Unfortunately, this deal is no longer valid
Amazon Music HD - 90 Day Free Trial (new subscribers only) - Amazon Music Unlimited Needed
295° Expired

Amazon Music HD - 90 Day Free Trial (new subscribers only) - Amazon Music Unlimited Needed

FREE£0.01Amazon Deals
38
Posted 17th Sep 2019

This deal is expired. Here are some options that might interest you:

Update: Offer extended until 11th November.

Brand new HD and Ultra HD music streaming service from Amazon.

The promotional offer is valid until November 11, 2019 at 11:59pm, and redeemable towards an Amazon Music HD Individual Plan or the Amazon Music HD Family Plan. The offer is only available to new subscribers to Amazon Music Unlimited. Customers who are currently in a free trial of Amazon Music Unlimited, are a current paying customer of Amazon Music Unlimited, or were previously a free trial or paying customer of Amazon Music Unlimited are not eligible for this offer. After the 90-day period, your subscription will auto-renew and you will pay the full monthly price of £14.99 (£12.99/month for Prime members) Amazon Music HD Individual Plan or £19.99 for the Amazon Music HD Family Plan with the option to cancel anytime. This offer cannot be combined with any other offer. Only customers over 18 years can participate. The offer is valid for digital content and services offered on amazon.co.uk (amazon.co.uk/) by Amazon Media EU S.à r.l. The offer is limited to one per customer and account. Amazon reserves the right to modify or cancel the offer at any time. The offer is non-transferable and may not be resold. If you violate any of these terms, the offer will be invalid.
Community Updates
If you click through or buy, retailers may pay hotukdeals some money, but this never affects which deals get posted. Find more info in our FAQs and About Us page.

Groups

Top comments
Ah I see. So not a free trial as per the title. No worries.
38 Comments
Heat 🔥
Comes up as £7.99 for 3 months for me then £12.99 for individual membership. I've previously had both a free trial and paid membership and I'm a current Amazon prime customer.
When I click on the link on the announcement page, I am only offered 30 days free?
zobby17/09/2019 23:00

Comes up as £7.99 for 3 months for me then £12.99 for individual m …Comes up as £7.99 for 3 months for me then £12.99 for individual membership. I've previously had both a free trial and paid membership and I'm a current Amazon prime customer.


The HD is a subscription on top of a subscription. You need an active Music sub to use it.

£7.99 for Amazon Music, £5 for the HD add on. £12.99 total.
Ah I see. So not a free trial as per the title. No worries.
To clarify, it's a free 90 days for new music unlimited customers only. After the free trial it would then be 14.99 per month (or 12.99 with prime).

It's also worth noting that selected accounts with an existing music unlimited subscription may also be offered a free 90 day upgrade to HD.
Edited by: "AGDeals" 18th Sep 2019
It's not just new subscribers. If you pay monthly for unlimited or the family plan, you can also do the "free" hd trial for 90 days.
For clarity, the HD music subscription is an Extra £5 on top of the standards of subscription normally. So your "free" 90 day trial would save you £15.
Their explanation of the service on offer is pretty vague.

HD audio and UHD audio...?

Presumably it’s the same as Amazon Music but with higher bitrates?

I am guessing you would need high quality kit to really hear/notice the different?
The page suggests HD is twice the bitrate of"standard" services, and UHD upto 10x.

Still sound a bit selling you something you don't need. Really can't imagine it makes any real difference in my echo dot.

But still, heat for 3 months free Amazon music.
Jaspabt118/09/2019 01:01

It's not just new subscribers. If you pay monthly for unlimited or the …It's not just new subscribers. If you pay monthly for unlimited or the family plan, you can also do the "free" hd trial for 90 days.For clarity, the HD music subscription is an Extra £5 on top of the standards of subscription normally. So your "free" 90 day trial would save you £15.


Lol... For clarity!!.. HD audio... Nice one!..
MrAlbert18/09/2019 06:23

The page suggests HD is twice the bitrate of"standard" services, and UHD …The page suggests HD is twice the bitrate of"standard" services, and UHD upto 10x.Still sound a bit selling you something you don't need. Really can't imagine it makes any real difference in my echo dot.But still, heat for 3 months free Amazon music.


