Spotify Platinum: The streaming giant would finally go to CD quality

Access to audiobooks with Spotify Premium would be deployed in October in the United States, and potentially earlier this year in other countries.

Spotify: Will we have to pay more for HD quality ?

In February 2021, Spotify announced with great fanfare the introduction of audio in HIFI quality on its application. But since then, the musical streaming platform has been very silent as to the deployment of this offer, which could finally soon arrive, more than two years after.

For when loss audio on Spotify ?

Bloomberg said that Spotify wants to start to offer its superior quality audio during the year. This will not be available from all users, since the service would consider launching an additional paying subscription formula, more expensive than the premium offer, to benefit from this novelty.

Internally, this plan was baptized “Supremium”, But its commercial designation will undoubtedly be modified. First, not all countries will be eligible for this new third-party third party, the media evoking an initial outing on markets not including the United States. We do not know if France is envisaged to be part of the first wave.

According to Bloomberg, The delay taken by Spotify is explained by the announcements made by two of its competitors, Apple Music and Amazon Music, who both added loss audio in their standard subscription, without additional cost.

Audiobooks included in Spotify Premium ?

The report also indicates that Spotify is thinking of including access to audio books in its premium offer. This would not be unlimited and subscribers would be restricted by a volume of hours or a number of audiobooks per month. Currently, Spotify only offers audiobooks for individual sales.

This is not confirmed, but Spotify could add this option to bring the pill from an increase in price, which is currently slightly cheaper than Apple Music or Amazon Music.

Access to audiobooks with Spotify Premium would be deployed in October in the United States, and potentially earlier this year in other countries.

• Many subscription offers according to the needs of each
• Personalization of saving content
• Effective interface and ergonomics

Despite some minimal faults (including sound quality about to be improved to better respond to new standards on the market), Spotify remains a reference in the field of musical streaming. With more than 200 million regular users worldwide, it is simply the most popular service at present. Thanks to total personalization of its service, many options to subscribe (or the possibility of enjoying it for free), a simple and effective interface, Spotify is undoubtedly there to last and impose itself for many years as a leader.

Despite some minimal faults (including sound quality about to be improved to better respond to new standards on the market), Spotify remains a reference in the field of musical streaming. With more than 200 million regular users worldwide, it is simply the most popular service at present. Thanks to total personalization of its service, many options to subscribe (or the possibility of enjoying it for free), a simple and effective interface, Spotify is undoubtedly there to last and impose itself for many years as a leader.

You use Google News ? Follow Clubic so as not to miss anything from the tech news ! Google News

To discover in video

On the same subject

Amazon: to a free mobile package for bonus subscribers ?

Spatialized audio continues to arrive on Netflix. But on which films, and what material to enjoy it ?

Spotify announces its annual conference. And we all wait for the same thing

Tonnerre in tech: Japan and the Netherlands adopt American restrictions on Chinese components

Sonos is preparing two new connected speakers, and they are very promising

Join the Clubic community

Join the community of new technologies enthusiasts. Come and share your passion and debate the news with our members who help each other and share their expertise daily.

Comments (14)

After all, why not have a little more money on the backs of naive people convinced to have great ears. As a reminder, blind tests have shown that it is already difficult to differentiate between low -quality mp3 and good quality mp3. Between good quality mp3 and lossless, it is impossible whatever your ears and your equipment.

The C is not MP3 and Flac, but 16 bit 44hz and 24 bit 192khz, which is even more stupid.
Because 44 kHz covers the human hearing of a young hearing healthy, the 24 bit is the level of the noise Floor is-144 dB which is not even reached by the best audio gear just because the components and PCB do not allow it. 16 bit C is 96 dB of dynamic which is equivalent to making hammer pricker in a room without protection and at the same time hear a fly fly in the same room.
In short, all the songs are masterized towards-14-8 lufs then the 16 bit is largely sufficient
But we are still in a world of who has the biggest
In the studio we work as much in 44 as in 88 there are methods against aliasing, and 24 bit it is to have a lowest floor noise because we will sometimes superimpose lots of tracks,…
To understand the base and not the bullshit of Devialet with zero ordering representation Hold and what is a sampling freq, e that is the bit,…

I note above all that the ABO will increase when the competition had introduced this quality increase without additional.

Except that ordinary people use bad equipment, sorry to say so the tests you are talking about (MP3 128 vs 320) are completely wrong !!
It is certain that if people use headphones, helmet at – € 50 they will not see the difference ..
It does not mean that we must spend thousands of euros to receive a difference between the MP3 and the Flac ! Still, you don’t have to listen to too loudly music and also spend your weekend in a nightclub / cinema / concerts without the slightest protection !
Yes I even put the cinema in the list because the sound level is clearly abusive.

