Amazon Music HD / Ultra HD Music Review

A full review of Amazon Music HD / Ultra HD Music, comparing it with Tidal, Qubuz and Spotify. Looking at the requirements to get the best from a high end streaming service, the competition and my recommendations.

[@chunli2]

"Apple will do it several years down the line and then claim it was their idea all along" hahaha

[@RobertBorley]

Chuy Trevi-Diamandis yeah. But they’ll do it better!

[@RedRyz3n]

@@RobertBorley But Apple Music is still a mess in 2019!

[@RobertBorley]

Jefferson Ettienne most of the time!

[@BruceLeroyUK]

@@RedRyz3n and in 2020!

[@blueletric1680]

Not anymore fellas

[@brentspaulding9990]

I have been wondering which of the three (tidal hifi, Amazon music HD, and Qobuz) is the best for audio quality and decided to test all three side by side. My setup is this (bluesound node 2i coaxial out to the internal dac of my Arcam sa20 to a pair of focal aria 926’s and a stereo pair of rel t9i subs) because I can have all three streaming services active on the bluesound at the same time I can queue up the same song from all three services side by side and listen to each one. This I found was a great way to directly compare them. I compared a 24/96 MQA Tidal, 24/96 Flac Amazon hd, and a 24/96 flac Qobuz of the same song. As I switched back and forth I definitely noticed there is something going on with the mqa. I thought at first it sounded good but then I started noticing it felt like the bass was being boosted. The bass felt very bloated. Also sounded somewhat muddy and less defined. The Qobuz sounded not as rich as the MQA but the basss was now much more balanced and more defined. Now throwing in the Amazon HD 24/96 I noticed going back and forth between it and qobuz there is more detail retrieval in the Amazon HD stream. I would play a small section of the song on each and keep switching back and forth. You can definitely hear more of the upper frequencies and pick out details that you can not hear as well with Qobuz and tidal. I would also say it seems the soundstage is wider with Amazon HD. You feel more enveloped by the sound. I know most won’t probably hear a difference unless they have a higher end system but that’s what I could hear directly comparing them over a few days. Ohh and also I compared songs between tidal (cd flac), Qobuz (cd flac), and Amazon HD (cd flac) and noticed the tidal and qobuz sounds exactly the same and Amazon HD still has more detail retrieval but not as noticeable. I would say for most you probably won’t hear a difference unless you have a higher end system. My system is very sensitive to upper frequency detail and lower frequencies with the rel subs and focal arias so I think that’s why I can hear those differences. I also think that is why the MQA’s sound so bloated as it pushes more to the subs throwing it all out of balance. Just thought I would share my findings. P.S. even though I am going with Amazon HD because the sound quality it has by far the worst interface with bluesound. Qobuz and tidal have a much easier to use interface and not laggy like Amazon HD.

[@godtiermedic]

2031 - Apple releases the world's first flac lossless audio streaming service

[@imrulhaque]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@lucymorrison992]

funny how a year later they released lossless for no extra cost to all subscribers

[@ChrisQuinn]

Check out "Wild World" by "Cat Stevens". It says that the track quality is 24/192

[@joeythedime1838]

My fairly high-end system (~£35k) is a T+A Elektroakustik PA 3100 HV Integrated Amplifier, T+A MP 3000 HV (Reference CD player and Multi Source Player) with T+A Criterion TCD 210 S speakers. I run my streamer via digital AES-EBU (24/192) directly into the MP 3000's DAC. I can say I notice the Amazon's HD/UHD service has less dynamic range and "flattened" bass on a lot of tracks compared to both Tidal, CD's and a direct connected hard disk containing my ripped CD FLAC flies when played via the MP 3000.

[@CPetchelli]

Did you need to say the price? 🤣

[@trevebacon3834]

Thank you. Deadened/flattened/lifeless sound here too with Amazon HD/UHD via Android mobile on my £fewKs set up. Good to see what you're putting Amazon HD/UHD through. Unless I can find a way to improve it (90% of reviews rave about it), I'm going to cancel during my free window.