To be fair, the regular Amazon music streaming audio sounds miles better than Spotify/Deezer , YouTube is better but Amazon the the best.
Not tried tidal, I know they do lossless but don't have an account.
If you're in the car/bus/gym, I doubt you would notice the difference, if you've got the setup and a nice quiet room, then certainly .. sure...
Decent trial deal, however to enjoy the benefits of this you need lightning-fast connection ideally otherwise the music will still be compressed, for example a traditional 12 Track HD Audio Album to download is at around 500Mb, a FLAC Audio Album around 300Mb, HD Audio been the HIGHEST of all, so average size for an album is between 500mb - 1GB. Should you have a fast internet connection then you will be fine, but I know Amazon Music Services use a AUTOMATIC compression algorithm so this means it will compress and un-compress music streams as it feels necessary. I think £12.99 is way ott, but some people will pay it.
Edited by: "lettherebedeals" 18th Sep 2019
Avatar
deleted107814
Nujol18/09/2019 06:09

Their explanation of the service on offer is pretty vague. HD audio and …Their explanation of the service on offer is pretty vague. HD audio and UHD audio...?Presumably it’s the same as Amazon Music but with higher bitrates?I am guessing you would need high quality kit to really hear/notice the different?


Most are just red book audio quality FLAC.
Edited by: "deleted107814" 18th Sep 2019
Avatar
deleted1233369
You've got to be a proper audiophile to need this. For an average person with an average setup the regular subscription service is more than good enough to stick a bit of Oasis on for a singalong in the car. My hearing is shot from going to gigs when I was younger anyway so definitely wasted on me.
Edited by: "deleted1233369" 18th Sep 2019
deleted123336918/09/2019 13:24

You've got to be a proper audiophile to need this. For an average person …You've got to be a proper audiophile to need this. For an average person with an average setup the regular subscription service is more than good enough to stick a bit of Oasis on for a singalong in the car. My hearing is shot from going to gigs when I was younger anyway so definitely wasted on me.


My hearings pretty decent, and regular Amazon sounds certainly good enough for me to stop moaning.. in fact can't find anything quality wise to moan about.. it really is good enough!.
I find Spotify premium highest quality to still be crap.
deleted123336918/09/2019 13:24

You've got to be a proper audiophile to need this. For an average person …You've got to be a proper audiophile to need this. For an average person with an average setup the regular subscription service is more than good enough to stick a bit of Oasis on for a singalong in the car. My hearing is shot from going to gigs when I was younger anyway so definitely wasted on me.


Indeed, if you don't have the relevant audio equipment you literally won't notice any difference. I mean, you can download samples to test in advance whether you can hear anything. A good page here although probably best not to read through the text and just listen to the music first, before reading about what you're meant to be able to hear and see if you've noticed anything.
Avatar
deleted1233369
To get the most out of this service it might be worth investing in a set of these, which I believe are Henry Rollins speaker of choice. Only a touch over $200,000.

paragonsns.com/pro…lf/
polarbaba18/09/2019 06:35

Lol... For clarity!!.. HD audio... Nice one!..


Wasn’t it once called “High Fidelity”
I may wait to see if this promotion is still available for Black Friday.

Would like to listen to Last Christmas in HD!
veralum18/09/2019 15:23

Wasn’t it once called “High Fidelity”


Yes, but you know marketing etc...
polarbaba18/09/2019 15:55

Yes, but you know marketing etc...


I think I will wait for 4K music then
For 99.9999999% of people this is overkill
zinglebarb18/09/2019 16:09

For 99.9999999% of people this is overkill


Agreed, amazons compression really hits the sweet spot on their regular service.
hollger18/09/2019 14:32

Indeed, if you don't have the relevant audio equipment you literally won't …Indeed, if you don't have the relevant audio equipment you literally won't notice any difference. I mean, you can download samples to test in advance whether you can hear anything. A good page here although probably best not to read through the text and just listen to the music first, before reading about what you're meant to be able to hear and see if you've noticed anything.



Sorry but I disagree with that.
I have 2 echoes paired with an Echo sub and I was pleased with it, but I have changed to this HD stuff and the difference is very noticeable as in the clarity Heat added
Bazzer5518/09/2019 20:47

Sorry but I disagree with that.I have 2 echoes paired with an Echo sub and …Sorry but I disagree with that.I have 2 echoes paired with an Echo sub and I was pleased with it, but I have changed to this HD stuff and the difference is very noticeable as in the clarity Heat added


Maybe they nerfed the codec in preparation of the HD service.. maybe the regular service was ready HD prior??? Wouldn't be the first time a company did this.
polarbaba18/09/2019 17:10

Agreed, amazons compression really hits the sweet spot on their regular …Agreed, amazons compression really hits the sweet spot on their regular service.



