• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Spotify coming to PS3 and PS4; Music Unlimited shutting down.

DOWN

DOWN

Banned
JP said:
And yet whenever people try to prove this point I can not only pick out which is the lower quality sample but if it was running on my system I could give you a good estimate of the actual bitrate of the file that you played to me. It's not important to everybody but it is to some and it can just as obvious as the difference between 30fps to 60fps or the difference between a well mastered DVD and a well mastered blu-ray film.

It depends on your setup and also the quality that your used to but to suggest that the difference is negligible is both subjectively and objectively incorrect and it doesn't matter how often people choose to repeat this fallacy, it doesn't become true.

I haven't used Spotify previously but there are streaming services such as TIDAL which stream uncompressed FLAC music files and Spotify advertising their "Extreme Quality" suggests to me that maybe the quality would be extreme but instead it's a less than stellar 320 kbps.

Not everybody wants HD quality music or even CD quality streaming like you get on TIDAL but that doesn't mean it isn't wanted or appreciated by some people.
Click to expand...

That's not what blind ABX style testing has shown. It's easy to find numerous test results. At this point, many on the enthusiast forums when I've searched the topic now only argue for lossless as a smart format to future-proof their collections and have peace of mind that they just have the best. The overwhelming majority of enthusiasts in the blind tests admittedly could not consistently give an accurate selection and noted its difficulty.

I don't know why you are talking to me like I never thought about there being different levels of equipment quality. That's obvious, and so are all the blind test results. 128 vs 320? Easy difference. Almost like YouTube vs. iTunes to enthusiasts. But 320 vs lossless? The jig is up. It's about other factors than a truthful interpretation of the sound quality. I found the answers here most informative. Maybe try the ABX tests if you are curious, but you sound quite determined.

DVD vs. Blu-Ray is quite an exaggerated comparison, as almost anyone with an HD TV can spot the difference (that's what TV displays put them side-by-side to show the obvious).
 
M

Michael F. Assbender

Banned
thebigmanjosh said:
Taylor-Swift-Blank-Space-Music-Video-GIFs.gif
Click to expand...

Help! Some hideous skeleton demon is staring at me! My soullllllllll-------*blargle*
 
5

5taquitos

Member
I really hope this is paving the way for more music services on the PS4. I know this is replacing Sony's music service so the chances are slim, but I'd love to see GPMAA make its way to the PS4 as well, since I'm heavily invested in that ecosystem.
 
J

JP

Member
PANTHEON said:
That's not what blind ABX style testing has shown. It's easy to find numerous test results. At this point, many on the enthusiast forums when I've searched the topic now only argue for lossless as a smart format to future-proof their collections and have peace of mind that they just have the best. The overwhelming majority of enthusiasts in the blind tests admittedly could not consistently give an accurate selection and noted its difficulty.

I don't know why you are talking to me like I never thought about there being different levels of equipment quality. That's obvious, and so are all the blind test results. 128 vs 320? Easy difference. Almost like YouTube vs. iTunes to enthusiasts. But 320 vs lossless? The jig is up. It's about other factors than a truthful interpretation of the sound quality. I found the answers here most informative. Maybe try the ABX tests if you are curious, but you sound quite determined.

DVD vs. Blu-Ray is quite an exaggerated comparison, as almost anyone with an HD TV can spot the difference (that's what TV displays put them side-by-side to show the obvious).
Click to expand...
I was going to explain but I no longer need to thanks to what you've said. By your own measure...
PANTHEON said:
The overwhelming majority of enthusiasts in the blind tests admittedly could not consistently give an accurate selection and noted its difficulty.
Click to expand...
...which instantly discounts your own claims of it being a "placebo and peace of mind".

If what your claiming was a universal truth nobody would be able they tell the difference. I agree with you completely that it's not going to be important to everybody but even if it's only one person on the planet can tell the difference and demonstrate as much in studio tests then your claim is factually incorrect, which is what I stated.

Either there is an audible difference to people or there isn't, you can't present a negative statement and then qualify that negative statement with an opposing positive because then you've turned the entire statement into a positive.

Initially you claimed there was a negligible difference which for some reason then changed into it being that any difference was a placebo and now you're returning to it making a difference to some people.

From the words you use we seem to agree that it does make a difference to some people but to others they can't tell the difference or maybe they can and they just don't care. The issue I have is what you said is that the "jig is up", the great con is finally over and truth has been heard...and yet there are still people in the world, including me, who time and time again are able to pick out which track is which.
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
JP said:
I was going to explain but I no longer need to thanks to what you've said. By your own measure...

...which instantly discounts your own claims of it being a "placebo and peace of mind".

If what your claiming was a universal truth nobody would be able they tell the difference. I agree with you completely that it's not going to be important to everybody but even if it's only one person on the planet can tell the difference and demonstrate as much in studio tests then your claim is factually incorrect, which is what I stated.

