Tidal Music review

gearbest.com

Review: Updated: Tidal

Tidal used to be a plucky new underdog from the makers of WiMP in Sweden a year ago, a Spotify-like streaming service with a unique focus on CD-quality music.

It was a shining beacon of opportunity for music lovers who coveted sound quality over everything else; a chance to combine the convenience and mobility of Spotify with the fidelity and prestige of a CD collection.

But while Spotify remains to this day a plucky upstart from Sweden, albeit a rather popular one these days, Tidal has since been acquired by little-known rap star “Jay Z” (ahem) for 56 million American dollars.

Tidal is consequently now the first major music service to be owned by artists themselves, and claims to pay higher royalties to artists and songwriters.

Whether it actually does that or not is unproven, and certainly the controversial American relaunch earlier in 2015 – during which Jay Z dished out shares in the service live on stage not to young, up-and-coming musicians but to some of the wealthiest artists on the planet including wife Beyoncé, Coldplay and Madonna – is seen by some as a curious way of achieving its stated aim.

But whatever your opinion on that, Tidal as a CD-quality alternative to Spotify and a high-quality rival to Deezer Elite remains a compelling proposition and one thoroughly worthy of your consideration.

Review: Updated: Tidal

How much does Tidal cost?

When it launched at the back-end of 2014, Tidal cost £19.99/$19.99 for the CD quality service, but seven months on, the service now operates a two-tier system.

Tidal Premium now matches Spotify’s Premium price of 9.99 per month and offers music at the same bitrate – 320kbps. That’s lossy but still not too bad compared to an MP3 at a lower bitrate.

To get the “lossless high fidelity” sound Tidal hangs its hat on, you’ll still need to shell out 19.99 a month for a “Tidal HiFi” membership.

Get your free one-week Tidal trial

Review: Updated: Tidal

How Tidal works

On the surface, Tidal looks just like Spotify. It’s got an excellent Chrome-based web player and a desktop player for PCs as well as decent iOS and Android apps.

It offers comprehensive playlist functionality, sharing of music as well as offline listening. And the library is off to a good start, now with well over 25 million tracks. We regularly noticed holes in Tidal’s library when we first reviewed it but these days things are looking a lot more healthy.

Where Tidal really differs from its other rivals is that instead of only serving up compressed music formats like MP3 and OGG – as do Spotify, Google Play Music and most of the others – Tidal offers music at CD quality.

It streams music in the form of 16bit, 44.1kHz FLAC files with a bitrate of 1411kbps. And I can tell you now, it’s brilliant.

Tidal is more than just a FLAC streaming service though. It’s been designed from the ground up to be the ultimate music resource for fans of hi-fidelity music, offering playlists and recommendations curated by experienced music journalists, not to mention 75,000 music videos.

Review: Updated: Tidal

Why FLAC?

For the uninitiated, FLAC is the format of choice for many people who want to listen to music files without having to put up with lossy formats like MP3.

When you compress a music track into an MP3, you have to shave off a lot of detail in order to achieve that miniature file size. Other formats like OGG (as used by Spotify) do a highly commendable job of limiting that shaving mostly to parts of the audio that might be considered ‘inaudible’.

The truth is that all compression formats are a compromise, a victory for convenience over sound quality.

FLAC tracks are also compressed but in a totally different way. They’re a lot more like a zipped file, so when they’re played back, they can be decompressed to their original glory without any loss of fidelity.

Thus, while a CD track might take up anywhere between 60 and 100MB, a FLAC file will be more like 30 to 50MB. MP3s encoded at the maximum bitrate of 320kbps are typically only about 5-10MB in size, and there’s no way to get back the information you threw away during compression. That’s why MP3 is described as a lossy format while FLAC is not.

The upshot of this is that FLAC is the perfect format for delivering CD-quality music down an internet pipe.

There are several other music services that offer FLAC such as Deezer and Qobuz, but it’s still a fairly niche area of growth.

Read:the 5 best high-quality music streaming services

Review: Updated: Tidal

Tidal Music Library

Tidal went live in the UK back in October 2014 with 25 million tracks in its library and that was a good start. Back then, I used my CD collection and Spotify account to guide my search for all the music I would consider ‘mine’ and most of what I searched for was available. But also it wasn’t hard to find some omissions – these days though, the Tidal catalogue is far more complete for all types of music.

For example, one of my favourite bands, Wolf Parade, was completely absent at launch but is now fully available. The Strokes were also missing last year but now all their albums are accounted for.

