Spotify’s Hi‑Res Lossless Streaming Is Finally Here – How It Compares to Apple Music and Amazon Music HD

• Spotify Launches Long-Awaited Lossless: In September 2025 Spotify began rolling out lossless audio streaming (FLAC up to 24-bit/44.1 kHz) to Premium subscribers in 50+ markets newsroom.spotify.com theverge.com. This delivers true CD-quality sound (approx. 2,100 kbps bitrate) for nearly Spotify’s entire song catalog newsroom.spotify.com, after years of delays.
• Included in Premium (No Extra Tier): Unlike past plans for a pricey “HiFi” or “Platinum” tier, Spotify’s lossless feature is included free with the standard Premium plan – no new subscription or price hike theverge.com. Spotify confirmed it would not charge extra for lossless, likely due to rivals like Apple and Amazon already offering hi-res audio at no added cost emarketer.com whathifi.com.
• Technical Details – FLAC 24-bit/44.1 kHz: Spotify uses the open-source FLAC codec for lossless streaming, topping out at 24-bit depth, 44.1 kHz sample rate newsroom.spotify.com theverge.com. That is equivalent to CD resolution (with extended bit depth for greater dynamic range) – a big jump from Spotify’s previous 320 kbps Ogg Vorbis streams soyacincau.com. However, it’s below the max “hi-res” quality of some competitors (which go up to 96 or 192 kHz). In practice, 24/44.1 FLAC means each song can use ~1 GB of data per hour of streaming soyacincau.com, requiring more bandwidth and storage than lossy audio.
• Device Support and Playback: Lossless streaming works on Spotify’s mobile, desktop, and tablet apps, and on many Spotify Connect devices (Wi-Fi speakers, AV receivers, etc.) that can decode FLAC newsroom.spotify.com stereophile.com. Initial partners include Sony, Bose, Samsung, Sennheiser with Sonos and Amazon Echo devices gaining support by Oct 2025 newsroom.spotify.com stereophile.com. Users must manually enable “Lossless” quality in settings for Wi-Fi, cellular, and/or downloads stereophile.com. When lossless is active, a “Lossless” indicator appears on Now Playing and Connect screens stereophile.com. Important: Bluetooth connections cannot transmit full lossless quality (insufficient bandwidth), so Spotify recommends wired headphones or network speakers for true lossless playback newsroom.spotify.com stereophile.com.
• Competitive Context: Spotify’s move finally achieves feature parity with Apple Music and Amazon Music HD on audio quality. Apple Music has offered lossless audio up to 24-bit/192 kHz (using ALAC codec) since June 2021 at no extra charge musicbusinessworldwide.com twitteringmachines.com. Amazon Music likewise launched its HD tier in 2019 (folded into the $9.99 Unlimited plan by 2021) with CD-quality and “Ultra HD” hi-res up to 24/192 in FLAC musicbusinessworldwide.com. All three services now provide tens of millions of tracks in lossless/CD quality, with millions in hi-res. Spotify’s 24-bit/44.1 kHz limit means it technically trails Apple/Amazon’s hi-res ceiling theverge.com, but for most listeners and most music, the difference is negligible (more below).
• Market Impact: By adding lossless, Spotify closes a key gap versus Apple, Amazon, Tidal, and others – removing a reason for audiophiles to leave. Industry analysts note that lossless audio alone may not significantly boost new subscriptions since competitors already have it, but it helps Spotify retain users and match rivals’ offerings emarketer.com emarketer.com. This rollout comes after protracted licensing negotiations and strategic delays; as Spotify’s co-president Gustav Söderström admitted, “The industry changed and we had to adapt” whathifi.com once Apple and Amazon made lossless standard. With Spotify’s Premium price now ~$11 (individual plan) in the US, on par with Apple Music, the company is adding value to justify recent and future price hikes musicbusinessworldwide.com emarketer.com and to keep its 276 million paying users from drifting to competitors emarketer.com emarketer.com.
• Audiophile Perspectives: Experts say Spotify’s lossless streams will deliver audible improvements for discerning listeners – better clarity, detail, and stereo imaging – especially on high-quality audio gear. However, 24-bit/44.1 kHz vs higher-res 96/192 kHz is largely academic for most; once you hit CD-quality levels, diminishing returns kick in theverge.com whathifi.com. Research shows most people can’t reliably tell apart a high-bitrate lossy stream from a lossless one in blind tests, especially using common Bluetooth earbuds or in casual listening environments soundguys.com. In other words, Spotify’s new lossless option “won’t matter for most people” in terms of everyday listening quality whathifi.com whathifi.com – but for Hi-Fi enthusiasts with the right gear, it finally unlocks the full fidelity of the music library on their preferred platform.

Spotify’s Lossless Audio Rollout: Technical Approach and Features

After years of anticipation, Spotify’s high-fidelity streaming has arrived in late 2025. All Spotify Premium users will soon have the ability to stream music in lossless CD-quality. Here’s an overview of Spotify’s technical approach and how the feature works:

• Codec and Quality: Spotify chose the FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec) format for its lossless streams soundguys.com. This allows audio to be delivered bit-for-bit identical to the source with no compression artifacts. The max fidelity is 24-bit, 44.1 kHz – the same sampling rate as audio CDs, with a higher bit depth for potentially greater dynamic range newsroom.spotify.com. In practice, that means each track contains all the data of the original recording at CD resolution. The bitrate of a 24/44.1 FLAC file varies with the music’s complexity, but averages around ~1,000–2,000 kbps (compared to 320 kbps for Spotify’s prior “Very High” quality). An uncompressed 16-bit/44.1kHz stereo WAV is 1,411 kbps, and 24-bit would be ~2,116 kbps; FLAC compression reduces those somewhat (often ~30–50% smaller than WAV). Bottom line: Spotify Lossless transmits roughly 3–6× more data than a typical lossy stream to preserve full quality whathifi.com.
• Library Coverage: At launch, Spotify says lossless quality is available for “nearly every song” in its catalog newsroom.spotify.com. In other words, the vast majority of Spotify’s 100+ million track library can now be heard in lossless form. This was made possible by Spotify ingesting lossless masters from labels and rights holders – something it likely had been doing behind the scenes in preparation for HiFi. (Competitors had a head start here: Apple converted its entire 75 million-song library to ALAC lossless by late 2021 twitteringmachines.com, and Amazon has offered most tracks in at least HD 16-bit since 2019.) There may be a small number of obscure or very new releases that aren’t immediately in lossless if the source isn’t provided to Spotify, but expect virtually all songs to be lossless-capable – a huge improvement from the lossy-only days.
• Rollout and Availability: Spotify began rolling out Lossless in select markets on Sept 10, 2025 and is expanding to 50+ countries through October 2025 newsroom.spotify.com newsroom.spotify.com. Early markets include the US, UK, much of Europe (e.g. Germany, Sweden, Portugal), Japan, Australia/New Zealand and others newsroom.spotify.com. Users will receive an in-app notification when lossless becomes available on their account stereophile.com soyacincau.com. By the end of the rollout, a large portion of Spotify’s 240+ markets should have access, though a few countries may come later. (At launch, Spotify noted it’s not immediately everywhere – e.g. one report lamented Malaysia had to wait a few weeks soyacincau.com.) In any case, by late 2025, lossless streaming will be a standard part of Premium in most regions.
• How to Enable Lossless: Unlike lower quality levels which default based on connection, Spotify requires users to manually opt-in to lossless. This opt-in design is intentional – higher quality uses more data, so Spotify (like Apple Music) doesn’t want to surprise users with huge data consumption without consent twitteringmachines.com. To enable it, users go to Settings & Privacy → Media Quality in the Spotify app and select “Lossless” for Wi-Fi streaming, cellular streaming, and/or downloads as desired stereophile.com soyacincau.com. You can independently set quality for each context (e.g. maybe Lossless on Wi-Fi, but keep “High” on cellular to save data). Once turned on, tracks will start streaming in FLAC. Spotify also updated the UI to show estimated data usage for each quality level (e.g. how many MB per minute/hour), helping users make informed choices stereophile.com.
• User Interface Indicators: When lossless playback is active, Spotify provides clear indicators. In the Now Playing bar (on mobile and desktop) you’ll see a “Lossless” label or icon, confirming the track is streaming in FLAC stereophile.com. Similarly, if you use Spotify Connect to play to a speaker, the Connect device menu will show a Lossless badge next to devices that support it stereophile.com. This transparency was a design focus – Spotify’s VP of Subscriptions, Gustav Gyllenhammar, said they built lossless “with clarity at every step, so you always know what’s happening under the hood” stereophile.com musicbusinessworldwide.com.
• Device Compatibility: Out of the gate, lossless works on iOS and Android phones/tablets, Windows and Mac desktop apps, and any speaker or audio component with Spotify Connect that has been updated for FLAC support stereophile.com newsroom.spotify.com. At launch, Spotify confirmed Connect support on devices from Sony, Bose, Samsung, Sennheiser, and others, with Sonos and Amazon Echo devices getting updates by October 2025 newsroom.spotify.com stereophile.com. Essentially, many Wi-Fi connected speakers, soundbars, smart TVs, and Hi-Fi components that already integrate Spotify Connect can now receive the lossless stream (provided the manufacturer issues a firmware update if needed). On the Spotify side, the Connect protocol will send FLAC to devices that signal support, otherwise it can fall back to a lower quality if a device can’t handle FLAC.
• Bluetooth and Audio Outputs: A critical point – Bluetooth does not support lossless audio in its current standard form. Spotify bluntly notes that “Bluetooth doesn’t provide enough bandwidth to transmit lossless audio, so the signal has to be compressed” for wireless headphones or speakers newsroom.spotify.com. This applies to all services, not just Spotify: Bluetooth codecs (SBC, AAC, aptX, LDAC, etc.) are lossy, so even if you stream a FLAC file, by the time it reaches your Bluetooth earbuds, it’s been re-compressed. Because of this, Spotify recommends using wired headphones or high-quality wired speakers for true lossless listening newsroom.spotify.com stereophile.com. You can also use network-based wireless solutions that carry lossless data: for example, Spotify Connect (over Wi-Fi/Ethernet) keeps the audio lossless from cloud to device, and from there you can output via line-out or digital out to speakers. Similarly, Apple users might use AirPlay (which transmits audio in ALAC, a lossless codec – though AirPlay 2 is typically limited to CD quality). Bottom line: to really hear the difference, use a wired path (phone or PC to a DAC/headphones, or a Connect streamer to your stereo) and avoid Bluetooth bottlenecks.
• Performance Considerations: Lossless audio files are much larger than compressed ones, so there are some performance impacts:
  • Slower Initial Buffering: Spotify acknowledges that when you hit “Play” on a lossless song, it may take a moment longer to start than you’re used to newsroom.spotify.com. The app needs to buffer more data. Once the track is cached on your device, playback is smooth stereophile.com, but that initial load might be a second or two slower than a 320 kbps stream. It’s a small trade-off for higher fidelity.
  • Storage for Downloads: If you download songs/albums in lossless quality, expect them to consume significant storage on your device. For example, a 3-minute song in FLAC might be ~20–30 MB (versus ~7–10 MB in 320k Ogg). So a whole album could be several hundred MB. Users with limited phone storage should be mindful when enabling lossless downloads.
  • Data Usage: As mentioned, streaming lossless can use roughly 1 GB per hour of data soyacincau.com. If you have a limited data plan, you’ll want to either restrict lossless to Wi-Fi or monitor your usage carefully. The Spotify app’s separate setting for cellular quality is handy here – you might keep cellular at “High” (approx ~160 kbps) or “Very High” (320 kbps) to save data on the go, and use Lossless on Wi-Fi at home.
  • Battery Life: Decoding FLAC is a bit more processor-intensive than decoding a smaller Ogg file, and transferring more data (especially over cellular) can increase battery drain. The impact isn’t likely dramatic on modern phones, but if you stream lossless on mobile data, expect slightly higher battery usage.

