I would say no. The main benefit of having lossless audio is for archival and transcoding, neither of which matter in the context of streaming.

That being said if you are using Bluetooth headphones this will avoid possible double transcoding, and if you want the maximum quality no matter what then yeah consider lossless streaming.

Other than that? Not worth it. I have extremely high end electrostatic headphones and I still use YouTube Music. Modern codecs like Opus, AAC, and Vorbis are all perfectly capable of producing compressed audio that you cannot tell apart from the source.

I'm suscribed to youtube premium and I still pay for Tidal.

I like the integration into Plexamp. I use it often.

I don't don't regularly download music, The music I download is mainly specific recordings that I can't find on Tidal, for example Vynil versions. (I like some good Vynil recording since they usualy have a higher dynamic range).

So having Tidal besides my library is nice. The Tidal integration has its quirks though. Sometimes I can't play some albums. Don't know why or how to fix it.

I know this was from months ago, but I find it worth it and the integration is pretty solid. Keep in mind that even the $10 per month tier gives you access to FLAC at 16bit 44.1kHz - the more expensive tier takes you to 24bit 192kHz.

I've been on Tidal since the big Joe Rogan/Spotify thing.

It's got its quirks, but what service doesn't? It does a pretty solid job of music recs and discovery and stuff, once it gets to know you.

Best Buy used to have the subscription at a discount but I don't see it anymore. Maybe that ended? Glad i snuck in beforehand! :(

My library is entirely my music. I'm slowly converting it all to FLAC.

I can't find a cost benefit to Tidal.