= MUSIC STORAGE IN OPUS =

so you care about bitrate completely ignoring type of codec?

if 96kbps opus 1.1 sounds transparent and opus 1.2 was improved, why not?

not possible I tested it myself at home I hear from Chirp

I do not use 96kbps mp3 or bluetooth speakers. 96kbps mp3 is equivalent of 32-48kbps opus (nearer 32 than 48). When I am testing OPUS I am doing it on standard size headphones (even that later I mostly listen at decent quality speakers).
96kbps OPUS is similar to ~200kbps mp3 vbr.

Of course it should be done below 320kbps. Only goys use 320kbps to send money to jewish storage sellers.

256 is transparent in mp3, opus needs 96-128kbps to achieve transparency at 95%+ songs.

I do not listen to mushed mp3s. But I *might* upgrade my speakers and headphones that's why I encoded at higher kbps than transparency. 64kbps opus sounds almost transparent on headphones so I decided (long time ago) to use 96kbps. But now opus got improved so I am considering using lower bitrate.

Opus is what you use when your micro penis card is full. Girls will choose FLAC every time.

the small penises choose FLAC to pretend how big they are, just like small penises choose big cars

I wanna try converting some flacs to opus. Do I just do "ffmpeg -i song.flac -c:a libopus -b:a 128k song.opus"? Is that all?

are u linux nigger?
on windows you just click and select songs in foobar2000 and convert them to opus to bitrate/quality of choice

Epic bait my good sir, upboated

it's not bait, flacnigger

jews want you to use FLAC so you buy 10 jewish hard disks. you are goy

i thought big cars was for rich people who brag about their money and free open formats was for poorfags..

which beer does small penises drink? i just want to be sure my penis is average or above..

how about trying to press enter dude

I did press enter. I'm asking if there are any other options I should be aware of when converting to opus.

ffmpeg --help encoder=libopus

Then don't drive to walmart in a motorized fucking wardrobe faggot, what part of "storage" do you not understand

Now this is a confirmed troll thread.
Don't waste your time buddies.

Opusenc will read FLAC.

find . -type f -name "*.flac" -print0 | while read -d '' -r in; do opusenc --comp 10 --bitrate 64 "$in" "${in%.flac}".opus; done

I CANT SPEND 100 BUCKS ON A PROPER HDD
I WANT TO STORE MY MUSIC IN A FORMAT DESIGNED FOR LOW LATENCY AUDIO CALLS
MUH 1 PERCENT REEEEEEE
ENJOYMENT
JEWS KIKES I AM TOTALLY Holla Forums I SWEAR

lmao what a shit thread.

Let's not let a thread die for this.

In general you want to store your music on your PC in the highest possible quality. The space usage is not that high actually and you can convert it to lossy formats quickly whenever you want. There is no reason to actually archive in lossy formats, it kills the whole point of archiving. Let's hope you won't listen to music forever with earbuds and you will experience the joys of high quality audio. SD cards and other places where the space is limited and the audio quality is shit anyways is why you actually convert to lossy formats. Anybody who says otherwise is literally a deaf nigger. Let's see the codecs.

mp3
Babby's first format. It's an ancient format and there are better alternatives now. The advantages are extensive tagging, total support pretty much everywhere and high space-efficiency. The highest 320k setting is actually pretty crisp and doesn't take up that much space. Converting to higher bitrates is technically possible, but unsupported and generally pointless. Also VBR is a pretty cool thing, no idea why is it so rarely used. Still, the retarded license (now not relevant) and the dated algorithms make this a deprecated format.

opus
Opus was never designed to be a storage format. Storing music in Opus is a forced meme, literally even MP3 is better at this task. I hope none of you are actually using Opus.

The main advantages of Opus compared to Vorbis for example are low latency, the possibility to use extremely low bitrates and optimization for speech as human voice is still comprehensible at very low bitrates. None of these are particularly useful for storing music. Even the shittiest portable players can play MP3 files quickly. If you are okay with less than 128k music files, consider buying new ears.

As you can see 128k Opus files actually larger than 128k MP3 files, making the shitty and patented MP3 BETTER at low quality and efficient storage, the whole point of lossy formats. At higher bitrates the Opus is on par with MP3 in terms of size and actually decodes faster. Not that it matters. Storing Opus at that quality is a waste and the hardware support for Opus is still non-existent, especially on phones or portable players, where you'd want to store lossy music. Only use Opus for storing speeches at low bitrates, as it was intended.

vorbis
Vorbis was meant to be the successor of MP3 and it's actually doing quite a good job at it. It's made by the same guys as FLAC and Opus, so you know it's good. Vorbis cannot support THAT low bitrates (around 48k is the lowest) as Opus and is slower, but uses a much more efficient encoding than MP3 and Opus. It's the clear winner in both the 128k and the 320k tests. Also it sounds much better at the same bitrate than the others. The support for Vorbis is actually pretty good now and many players support it now out-of-box, even on phones. If you want to store music lossy, use Vorbis.

aac
There's AAC too, but it's licensing and support is a mess and it's not even that good as a format. ffmpeg couldn't even convert to AAC the last time I tried. It seems to be only used on Youtube, TV, iTunes and other proprietary shit. What a waste. Wouldn't recommend.