In short, Spotify’s implementation strives to make lossless listening simple but intentional – users turn it on when they want the best quality, and the app gives feedback that it’s working. Technically, the service is now delivering the maximum quality that the majority of music recordings are mastered in (44.1 kHz). It’s a conservative hi-res approach (not venturing into 96+ kHz territory yet), but one that covers the essential needs of music lovers seeking better sound.

Licensing, Infrastructure, and Cost Implications of Lossless at Scale

Bringing lossless streaming to a platform as large as Spotify wasn’t just a technical flip of a switch – it involved behind-the-scenes business and infrastructure challenges. Why did it take Spotify so long (eight years since rumors began in 2017) to roll out HiFi, especially after officially announcing it in 2021? The answer lies in a combination of music licensing negotiations, economic considerations, and the sheer logistics of delivering lossless at Spotify’s scale.

• Licensing and Label Negotiations: Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek revealed that the delay of Spotify HiFi was not due to technical hurdles but rather “caught up in licensing negotiations” with music rights holders whathifi.com. In early 2022 – a full year after announcing HiFi – Ek told investors that while the HiFi feature was ready from a tech perspective, “the economics of it all took some working out.” whathifi.com This strongly suggests that major record labels were initially expecting Spotify to charge more for lossless audio or to somehow compensate them for the higher-quality streams. (Possibly labels saw hi-res tiers as a premium product, as Tidal had been charging $20/month for HiFi, and initially Amazon charged extra for HD.) However, when Apple Music dropped its lossless update at no extra cost in 2021, it upended the industry’s leverage on this – Apple essentially gave it away, forcing others to follow or risk losing audiophile-minded customers whathifi.com. Ek and Spotify likely spent 2021–2023 in “constant dialogue” with labels to secure a viable model for HiFi whathifi.com. The outcome by 2025 was that Spotify decided not to create a separate HiFi tier (avoiding a new round of license complexity) and instead include lossless in Premium. From the labels’ perspective, they will get paid the same per stream (Spotify’s standard payout), and any revenue impact would hinge on whether lossless attracts new subs or ups engagement.
• Foregoing New Revenue vs. Staying Competitive: Initially, Spotify seemed keen to monetize HiFi as a higher-priced plan – various leaks and statements pointed to a $5–$10/month add-on or “Platinum” tier with HiFi and extras whathifi.com whathifi.com. As late as mid-2024, Daniel Ek teased a “deluxe version of Spotify” around $17–18 (i.e. $5 above Premium) that would include “better audio” among other perks techcrunch.com techcrunch.com. However, by launch time, Spotify reversed course, folding lossless into the standard plan. Industry analysts believe Spotify “chose not to charge more” largely because all its major rivals give lossless free, and a paid HiFi tier might have flopped in the market emarketer.com. Charging extra could also spark PR backlash when Apple and Amazon offer hi-res to all subscribers (Spotify was already facing criticism over artist payouts and CEO investments emarketer.com). In the end, Spotify likely determined the competitive risk of not having lossless was greater than the loss of a potential upsell. As one analyst put it, achieving feature parity was crucial as the market leader, even if this feature alone “won’t move the needle” on new subscriber growth emarketer.com. Instead, the value may come in reducing churn – keeping quality-conscious users loyal so they don’t jump to Apple, Amazon, Tidal, etc. emarketer.com.
• Infrastructure and Storage: Delivering lossless at Spotify’s scale (over 550 million total users, including ~276 million Premium emarketer.com) is a massive infrastructure undertaking. Spotify has to store or generate lossless copies of millions of tracks and distribute them via its content delivery network (CDN) globally. The storage requirement for lossless files is roughly 2–3× larger per track than for 320 kbps Ogg files. However, Spotify likely already had lossless masters archived (labels typically supply WAV/FLAC files to streaming services). The bigger strain is on bandwidth and CDN caching: A user streaming at 1–2 Mbps (lossless) instead of 320 kbps means roughly triple the data throughput per stream. Multiplied by millions of users, that’s a significant increase in traffic. Spotify’s engineering teams would have prepared for this by upgrading servers and partnering with CDNs to handle peaks. Caching strategies (e.g. caching popular songs in lossless on edge servers closer to users) help mitigate repeated downloads. Spotify also smartly caches songs on the user’s device once played, so replays don’t re-download the file stereophile.com. Still, providing high-bitrate streams reliably without buffering is an ongoing challenge – especially in markets with slower networks. Spotify’s gradual rollout might be partly to monitor and ensure network performance can cope before flipping the switch everywhere.
• Cost Implications: Higher streaming quality directly increases Spotify’s operating costs. More data streamed equals higher bandwidth and CDN bills. For a company that historically has thin profit margins, this was a real consideration. However, several factors likely made it palatable:
  • Declining CDN Costs: Over the past few years, the cost per gigabyte of data delivery has decreased industry-wide. Spotify can likely deliver FLAC streams far cheaper in 2025 than it could have in 2017.
  • Selective Usage: Not all users will enable lossless – in fact, many may not bother if they’re casual listeners. Those who do may only use it on Wi-Fi or for certain listening sessions. So the average per-user data consumption may not skyrocket across the entire base.
  • Increased Premium Price: Spotify raised its Premium prices in mid-2023 (e.g. in the US from $9.99 to $10.99, and again to $11.99 by 2024) musicbusinessworldwide.com musicbusinessworldwide.com. These hikes, applied before HiFi launch, indirectly fund the higher streaming costs. One could argue users are now getting a better product (lossless music) for that higher price. Some commentators have noted it might have been smarter PR to launch lossless then raise the price, rather than vice versa soyacincau.com – but either way, the additional revenue helps cover the cost of lossless delivery.
  • No Royalties Surcharge: Music royalties are typically paid per play (or per stream) regardless of quality. So a lossless stream should cost Spotify the same in royalties as a lossy stream. The difference is only in delivery cost, not content cost.
  • Offset by Engagement? There’s a theory that better quality might encourage more listening (subscribers valuing their service more, thus streaming more hours or remaining subscribers longer). If lossless draws in some new audiophile subscribers or keeps others from canceling, that revenue offsets costs. It’s hard to quantify, but it’s part of the strategic bet.
• Caching and “Offline” Focus: Spotify has always been aggressive about caching frequently played songs on devices to improve speed and reduce re-downloads. With larger file sizes, this is even more important. If you play the same favorite track daily in lossless, Spotify will cache it after the first play so it’s not pulling from the network each time stereophile.com. Users can also make use of Offline Downloads in lossless (if storage permits), which both guarantees playback with no buffering and reduces network load. The expectation is that many audiophiles will download their top playlists/albums in FLAC for best experience.
• Quality Control and Metadata: Another task was ensuring all tracks are correctly matched to their lossless version. Spotify needs to avoid scenarios where a user expects lossless but gets a transcoded lossy file due to a mismatch. They also introduced new metadata to indicate track quality. This behind-the-scenes work to map each of millions of tracks to a FLAC source (and fall back to lossy if not available) had to be robust before launch.

