got frustrated that a lot of stuff I like to listen to wasn't available. 

I already pay for Amazon Prime so adding Amazon Music only costs me an extra £5 per month (a lot cheaper than a Tidal £20 / mth). 

The main problems with Amazon is they haven't fully got the bit perfect thing working yet via pc or streamer (correct me if I'm wrong), their user interface is not as good as Tidal / Spotify, their recommendations suck, they lose songs from playlists, and this is the main one for me - Amazon are not being forthcoming in allowing open-source developers wanting to access the Amazon API, meaning very limited availability on streamers. I would like to get a Volumio or similar but Amazon are just ignoring companies like these.


----------



## gimmeheadroom (Jan 5, 2021)

Harmonyx said:


> I haven't tried Qobuz but I hear its top notch. Amazon Music has a few flaws but, if u can live with them, it's pretty great sound quality (up to 24/192 FLAC) and a massive library.
> I loved using Tidal for a while but got frustrated that a lot of stuff I like to listen to wasn't available.
> 
> I already pay for Amazon Prime so adding Amazon Music only costs me an extra £5 per month (a lot cheaper than a Tidal £20 / mth).
> ...


Yeah this is a big inhibitor the lack of bit perfect. In addition to Tidal I have Deezer since Qobuz isn't available in Czech Republic and it is also not bit perfect on Windows. I have a node 2i so I can get bit perfect but the node 2i is not in my main system so it's annoying. I think most people will need 2 subscriptions to get all the missing tracks on the other one. That's really annoying.

I really hate scamazon but I would be willing to try the music service if the bitperfect issue gets resolved. BTW Tidal hifi here is 11,20 euros. It is nice that they make adjustments for regional salaries etc. but another part of me feels it's unfair to charge people in the UK 2X what we pay. So many screwings lately.


----------



## dharmasteve

Harmonyx said:


> I haven't tried Qobuz but I hear its top notch. Amazon Music has a few flaws but, if u can live with them, it's pretty great sound quality (up to 24/192 FLAC) and a massive library.
> I loved using Tidal for a while but got frustrated that a lot of stuff I like to listen to wasn't available.
> 
> I already pay for Amazon Prime so adding Amazon Music only costs me an extra £5 per month (a lot cheaper than a Tidal £20 / mth).
> ...



"What is Amazon Music HD?
Amazon Music HD is a new tier of premium quality music with more than 50 million songs in High Definition (HD) and millions of songs in Ultra High Definition (Ultra HD). At just £12.99/month for Prime members"

I'm fairly sure Amazon HD is £12.99 for Amazon Prime members.


----------



## Harmonyx

dharmasteve said:


> "What is Amazon Music HD?
> Amazon Music HD is a new tier of premium quality music with more than 50 million songs in High Definition (HD) and millions of songs in Ultra High Definition (Ultra HD). At just £12.99/month for Prime members"
> 
> I'm fairly sure Amazon HD is £12.99 for Amazon Prime members.



Oh yeah, you're right. My mistake... 
Despite its shortcomings I'm pretty happy with the service and the insanely large catalogue. 

I did a quick comparo of UK prices. .. Amazon is still the most competitive (but really need to work on some issues):
Tidal: £19.99 / month
Amazon Music HD: £12.99 (with Prime) 
Qobuz: Monthly £14.99 / month
Deezer: £14.99 / month

Qobuz and Deezer aren't far behind (pricing wise) so I may try them out also. How are their libraries? 

I don't like the way if I go with Tidal I'm forced to buy MQA compatible DACs to fully utilise it.


----------



## Harmonyx

gimmeheadroom said:


> Yeah this is a big inhibitor the lack of bit perfect. In addition to Tidal I have Deezer since Qobuz isn't available in Czech Republic and it is also not bit perfect on Windows. I have a node 2i so I can get bit perfect but the node 2i is not in my main system so it's annoying. I think most people will need 2 subscriptions to get all the missing tracks on the other one. That's really annoying.
> 
> I really hate scamazon but I would be willing to try the music service if the bitperfect issue gets resolved. BTW Tidal hifi here is 11,20 euros. It is nice that they make adjustments for regional salaries etc. but another part of me feels it's unfair to charge people in the UK 2X what we pay. So many screwings lately.




That's a great price for Tidal! 
"Scamazon"... I like that 😅


----------



## TK33 (Jan 5, 2021)

Harmonyx said:


> I haven't tried Qobuz but I hear its top notch. Amazon Music has a few flaws but, if u can live with them, it's pretty great sound quality (up to 24/192 FLAC) and a massive library.
> I loved using Tidal for a while but got frustrated that a lot of stuff I like to listen to wasn't available.
> 
> I already pay for Amazon Prime so adding Amazon Music only costs me an extra £5 per month (a lot cheaper than a Tidal £20 / mth).
> ...



I actually tried Amazon HD for four months before downgrading to Amazon Music Unlimited (still have an individual membership for my wife and toddler to use on Echos and in the car, which Amazon actually gave me free for a year for due to all the issues I was having) and subscribing to Qobuz.  Pricewise, it actually comes out to about the same thing for me (Amazon Muaic Unlimited (no HD) for wife ($80) + Qobuz for myself ($150) = $230 / year vs $200 / year for Amazon HD Family membership only).  I currently have two Node 2is so not concerned about bitperfect via PC.  My main issues with Amazon were:

1.  Lack of external DAC support for Android (which seem to have been fixed now)
2. Offline downloading never worked properly for me.  Amazon confirmed this was due to lack of support for purchased music last year.  Unfortunately, this still does not appear to be resolved since I just tried downloading an 80 song playlist and the Offline playlist only shows 73 songs...not a big deal right now but hoping they fix before I start commuting again.

Amazon definitely has the better library and discovery vs. Qobuz (i end up converting some Amazon playlists to Qobuz once of twice a month).  Still on the fence but have a month left to decide. Maybe I continue to support the little guy for another year.


----------



## dharmasteve

I stream through a HiBy R5 or Phone and  iFi hip dac. I use amazon HD but was about to migrate to Tidal as they had a three month 20% discount showing. I was having a trial and decided I preferred Tidal on my Laptop, using the iFi hip dac, and I also liked playing Tidal through UAPP on my phones having bought the MQA upgrade. But on trying to activate the 20% discount it said it did not apply to me. Wow...how to lose a customer! So I'm staying with £12.99 Amazon HD. Wish Tidal had their act together, but they are 'not on the ball' and we all know the extent of their library needs improving. MQA is good though. So, sadly I wanted to emigrate but had to unpack my suitcases and stay with Amazon........ until Tidal up their service. Many of us older folks don't have the money. Amazon Prime and Amazon HD together are barely more than Tidal. If Tidal rationalised their prices they would get millions of Amazon customers.


----------



## Harmonyx

Android Update:
I gave up looking for a streamer with USB output that supports amazon music hd (my dac has limited quality with digital coax and optical input so USB is my only option for 24/192)
Now that the android problem has been solved (the capping of uhd quality tracks) I decided to use a tablet (Samsung Galaxy S4) as my main music streamer for my living space which is working like a charm so far! 
The bonus is I can now use my phone or very old and cheap Amazon Fire tablet as a remote control for the Samsung using Teamviewer.


----------



## Brava210

So is Amazon now sending tracks unmolested to the USB port on Android to feed an external DAC the same way UAPP does?
I doubt it


----------



## TK33 (Jan 15, 2021)

Brava210 said:


> So is Amazon now sending tracks unmolested to the USB port on Android to feed an external DAC the same way UAPP does?
> I doubt it


I think you are correct.  I just upgraded my Amazon Music Unlimited plan to HD again and it did not work properly out of my V60 or OnePlus 8T to my Dragonfly Cobalt or Aurender Flow.  The app showed it was playing 44.1 khz at 44.1khz but my Flow was showing 192khz.  Indicator on Cobalt wasnt changing when I switched tracks either.  Both phones/DACs work when I use UAPP/Qobuz, which I am not planning on renewing next month (Qobuz has great SQ but too many gaps in catalog and I want more radio features).

A bit disappointed that Amazon doesnt seem to be bypassing Android like UAPP (it does identify the device capability correctly at least) but not the end of the world since I am just working from home for the foreseeable future and use my Node 2is in my desktop and living room setups.

Seems like that popup showing the sample rate the track is currently playing at is not always accurate (i.e. does not reflect what Android is actually playing).  It is unfortunate that this has not been resolved since it has been an issue since launch.


----------



## Brava210

I'll stay put with Tidal then 

Thanks


----------



## senorx12562

Post #1487 on the previous page seems to imply exactly the opposite.


----------



## TK33

senorx12562 said:


> Post #1487 on the previous page seems to imply exactly the opposite.



Yes; I saw that which is why I decided to try it.  Would be curious if it is just me and if it is working fine for others. 

I am just using Node 2i at home right now so not a deal breaker for me but may start caring whenever I start commuting again.


----------



## rlw6534 (Jan 15, 2021)

TK33 said:


> Yes; I saw that which is why I decided to try it.  Would be curious if it is just me and if it is working fine for others.
> 
> I am just using Node 2i at home right now so not a deal breaker for me but may start caring whenever I start commuting again.




I just tested my Nvidia Shield Tablet with my iFi Zen DAC and got 24/192 from Amazon (and the yellow light on the DAC).  So it seems to work for me.  The tablet runs Android 7.0 - I would think newer versions would work as well (if they support OTG mode).

Update:
When I play a 44.1 track the Zen Dac light stays yellow, so it must be upsampling to 192 for lower bitrates.


----------



## TK33

rlw6534 said:


> I just tested my Nvidia Shield Tablet with my iFi Zen DAC and got 24/192 from Amazon (and the yellow light on the DAC).  So it seems to work for me.  The tablet runs Android 7.0 - I would think newer versions would work as well (if they support OTG mode).
> 
> Update:
> When I play a 44.1 track the Zen Dac light stays yellow, so it must be upsampling to 192 for lower bitrates.


Yes. that is what I saw too.  I was able to play 24/192 correctly but, when I switched to 24/44.1,for example, the DAC still shows 192khz so Amazon seems to upsample everything.  Node 2i still seems to work great though (no resampling).


----------



## rlw6534

TK33 said:


> Yes. that is what I saw too.  I was able to play 24/192 correctly but, when I switched to 24/44.1,for example, the DAC still shows 192khz so Amazon seems to upsample everything.  Node 2i still seems to work great though (no resampling).



I'm not sure that upsampling is bad, but I would prefer bitperfect.  One advantage of Amazon's approach is that you don't get any noise/clicks/pops due to sample rate changes between tracks.  I often experience this with UAPP.


----------



## TK33

rlw6534 said:


> I'm not sure that upsampling is bad, but I would prefer bitperfect.  One advantage of Amazon's approach is that you don't get any noise/clicks/pops due to sample rate changes between tracks.  I often experience this with UAPP.



My point was that it is not bitperfect and is resampling, which is not what the previous post seemed to imply.  Maybe it just doesn't work with all DACs (mine included) but works for others? I dont know the answer to that but thought I would pose the question here so others can share their experiences.

I hear you on the noises for sample rate changes.  I found some DACs handle that better than others and it may be an issue with the design or firmware (the person I spoke with at Grace Design seemed to think it may be firmware related). I am using the Aurender Flow and Dragonfly Cobalt for IEMs because they do not pop or skip on sample rate changes.  My Grace m900 went back in the closet because, while it can handle sample rate changes perfectly over USB, it popped dangerously loudly when using it via coax/toslink (literally making my ears ring).  My Nad D3045 which is currently driving my desktop speakers doesnt pop but skips the first second or two when using digital inputs but thankfully no popping noises.


----------



## rlw6534

TK33 said:


> My point was that it is not bitperfect and is resampling, which is not what the previous post seemed to imply.  Maybe it just doesn't work with all DACs (mine included) but works for others? I dont know the answer to that but thought I would pose the question here so others can share their experiences.
> 
> I hear you on the noises for sample rate changes.  I found some DACs handle that better than others and it may be an issue with the design or firmware (the person I spoke with at Grace Design seemed to think it may be firmware related). I am using the Aurender Flow and Dragonfly Cobalt for IEMs because they do not pop or skip on sample rate changes.  My Grace m900 went back in the closet because, while it can handle sample rate changes perfectly over USB, it popped dangerously loudly when using it via coax/toslink (literally making my ears ring).  My Nad D3045 which is currently driving my desktop speakers doesnt pop but skips the first second or two when using digital inputs but thankfully no popping noises.



For what it's worth, my iPad also stays at 24/192 when using Amazon, regardless of track bitrate.   The iPad does play bitperfect for Roon, so it's not an iOS limitation.


----------



## Harmonyx

TK33 said:


> My point was that it is not bitperfect and is resampling, which is not what the previous post seemed to imply.  Maybe it just doesn't work with all DACs (mine included) but works for others? I dont know the answer to that but thought I would pose the question here so others can share their experiences.
> 
> I hear you on the noises for sample rate changes.  I found some DACs handle that better than others and it may be an issue with the design or firmware (the person I spoke with at Grace Design seemed to think it may be firmware related). I am using the Aurender Flow and Dragonfly Cobalt for IEMs because they do not pop or skip on sample rate changes.  My Grace m900 went back in the closet because, while it can handle sample rate changes perfectly over USB, it popped dangerously loudly when using it via coax/toslink (literally making my ears ring).  My Nad D3045 which is currently driving my desktop speakers doesnt pop but skips the first second or two when using digital inputs but thankfully no popping noises.



I'm going to check again to see if it is upsampling all tracks and report back. 

I can't remember if I checked any other tracks previously apart from 24/192... 
I think you're probably right though and it won't be bit perfect. 

Damn Amazon. They found a way to fake it. 

Bit of a newbie question: is up-sampling always a bad thing vs bit perfect? 

I found this advice on an old post on another audio forum:
"It depends on the quality of the conversion algorithm and the precision used."


----------



## Harmonyx

Will an Apple iPad also up sample (the same as android) or can Amazon Music HD send bitperfect data to an external DAC via the lightning port?


----------



## tmb821

Harmonyx said:


> Will an Apple iPad also up sample (the same as android) or can Amazon Music HD send bitperfect data to an external DAC via the lightning port?



In my iPhone 12, everything shows 192 no matter what Amazon hd says it is playing using the lightning port.


----------



## rlw6534 (Jan 16, 2021)

tmb821 said:


> In my iPhone 12, everything shows 192 no matter what Amazon hd says it is playing using the lightning port.



Same with my iPad Air 2 and Zen DAC connected with lightning.


----------



## Harmonyx

rlw6534 said:


> Same with my iPad Air 2 and Zen DAC connected with lightning.



Thanks. 
Would be nice if Amazon could solve this problem that seems to be a non-issue for their competition. 
I'm not sure if the upsampling is affecting the sound quality but it would be nice to remove the risk and just be able to send bit perfect.


----------



## dharmasteve

I just had a free three months of Tidal MQA paralleling my paid for Amazon HD.  After 3 months I think, IMHO, Tidal MQA bit perfect sounds better. At the end of my Tidal trial they offered me 3 months at 20% discount, but no way could I get it to work. I was going to migrate but Tidal customer care is totally useless. Amazon Prime plus Amazon Music HD cost virtually the same as Tidal MQA. Tidal must lose so many potential customers because of their incompetently poor customer services. Even though Amazon is not bit perfect, and Amazon are not perfect anyway, they are easier to deal with than Tidal's worst customer service in the world.


----------



## Jazz1 (Jan 16, 2021)

dharmasteve said:


> I just had a free three months of Tidal MQA paralleling my paid for Amazon HD.  After 3 months I think, IMHO, Tidal MQA bit perfect sounds better. At the end of my Tidal trial they offered me 3 months at 20% discount, but no way could I get it to work. I was going to migrate but Tidal customer care is totally useless. Amazon Prime plus Amazon Music HD cost virtually the same as Tidal MQA. Tidal must lose so many potential customers because of their incompetently poor customer services. Even though Amazon is not bit perfect, and Amazon are not perfect anyway, they are easier to deal with than Tidal's worst customer service in the world.


I like the selection Tidal gives me. But the occasion I did have to contact customer support wasn't particularly good, or helpful after a couple of attempts to get some technical support. In fact I got better answers on these forums, for which I am grateful!


----------



## iFi audio

rlw6534 said:


> I just tested my Nvidia Shield Tablet with my iFi Zen DAC and got 24/192 from Amazon (and the yellow light on the DAC). So it seems to work for me.



Good to know, thanks and enjoy!


----------



## Brava210

I think the fact it is not bit perfect means there will always be a voice in your head saying " will it sound better if it was bit perfect" 
That's the issue with upsampling,or messing with things, You just never know.
My old fiio M6 was the only device I had that played Amazon with the correct sample rate.
I could then line out To a good amp
But the interface was so sluggish, I sold it


----------



## iFi audio

Brava210 said:


> " will it sound better if it was bit perfect"



That's why it's cool to have options


----------



## Papa253

its been sometime that I've been on here, has amazon HD gotin any better?   

or should O stick with Tidal or Deezer?????????????


----------



## iFi audio

Papa253 said:


> or should O stick with Tidal or Deezer?????????????



Are you happy with them?


----------



## Papa253

iFi audio said:


> Are you happy with them?


not particularly at least not on a windows 10 PC. On a mac both are fine.


----------



## iFi audio

Papa253 said:


> not particularly at least not on a windows 10 PC. On a mac both are fine.



Was going to say that if I were happy with my streaming service of choice, I wouldn't change it. But from what I can tell, Amazon HD is getting a bit more popular recently, and I trust that there's a reason for that. A trial wouldn't hurt


----------



## runssical

Does Amazon still use adaptive bitrate technology that changes the bitrate as your WiFi connection fluctuates from network congestion? If so the service is a hard pass for me. 

Our audio enthusiast community should not be supporting this exploitive meat grinder of a company in any event.


----------



## senorx12562

runssical said:


> "exploitive meat grinder of a company"
> 
> Now this is funny.


----------



## Papa253

runssical said:


> Does Amazon still use adaptive bitrate technology that changes the bitrate as your WiFi connection fluctuates from network congestion? If so the service is a hard pass for me.
> 
> Our audio enthusiast community should not be supporting this exploitive meat grinder of a company in any event.


I so get that!!!! LOL


----------



## iFi audio

runssical said:


> Does Amazon still use adaptive bitrate technology that changes the bitrate as your WiFi connection fluctuates from network congestion?



Is it that bad during normal usage? As in, sound quality goes down this much? Just a friendly question


----------



## runssical

iFi audio said:


> Is it that bad during normal usage? As in, sound quality goes down this much? Just a friendly question



When I used the app it was never certain what level of compression you were getting at any one moment. Adaptive bitrate technology doesn't exist for the customer's benefit. It's designed to save the platform operator money on bandwidth and transfer costs. A 24bit piece of audio is much smaller than an equivalent length of 4K video. So I expect it to be streamed to me bit perfect.


----------



## iFi audio

runssical said:


> When I used the app it was never certain what level of compression you were getting at any one moment. Adaptive bitrate technology doesn't exist for the customer's benefit. It's designed to save the platform operator money on bandwidth and transfer costs. A 24bit piece of audio is much smaller than an equivalent length of 4K video. So I expect it to be streamed to me bit perfect.



OK, I hear you, so it's about the principle then


----------



## Uebelkraehe

runssical said:


> When I used the app it was never certain what level of compression you were getting at any one moment.



Does this definitely also apply if you set the streaming quality for wifi to "HD/Ultra HD"? Serious question, i thought this would only apply if you choose "best available".


----------



## runssical

Uebelkraehe said:


> Does this definitely also apply if you set the streaming quality for wifi to "HD/Ultra HD"? Serious question, i thought this would only apply if you choose "best available".



Not sure. I no longer have a subscription.

But I think it's possible to test this. Login to your WiFi router's console and put an aggressive bandwidth cap on the device you're using for streaming such as your phone. Then see if the stream still continues to play. That would imply that Amazon is lowering the bitrate to mp3 levels to accommodate the slower connection.


----------



## runssical

@Uebelkraehe I've used both Tidal HiFi and Qobuz in the past year. I directly compared Tidal to Amazon and Tidal sounded noticably better. The streams from Amazon sounded compressed, thin, and bass light.


----------



## Uebelkraehe

runssical said:


> @Uebelkraehe I've used both Tidal HiFi and Qobuz in the past year. I directly compared Tidal to Amazon and Tidal sounded noticably better. The streams from Amazon sounded compressed, thin, and bass light.



Can't confirm from my own experience as i did the same thing last year. Actually, Tidal seems to be eq-ing for more bass when using their app, which is not what i want a high-res streaming service to do by default.


----------



## runssical

Uebelkraehe said:


> Can't confirm from my own experience as i did the same thing last year. Actually, Tidal seems to be eq-ing for more bass when using their app, which is not what i want a high-res streaming service to do by default.



That's possible. I only stream Tidal and Qobuz through UAPP


----------



## Uebelkraehe

runssical said:


> That's possible. I only stream Tidal and Qobuz through UAPP



Incidentally, i'll be able to extensively compare Amazon HD with Qobuz through Audirvana and UAPP this month, should be interesting. Would be nice to be able to ditch AHD as i'm not a fan of the company, either.


----------



## dharmasteve (Feb 8, 2021)

I have used Tidal and Amazon HD extensively together for 3 months. Tidal MQA sounds the best to me through UAPP using my Android phone (Samsung S9+)..through the iFi Hip Dac. I think there is too much criticism of Amazon HD. There is not a lot of difference between the two when using just HD/General files. Tidal customer services is the worst ever known. Amazon is not great but is contactable. Tidal is an embarrassment. I like the Tidal sound a lot and looking from every angle Tidal just outdoes Amazon HD in sound quality, but only at the top level and there is not much in it. I've binned Tidal though as the difference is not enough to put up with the abysmal Customer Services and price difference is too much. I prefer the Amazon app. Tidal on UAPP sounds great, but does have quite a few problems in use.


----------



## Marlowe

dharmasteve said:


> I prefer the Amazon app.


Really? Well, to each his or her own. When I had an Amazon trial, I thought Tidal generally sounded slightly better, but the difference was not great. If it were just cost, I might have switched. But I simply could not abide using the Amazon Windows (or Android) app; it was and is (I've checked back using the free Prime service) so appallingly awful that I'm not sure I'd use Amazon HD if it were free.


----------



## dharmasteve

Marlowe said:


> Really? Well, to each his or her own. When I had an Amazon trial, I thought Tidal generally sounded slightly better, but the difference was not great. If it were just cost, I might have switched. But I simply could not abide using the Amazon Windows (or Android) app; it was and is (I've checked back using the free Prime service) so appallingly awful that I'm not sure I'd use Amazon HD if it were free.


I agree the Tidal sound is a little better 'overall' in general, but the Tidal app is really poor when using through UAPP on Android, and for most Android phones without UAPP you cannot get MQA Bit Perfect. The Tidal app used itself on Android cannot deliver MQA, it has to be through UAPP and with a purchase of the MQA function through UAPP. Things are not always as they seem. I have to agree on Windows, Amazon HD is poor, but on Android the Tidal app offers very little and is quite some worse than the Amazon app and does not deliver it's best sound quality.


----------



## sebek

I did a month trial with Tidal, but I don't really like SQ directly from Tidal. Sound too dark and fuzzy. From UAPP it's great, but can't play offline.

Now I have purchased a month of Amazon HD, my use is exclusively from Android smartphone, with Chord Mojo and Dragonfly Cobalt.

What do you think of the Amazon HD SQ compared to Tidal and Qobuz, played directly from their APP on Android?


----------



## originalsnuffy

When you A / B sources like Tidal and Amazon you may pick one over the other.  But after extended listening my conclusion is that Amazon HD on its own offers about 95% of the sound quality of going straight from a CD or HD tracks.   I have Amazon HD on Android on my HiBy R5.  Also on my iphone and at home on the HTPC and Amazon Fire Cube.  I would go with the 95% comment for virtually all of them.   YMMV.  By the way I am happy with the service at the price.   And the convenience is phenomenal.


----------



## ForSerious

Unless they have gotten new copies lately, Amazon has the biggest collection of watermarked songs I have ever listened to.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Does that mean the music has "notches" in the audio band or just that there are measures to deter copying?


----------



## ForSerious

The best way I can describe it is an added swishy noise. You can check out a sample here.


----------



## dharmasteve (Mar 10, 2021)

I had Amazon and Tidal MQA at the same time. I would say Tidal MQA is minutely better, but there is no big difference, so I stuck with Amazon HD because I had to run Tidal through UAPP to get MQA. I prefer the Amazon interface.


----------



## TK33

dharmasteve said:


> I had Amazon and Tidal MQA at the same time. I would say Tidal MQA is minutely better, but there is no big difference, so I stuck with Amazon HD because I had to run Tidal through UAPP to get MQA. I prefer the Amazon interface.


I just dropped Qobuz for similar reasons...Qobuz definitely sounded better but if you arent comparing then you dont know any better.  Qobuz just has too many holes in its catalog and no discovery functionality.  Switched to an Amazon HD family plan so now everyone can listen on their own phones and Echo devices that are scattered in almost every room and it even works on grandma's Echo when my son goes over there. Just cant beat the convenience of it. Have my Amazon music accounts set up on my Node 2is and it works great.


----------



## rkw (Mar 10, 2021)

ForSerious said:


> Unless they have gotten new copies lately, Amazon has the biggest collection of watermarked songs I have ever listened to.


I haven't tried Amazon Music, but UMG watermarking that I used to hear on Spotify and Tidal is no longer there. Others have also noticed the change:
http://www.mattmontag.com/music/an-update-on-umg-watermarks
How long ago was it that you heard watermarking? Streaming services play music files provided by the record labels, and it would be strange if Amazon receives a different version.


----------



## TubeStack

Amazon is always missing artists/albums I’m looking for.  Every other time I search for an album, they don’t have it.  Tidal has always had everything I’ve searched.


----------



## ForSerious

rkw said:


> How long ago was it that you heard watermarking? Streaming services play music files provided by the record labels, and it would be strange if Amazon receives a different version


I think I stopped using Amazon music last March. So a year ago. They're offering me a month free trial again. I'll take them up on it and see if it's better.


----------



## 3Putter

sebek said:


> I did a month trial with Tidal, but I don't really like SQ directly from Tidal. Sound too dark and fuzzy. From UAPP it's great, but can't play offline.
> 
> Now I have purchased a month of Amazon HD, my use is exclusively from Android smartphone, with Chord Mojo and Dragonfly Cobalt.
> 
> What do you think of the Amazon HD SQ compared to Tidal and Qobuz, played directly from their APP on Android?


Sound? Qobuz, Tidal, and a distant third for Amazon. Selection? Tidal, Amazon, and Qobuz a distant third...I feel Tidal is pretty close to Qobuz but just a skoche warmer...


----------



## MikeO3

dharmasteve said:


> I have used Tidal and Amazon HD extensively together for 3 months. Tidal MQA sounds the best to me through UAPP using my Android phone (Samsung S9+)..through the iFi Hip Dac. I think there is too much criticism of Amazon HD. There is not a lot of difference between the two when using just HD/General files. Tidal customer services is the worst ever known. Amazon is not great but is contactable. Tidal is an embarrassment. I like the Tidal sound a lot and looking from every angle Tidal just outdoes Amazon HD in sound quality, but only at the top level and there is not much in it. I've binned Tidal though as the difference is not enough to put up with the abysmal Customer Services and price difference is too much. I prefer the Amazon app. Tidal on UAPP sounds great, but does have quite a few problems in use.


Why do you need to contact customer service so much?


----------



## sebek

3Putter said:


> Sound? Qobuz, Tidal, and a distant third for Amazon. Selection? Tidal, Amazon, and Qobuz a distant third...I feel Tidal is pretty close to Qobuz but just a skoche warmer...


Amazon HD sounds too bright and fatiguing. I also took the trial month with Qobuz and it is the most balanced and enjoyable sound of the three.

Then I tried Qobuz through UAPP and it's just perfect to my ears. Sound wonderful. In addition to having a much more intuitive and easier management than Tidal.

Too bad that it cannot be played offline through UAPP.

