3 ms·
Billions of dollars at their disposal. A near monopsony or just massive buyer of infrastructure, and some of the smartest people in the space. Yet the best they
by xyst 2y ago
Billions of dollars at their disposal. A near monopsony or just massive buyer of infrastructure, and some of the smartest people in the space. Yet the best they could do in 2022 is lossy codec at 120-190 bit rate?
I got better audio quality ripping songs from limewire or Napster in the 2000s.
Why do we settle with this substandard quality? Oh wait, YT barely has any competition and subsidized by G. No need for competition. Just shove ads down users throats and sell of their usage data.
- edflsafoiewq 2y agoLossy codecs at 120-190k in 2022 are probably transparent.
- out_of_protocol 2y agoOpus _IS_ transparent at 128 kbps, big IF - encoded properly. YouTube does some weird shit instead of just reencoding
- udev4096 2y agoMost people don't have a standard of listening to higher audio quality and youtube has taken advantage of it. Those who do, naturally self host. Plus, if they started serving FLAC, it would be bandwidth intensive
- ZoomZoomZoom 2y ago> I got better audio quality ripping songs from limewire or Napster in the 2000s. Nah, you didn't, at least not reliably. Half of that were recodes and upcodes that used Blade, FhG or Xing. Only with torrent technology and community-driven trackers we got reliable distribution that surpassed the official non-physical channels.