That said, folk-rock superband Bright Eyes is only represented by two albums instead of the full roster and there are plenty other examples of bands and labels that are yet to sign up. This is a work in progress though and Spotify suffered the same painstaking sign-up process back in the day.

Review: Updated: Tidal

The good news is that the ‘Your Music’ feature that Spotify added a year ago was part of the Tidal service from day one. Big relief.

It works in exactly the same way, allowing you to go through all your favourite bands and ‘star’ any album you’d like to add to your own personal music library. Once you’ve done this, they’re all waiting for you in your ‘My Music’ area.

It’s the digital equivalent of a a CD collection, only the discs are stored in the cloud instead of racks on your wall.

Remember to star the bands themselves at the same time, though, because unlike Spotify, Tidal won’t automatically add the tracks from those albums to ‘My Tracks’ and the artist isn’t auto added to ‘My Artists’ either.

The headlines are that most music I searched for – even obscure stuff – was ready and waiting for me.

Review: Updated: Tidal

Using Tidal Music

The fear with a brand new music service like this is that it starts off looking quite basic and feature-light.

However, Tidal impressed from the first second we fired it up and while it hasn’t changed much since then, it remains a fully functioned, highly usable service. The Chrome-based web player is visually very similar to Spotify, with a homescreen that offers links to curated playlists and recommended hi-fi albums as well as top 20 charts. It looks great and there’s no learning curve – it works exactly how you’d expect it to.

A simple click on the sidebar will take you to your ‘My Music’ area where you’ll find all your stuff. And browsing music is very easy.

You can’t search by genre, which might have been a great way to win over some Spotify subscribers, but there is a ‘Genres’ button you can click on in the sidebar which will take you to curated areas with playlists and recommended albums. A decent compromise.

Review: Updated: Tidal

Search generally isn’t terribly smart – misspell an album or artist name even by one character or one piece of punctuation, and you’ll be left with zero results. A bit of optimisation here wouldn’t hurt, but as long as you’re careful you won’t have any problems with it.

And if you’re a fan of the ‘radio’ function on Google Play Music or Spotify, you’ll find an identical service ready and waiting in Tidal. You can select Artist radio or individual track radio, and it’s a great way to discover new music.

Review: Updated: Tidal

Social features

gearbest.com

In the settings, you can connect Tidal to Facebook which will allow you to share music with your friends. You can also extract a URL if you want to link someone to any album, playlist or track.

But the social features are nowhere near as mature as the ones in Spotify – it’ll take a lot of work to catch up in that regard. But judging by the amount of care and attention that’s gone into Tidal pre-launch, I would expect that side of things to be developed quite quickly.

gearbest.com

Other formats

In settings you can also change your streaming settings, so if you want to save bandwidth you can drop down a notch to 320kbps AAC or, if you’ve gone insane, all the way down to 96kbps AAC+.

It’s important to have these settings, as I anticipate plenty of people using the FLAC service at home while opting for 320 AAC when they’re out and about. Those files are big, after all…

Review: Updated: Tidal

gearbest.com

Performance

As you might expect, streaming FLAC files from the Tidal HiFi service is a lot more bandwidth intensive than streaming the Premium option at 320kbps. Typical albums weigh in at around 400MB, so you’re either going to need to download when you’re on wi-fi or make sure you have an unlimited data plan for on-the-move listening. Either that or opt for the reduced-quality AAC versions.

Quickly downloading an album before you leave for work in the morning is a lot harder with FLAC – you’ll be waiting a while, depending on your connection speed.

I found that even when listening on a PC in the web player, tracks did not start instantly when selected. It takes at least a few seconds to buffer up and begin playing when you skip through tracks etc. But when listening to an album or playlist, the next song is buffered ahead of time so you won’t get any annoying gaps in Dark Side of the Moon unless you have bandwidth issues.

This is nothing to do with Tidal’s server performance though, it’ll be down to your own connection and how fast it can suck those FLAC files through the tubes.

As for the 75,000 HD music videos… I would call it a work in progress. A lot of the videos I specifically looked for were absent. I’m a big Queen fan and love a lot of the Queen videos, but there are none in Tidal. The system uses Flash as the video format, and I did notice some quality issues on a lot of the videos, but most of them looked at least 720p – there’s no way to tell for sure.

It’s certainly a great feature to have, though, and something the other services might like to copy, I would suggest.