In summary, Spotify’s multi-year delay wasn’t because they couldn’t figure out FLAC – it was about when and how to launch it without hurting their business. They had to renegotiate terms in an industry that was shifting to make lossless a free commodity, and they had to prepare their platform to serve a lot more data. By 2025, the planets aligned: licensing hurdles were resolved and Spotify was ready to eat the infrastructure cost as the price of remaining competitive. As Gustav Söderström said of the long wait, “We’re going to do it in a way where it makes sense for us and for our listeners” whathifi.com – and that turned out to be bundling it into Premium at the right moment.

Audio Quality Comparison: Spotify vs. Apple Music Lossless vs. Amazon Music HD

How does Spotify’s “lossless” quality stack up against Apple Music’s and Amazon Music’s offerings on paper and in practice? Let’s compare the technical specs, formats, and real-world audio quality of these services:

Max Resolution and Formats

• Spotify: Up to 24-bit, 44.1 kHz FLAC for all content newsroom.spotify.com. This is true CD-quality (with 24-bit depth allowing a theoretical dynamic range up to 144 dB, though most music won’t use that full range). There is no support (yet) for higher sample rates like 88.2, 96, or 192 kHz. So Spotify’s “hi-res” tops out at the base level of hi-res by definition (some consider anything above 16/44.1 to be hi-res, so 24-bit counts, but sample-rate purists might say 44.1kHz is not high-resolution audio, it’s standard resolution). In practice, many studio masters and digital releases are in 24/44.1 or 24/48, so Spotify can deliver those natively if available. But material that exists in 96kHz or above would presumably be downsampled to 44.1 for Spotify. (Currently, Spotify hasn’t detailed how it handles >44.1 content – it may be relatively moot since most popular music is recorded/mixed at 44.1 or 48 kHz. Still, classical and some jazz aficionados might note the absence of 96/192kHz streaming.)
• Apple Music: Supports lossless in two tiers: “Lossless” = up to 24-bit, 48 kHz, and “Hi-Res Lossless” = up to 24-bit, 192 kHz twitteringmachines.com. Apple uses its proprietary ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec) format for all lossless tracks twitteringmachines.com. In practice, Apple converted its entire catalog to at least 16/44.1 ALAC, with the majority of tracks also available in 24-bit and some in 88.2/96kHz or higher. Apple’s maximum spec of 24/192 is on par with the highest common studio mastering formats. So Apple offers the full hi-res spectrum to those who want it. Notably, Apple does not use FLAC (likely due to ALAC being equivalent and already an Apple standard). Audio quality: 24/192 ALAC is mathematically identical in fidelity to the studio master files. Apple doesn’t compress or adjust loudness on lossless tracks (unless the user has Sound Check normalization on). Apple also provides a badge in the app for each song indicating “Lossless” or “Hi-Res Lossless” and what the exact bit/sample rate is, if you dig into the file info.
• Amazon Music HD: Offers two lossless quality grades: HD = 16-bit, 44.1 kHz (CD quality) and Ultra HD = 24-bit, with sample rates ranging from 44.1 kHz up to 192 kHz musicbusinessworldwide.com. Amazon uses FLAC for both HD and Ultra HD streams (packaged in an MPEG-4 container for streaming) developer.amazon.com developer.amazon.com. Essentially, Amazon’s capability is the same as Apple’s – up to 24/192 hi-res – though Amazon’s library in Ultra HD might not be as uniformly broad as Apple’s. (Amazon says it has “over 100 million songs in HD and millions in Ultra HD,” and that number has grown over time. Popular new releases are often in Ultra HD 24/48 or 24/96). The average bitrate of Amazon’s Ultra HD 24/192 streams is around 3730 kbps (3.73 Mbps) according to one review – obviously it can vary by complexity of music soundguys.com. That’s roughly 4× the data of CD quality, and about 12× what a 320k mp3 would be. Amazon also distinguishes tracks in the interface: it labels songs as “HD” or “Ultra HD” and shows the exact bit-depth/sample rate and even your device’s capabilities, so you know if you’re hearing the track at full quality or downsampled.
• Tidal and Others: (Though the question focuses on Apple and Amazon, a quick note for context.) Tidal, long known for its HiFi tier, now offers FLAC streaming up to 24-bit/192kHz as well, after initially using MQA encoding. As of 2023, Tidal’s HiFi Plus tier provides hi-res FLAC to compete with Apple/Amazon whathifi.com. Qobuz, a smaller audiophile-focused service, streams many tracks at 24-bit/96 or 192 in FLAC. Essentially, Spotify was the last major holdout not offering at least 24-bit/44.1. With Spotify Lossless live, the only major platform without lossless is YouTube Music (which remains lossy-only) theverge.com.

In summary of specs: Apple and Amazon can deliver higher resolution audio than Spotify – up to 192 kHz vs 44.1 kHz – but all three provide lossless, 24-bit audio for the core catalogue. Spotify covers the vast majority of use cases (CD quality) but doesn’t cater to the niche of super-hi-res recordings. That said, the audible difference between 24/44.1 and 24/192 is highly debatable. As The Verge wryly noted, beyond CD quality “it can get pretty hard to tell the difference unless you’re a particularly demanding audiophile with a soundsystem priced like a used sedan.” theverge.com And a What Hi-Fi analysis pointed out that most hi-res library content on rivals is actually 44.1 or 48 kHz; only a minority of songs are available in 96kHz+, so “for much of what a Spotify listener might play, they’re probably getting what a subscriber to another service is [getting].” whathifi.com In other words, Spotify’s 24/44.1 covers the bulk of music in the market.

Audio Codec Differences and Compatibility

• FLAC vs ALAC: Spotify and Amazon both use FLAC, whereas Apple uses ALAC. Technically, both are lossless compression codecs that result in identical audio output. Neither is inherently “better” sounding; they just have different origins (FLAC is open-source, ALAC is Apple’s open format which is now open-source as well). Device support for FLAC/ALAC can differ: FLAC is widely supported across Android, Windows, many smart devices; ALAC is native on Apple devices and also supported by some others. For end users of streaming services, this difference is mostly invisible – the apps handle decoding. However, one practical quirk: Apple Music’s ALAC streams can be output via iOS devices bit-perfectly to DACs, whereas Spotify’s FLAC on iOS undergoes a quick conversion (since iOS doesn’t natively decode FLAC, Spotify’s app includes its own decoder to PCM). But again, the result is lossless PCM either way, so effectively identical.
• Resampling: One area to watch is whether the services do any resampling. Apple Music will play back at the source file’s native sample rate if the output device supports it (on Mac, the Music app will switch the DAC to match 44.1, 96, etc., or on iPhone it’s fixed to 48kHz max unless an external DAC is used). Spotify’s output on desktop likely resamples to the system’s setting (e.g. Windows often at 44.1 or 48). It’s technical minutia that hardcore audiophiles care about. In general, all these services try to deliver bit-perfect streams, but depending on your OS and gear, there might be an extra conversion. For typical listening, it’s not something to worry about.
• Loudness Normalization: By default, Spotify applies loudness normalization (adjusting the volume of tracks for consistency), which some purists turn off to get the original dynamics. Apple’s Sound Check is similar. These settings can affect perceived audio quality more than codec differences. Users chasing optimal quality on any service might disable normalization and ensure no DSP effects are applied by the app.

Catalog Coverage in Lossless/Hi-Res

All three services boast tens of millions of tracks in lossless quality, essentially their full catalogs:

• Spotify: States that “nearly every song available on Spotify” can now be streamed in lossless FLAC newsroom.spotify.com. It implies a coverage approaching 100%. It’s likely that any song that a label delivered in at least CD quality to Spotify is now available as such. If any tracks are still lossy-only, they might be older uploads from independent artists or certain back-catalog items that were originally provided in compressed form. Over time, those may get replaced with lossless files if possible. The vast library of mainstream music (all the big label content) will definitely be available in lossless from day one.
• Apple Music: Apple announced in 2021 that its entire catalog of 75 million songs (now said to be 100 million+ songs) would be available in lossless ALAC by the end of 2021 twitteringmachines.com. They hit that goal; currently virtually every track on Apple Music has a lossless version. For Hi-Res (24-bit >48kHz), Apple started with about 20 million hi-res tracks in 2021 and has been expanding. Today most new releases, especially in certain genres, are delivered in 24/48 or 24/96, so the hi-res portion of Apple’s catalog has grown. Still, many tracks (especially older ones) might only exist in 16/44 or 24/44. Apple doesn’t publish an exact number, but it’s safe to say millions of tracks are hi-res (and all are at least CD-quality).
• Amazon Music: Amazon similarly offers virtually its whole catalog in at least HD (16/44.1) – over 100 million songs. For Ultra HD (hi-res), Amazon a couple of years ago cited “millions of songs” in Ultra HD, and likely this has increased. They also have a section for 3D/Spatial Audio (thousands of tracks in Dolby Atmos or Sony 360RA, playable on certain devices). So Amazon’s coverage is broad, and like Apple, not everything is hi-res 192 kHz – but the content that audiophiles seek out (e.g. specific remasters, classical, etc.) is often there in Ultra HD.
• Others: Qobuz prides itself on hi-res catalog, as does Tidal. Qobuz tends to have a lot of jazz, classical, hi-res versions (they even sell downloads). Tidal’s catalog in hi-res is similar in breadth to Apple/Amazon now, after moving to FLAC. Deezer (another service) offers CD-quality (16/44.1) on its HiFi plan but no hi-res beyond that.

In practical terms, a mainstream music fan will find the same new releases in lossless quality on all platforms. There might be occasional exclusives (for instance, Apple often gets exclusive Spatial Audio mixes; Tidal might get an exclusive MQA version, etc.), but for core lossless stereo audio, the catalogs are comparable.

