Freed At Last From Patents, Does Anyone Still Care About MP3?
-
-
I'm a big fan ogg opus, but I wouldn't convert between lossy formats
-
-
Yeah only the most popular formats are guaranteed support sadly. Support seems to be relegated to formats that are 20+ years old.
-
I am under 30, and I have interacted with music files.
edit: I don't know about where you live, but I am definitely not the exception.
-
192kbps variable mp3 on my 64MB mp3 player...
-
I mean, I'm sure that it is less supported, but in all the years I've been using it I haven't found one.
️ -
-
-
Workarounds in a specific player don't negate the fact that the format has limitations.
-
The man with the action packed expense account.
-
I have boatloads of MP3s and at least they can pretty much be played by all imaginable software and hardware imaginable, and since the patents have expired, there's no reason not to support the format.
MP3s are good enough for its particular use case. Of course, newer formats are better overall and may be better suited for some applications. (Me, I've been an Ogg Vorbis fan for ages now. Haven't ripped a CD in a while but should probably check out this newfangled Opus thing when I do.)
-
That’s a great idea, especially since I’m also trying to purge old stuff
-
It turns out that dynamic range is limited by the audio sampling rate and the human ear can easily detect a far greater range CD audio supports.
Dynamic range isn't limited by the sampling rate. It is limited by the resolution, which is 16 bits for the audio CD. With that resolution you get a dynamic range of 96 dB when not using any dithering and even more than that when using dithering. Even with "only" 96 dB that dynamic range is so vast, that there is no practical use of a higher resolution when it comes to playback. I know that the human ear is supposed to be able to handle 130 dB or even more of dynamic range. The thing is, you can only experience such a dynamic range once, afterwards you are deaf. So not much point in such a dynamic range there.
There are good reasons to use a higher resolution when recording and mixing audio, but for playback and storage of the finished audio 16 bits of resolution is just fine.
-
It is my admittedly limited understanding that we really can't do better at digitally recording an audio signal than how red book audio does it, such that the microphones, amplifiers, ADCs etc on the recording end and the DAC, amp and speakers on the playback end are going to be much more significant factors in audio quality.
-
You're absolutely right a out data formatting being an issue and something that really does cause vendor lockin.
I would just think content creators would still want archive/backup of the final products (the video itself). For example could you imagine if a movie just disappeared because Adobe or someone shutdown.
-
As I said, some of the music is just the audio of a video, but they also get a lot of releases directly from the publishers. They are both on YT Music and the difference in quality in between them is noticeable.
I have my audio quality set to high in that options menu btw.
-
Sure, it's like JPG.
It may not be the newest or best compression ratio, but it works, and even the shittiest old hardware supports it. And I know it won't whine about licences being missing or some shit.
-
Biggest free download site is probably https://www.oldradioworld.com/
There's also the Internet Archive - https://archive.org/details/oldtimeradio
-