But isn't there another app on Android that can play Qobuz offline?


----------



## ForSerious

MikeO3 said:


> Why do you need to contact customer service so much?


I can't speak for dharmasteve or for Tidal, but at least with Amazon, I found several tracks that would play from the wrong version of an album. Or they were tagged as the wrong song. Like track 5 played track 6, 6 played 7 and 7: 5. In the time frame of the three month trial, I contacted them about 5 times over things like that.


----------



## dharmasteve

ForSerious said:


> I can't speak for dharmasteve or for Tidal, but at least with Amazon, I found several tracks that would play from the wrong version of an album. Or they were tagged as the wrong song. Like track 5 played track 6, 6 played 7 and 7: 5. In the time frame of the three month trial, I contacted them about 5 times over things like that.


Yep that does happen. Occasionally the wrong track plays or tracks just added to playlists don't play. Playing Tidal through UAPP was worse though so it's 'the better of two evils'. Amazon is far from perfect but Tidal is significantly flawed especially playing directly through Android....no MQA. In the end I just chose Amazon HD because with Prime it is significantly cheaper than Tidal, generally as good, and the interface better than UAPP Tidal to me. Amazon though is flawed, but so is Tidal. In those circumstances £12.99 is better than £19.99.


----------



## sebek

Qobuz interface on UAPP instead is perfect, it's like using UAPP directly. Big plus point.


----------



## 3Putter

sebek said:


> Amazon HD sounds too bright and fatiguing. I also took the trial month with Qobuz and it is the most balanced and enjoyable sound of the three.
> 
> Then I tried Qobuz through UAPP and it's just perfect to my ears. Sound wonderful. In addition to having a much more intuitive and easier management than Tidal.
> 
> ...


I find Tidal easier to use and a bit more pleasing but I did think Qobuz was outstanding sounding. Just didn't have half of what I find on Tidal. I have a list on Tidal 'Yet to Discover' that I add songs to every day to check out that get fed to me from listening tastes.


----------



## sebek

3Putter said:


> I find Tidal easier to use and a bit more pleasing but I did think Qobuz was outstanding sounding. Just didn't have half of what I find on Tidal. I have a list on Tidal 'Yet to Discover' that I add songs to every day to check out that get fed to me from listening tastes.


Regarding the Qobuz interface, I meant that from UAPP it is extremely simple, fast and intuitive. Instead Tidal from UAPP is much slower and more problematic.

By using their respective apps directly perhaps Tidal has a better interface.

Economically, however, Qobuz is worthwhile if you make an annual pass. It costs you € 15 a month. If you pay monthly, it's 20 € like Tidal.


----------



## sfig

3Putter said:


> Sound? Qobuz, Tidal, and a distant third for Amazon. Selection? Tidal, Amazon, and Qobuz a distant third...I feel Tidal is pretty close to Qobuz but just a skoche warmer...


That is just how they sound in my system as well.  On sound, a very distant third for Amazon for me.


----------



## Pro-Jules

Qobuz via Roon here (way better looking than Qobuz on its own + discovery & Radio functions)


----------



## sg2k

I would also prefer Amazon Music HD over Tidal because it's much cheaper if you already have Prime. There is only one problem and that's the hires quality restriction on (HiRes) Android Devices. For example my Astell & Kern Player is restricted to 24bit/48KHz. That's the only reason why I'm still using Tidal. I wrote to Amazon because of this Problem, but they never reported back to me.


----------



## hmscott (Apr 21, 2021)

sg2k said:


> I would also prefer Amazon Music HD over Tidal because it's much cheaper if you already have Prime. There is only one problem and that's the hires quality restriction on (HiRes) Android Devices. For example my Astell & Kern Player is restricted to 24bit/48KHz. That's the only reason why I'm still using Tidal. I wrote to Amazon because of this Problem, but they never reported back to me.


Actually, I pay more for my Amazon Music HD than Tidal - even more, due to paying for Prime on top of Amazon Music + Amazon Music HD (there are 2 charges to get the full bandwidth).

I bought the BestBuy Annual Tidal subscription at $89/yr for the 1st year and $119/yr on renewal. To see the discounted price, create a Bestbuy account (if you don't have one) and login. 

There are things that get in the way of full bandwidth even if the hardware can provide full 32/384khz.  Check your player - try the Android app UAPP and enable Bit Perfect mode.

Amazon FLAC files are generally 44.1khz or 48khz, but there are 96khz tracks available - sometimes not all tracks in an album are UltraHD or as high as 96khz, and some are 192khz FLAC files:

(Note that the album / tracks need to be opened in the Amazon Music *App*, not played in a browser, to get the full high-resolution playback.

The Doors - The Doors
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B0018B1O7I?ref=dm_sh_d723-7db0-1887-bced-89c86

Break on through to the other side - 96khz
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B0018B1O7I?trackAsin=B0018AZV8W&ref=dm_sh_16dd-9856-28d9-dbe9-9c0ec

The Crystal Ship - 192khz
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B0018B1O7I?trackAsin=B0018AYH3C&ref=dm_sh_f6fb-bbc3-b390-303a-e88fb

Light my Fire - 192khz
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B0018B1O7I?trackAsin=B0018AYH4G&ref=dm_sh_9e6e-041f-a920-7df0-9118d

On the bottom track control panel - click on yellow "UltraHD" icon to see these details on the music track:


----------



## 3Putter (Mar 14, 2021)

sg2k said:


> I would also prefer Amazon Music HD over Tidal because it's much cheaper if you already have Prime. There is only one problem and that's the hires quality restriction on (HiRes) Android Devices. For example my Astell & Kern Player is restricted to 24bit/48KHz. That's the only reason why I'm still using Tidal. I wrote to Amazon because of this Problem, but they never reported back to me.


Although I can't afford the gear I'd like to own I don't pinch when it comes to source quality. The Amazon HD offering is fine but isn't in the same league as Tidal or Qobuz.


----------



## senorx12562

sg2k said:


> I would also prefer Amazon Music HD over Tidal because it's much cheaper if you already have Prime. There is only one problem and that's the hires quality restriction on (HiRes) Android Devices. For example my Astell & Kern Player is restricted to 24bit/48KHz. That's the only reason why I'm still using Tidal. I wrote to Amazon because of this Problem, but they never reported back to me.


Both my M9 and M11 Pro bypass Android sound stack. I'm surprised an A&K doesn't.


----------



## senorx12562

hmscott said:


> Actually, I pay more for my Amazon Music HD than Tidal - even more, due to paying for Prime on top of Amazon Music + Amazon Music HD (there are 2 charges to get the full bandwidth).
> 
> I bought the BestBuy Annual Tidal subscription at $89/yr for the 1st year and $119/yr on renewal. To see the discounted price, create a Bestbuy account (if you don't have one) and login.
> 
> ...


I don't think there is any way to use uapp to play back files from Amazon HD.


----------



## ForSerious

Here's my report back form comparing Amazon Music to last year:
They have gotten better quality versions of about half of the songs that were in opus format. Same thing seems true about all the songs that had watermarks last year. Half of them don't anymore.
Again, this is just comparing the small sample of songs that I listened to then and now.


----------



## rlw6534

sg2k said:


> I would also prefer Amazon Music HD over Tidal because it's much cheaper if you already have Prime. There is only one problem and that's the hires quality restriction on (HiRes) Android Devices. For example my Astell & Kern Player is restricted to 24bit/48KHz. That's the only reason why I'm still using Tidal. I wrote to Amazon because of this Problem, but they never reported back to me.



If you play a 24/192 file using the default player prior to opening Amazon HD on Astell & Kern devices, Amazon will detect the higher capabilities and work properly.   It's  a workaround but it does work.


----------



## senorx12562

rlw6534 said:


> If you play a 24/192 file using the default player prior to opening Amazon HD on Astell & Kern devices, Amazon will detect the higher capabilities and work properly.   It's  a workaround but it does work.


I should have mentioned this, same with the Fiios.


----------



## rlw6534

senorx12562 said:


> I should have mentioned this, same with the Fiios.



Yeah my M11 Pro was doing this as well at some point.  The latest version(s) seem to have fixed it, for now.   Amazon tends to break things with updates.


----------



## hmscott (Apr 21, 2021)

senorx12562 said:


> I don't think there is any way to use uapp to play back files from Amazon HD.


Too bad, I use UAPP to stream Tidal on Android, phone and FiiO M15, along with the Tidal app - of course.  I haven't had any problems with the Amazon Music HD App on Android, so there was no reason to look around for an alternative. 


rlw6534 said:


> Yeah my M11 Pro was doing this as well at some point.  The latest version(s) seem to have fixed it, for now.   Amazon tends to break things with updates.


That's an unnecessary generalization since Tidal broke things on Android and Windows as many times as they have fixed it, but Tidal is running fine now.

Amazon had problems with their Windows App for a long time, but the Amazon Music App is running stable now.

I wouldn't kill the joy for either of them with long past situational historic problems that no longer exist.  For me, both Tidal and Amazon run fine on Android and Windows.

And, I don't think I'd be happy with one or the other alone, as Tidal is great for MQA playback, but Amazon has many publishers and albums that I can't get on Tidal, and Amazon Music HD has a lot of FLAC content - as high as 192khz (higher?) - which sound as good as Tidal in many instances.

If I did have to choose only one I would choose Tidal, since it's cheaper and overall I live in Tidal and only occasionally use Amazon Music HD when I am looking for new music I can't find on Tidal.

There are good reasons for me to enjoy both.  I'm still listening to Amazon Music HD since last night, and it's awesome. 
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B00BZQ563Y?ref=dm_sh_3d04-f827-68e7-9039-8b518


----------



## 3Putter

hmscott said:


> Too bad, I use UAPP to stream Tidal on Android, phone and FiiO M15, along with the Tidal app - of course
> 
> That's an unnecessary generalization since Tidal broke things on Android and Windows as many times as they have fixed it, but Tidal is running fine now.
> 
> ...


I was getting good readings, too, when using Amazon HD. But...and there's always a but...when I would A/B the same track, not even MQA files, the sound difference was pronounced to my ears.


----------



## hmscott (Mar 14, 2021)

3Putter said:


> I was getting good readings, too, when using Amazon HD. But...and there's always a but...when I would A/B the same track, not even MQA files, the sound difference was pronounced to my ears.


Yup, right now I A/B'd "The Doors - LA Woman" and it sounds better on Tidal. 

Note that we need to reset the volume level on both to match before judging the track from each service.  It helped out AMHD, but not quite enough this time.

After listening for many hours on Amazon Music HD I was very happy when I was listening to that album until you brought it up and I went through the trouble of A/B'ing.

I don't take the time to swap back and forth A/B'ing music between the two.  Often when I do check there is little to no difference, sometimes there is a big difference in favor of one or the other. When I am on AMHD / Tidal and I am happily listening, for me that's what counts, so I keep the streaming flow going.  I'm not wound so tight that I need to hear the best, song by song, album by album, all the time.

Sometimes Tidal has more inventory than Amazon, sometimes the other way around.  Search for _live at the village_ on both, show all Albums, both have a great selection and a lot of enjoyable listening. 

Both are relaxing and enjoyable:
https://tidal.com/browse/album/56151824
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B01AH0LT0M?ref=dm_sh_7f1e-8f21-812d-5202-93263


----------



## 3Putter

hmscott said:


> Yup, right now I A/B'd "The Doors - LA Woman" and it sounds better on Tidal.
> 
> Note that we need to reset the levels to match before judging the track from each service.  It helped out AMHD, but not quite enough this time.
> 
> ...


I would be one of those guys wound too tight. Even when I hear something on Tidal that I like and it sounds not quite right I move on to another track or album. Sometimes I will listen still but not often.


----------



## hmscott

3Putter said:


> I would be one of those guys wound too tight. Even when I hear something on Tidal that I like and it sounds not quite right I move on to another track or album. Sometimes I will listen still but not often.


Hey, whatever makes you happy


----------



## rlw6534 (Mar 15, 2021)

rlw6534 said:


> Yeah my M11 Pro was doing this as well at some point.  The latest version(s) seem to have fixed it, for now.   Amazon tends to break things with updates.





hmscott said:


> That's an unnecessary generalization since Tidal broke things on Android and Windows as many times as they have fixed it, but Tidal is running fine now.
> 
> Amazon had problems with their Windows App for a long time, but the Amazon Music HD app is running stable now.
> 
> I wouldn't kill the joy for either of them with situational historic problems that no longer exist.  For me, both Tidal and Amazon run fine on Android and Windows.



You are correct, I think that trying to get high resolution audio outside of the Android mixer has been a technical challenge for all of the Android apps with the various DAP hardware out there.  I don't use Windows for native audio, so I have avoided any of that frustration that I have seen discussed here... 

At least for me, the problems do still exist on the Android platform, and I hope to see continued improvement.


----------



## sg2k

rlw6534 said:


> If you play a 24/192 file using the default player prior to opening Amazon HD on Astell & Kern devices, Amazon will detect the higher capabilities and work properly.   It's  a workaround but it does work.


Thanks for this advice. That's totally weird, but it works  Seems like a bug with the Astell & Kern Players.


----------



## Deolum

Pro-Jules said:


> Qobuz via Roon here (way better looking than Qobuz on its own + discovery & Radio functions)


Qobuz on Lumin OS is also dope.


----------



## JES

Being a Prime subscriber, I wanted to give Amazon Music HD a try, and I did. The overall sound quality is a definite improvement over Spotify. That's the only good thing I can say.

My first problem was the throttling of tracks. Even tracks that I had downloaded to my PC. I just can't see paying for a lossless streaming service that's going to become lossy through no fault of my own. It happened three times in five listening sessions. That's too often.

The second problem was on my phone. I simply couldn't get the app to play the songs I wanted. It would randomly choose a different song on the playlist. Or sometimes it wouldn't play at all. It was during my workout, so I finally gave up and just listened to Spotify for the session.

I cancelled the trial and uninstalled the apps. I'm trying Qobuz and so far it's very impressive. Sound quality is better, the apps work better, and I like the interfaces more. The only tracks Qobuz didn't have from my master list of 280 favorites are four from Bob Seger and one track from Sonic Youth. I can most definitely live with that.


----------



## Hadyree (May 5, 2021)

Do you know any good alternatives to it with better sound quality? I mean, it is not that bad, but maybe you know a better option. I have a firestick, and there are so many great apps and solutions for video streaming, I love it! I found a lot of them on https://www.firesticktricks.com/mobdro-alternatives.html and I often use those to watch movies and TV shows online for free. So I would like to get some recommendations on music services too..


----------



## TK33

Hadyree said:


> Do you know any good alternatives to it with better sound quality? I mean, it is not that bad, but maybe you know a better option


An alternative to Amazon Music HD? The post right before yours was just discussing Qobuz, which I also used to have until a month ago.  Their catalog is not as large and they don't have great discovery/radio functions (I also kept an Amazon music subscription for that) but their SQ is excellent and they actually have a true "Exclusive Mode" that works. Qobuz also worked great with Roon and UAPP for bitperfect playback if you use Android devices.  I recall I started with their trial so if they still offer one, I would give it a try.  I cancelled because I just didnt need really two services and Qobuz didnt have any content for my toddler.


----------



## JES

Hadyree said:


> Do you know any good alternatives to it with better sound quality? I mean, it is not that bad, but maybe you know a better option





TK33 said:


> An alternative to Amazon Music HD? The post right before yours was just discussing Qobuz, which I also used to have until a month ago.  Their catalog is not as large and they don't have great discovery/radio functions (I also kept an Amazon music subscription for that) but their SQ is excellent and they actually have a true "Exclusive Mode" that works. Qobuz also worked great with Roon and UAPP for bitperfect playback if you use Android devices.  I recall I started with their trial so if they still offer one, I would give it a try.  I cancelled because I just didnt need really two services and Qobuz didnt have any content for my toddler.


I'm still in my Qobuz trial and have no qualms about paying monthly moving forward. I say monthly, because I'm holding out hope that Spotify Hi-Fi (or whatever it's called) will solve the world's problems when it comes out this year.


----------



## Bonddam

Any fix for Amazon HD seeing my DAC not playing above 24 bit 48k?. Tidal takes control correctly but Amazon only thinks my Holo May isn't capable with exclusive mode activated.


----------



## TK33

Bonddam said:


> Any fix for Amazon HD seeing my DAC not playing above 24 bit 48k?. Tidal takes control correctly but Amazon only thinks my Holo May isn't capable with exclusive mode activated.


Are you on Windows? Amazon's "Exclusive Mode" doesn't appear to be a true exclusive mode like what people on this forum likely think of when they hear "Exclusive Mode," and it does not appear to work the same way as it does for Qobuz or Roon (or Tidal, I assume since I have never used Tidal).  I still need to set the sample rate in Windows sound settings and everything still seems to go through the Windows mixer/resampling.  The only thing Amazon's "Exclusive Mode" does is prevent other apps from using your DAC.


----------



## Bonddam (Apr 18, 2021)

TK33 said:


> Are you on Windows? Amazon's "Exclusive Mode" doesn't appear to be a true exclusive mode like what people on this forum likely think of when they hear "Exclusive Mode," and it does not appear to work the same way as it does for Qobuz or Roon (or Tidal, I assume since I have never used Tidal).  I still need to set the sample rate in Windows sound settings and everything still seems to go through the Windows mixer/resampling.  The only thing Amazon's "Exclusive Mode" does is prevent other apps from using your DAC.


There's no change so I guess downgrade to regular Amazon till they feel like being like Tidal


----------



## senorx12562 (Apr 19, 2021)

Bonddam said:


> There's no change so I guess downgrade to regular Amazon till they feel like being like Tidal


I don't see this happening, actually. There are devices that play Amazon bit-perfect (Bluesound enabled streamers, some streaming daps) but I don't see Amazon caring enough to bother. On the rare occasion I use a pc or a phone for Amazon HD playback, I just set the device to playback at 24/44.1, as that is what most of the "ultra hd" files are anyway, unless I am playing an album or a playlist that are all one bit/sample rate, where I change settings to match. Android phones are all limited to 24/48 iirc without playback software like UAPP or Neutron, but none of them work for amazon.


----------



## TK33

senorx12562 said:


> I don't see this happening, actually. There are devices that play Amazon bit-perfect (Bluesound enabled streamers, some streaming daps)


Good point.  I do use BluOS and it works great for Amazon Music HD.  I have a Node 2i on my desktop and another in my living room.  I do use the Windows app on my laptop setup or when I need to edit playlists (can't edit using BluOS).


----------



## ForSerious (Apr 19, 2021)

> Any fix for Amazon HD seeing my DAC not playing above 24 bit 48k?. Tidal takes control correctly but Amazon only thinks my Holo May isn't capable with exclusive mode activated.


I agree. It sounds like you have your sound card set to 48kHz in the Windows sound settings. The official drivers for my sound card can set it to 96kHz at the most, but Windows says it can be set up to 192kHz. The Amazon music player seems to agree with the Windows sound setting.


----------



## roach7

Bonddam said:


> Any fix for Amazon HD seeing my DAC not playing above 24 bit 48k?. Tidal takes control correctly but Amazon only thinks my Holo May isn't capable with exclusive mode activated.


i find that i have to manually change it before launching the app for it to pick up correctly...


----------



## roach7

TK33 said:


> An alternative to Amazon Music HD? The post right before yours was just discussing Qobuz, which I also used to have until a month ago.  Their catalog is not as large and they don't have great discovery/radio functions (I also kept an Amazon music subscription for that) but their SQ is excellent and they actually have a true "Exclusive Mode" that works. Qobuz also worked great with Roon and UAPP for bitperfect playback if you use Android devices.  I recall I started with their trial so if they still offer one, I would give it a try.  I cancelled because I just didnt need really two services and Qobuz didnt have any content for my toddler.


just signed up for the qobuz trial... not having the radio feature might be a dealbreaker for me but let's see how this compares to amazon music hd. i do love amazon music hd's lyric feature


----------



## DeweyCH

Anyone know if Amazon Music HD can be finagled to cast to Chromecast Audio via the Windows app? I can cast from Chrome, but I don't think that supports exclusive mode, and I've found that to make a massive difference.


----------



## roach7

DeweyCH said:


> Anyone know if Amazon Music HD can be finagled to cast to Chromecast Audio via the Windows app? I can cast from Chrome, but I don't think that supports exclusive mode, and I've found that to make a massive difference.


afaik you can also cast using the adroid app but not sure if there's exclusive mode on that


----------



## senorx12562

DeweyCH said:


> Anyone know if Amazon Music HD can be finagled to cast to Chromecast Audio via the Windows app? I can cast from Chrome, but I don't think that supports exclusive mode, and I've found that to make a massive difference.




The Amazon app for Windows  does not support exclusive mode (in the sense of letting the native sample rate of the file control the sample rate of playback), instead playing back through the Windows audio stack at the sample rate picked in your sound control panel regardless of the sample rate of the file, up or down sampling is done by Windows. I don't know why it would be any different casting the signal to a Chromecast dongle. One of the reasons I don't use a pc for Amazon Music playback, but not the main one. I wouldn't say I noticed a "massive" difference though, but your ears must be better than mine.


----------



## DeweyCH

senorx12562 said:


> The Amazon app for Windows  does not support exclusive mode (in the sense of letting the native sample rate of the file control the sample rate of playback), instead playing back through the Windows audio stack at the sample rate picked in your sound control panel regardless of the sample rate of the file, up or down sampling is done by Windows. I don't know why it would be any different casting the signal to a Chromecast dongle. One of the reasons I don't use a pc for Amazon Music playback, but not the main one. I wouldn't say I noticed a "massive" difference though, but your ears must be better than mine.


It does though, when I'm playing Amazon music through the Windows app directly going into my desktop DAC the option is there to toggle exclusive mode. I can hear a significant difference when it's toggled on, the most significant being soundstage and separation.


----------



## roach7

DeweyCH said:


> It does though, when I'm playing Amazon music through the Windows app directly going into my desktop DAC the option is there to toggle exclusive mode. I can hear a significant difference when it's toggled on, the most significant being soundstage and separation.


 i agree, the exclusive mode in the windows app makes a difference and i always turn it on


----------



## senorx12562

DeweyCH said:


> It does though, when I'm playing Amazon music through the Windows app directly going into my desktop DAC the option is there to toggle exclusive mode. I can hear a significant difference when it's toggled on, the most significant being soundstage and separation.


The only thing that function does is make it so that system sounds won't hijack your dac while you are playing back music. That's it. Has no bearing on anything that could affect sound quality.


----------



## senorx12562

@DeweyCH, I am curious as to what function that you believe that "exclusive mode" is performing in the Amazon app whereby your sound quality is being improved. Please enlighten me, as I am always interested in improving sound quality.


----------



## TK33

DeweyCH said:


> It does though, when I'm playing Amazon music through the Windows app directly going into my desktop DAC the option is there to toggle exclusive mode. I can hear a significant difference when it's toggled on, the most significant being soundstage and separation.


Yes the Exclusive Mode switch in the Windows app seems to make a difference and I, too, toggle it on but the difference appears to be volume and blocking other apps from using it.  Maybe there is other noise Windows is introducing.  However, as @senorx12562 correctly pointed out, the Windows app is not streaming bitperfect and seems to resample the music through the Windows mixer.  My DAC shows the sample rate it is receiving and, when I use the Windows app, it always shows whatever I set the sample rate to in Windows Sound Settings, not what the app shows as the sample rate being played back when you click the CD/HD/Ultra HD badge.  This is in contrast to the Node 2i which, when output via coax or toslink to the same DAC, such DAC does show the correct sample rate.  Note, this is also still an issue with Android as far as I know (i.e. everything is resampled to 48khz when using an external DAC).


----------



## senorx12562

It is also entirely possible that Amazon has changed somehow the function of the exclusive mode setting since I last compared them, which was no more than two weeks or so after that option was added to the app. At that time, I couldn't discern any difference in sound quality between having it enabled or not. The pc I did use at the time was a headless cpu dedicated to music that I manually attempted to optimize for music playback by minimizing or disabling the non-music playback related processes as much as possible, so the exclusive mode might have literally been a duplication of those efforts and actually doing nothing. That's why I am curious about how it actually  functions.


----------



## originalsnuffy

When I want the best possible quality I go to my Hi Res tracks from HDTracks, the late great Pono, or self created rips from various physical hi res media that I have lying around.   When I want convenience, I use HD Tracks.   I would venture that for me Amazon HD gives me about 95% of the experience of the native track.   Sometimes I get short gaps in the music and other anomalies, and I have every reason to believe that internally the app does some processing which probably means the music is not presented as bit perfect.   But it sounds pretty good overall and I generally settle for that.


----------



## senorx12562

originalsnuffy said:


> When I want the best possible quality I go to my Hi Res tracks from HDTracks, the late great Pono, or self created rips from various physical hi res media that I have lying around.   When I want convenience, I use HD Tracks.   I would venture that for me Amazon HD gives me about 95% of the experience of the native track.   Sometimes I get short gaps in the music and other anomalies, and I have every reason to believe that internally the app does some processing which probably means the music is not presented as bit perfect.   But it sounds pretty good overall and I generally settle for that.


I am curious, what are the reasons you believe that?


----------



## originalsnuffy

senorx12562 said:


> I am curious, what are the reasons you believe that?


Which part of my comment are you looking for more clarification?


----------



## senorx12562

You said you "have every reason to believe that internally the app does some processing which probably means the music is not presented as bit perfect." I am curious what reasons you have to believe that there is some processing going on that renders the music as not bit perfect.


----------



## originalsnuffy (May 2, 2021)

There are any number of posts by technically proficient music lovers that have analyzed the Windows version of Amazon HD and that was their shared conclusion.   I think if that is of interest its worth doing a search on this site and google to hear more from others.  

I have no reason to doubt the conclusion that the service is not bit perfect,  and that it why I worded my previous post as such.   But if that statement is true, I for one can't hear any obvious problems from the resampling.  I would imagine that one reason to not be bit perfect would be to discourage piracy.

I do hear glitches (pauses mainly) in music with the app from time to time.   That is my primary issue; again please note that I actually LIKE Amazon music.


----------



## ForSerious

The more you guys say about the app, the more happy I am with my sound card. Seems like all the issues mentioned are solved with the "Stereo Direct / Bit Accurate Playback" option it has.
So, in the Amazon app, I have to make sure the loudness normalization option is off, the audio quality set to highest possible and the exclusive mode enabled. I can tell the Bit Accurate Playback is kicking in because it makes a pop sometimes when the sampling rate changes.
Changing any of these options makes a noticeable difference in the sound.


----------



## DeweyCH

senorx12562 said:


> @DeweyCH, I am curious as to what function that you believe that "exclusive mode" is performing in the Amazon app whereby your sound quality is being improved. Please enlighten me, as I am always interested in improving sound quality.


As I understand it the "exclusive mode" option bypasses the Windows audio mixer. It really, really does make a difference. Not a placebo. Not a change in volume. But an audible difference in clarity and a huge difference in soundstage. If I were to guess, I'd say that the Windows audio mixer condenses a single stream of audio into its own interpretation of L/R, but hell if I know why. I just know the sound is dramatically different. Turning it off and it almost feels like the left channel is just... gone. It's still there, but it's practically mono in comparison.

Who knows, maybe my Windows audio settings are borked and bypassing them un-borks them.

My setup right now:

Windows 10 Amazon Music HD --> SMSL SU-8 --> Liquid Platinum --> ZMF Auteurs.


----------



## TK33

DeweyCH said:


> As I understand it the "exclusive mode" option bypasses the Windows audio mixer. It really, really does make a difference. Not a placebo. Not a change in volume. But an audible difference in clarity and a huge difference in soundstage. If I were to guess, I'd say that the Windows audio mixer condenses a single stream of audio into its own interpretation of L/R, but hell if I know why. I just know the sound is dramatically different. Turning it off and it almost feels like the left channel is just... gone. It's still there, but it's practically mono in comparison.
> 
> Who knows, maybe my Windows audio settings are borked and bypassing them un-borks them.
> 
> ...


Does your SMSL SU-8 actually show the correct sample rate that the Amazon app claims it is currently playing at? When you change tracks does the sample rate shown on the SU-8 (not the Amazon app) change accordingly?