[@joeythedime1838]

@@CPetchelli I guess not - it was meant only as a reference point so folks who have not heard of Theory and Application, or T+A for short - could get a sense of the system compared to brands that sit in the same class of system.

[@blueletric1680]

Any updates?

[@ericheaton9926]

Have subscribed to Tidal but now trying Amazon HD on 3 month trial. Both sonically are identical on my systems and miles better than the likes of Spotify. To my tastes I would disagree that Tidal has a better ultra hd library. Tidal seems to cater more for rap, hip hop and jazz whilst Amazon has a better choice in classic rock, prog rock genre which appeals to me more. I’ve been pleasantly surprised at the number of albums available on Amazon not available as Hi Res elsewhere. The Amazon GUI app is not the best and probably the worse of all the streaming services I have tried but all in all I am prepared to put up with this in the hope that over time it will improve. I will continue using Amazon over Tidal but look forward Spotify and Apple etc following suit into the HiRes market and wonder how they will compare

[@ajzepp8976]

Dude, come on, Iim 7min in and you haven't even gotten into what this video is supposed to be about.

[@davidr9876]

He really like to hear himself talk. Never gets to the point

[@tswarren68]

I recently tried Amazon Music again, and again ran into a serious (and deal-breaking) problem with it. I am surprised that I have not seen anybody else write about this. When listening to an album that is only available in CD-quality (oddly called HD) they will replace individual tracks with high definition versions if available on other albums. On my first go-around two years ago, I found five or six instances where they had replaced a track with an incorrect version of the song. That was within the first hour of using the service. Sadly, things have not gotten better. Check out the remastered version of The Beatles’ Abbey Road. Somehow, three tracks are in Ultra HD and Dolby Atmos, while the others are all in HD. Clearly, those three tracks are from the 2019 remix of the album, while all of the other tracks are from the 2009 CD release. On the special edition of Something Else by the Kinks, several of the mono mixes have been replaced with ultra HD stereo mixes. The tracks still say mono, but are definitely stereo. Another example is the Bootleg Series recording of Bob Dylan‘s Rolling Thunder Review. They replaced one of the tracks with a different high definition version. Clearly the track A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall is from a different release than the other tracks on the album. I doubt the publisher sent this to Amazon with only one Ultra HD track on the album. Compare it to the same track from the same album on Qobuz. They are clearly different masterings, if not different performances. How can anyone have any confidence that they are actually hearing what they want to listen to? I listen to a lot of classical music. How can I be sure that I am listening to the conductor or the soloist that I have selected? How can I be sure that Amazon didn’t just decide that the third movement of any given symphony should be replaced with a different recording? For me, this constitutes a fatal flaw. I wrote to Amazon about this problem last year and they suggested that I check my Internet bandwidth. Not very helpful.

[@cnett486]

So my question is, what is the dynamic range of the songs? If I were using the Dynamic Range Database Offline Tool as my example (for testing the range of a song), if it gave me a 5 on the dynamic range of a song I chose, then I would consider it no good. Just an extra service to pay for with no decent benefit. If I were to test it and got like a 13 or something, then we have something that has merit (to me). Otherwise I'd just stick with getting stuff on amazon directly as the mp3s, or buying stuff on vinyl and converting it.

[@jerryr458]

Folks it’s a culture thing. Brits love to ramble

[@ronaldmelia1172]

Ok, I am just getting back into this for the first time in years and life has moved on from the CD. What I cant seem to get my head around is delivery. I am tempted with Amazon HD but here is my question. So you have a higher bit rate, CD quality, but how do you get it to the amplifier without losing something in the process. Bluetooth whilst convenient wont cut it (in my view) The only thing physically connected to my amp is a Blue ray player and a TV via ARC. Will the App on my Samsung TV allow the transfer of the full bitrate transfer or will I lose something in the transfer? having just paid out for a reasonable system, paying another £700 - £1000 for a streamer is not going to get past her indoors.