Sound quality

As for sound quality, what can I say? It’s brilliant.

As you would expect from a FLAC service, sound quality is a lot better than Spotify and the other music streaming services. Hi-fi enthusiasts don’t need to be convinced about the benefits of FLAC over MP3 or OGG.

But what about your everyday Spotify subscriber? Well the good news is that there’s a free trial for Tidal so you can decide for yourself if you think it’s worth it.

Review: Updated: Tidal

But certainly, you’ll only get the very best out of Tidal if you have some decent audio gear and a willing pair of ears. This could be the perfect excuse to buy that pair of headphones you’ve been eyeing up.

I primarily tested at home with a PC plugged into a separate DAC and headphone amp. Into this was plugged a pair of Oppo PM-1 headphones and with this setup I would defy anyone to tell me Tidal doesn’t sound absolutely incredible.

Review: Updated: Tidal

But what about laptops, mobile devices and headphones that don’t cost £1000? I tested with a Samsung Galaxy Note 3, an iPod touch 5th Gen, iPad 2 and several laptops with a variety of headphones and speakers at different price points. Results were great but each device imprints its own noticeable sound signature on the output.

The Galaxy Note 3’s DAC, for instance, is like many Android devices, known for being quite feeble.

Android and iOS as operating systems aren’t exactly the best for handling high resolution audio, either.

And that ultimately means that FLAC will never sound quite as good through an average mobile device’s headphone jack as it does from a device with more competent audio hardware.

But even so, it’s still a noticeable step up from a 320kbps Spotify stream on whatever device you listen on.

However, if you don’t even know which quality setting your Spotify app is set to (320 is not the default!), and if you’re happily using your Apple EarPods to listen to music every day, it’s unlikely that Tidal is for you and that’s fine.

Review: Updated: Tidal

Apps

Update: Tidal has recently released updated desktop apps for PC and Mac. Changes include a more inclusive search function, support for media keys and integration with Ticketmaster. The desktop app will now also be able to detect external audio sources when needed – like a digital-to-analog converter or Mac AirPlay.

When we first tested Tidal, there was no desktop app so computer-bound users had to use the web-player. These days, there is a desktop player but it’s nowhere near as refined as that of Spotify. And a quick look on the Tidal website reveals it’s been hidden away – Tidal wants you to use the web player only. And frankly, that’s probably a good idea – it’s a lot better.

It’s got plenty of functionality, and will even allow you to import your Spotify playlists into Tidal pretty easily, but it’s clearly in need of some development. It doesn’t look great at higher resolutions and so the web player offers a better experience.

Review: Updated: Tidal

Mobile apps

On the whole, both the Android and iOS apps were very good. There’s not much difference between them, frankly, but I found that the Android one seemed a bit more slick and responsive.

The syncing of playlists and albums for offline listening could be improved. You select ‘Offline’ to download, the button being exactly the same as the Spotify one, but you have to go into your sidebar, select ‘Offline Content’ and then swipe to your download queue in order to see whether something has finished downloading or not. I found this really quite annoying.

It’s worse on iOS. Because, on Android, the downloading files show up in your Action Bar in the same way as any other downloading file. But on iOS, there’s just no way to see what’s downloaded and what’s not.

One very cool feature that the Tidal has that Spotify doesn’t, is audio-search. It’s like having Shazam built directly into the app – press the button and it’ll listen to any song you can hear in your environment, identify it and allow you to save it to your own Tidal library.

Verdict

Tidal is the CD quality music streaming service hi-fi people have been waiting for.

For a brand new service, the level of detail that’s been put in and the number of different ways to explore new music is simply fantastic. If it didn’t cost double the price of a standard subscription, I would say it’s well worth anyone switch over immediately.

Whether your ears care about the increase in fidelity, whether you have the headphones and playback devices to make the best of it, and whether the extra cash is worth it, only you can tell. But with a one-week trial for everyone, there’s simply no reason not to at least give it a try.

We liked

Sound quality is the obvious attraction here and provided you listen using the right equipment, you’ll easily notice the difference compared to lower-quality formats.

The service is compatible with Sonos and other players such as Marantz receivers and if you’re an iPhone or iPad owner you’ll be able to stream over AirPlay without any loss of quality.

We disliked

Honestly, the fact that Jay Z now owns Tidal and has dished out shares to all his rich chums in the industry hasn’t made us any more fond of the service. But we can get over that.

