3 ms·
`youtube-dl` downloads from many more sites than just YouTube. As for the quality, people listening to streaming music probably tend to not pay much attention t
by aasasd 7y ago
`youtube-dl` downloads from many more sites than just YouTube. As for the quality, people listening to streaming music probably tend to not pay much attention to that. As indicated by the popularity of music uploads on YouTube.
- asveikau 7y agoWell, higher quality audio is feasible to stream from a technical perspective. It's just that YouTube does not prioritize that. They likely care more about video experience. So I would bet that any major audio-oriented streaming service beats YouTube on quality. I tend to think as YouTube as more useful for discovery. At that, it is very good. If I decide I like something I will listen to it elsewhere with better quality.
- aasasd 7y agoYoutube in HD modes often has AAC at 192 kbps. Bandcamp, which I'd guess is a music-oriented service, for non-bought tracks seems to give me mp3 at 128 kbps. So yeah, sounds like Youtube is quite alright for discovery until you're ready to part with the money (though Bandcamp is much lighter on the cpu overall). However, this whole discussion falls firmly under ‘suum cuique’, and quite pointless in the light of `youtube-dl` being not just for Youtube, as already mentioned.