esp if you change the streaming setting quality to the highest of the three
I noticed the difference even listening in the car. 70 song album 2.5GB to download, but only few songs are in UHD the rest in HD
38496702-XzQly.jpg38496702-e6k1z.jpg
Morenenth18/09/2019 21:16

esp if you change the streaming setting quality to the highest of the three


I always do that, sounds good.
Bazzer5518/09/2019 20:47

Sorry but I disagree with that.I have 2 echoes paired with an Echo sub and …Sorry but I disagree with that.I have 2 echoes paired with an Echo sub and I was pleased with it, but I have changed to this HD stuff and the difference is very noticeable as in the clarity Heat added


I was going to just say that if that was true, then either Amazon's 'up-to 320kbps' standard option is either very poorly encoded or it just isn't delivering the bitrates it says it is. For you to say the difference is very noticeable, I would be expecting the streaming to be constantly at the lower end of the spectrum because in reality, a properly encoded variable bitrate mp3 is very hard to distinguish from the CD original.

But instead I decided to try some comparisons of my own. Firstly, I don't have the HD service because I'm currently in an introductory period for the standard service itself, so I don't think I can apply this without screwing that up. It won't matter because I only want to compare the standard service vs my own music for this. Also, I'm absolutely no audiophile and make no claims to be!

I just tried streaming a track from an album I physically own and compared it to both a raw PCM WAV file and a VBR encoded mp3 file. I'm listening through Audio Technica ATH-M50 headphones my laptop via a USB B&O DAC and to be honest, I could barely tell the difference between the Amazon stream and the raw PCM WAV file. Maybe it sounded a little louder? It definitely was not 'very noticeable', honestly I struggled to tell a difference. I saw on a Sony article hyping Hi-Res Audio (and their over-priced headphones!) that Adele's "21" album was one you can use to tell the difference. The wife owns that, so I got it and ripped the WAVs to my disk and also compressed them to VBR mp3 using the LAME encoder with the -V0 switch. Streaming "Someone Like You", I could notice a slight difference - the Amazon stream was a bit flatter. However, the WAV and my MP3 were almost identical to my ears, so my conclusion I guess is that Amazon's MP3s are not using the best-in-class encoding or are not sending me the highest quality file at all times, despite me selecting that option and having plenty of bandwidth to use it.

So what's been the point of this exercise!? Well based on my brief testing (and if it can be applied to all their content), if Amazon encoded their SD music using the best options out there then, there really wouldn't be a need for this "HD" service. However, then they wouldn't be making a fiver a month off people willing to pay it, would they?

Obviously, the Ultra HD stuff will make no difference as unless you have the equipment, it won't go above the HD rates.
hollger19/09/2019 16:20

I was going to just say that if that was true, then either Amazon's 'up-to …I was going to just say that if that was true, then either Amazon's 'up-to 320kbps' standard option is either very poorly encoded or it just isn't delivering the bitrates it says it is. For you to say the difference is very noticeable, I would be expecting the streaming to be constantly at the lower end of the spectrum because in reality, a properly encoded variable bitrate mp3 is very hard to distinguish from the CD original.But instead I decided to try some comparisons of my own. Firstly, I don't have the HD service because I'm currently in an introductory period for the standard service itself, so I don't think I can apply this without screwing that up. It won't matter because I only want to compare the standard service vs my own music for this. Also, I'm absolutely no audiophile and make no claims to be!I just tried streaming a track from an album I physically own and compared it to both a raw PCM WAV file and a VBR encoded mp3 file. I'm listening through Audio Technica ATH-M50 headphones my laptop via a USB B&O DAC and to be honest, I could barely tell the difference between the Amazon stream and the raw PCM WAV file. Maybe it sounded a little louder? It definitely was not 'very noticeable', honestly I struggled to tell a difference. I saw on a Sony article hyping Hi-Res Audio (and their over-priced headphones!) that Adele's "21" album was one you can use to tell the difference. The wife owns that, so I got it and ripped the WAVs to my disk and also compressed them to VBR mp3 using the LAME encoder with the -V0 switch. Streaming "Someone Like You", I could notice a slight difference - the Amazon stream was a bit flatter. However, the WAV and my MP3 were almost identical to my ears, so my conclusion I guess is that Amazon's MP3s are not using the best-in-class encoding or are not sending me the highest quality file at all times, despite me selecting that option and having plenty of bandwidth to use it.So what's been the point of this exercise!? Well based on my brief testing (and if it can be applied to all their content), if Amazon encoded their SD music using the best options out there then, there really wouldn't be a need for this "HD" service. However, then they wouldn't be making a fiver a month off people willing to pay it, would they? Obviously, the Ultra HD stuff will make no difference as unless you have the equipment, it won't go above the HD rates.


