Here at What Hi-Fi? we firmly believe that a higher quality stream can make all the difference to your listening experience – especially when paired with decent hi-fi.
It's why we support Neil Young's latest dig at Spotify in March. Young criticised the service’s poor stream quality while simultaneously announcing his music’s return to it. For those short of memory, he removed his catalogue to protest Spotify hosting the Joe Rogan Podcast two years prior.
Politics aside, many of the What Hi-Fi? team were nodding in agreement when they read his blog post announcing the move:
“The #1 streamer of low res music in the world – Spotify, where you get less quality than we made… I hope all you millions of Spotify users enjoy my songs! They will now all be there for you except for the full sound we created.”
We’ve also long bemoaned the fact Spotify doesn’t offer CD-quality, let alone hi-res, streaming. It announced a CD-quality ('lossless') Spotify HiFi tier over three years ago, but it still hasn't materialised. The lack of high-quality streaming is a key reason why many of the team favour Tidal and other hi-res services, both at home and at work while testing hi-fi.
Trust me, when paired with decent audio hardware, if you have the ear to hear the difference it’s hard to go back to basic Spotify.
But, despite our belief in better quality, to the surprise of myself and the team, the opinion divided our community, with a vocal number of you disagreeing with Young.
“For most people, Spotify quality is enough,” wrote one reader on our Facebook page.
“Sorry Neil, NO ONE CARES,” chimed in another, less diplomatic reader.
The sea of thumbs-up emojis that posts like this received left us slightly sad. But, the more we pondered it, the more we found ourselves coming to a simple conclusion: in one way, you're right.
As individuals who consider hi-fi a hobby as well as a job, and who are accustomed to listening to music through high-quality set-ups, often in dedicated test rooms using equipment half the value of the houses we live in, we are familiar with the finer things in hi-fi.
Of course, many people don’t get that opportunity. Maybe they don't have an interest in high-quality playback, which is fine, or perhaps they do but don't have the bank balance or domestic space to build a separates system, let alone one that features the kind of top-end hardware we showcase in our Temptations reviews.
With that in mind, our technical editor, Ketan Bharadia, made a very good point – if you can’t afford it, ignorance is in many ways bliss.
If you can’t tell, or haven’t had a chance to hear, the differences between Spotify streams through a Bluetooth speaker and Tidal streams through a hi-fi system, to offer two polar extremes, you won’t feel the need to spend more on your set-up.
Naturally, we'd love people interested in music to get a taste for good sound quality, but the idea reminded me of a related, very first-world dilemma I’ve been having with my whisky preferences.
As an adult, I’ve always enjoyed a nice whisky at the end of a long week at work. Traditionally I’ve stuck to the single malts and blends within my budget, but recently my lovely wife has gotten into the wonderful habit of surprising me with tasting events and distillery tours for special occasions.
This typically involves an expert discussing the different types of whisky on offer and giving you a selection to taste. These often include the entire range, including expensive options I’d normally never get access to.
There have been two consequences to this. First, I have clear proof my wife is awesome as she usually comes with me despite being more of a gin person. Second, I have developed a taste for expensive whisky I cannot sensibly afford.
When buying whisky I used to get excited to see five quid off one of my favourite entry-level single malts at Tesco. Now I find myself staring at distilleries’ web stores hovering the cursor over the latest ambrosia I got a sniff of at my last tasting, wishing I could afford it.
Is this a first-world problem? Of course. Does it make the fact that I now know what I’m missing out on any less painful? No.
In my mind, the same dilemma exists for people yet to enjoy the benefits of high-quality audio, or who simply can’t hear the differences between basic Spotify and hi-res streams from Tidal and its ilk. You can't miss what you've never had, so is it better to never know what's just beyond your budget?
From there we get back to the basic philosophical question: is it better to be a fool satisfied than Socrates dissatisfied? And to that, I don’t have an answer. But I can say the fool’s bank balance will likely look healthier.
MORE:
These are the best hi-fi systems we’ve tested
Check out our picks of the best music streaming services
We detail the best Bluetooth speakers for every budget