I dont disagree with you that toggling "Exclusive Mode" sounds better(i use it too) but I dont think that is evidence that it is bypassing Windows mixer and is bitperfect if the DAC is still receiving resampled data.  At least for me, the sample rate the DAC seems to show is whatever you set the sample rate to in Windows Sound Settings.  If yours works, maybe I need a new DAC.  I have tested using an Aurender Flow, Dragonfly Cobalt and Grace Design m900 with a Windows desktop PC and a Dell XPS 13 9310 and Exclusive Mode does not work as you described. Worked perfectly on Qobuz.

I do get the correct sample rate when using my Node 2i instead of a Windows 10 PC or laptop to my Aurender Flow or Grace m900.


----------



## DeweyCH

TK33 said:


> Does your SMSL SU-8 actually show the correct sample rate that the Amazon app claims it is currently playing at? When you change tracks does the sample rate shown on the SU-8 (not the Amazon app) change accordingly?
> 
> I dont disagree with you that toggling "Exclusive Mode" sounds better(i use it too) but I dont think that is evidence that it is bypassing Windows mixer and is bitperfect if the DAC is still receiving resampled data.  At least for me, the sample rate the DAC seems to show is whatever you set the sample rate to in Windows Sound Settings.  If yours works, maybe I need a new DAC.  I have tested using an Aurender Flow, Dragonfly Cobalt and Grace Design m900 with a Windows desktop PC and a Dell XPS 13 9310 and Exclusive Mode does not work as you described. Worked perfectly on Qobuz.
> 
> I do get the correct sample rate when using my Node 2i instead of a Windows 10 PC or laptop to my Aurender Flow or Grace m900.


Doesn't seem to; it always displays 48k, which is the default Windows setting for it. Like I said, I don't know why it sounds so different, the bypassing the mixer was just me spitballing, but the difference is drastic.


----------



## senorx12562

DeweyCH said:


> Doesn't seem to; it always displays 48k, which is the default Windows setting for it. Like I said, I don't know why it sounds so different, the bypassing the mixer was just me spitballing, but the difference is drastic.


And I cannot reliably hear any difference. I guess it shall remain a mystery.


----------



## roach7

Can you set you audio device to 96k or 192k if it can handle it? but i doubt most people can tell the diff between 48k vs 96k vs 192k; i know to me they all sound great...


----------



## TK33

roach7 said:


> Can you set you audio device to 96k or 192k if it can handle it? but i doubt most people can tell the diff between 48k vs 96k vs 192k; i know to me they all sound great...


That is what I was doing. 
For example, Amazon HD Windows app will show currently playing at 48khz and my DAC will report 96khz or 192khz received depending on what I set it to in Windows Sound Settings.


----------



## DeweyCH

roach7 said:


> Can you set you audio device to 96k or 192k if it can handle it? but i doubt most people can tell the diff between 48k vs 96k vs 192k; i know to me they all sound great...


I can probably convince myself I hear a difference, but at first blush... it would take some convincing. Strangely, my Windows settings won't let me choose a bit depth other than 32-bit.

Edit: It does change the display on the DAC, so that's reacting correctly.


----------



## roach7

For me the Amazon app shows 192k if I set it to 192k in settings...


----------



## DeweyCH

I wonder if my odd behavior is due to my setting up the SMSL with Microsoft's plug-and-play drivers...


----------



## roach7

DeweyCH said:


> I can probably convince myself I hear a difference, but at first blush... it would take some convincing. Strangely, my Windows settings won't let me choose a bit depth other than 32-bit.
> 
> Edit: It does change the display on the DAC, so that's reacting correctly.


If you don't see anything other than 32bit then it's a driver issue... see if there's any updated drivers for you dac. mine was like that too until i installed the drivers.


----------



## TK33

roach7 said:


> For me the Amazon app shows 192k if I set it to 192k in settings...


That would probably be the Device Capability line, which should show what you set it to in Windows.  The currently playing line below it should be limited to the track quality (48khz in my previous example). Of course if the sample rate of the track is 192khz then the app would show currently playing at 192khz.  

If one did not look at what the DAC is actually reporting, such person might believe what they are hearing is bitperfect when it probably is not.  In my opinion, this is very misleading. I was merely trying to point out that the behavior we are still seeing (was an issue since launch) seems to indicate the Amazon's Windows app is not bypassing Windows mixer, although it may be doing something else.


----------



## DeweyCH

roach7 said:


> If you don't see anything other than 32bit then it's a driver issue... see if there's any updated drivers for you dac. mine was like that too until i installed the drivers.


Turns out, yup. That's also apparently why Exclusive Mode was making such a big difference. Uninstalled the DAC, deleted the drivers, installed SMSL's XMOS drivers, set Windows default to 24-192k, and now I don't hear any real difference toggling Exclusive Mode on and off.

Mystery solved (sort of).


----------



## roach7

DeweyCH said:


> Turns out, yup. That's also apparently why Exclusive Mode was making such a big difference. Uninstalled the DAC, deleted the drivers, installed SMSL's XMOS drivers, set Windows default to 24-192k, and now I don't hear any real difference toggling Exclusive Mode on and off.
> 
> Mystery solved (sort of).


so does it now sound better or worse than before the driver change?


----------



## DeweyCH

roach7 said:


> so does it now sound better or worse than before the driver change?


Sounds basically the same as exclusive mode sounded before.


----------



## ForSerious

I don't have anything that will tell me the sample rate coming out of my computer, otherwise I would love to test out if it's actually switching per-track—or if the app just resamples everything to the Windows set rate. The pops I mentioned earlier, mainly only happen when I start or stop playing music. I have never noticed one while the app finishes playing a 44.1kHz track then starts playing a 96kHz one. (I had a Fiio player that would do exactly that in that same situation.)


----------



## senorx12562

ForSerious said:


> I don't have anything that will tell me the sample rate coming out of my computer, otherwise I would love to test out if it's actually switching per-track—or if the app just resamples everything to the Windows set rate. The pops I mentioned earlier, mainly only happen when I start or stop playing music. I have never noticed one while the app finishes playing a 44.1kHz track then starts playing a 96kHz one. (I had a Fiio player that would do exactly that in that same situation.)


One of my dacs shows sample rate, and it always shows the rate that is set in windows, regardless of the sample rate that the Amazon app says the file is. The setting in windows is also the sample rate the app says my device is capable of playing, regardless of the actual capabilities of the dac.


----------



## ForSerious

senorx12562 said:


> One of my dacs shows sample rate, and it always shows the rate that is set in windows, regardless of the sample rate that the Amazon app says the file is. The setting in windows is also the sample rate the app says my device is capable of playing, regardless of the actual capabilities of the dac.


Agreed. So, if your dac is to be trusted, we can conclude that the Amazon music app does some form of resampling to match whatever Windows is set to. (I am assuming that your dac correctly displays different sample rates while playing files in other music player apps.)


----------



## senorx12562

I don't have any other streaming apps, but it is accurate with my own library played via jriver 24. It only shows sample rate via USB though, so I couldn't test with music via the Node 2i which has no USB out. The Node and my m11 Pro are my normal streaming devices, while my usual dac for music is the Gungnir MB. the dac that I used to test is a Geek Pulse, which I normally use for tv/movies, but it does show sample rate when using USB.


----------



## TK33

ForSerious said:


> Agreed. So, if your dac is to be trusted, we can conclude that the Amazon music app does some form of resampling to match whatever Windows is set to. (I am assuming that your dac correctly displays different sample rates while playing files in other music player apps.)


It may be the app or it may be Windows.  As noted before, worked fine on Qobuz but only if using exclusive mode in the app.  Worked fine with Roon when I had that too (and Audirvana and Media Monkey if I recall correctly so it shouldn't be hard for Amazon to figure out).  I think the only thing you can conclude is that Amazon is not bit perfect and some sort of resampling is happening (I.e. their "exclusive mode" does not work the way we expect it to).  Where the resampling is happening, I have no idea.


----------



## TK33

senorx12562 said:


> I don't have any other streaming apps, but it is accurate with my own library played via jriver 24. It only shows sample rate via USB though, so I couldn't test with music via the Node 2i which has no USB out. The Node and my m11 Pro are my normal streaming devices, while my usual dac for music is the Gungnir MB. the dac that I used to test is a Geek Pulse, which I normally use for tv/movies, but it does show sample rate when using USB.


My DACs do show sample rate over coax and toslink and I can confirm Amazon Music HD works properly with the Node 2i over both connections and does not resample.  Others have confirmed this early on in this thread as well (I ended up buying two of them over the past year and they are great for streaming Amazon, Qobuz, local files and I can even mix songs from different sources on the same Node 2i playlist). I also get those annoying clicks/pops on my Grace m900 that someone described earlier and my IFI SPDIF iPurifier2 skips the first few seconds whenever the sample rate changes (had to remove that from the chain).


----------



## rlanger (May 9, 2021)

On my system, if I enable WASAPI Exclusive Mode out to my DAC (not using Amazon, but another player), then APO / Peace has no impact on the music. Unfortunately, I don't have my DAC right so I'm plugged directly into my PC, and can't test this with Amazon.

So, my guess is that if you have enabled Exclusive Mode in the Amazon app, then your DAC should be doing the rendering and APO should have no impact on the sound. Can anyone test this?

There's also an "Enable Hardware Rendering" button in the Amazon app, which I assume everyone has toggled on.


----------



## rlanger

On my system, there seems to be no resampling being done. I have my sound card set to 24 / 192 and only get that when the track says it's available.


----------



## senorx12562

rlanger said:


> On my system, there seems to be no resampling being done. I have my sound card set to 24 / 192 and only get that when the track says it's available.


I believe your dac would report that it was receiving 24/192 because Windows is converting it from 24/44.1 to 24/192 downstream of the app. At least that is what is happening in my pc. Can't figure out why yours would be any different.


----------



## rlanger

senorx12562 said:


> I believe your dac would report that it was receiving 24/192 because Windows is converting it from 24/44.1 to 24/192 downstream of the app. At least that is what is happening in my pc. Can't figure out why yours would be any different.


Well, I should get my DAC this week, hopefully. Tracking was just updated today to show that it's in the process of being cleared by customs.  Will report back.


----------



## senorx12562

rlanger said:


> Well, I should get my DAC this week, hopefully. Tracking was just updated today to show that it's in the process of being cleared by customs.  Will report back.


What are you waiting on? Many dacs do not report the sample rate being received.


----------



## rlanger

senorx12562 said:


> What are you waiting on? Many dacs do not report the sample rate being received.


XDuoo XD-05 Balanced. It has a screen which shows the sample rate.


----------



## reivaj

Question for yall since my ears are getting trained to the finer sounding audio. I used to really Enjoy the song Quit by Cashmere Cat feat Ariana Grande. However, in ultra hd I notice like a clipping/distortion/peak(maybe?) in the sound. Not quite sure how to accurately describe it. Wanted to see if anyone else picks up on it. Happens during the high points of the song. For example: at 57 secs the music hits and I hear it. At 2 minutes 36 seconds it happens when everyone joins in.
Initially was thinking it was an issue with my system. Yet tried it on my work laptop with bluetooth throwaway IEMs and I hear it. Is this the recording/system/amazon/etc? Used to looove the song but this is inhibiting my enjoyment 
https://music.amazon.com/albums/B071XQD8NC?trackAsin=B06ZZJPKDP&ref=dm_sh_725e-268e-edbb-f3ed-4db9d


----------



## roach7

reivaj said:


> Question for yall since my ears are getting trained to the finer sounding audio. I used to really Enjoy the song Quit by Cashmere Cat feat Ariana Grande. However, in ultra hd I notice like a clipping/distortion/peak(maybe?) in the sound. Not quite sure how to accurately describe it. Wanted to see if anyone else picks up on it. Happens during the high points of the song. For example: at 57 secs the music hits and I hear it. At 2 minutes 36 seconds it happens when everyone joins in.
> Initially was thinking it was an issue with my system. Yet tried it on my work laptop with bluetooth throwaway IEMs and I hear it. Is this the recording/system/amazon/etc? Used to looove the song but this is inhibiting my enjoyment
> https://music.amazon.com/albums/B071XQD8NC?trackAsin=B06ZZJPKDP&ref=dm_sh_725e-268e-edbb-f3ed-4db9d


maybe it's the recording? i tried on both qobuz & amazon hd and i'm hearing the same "anomaly"


----------



## reivaj

roach7 said:


> maybe it's the recording? i tried on both qobuz & amazon hd and i'm hearing the same "anomaly"


That gives me a sigh of relief and makes me feel disappointment since that sound is now ruining my enjoyment of the song.


----------



## roach7

reivaj said:


> That gives me a sigh of relief and makes me feel disappointment since that sound is now ruining my enjoyment of the song.


are you referring to that staticky sound i'm hearing? i've never heard this song until today so i'm not sure what it should sound like...


----------



## reivaj

roach7 said:


> are you referring to that staticky sound i'm hearing? i've never heard this song until today so i'm not sure what it should sound like...


Yes that is what I am referring to


----------



## roach7

reivaj said:


> Yes that is what I am referring to


I'm hearing the same on Youtube Music as well...


----------



## rlw6534 (May 17, 2021)

Apple Music lossless/atmos was announced this morning.  In an apparent response, Amazon has reduced prices:

https://www.macrumors.com/2021/05/17/amazon-music-lossless-for-free/


----------



## TK33

rlw6534 said:


> Apple Music lossless/atmos was announced this morning.  In an apparent response, Amazon has reduced prices:
> 
> https://www.macrumors.com/2021/05/17/amazon-music-lossless-for-free/


Thats great news. Got an email from Amazon today as well.  They merged theirs HD and Unlimited plans and dropped the pricing down to the Amazon Music Unlimited tier.  

Individual HD plan is now $7.99/month ($79 annual) with Prime and the family plan is now only $14.99/month ($149 annual).  Too bad I just renewed my family plan.

https://smile.amazon.com/music/unlimited/hd?ref_=pe_44662510_583234550


----------



## Marlowe

Hmmm. For just eight bucks I might just add this along with Tidal, even though I absolutely despise the Amazon UI. It's arguably worth it just for the huge hole that Neil Young recently blew in the Tidal catalog (and my heart) by removing the vast majority of his work because he does not want it in the Masters (MQA) format. It appears to be a typically silly argument over semantics for the curmudgeonly Mr. Young, but I've loved his music for 50 years.

FWIW, this is Young's statement on pulling his music from Tidal: "TIDAL is calling their files of my songs Masters. But Tidal’s MQA files are not my masters. I make my masters - not TIDAL. I don’t need some hocus-pocus file manipulation that claims to improve my work. I made my masters the way I wanted them to sound. If TIDAL referred to their titles as TIDAL MASTERS, I would have no problem, but they don’t. They call them Masters. I had my music removed from that platform. They are not my masters."


----------



## ForSerious

I don't blame him. MQA dose apply modifications to the sound... but it could be argued that vinyl also modifies the sound.
Anyway, That's pretty sweet to hear about Apple making some more competition to Amazon music. Now I kind of wish I had waited a year to try their music trial.


----------



## audiobomber

TK33 said:


> Thats great news. Got an email from Amazon today as well.  They merged theirs HD and Unlimited plans and dropped the pricing down to the Amazon Music Unlimited tier.
> 
> Individual HD plan is now $7.99/month ($79 annual) with Prime and the family plan is now only $14.99/month ($149 annual).  Too bad I just renewed my family plan.
> 
> https://smile.amazon.com/music/unlimited/hd?ref_=pe_44662510_583234550


I would request a refund for the difference.


----------



## audiobomber

Marlowe said:


> Hmmm. For just eight bucks I might just add this along with Tidal, even though I absolutely despise the Amazon UI. It's arguably worth it just for the huge hole that Neil Young recently blew in the Tidal catalog (and my heart) by removing the vast majority of his work because he does not want it in the Masters (MQA) format. It appears to be a typically silly argument over semantics for the curmudgeonly Mr. Young, but I've loved his music for 50 years.
> 
> FWIW, this is Young's statement on pulling his music from Tidal: "TIDAL is calling their files of my songs Masters. But Tidal’s MQA files are not my masters. I make my masters - not TIDAL. I don’t need some hocus-pocus file manipulation that claims to improve my work. I made my masters the way I wanted them to sound. If TIDAL referred to their titles as TIDAL MASTERS, I would have no problem, but they don’t. They call them Masters. I had my music removed from that platform. They are not my masters."


_Ain't singin' for Pepsi
Ain't singin' for Coke
I don't sing for nobody
Makes me look like a joke
This note's for you_

Neil Young isn't called the godfather of grunge just for his music, it's also because of his attitude.


----------



## Jon L

TK33 said:


> Thats great news. Got an email from Amazon today as well.  They merged theirs HD and Unlimited plans and dropped the pricing down to the Amazon Music Unlimited tier.
> 
> Individual HD plan is now $7.99/month ($79 annual) with Prime and the family plan is now only $14.99/month ($149 annual).  Too bad I just renewed my family plan.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/music/unlimited/hd?ref_=pe_44662510_583234550



I just got the free upgrade to Amazon Music HD, and I must say the sound quality is very, very good.  HD (16 bit/44.1kHz) appears to sound as good as redbook CD's I've ripped myself, and the Ultra HD files (24 bit and variable sampling rate "up to 192kHz") do sound great, but so far I've only found 24bit/44.1kHz files.  
Give this album a listen for great music and SQ:
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Woong-S...d=1621398824&sprefix=woong+san,aps,200&sr=8-4


----------



## judomaniak57 (May 19, 2021)

ok , i am new to amazon, but how do i tell if a album is hi res or cd quality by looking at it before picking it. i only see   what quality the album is once i am playing it


----------



## TK33 (May 19, 2021)

judomaniak57 said:


> ok , i am new to amazon, but how do i tell if a album is hi res or cd quality by looking at it before picking it. i only see   what quality the album is once i am playing it


On Android and the Windows app if you click the album and look at the tracks it should say Ultra HD for hires and HD for CD quality.


----------



## judomaniak57

On my android using BluOS to control my Blusound node 2i there is no indication of Ultra HD or cd quality, same on my windows based computer when i look at music  there


TK33 said:


> On Android and the Windows app if you click the album and look at the tracks it should say Ultra HD for hires and HD for CD quality.


----------



## TK33

judomaniak57 said:


> On my android using BluOS to control my Blusound node 2i there is no indication of Ultra HD or cd quality, same on my windows based computer when i look at music  there


If you use Amazon's apps, it will say "HD" or ULTRA HD" but it will not say exactly that in the BluOS app.  In the BluOS app I have a little circle under the album art (between the Amazon logo and track title) that says "CD" or "HR" instead.


----------



## ForSerious

Well, Amazon considers 44.1kHz 24 bit to be Ultra HD but not 48kHz 16 bit. Personally I put more weight in frequency for HDness, but that's probably because 12 bits of depth more than covers the all of the dynamic range of the analog tape reels used to record most of the music I listen to.


----------



## Danrov2223 (May 23, 2021)

Hello. I am new to this forum so hopefully I am adding my view here in an appropriate manner , but if not, I am pretty sure that one of you will let me know.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Here goes. I really  want Amazon Music HD to do the job of playing back in 24 bit UltraHD as Amazon refers to these music files
For rock music which is my favorite , Amazon Music has every artist and album that companies like HD Tracks offers for sale between 24/44, through 24/192. and also along with this, I like the interface that Amazon Music offers apart from the suggestions which once I selected the Artists that I like in my favorites, it isn't a problem.

Before I progress, please take for granted that I have the latest updates, know which switches go where in the app and have made sure that "exclusive mode is selected, atleast where that option has been available to select ( unfortunately in my Windows 10 pc desktop setup it needs to be re-selected every time that I start the app up...)

Here are my issues.

1. In my desktop setup which is  Alienware Area 51 m - Chord Hugo2 and Adam A3X/ Adam Sub 7 , when all the right ticks and exclusive mode is selected, the  Chord Hugo 2 which displays the incoming frequency of a track by colour, is only showing the indicated colour of the current setting in Window sound properties so, for example sound card set to 24/196 in Windows and playing back  a 24/96  track from Amazon shows up in the Chords Hugo 2 " as 24/192,  and no matter what frequency plays it back as, end of.

2. In my lounge setup, I have a Denon 8500H and an Oppo 205 . I bought a Amazon Firestick 4k (which recently was advertised as supporting Amazon Music 24 bit UltraHD)   and updated it and the installed Amazon Music HD app to the latest and greatest firmware and software.

I then tried playing back Amazon Music 24 bit Ultra HD tracks with first the firestick plugged directly into the Denon amp and then second , into the Oppo 205, (which is connected to the Denon amp). The result was showing  16 bit  playback rather than 24 bit which is displayed on our Sony KD-65AG8 , acting as merely a monitor of this.

I might mention that I have 24 bit music files and they all play back perfectly from my hard drive via USB input in both the Denon amp and the Oppo .

Using the HEOS app that is built in to my Denon amp Amazon music cast from my phone using the HEOS Andriod app plays back bit for bit perfect with all Amazon 24 bit UltraHD tracks.  My problem here is that I personally find the HEOS app terrible.

All this has cost me a few hairs and a serious amount of time trying to get 24 bit playback from the Amazon 4k firestick in the lounge and getting a track frequency change showing once music reaches the Chord Hugo 2.

It isn't all bad....enter Qobuz!

I am on a free 1 month  trial with them now which allows me to playback their 24 bit files.

The interface at first wasn't to much to my liking but after a day, I picked my artists and added them to my favorites. Excellent .
Next, played back all 24 bit variations that they have to offer and each one  going to the CH2 in my desktop setup changed the colour indicator of frequency of each track   immediately, from 24/44 all the way to 24/192, which clearly demonstrates that the output of music files from my pc are totally bypassing Windows and going straight to the Hugo 2. Perfect!!

In the lounge, after installing a small android free app called mconnect light (Bubble UPnP also works here and can be downloaded at Google Play as well) I could playback Qobuz 24 bit music perfectly and still have my playlists and favorite artists and albums at my fingertips! YES!

An extra, which surprised me is that with the Qobuz App and either of these two programs on my phone, I could stream Qobuz music bit for bit to our Denon 8500h and or Oppo 205!

I am passing this info on here since I believe that quite a few enthusiasts are being troubled by my same previous issues with Amazon Music.
I hope that Amazon take literally a page or two out of Qobuz's operation and allow their 24 bit // Ultra HD music to play asa it should and like it does with Qobuz.

HOpefully this will help one of you. Thank you for reading this, especially if you got this far. I don't like to type but this is one time I thought that if anyone else has been fed up with not being able to interface Amazon ultra hd music , here is a solution until they get their act together!
Cheers!


----------



## Jon L (May 26, 2021)

Danrov2223 said:


> Hello. I am new to this forum so hopefully I am adding my view here in an appropriate manner , but if not, I am pretty sure that one of you will let me know.
> Here goes. I really  want Amazon Music HD to do the job of playing back in 24 bit UltraHD as Amazon refers to these music files
> For rock music which is my favorite , Amazon Music has every artist and album that companies like HD Tracks offers for sale between 24/44, through 24/192. and also along with this, I like the interface that Amazon Music offers apart from the suggestions which once I selected the Artists that I like in my favorites, it isn't a problem.
> 
> ...


Yup, Amazon is so huge, I doubt they are interested in their music app serving the niche market like quobuz, Roon.  Highly doubt Amazon will share their API so others can mold the Amazon platform to our needs.

What you don't mention is how you found the SQ through your various journey.  I used to care a lot about things like bit-perfectivity, bit-depth, sampling rate, etc, but I have found that the master and mix quality WAY trumps over any of that by a mile, to the point I hunt for the well-done mix and not care so much about the numbers.

For example, I compared the Amazon Exclusive mode to default Win mixer, but in My system, I preferred the exclusive mode off.  This is a personal preference, but Default sounded more alive and more "raw," which is what I usually lean towards.


----------



## rlanger

Jon L said:


> For example, I compared the Amazon Exclusive mode to default Win mixer, but in My system, I preferred the exclusive mode off.  This is a personal preference, but Default sounded more alive and more "raw," which is what I usually lean towards.


Me too, especially since APO/Peace doesn't function in Exclusive Mode. I find I get a much better experience running in shared mode with my preferred EQ, than any bit perfect setup.

Not surprising since I can barely, if ever, tell the difference between 320 and Flac. So, I'm with you, mastering and mixing trumps all else for me.


----------



## Danrov2223 (May 25, 2021)

Jon L said:


> Yup, Amazon is so huge, I doubt they are interested in their music app serving the niche market like quobuz, loon.  Highly doubt Amazon will share their API so others can mold the Amazon platform to our needs.
> 
> What you don't mention is how you found the SQ through your various journey.  I used to care a lot about things like bit-perfectivity, bit-depth, sampling rate, etc, but I have found that the master and mix quality WAY trumps over any of that by a mile, to the point I hunt for the well-done mix and not care so much about the numbers.
> 
> For example, I compared the Amazon Exclusive mode to default Win mixer, but in My system, I preferred the exclusive mode off.  This is a personal preference, but Default sounded more alive and more "raw," which is what I usually lean towards.





Jon L said:


> Yup, Amazon is so huge, I doubt they are interested in their music app serving the niche market like quobuz, loon.  Highly doubt Amazon will share their API so others can mold the Amazon platform to our needs.
> 
> What you don't mention is how you found the SQ through your various journey.  I used to care a lot about things like bit-perfectivity, bit-depth, sampling rate, etc, but I have found that the master and mix quality WAY trumps over any of that by a mile, to the point I hunt for the well-done mix and not care so much about the numbers.
> 
> For example, I compared the Amazon Exclusive mode to default Win mixer, but in My system, I preferred the exclusive mode off.  This is a personal preference, but Default sounded more alive and more "raw," which is what I usually lean towards.


Hello. I understand and accept your point. My line with this is that I like all kinds of music but my lean is toward rock music from the late 60's and onwards which I grew up with .  Now that I have given away my age group, I have also been a hI-fi enthusiast since my early teens so I have a bit of experience with this subject and feel qualified to at least share my views.

I have been asked  "but what about your hearing, your ears are not what they used to be so how can you tell the difference ?"

My reply to that is I would say that one of thankfully a few things that I have been blessed with and still retain is my hearing.  When listening to an  album"  that has been digitally remastered not only those encoded into 24 bits but also some 16/44 music that has been cleaned up etc with modern day digital sound engineering by a guy like Steven Wilson , I do experience  a more pleasurable and involving listening experience myself .

What you enjoy and the next person enjoys listening to is all relative to each individual. Maybe I am convincing myself that 24 bit masters are better, but if that is the case, fine, as it works for my two ears!
  We all have special things that we enjoy and for myself, listening to music that I first heard in the early 70's and finding that it sounds more evolving , defined and richer in a master 24 bit recording is my gig and I am not trying to convince anyone else otherwise.

I have played back Amazon music ultra hd tracks on my desktop system and yep, they are sweet to the ears. I find that I like the music best with "exclusive" mode, but that is to my taste. What gets to me  though is that Amazon have advertised that they are 100% able to supply 24 bit ultra HD music  which is not the case, either in my desktop setup or via their Firestick 4k, which I had only purchased because of Amazon's claim that it also would allow the Amazon music HD app to playback true 24 bit music in our the lounge Denon etc system.

In short, I want Amazon music hd ultra HD 24 bit music  to work as they have advertised! I  definitely like their way of displaying the artists available and the vast selection of ALL my favorite artists.  All that I would hope and expect from Amazon is to just admit to the public  that they do have bugs in their 24 bit playback in the Music app and get on with making it right because if Qobuz can do it, so can they but if they are like you said do not wish to " share their API so others can mold the Amazon platform to our needs" , then stop advertising otherwise.


----------



## Brava210

I have the same issue with firestick plugged into Denon Amp, 
Says device capability is 16bit when the Denon is capable of 24bit


----------



## rlw6534

Brava210 said:


> I have the same issue with firestick plugged into Denon Amp,
> Says device capability is 16bit when the Denon is capable of 24bit



The recent Denon AVRs (last 3 years at least) play Amazon Ultra HD natively with the Heos app.   In case you didn't know...


