Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BlueSwordM t1_iy91evs wrote

Reply to comment by uzimyspecial in I do use Spotify more nowadays by UnnecessaryMovements

It's not sarcasm.

For 90-95% of tracks, 128kbps Opus 1.3.1 us psychoacoustically transparent.

15

uzimyspecial t1_iy91r6b wrote

oh ok. sorry, thought it was sarcasm lol. But yeah, it's def a good bitrate for most tracks. Sometimes i got for 160 if i'm using lossy codecs just in case, but 128kbps OPUS is really good.

6

klogg4 t1_iy99npt wrote

I use 256 kbps with Opus for robustness against all possible artifacts (heard some at 192kbps and even 224kbps). But if you ask me, 128kbps is the best bitrate for Opus in terms of efficiency. ALMOST transparent, yet files are super small.

5

uzimyspecial t1_iy9tkdi wrote

kinda makes me wish podcasts and audiobooks were encoded with OPUS instead of MP3. Usually they're mp3 and somewhere between 64 and 128kbps. Might sound weird but the artifacting bothers me even for vocal content. You could probably get both better quality and small file sizes if they used opus at say 64kbps. but i guess it doesn't make sense for compatibility reasons.

2

EducationalCreme9044 t1_iyf476h wrote

I mean in this day and age where you can buy a 1TB SSD for spare change, do small sizes matter that much?

1

WhiskeyGnomes t1_iya47py wrote

I mean just saying 90% of tracks, it means nothing. To one's personal ears it means nothing. What you are saying is that YOU and a designated group of people cannot tell the difference. That's all it means. You guys are convincing yourselves that 128 Opus is transparent, when it isn't. You shouldn't use that word. Because it means nothing without the user and gear in question.

1

shavitush t1_iycc27w wrote

i agree. and youtube music (with premium) on compatible devices does 256kbps

1