Goldensound, can you explain why so many of us here prefer the sound of Qobuz to tidal?
Could be a few things.
1) Firstly ensure that you're using a bitperfect output on both. It's not enabled by default in Tidal and you have to click 'more settings' to see that toggle.
2) Volume normalization may be on, Tidal enables it by default. This will cause Tidal to attenuate many tracks according to replaygain info, and as a result if a track is say 1-2dB quieter on tidal, people will perceive this as inferior in most cases.
If both the above are sorted though, then both services are providing absolutely identical data to your DAC in most cases (some tracks have watermarking or other mastering differences but most are the same on both services) and so the answer would likely just be placebo.
Also my second question is why’d you let them off the hook after exposing them on your original channel?
Two reasons:
1) My issue was never directly with Tidal themselves, but MQA. The video exposed many false claims and misleading aspects in regards to MQA, but for all I know Tidal themselves were also swindled and didn't actually know about these problems at first.
2) Manufacturers/Service Providers improving their products in response to community feedback (or backlash) is a good thing.
When I call out problems in a review, the best thing that could happen would be for the manufacturer to fix them. That's what Tidal has done, sure it's taken a while but they're moving away from MQA, restoring lossless content, adding hires content, as I see it they're making drastic improvements to their product. If a manufacturer who previously made great products starts going downhill I'll call that out, but if a manufacturer improves their products and becomes a viable or excellent option I'll flag that too.
(Aside from certain more serious ethical concerns of course, there ARE some companies I will never endorse regardless of how good their products may be)