Spatial Audio and Other Formats

One big differentiator in “audio features” is spatial audio (Dolby Atmos Music, Sony 360 Reality Audio) which Apple and Amazon support but Spotify does not (yet):

• Apple Music: Introduced Dolby Atmos Spatial Audio in 2021 alongside lossless. Apple offers thousands of tracks and many full albums in Atmos immersive audio, which can be experienced on any headphones (through Apple’s binaural virtualization) or on Atmos-enabled speaker systems. This is not a lossless format (Atmos is a compressed spatial format), but it’s a value-add for Apple. Users with AirPods or Beats get automatic spatial playback, making it a marquee feature for Apple’s ecosystem. Notably, Apple’s Spatial Audio is included in the standard subscription too.
• Amazon Music: Provides Dolby Atmos tracks and Sony 360 Reality Audio tracks, under the banner of “Spatial Audio.” These can be played on specific devices – e.g., Amazon’s Echo Studio speaker supports Atmos and 360RA playback natively, and some Sony headphones can play 360RA via the Amazon app. Amazon doesn’t have as large an Atmos catalog as Apple, but they have partnered with major labels to offer a decent selection. Again, no extra cost – part of the subscription.
• Spotify: Currently, Spotify has no spatial audio format support. Music on Spotify is strictly stereo (2-channel) for now. There have been rumors or requests about Spotify possibly supporting Dolby Atmos in the future, but nothing official. So in comparison, Spotify lags on immersive audio features. For users with home theaters or fancy headphones looking for 3D sound, Apple and Amazon have an edge here soyacincau.com. However, spatial audio is still a niche interest and often the stereo mix is preferred by many audiophiles. Spotify may be waiting to see demand or could roll out spatial later (perhaps as part of that future “deluxe tier”).

It’s worth noting: the introduction of lossless on Spotify could lay the groundwork for spatial audio later, since spatial formats like Dolby Atmos can be delivered in a lossless container (Apple delivers Atmos in a Dolby MAT stream on Apple TV for example, or as part of ALAC files as metadata). But that’s speculative – as of 2025, spatial audio remains a differentiator for Apple/Amazon/Tidal vs. Spotify.

Sound Quality – Do These Differences Matter?

From a sound quality standpoint, all these services at lossless settings will provide excellent fidelity suitable for audiophile listening. The differences in 44.1 vs 96 kHz, or FLAC vs ALAC, are not audible to the vast majority of people in controlled tests. The most significant jump in quality is the step from lossy (e.g. 320k Ogg or AAC) to lossless (FLAC/ALAC) because you eliminate compression artifacts. Going beyond 16-bit/44.1k yields very subtle (if any) improvement, and only in ideal listening conditions with very revealing equipment. Human hearing tops out around 20 kHz (often much lower for adults), so the extra ultrasonic range of 96 kHz audio is mostly theoretical, and 24-bit depth mainly provides more headroom and lower noise floor – beneficial in production, but rarely noticeable in playback once dithered to 16-bit.

Several experts have commented on this:

• SoundGuys (audio review site) notes that “most people can’t consistently distinguish between compressed and lossless tracks” in blind listening soundguys.com. Especially if using common setups (Bluetooth earbuds, or listening in the car or a noisy room), the difference is effectively nil. In quiet environments with high-end wired headphones or speakers, some listeners can notice the cleaner artifact-free sound of lossless versus a 320k mp3 – things like cymbal crashes sound less “swishy,” dense passages retain clarity, etc. But distinguishing 44.1k vs 96k is extremely difficult in tests.
• The SoundGuys article further explains that CD-quality (16-bit/44.1) already exceeds the dynamic range and frequency range that humans can perceive soundguys.com. They emphasize that the mastering quality of a track (how it was recorded and engineered) matters more than the file’s sample rate or codec for how good it sounds soundguys.com. A well-mastered 320k track can beat a poorly-mastered hi-res track in listening enjoyment.
• What Hi-Fi? concluded that while Spotify’s limit of 44.1 kHz means it technically “trails behind hi-res rivals,” this “won’t matter for most people” because 24/44.1 is “more than adequate for the majority.” whathifi.com whathifi.com Only a small minority with ultra-high-end gear (and keen ears) might lament the absence of 96kHz content on Spotify, and those folks likely are already on Qobuz or have local hi-res files. For mainstream Premium subscribers, Spotify Lossless is going to sound as good as Apple or Amazon’s offering in practice.

One caveat: if you do have a top-notch audio chain and a collection of 24/96 or 24/192 albums you love, Apple or Amazon could deliver those in full hi-res whereas Spotify might effectively downconvert them to 24/44.1. It’s a corner case, but real – e.g. some classical recordings or HDtracks releases are 24/96. So super users might still prefer those services or physical media for that content. But this is a slim segment of the market.

In summary, Spotify’s audio quality now reaches parity with CD and nearly parity with Apple/Amazon’s hi-res. All services provide lossless distribution, ensuring you hear what the producers intended without compression losses. The differences beyond that are more academic than audible for the vast majority. For most listeners with typical gear, Spotify will now sound just as good as Apple Music or Amazon Music HD – and all can deliver a fantastic listening experience. The era of Spotify being “inferior sound quality” is over.

Pricing, Tiers, and User Experience Differences

While audio quality is one aspect, the pricing and user experience around these lossless offerings are equally important to consumers. Here we compare Spotify, Apple Music, and Amazon Music in terms of subscription cost, plan structure, and how users interact with the lossless features on each service.

Subscription Plans and Cost

• Spotify Premium: Spotify’s lossless streaming is included in the standard Premium subscription, which costs $11.00–$12.00 per month (individual plan) in the US (prices vary slightly by country; e.g. £12 in the UK, €11 in Europe) whathifi.com. This is the same plan that previously only offered lossy streaming. In mid-2023 Spotify raised the individual price from $9.99 to $10.99 in the US, and in mid-2024 it went to $11.99 musicbusinessworldwide.com musicbusinessworldwide.com. Family, Duo, and Student plans also exist (Family being around $17–$18 now in the US). Important: There is no separate “HiFi tier” – Premium is Premium. So if you’re already a subscriber, you get lossless automatically once rolled out. New subscribers simply subscribe to Premium as usual.
  • Prior plans: Spotify did toy with ideas of a “Supremium” or “Platinum” tier (around $19.99) that might have included HiFi and extras whathifi.com, but as of the 2025 launch, those plans were shelved theverge.com. There is speculation Spotify may later introduce a higher tier for other features (like more audiobooks or advanced playlist tools), but they explicitly said lossless is not being paywalled behind any new tier at launch theverge.com. This means Spotify is slightly undercutting Tidal (which charges more for hi-res) and matching Apple/Amazon in offering hi-res as a standard feature.
• Apple Music: Apple Music is a single-tier service: one price gets you everything (lossless, spatial, etc.). The individual plan is $10.99/month in the US (Apple raised it from $9.99 in late 2022) – effectively the same price range as Spotify Premium whathifi.com. Family plans run $16.99 for up to 6 users, student plans around $5. Apple notably introduced lossless and Dolby Atmos at no additional cost in 2021 whathifi.com, setting a precedent. So an Apple Music subscriber today pays the same as in 2020, but gets high-res audio included. Apple also offers the Voice plan ($4.99, Siri-only) which does not guarantee lossless (since it only plays via Siri on certain devices at standard quality), and the Apple One bundles. But for apples-to-apples (pardon the pun) – Apple’s main plan vs Spotify Premium – they’re priced identically and both include the highest quality audio.
• Amazon Music: Amazon’s offering is a bit layered: Amazon Music Unlimited is the main subscription that gives full catalog access including HD/Ultra HD. For non-Prime members, it’s typically $10.99/month for an individual plan (matching Spotify/Apple) whathifi.com. Prime members get a slight discount (around $8.99/month) as an add-on to Prime, or sometimes Amazon runs promotions. Amazon originally launched “Amazon Music HD” in 2019 as a separate $14.99 plan, but in May 2021 they dropped the extra fee and folded HD into the regular plan in response to Apple whathifi.com. So now, if you subscribe to Amazon Music Unlimited, you automatically get all the HD and Ultra HD content. Amazon also has a Family plan (~$16) and a Single-Device plan ($4.99 for use on only an Echo device or Fire TV). The cheaper single-device plan interestingly does include HD/Ultra HD on that one device (for example, you could pay $5 to turn your Echo Studio into a hi-res music jukebox with Amazon’s library). Overall, Amazon’s pricing is effectively on par with Spotify and Apple, especially after Apple forced the price of HD audio down.
• Tidal: Tidal currently offers two main tiers: Tidal HiFi ($10/month) and Tidal HiFi Plus ($20/month). The HiFi ($10) tier gives FLAC lossless at 16-bit/44.1kHz (CD quality) and now also access to hi-res FLAC up to 24-bit/96kHz for the entire catalog, but excludes certain things like Dolby Atmos and Master edition tracks. The HiFi Plus ($20) tier gives everything including MQA-encoded hi-res (which was their original method for >96kHz audio), Dolby Atmos Music, 360 Reality Audio, and some fan-centric features (higher artist payout share, etc.). In 2023–24, Tidal adjusted pricing to be more competitive: it introduced the $10 HiFi tier with lossless and some hi-res, as noted by What Hi-Fi: Tidal “followed suit in 2024, reducing its subscription fee to price-match its competitors.” whathifi.com So essentially you can get lossless on Tidal now for the same $10.99. But to get all hi-res and surround formats on Tidal, you still pay a premium. Tidal is the priciest if you want everything (double the cost of Spotify/Apple). This is a differentiator: Spotify’s lossless undercuts Tidal’s high-end offering significantly – a point audiophiles will notice, possibly making Spotify a tempting value proposition if they don’t care for MQA or Tidal’s other perks.
• Others: Qobuz is around $12.99/month solo (hi-res included), Deezer HiFi $10.99 (16-bit only). YouTube Music is $9.99 for premium but maxes out at lossy ~256kbps AAC – no lossless yet (though YouTube’s strength is in videos and user uploads).

