Seems far from simple, having to personally check out the validity of all those tests, the conditions in which they were run, who ran them (and for what purpose) and who they drug in off the street to test it all on (and what their hearing ability was as well as listening skill). And of course what was the quality of the system, listening room, amount of distractions etc. I would then put into question who exactly is funding these tests, what agenda that they might have, and how they might stand to gain from spreading the word that lossy is indistinguishable from lossless on a GOOD system. For me the only thing that might satisfy some doubt of the validity of the tests would be reading some sort of science based peer reviews, not just on whether lossy is indistinguishable, but on the use of the ABX test itself, how the mind perceives subtle differences in SQ, how long it takes to perceive them, and exactly what the music choices used in the test were. Just too many ways these things can get manipulated by pure BS.
I know I am coming across a bit doubtful and it is for good reason. I really do not like the sound of lossy.
I compared Tidal lossless streams against file ripped from CD of the same title side by side. Always I heard the difference in favor of file. Likely Tidal adds some processing, like additional compression for certain reason. Lossy streams I could identify even on its own without comparison. But I can distinguish taste of different bottled water brands too, thus it may not be a common thing. I know people who liked Tidal streams more.
Last edited: