hmmn, how do you compare Apple Music to Tidal? this is interesting..
Let me attempt answering based on my experience:
1. The resolution of Tidal (FLAC) no doubt gives more detail and texture than Apple/Spotify/YouTube at 320 or 256 kbps. But you notice them only when you listen back to back or it’s a song that you know inside out.
2. Tidal has been suffering with loss in dynamics and the tracks therefore lose on ‘aliveness’. This is not a function of resolution, but either due to the masters that are used or probably some filter/algorithm Tidal uses. The sound therefore comes through with excessive soft/flat (or like a fellow FM expressed it, feels like been run over by a road-roller). Between the other options. I find YouTube music has extra brightness and Spotify has slight smearing while Apple SQ is most palatable to me at least through my system.
3. Tidal’s features/UI is ok but not as evolved as Apple Music’s (for example lyrics) and its suggestions based on tracking your listening habits are poor. If ever one decides to use Tidal and values these aspects, I’d strongly recommend spending on Roon. But that adds to the cost, our next point.
4. While Tidal Turkey is attractively priced for FLAC resolutions, the above points still make it less VFM to me than Apple (Rs 999 per annum). Especially when I use streaming only to explore music ans not for attentive/intensive/critical listening which I do with my CD collection.
5. Apple Music has a seamless integration with Shazam (as they own it). So when I listen to internet radio and like a track, I can just Shazam it and press one button to get the album/artist on Apple Music to explore more of them. In Tidal, I’d need to type the artist/track name in the search box - a non-value adding step.
Having said all this, if Tidal can improve their SQ (to me, dynamics and emotionality are far more important than detail/resolution), I’d still go back. On the other hand, I also wonder if Apple would launch a FLAC (ALAC) service at say Rs 250 pm to get best of both worlds.