Browsing my local library is good enough. For streaming, I mostly care to find and play.
The more I think about this, the more I realise that there’s one key fact. Namely that there’s no money to be made in streaming. If Spotify can’t make money, then nobody can. So what are Apple and Amazon doing?
They’re not trying to corner the streaming market, they’re trying to tie people (us) into their ecosystems. This is, potentially, where the profit lies. So if this is the case, why on earth would they work with existing endpoint providers? They want to provide the source (computer, tablet, phone) and the endpoint. They have no need of additional partners.
Sure, we can plug our source directly into a DAC, but that’s along way from where we are now with Roon. I don’t think we should assume that Apple or Amazon are going to provide innovative solutions for the tiny minority of their users who might want a Roon-like experience. There’s no money in this approach.
4 Likes
One example (keep in mind Spatial Audio is one of the big things coming to Apple Music).
Too many people on audiophile forums are only thinking about RBCD and hi-res, which is fair enough too. Stereo listening is most important to me too (for now).
1 Like
Exactly. Cornering the streaming market allows money to be made via endless hardware innovation.
1 Like
Yup but not only hardware innovation though.
Surround sound simulation done well with headphones (incl. head tracking) can be amazing…
So there’s space for music listening experience innovation.
Don’t forget Apple VR (tied with Spatial Audio) is a freight train coming too ! 
Apple is checking a box. Just like Amazon did. Just like Spotify will be doing.
If Apple’s implementation is anything like Amazon’s, don’t expect much.
Spotify’s app and Spotify Connect could be their differentiator if they want it to be. Or, they could just check off a box.
None of them seem all that interested in “audiophile.” They know their customers, I guess.
For Apple, I can’t see Lossless being anything other than a defensive move not to be caught out as ‘the one with inferior audio quality’ – at the same time forcing Amazon to lower its price and blocking Spotify from raising prices for its HiFi tier. It’s rough out there.
6 Likes
Signed up for the Apple Music free trial. Apparently, John Coltrane is to Apple as Miles Davis is to roon. Lol.
1 Like
This is true only if all other aspects are equal. In other words, if all streaming services offer lossless, then they will have to differentiate themselves by offering other things like more tracks, more high res. tracks.
All things being equal, if all streaming services offer the same amount of tracks and lossless and high res., the one with the lowest price will win.
the one with better price, better integration and compatibility wins.
2 Likes
This was my point in this thread:
Any service that focused on high res as their USP (Qobuz and Tidal) are now DOA.
From a Roon users point of view they still have value (Qobuz mainly ) but that knee caps their growth. All of these services have investors that are looking for growth. Now they don’t have a path to that. Why would anyone (outside of Roon) switch to either of those services ?
2 Likes
Another thing to consider when we’re looking at this issue is the future of Spotify. The best way for the big players (Amazon, Apple, Google) to achieve dominance in the streaming market is to acquire Spotify. You squeeze Spotify’s margins, they lose even more, you’re in the running to acquire Spotify.
Qobuz and Tidal are not in anybody’s sights (too small), but they could well be collateral damage. None of this leaves Roon users in a good place, unless we want to jump ship (which I don’t). 
1 Like
I hate to say this type of market force happening is one reason I never went with Roon lifetime as I just did not see there not being the new next big worthwhile" thing" in minimum 6 years.
Just renewed for one more year a month back but this time next year?
Will be a totally different landscape.
2 Likes
Interesting. But, SPOT market cap is around $43B (! Wtf?). And they are still losing money. What would Apple or Amazon get for $43B? 150,000,000 subscribers (they say) are generating about $8B in revenues. So 5X revenues to lose more money? I guess they would get all the personal data and a bunch of record label contracts. Not sure what the value is there. Something, maybe, probably.
It depends on what those services offer. If you haven’t paid attention to MQA’s website, they are exploring broadcast, live streaming, gaming, IR/VR etc. Those are bandlimited audio arenas where Qobuz high res cannot go but MQA high res, at 48 kHz, can. Tidal also are experimenting with Dolby, radio and more. There are openings beyond the traditional stereo audiophile market that haven’t been explored yet but will be in the future. But no doubt it will be competitive.
1 Like
Anti competition would prevent them from acquiring Spotify presumably. Letting them bleed out however, a very clear goal.
1 Like
Spotify are by far the largest streaming service. Not likely to bleed out.
I wasn’t aware of that, cool to hear.
I was more referring to the mainstream + light enthusiast (I.e. everyone outside of Roon). Given Apple has spatial audio now and high res, i can’t see a good reason to switch to Tidal.
So it seems to me we will end up with 2-3 music services .Spotify,Apple and ? The rest merge with the big boys.