In summary, all mainstream services (Spotify, Apple, Amazon) now charge roughly the same ~$11 for individuals and include lossless audio as standard. This is a big win for consumers compared to a few years ago when hi-res cost extra. Spotify’s late entry means there’s no price war needed – they just matched the market norm. Spotify did implement a price increase, but so did Apple and Amazon in recent times; they’re all in lock-step.

For a user deciding purely on cost and quality, there’s no longer a price penalty to choose one over the other based on audio fidelity – it comes down to other ecosystem and library considerations.

User Experience: Enabling and Using Lossless Features

How users access and enjoy lossless/hi-res audio differs a bit across Spotify, Apple, and Amazon:

• Spotify UX: Spotify’s approach emphasizes user control over quality to manage data usage. By default, even after you get the lossless feature, your streaming will remain at the previous “Very High” (320k) setting until you opt in. You toggle the new “Lossless” quality setting individually for Wi-Fi, cellular, and downloads stereophile.com. This granular control is great – it matches what Apple does in settings, and is arguably more integrated than Amazon (which often auto-adjusts quality). Spotify’s app interface clearly labels the quality settings (Low, Normal, High, Very High, Lossless) and even provides data per minute estimates. Once lossless is enabled, the listening interface shows a “Lossless” badge on tracks currently playing in that quality stereophile.com. If a track is not available in lossless for some reason, presumably it would not show the badge. Spotify Connect will also indicate when it’s streaming lossless to a device, so users know they’re getting full quality on their speakers stereophile.com. In terms of UI simplicity, Spotify’s integration is smooth – you use the same app, same playlists, just now you have a higher quality option. There’s no separate catalog or section; everything is the same music just with an upgrade toggle. The manual opt-in ensures only users who care will use the extra data. Some might find it slightly inconvenient to have to go into settings per device and turn it on (yes, Spotify requires enabling it on each device you use – your phone, your PC, etc., it doesn’t sync across devices by design) soyacincau.com. But that’s likely to avoid any surprise if, say, you wanted lossless on your home stereo but not on your mobile data. Spotify’s content discovery and interface remain top-notch (personalized playlists, etc.) and now one can enjoy those with improved sound. The Now Playing screen doesn’t (currently) display the exact bit depth/sample rate, just the Lossless indicator. But for most, that’s enough.
• Apple Music UX: Apple takes a slightly different route: Lossless is opt-in via Settings on each device as well (not a quick in-app toggle, but in iOS Settings or macOS Music preferences). Under Music → Audio Quality, you can turn on Lossless and separately choose quality for streaming and downloads on Wi-Fi or cellular twitteringmachines.com. Apple’s choices are “High Quality (AAC 256k)”, “Lossless (ALAC up to 24/48)”, and “Hi-Res Lossless (ALAC up to 24/192)”. If you pick Hi-Res, it will play the hi-res version when available and when a compatible DAC is connected – otherwise it falls back to 24/48. Apple’s default is lossless off to save data, similar to Spotify. But one big difference: Apple’s music player UI doesn’t have an always-visible badge while playing. To see if a track is lossless, you have to tap the info (… menu -> Song Info) where it will show “Lossless” or “Hi-Res Lossless” next to the audio specs. Apple does put a small “Lossless” tag on the Now Playing screen in iOS 16+ for lossless tracks, but it’s subtle. They also tag albums in the album view as “Lossless” or “Hi-Res Lossless” under the release year/label info. Apple’s experience can be very seamless if you’ve enabled it – the app will automatically deliver the best quality your setup allows. For example, on an iPhone with no external DAC, it will do 24/48 max. On a Mac with a 192k-capable DAC and if you allowed hi-res, it will output 192k if the track has it. Users don’t have to worry about picking specific versions; it’s the same library of songs, and Apple switches the stream quality on the fly. This is user-friendly but also means less explicit control than Spotify. Apple doesn’t let you easily force a lower quality for a particular scenario except through the settings, whereas Spotify allows per-connection type control more readily in-app. Apple’s Spatial Audio integration is a distinct part of the UX – albums available in Atmos are badged and auto-play in Atmos if you use compatible hardware (like AirPods). That is outside the scope of lossless, but it’s a differentiator in user experience (some users get “wow” moments from spatial tracks, which Spotify doesn’t offer). Apple also has features like crossfade disabled for lossless (to keep it bit-perfect), similar to Spotify likely disabling any DSP for lossless.
• Amazon Music UX: Amazon’s app tends to automatically play the highest quality available based on your settings and device. In Amazon Music’s settings, you can choose streaming quality preferences (Auto, or set specific quality). By default, if on Wi-Fi, it will go to the maximum (HD/Ultra HD) your device can do. Amazon prominently shows “HD” or “Ultra HD” labels on tracks in the app’s Now Playing screen and in lists developer.amazon.com. Tapping the quality badge will show details: e.g. “Track: 24-bit/96 kHz, Device: 24-bit/48 kHz” – meaning if your phone can only do 48 kHz, it will downsample accordingly. This transparency is nice for enthusiasts. If a track is only available in 16/44, it’ll just say HD. Amazon’s interface around quality is a bit more technical (which suits the “hi-fi enthusiast” crowd). But they also keep it mostly in the background for casual users who just trust the “Ultra HD” logo. One annoyance historically was that Amazon’s desktop app didn’t have exclusive mode for output, causing resampling on Windows unless you manually changed OS settings – but that’s too in-the-weeds for most. On mobile, Amazon will not stream Ultra HD on cellular by default unless you allow it (to save data). They have an option similar to Apple/Spotify for adjusting cellular quality or offline download quality. Amazon’s user experience in terms of discovery is often considered a bit less refined than Spotify’s (their focus has been on catalog and quality), but they have improved recommendations and have a robust voice integration (Alexa voice commands to play specific versions or quality). If you ask Alexa for a song and you have HD, it tends to play the HD/UHD automatically if available.
• Tidal UX (for reference): Tidal’s app has an explicit quality selector (Normal/AAC, High/320k, HiFi/lossless, Master) that you can toggle. The “Master” setting gives MQA or hi-res FLAC where available. Tidal shows an “M” or “HR” badge for master/hi-res content. It’s a bit more involved to ensure you’re getting hi-res on Tidal, whereas Apple/Amazon just do it. Spotify’s approach is closer to Apple’s in being straightforward: one toggle in settings and forget.

In all cases, to truly experience hi-res audio, the user must have appropriate hardware (as discussed in the device section below). The user experience of realizing that, say, their phone’s DAC is limiting them can be confusing. Apple addresses this via footnote: hi-res above 48 kHz “requires external equipment” twitteringmachines.com. Amazon addresses it by showing device capability info. Spotify addresses it by recommending wired connections and noting Bluetooth won’t carry lossless newsroom.spotify.com. So each is trying to set expectations.

A noteworthy user-experience difference: Spotify allows on-the-fly switching between quality tiers in Now Playing (at least between preset tiers, not sure if you can seamlessly switch to lossless mid-song without going to settings – likely not, you have to set it in settings which is a bit buried). Apple and Amazon don’t easily let you toggle quality mid-playback; they assume you set it once and mostly leave it. For the average user, that’s fine. For testers who might want to A/B compare a song in lossy vs lossless, Spotify might make that slightly easier (if one were to set cellular to a lower quality and trick the app, etc.).

Data management: All three let you download songs for offline use, and you can choose the quality for downloads (Spotify and Apple explicitly, Amazon likely uses your streaming preference for downloads too). Be mindful that downloading a lot of lossless songs can chew up phone storage.

Finally, on UI polish: Spotify is known for its slick app and personalized playlists (Discover Weekly, etc.), which now can be enjoyed in higher fidelity. Apple’s app is integrated well into iOS/macOS and has cross-device library sync and handoff features (plus lyrics, etc.). Amazon’s app is perhaps the least flashy, but functional, with a strong emphasis on showing quality info. None of the apps force you to play a “special” version of a song for hi-res – you just play the song and the app picks the best source available. That’s an improvement from older approaches (like having separate “Master” catalogs).