It’s clear the desktop player needs plenty of work and the catalogue could do with some fleshing out but these are works in progress and not major issues that should dissuade you from getting involved.

The price is obviously the main turn-off for Tidal. There’s absolutely no reason to opt for the Tidal Premium option over a Spotify Premium one, given that they’re the same price despite Spotify’s clear superiority. No, the only reason to go with Tidal is for the £20 HiFi streaming and on that score, only you know how much you value sound quality.

Verdict

We really love Tidal. And while seeing Jay Z and his mates at the helm is almost as hard as watching Joffrey Lannister terrorise the citizens of King’s Landing, it’s really no reason to not give it a shot. The sound quality is truly excellent and the apps are largely very easy to use.

The price is clearly the barrier to entry but we reckon if you’re a fan of sound quality, the free trial might be enough to persuade you that it’s worth the cost.

Source: feedproxy.google.com

pontofrio.com.br
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

50 thoughts on “Tidal Music review

  1. I’m about to listen to your music. How are those migraines? Ok, just listened and it definitely sounds edgy! I can pickup on the Britney influence with your vocals.

  2. I was almost surprised to see major artists backing so heavily. Like this is some music savior heavily, and we know they want money. Maybe they already got theirs. Ha. So I’m curious not just about artist payouts but unsigned/indie/general artist payouts. Sometimes major labels make skewed deals. Either way, I was still happy to see that my first single was delivered and my artist page is running. LOL. Not going to bother with a trial/listening because I know I won’t pay next month/don’t just blast out CC details lightly. Although if I could afford it I’d be interested. Since I produce my own music I DO have the equipment to hear the difference, but I’m in agreement with these broke students commenting on social media tonight about not fitting it into my budget. This info, about payouts, is surprisingly missing from Google and, less surprisingly, from the social chatter. I’ll look directly on music industry / DIY music-artist blogs though.

  3. One artist claimed the royalties he was receiving was 3x’s that of Spotify’s. But that will probably decrease for a revenue shift. -Wikipedia

  4. I guess we just have to wait for litigation from artist whom feel they are not being compensated. It’s coming, trust me. Greed always has a way of lifting it’s ugly head.

  5. I rather support Artists than no named Executives at Spotify….

  6. Yes, instead of paying them 0.00001 cents per play, they’re going to pay them 0.00002 cents. What a huge difference!

  7. This article doesn’t address the most important issue to me which is artist royalties. Does Tidal pay the artists better than existing services because that’s the main thing that keeps from using them.

  8. Couldn’t agree more, I download a lot of FLAC- mostly live concert recordings but also a fair amount of albums. I do that so I know I have a perfect copy for the future. NOT for listening and enjoying over the

  9. I use to be you years ago. Now I just need the band on the run and really don’t require all the HiTech increase in sound. At least not for $20.00.

  10. The difference is actually quite noticeable. the better the equipment is, the bigger the difference is of course: I have been comparing Spotify’s 320 kb/s audio to Tidal’s lossless audio earlier (no scientific tests of course, just my impressions whilst trying to find differences in the recordings) with the HD 800 paired up with the HDVD 800 amp/dac and I can clearly hear the difference. Don’t get me wrong, 320kb/s sounds great, and is probably good enough for most people, but there is quite a noticeable difference still; especially when listening to more complex recordings. I also tried this with just my regular macbook pro built in speakers and I still managed to hear a difference, although much less prominent. I really had to struggle to hear any significant difference. My conclusion is that lossless is only worth it if you have a good audio setup and perhaps

  11. There is a LOT of things that go into listening to

  12. but who only listens to music at home? many people wanna listen on the go i.e. smartphone and earbuds. ur not gonna get that quality outta some $30 buds from apple or smasung

  13. Being that I use Klipsh 4.2’s from 1992 and Senheisers I’d have to agree with your assessment. An Adcom GFA and Pre Apm also make the sound difference engaging at least for me. I had to sit down when I started using Tidal as it was as crispy as I’ve heard streamed.

