The numbers don’t line up with what lossless marketing has been promising for years.
Lossless audio has been marketed for years as the next big reason to switch streaming services. Yet the fastest growth is coming from the only major platform that still does not offer it.
According to Luminate, YouTube Music’s share of U.S. paid streaming users rose from 20% in early 2022 to 31% by Q3 2025, while Apple Music declined over the same period.
That gap raises a simple question. If sound quality is not driving growth, what is?
Why Lossless Isn’t Driving Subscriptions
YouTube Music added about 25 million subscribers in one year, reaching 125 million paid users by March 2025. It was also the fastest-growing music service in Q2 2024, while Apple Music and Amazon Music saw slight usage declines. That’s hard to square with the idea that “better audio” is what wins subscriptions.
A more likely explanation of this is that most listeners hit a “good enough” ceiling long before lossless matters.
Once playback is happening on everyday earbuds, laptop speakers, or in the car, people generally can’t reliably tell formats apart. So, the upgrade is easy to ignore in real-world listening.
The key point, however, is that buying gear and choosing a streaming subscription aren’t the same decision. Even someone who cares about sound quality may not pay extra attention to lossless if (1) the difference is subtle on their daily setup, and (2) the service that fits their routine is simply easier to live with.
That “fit” is where YouTube Music benefits. And because Gen Z often plays music in the background while doing other things, convenience wins even more often.

The Bundling Advantage
If lossless isn’t a strong enough hook on its own, then value per subscription starts to matter more than incremental audio upgrades. This is where YouTube Music has a structural edge.
For $13.99 a month, YouTube Premium includes ad-free YouTube, YouTube Music Premium, offline downloads, and background playback. Spotify charges $12.99 for music alone.
That means the price gap isn’t just “two more dollars for music.” It’s paying a little more to remove ads from the most-used video platform in the world, and getting a full music service attached.
Aside from that, bundling also makes subscribers “stickier”. For instance, a research from Magid found that bundled users are 16% less likely to quit and 15% more likely to stay past six months.
This is supported by another study that shows how the average consumer spends $83 a month on TV and music services, which is almost at their comfort limit. And when money feels tight, one bundle that covers both video and music feels easier to justify than paying for separate subscriptions.
South Korea shows how powerful this can be. YouTube is already one of the country’s most-used video platforms, so many people subscribe to YouTube Premium simply to remove ads. As a result, YouTube Music ends up in their hands without requiring a separate choice.
In fact, a 2024 survey by the Korea Creative Content Agency found that most Korean users didn’t actively seek out YouTube Music as a standalone service. It was adopted passively, through an existing subscription.
Other Reasons People Choose YouTube Music

While bundling helps YouTube Music land on people’s phones, what helps it stay there is that it’s plugged into the same place many listeners already discover music, which is YouTube itself.
Unlike most music-only apps, YouTube Music lets users switch between audio and the song’s music video without restarting the track. That sounds minor, but for people who bounce between “watching” and “listening,” it removes one more little annoyance.
It also benefits from a catalog that reaches beyond studio releases. Alongside official tracks, YouTube’s ecosystem surfaces live performances, covers, remixes, DJ sets, and fan uploads. These are stuff that often drives niche fandoms and repeat listening.
In other words, the “best” service might be the one that makes discovery effortless for how you actually listen, even if it’s not the one with the highest audio specs.
It may just be most of YTM users are also mostly using Bluetooth. If this is the case, why use Loseless, they would not benefit from it in any way.
I want DJ gear integration without the need for a DRM chip. Google has to have streaming capacity close to that of Amazon. Apple and Amazon are requiring these chips, Tidal does not have very good streaming capacity and just raised their prices, and SoundCloud has a bunch of garbage that’s ripped from Sirius satellite radio and stuff that’s like EP samplers of a bunch of 30-second snippets all as one track. And was it Apple or Amazon that only allows you to have two track few minutes? LOL.