[@hakki1999]

I was tidal user where they named Wimp. After that tidal disater at the beginning i moved to spotify. Was happy. Just streaming spotify on hifi speaker system sounds crap have to say. Now with family i need a family plan.... Spotify is ok with pricing. Tidal Master for family i dont want to pay that much. Amazon ultra hd + family plan sounds like the way to go now. Compared tidel vs amazon ultra. Sounds same same.... Spotify is crap but a nicer app.

[@Keepskatin]

Spotify does not have HD music.....simp

[@hakki1999]

@@Keepskatin??

[@overdriver2912]

Tidal or amazon music hd in terms of quality ?

[@truthx7]

amazon hd and ultra hd are hands down the best quality

[@nitram419]

@Geoffrey Conn Even will the full 'certified' hardware, MQA delivers *lossy* audio. If they say it's 384kHz (or whatever) that's a load of bullcr@p. MQA is just an upsampling and noise-shaping algorithm -- with added trojan DRM!

[@greatwhite1958]

Amazon pay more to the artists than Tidal do and that is a large plus point for using Amazon HD.

[@avguytx4361]

I tried Amazon HD Music last year when they first started pitching it....or whenever it was. I did like the sound but their interface is about the worst thing ever. I've been with Spotify for years and you can't beat their interface and integration. If I'm home listening to music, I typically have the Spotify desktop app open and just control it through the phone or tablet app. That's the first big yes for Spotify even at lower resolution. The second is the lack of UI on Amazon in "saving" an artist. When you save an artist on Spotify, you can go to their "page" and peruse their discography; there is absolutely nothing like that on Amazon HD Music. A person is forced to just know who they want to listen to or you have to sit for hours and create playlists. That, to me, is what people who listen on their phones do....not people on real stereos. If Amazon would just fix those two things, I'd go back. Otherwise, I could care less about Tidal and supporting the people that own it.

[@PalmTree26]

Not to mention, every other fucking music streaming service, you're able to sort your playlist by Recently Added but nope, can't do that with Amazon Music.

[@johnejdowski6515]

Been subscribed to Amazon HD for awhile now. The app on my smart TV will not give me the higher resolutions as ATMOS is not supported on my brand. I am running an 11.1.4 system and currently getting Atmos and Amazon HD music through my Amazon 4k Fire stick into my receiver. The app isn't very user friendly. I can receive the HD quality music but not the Ultra HD. Says Track quality: 24/192kHz but device capability is@ 16/192 kHz. I can stream Atmos films so I assume it's the Firestick? I have been on the phone to Amazon but they don't have a clue. Would you or anyone be able to shed light on why I can't get the Ultra HD? I don't suppose you can add a DAC to the firestick? Thanks. Any comments would be very welcome.

[@Milo_Molnar]

I am using DAC.And capability of device is ultra HD.24 bit/192 Khz.

[@wesleyburks5368]

AMAZON DOES HAVE FILES UP TO 192KHZ AND IT SHOWS UP WHEN YOU CLICK ON THE ULTRA HD BUTTON ON THE SONG IT SHOWS THE RATE

[@JustinMurray170fin]

With regard to market forces/artists dividends: Maybe more PPL sign up to Amazon that wouldn't otherwise & are only currently listening to F2P music? That being said, I do understand your point & share your concern. Appreciate your thoughts/experience. Thank you.

[@ShareHobby]

TIDAL sounds significantly better on my system when compared to AMAZON. Bowers&Wilkins, Meridian Explorer2 MQA DAC.

[@Keepskatin]

You're probably using amazon unlimited without HD add on subscription

[@d.b.c.t1m059]

@@Keepskatin I got the same problem. Same track same resolution same equipment. Qobuz sounds way better than Amazon Music.

[@Keepskatin]

@@d.b.c.t1m059 Are you using amazon unlimited or Amazon HD

[@d.b.c.t1m059]

@@Keepskatin HD - like I said same resolution.