  14. Utter nonsense. Try this at home, kids. Use a good pair of headphones or good speakers and a good amp. Take some of your favorite music from a lossless source, say a CD and get to know it really well for a month. Then listen to an MP3. The poor guy above can’t even tell 160 from

  15. but like u said ur using $200 headphones most people listen to music on their phone using thone $30 ear buds. ur not gonna be able to tell the difference on those

  16. Agree I’ve the same and similar comparisons many times and most recently with Tidal vs 320kb mp3 in the studio here . Tidal 16/44.1 RBCD sounds better on studio phones and speakers both. Whomever says they cant hear music well on phones obviously doesn’t realize phones are used more often than not by recording engineers precisely because you can hear accurately on them . There are some $600.00 phones out there that aren’t very accurate also likewise some expensive speakers that are inaccurate not to mention the inaccuracies of an untreated room . In fact I’m enjoying Tidal right now on some studio phones that resolve from 5 Hz -27K Hz not that many speakers can do that out to the listening position without severe roll off of both highs and lows . I would agree however that up sampling loss less or lossey encodes to a higher resolution does nothing but increase the file size

  17. I’m testing out Tidal ( Im a long time Spotify subscriber) and so far I really LOVE it!!

  18. I’ve never been super happy with the best that mp3 can give. It’s good enough to enjoy, but I have to remind myself not to expect clean transients and that those aren’t the most important thing in the world. I’ll be happy when Tidal is solid enough that I can switch. I’d feel a little silly doing it today, I just downloaded 12 gig of music to my phone from Beats two days ago.

  19. Take wav or aiff sound files, encode each of them to flac and 320kbs MP3, and take the double blind test for the resulting files. Only that way do you truly know there’s no other factors involved. Apart from selection acquisition and compression theres 50.000 other things that Tidal and Spotify may be doing before the sound reaches your ears…

  20. Well, I’ve logged a few thousand hours doing just that being affiliated with a high end audio manufacturer, but chose to leave those off to avoid the snake oil comment that typically follow and left it at the much less organized having my wife click on one or the other without teling me which she selected. I’ve already verified that volume levels were at or near identical, though I admittedly cannot verify without inside information from Tidal or Spotify on where they acquired their selection.

  21. The experiment you are describing does not fall under the definition of a

  22. Having done a number of blind comparisons between Spotify and Tidal songs now with a set of Sennheiser PC 360’s, I can say without any questions there’s a pretty big difference between the two. My helper (ie. wife) would play the same song from the same album on the two players randomly (sometimes she tried to throw me off by playing the same player twice) and it was obvious each time which was playing. So either the bitrate/format (more likely the format) is making the difference, or Tidal’s gotten a hold of some better recordings. These are $200-250 headphones, so not some crazy level of audiophilia, but if you can’t hear the difference with something of that level with how vastly different they sounded, then I guess you could count yourself lucky as you’ll be completely happy saving $20/month and being oblivious to the difference.

  23. mrpete, thanks for making an earnest effort to explain your side. However, have you actually verified any of this with double blind tests? You seem to be relying solely on subjective impressions, and I get it, hearing a difference in sound quality can be so convincing that it feels bizarre to even consider that it’s not actually there. But–and I speak from experience–you have to, because it may well not be. Until you do, this is equivalent to other examples of subjective impressions from head-fi, Stereophile, etc. that are unreliable, frequently observe differences that aren’t there, and as a result are more likely to add to the confusion than help people figure out which gear to buy and what matters in their systems. Maybe I didn’t emphasize this enough in my first post, but my main point is this: It’s much easier than expected to hear things that aren’t there, so verification is paramount. Subjective evaluation is great, just verify. Given the available information, I hope you understand that until you do, I have to assume this is another example of placebo. (And so should you.)

  24. I put another post in response to another poster farther down that you can read if you like, on the differences that can be heard between 320 and lossless. Basically, yes, there is a lot of placebo, and for most listeners, anything over 320 IS overkill, especially on headphones, where even 40mm or 50mm drivers are unable to really capture what the increased fidelity can provide. I can only truly tell the difference on my home system, which I admit is NOT the absolute bleeding edge you can buy but does have full range 4-way front speakers, a decent subwoofer, and a mid-high quality Pioneer amplifier. It’s all about intangibles. But they ARE present. It’s not all in people’s heads. The cymbals and percussion tell the story, as does the depth, presence, and clarity of the deep bottom end and the crystal precision of the way the highs ring. People tend to forget how the quality of these ends of the spectrum help the music feel alive or simply there. You’d be hard pressed to hear these things on even the most expensive headphones, though. The sound will get more accurate, yes. But to really heard where the difference is you need to hear it on a quality, full-range system that can drive the power appropriately, and how the music bounces of the walls of the room to create that thick atmosphere where sounds don’t get lost in the noise but ring clear together. And these aren’t just things that aren’t there.