Except that a false helmet the stereo.
Then the stuff a 100euro sound card is already very precise even the PC Realtek for listening.
What will be important remains the speakers its position in front, and also the part, the position of the speakers in the room, … in short a cheap (mini correct) gear well positioned, will be better than the speakers at 20k € piece

I’m not very young, so my ears are far from being at the top.
I subscribe Apple Music, the difference is audible on the Hifi channel (Triangle Quartet) without making any effort.
On the other hand, by car, on ordinary PC speakers, on the portable speaker by the pool, MP3 is largely enough, with rolling noises it is impossible to draw any benefit from the lossless.

Beyond this upcoming offer and the exploding price, we are talking about an X2 compared to the current premium offer (Mono User), it is especially the fact that Spotify has surveyed French users on an increase in price. In summary they asked until how much one could pay more with a suggestion range included in an increase between 1 and 4 € more/month/month.
Being a family subscriber, I would not pay more and if they want to increase their good well, but it will be without me and millions of others. I would therefore return to the torrents or I would choose a cheaper competitor.
And if however you want to take advantage of the cheaper lossless, there is still the Qobuz option, a Made in France box (Pantin) which offers a solo formula from € 12.50/month (24-bit FLAC up to 192 KHz) for cash payment over the year or € 15/month for a monthly subscription without obligation. These are precursors, they have been offering these UHD offers for years, long before all the others, they know a ray on their ears

Iatw:
Except that ordinary people use bad equipment, sorry to say so the tests you are talking about (MP3 128 vs 320) are completely wrong !!
The blind tests were carried out by audio professionals on professional equipment ..
Zoup01:
I’m not very young, so my ears are far from being at the top.
I subscribe Apple Music, the difference is audible on the Hifi channel (Triangle Quartet) without making any effort.
Yes yes, the difference is always obvious when you do a simple test without blind, it’s called the placebo effect

@Clubic, hold I asked Chatgpt to create titles in your image:
“Spotify: Love to the test of high definition ! Will they have to break their piggy bank for a crystalline sound ? »»
“Spotify’s hassles: a new scandal bursts ! Which will pay the high price for HD ? »»
“Spotify tribulations: the battle of HD prices, between passion and heartbreak ! »»
At one point you have to think about changing guidelines for your titles, we are no longer in 2005, you need relevant titles, it becomes ridiculous frankly .. !

You are right … the placebo effect works on several people ..
So try on correct equipment, we talk about it again after.

Uh yes, obviously. It is even the definition of the placebo effect, it is universal and scientific literature is abundant on this subject.
And I am a musician, I have very good equipment thank you

I’m going to tell you about my case which is not a scientific study and is purely subjective.
I stayed at Spotify for a long time (I ride a lot so listen by car). No quality concerns.
Then for various reasons, I went to Deezer (who offers HQ in I don’t know what format).
Listening to various songs that I know well, and without trying to make comparisons (by driving and with the original installation of my car …) I noted a difference. Instruments that emerge more or less for example.
I even thought of a different mix, but it is not very plausible that the platforms have different mixes. The record company sends the same to everyone.
So I’m not saying it’s better or not, I don’t know, I’m not an audiophile, but I heard a difference on several songs.
Placebo? I don’t think, but maybe. I did not focus especially on a precise listening, but the difference interlipped me.
It’s worth what it’s worth, as I said

What is your equipment ?

Sorry to contradict you but, as in wine, there is a positive correlation between the price and the quality. After everyone does according to their means but it becomes ridiculous to assert that a equipment at 100 € offers the same service as another at € 20,000. To check it, just go to a well -equipped auditorium or in a living room dedicated to the Hifi.

