Who has tried "TIDAL" vs other streaming applications?

Ghosthouse - I don’t think it "narrows the gap" but distorts the sound to where you are unable to discern the difference. There is a HUGE difference between 320kps and 14,400 kps. (you would walk out of a concert at 320 - not at 44.1). Its like 32 bit color and 256 colors. As for "sampling" I do upsample my 44.1 to 96k as my dac really likes that but I would not think I was getting a decent sound by upsampling a 320kps signal. There is just not enough info (320kps) there. I have sattelite radio which is an MP3 signal (your spotify is MP3) and I upsample it and it sounds like crap compared to a real 44.1 signal.

Loomisjohnson - Tidal is not "buggy". The buffering issues are due to lag with your internet connection. Tidal is a robust signal which needs the appropriate infrastructure.

I would have to agree with cerrot on all counts above 320kbps just does not cut it. The Lightning DS app I use displays the sample rate of what’s playing though it varies it’s usually in the 1000kbps range with Tidal as well as my own recordings that are flac. I have some recordings in my collection that are mp3, mostly live recordings people have sent me, and the first time I put one on through my Aries I was like hmmm that doesn’t sound great and I glance over and sure enough 320kbps. Just not good enough.

Ghosthouse you might want to retry your experiment and leave the V-link out and see what the results are just for fun. And regarding Tidal being buggy I also agree its about your internet connection. One thing that really helped me was moving it to the 5ghz band, the 2.4ghz band is just too crowded in my urban environment.

Just a quick correction, Tidal is 1411kbps, not 14,400.

I agree with both cerrot and jond, once dialed in, Tidal is vastly superior to any MP3 service.

Hi Folks - Thanks for the consideration given my remarks.  A couple of additional points:
- The V-Link was not part of the headphone listening that compared Spotify Premium vs Tidal HiFi.
- I doubt distortion played a role.  Both formats sounded EXCELLENT with only slight advantage to Tidal HiFi as noted above.  I'll add that I actually liked the bass from Spotify Premium a little better.  
- For me any difference between the two was not significant and not worth the 2x price differential for Tidal.  If you judge the differences otherwise,  no problem.  I am certainly not offended...or convinced to revive my Tidal subscription  ;-)
- I did not report Tidal to be buggy.
- Not all MP3 files are created equal...MP3 is only a "container"; it doesn't speak to "contents".
- Based on listening tests, mp3s at 256 kbps were found indistinguishable from CD (G Mitchell citing testing by Fraunhofer and Thomson; see link below).  I know, "HERESY"!
- Do I think there are individuals with exceptional hearing acuity or who have developed listening skills that make them outliers on the bell curve?  Yes.  Doubt I'm one of them, though....and yet, strangely content.
- Bit rate is not the absolute and certainly not the sole determinant of audio quality from a digital file.
- "A low-res file in a hi-res bucket is still..... low res." 
- Spotify Premium is not an MP3 service. It uses compression software called Ogg Vorbis.
- It is claimed an Ogg Vorbis file will "sound" better than an MP3 file of the same bit rate.
- Just posted elsewhere on Audiogon by Pokey77:
 "High Resolution Audio Demystified"
This a great, though lengthy, presentation by Dr. Mark Waldrep.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/high-resolution-audio-demystified-mark-waldrep

http://grahammitchell.com/writings/vorbis_intro.html 
(see especially the section "Just Say No To Bit rates")

Enjoy the music whatever medium you choose.