  25. Thank you so much for your pity, brenro. Here’s a place where you can prove your golden earedness: abx . digitalfeed . net / list . html

  26. Not everyone has the equipment to take advantage of the greater detail offered by lossless formats. Even fewer actually know how to critically listen to music. Pinpoint imaging that describes a three dimensional sound stage is very much present on higher quality recordings but relatively few people have ever learned how to listen for it, which is really a shame. So they love to proclaim that it’s all snake oil and we’re all being duped. I truly feel sorry for such people.

  27. Yeah, for the 1% of the music listening population who has the equipment and ears to be able to hear the difference. This is a gimmick that only a few idiots are going to fall for.

  28. I agree. There’s a noticable difference between an MP3 and a FLAC file. The MP3s sound woolly in the bottom end and often rough in the top end, with a lack of detail and depth. (After all, that’s what compressed audio does; it takes out the detail.)

  29. You are correct. The few were born out of the many different shifts in the music industries.

  30. how about you listen through a decent system. Then you’ll notice. There is more than a few of us with meridian, naim, linn systems. You keep kidding yourself that quality doesn’t matter while listening through your beats headphones

  31. Believe me, you don’t need good ears at all to tell 192k file from lossless.

  32. there is just too few of you, that care about this difference, to make this a mainstream success

  33. This review contains a lot of misinformation. I think tech media is really doing us a disservice by not emphasizing that the improvements offered by lossless audio, as well as the hi-rez 24/192 audio Neil Young is promoting with the Pono Player, are completely inaudible. For more on this, I highly recommend searching for Jeff Atwood’s posts

  34. I can understand your dislike for the artists…everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, I don’t think you should let your feelings about them make you miss out on such a dope app…I love Tidal and literally advocate for it often just because how good it is…The music selection is sooo vast ranging from Rihanna, Drake, Vybz Kartel, Sza, etc. etc. It streams super fast and has a clear quality of sound and visuals…Yeah we gotta pay to use it but i think its worth the price..

  35. Tidal was actually an okay venture into hifi, but the fact that Madonna and kanye own it…i don’t want to give money to the bullshittery of their brand; Madge and Kanye are two of the worst people in music…their personalities are in the bucket, they suck royally…

  36. But the service in itself isn’t new, they just changed colours on the the WiMP client from white to black and released it as Tidal, and WiMP has been around for several years.

  37. Another fault check mark against Tidal.,, hopefully they are working on this. Growing pains from new services like this one is expected.

  38. it took 9 years for spotify to get where it is, let them do their work, also as pointed out in the review the buffering is down to your connection, mine is working fine.

  39. If it’s slow now, imagine in a couple of months when everybody knows about it. And the streaming should be one of their top priorities. Not serious enough if they are going to fix it months after launching.

  40. Since it’s coded in Adobe Air just like WiMP was I have no high hopes for the client of theirs. Adobe Air is rubish.

  41. Absolutely! I would be concerned with that price too, if certain key features were broken or worked half of the time. One of the reasons why I wait for comments like this one. What are the pitfalls of this new service and is it worth shelling out $20.00 per month for the premium services rendered. We will just have to wait and see. Thanks for sharing.

  42. I used Tidal during the trial (just for the Jay-Z concert) then cancelled the service but I’m thinking about getting it again but I have a few questions before I do. I use Spotify now and a few of the things I like is the ability to download songs for offline use and the ability to control what plays on my spotify from another device. Does Tidal allow you to do this? I really just want that exclusive content. I was watching the Side B concert and heard a song by Jay and Jay (lol) and I can’t find it anywhere.

  43. Ive actually experienced the complete opposite…compared to all the other apps that i have, such as SoundCloud, Spotify, Youtube, Hulu, and Netflix, Tidal streamed the fastest for me…I never got the buffering or shuttering that you experienced…idk its the best app i have in my phone for media entertainment so far…it even works offline which helps when my service times out…reconsider giving it another try its blessed me so far…

  44. Did the trial, let the full service kick in.. and I’m most likely gonna bail at the end of the month. I have full on 50 / 50 verizon fios.. never a buffer on netflix, rhapsody, rdio, nothing.. but Tidal constantly buffers, stutters, or flat out won’t play 50% of the time. And they’re suggestion box that pops up recommending me to reduce my bitrate because of high traffic is UNACCEPTABLE when I’m paying $20.00 a month. Really want to like this service, and don’t mind a few growing pains, but not at full price. C’mon guys… get your stuff together.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>