[@Keepskatin]

@@d.b.c.t1m059 Are you listening to the exact same tracks with the exact music equipment❓ Are you listen in the same audio output settings on Amazon, as you are on Tidal or Qubuz❓ Also Amazon has a larger catalog of music than Qubuz and Tidal combined.👐 Qubuz also cost $250 per year compared to Amazon HD $180 per year 💸. Lastly, according to whatwifi website Tidal sounds better than Qubuz. You should read the reviews of people on that website who claim qubuz hi res tracks are lower quality upconverted to higher bit rates. Even further, Amazon allows you to download your Hd music to listen offline. By the way, are you also streaming your music from qobuz and amazon or downloading like me. Male sure your download quality is set to highest quality too☝🏾

[@MrElectronicFan]

Great Review! I'm at the same point. Running with Tidal since 2015 and being very happy with it. Currently I am comparing it with Amazon Music HD but somehow, I can’t get familiar with Amazon HD Tidal has the better audio quality. The most of amazon music is only in HD, means its only up to 850kbps which could be also under 850 kbps (tidal seems to use the full 1411kbps (2 channel * 16 Bit * 44,1 kHz = 411kbps)). I think this is the problem why I always have the feeling that the music on tidal is fuller and clearer while amazon music HD is somehow flat and tinny. I always had the feeling that I can dive deeper into the music on tidal then on amazon music HD and this is important for me. Clear, full sound where I can dive into and hear every single instrument and get always surprised by hearing something new which I didn’t expected.

[@nitram419]

Nonsense. I'm loving Amazon HD. My Marantz processor is playing all my favourite music in the highest available *real* resolution via the built-in HEOS streaming via my network. If the song exists in 192kHz 24bit then that's what I'll get. Whereas MQA is just an upsampling + noise-shaping algorithm with trojan DRM.

[@js2009-g9f]

That’s not true. I don’t find Tidal has a meaningful edge of having more ultra HD music for the songs I listen to. Considering Amazon HD is now only 7.99 at about 1/3 the price of tidal it’s a no brainer

[@Pirxel]

I subscribe to Tidal and Spotify and I have a nice system here, so I must say I keep Tidal around just because of the masters, Spotify is otherwise much better, better interface, more features, better catalog (bigger, more alternative music from around the planet), much better curation, I honestly feel offended of how customized my initial screen in Tidal looks, since they keep rubbing shit I really don't care for in my face every time, while in Spotify the tailoring to my tastes is really on point and I find MUCH easier to discover new nice music there. The moment Spotify starts HD streaming I'll cancel my Tidal sub, a shame they never seem to getting around that.

[@xjmzrq]

Well said. Have you kicked the tires on Qobuz yet? Despite the anemic catalog, the sound is quite phenomenal.

[@SubSonic1]

Good review. I'm running a Fire Stick 4k directly into my Marantz AVR for flawless 24bit/192kHz audio. Messed around with Tidal for ages and to be fair the Atmos tracks were fun. But settled with Amazon as the overall experience is nicer and the hi-res lossless caps it off.

[@Trebor-u4q]

Amazon music HD is potentially great, very high quality audio, very broad range of music, good UI and app BUT... and it's a very big but, why can't I stream it over wi-fi to my stereo? Is it that Amazon wants to get more money out of me by forcing me to buy an Alexa or Echo to talk to my wi-fi? It might be my streamer's fault (Yamaha wxc-50, part of the Yamaha musicast system) as it dosn't have it built-in support for it like it does for Tidal and Qobuz, but there must be a way of streaming it from my laptop like I stream iTunes using Airplay. Unfortunately, bluetooth connection to my streamer is very unreliable. Does anyone have any solutions?

[@yaniv-nos-tubes]

i prefer tidal with mqa when available played through a pc>isilencer mercury usb cable ipurifier 3>idac2>itube>loki>gilmore lite to headphones nighthawks/hd700/99 noirs or to my 1990 hifi set: arcam delta power amp>b&w dm580 .it's arbitrary what you can get at master quality things like pink floyd steely dan or dire straits are only at cd quality but some nice jazz albums by small modern artists are available at mqa.if you use a pc as a source and than through usb to an external dac the usb cable really matters. i recommend using a known brand's audio usb cable(so the power and audio signal are separated.),small cheap usb gadgets like the ones from ifi or audioquest also helps the dac to perform better with less glare and noise since a computer is such a noisy source .