Ecosystem and Device Compatibility

This is a big part of “user experience” – can you actually play the music in hi-res on the devices you own? Each service has its own ecosystem integration:

• Spotify Devices: Spotify Connect is a huge plus – many devices (AV receivers, smart speakers, game consoles, car systems, etc.) have native Spotify Connect support. With the upgrade, those devices (if updated) can directly stream the FLAC from Spotify’s servers, meaning you get lossless audio out of, say, your Denon receiver or KEF wireless speakers without needing a phone in the middle. Initially only certain Connect partners support FLAC (as noted: Sony, Bose, etc., Sonos shortly) newsroom.spotify.com, but over time most Connect devices could get firmware updates. Some older devices might not get updated if the manufacturer doesn’t support it – they’d then continue playing the 320k stream. Users won’t necessarily know unless they check device firmware notes. But a new Sonos or recent smart speaker likely will support it. On mobile and desktop, Spotify’s apps can output high quality to any connected DAC (the desktop app can use default OS audio device, which if a good DAC is selected, will output the PCM). On iOS, Spotify can’t fully bypass the system resampling to 48k if using the internal DAC – but since Spotify is 44.1k max, the phone will actually upsample 44.1 to 48 for the internal speaker/headphone jack (Lightning adapter) because iOS standardizes on 48k output. If using an external DAC with an app like Spotify, it might not automatically switch like Apple’s own app does. Enthusiasts on iPhone might use third-party apps or workarounds to bitstream exact sample rates – but again, at 44.1k it’s less of a concern. On Android, many devices output at 48k by default too. This is a technical nuance affecting all services equally when played from phone. In cars, Spotify can do lossless via Android Auto or CarPlay if the phone is outputting it. Android Auto likely compresses audio over USB (not sure if it supports lossless transmission). CarPlay wired might handle lossless up to 48k; wireless CarPlay uses ALAC over Wi-Fi for audio so it could in theory do lossless 16/44 at least. One disadvantage for Spotify’s ecosystem: Apple HomePod – Apple does not allow Spotify to stream directly to HomePod (aside from via AirPlay). So if you have HomePods, Apple Music is the only service that integrates natively (and HomePod does support Apple Lossless now). Spotify via AirPlay to HomePod would still be limited to AirPlay’s capabilities (which is ALAC 16/44.1 for AirPlay 1, and I believe still 16/44.1 for AirPlay 2, maybe 24/48? But HomePod itself tops at 48k internally). So Apple users with HomePods don’t get an easy lossless Spotify experience, whereas Apple Music on HomePod is seamless.
• Apple Devices: Apple Music’s strength is in its integration with Apple’s hardware ecosystem. If you primarily use iPhone, iPad, Mac, HomePod, Apple TV, etc., Apple Music is built-in and optimized. That said, Apple’s own devices have some limitations:
  • The iPhone’s internal DAC (in the Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter or built-in on older phones) can only do up to 24-bit/48 kHz. So even though Apple Music offers 192 kHz, you can’t get that through the headphone jack without an external USB DAC (Apple explicitly notes this twitteringmachines.com). On Mac, you can output 192k to a USB DAC if you manually set the Audio MIDI settings.
  • HomePod (original and HomePod 2) supports lossless ALAC up to 24/48 over Apple Music. That covers most “Lossless” but not “Hi-Res Lossless.” So HomePod won’t play 96k or 192k at full resolution (it likely downsamples, though Apple doesn’t detail it). But to most, it’s fine given HomePod’s hardware.
  • Third-party devices: Apple Music is available on Android (app supports lossless there too), on PCs (iTunes for Windows now replaced by Apple Music app or web – which currently might not support lossless on web). There’s also Apple Music on some smart TVs, consoles, and streaming devices like Roku – those often don’t support lossless (they might stream AAC 256k because they haven’t updated to handle ALAC).
  • One ecosystem drawback: No Apple Music Connect equivalent. You can’t stream Apple Music directly to many Wi-Fi speakers except via AirPlay from an Apple device or if that speaker has Apple Music built-in (very few do, aside from Sonos which has an Apple Music integration, and some high-end streamers that support Apple Music via their apps). Apple relies on AirPlay for external speaker streaming, which is fine for home use but not as widely implemented on third-party as Spotify Connect is.
  Apple does have an advantage for those deep in Apple gear: things like Apple Watch can stream Apple Music lossless locally (the watch can stream via Wi-Fi or cellular and output to Bluetooth headphones – though again Bluetooth will degrade it, but at least you have that independence).
• Amazon Devices: Amazon leverages its Alexa/Echo ecosystem. If you have Echo speakers (Echo, Echo Studio, Echo Dot), Amazon Music is deeply integrated. Echo Studio, Amazon’s flagship, supports Ultra HD (up to 24/48 at least) and Dolby Atmos playback from Amazon Music natively. So you can just say “Alexa, play my music in HD” and it will. Many third-party Alexa-enabled speakers can also stream Amazon Music HD (the exact quality might depend on the device’s capabilities). For example, an Alexa-compatible soundbar could stream directly without phone. Outside of Echo, Amazon Music is available on Fire TV, many smart TVs, and devices like Bluesound or HEOS streamers often support Amazon Music HD. On mobile/PC, Amazon’s app will use whatever output device. PC can do bit-perfect if using exclusive mode (not sure if Amazon introduced that; initially they didn’t have it, causing OS resample to 48k, but they may have added a wasapi exclusive mode later due to feedback). On Android, Amazon can use internal DAC up to 48k and external DAC for 192k. On iOS, Amazon Music can’t change system sample rate, so same limitation of 48k via internal DAC. So Amazon’s compatibility is pretty broad; plus they encourage use of Alexa voice and multi-room music with Echoes, which all support at least HD (CD quality) streams, and newer ones UltraHD.
• Cross-platform: Spotify is on nearly every platform (except not on old iPods). Apple Music is on Apple devices primarily, plus Android and some others. Amazon is on many but not on, say, Linux (except web app). If you use a variety of devices (Windows PC, Android phone, smart TV, etc.), Spotify and Amazon might feel more at home, whereas Apple Music is great if you live in the Apple world but less so outside it.
• Integration with receivers/DACs: Many modern hi-fi receivers and DAC streamers have built-in support for Tidal Connect, Spotify Connect, AirPlay, Chromecast, etc. Spotify Connect’s presence is huge – lots of stereo receivers (Yamaha MusicCast, Denon HEOS, etc.) let you cast Spotify directly. Apple Music can be cast via AirPlay or Chromecast depending on device (Apple doesn’t support casting via Google Cast from iOS, but the Apple Music Android app supports Chromecast output). Amazon Music doesn’t have its own cast protocol but on Android you can cast the audio system-wide or use Alexa Cast (which is kind of a protocol to transfer playback to an Alexa device).
• Bluetooth and mobile listening: As touched on, none can send lossless over Bluetooth. If you use Bluetooth headphones, you won’t get the full lossless benefit with any service. However, some high-end Bluetooth codecs (LDAC, aptX HD) can transmit at ~900 kbps, which might preserve nearly lossless 16/44 in many cases. But Apple’s AirPods use AAC, which definitely is lossy. So ironically, Apple gives you hi-res files but their own AirPods can’t play them losslessly (they prioritize convenience). Spotify explicitly points out Bluetooth will downrate the quality.
• Offline and portability: All services let you download in full quality for offline use. One difference: Apple Music’s downloads are ALAC files (which can be large). Spotify’s downloads for lossless presumably will be stored as FLAC (or some encrypted variant of FLAC). These files are DRM-wrapped (you can’t copy them out of the app), but it means if you go offline you still have that lossless quality.

In general, Spotify’s device ecosystem compatibility is the widest (because of Connect and being platform-neutral), Apple’s is the most vertically integrated (great if you have Apple devices, not as great outside), and Amazon’s is extensive especially for smart home/Alexa users. If you already have a chain of equipment you enjoy, it’s worth checking which service it supports natively:

• If you have Sonos: Sonos supports Spotify, Apple, Amazon all natively via the Sonos app. Sonos has announced support for Spotify HiFi FLAC coming soon (in 2025) newsroom.spotify.com. Sonos already supports Apple Music lossless (up to 24/48) and Amazon HD/Ultra HD up to 24/48 on newer Sonos models. So Sonos users can pick any – they’ll all work.
• If you have a nice USB DAC/headphone setup: All services can output to it via a PC or phone with appropriate settings. Possibly Apple on Mac gives the most straightforward hi-res config, whereas Spotify on Windows might require ensuring Windows output is 24-bit to avoid truncation.
• If you primarily use smart speakers: If they’re Alexa – Amazon is naturally best (though Spotify via Alexa works too, but until Echo supports FLAC, Spotify on Echo might currently still be lossy – the Spotify press release suggests Echo support is coming in October newsroom.spotify.com). If they’re Google Assistant speakers – none of these three except YouTube Music integrate deeply with Google voice (Spotify does to some extent with Google Assistant). Apple Music works on Google Nest speakers as a linked service now, but I suspect it streams in standard quality.
• If you have car integrations: Apple Music via CarPlay, Spotify via CarPlay/Android Auto, Amazon via Android Auto (no CarPlay for Amazon Music as of now). Spotify probably has the edge in car simply because it’s been ubiquitous and stable there.

The user experience of “just playing music in highest quality” is becoming fairly seamless now. Spotify’s last missing piece was delivering that highest quality – now that it does, users don’t have to make compromises.