Either there is an audible difference to people or there isn't, you can't present a negative statement and then qualify that negative statement with an opposing positive because then you've turned the entire statement into a positive.

Initially you claimed there was a negligible difference which for some reason then changed into it being that any difference was a placebo and now you're returning to it making a difference to some people.

From the words you use we seem to agree that it does make a difference to some people but to others they can't tell the difference or maybe they can and they just don't care. The issue I have is what you said is that the "jig is up", the great con is finally over and truth has been heard...and yet there are still people in the world, including me, who time and time again are able to pick out which track is which.
Click to expand...
PM'd
 
E

ErasureAcer

Banned
sono said:
Never used Spotify what makes it special for those that have?
Click to expand...

It's basically Netflix for Music but with a much deeper library.

I just downloaded it(free version) last night and did some research. Apparently before there were some limits on stuff(could only listen to tracks a certain amount of times, etc...) but that appears to be gone now. It's really great. Not a total killer to buying tracks/albums as they're missing some stuff here and there but they do have just about everything. If you were to sign up for premium at 10/month...(5 if you're a student)....you'd still be saving a shit ton of money each year from music you'd be paying out for. But since the free service(have to listen to ads every few songs, one of which is annoying as hell changing the audio channels) now appears to do what the premium service used to do....basically listen to as much as you want on all sorts of devices. You can put up to 3,333 or something songs onto any device at any time...maybe that was a premium feature still. I dunno as I'm still on the free version and haven't tried putting anything anywhere other than streaming from the web.

This will probably kill most music downloads soon enough. Looks like they don't have a public stock yet...but I'd imagine it will soar when it launches.

You should try it out. Sign up is all of 5 seconds. username/password...and you're good to go.
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
blastprocessor said:
Why did Sony just give up with their service? I never had an issue with it to be honest.
Click to expand...

No matter how well it works, it has to make enough money in fast enough time to be worth them spending on it. It didn't become popular enough or well-received enough to warrant continuing. Partnering with a far more successful company who already beat Sony to the punch by the time they'd launched MU is much smarter. Takes a lot of difficulty and struggle out of offering a streaming service to their user base.
 
G

gelf

Member
What would be nice is if the app let you include your own local files in the playlists like the desktop version does. I think the mobile version does too if you sync from desktop. I somehow doubt it will though so we'll be stuck with the USB player.
 
J

jcm

Member
blastprocessor said:
Why did Sony just give up with their service? I never had an issue with it to be honest.
Click to expand...

I thought the service itself was okay, but the apps were really bad. The iOS and web clients were terrible, and the PS3 and ps4 apps were pretty bad too. I had MU for a year thanks to the PS Plus promo, but I couldn't justify $10 a month for it when there are others who do it much better for the same price.
 
S

SomTervo

Member
Sounds amazing, MU is a decent service but nowhere near good enough to be a consistent go-to app.

Don't like the sound of hearing audible adverts over my videogames though? Jesus.

It'll be really useful for entertaining. It's so easy to put MU up on the TV screen during a party.

jcm said:
I thought the service itself was okay, but the apps were really bad. The iOS and web clients were terrible, and the PS3 and ps4 apps were pretty bad too. I had MU for a year thanks to the PS Plus promo, but I couldn't justify $10 a month for it when there are others who do it much better for the same price.
Click to expand...

Yep, that.
 
F

FrunkQ

Neo Member
As a MU subscriber I thought things were gonna get weird this month.... I just got this receipt through:


Date and time of purchase: 28/02/2015 @ 09:30 AM
Total: £0.00

Details Unit of Price
Premium Subscription (30 Day) £0.00

Next payment date: 28/06/2015 @ 09:22 AM
Click to expand...


So I was expecting my free month... cool... but the "Next Payment Date" being 4 months away is a weird one. Anyone else got similar? Anyone else know what is going down?

Do we cancel and re-sub to the new service? Have they given themselves 4months grace in case they take time to get things running?

Just wondering what others have seen?
 
EL CUCO

EL CUCO

Member
I'm listening to the free version for now. So far, so good. Seeing one of my favorite groups, Fenech Soler makes me happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AeternoBlade II: Infinity now available for PS5 & PS4, coming to Xbox Series, Xbox One, Switch, and PC on February 6 (free update for existing owners)
News Trailer
2
804
Punished Miku replied
Merge of Discovery and Warner Bros. renders PlayStation licensing agreement worthless. (Up: new licensing agreement, shows will not be removed)
2 3 4 5 6
255
21K
Dr. Wilkinson replied
Microsoft is increasing the price of Xbox Series X and Xbox Game Pass
11 12 13 14 15
741
47K
NeoIkaruGAF replied
Apple Music coming to PlayStation 5
2
96
6K
smbu2000 replied
Star Wars: Dark Forces Remaster announced by Nightdive Studios. Coming to PS4, PS5, Xbox One, Series S|X, Switch and PC (Steam)
News Trailer 2 3 4
185
15K
Guilty_AI replied
Top Bottom