[@Keepskatin]

Amazon is the Master of hi res streaming. Your pinky music is on amazonHD in Master quality, not cd like your Tidal.

[@PaulRigby]

Interesting review. I've used pretty much all music streaming service. I've found there is more hi-resolution content on Amazon Music HD than Tidal. I agree Amazon Music HD is lacking in the discovery department. I much prefer the Tidal interface and like the various 'My Mix' playlists. I'm also struggling at the moment to find a compatible device other than my mobile and USB DAC capable of playing the highest bitrate. One of the big things for me is the price. It's hard for me to subscribe to Tidal for 19.99 when I can get Amazon Music HD as a Prime subscriber for 12.99. For the same price of Tidal, I can get an Amazon Music HD Family subscription. I'm using my Indian subscription to KZbin premium to access Play Music and KZbin Music to discover music and then listen to the songs, artists & albums I like on Amazon Music HD. My favourite music service so far has to be Apple Music (I'm an Android user by the way). I just find the interface, curated content, radio stations, discovery etc. to be the best experience out of all the music streaming services. I am hoping sometime soon that they are going to follow suit and introduce lossless and hi-resolution.

[@Keepskatin]

Apple fanboy, AmazonHD eats your low res cake music

[@PaulRigby]

@@Keepskatin not really, I'm an Android user and Windows. It just has the best user experience, unfortunately minus the music quality.

[@blueletric1680]

@@Keepskatin now what?

[@blueletric1680]

Whats ur take now on apple music lossless?

[@PaulRigby]

Love it, been using ever since and never looked back.

[@christophercoey7804]

Only just found or rather needed this. Brilliant video Stu, thx. I'm way off the pace in such matters and this was pitched in a way that was nigh on perfect for me and those of us a little off the pace with our streaming. Thx.

[@kevindavies5332]

Only just found your review. Simon and Garfunkel's Greatest Hits is at 24/192 and sounds very good.

[@gingerninja7187]

Hi I’ve tried tidal on a one month free trial and now amazon hd/ultra hd trial yes I do agree with tidal has the upper hand on content and as you say doing a A/B test between these two streaming sites personally tidal seems to have a better sound but with all tidal master music it’s a lot louder than a amazon ultra hd version of the same song so not sure what’s going on there ,is their a possibility amazon is still slightly compressed , All my listen is done through an arcam rplay with arcam av860 processor / marantz power amp and focal speakers and a rel t9i sub so with this equipment I definitely get a great sound and gives me the ability to compare , at the moment tidal is the winner but be sure amazon will soon catch up , but personally I like both :)

[@d.b.c.t1m059]

Got the same impression when comparing it directly to Qobuz. Identical tracks in the same resolution lack dynamics and soundstage on Amazon Music.

[@60zeller]

This video should be 3 minutes. On with it boy

[@1mingemaster]

60zeller 😂😂😂 he dragged this one.... Jesus drones on and on.....just get to the point will you!

[@elronelvis]

Good to have you back Stew , have been missing the samsung firmware updates from you. I have just downloaded 1241.5 , so hoping for a review please

[@M0ren090]

CD quality is all I need and Amazon music much cheaper than Tidal. I had Tidal for a little over a year and really enjoyed it but I really don't have the equipment to take full advantage of the Masters quality.

[@andynowy]

About playing music through the phone, you are wrong about it, and the earphones too. Most of music i'm listening is in DSD format i'm listening to jazz mainly, have also home system a bit better then yours and my phone with earphones keeping very good against home system, mostly dynamics and detailed playback. Galaxy s8 and pioneer quad driver earphones. This phone playing DSDs up to 11.2mhz

[@francomusty5013]

I have a LG g7 and it has a very good dac in it and most ov the time i output straight from my headphone jack through a 3.5 to RCA cable to my main system. It sound good.

[@psipsitronick9250]

Franco Musty LG g7 is THE audiophile phone. Without it lossless benefits from an external Dac.