Strategic Implications for Spotify’s Market Position

Adding lossless audio might seem like a mere technical upgrade, but strategically it’s a significant move in the streaming wars. Here’s what Spotify’s rollout of HiFi means for its competitive position and business:

• Feature Parity = Competitive Neutralization: For years, Spotify’s lack of a hi-fi option was a differentiator that competitors tried to exploit. Tidal built its brand around “HiFi sound” and niche services like Qobuz targeted audiophiles. More recently, Apple and Amazon used lossless as a value-add marketing point (“get better-than-CD quality at no extra cost”). Now, with Spotify Lossless live, a major selling point for rival services disappears. Consumers comparing music services can no longer say “Spotify has worse sound.” As Music Business Worldwide noted, Spotify’s update “supports streaming at up to 24-bit/44.1 kHz FLAC quality, matching its rivals.” musicbusinessworldwide.com It essentially closes a feature gap. This defensive move protects Spotify’s huge user base from being poached on the basis of audio quality. Particularly, some fraction of users had left Spotify for Apple or Amazon when those launched lossless in 2021 – Spotify might now win some of them back or at least stop further bleeding of audiophile-minded users.
• Impacts on Subscriber Growth: Will lossless sound attract a lot of new subscribers to Spotify? The consensus seems to be not a dramatic number on its own. An eMarketer analysis bluntly titled “Spotify’s too-late lossless audio won’t move the needle” argues that while it’s important for Spotify to have this feature, it’s “uncertain how many new subscribers [it] will drive” emarketer.com. Lossless audio is likely more of a retention tool and a way to make the service “even stickier with low churn” among existing users emarketer.com. Spotify already excels at retaining users through its network effects (playlists, friends, familiarity), and this will shore that up further. People who might have considered switching to Apple Music for better sound now have one less reason to do so. That said, Spotify could gain some new subs in markets or segments where it previously wasn’t considered by audiophiles. For instance, hi-fi enthusiasts might have kept a Spotify account for discovery but a Qobuz account for quality – some may consolidate if Spotify sounds as good and has the convenience. Also, Spotify can now market itself fully against Apple/Amazon with “we have 100 million songs in the highest quality audio” and not worry about the narrative of being inferior.
• No Pricing Upsell (For Now): By not charging extra for HiFi, Spotify is forgoing a potential revenue stream in the short term. We know from industry examples that some consumers are willing to pay more for better quality – for instance, Tencent Music in China has a higher-priced “SVIP” tier where “Premium sound quality remains the most popular benefit,” and users pay 5× the normal subscription (though in absolute terms it’s ~$5 vs $1) musicbusinessworldwide.com. That shows there is a segment that values audio quality enough to pay. Spotify initially hoped to tap that willingness (with rumors of a $5–6 add-on musicbusinessworldwide.com). Why give it free then? Likely because in Western markets the expectation set by Apple and Amazon is that lossless is standard, and trying to charge would put Spotify at a marketing disadvantage. The competitive norm shifted. As Spotify’s co-president acknowledged, when Apple, Amazon, and Tidal all moved to no-extra-cost lossless, “the industry changed and we had to adapt.” whathifi.com So Spotify is adapting by matching the norm rather than trying to fight it. Strategically, this could mean Spotify will look for other ways to increase ARPU (average revenue per user) – perhaps through non-music content (podcasts, audiobooks, etc.), or the rumored future “Supremium” tier that bundles perks aside from just HiFi. They might also continue to implement periodic price increases across the board (as Netflix and others do), now justifying it with improvements like HiFi.
• Focus Back on Music Fans: Spotify spent the last few years heavily investing in podcasts and other audio (a strategy to differentiate and improve margins, as podcast royalties are different). Some music aficionados felt Spotify’s music experience was stagnating (meanwhile, Apple was doubling down on music with Spatial Audio, classical music app, etc.). In 2023, Daniel Ek stated Spotify would “double down on music in 2025” as a core offering techradar.com. The launch of Lossless in 2025 is a strong signal that Spotify is refocusing on its music enthusiast audience and not ceding that high-end segment to competitors. It’s a way to reaffirm Spotify’s identity as the top music platform, not just a general audio platform. Along with other new features like an AI DJ, personalized mixes, and live lyrics, HiFi improves the overall premium music experience on Spotify.
• Marketing and PR: After repeatedly teasing HiFi for years, Spotify risked a credibility issue with its user community. The rollout now helps address that: it shows Spotify listens to user feedback (HiFi was one of the most requested features by users). This can boost goodwill among the audiophile press and community. You’ll likely see Spotify in the conversation now when talking about high-quality streaming, whereas before it was an also-ran on quality. Spotify can also partner with hardware brands (headphone and speaker makers) to promote “Spotify Lossless” listening sessions or bundles, etc., which they couldn’t effectively do when limited to 320k.
• Remaining Differentiators: Now that sound quality is equalized, services will compete more on other fronts:
  • Catalog and Exclusives: All have 70–100 million songs, but exclusives are rare in streaming (no one really has major exclusives aside from occasional windowing or region-specific content). Spotify does have some exclusive podcasts but for music catalog it’s equal.
  • Curation and Personalization: Spotify’s algorithmic playlists and social sharing features are top-notch and a key reason people stay. Apple and Amazon have been catching up (Apple’s personalization has improved, Amazon has some stations and algorithmic mixes too). But many still prefer Spotify’s UI and playlists. That remains a differentiator that lossless doesn’t change – except now users can have both the best curation and best quality in one place.
  • Ecosystem Lock-in: Apple will always leverage integration with its devices (e.g., Apple Music works with Apple Watch offline, Siri, etc.). Spotify has tried to be device-agnostic and present everywhere – including on Apple devices (though sometimes without deep Siri integration). Amazon ties into Alexa and Prime. So each has a broader strategy beyond just the music bit rate. Spotify has to continue forging partnerships (like being the default music service option on more voice assistants, etc.) to keep its cross-platform edge.
  • Other Audio Content: Spotify leads in podcasts integration (they have exclusive podcasts and a seamless music/podcast experience). They also are pushing into audiobooks (offering some audiobooks free for Premium). Apple and Amazon also have podcasts and books (Amazon owns Audible), but Spotify’s heavy podcast investment is part of its uniqueness. Ensuring music quality parity while also being the podcast platform could make Spotify the best one-stop-shop for all audio needs for users who value that.
  • Social and Community: Spotify is adding features like real-time lyrics sharing, friends activity, blended playlists. Apple is more closed socially, Amazon minimal. If Spotify were missing lossless, hardcore music nerds might leave for Apple but now they can enjoy these social features without compromise in sound.
• Financial Impact: From an investor standpoint, giving away HiFi could be seen as a cost without direct revenue. However, if it helps keep users in the Spotify ecosystem, it supports the long-term subscriber growth and pricing power. Spotify’s recent price hikes show they are confident in their value prop; adding lossless just after a price hike is a way to add perceived value and reduce churn post-price increase. Also, there’s a possibility Spotify could still introduce a future higher-priced tier with additional benefits (just not basic lossless). For example, perhaps a “Platinum” tier might include Hi-Res Audio beyond 44.1 kHz, or surround sound music, or expanded liner notes/credits, or guaranteed higher payouts to artists (like Tidal offers), or bundled content like Netflix/Hulu, etc. The groundwork (and the prior market research about some users wanting to pay more for “super Premium”) is there techcrunch.com techcrunch.com. So strategically, Spotify might use the free lossless as a way to gauge interest and then later upsell a subset on something even fancier.
• Industry Trend Validation: Spotify holding out on HiFi for so long had some wondering if maybe lossless audio wasn’t actually important to success (since Spotify was growing massively without it). Its eventual adoption basically validates that lossless streaming has become a standard feature in the industry. It’s a checkbox that any full-service music platform is expected to have. This could put pressure on the few that don’t offer it (YouTube Music, for instance, now stands out as the only top service with no lossless tier). We might see YouTube/Google consider upgrading YouTube Music’s quality to stay in the game, especially if some users flock to Spotify or Apple for better sound.
• Artist and Label Relations: Interestingly, Spotify’s lossless launch might also be a play to appease artists and labels who, at least symbolically, often equate lossless with respecting music’s integrity. Even though royalties are the same, being able to say “Spotify offers the highest quality streaming” removes one criticism (in the past, some artists promoted Tidal or Qobuz to their fans for better sound). If Spotify eventually uses hi-res as part of a higher-priced tier, they could potentially justify slightly higher payouts or a new revenue share arrangement to sweeten label deals – but that’s speculative. For now, it’s more about not being at a disadvantage in label negotiations either; labels can’t say Spotify provides an inferior product anymore.
• User Demographics: Lossless might help Spotify among slightly older or more affluent demographics who care about quality. Spotify skews a bit younger historically; Apple Music often attracted more audiophiles and older listeners (e.g., because it had things like classical in lossless and a dedicated app now for classical, plus no free tier which typically means a more premium user base). Spotify HiFi could be part of making Spotify more attractive to the hi-fi enthusiasts – for example, the Stereophile crowd (the audiophile magazine) had been urging Spotify to do this and now they reported on it with some approval stereophile.com. That could convert some holdouts who stayed on Tidal/Qobuz for sound reasons.
• Ad-Supported Tier: Notably, Spotify’s free tier remains lossy (likely max 160k Ogg on desktop, 128k on mobile). Lossless is a Premium perk only. This gives an added incentive for free users to upgrade – some free users might have tolerated ads because they weren’t convinced of Premium’s value, but if they care about sound at all, knowing that Premium offers a massive quality boost might tempt them. So strategically, lossless is another carrot to convert free users into paying subscribers (where Spotify ultimately needs users to be for profitability). Given free still makes up over half of Spotify’s user base (and ad revenue has been underperforming) emarketer.com, pushing more people to Premium via features like HiFi is important.
• Advertising and Partnerships: With higher quality, Spotify can explore new partnership angles – e.g., bundling with high-end audio gear promotions (“Get 3 months of Spotify HiFi with these Sennheiser headphones”). They might also attract sponsorships or advertising in their free tier from audio brands now that Spotify is talking about audio quality (though free tier doesn’t get lossless, the brand association is there).

To sum up, Spotify’s market position is strengthened by finally offering lossless. It was a defensive necessity to not be outdone by Apple/Amazon in the long run, and it removes a vulnerability in Spotify’s product lineup. While it likely won’t itself catapult subscriber numbers, it contributes to the overall value perception of Spotify Premium, which helps justify price increases and maintain Spotify’s lead in paid subscribers. As one analyst put it, “Lossless audio certainly won’t be a detractor for Spotify… while unlikely to drive subscriptions [on its own]… it doesn’t hurt to add features that keep users from cancelling or drifting to competitors.” emarketer.com It’s about fortifying the Spotify ecosystem.