I suspect they nerfed Thier service to be able to sell this as a new and improved offering!.
hollger19/09/2019 16:20

I was going to just say that if that was true, then either Amazon's 'up-to …I was going to just say that if that was true, then either Amazon's 'up-to 320kbps' standard option is either very poorly encoded or it just isn't delivering the bitrates it says it is. For you to say the difference is very noticeable, I would be expecting the streaming to be constantly at the lower end of the spectrum because in reality, a properly encoded variable bitrate mp3 is very hard to distinguish from the CD original.But instead I decided to try some comparisons of my own. Firstly, I don't have the HD service because I'm currently in an introductory period for the standard service itself, so I don't think I can apply this without screwing that up. It won't matter because I only want to compare the standard service vs my own music for this. Also, I'm absolutely no audiophile and make no claims to be!I just tried streaming a track from an album I physically own and compared it to both a raw PCM WAV file and a VBR encoded mp3 file. I'm listening through Audio Technica ATH-M50 headphones my laptop via a USB B&O DAC and to be honest, I could barely tell the difference between the Amazon stream and the raw PCM WAV file. Maybe it sounded a little louder? It definitely was not 'very noticeable', honestly I struggled to tell a difference. I saw on a Sony article hyping Hi-Res Audio (and their over-priced headphones!) that Adele's "21" album was one you can use to tell the difference. The wife owns that, so I got it and ripped the WAVs to my disk and also compressed them to VBR mp3 using the LAME encoder with the -V0 switch. Streaming "Someone Like You", I could notice a slight difference - the Amazon stream was a bit flatter. However, the WAV and my MP3 were almost identical to my ears, so my conclusion I guess is that Amazon's MP3s are not using the best-in-class encoding or are not sending me the highest quality file at all times, despite me selecting that option and having plenty of bandwidth to use it.So what's been the point of this exercise!? Well based on my brief testing (and if it can be applied to all their content), if Amazon encoded their SD music using the best options out there then, there really wouldn't be a need for this "HD" service. However, then they wouldn't be making a fiver a month off people willing to pay it, would they? Obviously, the Ultra HD stuff will make no difference as unless you have the equipment, it won't go above the HD rates.



I was also in your boat I think "I'm currently in an introductory period for the standard service itself"
tried this and it upgraded mine to hd, but the prexisting trial date stayed the same
veralum18/09/2019 16:06

I think I will wait for 4K music then


I'm waiting for 8k. Sound has much more pixels so sounds more detailed.
MT198020/09/2019 09:55

I'm waiting for 8k. Sound has much more pixels so sounds more detailed.


Too primitive for me.. I'm waiting for Ray tracing sound, not just shadows but illumination and shadows!.
i need new ears
Very happy with Amazon's HD music offerings so far. Getting up to 24/192 Flac, on my Marantz NA6006 on HEOS. Sounds great. I know that some say that they cannot tell the difference between lossy and lossless but when listening on higher fidelity equipment, why compromise. I hope Spotify introduce lossless audio too. When my free trial is up, I will definitely be continuing my subscription.
Edited by: "funkymonkeyboy" 16th Oct 2019
polarbaba18/09/2019 06:38

To be fair, the regular Amazon music streaming audio sounds miles better …To be fair, the regular Amazon music streaming audio sounds miles better than Spotify/Deezer , YouTube is better but Amazon the the best.Not tried tidal, I know they do lossless but don't have an account.If you're in the car/bus/gym, I doubt you would notice the difference, if you've got the setup and a nice quiet room, then certainly .. sure...


Interesting you say this. I've always instinctively felt that Amazon Music sounded better on decent equipment (in my case an AV receiver with headphones). Wasn't sure there was any real basis for it as looked into bitrates etc.
Never saw this deal but randomly came across this on browsing my Amazon account yesterday. Signed up for the free trial straight away (even though I've previously been a Amazon Music unlimited user) and have to say the sound quality is fantastic! No, I haven't got a HiFi set up either, playing through phone to a B&O Beoplay A1 BT speaker. Remarkable difference between this (certainly the UHD tracks} and my current (Ukranian ) Google Play Music sub. Not sure I'll be able to give this up in 90 days time (and ppl wonder why Bezos is so filtyhy rich!)

If I had shares in Tidal I know what i'd be trying to do with them right now...
Edited by: "bellboys" 14th Oct 2019
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text