[@jfelicianolab]

Dude, you need to change your PC's audio settings to 24/192 Studio Quality. Right now your bottle necking your hardware.

[@MrGorpm]

Remembering that your horrible PC audio mixer is going to upsample or downsample everything you play.

[@cosmicheretic8129]

Probably explains why CD's sound better to him.

[@RedRyz3n]

I have a $1500 iPhone 11 Max Pro that cannot take advantage of any of these HD audio services due to not supporting these "PRO" streaming formats like LDAC and AptX etc. I have high end audio IEMs like Shure SE846s that I cannot use to their full potential even while connected to an EarStudio ES100 MK2 that is capable of using LDAC, aptX HD, aptX streaming formats. As the most expensive "PRO" oriented smart phone in the market Apple truly falls short when it comes to "Pro" level support where a $400 Android support these same features.

[@ohsoleohmio]

im looking to upgrade my quality of life with phone and ‘in ears’ of course im aware of wired being alot better and looking at getting LG v50 and using some cheap trn ba5 earbuds to start ... can you tell me a bit more about LDAC is this a wireless technology I can take advantage of with LG phone and decent source ? im guessing the phone dac would be switched off or useless and a straight connection to some new tech bluetooth transmitter ? or receiver transmitter ? would this offer same quality as wired now ? using tidal and good bluetooth dac amp ? or is lg phone already capable with some new bluetooth completely wireless earbuds i dont know about ?

[@larryeckerdt9750]

Look into adding an Audioquest Dragonfly Cobalt to your phone for vastly improved quality. DAC and amp helps a lot!

[@MAB_Audio_Nut]

Suepertramp Crime of the century is 24 bit 192 KBS

[@FIGUERESalain]

Hello. Note that tidal and deezer now offer "360 Reality Audio". ;-) In hires there are also: amazon music hd (not yet in france) highresaudio.com (present in europe) Primephonic.com (more for the classic) mora-qualitas.com (in Japan instead) primeseat.net even offers dsd streaming. (3 free concerts to listen to). Maybe it's a sketch of the future with very high speed internet connections? Personally I have a preference for Tidal sound level, their MQA format sounds better, and platform with a lot of rap, hip hop, ... The advantage of Qobuz remains its editorial line, its booklets, its quality ...

[@robcurran8677]

I can't get a measurement, but probably I'm not getting UltraHD music because of my system's limitations. Definitely getting CD quality music! Day and night difference compared to Spotify. Already a Prime member so a little extra money is well worth the listening experience for the CD quality music alone.. Downloaded Amazon Alexa and Amazon Music Apps to my Google Pixel 2 android phone. Casting to my UltraHD 4K Sony TV. TV is connected to home network and internet via ethernet connection. Have a digital optical connection (not HDMI) between TV and my older Flagship Marantz AVR for audio signal. AVR has capable of TrueHD processing. Now I MUST convince wife that I have to upgrade AVR so entire system is HDCP 2.2 compliant. :-)

[@CrueLoaf]

I'm still a big fan of Qobuz. Let me explain why....Tidal appears to be appealing to fans of videos as well as music. Their interface is also a little cluttered. Spotify is still not HD so may as well listen to Apple Music. I like the look of Amazon HD but again, interface needs cleaning up. Qobuz, clean and simple, HD, you can download HD tracks and keep forever and they take music seriously.

[@PMVault]

24bit is way more important than the Khz

[@tomkohman4620]

What is the resolution of the source? Converting a CD to 32/192 for streaming doesn't make the file sound any better than the original CD. It does waste bandwidth and create opportunities for audible errors. Unless the master recording is true Hi Rez, everything else is snake oil.

[@MobileDecay]

Well you predicted the Apple part. Lol.

[@josetorres5566]

Qobuz is the best for streaming especially if your using aptxHD!

[@josetorres5566]

@Geoffrey Conn you know a buetooh phone can send signal data on the other device. Pretty interesting sound coming out. Better than aptx or dsd. Its real sound

[@mowman7777]

Star Wars sound tracks are 24/192.