Gloumouf:
I’m going to tell you about my case which is not a scientific study and is purely subjective.
And who is therefore not very interest. A test of this kind is done blind and even in double blind people preferably. Tests of this type exist on the internet.
Gloumouf:
Listening to various songs that I know well, and without trying to make comparisons (by driving and with the original installation of my car …) I noted a difference.
Strictly impossible to make the difference between even poor quality and good quality mp3 on a car stereo.
Gloumouf:
Instruments that emerge more or less for example.
Especially since even when there is audible differences, it is done on very specific elements such as the definition of cymbals that the inggeneous sounds are trained to recognize but which will escape most people.
Gloumouf:
I even thought of a different mix, but it is not very plausible that the platforms have different mixes. The record company sends the same to everyone.
A different mix per platform is possible. A different equalization brought by applications is likely and above all there is the Loudness War. If a sound volume is higher on one source than on another, we will have the illusion that it sounds “better”.
Gloumouf:
Placebo? I don’t think, but maybe. I did not focus especially on a precise listening, but the difference interlipped me.
There are researchers who have fun passing tap water for a luxury brand with a test audience and it has gone cream. Same thing when you present the same wine with two different prices. In general, without blind test, it is absolutely not necessary to trust the senses of a human.
Edwinf:
What is your equipment ?
It doesn’t look at you.

Edwinf:
Sorry to contradict you but, as in wine, there is a positive correlation between the price and the quality.
Funny that you just post it right after my answer. There is above all a strong correlation between the announced price of a wine and its perceived quality, as I just said
Edwinf:
After everyone does according to their means but it becomes ridiculous to assert that a equipment at 100 € offers the same service as another at € 20,000.
Lolilol, if you have invested € 20,000 in hifi equipment you were damn pigeon.

Sodium:
A different mix per platform is possible. A different equalization brought by applications is likely and above all there is the Loudness War. If a sound volume is higher on one source than on another, we will have the illusion that it sounds “better”.
I did not say that she sounds better but that she sounds differently. But indeed it may be a different equalization between the platforms.

If it sounds “differently”, this is a question of EQ. With low quality encodings, we lose definition but that’s not what will transform the mix.
Here a blind test which allows to compare almost all possible formats with lossless, we already see that even the MP3 of the most poor quality is far from obvious on good quality speakers: Abx High Fidelity List test

A cable at 100 € is the same to a cable at 5 €
After doing Mastering in Pro, not compared to acoustics the position, the day we spent (noisy or calm), … plays more than the gear than the stuff
An auditorium is not the gear like the amp and others that I make the diff, just a piece that has been studied for that with calibrated systems, so fortunately it sounds better in an auditorium
A real test site and not the YouTube channels at PP
Articles, Reviews and Measurements of Audio Products | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

I touched a sensitive point

No, just that doesn’t look at you. I have good studio monitoring speakers, you will get me out that you have gold cables that are more expensive, we will simply sink even more in the ridicule.

Spotify Platinum: The streaming giant would finally go to CD quality ?

Ultra dominant (with Apple Music) on the audio streaming market, Spotify is however one of the only players not to have spent the CAP of 16 -bit Lossless quality, despite many rumors. Indeed, its premium offer is, as much as possible, available in OGG Vorbis 320 kb/s quality. If it is sufficient in nomadic use, it logically collides with a growing demand in the living room universe. It is there that a rumor (another) comes into play, rumor which reports an imminent lossless or even hifi offer, called Platinum, for $ 20 per month in the United States.

The rest after the ad

A logical evolution, but nothing confirmed

At the origin of this rumor, a thread of the Reddit site relays a screenshot, supposedly resulting from a Spotify survey. We see a possible offer appear at $ 20 per month, offering several new options:

• Hifi: more than probably the quality without loss in 16 bits/44.1-48 kHz, or even 24 bits.
• Sound studio. A little mysterious, this could refer to mastering specially carried out for the platform. A bit like Tidal and its MQA Master studio.
• Tuner headphones. Here too a mystery, but it is undoubtedly an equalization type setting for headphones, or even the door open to the support of atmos/3D files with binaural treatments.
• Insight audio: literally “audio preview”. Perhaps a quick extract from the highlight of a piece and not a simple introduction.
• Library pro. This would refer to more advanced management of the music library.
• Playlist Pro. Ditto, but for playlists.
• LIMITED-AD Spotify podcast. Quite clear: it would be a reading without advertising (or very little) of the podcasts available on the platform.

Inevitably, the argument of loss -free audio quality will be the easiest to marketer. But indeed, this is not the only point on which Spotify begins to be delayed. If ergonomics, Spotify Connect, allows the brand to overdo, the platform has not been extremely innovative for a few years.
On the other hand, if this Platinum offer is effectively marketed around $ 20 , Either 20 euros (or a little more), we would have one of the most expensive hifi services, in any case the most expensive of major services. As a reminder, Apple Music (24 bits) is available for 10 euros per month. Amazon Music Unlimited is offered to 10 euros also per month. Even Qobuz, a specialized actor, offers an individual offer to 15 euros per month.
Would the presence of an Lossless/HD offer at Spotify interest you ? Tell us.