----------



## TK33

Brava210 said:


> I have the same issue with firestick plugged into Denon Amp,
> Says device capability is 16bit when the Denon is capable of 24bit


I recall there is a setting you need to switch on to get 24bit (maybe in the Fire TV settings and the app).  There are a lot of discussions about this online if you do a search.  I have either thrown out or packed away all of my Amazon Fire devices so unfortunately cant check.  I use a Node 2i (connected to my X4300H) and/or HEOS for Amazon Music HD now and they work great.


----------



## TK33

rlw6534 said:


> The recent Denon AVRs (last 3 years at least) play Amazon Ultra HD natively with the Heos app.   In case you didn't know...


For a while Amazon intentionally  crippled the HEOS app so you could only play their playlists and stations, not your own library, but they seem to have stopped doing that recently.  I can now cast to my HEOS speakers directly from the Amazon Music app now, bypassing the awful HEOS app.


----------



## Danrov2223

rlw6534 said:


> The recent Denon AVRs (last 3 years at least) play Amazon Ultra HD natively with the Heos app.   In case you didn't know...


Hello. Thank you and yes, I am aware of this. The HEOS app does one thing right in this instance . It plays back any 24 bit track that is selected from Amazon  as it is supposed to.  My problem is HEOS .  I don't like it apart from what I just wrote above. 
I bought  the Firestick 4K  only for the Amazon music application and because Amazon stated that it would now play back their Amazon Music 24 bit files . Well, putting directly into the HDMI input of the 8500H as well as the OPPO 205, it did not, only maxing out at 16 bit and not 24 bit as it was advertised to be capable of and that is my complaint.


----------



## rlw6534

TK33 said:


> For a while Amazon intentionally  crippled the HEOS app so you could only play their playlists and stations, not your own library, but they seem to have stopped doing that recently.  I can now cast to my HEOS speakers directly from the Amazon Music app now, bypassing the awful HEOS app.



Do you get 24/192 in that configuration (casting)?  I had assumed not, but could be wrong.


----------



## Danrov2223 (May 25, 2021)

Brava210 said:


> I have the same issue with firestick plugged into Denon Amp,
> Says device capability is 16bit when the Denon is capable of 24bit


It is a bummer, isn't it! I hope that Amazon gets some good technically skilled designers to get this right because I would like to use the Firestick 4K again , plugged directly into the Denon and to be able to get what they claim it is able to do.


----------



## TK33

rlw6534 said:


> Do you get 24/192 in that configuration (casting)?  I had assumed not, but could be wrong.


No idea if the HEOS app reports this.  I dont trust anything in the Amazon app as I found it to be inaccurate.  I do recall if I select my HEOS speakers as a source in the Amazon app it also shows up as playing in the HEOS app so I dont think I am actually streaming from my phone (just using it as a controller).  My guess is that the actual HEOS speaker is doing the decoding.  If you already have a recent HEOS enabled receiver, wont hurt to give it a try to see if it works.

Anyway, if your budget allows for it, I would check out the Node 2i (or the newer Node).  It works with most music streaming services and allows you to even create playlists across different services.  It also delivers 24/192 via coax or toslink.  I ended up buying two of them since I started working from home last year.  The new one is coming out in June so you may find some used ones for sale.  As I noted earlier, I have one connected to my X4300H (the other is part of my desktop setup) and allows me to stream music to all my HEOS speakers as well from my AVR.


----------



## rlw6534

TK33 said:


> No idea if the HEOS app reports this.  I dont trust anything in the Amazon app as I found it to be inaccurate.  I do recall if I select my HEOS speakers as a source in the Amazon app it also shows up as playing in the HEOS app so I dont think I am actually streaming from my phone (just using it as a controller).  My guess is that the actual HEOS speaker is doing the decoding.  If you already have a recent HEOS enabled receiver, wont hurt to give it a try to see if it works.
> 
> Anyway, if your budget allows for it, I would check out the Node 2i (or the newer Node).  It works with most music streaming services and allows you to even create playlists across different services.  It also delivers 24/192 via coax or toslink.  I ended up buying two of them since I started working from home last year.  The new one is coming out in June so you may find some used ones for sale.  As I noted earlier, I have one connected to my X4300H (the other is part of my desktop setup) and allows me to stream music to all my HEOS speakers as well from my AVR.



Yes my Denon AVR is Heos enabled and I can stream from both the Heos app or the Amazon Music Android or iOS app (it doesn't work from MacOS).   According to Denon, the Heos app fully supports 24/196, so that's what I have been using.  I guess I'll have to try casting and see what happens...   Thanks for the info.


----------



## Arthur Weston

Does this compete with Apple’s new lossless streaming?


----------



## Pro-Jules

Yes but launched way before.


----------



## 3Putter

And it does not sound as good as Tidal or Qobuz.


----------



## senorx12562

3Putter said:


> And it does not sound as good as Tidal or Qobuz.


This is not a unanimous opinion.


----------



## 3Putter

senorx12562 said:


> This is not a unanimous opinion.


Unanimous meaning most people do not agree? I tested it out for a month and found the Amazon delivery of music to be less detailed and missing clarity that I found in both Qobuz and Tidal. Spent hours A/B'ing the same tracks and albums. This was on all gear I own across wired and wireless sets, amps, and DAC's. Seems to me most on these forums agreed with that opinion but yes, it's just my opinion (or fact to my ears. Using Amazon or Apple would be a tad more convenient for me but...


----------



## ForSerious (Jun 29, 2021)

Anyone can like the sound of Tidal, but at least one person has found it to be less than lossless.
Besides all the watermarked tracks still on Amazon music, I have not found any of the claimed Hi-Res tracks to not be what they claim.


----------



## 3Putter

ForSerious said:


> Anyone can like the sound of Tidal, but at least one person has found it to be less than lossless.
> Besides all the watermarked tracks still on Amazon music, I have not found any of the claimed Hi-Res tracks to not be what they claim.


Agree, there are some tracks on Tidal that sound horrible. I may really like the music but if it doesn't sound 'right' or good I don't listen. There are some Rush albums on Tidal that I find poorly done and I won't listen to them. Found the same things on other services, too. I'm not overly technical and don't analyze to the extent many can and do. But I know what sounds good and what doesn't. When you say less than lossless is that everything or just certain tracks?


----------



## ForSerious

If I remember right, it was just the tracks that are being encoded in the MQA format… but that Tidal is eventually going to convert their entire collection to that format. I don't remember where I read that, so don't just take my word as total truth.


----------



## 3Putter

ForSerious said:


> If I remember right, it was just the tracks that are being encoded in the MQA format… but that Tidal is eventually going to convert their entire collection to that format. I don't remember where I read that, so don't just take my word as total truth.


Could be. The MQA tracks do sound good but so do their normal HiFi tier, IMHO. My headphones range from mid-level Grado, Periodic Audio's Be and C's, and basic JDS Labs Atom, and a new NAD Streamer for listening room. Nothing fancy but I can still tell the difference on bad or lower sound quality. Could be my brain playing tricks on me but that's giving my brain too much credit.


----------



## ForSerious

I agree, go with what sounds good. I just like to have a clean base to start from.
Pretty much all of my music gets an Auto-EQ applied, declipped, high frequencies restored, and resampled. I pretty much make all the changes possible, but it sounds great to me. I still need that clean base-line to revert back to in case all my messing around does something unenjoyable.


----------



## hmscott (Jul 4, 2021)

3Putter said:


> And it does not sound as good as Tidal or Qobuz.





senorx12562 said:


> This is not a unanimous opinion.





3Putter said:


> Unanimous meaning most people do not agree? I tested it out for a month and found the Amazon delivery of music to be less detailed and missing clarity that I found in both Qobuz and Tidal. Spent hours A/B'ing the same tracks and albums. This was on all gear I own across wired and wireless sets, amps, and DAC's. Seems to me most on these forums agreed with that opinion but yes, it's just my opinion (or fact to my ears. Using Amazon or Apple would be a tad more convenient for me but...


Well, it might be when you did the A/B comparison Amazon wasn't as far along in their rollout as they are today.  Now I find AMHD compares well against Tidal Hifi non-MQA or MQA, some recordings are better on Tidal some are better on Amazon.

Early on both Tidal and Amazon had Windows App problems, Amazon more problems than Tidal.  Amazon Music HD and App improvements have greatly improved AMHD's usability and SQ.

And, both Tidal and Amazon catalogs have many of the same core publishers, but many fringe recordings are on one or the other, but not both.

I find having both beneficial, I've already got Prime - and now Amazon HD Music is even cheaper since Amazon folded HD down into the base charge - only $7.99 for HD instead of 2 charges totaling $12.99 per month.

And, while Tidal Hifi charges $19.99/mo direct, I bought an annual pass from BestBuy almost a year ago for $89.99/year ($7.49/month) - now $99/year - that renews after the 1st year for $119.99/year ($9.99/month), so my monthly cost for both services is $7.99+$7.49=$15.48, until September when the charges rise to $7.99+$9.99=$17.98

And, I have 2 catalogs of music to draw from, if I can't find something on Tidal I go to Amazon and usually find it, and Amazon HD sounds great to me.

BTW, I'm using a Topping D90 MQA + Topping A90 => I've now mostly replaced my A90 by the Xduoo TA-20 Tube/Hybrid for most of my listening, with some mobile listening done with my phone + Hidizs S9 USB, or FiiO BTR5 BT, or FiiO M15.


----------



## dharmasteve

I have both Tidal and Amazon. Tidal I use via UAPP MQA and Amazon HD through it's app. The only difference is there may be more MQAs than Amazon Ultra, but they sound much the same. Same for generic tracks. Amazon is way cheaper and I just slightly prefer the interface. Tidal MQA is good, but so is Amazon Ultra. Draw.


----------



## TK33

dharmasteve said:


> I have both Tidal and Amazon. Tidal I use via UAPP MQA and Amazon HD through it's app. The only difference is there may be more MQAs than Amazon Ultra, but they sound much the same. Same for generic tracks. Amazon is way cheaper and I just slightly prefer the interface. Tidal MQA is good, but so is Amazon Ultra. Draw.


The one thing I wish Amazon had was UAPP integration.  No way to bypass Android or Windows resampling and play bitperfect.  Somehow you can play via BluOS or HEOS so not sure why it doesnt work with other apps.  Still holding out hope.


----------



## dharmasteve

TK33 said:


> The one thing I wish Amazon had was UAPP integration.  No way to bypass Android or Windows resampling and play bitperfect.  Somehow you can play via BluOS or HEOS so not sure why it doesnt work with other apps.  Still holding out hope.


That would be the ideal thing but I don't think Amazon co-operate with anybody. The Tidal interface via UAPP is not that good. In practice they sound pretty much the same, and in the UK Tidal is silly money, way too expensive.


----------



## TubeStack

I find Tidal is labelling a lot of stuff MQA that isn’t high res and sounds worse than even just CD quality (Van Halen OU812, for example).


----------



## 3Putter

TubeStack said:


> I find Tidal is labelling a lot of stuff MQA that isn’t high res and sounds worse than even just CD quality (Van Halen OU812, for example).


That's discouraging to hear. I'll check it out and see what I hear and write back. My experience with Amazon HD was the first month it came out. I just tried Apple Music with their Spatial Audio and Lossless music and it sounds much better than normal tier Apple Music but it isn't anywhere near my Tidal albums I have saved and tracks in my playlists.


----------



## Nabooh

It seems that Amazon Music HD now have some 3D binaural songs. But it just seems to work on the smartphone App, I tried on my desktop, and it didn't work?


----------



## Brava210

I disagree, Tidals MQA is awful.
Amazon through Bluesound node is Awesome


----------



## 3Putter

What is awful in comparison?


----------



## iFi audio

3Putter said:


> What is awful in comparison?



Was going to ask the same thing ;P

@Brava210, can you explain please  ?


----------



## RogerHuston

I'm curious to try it out. I've been an Amazon Prime member forever.  I'm anxious to move away from Tidal as soon as I can, but their track radio prevents me from going all in on Qobuz.  Roon looks like a viable alternative for track radio, but no integration into Roon.  It seems like a closed ecosystem, I can't even import using Soundiiz, only export. 

Is there a track radio feature?  Discovery seems a bit primitive.  I think Amazon could do good things here, but only time will tell and with Apple Music and Spotify going lossless I'm wondering if Amazon's offer is a bit too little too late?


----------



## Brava210 (Jul 5, 2021)

Comparing Albums I know very well, Amazon sounds much more faithful to the original LP's I had.
I don't know why this is so, but thats my ears telling me.
Nothing against any Streaming service, but value wise Amazon at the moment is unbeatable
The Blusound Node 2i is connected to my Denon X2300 AVR and then in Pure Mode to a pair
of Q Acoustic 3050 Floorstanders, It sound immense and does Gapless properly from Amazon


----------



## 3Putter

Brava210 said:


> Comparing Albums I know very well, Amazon sounds much more faithful to the original LP's I had.
> I don't know why this is so, but thats my ears telling me.
> Nothing against any Streaming service, but value wise Amazon at the moment is unbeatable
> The Blusound Node 2i is connected to my Denon X2300 AVR and then in Pure Mode to a pair
> of Q Acoustic 3050 Floorstanders, It sound immense and does Gapless properly from Amazon


I use Tidal to my NAD C368 and it sounds great to me but I'm curious about Amazon now. I've felt everything I've tried has sounded inferior to Tidal except Qobuz and their catalog is lacking to my tastes. I would be shocked if Amazon didn't have everything Tidal does. Just may have to try it - but all the work I have put into Playlists and discovery in Tidal is hard to abandon.


----------



## RogerHuston

3Putter said:


> I use Tidal to my NAD C368 and it sounds great to me but I'm curious about Amazon now. I've felt everything I've tried has sounded inferior to Tidal except Qobuz and their catalog is lacking to my tastes. I would be shocked if Amazon didn't have everything Tidal does. Just may have to try it - but all the work I have put into Playlists and discovery in Tidal is hard to abandon.


I've been on Tidal for years.  While I'm not jumping on the MQA bandwagon as lossy is lossy, as a Hi-fi tier user I thought I was at least getting the lossless version.  Turns out you are getting the same lossy MQA file, just unfolded.  As a member for 6 years, I paid for lossless and that is what I expect when I choose the lossless tier.  That Tidal pulled the switch is the reason I'm leaving.  

Amazon HD seems like a viable option, but they have nothing in the way of integrations nor any of the niceties like track radio. It's very plain to start.  I think they need to integrate into Roon to appeal to the audiophile audience as both Spotify and Apple going lossless will appeal to the general audience and they have years of a head start.  So Amazon is kind of stranded at the moment.


----------



## TK33

RogerHuston said:


> Amazon HD seems like a viable option, but they have nothing in the way of integrations nor any of the niceties like track radio. It's very plain to start.  I think they need to integrate into Roon to appeal to the audiophile audience as both Spotify and Apple going lossless will appeal to the general audience and they have years of a head start.  So Amazon is kind of stranded at the moment.


It does work with BluOS and HEOS, although the HEOS integration is terrible (enough for me to get a Node 2i for my Denon X4300H).


----------



## runssical (Jul 7, 2021)

senorx12562 said:


> This is not a unanimous opinion.



I tried Amazon HD and it sounded awful. The service does not send you a bit-perfect file. Instead, the stream is constantly modulating between different bitrates as backbone and local network congestion fluctuates. A service such as TIdal or Qobuz transmit chunks from (one) actual FLAC file that is identical to what is available from a retail download store. Tidal and Qobuz also have integration with most of the popular third-party desktop and mobile music players which when used yield even greater audio fidelity especially on Android. So the gap in terms of quality between these aforementioned services and Amazon's service is considerable. Qobuz is very good value at $15/$12 per month considering they are the only service that streams bit-perfect 24bit FLAC files up to 192khz and have a store front with powerful search filtering that integrates into the streaming service.


----------



## senorx12562

runssical said:


> I tried Amazon HD and it sounded awful. The service does not send you a bit-perfect file. Instead, the stream is constantly modulating between different bitrates as backbone and local network congestion fluctuates. A service such as TIdal or Qobuz transmit chunks from (one) actual FLAC file that is identical to what is available from a retail download store. Tidal and Qobuz also have integration with most of the popular third-party desktop and mobile music players which when used yield even greater audio fidelity especially on Android. So the gap in terms of quality between these aforementioned services and Amazon's service is considerable. Qobuz is very good value at $15/$12 per month considering they are the only service that streams bit-perfect 24bit FLAC files up to 192khz and have a store front with powerful search filtering that integrates into the streaming service.


This is also not a unanimous opinion, and has definitely not been my experience thus far. Maybe my network is more robust/less congested, or the fact that I rarely use a pc /phone makes more difference than it should, but clearly many different variables matter.


----------



## rsbrsvp

If Blueos plays Amazon Bit-perfect, why cant a programmer develop a simple software app to allow a PC to do the same?  Should be simple...


----------



## senorx12562

rsbrsvp said:


> If Blueos plays Amazon Bit-perfect, why cant a programmer develop a simple software app to allow a PC to do the same?  Should be simple...


It shouldn't even require much more than tweaking their existing app. But imo the number of people who care about bit-perfect playback is vanishingly small. Most probably use the onboard dac in their computer/phone, in which case it would be of no benefit to them.


----------



## Marlowe

senorx12562 said:


> Most probably use the onboard dac in their computer/phone ...


I would change "Most probably" to "99% of Amazon Music users undoubtedly."


----------



## originalsnuffy

When I want my music to be 100% glitch and stutter free, I play my FLAC files etc.    When I want convenience....Amazon HD.
I get Ultra HD on my Windows computers and HiBy DAP (R5).   For the iphone, I download in HD which works well with BMW carplay and syncs just fine with the lossy but sweet sounding Apple Airpod Pro.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Marlowe said:


> I would change "Most probably" to "99% of Amazon Music users undoubtedly."


I just picked up a cheapo lightning compatible DAC (Zorloo) for my iphone.  It actually sounds pretty good with Amazon HD.


----------



## GlenAppleton

One thing I noticed with Amazon Music HD in the two weeks I've been listening to the service is that they seem to have several versions of different tracks.  Some of those versions are set at hi-res, but they sound like they've been mixed for 90s radio (much loudness added).  In any case, here's a few other things to consider when deciding:

Does Mr. Bezos really need more yachts?
A service like Qobuz pays artists more than 4x the amount per stream:  https://www.soundguys.com/qobuz-review-50100/#howitsupportsartists 
The Amazon Music HD app for windows doesn't actually support exclusive mode on the DAC (if that matters to you)
Does Mr. Bezos really need more flights into (nearly) outer space?
Ultimately, in my mind, if you can afford the extra few dollars each month, it might be better to support the other services.  I cancelled my Amazon Music HD service today (trial period), and now I'm trying Qobuz which seems to work great on my setup (so far).  Just my 2 cents.


----------



## 14christ (Jul 24, 2021)

My experience with Amazon HD unlimited has been nothing short of excellent. Coming from Deezer, then Apple Music, then Tidal and finally to Amazon HD Unlimited and comparing the same songs I can whole heartedly state that Amazon is the clear winner IMO. In terms of resolution Amazon is the highest, clearest, and true to CD quality that I have personally witnessed. Don't even mention the fact that it's one of the cheapest options available...I'm sold.

Some of the live music remasters are leaps and bounds above the other options. For example some of Pink Floyd's remasters at 24/192 on Amazon compared to Apple Music's version is the difference between a burr brown  and sabre chip implementation.

Amazon sounds detailed and accurate whereas Apple sounds melted and more laid back. Two different signatures and I personally prefer the analytical, sharp, detailed signature of Amazon.

Also, make sure and check out the Ultra HD albums. There are tons of them and the recordings are very much enjoyable.


----------



## senorx12562

GlenAppleton said:


> One thing I noticed with Amazon Music HD in the two weeks I've been listening to the service is that they seem to have several versions of different tracks.  Some of those versions are set at hi-res, but they sound like they've been mixed for 90s radio (much loudness added).  In any case, here's a few other things to consider when deciding:
> 
> Does Mr. Bezos really need more yachts?
> A service like Qobuz pays artists more than 4x the amount per stream:  https://www.soundguys.com/qobuz-review-50100/#howitsupportsartists
> ...


Courageous political statement dude. Have at it.


----------



## GlenAppleton (Jul 25, 2021)

senorx12562 said:


> Courageous political statement dude. Have at it.



Is it really "political" to state the obvious when it comes to large monopolistic organizations or artist compensation?  If it is, then I guess I don't know what "political" really means anymore.

In any case, here's some notes I took regarding the Amazon Music HD app on Windows 10:

*Pros:*

The Home page in general is very well organized, putting items related to your listening patterns first, then promoting other items further down the page
The "You Might Like" section on the Home page appears to work very well - good algorithm
Great song / album selection for someone who likes alternative rock, progressive rock, jazz, etc.
Good number of Ultra HD tracks and full albums
*Cons:*

32-bit application only, no 64-bit version (why?)
Song (now playing) view doesn't give any track details such as HD / Ultra HD; bit depth, sample rate, etc.
Inconsistent UI elements, nit picking here but I work in IT so I'm a bit critical of such things
Exclusive mode doesn't set (pass through to) DAC to sample rate / bit depth
Pages with filters don't remember your previous filter settings after navigating to other pages and back again
The app doesn't preserve any state between sessions (close and re-open later), such as output device selection, song queue, now playing, etc.


----------



## senorx12562

GlenAppleton said:


> Is it really "political" to state the obvious when it comes to large monopolistic organizations or artist compensation? If it is, then I guess I don't know what "political" really means anymore.


You obviously don't know what the word "monopoly" means either, although our fearless leaders clearly don't know either.


----------



## GlenAppleton

senorx12562 said:


> You obviously don't know what the word "monopoly" means either, although our fearless leaders clearly don't know either.



OK, you got me.  I used the word "monopolistic" incorrectly.  Have an amazing day!


----------



## senorx12562

GlenAppleton said:


> OK, you got me.  I used the word "monopolistic" incorrectly.  Have an amazing day!


Don't you mean an Amazon day?


----------



## jsmiller58 (Jul 27, 2021)

For what it is worth, and it might not be worth anything, we should probably focus on the completeness of the catalog, the usefulness of the apps, the quality of the tracks, the costs, etc…. While everyone will make a decision based on their own reasons, I am pretty sure those are universally at the core of what everyone is looking for…


----------



## senorx12562

jsmiller58 said:


> For what it is worth, and it might not be worth anything, we should probably focus on the completeness of the catalog, the usefulness of the apps, the quality of the tracks, the costs, etc…. While everyone will make a decision based on their own reasons, I am pretty sure those are universally at the core of what everyone is looking for…


Absolutely agree. Those are definitely at the top of my list.


----------



## Ultrainferno

A few weeks ago we checked out Apple Music and now it's time to have a close look at Amazon Music.
https://www.headfonia.com/amazon-music-review/
Article by @nanotechnos


----------



## GlenAppleton

Ultrainferno said:


> A few weeks ago we checked out Apple Music and now it's time to have a close look at Amazon Music.
> https://www.headfonia.com/amazon-music-review/
> Article by @nanotechnos



Hi @Ultrainferno!  Just curious why Spotify was included in the sound comparison, given that they haven't (yet) launched their HD music tier?  I understand the comparisons of the app UI and features, given that Spotify is a very popular music service for the masses, but for sound quality it just seems out of place in the comparison.

Also, I would like to point out something was covered regarding exclusive mode working correctly on iOS (and presumably MacOS as well).  This isn't the case on Windows OS based devices as that mode currently still only has limited functionality (locks out other apps), and doesn't set the DAC to the bit depth / sample rate of the stream.

Finally, when it comes to music purchasing and comparing Amazon Music HD to Qobuz, I don't think you can purchase HD music formats (FLAC, etc.) from the Amazon digital music store, but someone please correct me if I'm wrong.  From what I've seen, Amazon only offers relatively high quality MP3 (variable up to 320k) digital music, while Qobuz offers the exact quality and format for purchase as it does in it's streaming (FLAC up to 24-bit/192kHz).  I didn't see that mentioned in the article, but it's worth pointing out for those interested in collecting Hi-Res digital music files.

Overall, a great article and I enjoyed reading it.  Thanks!


----------



## Ordeith

Ultrainferno said:


> A few weeks ago we checked out Apple Music and now it's time to have a close look at Amazon Music.
> https://www.headfonia.com/amazon-music-review/
> Article by @nanotechnos



Thanks for this. 

I am already an Amazon Prime member, and the HD Music costs 7.99 a month. I'm tempted to give it a 30 day trial but wanted to ask:

1. How 'complete' is the audio library? Would I say, easily be able to listen to (in lossless) an Alanis Morissette live performance that she did with Amazon Music? Live performances in general - only those done with Amazon?

2. Can you 'download' music for offline mode? I'd love to do that on my phone, if possible - don't mind streaming on my PC. But on NYC subways I don't want interruptions


----------



## TK33

Ordeith said:


> Thanks for this.
> 
> I am already an Amazon Prime member, and the HD Music costs 7.99 a month. I'm tempted to give it a 30 day trial but wanted to ask:
> 
> ...


1. Every service will have holes in their catalog but Amazon is one of the larger catalogs.  You'll have to see if it has what you are looking for.  If you are eligible for a free trial, not sure why you wouldnt try it out. Its no risk to you and Amazon makes it very easy to cancel.

2. You are brave...just kidding. I started walking from Penn to my office on the UES even before COVID due to the overcrowded E train.  To answer your question, yes you can download offline music on your phone to listen in subways (I always lose signal in the East River tunnel).  I think most services allow you to do this if you use their app (only other ones I have used are Qobuz and Spotify, both of which you can download music).


----------



## lgcubana (Sep 1, 2021)

I recently switched from Tidal to Amazon Unlimited.  I found too many recordings on Tidal that sounded like they were converted to digital from an old vinyl LP.  Also there’s a current promo where you’ll get 3 (if you’ve subscribed to Amazon music before) or 6 (new subscribers) months of Disney+, with the Unlimited tier.

I haven’t tested it yet, but customer support (Amazon) says that I can take advantage of the free upgrade to the HD level, without jeopardizing the Disney+ promo.  Just confirmed (Sept. 1st), doing the free upgrade from Amazon Unlimited to HD does not jeopardize the promotion for Disney+


----------



## Eric M

Anyone get Atmos 3D audio working on an Nvidia Shield from the Amazon HD Music Android TV app? Atmos albums trigger Atmos on my Denon receiver from the Tidal on Android TV app, but only getting Stereo from Amazon Music HD.


----------



## Tubewin

Out of 3 streaming sites I've tried, I liked/preferred Amazon music HD the best/most. The other two I tried were Tidal and Qobuz.


----------



## jsmiller58

Tubewin said:


> Out of 3 streaming sites I've tried, I liked/preferred Amazon music HD the best/most. The other two I tried were Tidal and Qobuz.


Why - what differentiates them in your experience?


----------



## Tubewin

jsmiller58 said:


> Why - what differentiates them in your experience?


Some vocal tracks on Tidal seemed slightly recessed and I didn't like their balance with the frequency response. Some aspects felt overdone or over emphasized which could have affected the mid range. I also felt like I could hear more details on Amazon hd than tidal. Qobuz while being better than Tidal to me, again felt overdone. The one thing you notice immediately when you switch from Amazon to Qobuz, is that Qobuz is louder. Qobuz could actually be more dynamic than Amazon, but it was definitely more fatiguing. On certain tracks and volume matched, Qobuz sounded slightly more detailed, but again, to me, amazon was better balanced with the mids. I just preferred Amazon's sound signature.


----------



## jsmiller58

Tubewin said:


> Some vocal tracks on Tidal seemed slightly recessed and I didn't like their balance with the frequency response. Some aspects felt overdone or over emphasized which could have affected the mid range. I also felt like I could hear more details on Amazon hd than tidal. Qobuz while being better than Tidal to me, again felt overdone. The one thing you notice immediately when you switch from Amazon to Qobuz, is that Qobuz is louder. Qobuz could actually be more dynamic than Amazon, but it was definitely more fatiguing. On certain tracks and volume matched, Qobuz sounded slightly more detailed, but again, to me, amazon was better balanced with the mids. I just preferred Amazon's sound signature.


