TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

YouTube audio quality – How good does it get? (2022)

116 点作者 fhinson3 个月前

18 条评论

togetheragainor3 个月前
For music listening, the YouTube Music app has settings for higher audio quality under &quot;Settings &gt; Playback&quot;.<p>According to their documentation, this is &quot;Upper bound of 256kbps AAC &amp; OPUS&quot;: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;support.google.com&#x2F;youtubemusic&#x2F;answer&#x2F;9076559?hl=en&amp;co=GENIE.Platform%3DiOS&amp;oco=0#zippy=%2Caudio-quality-on-wi-fi" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;support.google.com&#x2F;youtubemusic&#x2F;answer&#x2F;9076559?hl=en...</a><p>EDIT: FWIW, I&#x27;m a Premium member. I&#x27;m not sure if this is a standard feature.
评论 #42903216 未加载
评论 #42902430 未加载
评论 #42909437 未加载
评论 #42906942 未加载
评论 #42902376 未加载
lazka3 个月前
See &quot;Why not use graphs &#x2F; frequency analysis to compare codecs?&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wiki.hydrogenaud.io&#x2F;index.php?title=FAQ#:~:text=Why%20not%20use%20graphs" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wiki.hydrogenaud.io&#x2F;index.php?title=FAQ#:~:text=Why%...</a><p>&quot;I decided that analysis should focus on the higher, more conventional rates – 48k and 44k1&quot; - opus is always 48khz, so that doesn&#x27;t mean much.
评论 #42902784 未加载
jurmous3 个月前
I have YouTube premium and I have access to experimental features and coincidentally they offer one feature called audio in high quality. So they are working on improving it.<p>Description:<p>High-Quality Audio<p>Available until February 22<p>With high-quality audio, you can listen to music on YouTube in the best audio quality.<p>How it works: Watch an eligible music video on YouTube and enjoy the benefits of higher-quality audio.<p>Only available on iOS and Android.
评论 #42903296 未加载
_DeadFred_3 个月前
Anyone uploading audio different platforms might find Streamliner useful (I&#x27;m nowhere near the point where details on that level matter). <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;adptraudio.com&#x2F;product&#x2F;streamliner&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;adptraudio.com&#x2F;product&#x2F;streamliner&#x2F;</a><p>It&#x27;s wild how many details sound people have to keep track of. I know when I upload to Youtube things get smoothed noticeably compared to say Soundcloud. Probably because I&#x27;ve mastered over their -14 LUFS requirement.<p>I wonder how much of the modern &#x27;everyone needs to use closed captioning watching TV now&#x27; comes from the streaming services Codecs and other decisions and not just the A&#x2F;V sound peoples&#x27; decisions. Do movies sound people now need to listen through on something like Streamliner above for every decision?
评论 #42905485 未加载
评论 #42909315 未加载
londons_explore3 个月前
Youtube probably have stats on viewer-happyness vs bitrate.<p>I would take a guess that a higher bitrate = longer loading times, and viewers care far more about an extra few second of buffering than they care about audio quality, especially when they don&#x27;t have the original to compare to.
评论 #42902052 未加载
评论 #42901624 未加载
xipix3 个月前
Nice analysis, for 1x playback speed. If you&#x27;re playing back at a different speed, for example, for music practice, YouTube audio is awful.<p>Why doesn&#x27;t this huge AV platform use a better audio time stretch algorithm?
评论 #42903061 未加载
评论 #42902665 未加载
评论 #42903426 未加载
评论 #42902335 未加载
eqvinox3 个月前
Including 44.1kHz in the analysis is ignorant of the fact that most consumer audio equipment made in the past decade or two cannot switch its clock source and physical playback sample rate to that anymore. It&#x27;s all 48kHz (or multiples of that, for snake oil) these days, starting with when Intel cemented HDA on a 24MHz clock. Playing back anything 44.1kHz just gets resampled at some point before hitting the DAC, in most cases in software.
评论 #42906898 未加载
评论 #42905706 未加载
评论 #42905132 未加载
ksec3 个月前
I swear within the last 24 months most of the new Youtube video I saw had 256kbps AAC-LC audio in it. I thought that was generous of them to up the quality of audio. ( Along with 4Mbps 1080p50 AVC Video Files which is also quite high in quality )<p>Now I just check on YouTube again and they are now back to 128 &#x2F; 130 Kbps for AAC-LC.
评论 #42906383 未加载
naltroc3 个月前
When I use an FFT to view the spectrogram on YouTube music videos, it is very obvious that YouTube applies a lowpass filter at 16kHz on <i>all</i> videos (true since 2023 at least).<p>While this does retain the majority of useful information, it explains why the youtube version of your song feels just a little more &#x27;lifeless&#x27; than the high quality version you have elsewhere.<p>The original recording contains high frequency detail that got lost. Your human body uses that high frequency detail to orient itself in space with respect to sound sources (like reverb, reflections, or ambient sounds).<p>It is interesting from a data storage point of view because this could result in massive savings. Consider audio is recorded at 44.1khz or 48kHz but is actually stored at 32kHz. They have effectively saved 25% in audio file storage at marginal customer experience.
评论 #42906872 未加载
评论 #42910328 未加载
atoav3 个月前
A good way of hearing the gras grow is a null test.<p>Take unprocessed audio and process it. Then take both the processed and unprocessed audio and add them to your audio software (e.g. Audacity). Now flip the polarity of one of the audio signals.<p>This allows you to listen to the difference between the two signals and if there is nothing there, guess what, they are the same or the differences are so small that theg are inaudible.<p>This is a great way to anger people with expensive hifi gold cables, because what is true in the digital also works in the analog.<p>You only need to make sure both ajdio signals are at the same level (by minimizing the level of the difference).
jeffbee3 个月前
This kind of analysis is interesting but must be considered rapidly outdated since we won&#x27;t know what&#x27;s changing behind the scenes at YouTube. Have they ever revealed whether their VCU handles the audio?
评论 #42902042 未加载
评论 #42901654 未加载
krick3 个月前
Why would it be 6.5 ms late? It&#x27;s not much, but way larger than I&#x27;d expect. I never knew encoding might shift the audio track.
评论 #42904040 未加载
评论 #42902715 未加载
ncprog593 个月前
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=StUxyyISJBA" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=StUxyyISJBA</a>
xiphmont3 个月前
Oh, look a new analysis of YouTube quality that, surely, has learned something from all the past discussions...<p>[reads]<p>...Jesus H. F. Christ....<p>Every generation thinks they discover sex and audio analysis for the first time.<p>[And don&#x27;t call me Shirley]
nexus75563 个月前
(2022)
baal80spam3 个月前
I always thought that YT audio was pretty bad.
xyst3 个月前
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?<p>I got better audio quality ripping songs from limewire or Napster in the 2000s.<p>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.
评论 #42908030 未加载
评论 #42907548 未加载
评论 #42904952 未加载
hulitu3 个月前
&gt; YouTube audio quality – How good does it get? (2022)<p>Good. YouTube audio quality is crap. Plain and simple. 320 bps MP3 sounds better than anything Youtube offers. And 320 bps MP3 is not even &quot;quality&quot;.