More > JRiver Media Center 22 for Mac

Tidal

<< < (2/3) > >>

churchmouse:
I can stream Qobuz lossless through MC on my Mac via BubbleUPNP Server creating an OpenHome server and then control using the BubbleUPNP app or the Linn Kazoo app. I don't use Tidal, but since both the Bubble and Linn apps allow Tidal sign in, is that route not possible for Tidal streaming?

robt:

--- Quote from: Awesome Donkey on May 17, 2017, 03:55:48 am ---Not possible on Mac (only somewhat possible on Windows with the Tidal app and JRiver's WDM driver).

Tidal integration within MC is unlikely to happen. Do a search of the forums for more information about this (it's been asked countless times). :)

--- End quote ---

I cant help but think every time I read this, that a significant number of potential JRiver users seeing this must walk away and look for something else that will do what they want.

I don't use a streaming service, but now there are lossless and even 24 bit streaming services, I think its inevitable that in the future that I will. And if JRiver can't do what I want at that point I too will look elsewhere.

I fully appreciate the reasoning behind all the issues and what it might cost to try and support these services, but how much is it loosing JRiver NOT to support them? As you say, this has been "asked countless times". That should tell you something.

Please don't refer me to the various threads why because I've read them, and they are the past. I'm interested in the future.

AndyU:
I am similarly disappointed over the lack of Qobuz integration into MC. QoBuz is now offering HiRes streaming up to 24/192, it has a fantastic catalogue, orders of magnitude greater than my collection of rips, but a rubbish interface orders of magnitude worse than my MC configuration. I see Qobuz integrated into other products like Audirvana and LMS, can't quite understand how the MC team can't do the same. Bit confused as to why MC needs to control a light switch but not access musical resources of unimaginable richness.

blgentry:

--- Quote from: robt on May 28, 2017, 02:46:13 am ---I cant help but think every time I read this, that a significant number of potential JRiver users seeing this must walk away and look for something else that will do what they want.[...]
Please don't refer me to the various threads why because I've read them, and they are the past. I'm interested in the future.

--- End quote ---

If you haven't read the thread or threads in question, here's a quick summary:

JRiver has spent a ton of money on several projects like this and have been faced with their work becoming totally useless.  So it was completely wasted money for them.  In particular, Tidal would not approve the interface that they wrote. So they are stuck in a situation where Tidal won't allow them to integrate and they wasted money doing it.

This also leads to JRiver not wanting to do more projects like this in the future because another company can control their fate.  A simple change of API on the provider end would render JRiver's interface "dead" and useless. ...and if that company isn't willing to work with JRiver, then it's dead forever.

I think what I've said reflects what Jim has said in the past.  I'm sure he will correct me if I'm mischaracterizing his experience and opinion.

I do agree that it's too bad that things are this way.  I personally don't use streaming and likely never will.  I disagree with it in several philosophical ways that I won't bore you with.  But just about everyone I know that likes music is interested in some streaming service.  THey are certainly popular.

Brian.

imugli:
I think you're correct Brian, and if you read into what Jim has said on a number of occasions, none of these services are yet profitable. I don't think JR want to go down the road of spending the coin (even just for API integration) when a lot of these services are, if we're being honest, eventual takeover targets at best.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page