Thank you - very helpful!


----------



## originalsnuffy

Is there a thread to discuss Dolby Atmos via streaming services like Apple Music or Amazon Music HD?   I am trying to figure out if I can stream high quality Atmos music to my Atmos capable receiver.   Seems like Amazon limits Atmos or 3D to one high end piece of hardware.   I am not sure if Apple goes beyond its headphones....


----------



## Alcophone (Sep 21, 2021)

Tubewin said:


> Out of 3 streaming sites I've tried, I liked/preferred Amazon music HD the best/most. The other two I tried were Tidal and Qobuz.





Tubewin said:


> Some vocal tracks on Tidal seemed slightly recessed and I didn't like their balance with the frequency response. Some aspects felt overdone or over emphasized which could have affected the mid range. I also felt like I could hear more details on Amazon hd than tidal. Qobuz while being better than Tidal to me, again felt overdone. The one thing you notice immediately when you switch from Amazon to Qobuz, is that Qobuz is louder. Qobuz could actually be more dynamic than Amazon, but it was definitely more fatiguing. On certain tracks and volume matched, Qobuz sounded slightly more detailed, but again, to me, amazon was better balanced with the mids. I just preferred Amazon's sound signature.


I'd appreciate it if you could be specific about how you configured the apps.

Since Tidal apparently MQAs all the things, including 16/44.1 material, there's certainly a good chance that it sounds different across the board. Qobuz and Amazon Music HD on the other hand both serve straight up FLAC files, lossless compression without any proprietary shenanigans on top (to my knowledge).

But they differ in an important way: For Qobuz, both the Mac app, as well as the Windows app (when used in exclusive mode), actually set the sample rate of the audio output device correctly, i.e. based on the current track. The Amazon Music apps, even though exclusive mode is supported on Windows, don't set the sample rate, so as soon as you listen to tracks with a variety of sample rates, you're guaranteed to have the OS resample the data before it gets sent to the DAC, adding a variable to the mix that Tidal and Qobuz can avoid (if set up correctly). In addition, both apps have their own volume dial, and exclusive mode bypasses the OS level volume setting on Windows, so if you set Windows to 90% volume and use exclusive mode in Qobuz, yeah, it'll be louder.

And then there's the "Loudness Normalization" setting in the Amazon Music app, which Qobuz doesn't seem to have. Even if the app volume and system volume are maxed out, this could result in the Amazon Music app reducing the volume of a loud track based on some average volume in order to make it roughly as loud as other tracks that have a higher dynamic range - another reason why Qobuz could sound louder.

For Amazon Music, unless you want to set the sample rate manually to what the track needs, 24/192 is the best setting so that the app actually selects the highest quality version of the file. Qobuz will adjust the sample rate as needed when exclusive mode is used, which won't be visible in Windows unless there's a device specific driver tool (like for iFi devices). Hopefully the DAC has a sample rate indicator to confirm.
Enhancements and Spatial sound should be disabled (exclusive mode will bypass those). Exclusive mode should be allowed, of course.




 



The OS level volume should be maxed out.





Qobuz should be set to use exclusive mode and the quality should be set to up to 24/192. The Qobuz app should be set to 100% volume.



 



The Amazon Music app should be set to HD/Ultra HD quality, loudness normalization off, exclusive mode allowed.

Separately, you need to set the output device and tell Amazon to actually use exclusive mode. You might have to do that every time you start the app.



 



To confirm that things check out, click on the quality icon. On the left I played Beck - The Golden Age, a 96 kHz track that Windows will upsample to 192 kHz before the DAC sees it. On the right, I played Beck - Paper Tiger, a 192 kHz that should not get upsampled with the settings I have.



 



Apologies if you have made all of these adjustments, but I think this is important when trying to get the most out of whatever streaming service you use, and especially when comparing them.


----------



## Tubewin (Sep 21, 2021)

Alcophone said:


> I'd appreciate it if you could be specific about how you configured the apps.
> 
> Since Tidal apparently MQAs all the things, including 16/44.1 material, there's certainly a good chance that it sounds different across the board. Qobuz and Amazon Music HD on the other hand both serve straight up FLAC files, lossless compression without any proprietary shenanigans on top (to my knowledge).
> 
> ...


Yeah, that's alot. But to answer a few of your points... I always max the volume in the os and control the volume through my headphone amp. My volume settings on both apps are setup so that they won't change when the tracks change. I have my windows os sample rate at 32bit/192khz. I do not have sound enhancements on.  I've listened through Qobuz with wasapi exclusive mode. I for some reason prefer the non-exclusive (standard) mode on Amazon. Again, Qobuz is louder when it's maxed out on it's app compared to maxed out Amazon.  This by no means was meant to be one size fits all in-depth comparison. Just my subjective impression. I just like the way Amazon music sounds more.


----------



## jsmiller58

Alcophone said:


> I'd appreciate it if you could be specific about how you configured the apps.
> 
> Since Tidal apparently MQAs all the things, including 16/44.1 material, there's certainly a good chance that it sounds different across the board. Qobuz and Amazon Music HD on the other hand both serve straight up FLAC files, lossless compression without any proprietary shenanigans on top (to my knowledge).
> 
> ...


Wow.  Thanks!


----------



## attilio

ghualmr said:


> @thelastwaltzuk - perfect write up. I too share exactly the same observations. I also had Qobuz trial membership which is comparable to Amazon price if you subscribe for a year. In addition to your observations I noticed that Qobuz was the best sounding as far as SQ. Interestingly their catalog is pretty extensive as well and growing. I listen to a large range of music genre depending if I am in my office or at the gym or in my dedicated listening room with or without family. Aamzon Music HD though promising does not offer bit perfect solution and to your point sounds a little compressed and sharp. I have tried running it through my PC or dedicated streamer via external DAC's (Benchmark, OPPO 205, Ayre) still the same sound. Tidal on the other hand is expensive. My thoughts are that the streaming industry is not mature yet and has a lot of growing up to do with possible mergers or even acquisitions. Roon complements Qobuz really well but itself has limitations (will not let you add songs to Qobuz playlists for remote listening). Maybe it's just best to select a mid tier cheaper option like Amazon for now and wait it out to see what happens to the likes of Qobuz, Tidal and Roon or if Amazon makes improvements this year.


The problem with sub to Amazon HD,  and then wait and see how it goes with Qobuz, Tidal.Is they won't be able to survive if we all did that.


----------



## originalsnuffy

attilio said:


> The problem with sub to Amazon HD,  and then wait and see how it goes with Qobuz, Tidal.Is they won't be able to survive if we all did that.


Not to put too fine a point on it; but only the big boys are likely to survive.  They can subsidize the whole thing and treat the service as a bonus to customers.  Which means a low price point which hurts the independents.


----------



## attilio

originalsnuffy said:


> Not to put too fine a point on it; but only the big boys are likely to survive.  They can subsidize the whole thing and treat the service as a bonus to customers.  Which means a low price point which hurts the independents.


So we can look forward to a world where we only have  Apple and Amazon. Because Spotify will be taken over by one of them.


----------



## ballard3

Alcophone said:


> Separately, you need to set the output device and tell Amazon to actually use exclusive mode. You might have to do that every time you start the app.


Exactly, every time I launch the app I must set exclusive mode.  Have anyone found the way of solving this annoyng issue?


----------



## GlenAppleton

ballard3 said:


> Exactly, every time I launch the app I must set exclusive mode.  Have anyone found the way of solving this annoyng issue?



I don't recall having that issue when I was trying the service a couple months back.  The main issue I had with the AM Windows app was that "exclusive" wasn't really the same exclusive that other apps / players had, with regard to bypassing the Windows sound interface.  Other than that, the app seemed fairly solid, even if it did use an unusual amount of system resources for what it was, but that's typical of Amazon apps in my experience.


----------



## originalsnuffy

attilio said:


> So we can look forward to a world where we only have  Apple and Amazon. Because Spotify will be taken over by one of them.


That is certainly a scenario, but then again why pay any kind of premium for Spotify if you are Apple or Amazon?   I am sure they already have the same customers for other services / products.  And nothing Spotify offers is really proprietary.    Granted that some people like their recommendation engine or maybe the radio station.    

I would think the buy out customer might be something from left field like Nike or Lululemon who want to add some kind of hip branding.   Or the market could just let it kind of wither away over time.


----------



## Alcophone

originalsnuffy said:


> That is certainly a scenario, but then again why pay any kind of premium for Spotify if you are Apple or Amazon?   I am sure they already have the same customers for other services / products.  And nothing Spotify offers is really proprietary.    Granted that some people like their recommendation engine or maybe the radio station.
> 
> I would think the buy out customer might be something from left field like Nike or Lululemon who want to add some kind of hip branding.   Or the market could just let it kind of wither away over time.


Nothing is as well integrated as Spotify. Spotify Connect is a big deal for one (as Tidal recognized), as is the ability to control playback on any device from any device. I don't know if Apple has that, but I miss it with Qobuz and Amazon Music HD.
That feature probably has years worth or debugging in it to work as well as it does. Cloning it would be quite an effort given the many platforms Spotify is available on.

Surprisingly, there's a Tidal app for my Vizio TV, but no Spotify app (nor Qobuz or Amazon Music). Spotify, Tidal and Amazon Music all have apps for Fire TV. No Qobuz, Apple, Deezer as far as I can see, unless you can access Apple Music via the Apple TV app.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Features are easily copied.  So that would not be a good reason to purchase a company.  Apple or Amazon, for example, could copy those features are almost no cost.


----------



## Tubewin

So I AB'd Qobuz with Audirvana running with Kernel Streaming (bit perfect) against plain amazon music hd, and... I think Amazon sounds better. One of the tracks I used was the theme from Jurassic Park by John Williams. I purchased and downloaded the hi-res 24 192 on Qobuz (I had to purchase the entire album since they don't allow individual tracks of that album to be purchased). I chose AIFF format played through Audirnava in Kernel Streaming. My testing devices were the Focal Utopia, gsx mini, holo may kte, PC. The first thing I noticed was the difference in the flute like wind instrument, 22-23 seconds into the track. On the Qobuz downloaded track, the wind instrument sounded more hazy, fuzzy, and as if there was excess energy from the instrument. The Amazon hd track streaming from their app sounded cleaner, more defined, and less haze around the sound. The size of soundstage was smaller on the Qobuz track than on Amazon. From 1:10-1:27 into the track, the bass resonating from the string instruments were impactful, well defined, and majestic on Amazon, while less clear and less impactful on Qobuz (the details just don't pop out at you like with Amazon). Most tracks I've tried just sound better on Amazon. I tried to give Qobuz/Audirvana another shot, since I just upgraded my dac, but... Amazon still sounds better in my opinion. I was not expecting this outcome. I thought for sure that Qobuz through Audirvana (bit perfect) with AIFF (non compressed) format Kernel Streaming/Asio would result in a better listening experience. To be honest, I walked away from this slightly sad. I had blindly purchased a few albums on Qobuz, from Julia Fischer's Sarasate to John Williams Jurassic Park to Alison Balsom's Sound the Trumpet, when I could have just listened to them through Amazon. I am curious to know how others feel about Amazon in comparison to the other hifi streaming companies.


----------



## GlenAppleton

Tubewin said:


> So I AB'd Qobuz with Audirvana running with Kernel Streaming (bit perfect) against plain amazon music hd, and... I think Amazon sounds better. One of the tracks I used was the theme from Jurassic Park by John Williams. I purchased and downloaded the hi-res 24 192 on Qobuz (I had to purchase the entire album since they don't allow individual tracks of that album to be purchased). I chose AIFF format played through Audirnava in Kernel Streaming. My testing devices were the Focal Utopia, gsx mini, holo may kte, PC. The first thing I noticed was the difference in the flute like wind instrument, 22-23 seconds into the track. On the Qobuz downloaded track, the wind instrument sounded more hazy, fuzzy, and as if there was excess energy from the instrument. The Amazon hd track streaming from their app sounded cleaner, more defined, and less haze around the sound. The size of soundstage was smaller on the Qobuz track than on Amazon. From 1:10-1:27 into the track, the bass resonating from the string instruments were impactful, well defined, and majestic on Amazon, while less clear and less impactful on Qobuz (the details just don't pop out at you like with Amazon). Most tracks I've tried just sound better on Amazon. I tried to give Qobuz/Audirvana another shot, since I just upgraded my dac, but... Amazon still sounds better in my opinion. I was not expecting this outcome. I thought for sure that Qobuz through Audirvana (bit perfect) with AIFF (non compressed) format Kernel Streaming/Asio would result in a better listening experience. To be honest, I walked away from this slightly sad. I had blindly purchased a few albums on Qobuz, from Julia Fischer's Sarasate to John Williams Jurassic Park to Alison Balsom's Sound the Trumpet, when I could have just listened to them through Amazon. I am curious to know how others feel about Amazon in comparison to the other hifi streaming companies.



Maybe I'm wrong, but comparing Amazon (FLAC streaming) to a download AIFF formatted file might not be an "apples to apples" (pun intended) comparison.  AIFF, while lossless, might not be the same bitrate and might not have been from the same master / mix of the music.  There's many aspects that go into the quality of music, and comparison of sources can be tricky at best.


----------



## Tubewin (Oct 13, 2021)

GlenAppleton said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but comparing Amazon (FLAC streaming) to a download AIFF formatted file might not be an "apples to apples" (pun intended) comparison.  AIFF, while lossless, might not be the same bitrate and might not have been from the same master / mix of the music.  There's many aspects that go into the quality of music, and comparison of sources can be tricky at best.


I thought by going AIFF (uncompressed) was giving Qobuz and Audirvana an advantage. You're saying by purchasing and listening through AIFF format it would sound worse? I've also downloaded and listened to them through flac and it wasn't any better. AIFF is a mastering format...


----------



## GlenAppleton

Tubewin said:


> I thought by going AIFF (uncompressed) was giving Qobuz and Audirvana an advantage. You're saying by purchasing and listening through AIFF format it would sound worse? I've also downloaded and listened to them through flac and it wasn't any better. AIFF is a mastering format...



Better / worse are subjective to the ear of the listener.  I'm saying that playback of each format can possibly change tonal qualities of the music, as can the source from which each was created (master / mix of the track).


----------



## Tubewin

GlenAppleton said:


> Better / worse are subjective to the ear of the listener.  I'm saying that playback of each format can possibly change tonal qualities of the music, as can the source from which each was created (master / mix of the track).


Of course it's subjective, but in theory AIFF is superior to FLAC because it is uncompressed and of master quality. I have also listened straight from Qobuz and it sounds worse than AIFF. _*It's all subjective. *_I understand that. But again, subjectively, Amazon sounds better.


----------



## DeweyCH

Alcophone said:


> I'd appreciate it if you could be specific about how you configured the apps.
> 
> Since Tidal apparently MQAs all the things, including 16/44.1 material, there's certainly a good chance that it sounds different across the board. Qobuz and Amazon Music HD on the other hand both serve straight up FLAC files, lossless compression without any proprietary shenanigans on top (to my knowledge).
> 
> ...


Question on this... I've got my setup the way you describe, and within the Amazon Music app the quality icon interface shows what you showed for those two tracks. However, my DAC (SMSL SU-8) always displays 192k. Is this Windows upsampling to its default quality? Would this be what you describe when you say you'd have to manually change the sound settings in Windows on tracks with different sample rates?


----------



## GlenAppleton

Tubewin said:


> Of course it's subjective, but in theory AIFF is superior to FLAC because it is uncompressed and of master quality. I have also listened straight from Qobuz and it sounds worse than AIFF. _*It's all subjective. *_I understand that. But again, subjectively, Amazon sounds better.



I guess a better example of source material would be my experience with both Amazon and Qobuz tracks from different mixes.  I did a trial for 3 weeks with the Amazon HD service, and I found several albums that were remixed / remastered, and while some of the collections (albums) sounded amazing, others sounded overly compressed.  Same music, different mix / master.

Now, I use Qobuz exclusively, and I've run into a similar pattern where in some cases the Hi-Res (24/96 - 24/192) don't sound as good as the standard CD (16/44.1) version of the same track.

Ultimately, to say one service / software is better for music you would probably need to use the same master+mix+format+bitrate+depth source through both.  It would then be equivalent to playing the same physical media on different gear for a comparison.  Otherwise, many variables to consider.


----------



## Tubewin

DeweyCH said:


> Question on this... I've got my setup the way you describe, and within the Amazon Music app the quality icon interface shows what you showed for those two tracks. However, my DAC (SMSL SU-8) always displays 192k. Is this Windows upsampling to its default quality? Would this be what you describe when you say you'd have to manually change the sound settings in Windows on tracks with different sample rates?


Amazon does not do bit perfect streaming. Their exclusive mode still doesn't work.


----------



## GlenAppleton

DeweyCH said:


> Question on this... I've got my setup the way you describe, and within the Amazon Music app the quality icon interface shows what you showed for those two tracks. However, my DAC (SMSL SU-8) always displays 192k. Is this Windows upsampling to its default quality? Would this be what you describe when you say you'd have to manually change the sound settings in Windows on tracks with different sample rates?



FYI:  The Amazon music app doesn't bypass the Windows sound processing layer, so yes, Windows is up-sampling and adding EQ when using the Amazon Music app.


----------



## DeweyCH

Tubewin said:


> Amazon does not do bit perfect streaming. Their exclusive mode still doesn't work.


Then what _does_ their exclusive mode do? I've gone back and forth here a while back with people about whether it actually does anything, but it sounds dramatically better in Exclusive Mode than not.


----------



## Alcophone

DeweyCH said:


> Question on this... I've got my setup the way you describe, and within the Amazon Music app the quality icon interface shows what you showed for those two tracks. However, my DAC (SMSL SU-8) always displays 192k. Is this Windows upsampling to its default quality? Would this be what you describe when you say you'd have to manually change the sound settings in Windows on tracks with different sample rates?


Correct. Now I don't know for sure whether the Amazon Music app is upsampling everything to 192 kHz or whether Windows does, but something is before it hits the DAC.



GlenAppleton said:


> FYI:  The Amazon music app doesn't bypass the Windows sound processing layer, so yes, Windows is up-sampling and adding EQ when using the Amazon Music app.


Exclusive mode should still bypass EQ and have the advantage that Windows has no need to lower the volume to allow some headroom for mixing audio from multiple apps. It may well be bit perfect if the track happens to have the same sample rate as what the DAC is set to. I have to verify this, very curious about it.


----------



## Tubewin

DeweyCH said:


> Then what _does_ their exclusive mode do? I've gone back and forth here a while back with people about whether it actually does anything, but it sounds dramatically better in Exclusive Mode than not.


To be honest, I do prefer the non-exclusive mode. But to answer your question, I'm not sure what it does. Exclusive mode is meant to bypass Windows processing, but the bit rate doesn't change from track to track. So it definitely is not working as intended.


----------



## GlenAppleton

Regarding the exclusive mode, from the Amazon Music HD FAQs:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/ama...sless-streaming.905493/page-116#post-16610510 


> What is exclusive mode?​When exclusive mode is enabled, the Amazon Music app will block sounds from other applications while music is playing. This provides a number of sound quality benefits, notably that it allows the Amazon Music app to play music in the highest possible quality supported by your playback device. It also reduces the likelihood of playback errors that can occur when multiple applications are playing audio at the same time. It is important to note that other applications will not be able to play audio when a song is playing while exclusive mode is enabled.


----------



## GlenAppleton

Alcophone said:


> Correct. Now I don't know for sure whether the Amazon Music app is upsampling everything to 192 kHz or whether Windows does, but something is before it hits the DAC.
> 
> 
> Exclusive mode should still bypass EQ and have the advantage that Windows has no need to lower the volume to allow some headroom for mixing audio from multiple apps. It may well be bit perfect if the track happens to have the same sample rate as what the DAC is set to. I have to verify this, very curious about it.



See my previous post with the text from the Amazon FAQs.  There is not information saying that it does anything but lock the device, preventing other software from using it during playback of the music.  So, you might be correct, but that wasn't my experience when I was using it a while back (it didn't bypass my EQ panel settings).  Maybe it has changed in the last couple of months.


----------



## Alcophone

GlenAppleton said:


> See my previous post with the text from the Amazon FAQs.  There is not information saying that it does anything but lock the device, preventing other software from using it during playback of the music.  So, you might be correct, but that wasn't my experience when I was using it a while back (it didn't bypass my EQ panel settings).  Maybe it has changed in the last couple of months.


What is the EQ panel you are referring to? Do you mean the Enhancements panel in the Windows sound settings?

I just tried the Bass Boost setting with an 18 dB boost at 600 Hz:










This sounds muffled (exclusive mode off):





This does not (exclusive mode on):


----------



## Tubewin

Alcophone said:


> What is the EQ panel you are referring to? Do you mean the Enhancements panel in the Windows sound settings?
> 
> I just tried the Bass Boost setting with an 18 dB boost at 600 Hz:
> 
> ...


Interesting, thank you for that. So it does bypass some aspects of windows processing.


----------



## GlenAppleton

Alcophone said:


> What is the EQ panel you are referring to? Do you mean the Enhancements panel in the Windows sound settings?
> 
> I just tried the Bass Boost setting with an 18 dB boost at 600 Hz:
> 
> ...



Actually, I was talking about an HP sound utility that came with my computer, so maybe my situation is different.


----------



## Alcophone

GlenAppleton said:


> Actually, I was talking about an HP sound utility that came with my computer, so maybe my situation is different.


Ah, yes, no idea how that is exactly implemented. If Amazon Music's exclusive mode doesn't bypass that I would expect Qobuz, Tidal and foobar2000 to fail to do so as well.


----------



## GlenAppleton (Oct 13, 2021)

Alcophone said:


> Ah, yes, no idea how that is exactly implemented. If Amazon Music's exclusive mode doesn't bypass that I would expect Qobuz, Tidal and foobar2000 to fail to do so as well.



Both the Qobuz app and Audirvana implement exclusive mode in a way that transport a bit-perfect stream directly to my external DAC.  The direct stream uses either WASAPI, ASIO, or Kernel streaming mode and completely bypasses all Windows sound processing, including the HP sound panel.

From what I've read, that is what exclusive mode is supposed to do, and the Amazon Music app doesn't implement it this way.


----------



## Tubewin

Alcophone said:


> What is the EQ panel you are referring to? Do you mean the Enhancements panel in the Windows sound settings?
> 
> I just tried the Bass Boost setting with an 18 dB boost at 600 Hz:
> 
> ...


So I just tried changing some stuff in windows like low frequency, and as soon as I change it and hit accept the exclusive mode automatically turns off. The enhancement becomes active and exclusive mode automatically slides off. Something isn't working properly with their exclusive mode in my opinion.


----------



## Vzyenyx

jumped on amazon and it's really great love the UI / lyrics etc. Jumped from spotify gonna try out qobuz as well and see how it compares to these two


----------



## Alcophone (Oct 14, 2021)

Alrighty, I did some investigating. I can record digital audio with my Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 2nd Gen, allowing for some comparisons. Keep in mind, I limited my recordings to the first 60 seconds of each track.

First, I used my Bluesound Node 2i since that is the only device I have that sets the sample rate of a connected DAC correctly for Amazon Music. Consequently, my suspicion has long been that this device is bit perfect, and it is. I recorded it playing some FLAC files from a USB stick and the result is identical to what I have on disk. So that's a good start.

Next I tried to find a song in 24/192 that I have purchased and that is available on Qobuz and Amazon Music as well.

My first attempt was *Beck - Paper Tiger*, track 2 from the album Sea Change (Qobuz, Amazon Music, HDtracks). While I can get this to play at 24/192 on the desktop, Qobuz didn't play along on the Node 2i for some reason. With another 24/192 song it did, so this was a weird fluke, not sure what happened.
I played and recorded the first 60+ seconds with the Amazon Music integration. Attempts 1, 3 and 4 were identical, attempt 2 had a good chunk that is somehow different. After attempt 2 I turned on the clock trim feature in the Node 2i, maybe it was one of those glitches it's trying to prevent that caused the difference. But broadly speaking, the results are repeatable - one worry I had was that streaming service may leave a slightly different watermark each time you play a song to track copyright infringement. That does not appear to be the case, though.
Comparing the output to what I had on disk from HDtracks was strange. Some chunks were identical, some were not. Scrolling through the list of bit-by-bit differences, I noticed a pattern, there is some regularity to the blocks with different bits. I suspect some watermarking is going on, but I didn't look into it further yet. Unclear whether it's watermarked on Amazon Music or on HDtracks (or both).

My second attempt was *Muddy Waters - Good Morning Little Schoolgirl*, track 4 from the album The Folk Singer (Qobuz, Amazon Music, HDtracks). The Amazon version and the HDtracks version have the same kind of regular difference as with the previous song, which I find interesting. Actually, for both Amazon and Qobuz, almost exactly the first second is completely identical to the HDtracks version, then the differences start. So very likely there's some watermarking at play here.

For the third attempt I gave up on hi-res, switching to 16/44.1 with Main Titles, track 1 from *Christophe Beck's The Pink Panther* soundtrack (Qobuz, Amazon Music, Qobuz Store). That was helpful because I bought this album from Qobuz. And the streaming version is exactly identical. Whether I look at the downloaded FLAC file, record the output from the Bluesound Node 2i, use the Qobuz Windows app with ASIO or WASAPI exclusive, I get exactly the same bits. Perfect.
Going to non-exclusive WASAPI mode, there are two short chunks, less than 4 ms long, that are different, everything else is identical to WASAPI exclusive mode. The exact same thing can be observed with the Amazon Music app, the same two parts of the track differ between exclusive and non-exclusive mode, even though the tracks themselves have lots of differences, but also lots of identical segments. Maybe some more watermarking? Anyway, it seems like Amazon Music is using WASAPI whether exclusive mode or non exclusive mode is used.
That is probably good, which we can see when using Qobuz with DirectSound instead of non-exclusive WASAPI mode, resulting in far more differences than between the two WASAPI modes. Still, the vast majority of bits are identical, it looks like it's the loudest segments that differ, possibly because Windows needs to leave some headroom to mix the sound of multiple applications. So if you can choose between DirectSound and WASAPI in any form, use WASAPI.
Lastly, I can confirm that the Amazon Music Windows app's output in WASAPI exclusive mode is identical to the output of the Node 2i with Amazon Music (provided the DAC's bit depth/sample rate matches the track's bit depth/sample rate). So manually adjusting the sample rate of the DAC for each song and using exclusive mode should yield the same result that we should get if the app adjusted the sample rate itself.

For the fourth attempt I used a track that I had on CD, namely *Lindsay Lou - Sugar* from the album Southland (Qobuz, Amazon Music, Portmerch). That was also very interesting. I found that when ripping the same CD multiple times, you may get largely the same bytes, but maybe a few more or less in the beginning or the end. Similarly, I had to shift the bits a bit to make things line up. Amazon had the better result here, skipping the first 12 samples of Amazon's track made it completely identical with my CD rip. For Qobuz instead I skipped the first 12 samples of my CD rip, then got a small chunk of different bits, with the rest of the file being completely identical. So essentially this song is completely identical between Amazon Music and Qobuz, making it a good candidate to try and see whether you hear differences between the two services.

In summary, using Amazon Music in exclusive mode + matching the DAC's sample rate to the track is objectively the best way to use it. However, skipping exclusive mode seems to make little difference as long as the volume is set to max in the app and on the OS level, enhancements are disabled for the audio device, etc. Yes, it won't be entirely bit perfect, but at least in my testing, 99% of the track had the exact same bits either way. It would be nice if Amazon could set the sample rate for us in exclusive mode, like the Node 2i does.

Apart from that, watermarking seems to be in play for some tracks, possibly from the publisher side and outside of the control of the streaming services. What the impact of those differences is on the sound I can't say, but since the watermarks aren't identical across the services there doesn't seem to be a way to categorically rule out differences in sound even for the same recordings / masters.


----------



## GlenAppleton

Alcophone said:


> Lastly, I can confirm that the Amazon Music Windows app's output in WASAPI exclusive mode is identical to the output of the Node 2i with Amazon Music (provided the DAC's bit depth/sample rate matches the track's bit depth/sample rate). So manually adjusting the sample rate of the DAC for each song and using exclusive mode should yield the same result that we should get if the app adjusted the sample rate itself.





Alcophone said:


> In summary, using Amazon Music in exclusive mode + matching the DAC's sample rate to the track is objectively the best way to use it. However, skipping exclusive mode seems to make little difference as long as the volume is set to max in the app and on the OS level, enhancements are disabled for the audio device, etc. Yes, it won't be entirely bit perfect, but at least in my testing, 99% of the track had the exact same bits either way. It would be nice if Amazon could set the sample rate for us in exclusive mode, like the Node 2i does.



Nice analysis!  I believe that the difference in the bits between exclusive (bit-perfect stream) vs. the Amazon implementation which allows Windows to up/down sample based on the DAC settings in Windows is something most people won't really notice or care about.  If you have a decent enough computer, the resampling process shouldn't introduce much (if any) digital noise to the music, so just set it to the highest level based on the DAC abilities and you should be good.  It would be nice if Amazon eventually updates their implementation of exclusive mode to what many (audiophiles) consider should be standard, and we'll see if they prioritize that change going forward.

One thing I would recommend when using the Amazon app would be to limit other processes (CPU heavy work loads) on the computer if you're doing a serious listening session so the resources can be dedicated to the re-sampling process and avoid potential digital noise introduced in the music stream data.  Otherwise, if just casually listening to music in the background, it probably won't be noticeable.


----------



## Tubewin

Sticking with qobuz and audirvana for awhile.


----------



## Alcophone (Oct 15, 2021)

GlenAppleton said:


> I believe that the difference in the bits between exclusive (bit-perfect stream) vs. the Amazon implementation which allows Windows to up/down sample based on the DAC settings in Windows is something most people won't really notice or care about.


Using exclusive mode does not prevent resampling, setting the sample rate of the DAC to match the track does (even without exclusive mode). I wouldn't call the potential additional partial changes to the bits when not using exclusive mode "resampling". I thought it might be some form of limiting maybe to prevent clipping but if my math is right, it didn't happen during a particularly loud part of the track.
I'd still agree that at least in this case most people won't notice because it was one < 4 ms chunk that differed, and one even smaller chunk, the rest was identical.
It's still unclear where the resampling occurs, other apps seem to be able to force the DAC's sample rate by using exclusive mode, but this comes down to the WASAPI API, which I don't know much about.



GlenAppleton said:


> If you have a decent enough computer, the resampling process shouldn't introduce much (if any) digital noise to the music, so just set it to the highest level based on the DAC abilities and you should be good.


That is my recommendation for convenience, but it is not ideal for a number of reasons, even if the computer is up to snuff. One reason is that not all filters (needed for resampling) are created equal, and noise isn't my main concern here. Schiit emphasizes their (mega) combo burrito filter as responsible for some of the sonic pleasantries that can be enjoyed with their DACs. For the Modi Multibit and the original Bifrost Multibit, sending it audio upsampled to 192 kHz will completely bypass that filter. For their other multibit DACs, the filter will still be used to upsample to 352.8 or 384 kHz, but its impact is obviously diminished at that point since its using samples derived by some other filter as the basis. Can you hear that difference? Maybe, maybe not.
I stopped using an external master clock with my reclocker because that resulted in it resampling the audio. Not even upsampling the audio, mind you, merely resampling it with the same sample rate, introducing filter artifacts like ringing into the signal sent to the DAC. That turned out to be responsible for a harshness that almost made me return a new amplifier.
That's why I'm so pedantic about it, as subtle as the impact of filters in general is, I seem to be sensitive to it, if only because typically resampling in the OS means multiple filters are involved. Sometimes I feel like "something isn't right" and discover that some settings changed that resulted in undue resampling. On the other hand, I have no idea how often it happened without me noticing it, so there is that.



GlenAppleton said:


> It would be nice if Amazon eventually updates their implementation of exclusive mode to what many (audiophiles) consider should be standard, and we'll see if they prioritize that change going forward.


Yupp, it would be. At this point it seems to be a conscious decision by them, possibly to avoid issues when changing sample rates, like brief pauses or glitches, or to increase compatibility with devices. For instance, on one computer I have that only supports 48 kHz (not even 44.1 kHz), Qobuz will completely fail to play 44.1 kHz content when using exclusive mode. Amazon may be trying to avoid that kind of support headache.



GlenAppleton said:


> One thing I would recommend when using the Amazon app would be to limit other processes (CPU heavy work loads) on the computer if you're doing a serious listening session so the resources can be dedicated to the re-sampling process and avoid potential digital noise introduced in the music stream data.  Otherwise, if just casually listening to music in the background, it probably won't be noticeable.


I suspect that most computers are fast enough for the resampling part, or even use hardware acceleration for it. The resampled audio should be identical regardless of the system load. But a busy computer may still may cause more USB noise, jitter or even cause buffer underruns, which is no fun, so while I wouldn't connect this to resampling per se, the recommendation is sound.


----------



## GlenAppleton

Alcophone said:


> Qobuz will completely fail to play 44.1 kHz content when using exclusive mode.



Are you talking about streaming 16/44.1 or playing local (purchased / downloaded) tracks?  I ask because I've had no issues with the Qobuz app (when I use it) playing 16/44.1 streams, or even switching between different resolutions in a playlist.  My DAC shows the difference using different LED colors behind the volume knob, so I can see that it's changing as it should.


----------



## rkw

Alcophone said:


> on one computer I have that only supports 48 kHz (not even 44.1 kHz), Qobuz will completely fail to play 44.1 kHz content when using exclusive mode.


It has a sound card that only supports one resolution? What computer is it?


----------



## Alcophone

rkw said:


> It has a sound card that only supports one resolution? What computer is it?


Lenovo L13 Yoga. You get to choose the bit rate, though! See, there's always a choice!








GlenAppleton said:


> Are you talking about streaming 16/44.1 or playing local (purchased / downloaded) tracks?  I ask because I've had no issues with the Qobuz app (when I use it) playing 16/44.1 streams, or even switching between different resolutions in a playlist.  My DAC shows the difference using different LED colors behind the volume knob, so I can see that it's changing as it should.


Streaming. I've only had this issue on this particular computer when trying to use the built-in DAC, which only supports 48 kHz, nothing else. But it turns out that's not the issue...

When I try to use exclusive mode with this DAC, I get the error "The selected device is not recognized by the application."


However, Amazon Music has that same problem. "Unable to Use Exclusive Mode For Selected Device".


So much for my theory about why Amazon might not want to set the sample rate exactly.

I then tried foobar2000, which gave me "Unrecoverable playback error: Device in use". Hm!

After some tinkering, producing the same errors with another DAC if something else was already using it in exclusive mode, killing all kinds of processes that may or may not be using the internal DAC already, I eventually turned off the checkbox next to "Allow hardware acceleration of audio with this device".

Tada, exclusive mode now works, in Qobuz, Amazon Music and foobar2000. Both Qobuz and Amazon Music actually happily play any sample rate through it, whether it's 44.1 kHz, 192 kHz or anything in between. I would not have been surprised if they are limited to 48 kHz and refuse to play anything else, which is what foobar2000 does.





Especially interesting that Amazon Music plays a high quality track and downsamples it instead of what it used to do, namely pick the lowest quality that is still supported by the hardware and upsample it.





Well, mystery solved.


----------



## GlenAppleton

Alcophone said:


> Streaming. I've only had this issue on this particular computer when trying to use the built-in DAC, which only supports 48 kHz, nothing else. But it turns out that's not the issue...



Ah, OK.  I took that other bit out of context, so that's what I get for trying to do too many things at once.    

Looks like you found an interesting issue with the hardware acceleration setting during your efforts, and that could prove to be good info for others that might have a similar configuration.  Excellent analysis, good sir!


----------



## senorx12562 (Oct 25, 2021)

tl;dr: No more changes from native sampling rate of tracks in either Windows or Android. Aft!

It would appear that Amazon Music Unlimited has fixed the two problems with sample rates in Windows and Android. On my phone and tablet (Android) I can now playback from their app at the native sample rate without Android resampling everything to 48kHz, and on a couple different W10 pics, I have been able to do the same, independent of the sound control panel setting in Windows. I set Windows at 32b/384kHz, (the maximum of which my dac is capable) and the Amazon app plays every track at its native rate up to Amazon's max of 192kHz. Amazon accurately displays the max sample rate of the playback device above, and the playback sample rate always matches that of the track itself.

Previously, Windows would playback at the sample rate set in the sound control panel, regardless of the native rate of the track, resampling up or down, while on an Android device, everything was resampled to 48kHz, and UAPP is not usable with the Amazon Android app the way it is with Tidal and Qobuz.  My dac still reports the playback sample rate set in Windows, even though Amazon says it is playing back at the native rate of the track. My guess is that the dac I have been using (L&P W2) reports the sample rate as set in the the Windows sound control panel, as it always reports the sample rate as 32b/384kHz, even though Amazon doesn't have any tracks over 192kHz. I'm sure I could obtain the same result sound-wise using a setting of 24b/192kHz, but leaving it at my dac's max means I don't have to screw with the sound control panel if I use JRMC to playback from my local library, which contains some dsd. Oh, and enabling exclusive mode in Amazon's Windows app makes a huge difference for the better in the sound quality, whereas to my ears the difference previously was minimal. I have no idea when these changes took place, but my results have been consistent over the last 2-3 days.


----------



## Alcophone

I can *not* confirm that the sample rate behavior is fixed, though it may have been improved on Android, I don't know what it was before.

*Android:* First I updated the app. Then I connected a Topping D10 and played some music. I always got 192 kHz shown as the sample rate. This is slightly different from Qobuz, which shows 48 kHz for tracks with 44.1 or 48 kHz, or 192 kHz for tracks with 88.2/96/176.4/192 kHz.

*Windows and Mac:* Windows was already on the lastest version, on the Mac I had to update. The result is as before, whatever sample rate is set on the system is what the DAC sees, regardless of the track's quality.

So from my perspective, this is still borked.



senorx12562 said:


> I set Windows at 32b/384kHz, (the maximum of which my dac is capable) and the Amazon app plays every track at its native rate up to Amazon's max of 192kHz. Amazon accurately displays the max sample rate of the playback device above, and the playback sample rate always matches that of the track itself.


I think in the past the Windows app always chose a track quality at or below the device's configured sample rate, while later it played the highest quality version even if that required down sampling.

However, that doesn't mean it's not getting resampled. Yes, Amazon will show you the track's quality, but it will get resampled to what it shows under device capability.



senorx12562 said:


> UAPP is not usable with the Amazon Android app the way it is with Tidal and Qobuz.


As far as I know, what UAPP can do with Tidal and Qobuz has nothing to do with those respective Android apps. You don't need to have the Tidal and Qobuz apps installed to access those services with UAPP, it's an alternative client.



senorx12562 said:


> My dac still reports the playback sample rate set in Windows, even though Amazon says it is playing back at the native rate of the track. My guess is that the dac I have been using (L&P W2) reports the sample rate as set in the the Windows sound control panel, as it always reports the sample rate as 32b/384kHz, even though Amazon doesn't have any tracks over 192kHz.


That means it's getting resampled. The DAC gets a 384 kHz signal. Try using it with Qobuz or foobar2000 and WASAPI or ASIO in exclusive mode, and your DAC should reflect the track's sample rate, no matter what the Windows playback device is set to.



senorx12562 said:


> Oh, and enabling exclusive mode in Amazon's Windows app makes a huge difference for the better in the sound quality, whereas to my ears the difference previously was minimal.


Check that you haven't left any EQ settings on in the Windows level settings.


----------



## senorx12562

Alcophone said:


> I can *not* confirm that the sample rate behavior is fixed, though it may have been improved on Android, I don't know what it was before.
> 
> *Android:* First I updated the app. Then I connected a Topping D10 and played some music. I always got 192 kHz shown as the sample rate. This is slightly different from Qobuz, which shows 48 kHz for tracks with 44.1 or 48 kHz, or 192 kHz for tracks with 88.2/96/176.4/192 kHz.
> 
> ...


I see no evidence of any resampling going on on either Android or Windows. The only difference is in how the w2 reports the sample rate. On my desktop dac that has a display, the playback sample rate is reported as the same as what Amazon reports the track's native sampling rate to be, meaning the dac is reporting what it is receiving, not the setting in the Windows sound control panel. As far as I am concerned, these problems have been resolved to my satisfaction. Sorry you disagree. But then I always thought the whole kerfuffle was much ado about nothing anyway. And no, I have never used any eq or dsp in Windows or  any playback apps, including Amazon.


----------



## Alcophone

senorx12562 said:


> I see no evidence of any resampling going on on either Android or Windows. The only difference is in how the w2 reports the sample rate. On my desktop dac that has a display, the playback sample rate is reported as the same as what Amazon reports the track's native sampling rate to be, meaning the dac is reporting what it is receiving, not the setting in the Windows sound control panel. As far as I am concerned, these problems have been resolved to my satisfaction. Sorry you disagree. But then I always thought the whole kerfuffle was much ado about nothing anyway. And no, I have never used any eq or dsp in Windows or  any playback apps, including Amazon.


What desktop DAC is that?

I see that the W2 has a SPDIF out, if you connect that to your desktop DAC, the desktop DAC has no choice but to reflect the actual signal sample rate from the W2 because there is nothing else to reflect.

It would be really weird if the W2 got a 96 kHz signal and showed 384 kHz (or whatever Window is set to). Even if you need a special driver for it that gives it extra information, why would it choose to display a sample rate unrelated to what is playing?

What is intriguing is that the W2 also shows the bit depth, that is quite rare.


----------



## jsmiller58

Alcophone said:


> What desktop DAC is that?
> 
> I see that the W2 has a SPDIF out, if you connect that to your desktop DAC, the desktop DAC has no choice but to reflect the actual signal sample rate from the W2 because there is nothing else to reflect.
> 
> ...


IIRC the Lotoo S1 also shows bit depth.


----------



## Johnlovemusic

Another good option for steaming!


----------



## Jon L

senorx12562 said:


> I see no evidence of any resampling going on on either Android or Windows. The only difference is in how the w2 reports the sample rate. On my desktop dac that has a display, the playback sample rate is reported as the same as what Amazon reports the track's native sampling rate to be, meaning the dac is reporting what it is receiving, not the setting in the Windows sound control panel. As far as I am concerned, these problems have been resolved to my satisfaction.


I sure hope you are right.  I'll have to play with Amazon HD and see if the native sample rate issue is fixed.


----------



## ballard3

Alcophone said:


> The result is as before, whatever sample rate is set on the system is what the DAC sees, regardless of the track's quality.


I confirm. The display of my dac (Ifi Neo) shows exactly the sample rate set on Windows.


----------



## senorx12562 (Oct 25, 2021)

Alcophone said:


> What desktop DAC is that?
> 
> I see that the W2 has a SPDIF out, if you connect that to your desktop DAC, the desktop DAC has no choice but to reflect the actual signal sample rate from the W2 because there is nothing else to reflect.
> 
> ...


My desktop dac w/ display is a LH Labs Geek Pulse, but it only displays sample rate for the USB input, not S/PDIF, so I can't check it from that output on the w2>pulse. But I am listening on my tablet right now, and Amazon reports the track's rate as 96k, the device (which is listed as the tablets model, not the w2) is reported as being capable of 96k (used to be that on Android this was always 48),and that it was being sent at 96k as well. But the w2 reports that the sample rate is 192kHz, and this is true as long as I am listening to Amazon Music, no matter if the track is 44.1kHz or 192kHz or anything in between. I don't know how Android could be upsampling a 44.1kHz track and a 96Khz track to a192kHz sample rate, which tells me that the sample rate being reported by the w2 is not always accurate with Amazon Music. No clue why, but then I've already spent more time on this than I care to. I have a Node 2i and a Fiio m11 pro, which do appear to play Amazon Music bit-perfectly, at least close enough for my old ears. Could've been listening to music. Good luck all.


----------



## rids57

I updated a couple of days ago and no change, my SU9 still shows 384kHz no matter what the original bit rate of the track (shown in Amazon Music HD)


----------



## Alcophone

senorx12562 said:


> I don't know how Android could be upsampling a 44.1kHz track and a 96Khz track to a192kHz sample rate, which tells me that the sample rate being reported by the w2 is not always accurate with Amazon Music.


In most cases, apps interface with the OS, which interfaces with the driver, which interfaces with the device. Apps can typically send audio in any sample rate that the OS supports, and the OS is then responsible for passing it on to the driver, which may require resampling. Android, Windows, Mac OS are all capable of doing that.



senorx12562 said:


> No clue why, but then I've already spent more time on this than I care to.


Thanks for having spent that time, I appreciate the intent behind it.



senorx12562 said:


> I have a Node 2i and a Fiio m11 pro, which do appear to play Amazon Music bit-perfectly, at least close enough for my old ears. Could've been listening to music. Good luck all.


My Node 2i indeed does. Take care!


----------



## TK33

rids57 said:


> I updated a couple of days ago and no change, my SU9 still shows 384kHz no matter what the original bit rate of the track (shown in Amazon Music HD)


I just tried with my RME ADI-2 DAC FS / Windows 10 desktop after reading these posts and can also confirm that Exclusive Mode in the Amazon Windows app does not bypass Windows resampling. Played a track with a sample rate of 44.1 and DAC shows 384khz.  Does not appear to be resolved.  Did not bother testing on Android.

As others have confirmed, Amazon HD is bitperfect on my Node 2i as well.


----------



## rlw6534 (Oct 25, 2021)

I'm pretty sure that Amazon Music Android app upsamples all tracks to the detected "device capability".   Not sure about other platforms though.  This can be good or bad depending on how you look at it.  It's not bitperfect, but you also don't have to worry about sample rate changes from song to song and the associated clicks and pops.  It's not the device (DAP/DAC) that's doing the upsampling, it's the Amazon Music app.


----------



## Alcophone

rlw6534 said:


> I'm pretty sure that Amazon Music Android app upsamples all tracks to the detected "device capability".   Not sure about other platforms though.  This can be good or bad depending on how you look at it.  It's not bitperfect, but you also don't have to worry about sample rate changes from song to song and the associated clicks and pops.  It's not the device (DAP/DAC) that's doing the upsampling, it's the Amazon Music app.


I suspect that's why Amazon decided to do it that way. It's unclear (but not really important) if the Amazon app itself does the resampling or leaves it to the OS. It would make a difference when comparing the output of the apps on two different platforms. If Amazon wants control over the resampling quality, they could do it before sending it to the OS, though it might be harder to use hardware acceleration in that case.

Anyway, even if you want to avoid clicks and pauses related to sample rate changes (which I would support as an optional setting), it would likely be better if Amazon detected the actual device capabilities instead of the currently set sample rate. I.e. they could detect that the DAC that is currently set to 44.1 kHz is capable of 384 kHz, and send everything at 384 kHz in order to avoid downsampling (followed by upsampling in the DAC), but instead act as if the device is only capable of 44.1 kHz.


----------



## rlw6534

Alcophone said:


> I suspect that's why Amazon decided to do it that way. It's unclear (but not really important) if the Amazon app itself does the resampling or leaves it to the OS. It would make a difference when comparing the output of the apps on two different platforms. If Amazon wants control over the resampling quality, they could do it before sending it to the OS, though it might be harder to use hardware acceleration in that case.
> 
> Anyway, even if you want to avoid clicks and pauses related to sample rate changes (which I would support as an optional setting), it would likely be better if Amazon detected the actual device capabilities instead of the currently set sample rate. I.e. they could detect that the DAC that is currently set to 44.1 kHz is capable of 384 kHz, and send everything at 384 kHz in order to avoid downsampling (followed by upsampling in the DAC), but instead act as if the device is only capable of 44.1 kHz.



I have several DAPs/DACs and generally Amazon detects that they are 192 kHz capable (which is as high as the Amazon app goes).  I do have a couple of DAPs (i.e. A&K) that need to play a 192 kHz track before opening Amazon Music or it won't detect correctly.  The DAPs/DACs that show sample rate always show 192 kHz regardless of the track being played (when it's working).


----------



## Alcophone (Oct 25, 2021)

rlw6534 said:


> I have several DAPs/DACs and generally Amazon detects that they are 192 kHz capable (which is as high as the Amazon app goes).  I do have a couple of DAPs (i.e. A&K) that need to play a 192 kHz track before opening Amazon Music or it won't detect correctly.  The DAPs/DACs that show sample rate always show 192 kHz regardless of the track being played (when it's working).


Are you possibly using Mac OS? On both Mac OS and Windows, the Amazon Music app shows the Device Capability based on what the DAC is set to on the OS level. However, on Mac OS, apps that properly set the sample rate do so on the system level (check with the Audio MIDI Setup tool), i.e. unless they deliberately set the sample rate back to what it was when the app was started, the device is set to the last song's sample rate on the OS level. So playing a 192 kHz song in VOX, for instance, sets the DAC to 192 kHz on the system level. Afterwards, Amazon Music will see the device as 192 kHz capable - because it's set to that on the system level. With Windows, it's session based, i.e. a WASAPI exclusive mode session temporarily overrides the sample rate (if the app chooses so, which Amazon Music doesn't) without any visible or lasting change to the OS level settings, so what you're suggesting would be more surprising on Windows.

Or are you saying you need to play a 192 kHz song on the DAP itself, then connect it and it's set to 192 kHz on the OS level? Normally, when you reconnect a DAC to a computer it gets set to the sample rate you last used it with (on that computer).


----------



## rlw6534

Alcophone said:


> Are you possibly using Mac OS? On both Mac OS and Windows, the Amazon Music app shows the Device Capability based on what the DAC is set to on the OS level. However, on Mac OS, apps that properly set the sample rate do so on the system level (check with the Audio MIDI Setup tool), i.e. unless they deliberately set the sample rate back to what it was when the app was started, the device is set to the last song's sample rate on the OS level. So playing a 192 kHz song in VOX, for instance, sets the DAC to 192 kHz on the system level. Afterwards, Amazon Music will see the device as 192 kHz capable - because it's set to that on the system level. With Windows, it's session based, i.e. a WASAPI exclusive mode session temporarily overrides the sample rate (if the app chooses so, which Amazon Music doesn't) without any visible or lasting change to the OS level settings, so what you're suggesting would be more surprising on Windows.
> 
> Or are you saying you need to play a 192 kHz song on the DAP itself, then connect it and it's set to 192 kHz on the OS level? Normally, when you reconnect a DAC to a computer it gets set to the sample rate you last used it with (on that computer).



I was referring to Android only.  On my MacBook (in exclusive mode) it automatically sets the rate to 24/192 for a USB DAC and stays there regardless of the tracks actual rate.  Which is basically the same as Android, upsampling to 192 for capable hardware...


----------



## senorx12562

This is what I was talking about. In this case, the track is 192kHz (Todd Rundgren, It Wouldn't Have Made Any Difference, from 2015 remaster of Something/Anything,) Windows sound control panel setting is 48kHz, but it still says it is sending it to my dac (in this case Gungnir MB) at 192kHz. Previously, with Windows set to 48 kHz, it would have reported sending it to my dac at 48 kHz. This is different than it used to be.


----------



## Alcophone

senorx12562 said:


> This is what I was talking about. In this case, the track is 192kHz (Todd Rundgren, It Wouldn't Have Made Any Difference, from 2015 remaster of Something/Anything,) Windows sound control panel setting is 48kHz, but it still says it is sending it to my dac (in this case Gungnir MB) at 192kHz. Previously, with Windows set to 48 kHz, it would have reported sending it to my dac at 48 kHz. This is different than it used to be.


I can reproduce this the following way:

Set DAC to 24/192 in Windows
Set Amazon Music to use that DAC, but with exclusive mode disabled. Otherwise step 4 will stop playback and potentially mess up the playback state in the app. Though pausing before step 4 seems to be okay with exclusive mode enabled.
Play a 192 kHz track with Amazon Music. Will show as track/device/playing as 192/192/192, DAC shows 192 kHz.



While the track keeps playing, set the DAC to 24/48 in Windows. Amazon Music will show track/device/playing as 192/48/192, DAC shows 48 kHz.


Switch to a different song and then back to the song played initially. Amazon Music will show track/device/playing as 192/48/48, DAC shows 48 kHz.

Essentially, when you start playing a song for the first time, Amazon Music picks the playback sample rate based on the device capability at the time. If the track's quality is higher, it chooses the device's quality, otherwise it's based on the track quality. If you change the DAC setting during playback, this does not get updated until you change tracks. It will keep playing at the same sample rate (send 192 kHz audio to the Windows WASAPI interface), but it will get downsampled by Windows prior to hitting the DAC. Once you switch to a different track and back, it gets another shot at picking the playback sample rate.

Now, that worked for Muddy Waters - Good Morning Little School Girl. Playing a 16/44.1 file does not result in Amazon playing at 24/48, track/device/playing says 44.1/48/44.1. The DAC still shows 48 kHz.



I suspect that the Amazon Music app does the downsampling itself, while upsampling is performed by Windows (or possibly downsampling if the Amazon Music app hasn't re-checked the device sample rate since it changed). Either way, the system level output device setting always determines what the DAC sees.


----------



## senorx12562 (Oct 25, 2021)

Alcophone said:


> I can reproduce this the following way:
> 
> Set DAC to 24/192 in Windows
> Set Amazon Music to use that DAC, but with exclusive mode disabled. Otherwise step 4 will stop playback and potentially mess up the playback state in the app. Though pausing before step 4 seems to be okay with exclusive mode enabled.
> ...


I did not do any of the steps you have listed. And I have since that started fresh a few times, and it acts the same way. But I am sure you are right. I am a very old computer-barely-literate person, but that is why...oh, never mind. I was really just trying to be helpful. I do (or used to) know better.


----------



## Alcophone (Oct 25, 2021)

senorx12562 said:


> I did not do any of the steps you have listed. And I have since that started fresh a few times, and it acts the same way. But I am sure you are right. I am a very old computer-barely-literate person, but that is why...oh, never mind. I was really just trying to be helpful. I do (or used to) know better.


Okay, interesting. I'm just trying to get on the same page, whether the story on that page is closer to mine or yours is irrelevant. When you posted your findings, I got excited and tested it right away, and was disappointed that it didn't match what I saw.

The song you mentioned is this one, right? Is your Gungnir using USB gen 2, 5 or or Unison? I have a Jotunheim with USB gen 2, Yggdrasil with USB gen 5 and a Bifrost 2 with Unison USB, for a more apples to apples comparison, though only the Yggdrasil would tell me what it's receiving.

One thought that crossed my mind is that Amazon may be A/B testing different versions of the app by sending experimental versions to a subset of the users to limit the impact of breaking changes. I would expect that to be reflected in the version, though. In the top right corner, clicking on the user icon > Help > About Amazon Music shows me that I'm using version 8.8.0.2295. I'm using Windows 10 Pro 20H2 / 19042.1288.

I do appreciate your effort, truly. This is a pet peeve of mine, hence my obsession. Nothing against you. Sorry for coming across as dismissive.


----------



## Alcophone

Did the Android app always look this way? Seems to imitate Roon.

On my Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Android 11):



On my Samsung Galaxy Tab A (Android 9):



Different tracks each. In both cases a Topping D10 is connected, and in both cases it receives 192 kHz audio, yet Amazon is claiming I'm using wired headphones.

On the tablet it's apparently downsampling the 192 kHz track to 44.1 kHz, then sending it to Android, which upsamples it to 192 kHz. 🤪

With Qobuz on the S10 Plus, 44.1/48 tracks arrive at the USB DAC as 48 kHz and 88.2/96/176.4/192 arrives as 192 kHz, while on the tablet everything arrives as 192 kHz.

UAPP on the tablet, without an external DAC connected, is also sending 44.1 kHz exclusively. Might be an Android 9 limitation, or one this particular tablet has.
On the S10 Plus, UAPP passes each sample rate on to Android as is.

At least Qobuz via UAPP sets the sample rate correctly using a USB DAC. I doubt streaming apps will ever put in that amount of effort to bypass Android's shenanigans.