[@bogroll1881]

The reason he spends so much time explaining at the beginning is the inconvenient truth that in order to hear the difference and get the most benefit from HD audio streaming you need proper hifi equipment to play it back on. Honestly you need streamer/amp/speakers well matched for about £1000 and if the total value of an audiophile setup exceeds £5000 you will be in a position to benefit from ultra HD - I am not saying you won't be able to hear slight differences on less expensive equipment - I am saying there is little point unless you can listen through a quality setup that benefits a quality source.

[@arthurwatts1680]

After years of messing around with everything from AIFF (vs FLAC/WAV) to DSD, I'm convinced that the number one determinant of sound quality is the studio production - there are only so many ways you can polish a turd and sadly that's what a large percentage of popular music from the 80s onward is in terms of the extent to which engineers gave a crap about anything beyond loudness. Loud, in-yer-face tracks sold (sadly) and that's all she wrote. Even Rush, great musos that they are (RIP NP) released albums with hideous dynamic range figures :( dr.loudness-war.info/ That said, I'll take a track I LIKE at 320K LAME over anything 'meh' at ANY bitrate (or codec), and sadly that's a very large swathe of the music available on any given streaming service. I refuse to listen to Steely Dan simply because their music is 'audiophile approved' while early Clash/Ramones/Van Halen isn't. Thanks for the vid.

[@GadgetyMV]

Tidal having gone MQA is enough NOT to use them.

[@ohsoleohmio]

why ? :/

[@psipsitronick9250]

Because it’s proprietary, closed, not supported by all DACS, more expensive.

[@GadgetyMV]

@@psipsitronick9250 AND doesn't improve sound!

[@Keepskatin]

@@GadgetyMV you are delusional

[@GadgetyMV]

@@Keepskatin Nope

[@kazuthesamurai7346]

I have a pair of 200 dollar headphones Sony, yet both HD and ULTRA HD songs sound exactly the same as the standard versions to my ears. Their HD music service perhaps actually means "HD" (jack shit) 😂 In case you wondered which tracks I used to test the quality with, I used several albs from the Allman Brothers Band.

[@androvich20]

That's normal, it's almost impossible to distinguish 320 mp3 from FLAC as numerous blind tests show

[@kevinzhang3313]

Your phone if you're using one for instance, probably won't be able to hear a difference between HD and Ultra HD without an amplifier.

[@kazuthesamurai7346]

Well, every god damn song sounds better with a high quality amplifier lol The whole point of paying 10 plus dollars for HD and ULTRA HD is that you don't need other equipment other than your devices to get the high quality sound 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@RobertBorley]

Fake Japanese Gamer I think you may be missing the point of these services. They don’t exist to improve quality when listening through your phone. You won’t tell the difference be it Amazon Music HD, Tidal, Deezer etc. if using your phone. Plug your nice headphones into a DAC or listen via a PC/Mac plugged into a DAC-Amplifier on some proper speakers. Then play Apple Music / Spotify on that setup and compare to the other higher quality services and it will seem like chalk and cheese my friend.

[@ffletch5277]

Dude, get the f ing point...and move on. You only have 3-4 minutes to capture ur attention...not 17.

[@Keepskatin]

Impatient Millennials

[@gregwomack8162]

I don't know if your review and comparison video on amazon music hd was good or not....I fell asleep after the first minute or so!! Boring as hell bud...

[@scottsrush]

Tidal was in no way better then qobuz.

[@dereksewkumar07]

"Spotify is still the most user friendly that (I've found 🎵) and most of the catalogue they have ..Is what I listen to!💜 And save you money on sacd ..being DSD streaming🎵 d 🤕💜🇪🇺🗺🎵

[@Sabot1313]

I will try it...I used Tidal until I found out who owned it, I don't support racists

[@Keepskatin]

@Sabot. You broke crybaby peasant. You are the racist.

[@francomusty5013]

I'm so ready to ditch tidal and their stupid rap sh*t plastered all over the place. If amazon is more neutral im in.

[@daytonaukpc9387]

What a prat.

[@BitsBytesBobs]

I love you too.