this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2025
1258 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
78029 readers
3397 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As far as I’ve read, the database is largely low bitrate files, and some AI. The value here is metadata and preservation of “rare” music.
Nope, I would not call 160kbps Vorbis low bitrate, it’s roughly quality of 192kbps MP3. Only the ”popularity=0” stuff (so stuff with so few listens that Spotify does not keep record of) were re-encoded to 75kbps Opus, which as a modern codec is much better than it sounds like but of course re-encode is not great for already lossless stuff.
For purists there are those Tidal downloader sites available everywhere for free lossy music, even 24-bit hires FLAC.
Opus is what I’m encoding my working library to. I like ripping to flac (and archiving them as such), but the advantages to smaller file sizes for the working library are worth it for me. So far, I’m really liking the format.
I keep the archive on spinning hard drives, but the opus library on ssd (which makes browsing much quicker, and no unnecessary spinning up the hard drives.)
It's not lossless but current ogg vorbis at 160kbps is absolutely transparent for the vast majority of people. That's actually what I chose to keep my own collection, I mean, outside of the lossless albums that I absolutely want to flawlessly preserve.
How does it compare to 192 and 320 bps mp3?
I'd say in general it's the same, but way lighter than 320 kbps mp3. It's better than 192 kpbs mp3 and as good or better than 256 kbps mp3.
If you have really high end speakers you can hear difference between 160 Vorbis and 320 MP3, but between 160 Vorbis and 192 MP3 no way.
Thanks.
I hear the diff between 192 & 320 (probably 256 is enough but better safe than sorry I thought so that's what I use) so 160 vorbis is very good but not totally perfect for me then.
Am I losing my mind? All magnet links are metadata, no?
They havent released the music files yet