----------



## SolaVirtus

Alcophone said:


> Did the Android app always look this way? Seems to imitate Roon.
> 
> On my Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Android 11):
> 
> ...


I think this is pretty new, at least not more than a week at most. 
Mine also calls it "wired headphones" though I'm using a Tempotec dongle.


----------



## TK33

SolaVirtus said:


> I think this is pretty new, at least not more than a week at most.
> Mine also calls it "wired headphones" though I'm using a Tempotec dongle.


I believe it is pretty new as well l. I only noticed it last night and only because I saw a Dolby Atmos badge pop up and I was curious.  If you swipe left and right on that screen, you can actually switch between Dolby and Ultra HD if the track is available in both formats.  Thought that was pretty cool.


----------



## H20Fidelity (Oct 26, 2021)

Amazon Music HD launched in Australia last week, I was so happy, the interface, the library, the price.

But after listening and tinkering around I too discovered exclusive mode means something different to Amazon.

Bit perfect is in fact not perfect.

I contacted their customer support and explained which they forwarded onto the developers but internet searches show people have been asking for 2-years about this, people have jumped ship to other streaming services because of it and still nothing is done.

So close yet so far.... I'll stick with Tidal until something is done about it.


----------



## senorx12562

Alcophone said:


> Okay, interesting. I'm just trying to get on the same page, whether the story on that page is closer to mine or yours is irrelevant. When you posted your findings, I got excited and tested it right away, and was disappointed that it didn't match what I saw.
> 
> The song you mentioned is this one, right? Is your Gungnir using USB gen 2, 5 or or Unison? I have a Jotunheim with USB gen 2, Yggdrasil with USB gen 5 and a Bifrost 2 with Unison USB, for a more apples to apples comparison, though only the Yggdrasil would tell me what it's receiving.
> 
> ...





My Gungnir usb is definitely gen5, in fact i assume it is an A2, as the sn starts w/ B and it was purchased new from Schiit in late Sept 2017. But since Schiit won't confirm that that even exists, who knows? But as a more practical matter, for $80/year, (1/3 the price of Tidal) they are not gonna lose my business over these sample rate shenanigans. As long as I am enjoying it, the value is good for me. And getting a higher sample rate than 48kHz on an Android device from the Amazon app is definitely different than it used to be, fwiw.


----------



## H20Fidelity

Do you guys in USA still have the HD and Ultra HD symbols showing under the albums?

About 4-hours ago in Australia they all disappeared, even the HD option in settings to select it is gone.


----------



## rlw6534 (Oct 26, 2021)

H20Fidelity said:


> Do you guys in USA still have the HD and Ultra HD symbols showing under the albums?
> 
> About 4-hours ago in Australia they all disappeared, even the HD option in settings to select it is gone.



I just checked and it's still there for me (on Android).  I assume you're talking about the "now playing" screen.


----------



## senorx12562

H20Fidelity said:


> Do you guys in USA still have the HD and Ultra HD symbols showing under the albums?
> 
> About 4-hours ago in Australia they all disappeared, even the HD option in settings to select it is gone.


This has only happened to me when I try to use the app on 2 different devices simultaneously, then the 2nd device can't access HD (cd quality in Amazon's world apparently) and the yellow HD/ULTRA HD isn't there.


----------



## H20Fidelity

I've checked a few things but still don't have it back.

Still sounds alright though.


----------



## originalsnuffy

GlenAppleton said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but comparing Amazon (FLAC streaming) to a download AIFF formatted file might not be an "apples to apples" (pun intended) comparison.  AIFF, while lossless, might not be the same bitrate and might not have been from the same master / mix of the music.  There's many aspects that go into the quality of music, and comparison of sources can be tricky at best.


The Apples to Apples comparison here would simply be which provides a more enjoyable listening experience for that individual.   None of the rest really matters now does it?


----------



## GlenAppleton

originalsnuffy said:


> The Apples to Apples comparison here would simply be which provides a more enjoyable listening experience for that individual.   None of the rest really matters now does it?



Subjectively, absolutely.  Whatever your ears say is good is good.  However, the conversation did appear (to me) to be more about objective parameters.  But that might just be my subjective observation of the conversation.


----------



## jsmiller58

I have Amazon Music Unlimited installed on my Hiby R6 Pro DAP.  The issue I am experiencing is whenever I play music with 360 Reality Audio I get considerable stuttering and skipping in the tracks, but not when I play the same tracks in Ultra HD, or tracks that are presented in Dolby Atmos.  As a reference I don’t have the same stuttering on the same 360 Reality Audio tracks when played from my much older LG V30.

Any suggestions or insights?


----------



## rlw6534

jsmiller58 said:


> I have Amazon Music Unlimited installed on my Hiby R6 Pro DAP.  The issue I am experiencing is whenever I play music with 360 Reality Audio I get considerable stuttering and skipping in the tracks, but not when I play the same tracks in Ultra HD, or tracks that are presented in Dolby Atmos.  As a reference I don’t have the same stuttering on the same 360 Reality Audio tracks when played from my much older LG V30.
> 
> Any suggestions or insights?



No suggestions but I believe I'm having the same problem.  I hadn't figured out that it was only 360 RA as it seemed somewhat random, but my playlists are mixed format and there weren't many 360 tracks...


----------



## jsmiller58

rlw6534 said:


> No suggestions but I believe I'm having the same problem.  I hadn't figured out that it was only 360 RA as it seemed somewhat random, but my playlists are mixed format and there weren't many 360 tracks...


Yup…. On my R6 Pro I consistently have this problem on every 360 track I play, but when I switch the same track from 360 to Ultra HD or HD there is no problem.  Playing the very same 360 track on my v30 no problem at all.  Either a hardware or software stack problem related to the playback device.  

Not sure if Amazon is aware of the issues some have with the 360 tracks on some devices and if there is anything that can be done about it.  

At this point the only thing I think I can do is to disable 360 in the Amazon music app, but this also disables Atmos.  The tracks will default to HD / Ultra HD.


----------



## rlw6534

jsmiller58 said:


> Yup…. On my R6 Pro I consistently have this problem on every 360 track I play, but when I switch the same track from 360 to Ultra HD or HD there is no problem.  Playing the very same 360 track on my v30 no problem at all.  Either a hardware or software stack problem related to the playback device.
> 
> Not sure if Amazon is aware of the issues some have with the 360 tracks on some devices and if there is anything that can be done about it.
> 
> At this point the only thing I think I can do is to disable 360 in the Amazon music app, but this also disables Atmos.  The tracks will default to HD / Ultra HD.



Maybe it's just growing pains with the new spatial feature.  I hope Amazon gets it sorted as I'm also having issues with my R5.


----------



## Nellie75 (Dec 4, 2021)

I posted this in the HiBy R5 forum so I’ll also post it here:

I can confirm that *downloaded* Ultra HD songs in the Amazon App will play and display as they should at 24bit/192. The same song streamed off Amazon does not. 

HD and Standard songs play and display as they should whether downloaded or streamed. However, the HiBy R5 notification bar will show 192 even though the song is not 192khz.  Songs played via USB to my DAC will then remove the 192 symbol from the R5 notification bar. 

So, if you want to listen to HiRes music (24bit/192) on the HiBy R5 you must download it.


----------



## tmb821

So I’m noticing that songs will stream on my iPhone 12 in 24/192, or 24/96, but will not stream on my android devices that way. They will play that way if downloaded. Am I missing something? Or is this just they way it is now, songs used to stream in 24/192-96 on android, but the highest they will go now is 16/44.


----------



## GlenAppleton

tmb821 said:


> So I’m noticing that songs will stream on my iPhone 12 in 24/192, or 24/96, but will not stream on my android devices that way. They will play that way if downloaded. Am I missing something? Or is this just they way it is now, songs used to stream in 24/192-96 on android, but the highest they will go now is 16/44.



It's been a while since I've used that service, but I believe the app has a setting for the highest stream quality and it might have reset itself.


----------



## tmb821

GlenAppleton said:


> It's been a while since I've used that service, but I believe the app has a setting for the highest stream quality and it might have reset itself.


I have it set to highest quality for both downloading and streaming.


----------



## GlenAppleton

tmb821 said:


> I have it set to highest quality for both downloading and streaming.



Then, I guess typical trouble-shooting efforts might include:

Reboot the device
Remove and re-install the Amazon HD Music app
If you have other streaming music service installed on the same device, see if those will stream at a higher resolution
Contact Amazon support, but be prepared to wait a while for responses and answer the same questions (worded differently) several times
Hopefully, someone else has had a similar experience and can be more helpful that I.


----------



## rlw6534

tmb821 said:


> So I’m noticing that songs will stream on my iPhone 12 in 24/192, or 24/96, but will not stream on my android devices that way. They will play that way if downloaded. Am I missing something? Or is this just they way it is now, songs used to stream in 24/192-96 on android, but the highest they will go now is 16/44.



It seems to depend on the Android device.  My R5 only goes to 44.1 kHz, but my R6 2020 works all the way to 192 kHz.  I suspect the Amazon app still needs some work.


----------



## tmb821

GlenAppleton said:


> Then, I guess typical trouble-shooting efforts might include:
> 
> Reboot the device
> Remove and re-install the Amazon HD Music app
> ...


Yea, tried rebooting device, removing and reinstalling app. No other music players on device. Not worth the mental fatigue of contacting them…😂 I really can’t tell the difference between the two resolutions, was just curious.


----------



## rlw6534

rlw6534 said:


> It seems to depend on the Android device.  My R5 only goes to 44.1 kHz, but my R6 2020 works all the way to 192 kHz.  I suspect the Amazon app still needs some work.


On my R5, older versions of the app were working:

Amazon Music version 17.15.6 seems to be the last version that works with streaming at 24/192 (for the R5).

https://apkpure.com/amazon-music-discover-songs/com.amazon.mp3/download/517150610-APK?from=versions/version


----------



## Nellie75 (Dec 11, 2021)

I’ve subscribed to Amazon Music for nearly 2 years now.  To get ultra HD I streamed from my laptop connected to my receiver through a DAC.  It mostly showed 24bit 192khz.  Although there were suggestions on forums that it isn’t bit perfect and what is reported by Amazon is not entirely true, I was always pleased with the SQ.

I recently purchased a HiBy R5.  Although it appeared to be a quality device, it could not play AM in UHD.  Apparently, this a temporary issue with the current Amazon update on this device.  To make a long story short, I returned the R5 and started rethinking a different streaming service as well.  I looked into Tidal, Qobuz and Apple Music, etc. 

Apple Music came out on top for all my needs.  It seamlessly integrates my downloaded and ripped CD collection into my streamed library, has “Roonish” UI and can display my music on my big screen in the living room. It does scrolling lyrics like Amazon and has 24bit 48-192khz.  It made thr most sense at the low price (same as AM) and the fact that our family is already heavily into the IOS ecosystem. 

So  I contacted Amazon through their online chat to see if I could terminate the 7 months still left on my annual membership  as I was not getting 24bit/192 on the R5 (I had just returned). I was prepared for a “No” from the rep, or best case scenario, they would refund me for the months I hadn’t used yet.  To my surprise they refunded the whole year! 

I’ve had Apple Music for just a week now and Im really enjoying the service.  I don’t miss anything about AM. My main listening at home is through an AppleTV 4K>Schiit Modi DAC>Marantz 2245 Receiver.  Apple remote on my iPhone from the couch is so easy and seamless.  Now, I was prepared to make a small sacrifice on sound quality as it is apparently at a maximum of 24bit/48khz through AppleTVs (current maximum).  This is a little less than what I was getting through Amazon UHD.  However, the sound quality is amazing!  It is noticeably better than AM.  I don’t know why it sounds significantly better, as I really can’t understand how it could be. The whole system is the same except the player. 

AppleMusic: 
Apple TV4K (24/48)>toslink digital out (HDMI extractor)>Schiit DAC>Marantz 2245 Receiver>Wharfedale Diamond Towers.

Amazon Music:
Windows Laptop (sound settings 24/192 in Windows)>USB in>Schiit DAC>Marantz 2245 Receiver>Wharfedale Diamond Towers.

I’m not saying that Apple Music has superior SQ but it certainly sounds that way on my setup.  The difference is obvious.


----------



## rkw

@Nellie75, every time you mentioned "AM", I was wondering Apple Music or Amazon Music


----------



## Nellie75

Y


rkw said:


> @Nellie75, every time you mentioned "AM", I was wondering Apple Music or Amazon Music


Didn’t think about that!  That’s confusing. I used AM for just Amazon Music.


----------



## FractalSound

Hello everyone!  New to this thread here.  Quick question.... 

I use Amazon Music PC app. It seems to me that the amazon music app always upsample stream data to the max of what your "device" is capable of.  In my case, my DAC is good for 192K... so the amazon music app always upsample the music to 192K.  Would someone be able to confirm if that is the case?   Thanks a lot.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

FractalSound said:


> Hello everyone!  New to this thread here.  Quick question....
> 
> I use Amazon Music PC app. It seems to me that the amazon music app always upsample stream data to the max of what your "device" is capable of.  In my case, my DAC is good for 192K... so the amazon music app always upsample the music to 192K.  Would someone be able to confirm if that is the case?   Thanks a lot.


OS Mixer does that, not AM player. You can get bit perfect by manually matching bitrate and depth in Windows Sound settings to played track.
Quite a hassle, especially on mixed playlists, or just leave it at 24/192 and let mixer upsample everything to common denominator. Biggest reason people abandoning AM.


----------



## FractalSound

Andrew_WOT said:


> OS Mixer does that, not AM player. You can get bit perfect by manually matching bitrate and depth in Windows Sound settings to played track.
> Quite a hassle, especially on mixed playlists, or just leave it at 24/192 and let mixer upsample everything to common denominator. Biggest reason people abandoning AM.


Got it. Thanks a lot for the info!!

I guess the OS Mixer is being used even in "Exclusive Mode"?  I put the AM PC app in exclusive mode, but my DAC shows 192K all the time


----------



## Andrew_WOT

FractalSound said:


> Got it. Thanks a lot for the info!!
> 
> I guess the OS Mixer is being used even in "Exclusive Mode"?  I put the AM PC app in exclusive mode, but my DAC shows 192K all the time


Exclusive just disables sound control in player and prevents other apps from sharing audio device, not sure why Amazon stopped there and didn't make it bit perfect.


----------



## Jon L

Andrew_WOT said:


> Exclusive just disables sound control in player and prevents other apps from sharing audio device, not sure why Amazon stopped there and didn't make it bit perfect.


More and more, this issue is becoming a problem because I am finding some high resolution GEM's on Amazon!  
For example, 
Whitesnake Unzipped 24/96kHz
Muse Uprising 24/96
Anthrax Antisocial 24/96
Metallica pretty much most albums available at 24/96
Many classical pieces have good hi res versions of them


----------



## Nellie75

tmb821 said:


> So I’m noticing that songs will stream on my iPhone 12 in 24/192, or 24/96, but will not stream on my android devices that way. They will play that way if downloaded. Am I missing something? Or is this just they way it is now, songs used to stream in 24/192-96 on android, but the highest they will go now is 16/44.


You are not missing something.  I stated the exact same issue on a android HiBy R5 I had recently bought.  Downloaded played at the highest resolution and steamed did not.  

All this is behind me now though.  I dropped my Amazon subscription of the last two years and am happily enjoying Apple Music on a player I already own, my iPhone.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Jon L said:


> More and more, this issue is becoming a problem because I am finding some high resolution GEM's on Amazon!
> For example,
> Whitesnake Unzipped 24/96kHz
> Muse Uprising 24/96
> ...


What can I say, vote with your wallet and support companies that care. I believe at the moment the only option without MQA nonsense and working on PC is Qobuz, not sure what is going on with Spotify lossless and when they finally release it, but it wouldn't be high-res anyway.


----------



## FractalSound

I set my DAC (through Windows Sound) to 32 bit/384KHz...  Amazon Music PC app display Device Capability as 24 bit / 384 kHz.  Does anyone know how to make the configuration consistent?


----------



## originalsnuffy

As much as I like to have everything "bit perfect" and wrapped up in a bow, I wonder if we are looking for something we don't really need.   Just supposing Amazon Music actually sounds good and is in fact hi res.  Does it matter if the readings state 24 bit 192 when its really 24 bit 96?  The key for me is whether the sound is excellent.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

originalsnuffy said:


> As much as I like to have everything "bit perfect" and wrapped up in a bow, I wonder if we are looking for something we don't really need.   Just supposing Amazon Music actually sounds good and is in fact hi res.  Does it matter if the readings state 24 bit 192 when its really 24 bit 96?  The key for me is whether the sound is excellent.


It's not just reading, you are not getting the original unaltered audio stream, it got modified by OS Mixer with less than mediocre resampler, can as well just settle for a high bitrate MP3, it sounds good too.


----------



## originalsnuffy

Andrew_WOT said:


> It's not just reading, you are not getting the original unaltered audio stream, it got modified by OS Mixer with less than mediocre resampler, can as well just settle for a high bitrate MP3, it sounds good too.


I think there is a big difference between minor bit modifications of hi res and MP3.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

originalsnuffy said:


> I think there is a big difference between minor bit modifications of hi res and MP3.


How big?
https://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/11/measurements-windows-10-audio-stack.html
You can minimize this ill effect by matching Mixer sample rate with the actual material, but it's quite a hassle especially on mixed playlists featuring CD and hig-res tracks.
You pay for lossless, but not getting original bit-perfect quality.
In the end it might not be that big of a deal SQ wise, but it's matter of principle whether you are willing to support business ignoring numerous requests to add that feature to the service since its inception or not. And based on them being completely deaf to all these outcries, looks like audiophiles are not their primary audience.


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 17, 2021)

Andrew_WOT said:


> How big?
> https://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/11/measurements-windows-10-audio-stack.html
> You can minimize this ill effect by matching Mixer sample rate with the actual material, but it's quite a hassle especially on mixed playlists featuring CD and hig-res tracks.
> You pay for lossless, but not getting original bit-perfect quality.
> In the end it might not be that big of a deal SQ wise, but it's matter of principle whether you are willing to support business ignoring numerous requests to add that feature to the service since its inception or not. And based on them being completely deaf to all these outcries, looks like audiophiles are not their primary audience.


I am far from an expert on all this.   But isn't this article criticizing upsampling from within windows?   Unless I am missing something, I thought the upsampling discussed here happens within the Amazon app.  To my knowledge there are no analyses for that.  If my assumptions are correct, which they might not be, then it follows the archimago's comments do not apply to the matter at hand.   I also don't see how we make the jump from criticizing upsampling from fairly hi res material to lossy formats.  Redbook flac is hi res compared to lossy formats especially MP3.   I would agree that Apple's AAC codecs are more musical than MP3, an assertion originally made by Jobs.

I listen quite a bit to Amazon Music on my HiBy R5 DAC and it sounds pretty close to my FLAC (and hi res FLAC) records when I have done comparative listening.   I would go so far as to point out that I can mainly tell the difference when I hear the occasional technical glitch on Amazon and then I can say "oh that's Amazon".


----------



## FractalSound

originalsnuffy said:


> I am far from an expert on all this.   But isn't this article criticizing upsampling from within windows?   Unless I am missing something, I thought the upsampling discussed here happens within the Amazon app.  To my knowledge there are no analyses for that.  If my assumptions are correct, which they might not be, then it follows the archimago's comments do not apply to the matter at hand.   I also don't see how we make the jump from criticizing upsampling from fairly hi res material to lossy formats.  Redbook flac is hi res compared to lossy formats especially MP3.   I would agree that Apple's AAC codecs are more musical than MP3, an assertion originally made by Jobs.
> 
> I listen quite a bit to Amazon Music on my HiBy R5 DAC and it sounds pretty close to my FLAC (and hi res FLAC) records when I have done comparative listening.   I would go so far as to point out that I can mainly tell the difference when I hear the occasional technical glitch on Amazon and then I can say "oh that's Amazon".



Based on what I have read so far... it doesn't look like there is a way to bypass the windows mixer using the Amazon Music app.  Given that's the case, maybe take a look at the link below.  It seems setting the windows mixer to 24/192 can push whatever the deficiencies introduced by the mixers to above the audible frequency range.  ... and setting the mixer to 24/96 is not getting as good a result as 24/192

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...udio-quality-debate.19438/page-16#post-958026


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Or just show amazon middle finger and move somewhere else where you don't need to jump through the hoops to get something you are paying for.


----------



## originalsnuffy

FractalSound said:


> Based on what I have read so far... it doesn't look like there is a way to bypass the windows mixer using the Amazon Music app.  Given that's the case, maybe take a look at the link below.  It seems setting the windows mixer to 24/192 can push whatever the deficiencies introduced by the mixers to above the audible frequency range.  ... and setting the mixer to 24/96 is not getting as good a result as 24/192
> 
> https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...udio-quality-debate.19438/page-16#post-958026


I always set the audio setting to 24 / 192 anyway,


----------



## rsbrsvp (Dec 18, 2021)

I am no expert on this bit perfect stuff- but I want to share something I have found in my experience.  I use Tidal through Audrivana and Amazon through the Amazon App.

I have a very very transparent system which reveals everything.   When I play Tidal on Audrivana- to my ears it sounds more correct than Amazon HD.  However, Tidal does not allow downloads where Amazon does.   Now, when I download my Amazon music to my NAS and play from there- Amazon in exclusive mode sounds clearly better than Tidal in Audrivana even when playing in Kernal Streaming mode.  I have done many many comparisons of the same recordings over a period of many months- and this is my conclusion- to my surprise. I think the bit perfect aspect is not as important as getting a good feed into my PC.  I am guessing based on my results that Amazons streaming delivery is poorer than Tidal or Qobuz which results in slightly damaged sonics, but that can be circumvented by downloading Amazon songs to my NAS or direct to my PC. The difference in the downloaded file vs the direct stream from Amazon is IMHO pretty substantial- and I am very very happy with the results.

Truth is, downloaded amazon music is SUPERB- world class.  My only two issues left is I do not like how my downloaded songs disappear when I sign out- requiring me to redownload them, and also I do not like the Amazon interface very much.  I really prefer the Apple Music interface much more... and if Apple ever gets exclusive mode- that is where I am going.  Spotify Hi Fi is supposed to have exclusive mode as well and also allow downloads- so awaiting that as well.


----------



## rkw

rsbrsvp said:


> Spotify Hi Fi is supposed to have exclusive mode as well


Where did you see this? I haven't seen such a statement from Spotify.


----------



## rsbrsvp

rkw said:


> Where did you see this? I haven't seen such a statement from Spotify.


I don't remember....


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 18, 2021)

rsbrsvp said:


> I am no expert on this bit perfect stuff- but I want to share something I have found in my experience.  I use Tidal through Audrivana and Amazon through the Amazon App.
> 
> I have a very very transparent system which reveals everything.   When I play Tidal on Audrivana- to my ears it sounds more correct than Amazon HD.  However, Tidal does not allow downloads where Amazon does.   Now, when I download my Amazon music to my NAS and play from there- Amazon in exclusive mode sounds clearly better than Tidal in Audrivana even when playing in Kernal Streaming mode.  I have done many many comparisons of the same recordings over a period of many months- and this is my conclusion- to my surprise. I think the bit perfect aspect is not as important as getting a good feed into my PC.  I am guessing based on my results that Amazons streaming delivery is poorer than Tidal or Qobuz which results in slightly damaged sonics, but that can be circumvented by downloading Amazon songs to my NAS or direct to my PC. The difference in the downloaded file vs the direct stream from Amazon is IMHO pretty substantial- and I am very very happy with the results.
> 
> Truth is, downloaded amazon music is SUPERB- world class.  My only two issues left is I do not like how my downloaded songs disappear when I sign out- requiring me to redownload them, and also I do not like the Amazon interface very much.  I really prefer the Apple Music interface much more... and if Apple ever gets exclusive mode- that is where I am going.  Spotify Hi Fi is supposed to have exclusive mode as well and also allow downloads- so awaiting that as well.


I know that music can be downloaded from Amazon HD to PCs,
android DAP units, and iphones.   I am not too sure what happens on a NAS.

Why are you signing out by the way?

I personally think we are all getting too hung up on exclusive mode.   What matters is how the music sounds.

I did an A/B with a friend a year ago of Amazon HD vs Tidal.   He thought Tidal sounded better, I just think it sounded different but not necessarily better.   Apple Lossless sounds about the same to me as Amazon HD.   Frankly I suspect that all the uncompressed sources sound about the same.

For the sake of this discussion I will treat Tidal as uncompressed, although in reality Tidal MQA does feature mild compression.  I know that this information upsets Tidal users but if one researches the matter that is correct.   MQA has a very efficient compression algorithm and does in fact have the capability to present audio above 20 khz.  That doesn't mean MQA does not sound good by the way, just stating some truths about what is under the covers.


----------



## rsbrsvp

originalsnuffy said:


> I know that music can be downloaded from Amazon HD to PCs,
> android DAP units, and iphones.   I am not too sure what happens on a NAS.
> 
> Why are you signing out by the way?
> ...


Yeh.  Truth is I do not have a NAS.  I was using the term loosely.  I have a second PC with a 2tb SSD which is connected to my router and I store my songs on this second PC (like I would a NAS) and then play the music through my primary PC.  The music coming from my second PC passes two Etheregen's with linear PS and external 10MHZ Mutec clocks.

In my opinion- the exclusive mode on Amazon HD has some value; definitely sounds better to me than without.- but the "bit-perfect" ranting- I think has less value.  Bottom line- Amazon played from files downloaded to my SSD sound better than Tidal streamed from Audrivana in Kernal Streaming mode. 

I don't sign out of Amazon almost ever- but nevertheless I ask- why erase my downloads when I do sign out?  Apple does not do this.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

rsbrsvp said:


> Yeh.  Truth is I do not have a NAS.  I was using the term loosely.  I have a second PC with a 2tb SSD which is connected to my router and I store my songs on this second PC (like I would a NAS) and then play the music through my primary PC.  The music coming from my second PC passes two Etheregen's with linear PS and external 10MHZ Mutec clocks.
> 
> In my opinion- the exclusive mode on Amazon HD has some value; definitely sounds better to me than without.- but the "bit-perfect" ranting- I think has less value.  Bottom line- Amazon played from files downloaded to my SSD sound better than Tidal streamed from Audrivana in Kernal Streaming mode.
> 
> I don't sign out of Amazon almost ever- but nevertheless I ask- why erase my downloads when I do sign out?  Apple does not do this.


How do you play a downloaded song with something other than the Amazon HD Windows app?


----------



## originalsnuffy

PlantsmanTX said:


> How do you play a downloaded song with something other than the Amazon HD Windows app?


You can't


----------



## originalsnuffy (Dec 18, 2021)

rsbrsvp said:


> Yeh.  Truth is I do not have a NAS.  I was using the term loosely.  I have a second PC with a 2tb SSD which is connected to my router and I store my songs on this second PC (like I would a NAS) and then play the music through my primary PC.  The music coming from my second PC passes two Etheregen's with linear PS and external 10MHZ Mutec clocks.
> 
> In my opinion- the exclusive mode on Amazon HD has some value; definitely sounds better to me than without.- but the "bit-perfect" ranting- I think has less value.  Bottom line- Amazon played from files downloaded to my SSD sound better than Tidal streamed from Audrivana in Kernal Streaming mode.
> 
> I don't sign out of Amazon almost ever- but nevertheless I ask- why erase my downloads when I do sign out?  Apple does not do this.


I never really sign out of the app on purpose.  Once I had to reauthorize myself.   None of my downloads were gone.

I suspect that the App is seeing your "server" as an unauthorized PC or something along those lines.   I never have issues with downloading directly to my PCs.

No doubt that by most definitions the Amazon app is not bit perfect.  But on the other hand I can stream from my iphone to an external DAC.  That implies that whatever transmogriphications  of the bits might be going on, those manipulations are not messing up the ability to output to a DAC.  

Most of the time I just play back via my DAP unit (HiBy R5) from downloaded music.   I have also been messing a bit with Apple's equivalent but can't say I detect any difference.  Which is a good thing; as that implies both apps are doing a good job.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

originalsnuffy said:


> You can't


Got it.


