128kbps

How much does the difference in quality between 128kbps and 320kbps mp3 audio make you ache?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAME
torrentz.to/Initial-D-Music-Lossless-Collection-download-torrent-045ECA6AEC6AB8ED7E97278B293D72BB2479B313.php
finaldistance.net/mp3/repertoire/lossless/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

that shitty 128 was the gold standard during the limewire days, downloading the vice city songs in 5 minutes

>inb4 checking out the chinese spotify meme
>works great, has nice api
>only low quality songs
>still enjoyable

I cant listen to 128kbps, if I hear that warbling glittery sound it drives me fucking nuts. Its the only thing I'm really autistic about. One time I got a free sample disc at the mall from some record label promo that had a fuckload of MP3's and most of the songs were 128kbps to fit on the CD....pissed me off

If it's for free, like Spotify (which I think actually does 192Kbps MP3 streaming) it's not too bad.

I'm not sure what YouTube streams its audio at, but its okay for basic background music stuff.

For HQ, I go FLAC.

And the different between 128Kbps and 320Kbps hurts.

>For HQ, I go FLAC.

FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is 'lossy'. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA - it's about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don't want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.

I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange…well don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.

>rotational velocidensity

Never gets old.

>Mp3
It's [current year]. If you need compatibility at least switch to AAC now. Mp3 has been surpassed by nearly every other lossy format for years now.

Spotify uses off vorbis which is pretty much transparent at really low bitrates.

I don't use MP3, actually. Just pointing out the difference in quality is noticeable. Do you know what YouTube uses? Anyway, I prefer OGG, but most torrents are MP3.

If want lossy format go for opus.

About 198kbps.

A chink API for FLAC would be sweet

I literally can't hear the difference. It's just placebo

Please, MP3 has been superseded twice. Stop using that ancient format.

This is what YouTube uses

No 44.1khz support, I'll stick with my aac

...

Youtube uses way better quality than 128 mp3, they use 96 opus

Actually nevermind, they use a lot more now, did a quick youtube-dl, they use 50, 70, 160 opus and a ton of others that are worse anyways

youtube-dl

Don't use mp3, use opus.

While I'm an autist as far as video is concerned, I literally can't notice the difference in audio bitrates
Is there any test in the internets to help me see the light?

it was old soon after it came out

flac for archival and desktop computer
opus or ogg vorbis for mobile. I find 128 kbps to be good enough with these formats.
if you need anything else, you should use better devices

320 is the lowest i'll go at this point.
When you have access to a huge library of lossless music thanks to private trackers and slsk there's really no reason to listen to anything below 320.
Scene standards are 320 now instead of the V0 and V2 they used to be.

I literally play 128kbps youtube rips over my car stereo full blast all the time and no one has ever complained

What kind of shit hard drives are you using user?

I'm getting a cheap audio player that only supports a limited number of formats. And it has limited space so I need to compress my audio files down as small as possible. Which format should I choose?

>tfw mp3 player can't play ogg
now I just use V0 that I converted from flac

Opus or vorbis

Brainless audiophile morons

They never support Opus for some reason.

>dat nostalgia

You want a variable bit rate, which gives you the best of both worlds, files are small but the quality is high where you need it.
There are some good codecs that to that, for example LAME:
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAME

Because it's a meme.

use VBR. it's superior to CBR at any value

>No 44.1khz support
why would you care about resampling if you're using a lossy format in the first place
i think you're missing the point

It makes me ache quite a bit, user.
320kbps MP3 vs FLAC however doesn't ache at all.
I usually convert lossless files to VBR, see

Decent Headphones and music that isnt exploded niggabass

What is a modern codec that's both high quality and efficient space-wise?

>limewire
>opening the mp3 as a folder
>inside is cp

>tfw found a torrent of all the Initial D music (including arcade soundtracks) as flacs

share it, kind user

>slsk
what is this?

It's sorted into albums and everything, even a few playlists set up.
torrentz.to/Initial-D-Music-Lossless-Collection-download-torrent-045ECA6AEC6AB8ED7E97278B293D72BB2479B313.php

It kinda werks, but switching from a 177MB 128kbps mp3 collection to 3GB FLAC sure was a pleasant change, not for my slow ass internet connection on my ownCloud meme though.

Awesome. Bless you, user

Enjoy.

I found one on an open directory here
finaldistance.net/mp3/repertoire/lossless/

For music?
AAC-LC and Opus.
AAC-LC is what you actually want since it's what is actually supported on literally any mobile device produced in the last 10+ years.
Opus does **not** give you better quality over AA-LC in the 0-18kHZ (aka "audible") range and is **not** more efficient for bitrates >=128kbps.
If compatibility is an issue, pls pretty please with sugar on top use MP3 V0 with coarse representation of high frequencies (-Y switch), le meme 320 kbps MP3 is waaay past the point of diminishing returns and it's of the same quality, it's just waaay more bloated.

If space efficiency is a must and you have shit ears, Opus is extremely efficient starting at 64 kbps and people consider the new 96 kbps w/ Opus 1.2.1 as good than 128 kbps MP3. AAC-HE{,v2} is fine too but it's less competitive at shit bitrates like 48 (...)

FLAC is not the most space efficient lossless codec, wavpack with option -hh is 0.5~2% more efficient. Hybrid wavpacks were a cool idea (you don't have separate libraries for consumption and archiving). I don't know why it's not more popular; it's still free as in freedom, it supports bit depths deemed for archiving that FLAC didn't and still doesn't support, doesn't have some horrid FLAC bugs still present in the release version (fixed in git, yet you have to build it from source; mostly out-of-spec RIFF for some wavs on decompression and failed verification passes on import due to mis-handling of some chunks). Wavpack supports any kind of tagging including Xiph's one. Proabably it's because of idiots carrying around entire collections in 24/48 FLAC in their smartphones (wavpack -hh it's more heavy on decompression).

>/mp3/repertoire/lossless
>lossless folder inside mp3 folder
triggered

>How much does the difference in quality between 128kbps and 320kbps mp3 audio make you ache?
It should be illegal to make torrents of 128kbps mp3.

In its defense though: in some instances the 128k distorts the track enough to make it trippy, which is charming. 128k, ABR or CBR. A phenomenon rare enough that I recommend people have their own personal list of such examples. Some may describe the distortion as a warbling

>as good than 128 kbps
*better than 128 kbps

I remember ye olde days when "Suzanne Vega - Tom's Diner.mp3" was the absolute test reference for MP3 quality. Back in the days, we weren't that used to meme perfect digital audio: there were obviously no MP3 players, musiscassettes were a thing and portable CD players still weren't common (and they weren't really that portable). Back in the days, 128 kbps was a giant leap forward in quality.
I remember the joys when a 192 kbps MP3 (deemed "high quality") was shared on Napster and the like. I remember the chat with my peers (mostly "PLS DO NOT DISCONNECT pls" : p2p downloads were _not_ resumable) and yet I had a folder full of unfinished MP3s at downloaded at 99%..
Fucking millenials and their fucking FLAC I swear

But what does the uploader use?

>I go FLAC.
Where do you get them?