Now the battle among the big players will focus on who can offer the best overall experience – with audio quality now roughly equal, things like UI, recommendations, exclusive content, and ecosystem integration will decide the winners. Spotify is clearly positioning itself to continue leading, by ensuring it no longer has a weak spot in sound quality. As of late 2025, a music lover can confidently choose Spotify and know they’re getting the same audio fidelity as anywhere else, plus Spotify’s other benefits. For the industry at large, it’s a signal that hi-res audio streaming is here to stay – it’s not a niche extra; it’s baseline.

Expert Commentary and Reactions

The introduction of Spotify’s lossless streaming has drawn comments from industry observers, executives, and audio experts. Here are a few notable perspectives:

• Spotify Executives: Upon launch, Spotify’s VP of Subscriptions Gustav Gyllenhammar highlighted the quality and transparency of the new feature. “We’ve taken time to build this feature in a way that prioritizes quality, ease of use, and clarity at every step, so you always know what’s happening under the hood,” he said stereophile.com. This emphasizes Spotify’s goal of making HiFi simple for users (no confusion about when it’s on) while delivering the promised quality. Co-president Gustav Söderström had addressed the long delay earlier, noting in 2022 that “offering lossless audio was still the plan” and that “the industry changed and we had to adapt” whathifi.com – a candid reference to Apple/Amazon’s moves forcing Spotify to rethink its HiFi strategy. CEO Daniel Ek on a 2024 earnings call gave a hint of the eventual approach: “The plan here is to offer a much better version of Spotify… probably around a $17–$18 price point… a deluxe version… with a lot higher quality across the board.” techcrunch.com. Interestingly, that exact plan (a higher-priced tier) didn’t materialize for lossless – Spotify pivoted to including it in the base price – but it shows leadership was acutely aware of the need to improve quality for “superfans” willing to pay. Now that it’s included, Ek has positioned it not as a revenue driver but as part of making Spotify “the best audio experience for music lovers.”
• Industry Analysts: Analysts largely view Spotify’s lossless launch as a necessary catch-up rather than a game-changer. Daniel Konstantinovic of eMarketer noted that many competitors had lossless, and speculated that’s “likely why Spotify… chose not to charge more for the feature.” emarketer.com. He also pointed out that while it’s important for parity, it’s “uncertain” if it will drive many new sign-ups in itself emarketer.com. His take was that it will make Spotify an “even stickier service with low churn”, helping keep users in the fold emarketer.com. This reflects a common analyst sentiment: HiFi is a defensive move to protect Spotify’s massive user base, ensuring the platform remains as attractive as any alternative. Music Business Worldwide, focusing on the biz strategy, remarked on how Spotify rolled this out amid developing a possible “Music Pro” tier, and queried whether lossless and other perks might later migrate into a pricier plan as Spotify experiments with monetization musicbusinessworldwide.com musicbusinessworldwide.com. They also cited the example of Tencent’s SVIP success to show there is monetization potential in quality musicbusinessworldwide.com – something Spotify might revisit in the future if they add more “superfan” perks.
• Audio Engineers / Hi-Fi Experts: In the audiophile community, the reaction is a mix of “finally!” and measured enthusiasm. Many audio-focused reviewers acknowledge that Spotify’s chosen 24-bit/44.1kHz level is technically not “hi-res” beyond CD, but also that it’s more than sufficient for audible improvement. For example, What Hi-Fi? (a leading hi-fi publication) wrote that while Spotify Lossless “trails behind its hi-res rivals” on paper, that “won’t matter for most people” since 24/44.1 is plenty to deliver great sound whathifi.com. They even questioned the real importance of >44.1kHz content: “How much extra legwork is really necessary to include 24/96 and 192? Perhaps something is eluding me here,” one writer mused, suggesting that if Spotify can do 24/44.1, maybe it could have done higher, but also implying it might not be a big practical difference whathifi.com whathifi.com. Stereophile magazine’s coverage was straightforward and positive, simply noting Spotify is “delivering streams up to 24-bit/44.1 kHz FLAC… [a] response to competitors Apple Music and Amazon Music HD”, and recounting the basic features stereophile.com. Many audiophiles who use Spotify for its UI but complained about sound are happy they can now have both convenience and quality on one platform. Some are still a bit disappointed it’s limited to 44.1kHz – as one Reddit audiophile joked, “After all this time, Spotify HiFi isn’t even hi-res, just CD-quality… but honestly that’s fine for me.”
• Music Industry Voices: Some artists and producers have weighed in on lossless streaming in general – there’s often a split where producers and engineers are excited for any platform that delivers their work in full quality, while some skeptics note that mainstream listeners don’t notice. Grammy-winning mastering engineer Andrew Scheps once said in an interview that for the average person listening in a car or on earbuds, high bitrate lossy vs lossless is virtually indistinguishable, but he welcomed lossless for the sake of purity and archival. We don’t have a direct quote for Spotify’s launch, but it aligns with engineers’ preference that listeners get as close to the studio sound as possible. From the business side, an unnamed music industry executive was quoted by 9to5Mac around Spotify’s delays, saying Spotify was “one fail away” due to focusing on things like podcasts while Apple and Amazon could bleed money on lossless and undercut them 9to5mac.com. That exec predicted that ultimately Spotify would lose out to Apple/Amazon not due to an inferior service, but because those giants can afford to offer more (like lossless) for less 9to5mac.com. Now, Spotify’s move perhaps proves that pressure – they had to match the freebies the deep-pocketed competitors gave.
• Consumer Reaction: While not “expert” commentary, it’s worth noting the general consumer tech press reaction: It was covered as Spotify “finally” doing this after years of broken promises, often with a tone of mild sarcasm about the long wait (e.g., The Verge’s headline: “Spotify adds lossless streaming after 8 years of teasing” theverge.com). Many articles pointed out that Apple, Amazon, Tidal beat Spotify to it long ago, framing Spotify as playing catch-up. However, the fact that it’s not an extra charge was usually highlighted as a pleasant surprise (since earlier rumors strongly suggested it would cost more). So the public narrative is: “Spotify HiFi is here, it’s free with Premium, but it’s ‘only’ 44.1 kHz.” Audiophiles in forums have generally responded: “44.1 or 192 – the main thing is it’s lossless; this is great for the ecosystem.” Some super-users say they might still use Qobuz for niche hi-res needs, but for daily listening Spotify is now viable. Others say they’ll stick with Apple for the integration or Amazon for the lower cost (for Prime members). But overall, Spotify removed a major objection that certain potential customers had.

To wrap up the expert sentiment: Spotify’s HiFi launch was seen as overdue but very welcome. It aligns Spotify with industry best practices, and experts agree it’s a wise move to keep subscribers happy rather than a revolutionary step. The general advice from audio experts to consumers is: enjoy the new quality, but temper expectations – you may or may not hear a drastic difference, depending on your gear and ears. As SoundGuys aptly put it, “bitrate, bit depth, and sample rate may sound impressive, but human hearing has natural limits. CD quality is already beyond what most people can perceive… the mastering of a track often plays a more important role.” soundguys.com In other words, Spotify’s lossless will give enthusiasts peace of mind that they’re not missing out on quality, even if it’s not magically making everyone’s music sound different.

From a strategic and industry perspective, experts view it as Spotify keeping up with the Joneses – necessary for a market leader that doesn’t want to yield any ground to competitors on features. It’s the final checkmark in Spotify’s feature list that was missing. Now, with that resolved, the streaming service battlefield will likely shift to other arenas, but at least the audiophile front is, for now, at a truce: everyone can get their music in high quality on the platform of their choice.

Sources:

• Spotify Newsroom – “Lossless Listening Arrives on Spotify Premium…”, Sept. 10, 2025 newsroom.spotify.com newsroom.spotify.com
• The Verge – “Spotify adds lossless streaming after 8 years of teasing”, Sept. 10, 2025 theverge.com theverge.com
• Stereophile – “Spotify Premium Finally Gets Lossless Audio”, Sept. 11, 2025 stereophile.com stereophile.com
• What Hi-Fi – “Spotify Lossless: release date, price and all the official details…”, updated Sept. 2025 whathifi.com whathifi.com
• What Hi-Fi – “Spotify Lossless still trails behind hi-res rivals – but that won’t matter for most people”, Sept. 12, 2025 whathifi.com whathifi.com
• SoundGuys – “Spotify rolls out long-awaited lossless audio…”, Sept. 10, 2025 soundguys.com soundguys.com
• Music Business Worldwide – “Spotify is finally launching lossless – not part of a ‘super premium’ tier”, Sept. 10, 2025 musicbusinessworldwide.com musicbusinessworldwide.com
• eMarketer/InsiderIntelligence – “Spotify’s too-late lossless audio won’t move the needle”, Sept. 11, 2025 emarketer.com emarketer.com
• Twittering Machines – “Apple Music will bring Lossless Audio to entire catalog in June 2021”, May 17, 2021 twitteringmachines.com twitteringmachines.com
• Soyacincau – “Spotify finally launches Lossless streaming. But besides me, who else cares?”, Sept. 12, 2025 soyacincau.com soyacincau.com
• TechCrunch – “Spotify CEO says company is in ‘early days’ of hi-fi audio plans”, July 23, 2024 techcrunch.com techcrunch.com
• Spotify Press (via Spotify Community) – “Spotify Premium: Now Streaming in Lossless Quality”, 2025 soyacincau.com
• Apple press via TwitteringMachines – “Apple Music… entire catalog in Lossless Audio… up to 24-bit/192kHz, no additional cost.”, May 2021 twitteringmachines.com
• Music Business Worldwide – on Apple and Amazon lossless offerings musicbusinessworldwide.com
• Spotify Press Release (Gustav Gyllenhammar quote) stereophile.com.