----------



## rsbrsvp (Dec 20, 2021)

PlantsmanTX said:


> How do you play a downloaded song with something other than the Amazon HD Windows app?


I use the Amazon app. on the Source PC to instruct the download, but I direct the download to my second PC which is also connected to the same router, but on the other side of the room.  The following video instructed me how to do this.  Then I play music from Amazon desktop program on my source PC- but the music is being fetched from the hard drive of my fanless second PC where I originally placed the download which is connected to the same network.  In other words, my second PC is being uses as a NAS.  The results are both fuller and more analogue sound, and noticeably better detail than when streaming direct.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

rsbrsvp said:


> I use the Amazon app. on the Source PC to instruct the download, but I direct the download to my second PC which is also connected to the same router, but on the other side of the room.  The following video instructed me how to do this.  Then I play music from Amazon desktop program on my source PC- but the music is being fetched from the hard drive of my fanless second PC where I originally placed the download which is connected to the same network.  In other words, my second PC is being uses as a NAS.  The results are both fuller and more analogue sound, and noticeably better detail than when streaming direct.



I see, thank you. I don't have a second PC, but I do have an extra ssd installed that I don't really use.


----------



## rsbrsvp (Jan 5, 2022)

Try going to your settings and changing the playback mode from "HD" to "Standard".  I'm not joking...  I preferred Tidal in Kernal Streaming mode from Audrivana over Amazon until I switched to "Standard Mode".  Now Amazon is at least equal sonically....

Standard playback mode must be technically inferior but to my ears it is such an improvement. It is less bright, and more focused than "HD" mode.  Tonally I prefer it and detail is exactly the same as HD mode IMHO.


----------



## 3Putter

What did Yoda say when he saw himself on 4K? Duh! HDMI, LOL...


----------



## dilbertprogrammer

I've been enjoying Amazon Music.  What I find frustrating is that if I "Follow" an artist (by clicking the heart icon) it doesn't seem to accomplish anything.  

Does anyone know of a way to view the artists one has "Follow"ed?

As I understand it, Amazon will suggest similar artists/music to you based on who you follow, but it sure would be nice to be able to actually pull up a list of those one has chosen to follow.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

I believe that was broken from the very beginning and was never fixed, shows how much amazon cares. 
You need to follow album of the artist to show up in followed list.


----------



## dilbertprogrammer

Andrew_WOT said:


> I believe that was broken from the very beginning and was never fixed, shows how much amazon cares.
> You need to follow album of the artist to show up in followed list.


Ah - nice. Thanks for the tip!  I'll give that a shot!


----------



## originalsnuffy

rsbrsvp said:


> Try going to your settings and changing the playback mode from "HD" to "Standard".  I'm not joking...  I preferred Tidal in Kernal Streaming mode from Audrivana over Amazon until I switched to "Standard Mode".  Now Amazon is at least equal sonically....
> 
> Standard playback mode must be technically inferior but to my ears it is such an improvement. It is less bright, and more focused than "HD" mode.  Tonally I prefer it and detail is exactly the same as HD mode IMHO.


You do know that the Standard setting is basically MP3 at 320?


----------



## originalsnuffy (Jan 7, 2022)

rsbrsvp said:


> I use the Amazon app. on the Source PC to instruct the download, but I direct the download to my second PC which is also connected to the same router, but on the other side of the room.  The following video instructed me how to do this.  Then I play music from Amazon desktop program on my source PC- but the music is being fetched from the hard drive of my fanless second PC where I originally placed the download which is connected to the same network.  In other words, my second PC is being uses as a NAS.  The results are both fuller and more analogue sound, and noticeably better detail than when streaming direct.



Hey, can more than one device access the downloaded files on your NAS?  Or just the main PC?

To clarify, can I run Amazon HD on a laptop for example and find music files on the PC server?

By the way, if you are really sophisticated you can can configure the. PC in a RAID array.  But it is much easier to do that on a dedicated NAS.  I can also access my NAS remotely for a number of uses including high quality music streaming.


----------



## rsbrsvp

I do not know if more than one device can access the downloaded music to the NAS.


----------



## rkw

originalsnuffy said:


> Hey, can more than one device access the downloaded files on your NAS?  Or just the main PC?


The music labels are very strict in their licensing agreements about how streaming services must handle downloaded files. Usually the file will be DRM encoded so that it can only be played by the same app that downloaded it.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

You can have multiple instances of amazon player (single account) playing offline (downloaded) files, but only one instance streaming online.
Family plan allows multiple streaming instances.


----------



## rkw

Andrew_WOT said:


> You can have multiple instances of amazon player (single account) playing offline (downloaded) files, but only one instance streaming online.
> Family plan allows multiple streaming instances.


But if one instance downloads a file to a NAS, can any other instance play that downloaded file? This was the question that was asked.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

Amazon Music's Windows app was updated today, and now the playing times of songs have stopped being displayed. Anybody else having that problem?


----------



## rids57

PlantsmanTX said:


> Amazon Music's Windows app was updated today, and now the playing times of songs have stopped being displayed. Anybody else having that problem?


Same here


----------



## rlanger

PlantsmanTX said:


> Amazon Music's Windows app was updated today, and now the playing times of songs have stopped being displayed. Anybody else having that problem?


If you hover your mouse over the bottom part of the player where the music controls are, the timer appears in the bottom right corner of the window.


----------



## PlantsmanTX

rids57 said:


> Same here


They added podcasts, and took away playing time listings. Really though, it has to be some kind of database glitch. I chatted with support and they just said they would inform "the team". I tried two of the three things they recommend, to no avail. I didn't delete the data folder, but I doubt it would have worked.

_There are three different ways to refresh data.
_

_*Sign Out and Sign In* to the Amazon Music app to enable a library resync and refresh data._
_*Remove the Data folder*that is in the following locations:

*Windows:* Click the start menu and in the search box type: *%userprofile%\AppData\Local\Amazon Music\Data* and hit enter.
*Mac:* In Finder, type shift-command-g to open "go to folder" window and type: *~/Library/Application Support/Amazon Music/Data*
_
_Go to *Profile > Preferences > Advanced > Reload My Music?* and click on *Start Reload*._


----------



## PlantsmanTX

rlanger said:


> If you hover your mouse over the bottom part of the player where the music controls are, the timer appears in the bottom right corner of the window.


Yes, you can see the playing time by doing that after the track starts playing, but there's obviously a problem:


----------



## rids57

it shows how long the track's been playing and how much is left to go - only way of getting the total duration is add the two, which is just plain silly


----------



## PlantsmanTX

rids57 said:


> it shows how long the track's been playing and how much is left to go - only way of getting the total duration is add the two, which is just plain silly


The funny thing is that it still shows the playing times of the songs in playlists.


----------



## dharmasteve

Is the new Amazon HD app much slower? On my HIBy R5 it seems to be a lot slower. Anyone else experiencing Amazon Snail Speed HD?


----------



## Nick24JJ (Apr 3, 2022)

I have Amazon Music Unlimited for around 2 years now but today it's the first time I've started using Alexa, a bit. I have a Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro running Android 11 and the latest Amazon Music App. I'm using FiiO UTWS5 with 7 Hz Timeless. How do I access Alexa when my phone screen is locked? It works when the screen is unlocked but it does not work when the phone is locked. In phone Settings, I've toggled Show on Lock Screen 'On' for the Amazon Music App. Do I need to install the Alexa app, separately, from the Play Store?

EDIT: I installed the Alexa app. I can control the volume of my phone by voice now but the phone needs to be unlocked. Even when the Alexa app is minimized, running in the background, it does not work. When using Alexa from within the Amazon app, I cannot control the volume on my phone. 

So, is there a way to use Alexa app or Alexa from within the Amazon music app, when the phone is locked?
Also, is there a way to listen to my own music (mp3, FLAC) from my phone using Alexa?

Thank you


----------



## GlenAppleton

Nick24JJ said:


> I have Amazon Music Unlimited for around 2 years now but today it's the first time I've started using Alexa, a bit. I have a Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro running Android 11 and the latest Amazon Music App. I'm using FiiO UTWS5 with 7 Hz Timeless. How do I access Alexa when my phone screen is locked? It works when the screen is unlocked but it does not work when the phone is locked. In phone Settings, I've toggled Show on Lock Screen 'On' for the Amazon Music App. Do I need to install the Alexa app, separately, from the Play Store?
> 
> EDIT: I installed the Alexa app. I can control the volume of my phone by voice now but the phone needs to be unlocked. Even when the Alexa app is minimized, running in the background, it does not work. When using Alexa from within the Amazon app, I cannot control the volume on my phone.
> 
> ...



I'm pretty sure it's a security feature of Android that keeps any app from using the microphone / camera / etc. when the phone is locked.  I can't even get the 'Hey Google' commands to work on Android when the phone is locked.  This is a good thing IMO.


----------



## Nick24JJ (Apr 3, 2022)

GlenAppleton said:


> I'm pretty sure it's a security feature of Android that keeps any app from using the microphone / camera / etc. when the phone is locked.  I can't even get the 'Hey Google' commands to work on Android when the phone is locked.  This is a good thing IMO.


On my phone, specs given in my previous post, the Google Assistant comes up even when the phone is locked. The assistant itself, as well as its functionality, can be easily enabled/disabled/setup through the Settings. From there, I've enabled Alexa as my phone's digital assistant but it does not work that well. 

Has anyone used Alexa as their phone assistant? How does it work for you, compared to Google assitant?


----------



## Polky74 (Apr 4, 2022)

It seems that amazon music has taken full possession of the sampling on my V50 in fact now it gives me 24/44 up to the headphones so no android resampling at 48 khz. Can anyone confirm? If so, it would be simply wonderful.
I correct myself ... only for tracks at 44 khz ... while for the higher ones it always resamples at 48 khz ... but it was nice to dream at least for a while ...


----------



## alexdemaet

Is it possible on Amazon music to control your computer/laptop with the Amazon music app on your smartphone via wifi connection? On Spotify I can control the music playback with Spotify app on my smartphone while my laptop is connected with an external dac. That would be awesome if it is also possible with Amazon music! I tried to find a way via the Alexa app but it is not available on the Microsoft Store (Belgium)!


----------



## senorx12562

alexdemaet said:


> Is it possible on Amazon music to control your computer/laptop with the Amazon music app on your smartphone via wifi connection? On Spotify I can control the music playback with Spotify app on my smartphone while my laptop is connected with an external dac. That would be awesome if it is also possible with Amazon music! I tried to find a way via the Alexa app but it is not available on the Microsoft Store (Belgium)!


The only way I know of is to get one of the bluesound devices to stream in place of the computer. Afaik, Amazon does not have the equivalent of Spotify connect with its apps.


----------



## alexdemaet

senorx12562 said:


> The only way I know of is to get one of the bluesound devices to stream in place of the computer. Afaik, Amazon does not have the equivalent of Spotify connect with its apps.


That is a bit unfortunate. The hi-res audio files are pretty damn good for the sub price. I will have to do it with my phone with a 2 meter usb otg cable to dac then. Thanks


----------



## senorx12562

When I got my Node 2i  was looking for a streamer anyway to stream my local files from a nas, so it's integration w/ Amazon was merely a bonus. I also like its capability of creating playlists using both local and Amazon files. As a bonus, playback of Amazon files is bitperfect, which its own apps cannot seem to accomplish. Good luck.


----------



## rlanger

alexdemaet said:


> That is a bit unfortunate. The hi-res audio files are pretty damn good for the sub price. I will have to do it with my phone with a 2 meter usb otg cable to dac then. Thanks


Yes, but you are not getting bit-perfect from the PC app, even with Exclusive mode enabled.
I use a WiiM Mini Streamer connected to my network, which allows me to control Amazon Music with either my iPad or my Android Phone, and it provides bit-perfect streaming to my dac/amp. Sounds awesome. Listening now as I type.


----------



## Alcophone

rlanger said:


> Yes, but you are not getting bit-perfect from the PC app, even with Exclusive mode enabled.


It is bit perfect with exclusive mode if the configured sample rate for the DAC happens to match the sample rate of the track you're playing. It's just that the app doesn't do that for you, unfortunately.


----------



## rlanger

Alcophone said:


> It is bit perfect with exclusive mode if the configured sample rate for the DAC happens to match the sample rate of the track you're playing. It's just that the app doesn't do that for you, unfortunately.


It didn't seem to work that way on my system. I have a Mojo 2 which auto-adjusts to the incoming sample rate. But the Mojo only recognized the sample rate setting in Windows, whether Exclusive mode was enabled on the Amazon app or not.


----------



## alexdemaet

rlanger said:


> Yes, but you are not getting bit-perfect from the PC app, even with Exclusive mode enabled.
> I use a WiiM Mini Streamer connected to my network, which allows me to control Amazon Music with either my iPad or my Android Phone, and it provides bit-perfect streaming to my dac/amp. Sounds awesome. Listening now as I type.


I am not using the PC app, but the smartphone Amazon music app.


----------



## rlanger

alexdemaet said:


> I am not using the PC app, but the smartphone Amazon music app.


Yes, but you said that you want to use the smartphone to control playback on your computer, right? 

I guess my point was that if you do that, you won't be getting bit-perfect playback from your computer (not sure if it's bit-perfect or not from the phone app).


----------



## alexdemaet

rlanger said:


> Yes, but you said that you want to use the smartphone to control playback on your computer, right?
> 
> I guess my point was that if you do that, you won't be getting bit-perfect playback from your computer (not sure if it's bit-perfect or not from the phone app).


I wanted to try if I can control the playback with the smartphone but if it reduces the sound quality then I do not want that. I do not think I will spend another 500 euro extra for a streamer. 

I am going to see if the sound improves when I use offline streaming with hi-res audio files. 

You might want to read https://www.audiosciencereview.com/.../confirmed-bit-perfect-amazon-music-hd.34252/ ?


----------



## senorx12562

To get bit perfect playback of Amazon Music with a computer, one must manually set the bit depth/sample rate in Windows to match the native rate of the file. With Android, Android resamples everything to 24/48, and cannot be played back via apps like uapp that would bypass the Android audio stack. I know nothing about Apple devices.


----------



## alexdemaet

senorx12562 said:


> The only way I know of is to get one of the bluesound devices to stream in place of the computer. Afaik, Amazon does not have the equivalent of Spotify connect with its apps.


Can you store offline music on the bluesound node 2?


----------



## senorx12562

alexdemaet said:


> Can you store offline music on the bluesound node 2?


No, but for me, unless I have no internet service, it's effectively the same. If my power/internet is out, I use an m11pro, which can store Amazon music for offline playback.


----------



## alexdemaet

Does the fiio link works fine on an android Phone? For example, the fiio dap is connected to a high-end external dac via usb. Then you can control the playback with your Phone via fiio link?


----------



## senorx12562

alexdemaet said:


> Does the fiio link works fine on an android Phone? For example, the fiio dap is connected to a high-end external dac via usb. Then you can control the playback with your Phone via fiio link?


I have never tried that function tbh, so I can't say. It does work fine as far as the usb digital out to a dac, but I am so close to it I don't have need of the link function. But it should work. I dug in a little, and it looks like the control signals can be sent to the m11 via either bt or wifi.


----------



## rlanger

alexdemaet said:


> I wanted to try if I can control the playback with the smartphone but if it reduces the sound quality then I do not want that. I do not think I will spend another 500 euro extra for a streamer.
> 
> I am going to see if the sound improves when I use offline streaming with hi-res audio files.
> 
> You might want to read https://www.audiosciencereview.com/.../confirmed-bit-perfect-amazon-music-hd.34252/ ?


The WiiM Mini Streamer is less than 100 euro. I paid 10,000 yen here in Japan, which is about 70 eruo, I think. Incredible value.


----------



## Alcophone (Nov 10, 2022)

rlanger said:


> It didn't seem to work that way on my system. I have a Mojo 2 which auto-adjusts to the incoming sample rate. But the Mojo only recognized the sample rate setting in Windows, whether Exclusive mode was enabled on the Amazon app or not.


With setting the DAC's sample rate I meant setting it on the OS level (e.g. Windows sound settings).
Basically the Amazon app just looks at what bit depth and sample rate are set for the DAC on the OS level, then when you pick a song the app picks the highest quality version that is at that or a lower bit depth and sample rate, and then sends it to the OS, which upsamples if there's a mismatch.

So if you set your DAC (in Windows) to 16 bit, 96 kHz, the app would skip a 24 bit, 192 kHz version of the track and may instead choose a 16 bit, 44.1 kHz version, send that to Windows, Windows resamples it to 24 bit, 96 kHz and sends it to your DAC. If you set your DAC in Windows to 24 bit, 192 kHz it will pick the 24 bit, 192 kHz track and send that to Windows. Windows won't resample or otherwise alter it (with exclusive mode), but may alter parts of it (without exclusive mode) depending on how loud a section is or what other apps are playing audio (to avoid clipping, presumably).

When you then switch to a track that has a 24 bit, 96 kHz version as the highest quality, the app will send that to Windows and Windows will resample it to 192 kHz since that's what your DAC (in Windows) is still set to.


----------



## alexdemaet

Alcophone said:


> With setting the DAC's sample rate I meant setting it on the OS level (e.g. Windows sound settings).
> Basically the Amazon app just looks at what bit depth and sample rate are set for the DAC on the OS level, then when you pick a song the app picks the highest quality version that is at that or a lower bit depth and sample rate, and then sends it to the OS, which upsamples if there's a mismatch.
> 
> So if you set your DAC (in Windows) to 16 bit, 96 kHz, the app would skip a 24 bit, 192 kHz version of the track and may instead choose a 16 bit, 44.1 kHz version, send that to Windows, Windows resamples it to 24 bit, 96 kHz and sends it to your DAC. If you set your DAC in Windows to 24 bit, 192 kHz it will pick the 24 bit, 192 kHz track and send that to Windows. Windows won't resample or otherwise alter it (with exclusive mode), but may alter parts of it (without exclusive mode) depending on how loud a section is or what other apps are playing audio (to avoid clipping, presumably).
> ...


That's right. I can see 192 kHz on the rme adi-2 pro dac display.


----------



## alexdemaet (Nov 11, 2022)

rlanger said:


> The WiiM Mini Streamer is less than 100 euro. I paid 10,000 yen here in Japan, which is about 70 eruo, I think. Incredible value.


It looks great! The wiim mini streamer has optical output so you can connect it to a dac. Would usb output be better? It does play bit perfect? And you can control it with an app.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/wiim-mini-review-streamer.33099/


----------



## rlanger (Nov 11, 2022)

alexdemaet said:


> It looks great! The wiim mini streamer has optical output so you can connect it to a dac. Would usb output be better? It does play bit perfect? And you can control it with an app.
> https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/wiim-mini-review-streamer.33099/


I use optical out to a Mojo 2, but you can use USB. With the Mojo, optical is definitely the better solution, but with other dac/amps I'm not sure.

Edit: actually, I think USB is only for charging. You have to use optical or aux to connect to a dac.

Yes, it outputs bit perfect.

You can use the WiiM app to control your music or you can use the native Amazon app, which it supports. The WiiM app supports just about every streaming platform too and can even be used with Roon. That article says it doesn't, but I've heard from others that Roon will recognize it.

I have a 512gb SD card on my laptop that I can access through the WiiM app, so I tend to use that for both my local music and Amazon. Having said that, the Amazon app is better, especially for music discovery.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

I had problems signing up before but today I was able to get the trial started. Navigation and UX is atrocious!

Anybody have the secret sauce to add an Artist to "My Music?"

I'm using BluOS mostly, but even on the webapp I have only choices in the 3 dots to share or play similar.

Should there be something like Artist or Album in the choices here?

I don't want playlists, stations, charts, recommended, or new. I just want to pick the artists I like and save them somehow.


----------



## gimmeheadroom (Nov 20, 2022)

Tubewin said:


> Of course it's subjective, but in theory AIFF is superior to FLAC because it is uncompressed and of master quality. I have also listened straight from Qobuz and it sounds worse than AIFF. _*It's all subjective. *_I understand that. But again, subjectively, Amazon sounds better.



FLAC is uncompressed and it's bit perfect. It is just a container and can handle any practical sample rate PCM.

I can rip a CD to PCM, encode it with FLAC, decode it to PCM, and then do a bitwise comparison of the original PCM and the PCM recovered from FLAC, and they are identical. There is nothing subjective about it.



Tubewin said:


> Amazon does not do bit perfect streaming. Their exclusive mode still doesn't work.



They do, but their apps don't. As people have mentioned, it's bitperfect over BluOS devices and I guess also whatever other streamers support it.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

.


----------



## Tubewin

gimmeheadroom said:


> FLAC is uncompressed and it's bit perfect. It is just a container and can handle any practical sample rate PCM.
> 
> I can rip a CD to PCM, encode it with FLAC, decode it to PCM, and then do a bitwise comparison of the original PCM and the PCM recovered from FLAC, and they are identical. There is nothing subjective about it.
> 
> ...


"Overall, *one major way FLAC differs from AIFF is in terms of storage space*. FLAC deals with compressing the audio file as much as it can without any loss of quality in the audio. The AIFF file format, on the other hand, is not about compression. Instead, it is focused on rendering the music as accurately as possible" so in "theory" AIFF may be superior.


----------



## Nick24JJ

gimmeheadroom said:


> I don't want playlists, stations, charts, recommended, or new. *I just want to pick the artists I like and save them somehow.*


I am using playlists with the songs I like but one way I have found to add an Artist to my Library/Music is to go to the Artist's profile and add an Album in my Library, using the + button. Then the Artist appears in my Library. If you like their entire Discography you can add all of their albums. Try also following those you like.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Tubewin said:


> "Overall, *one major way FLAC differs from AIFF is in terms of storage space*. FLAC deals with compressing the audio file as much as it can without any loss of quality in the audio. The AIFF file format, on the other hand, is not about compression. Instead, it is focused on rendering the music as accurately as possible" so in "theory" AIFF may be superior.



No, bitperfect is bitperfect. All lossless formats are functionally identical. This is a typical response from Apple where they come up with their own versions of everything whether anybody needs it or not. The hifi world is based on FLAC. If AIFF went away tomorrow, nobody would miss it at all.

I have about 1,5T of FLAC and 0 bytes of AIFF.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Nick24JJ said:


> I am using playlists with the songs I like but one way I have found to add an Artist to my Library/Music is to go to the Artist's profile and add an Album in my Library, using the + button. Then the Artist appears in my Library. If you like their entire Discography you can add all of their albums. Try also following those you like.



Thank you! I saw this after some hair pulling. It still does not work as I want. Anyway, I have 30 days of free trial to see if I can hammer it into submission.

So far I'm disappointed. All the albums I can't find on Tidal and Deezer are also not on Amazon. Qobuz is not available here. Anyway it's 5,99 euros a month which is about half the price of the other services I have, so who knows...


----------



## Tubewin

gimmeheadroom said:


> No, bitperfect is bitperfect. All lossless formats are functionally identical. This is a typical response from Apple where they come up with their own versions of everything whether anybody needs it or not. The hifi world is based on FLAC. If AIFF went away tomorrow, nobody would miss it at all.
> 
> I have about 1,5T of FLAC and 0 bytes of AIFF.


It's a not a quote from apple https://midination.com/magazine/aiff-vs-flac/

Let's just agree to disagree.


----------



## Tubewin

gimmeheadroom said:


> No, bitperfect is bitperfect. All lossless formats are functionally identical. This is a typical response from Apple where they come up with their own versions of everything whether anybody needs it or not. The hifi world is based on FLAC. If AIFF went away tomorrow, nobody would miss it at all.
> 
> I have about 1,5T of FLAC and 0 bytes of AIFF.


"The most significant difference in FLAC vs. WAV is that *the former is compressed, and the latter is uncompressed*. FLAC is a compressed file, whereas WAV is technically a perfect copy of the original audio file. People often favor FLAC because it takes up significantly less space on their devices"  https://everpresent.com/flac-vs-wav/


----------



## gimmeheadroom (Nov 20, 2022)

Tubewin said:


> "The most significant difference in FLAC vs. WAV is that *the former is compressed, and the latter is uncompressed*. FLAC is a compressed file, whereas WAV is technically a perfect copy of the original audio file. People often favor FLAC because it takes up significantly less space on their devices"  https://everpresent.com/flac-vs-wav/


FLAC is a bitperfect copy of WAV (PCM) or anything else you encode with FLAC. I proved it by doing the test I mentioned above.



Tubewin said:


> It's a not a quote from apple https://midination.com/magazine/aiff-vs-flac/
> 
> Let's just agree to disagree.


The page is riddled with contradictions and superstition. I don't think any knowledgeable person would believe what's written there. If you look into it, I am sure you will agree to agree


----------



## Tubewin

gimmeheadroom said:


> FLAC is a bitperfect copy of WAV (PCM) or anything else you encode with FLAC. I proved it by doing the test I mentioned above.
> 
> 
> The page is riddled with contradictions and superstition. I don't think any knowledgeable person would believe what's written there. If you look into it, I am sure you will agree to agree


Agree to disagree. I'll go with the mainstream interpretation for now... but I'll keep an open mind.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Tubewin said:


> Agree to disagree. I'll go with the mainstream interpretation for now... but I'll keep an open mind.


What I wrote is the mainstream interpretation. What you have been reading is junk science.

Ask in the sound science forum if you want a second opinion


----------



## Tubewin

gimmeheadroom said:


> What I wrote is the mainstream interpretation. What you have been reading is junk science.
> 
> Ask in the sound science forum if you want a second opinion


Can you quote your source? Peer reviewed?


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Tubewin said:


> Can you quote your source? Peer reviewed?


You can use the test I mentioned above:

1. Encode a PCM file using FLAC
2. Decode the FLAC to PCM
3. Compare the original PCM file to the output of step (2). I use sha128sum or sha256sum but any comparison or checksum will work.

FLAC is used to encode even MQA files, which must be bitperfect, since modification of MQA files breaks MQA.

As far as what FLAC does, it has already been understood since Day 1.

"Since FLAC is a lossless scheme, it is suitable as an archive format for owners of CDs and other media who wish to preserve their audio collections. If the original media are lost, damaged, or worn out, a FLAC copy of the audio tracks ensures that an exact duplicate of the original data can be recovered at any time."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAC


----------



## Tubewin

gimmeheadroom said:


> You can use the test I mentioned above:
> 
> 1. Encode a PCM file using FLAC
> 2. Decode the FLAC to PCM
> ...


Didn't realize wikipedia was peer reviewed.Especially when the majority of the sources on the wiki page came from the same person/company who made flac.


----------



## gimmeheadroom

Tubewin said:


> Didn't realize wikipedia was peer reviewed.Especially when the majority of the sources on the wiki page came from the same person/company who made flac.


It is as peer-reviewed as you're gonna get, since anybody can edit and dispute anything that's on that site.

Anyway, you have the situation totally upside-down. You're using sources that contradict themselves that nobody relies on and going against facts that everybody knows.

I get it that you don't see that, but that doesn't change reality. Srlsly..


----------



## turbo87

Kind of a side question on AMAZON MUSIC.I am on a MacBook Air with M1, and have a Sony DAC/AMP connected via USB hub. I am not seeing anything other than 44khz being passed to my Sony. With the previous MacBook 12 inch running Big Sur , that I replaced, it was passing bitrates all the way up to 192khz. So issue with AMAZON MUSIC or latest version of Mac OS , Ventura? Any thoughts on how can get the same bitrate. Thanks.


----------



## rlw6534

turbo87 said:


> Kind of a side question on AMAZON MUSIC.I am on a MacBook Air with M1, and have a Sony DAC/AMP connected via USB hub. I am not seeing anything other than 44khz being passed to my Sony. With the previous MacBook 12 inch running Big Sur , that I replaced, it was passing bitrates all the way up to 192khz. So issue with AMAZON MUSIC or latest version of Mac OS , Ventura? Any thoughts on how can get the same bitrate. Thanks.



The M1 Air should support higher bitrates (although there have been issues with USB drivers).  Have you checked in the "Audio MIDI Setup" app?


----------



## turbo87

The audio midi is setup to the highest rate. Problem is Amazon sees the dac and the rate, but only converts to 44.1khz. Odd.


----------

