Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion HiFi & HT Chat Spotify now available in the US!

I would judge them after their Mobile clients started appearing and that was 2010. That is their strength atm where each mobile means 10�/Month. With approx 1M subscribers most of which most likely are Mobile they pull in about 10.000.000�/month which is nothing to sneeze at. But being valued $1B that is a question for analysts.

I just enjoy the nice service and if I find something I want for the big hometheater I buy/download the CD. But for mobile clients/devices they stay Spotify. I just don't think manual syncing(lossless) is worth the hassle outside main listening room.

I think they could use a real classical editor. My thought would be that they push the pop/rock/dance through firstly and classical is somewhat of an afterthought. At the moment I'm listening mostly to movie scores and there are a couple of good ones in there, but I hope they will get even more in there soon. 10.000 new tracks/day is not enough for us

One nice thing about premium subscribing that you could get a new album 1 week before it hits the shops, U2 Lady Gaga DM etc..

One reason I prefer internet radio streaming and/or using an in-house server to any service so far is that most services are, understandably, focused on the mainstream market. Niche markets, like classical, fit uncomfortably into the configurations that are optimal for popular music. One obvious issue is that, for the most part, classical is not organized around "songs."

Still, I find use for Pandora and, perhaps, I will find one for Spotify. I am giving it a chance.

Kal

Just in case people following this thread haven't noticed the recent posts on the Squeezebox Spotify Plugin & Volume Normalization thread.

Triode has discovered a way of optionally disabling normalisation for his Spotify plugin!!!!

With his new version of the plugin - go to Plugins, Spotify, Settings and untick "Volume Normalisation".

JohnGB,

That's great News for squeezebox owners running Spotify!

Taken from a recent review of Spotify's UK service...........

Surprised at the low Streaming Rates for Mobile users..........there was no discussion about the Bit Rate of the Saved / Cached Downloads......but the implication is that these would also be at the lower 96kbps bit rate on mobile devices

For users in Euro Countries where Spotify is not available, take a look at Grooveshark's Free and Premium Services.........

** the Free Service doesn't have the Limitations after 6 months that Spotify has......i.e. Spotify limits users to 10 hours max per month and 1 Track only 5 times per month

** it just has visual adverts on its Player.......just like you see on the side of most web pages.......rather than the visual ones which display in the centre of the Spotify app

** there are no Audio interruptions from adds like on Spotify's free service

** Streaming to Fixed and Mobile Devices is at 192kbps........Saved / Cached Downloads are also at the 192kbps level

** the Desktop Service is Free............the Mobile Service (incl cached downloads) costs $9 per month.......

** it seems to be available in most / every country........no VPN's required

Over the last week 2 weeks or so, I've subscribed to both the Spotify Premium and MOG Services to compare the Library Catalog and Sound Quality

CATALOG
In summary, they both appeared very, very similar in terms of Album / Track availability for Rock, R&B, Folk, Soul and other "modern" genres........no major differences, even when looking for reasonably obscure recordings or artists..........i.e. if they weren't on one service, then they likely weren't on the other one either

The Jazz and Blues selections were ok to reasonable.......not great for the aficionado.......but not too bad

Classical and Opera selections were quite limited on both services, especially for what I would call the "seminal" versions of a piece or opera


SOUND QUALITY
Playing both via a Mac / Pure Music / Async USB for Low Jitter.......to an 861 based system.......and comparing a selection of the same tracks

As has been covered already, MOG streams most of their content at 320kbps (one label only allows 256kbps).......while only 25% of Spotify's Premium service is at 320kbps (despite Spotify's misleading claims)

When played into a high quality system, the difference between the services was relatively easy to distinguish........Spotify's service was decent to quite ok for the most part.........but MOG's Sound Quality was superior for the most part.........granted I deliberately picked some tracks that would likely highlight compression differences.........but even on other tracks, the differences were relatively easy to pick up on

Given that both Services cost essentially the same........and both offer the same Mobile Services.......including Cached Downloads.........as well as similar Playlist Sharing / Collaboration.......(MOG's AMG Album Reviews are a notable difference)

I plan on sticking with the MOG Service, primarily due to its demonstrably better sound quality

Warning: MOG is US only at the moment......and non-US users require a VPN and a US Credit Card.......but both are easy to get in today's world.............(and the same limitations would apply to those in countries without Spotify.......and there are still many in Europe and elsewhere)

YMMV

Cool, MOG looks great as well. Just a clarification regarding Spotify for mobile devices. You can select 160kbit or 96kbit depending on much bandwidth you have available (some 2G carriers lacks Edge but with 3G or 2G-Edge, 160kbit is fine).

Sorry Crion
But it's been well documented that the Settings option that you change on your phone is merely a "Request" or a "Wish"

Spotify modifies the actual bit rate delivered based on the what it perceives the quality of connection, which can obviously vary as people travel around.......as well as perhaps the demands placed on their network, with maybe them using "Throttling" the bit rates delivered when user demand is high

When people have actually tested the Bit Rate delivered, even after selecting the higher bit rate option, they have found that about 80% of the Tracks delivered under 3G are only about 96kbps

And this was with full signal from HSDPA (H) and HSPA (H+) connections.......

Again IMHO, actual user testing shows that Spotify seem to have a habit of exaggerating their claims for Bit Rates, while not delivering what they claim to be delivering........akin to the earlier posts in this thread

As I said earlier, I've been keen on getting Spotify for at least a year now.......but the more I looked into it, and Listened to it, the more disappointed I've become in the ACTUAL service delivered..........I'll go so far as to say that Spotify seem to be deliberately misleading their users as regards the quality of service delivered.........they won't be the first company to do this, and not the last, but nevertheless it doesn't sit well with me

YMMV

Just one point about the range of classical music (which is my main interest) on Spotify. The search function on the Spotify PC interface is far from ideal and is actually misleading.

As an example, if I search for "Mahler" in Spotify's PC interface I get around 90 *tracks* returned. These are a limited selection from various albums. (The albums can be shown in full by clicking on the "album" field).

If I search for "Mahler" in the "Album" field in Triode's 3rd Party Squeezebox plugin, which presumably is accessing the same Spotify database, there are 605 *albums* returned!

The moral of the story is that there is a vastly larger selection available on Spotify than there would seem to be when using Spotify's own PC interface! It's just tricky finding them.

(I looked at the MOG website out of curiosity and the classical music there seemed extremely limited in comparison with Spotify, but perhaps that is because I wasn't using their system correctly.)

When searching on either, I find it better to be specific on Album Name, Piece Name or Composer / Conductor / Performer combinations

The Results are then more incisive and easier to find........broad searches (just like on Google) don't work very well........better to be specific as possible IMHO