It might worth mentioning that Monkey's Audio is actually a little bit better than FLAC at compression. The disadvantages are higher RAM and CPU usage, barely any support (FLAC is even supported on Win10) and has a retarded donutsteel license which prevents it from being properly supported on Linux. I wouldn't recommend it, but you may check it out if space is REALLY that much of a concern. 1-2 MBs per song can rack up quickly.

For the reference; the average size per minute for different formats is around...

Vorbis is around 5-7% smaller than MP3 at the same bitrate and has better quality. Also 100 hours of 16bit FLAC audio only takes around 32 GB of space. Even the ancient 320 GB HDDs can store almost 1000 hours of pure FLAC. You just can't flak the FLAC.

Irrelevant. If my music is transparent 99,95% of the time I don't care. Besides, I don't have a golden hearing. I rather pity you for having to care about such things. I enjoy the music as much as you, if not more :^)
Yes, except 128kbps Opus is near transparent, mp3 is nowhere near. That's as important as size
nah, Opus is newer and more transparent, even for music. I concede the point of general support, however all my gadgets support Opus

why would I? the music I want to archive I want to keep in its entirety and securely so FLAC on a zfs pool it is.

...

with opus I don't need to spend. it saves me money. and it's not just about money. hdd's have physical limit how much data can fit in

Why? That's stupid
If quality 100% takes 700kbit/s and quality 98% takes 120kbit/s, why not save space with quality 98%?

Then you can use higher bitrate OPUS, like 128kbit/s.

Can you show your blind tests with different bitrates and codecs?
You can review tests made by people with expensive devices: hydrogenaud.io/index.php/board,40.0.html

It takes a lot of space and [email protected]/* */ beats it while using half of space.

Dumb nigger, it doesn't matter for what purpose it was designed, but how it performs at the purpose that we discuss.

You forgot the main advantage of providing better quality at lower bitrate.

Dumb nigger 128k mp3 is equivalent of 64k opus, so you should be comparing them, not 128k mp3 with 128k opus.

this nigger thinks that music quality is defined by bitrate. so 128k mp3 sounds better than 120k opus. that's what this nigger thinks.

No it's not. Opus destroys MP3 at any bitrate.

Opus works on rockbox, which is all that matters.

So you trust the Opus guys? You know they said that all other codecs than opus are obsolete? Including Vorbis.

Opus uses much more efficient encoding than Vorbis. You don't know shit.
64kbit/s: listening-tests.hydrogenaud.io/igorc/results.html
96kbit/s: listening-test.coresv.net/results.htm listening-test.coresv.net/s/scores_by_tracks_en.png

Ok then show me those tests. I showed you 96k tests.

dumb idiot it's not smaller per bitrate. Bitrate by definition is size divided by duration. it's probably smaller because it's encoder used less than 320k (it's vbr after all).

That's not "only", and I have a lot more than 100 hours.

If you do not store anythin else other than music. But do you realize people use HDD's also for different things? And that HDD's are limited in GBs depending on their size and platter count?

And using OPUS instead of FLAC won't need you to convert music additionaly for mobile devices, instead, same file will be used. That will be a backup. How and where do you backup your FLAC music?

show me 5-10TB 2.5" drive, preferably single platter (so it's quiet).

also

...

sage

it's not my religion because im using science and argument to defent my view
if you show proofs that opus is bad i will be first to throw it under a bus

I honestly don't know if the people in this thread are only pretending to be retarded or not.

Where is the science? There is none in your posts.

here:
listening-tests.hydrogenaud.io/igorc/results.html
listening-test.coresv.net/results.htm
listening-test.coresv.net/s/scores_by_tracks_en.png

Are those links related to your opinion that it is better to use opus instead of flac? It isn't, right? Where is the science you are so proud of?

Fraunhofer pls go

...

fuck you, jewish seagate representative

probably
he isn't an autist because he is right, he is an autist because gets asshurt that not everyone stores their music the same way he does
no
wasn't an argument
it is funny that you are talking about flac religion in a opus religion thread

if you dont like it on Holla Forums just leave
antisage btw

Down yourself in semen

guys, I warned you, this is a poo-tier troll thread. maybe you'll listen now…

So? What is the optimal bitrate for high quality music with opus 1.2?

Personally I use 128kbps. It's near transparent. 144 won't be noticeably better unless you try some of those artificial killer samples. Actually, 128kbps is probably a bit overkill as well but I feel anxious about going lower than that. I have the space on my SSD anyway..

Try Musepack at the default settings. It's 150..190 for most music, and it's almost guaranteed to be transparent, even for killer samples which other encoders fail to deal with at any bitrate.

by retards with shit speakers

128kbps is an overkill. 96kbps is already near transparent.

Musepack is shit, opus beats it at any bitrate

opus is shit, flac beats it at any bitrate

Proofs?

look at the source code, stupid nigger

mp3 patient expired a few months ago didn't it?

Not an argument

yea, but everyone was happy when he died

show me a 96kbps flac you nescient fuckface

I keep my master audio files on CD/DVD. It's the most durable and "future-proof" solution capable to last more than 20+ years, at least in my experience. Inexpensive too. Nowadays I obviously use DVDs only. I put FLACs on there, after having compressed them along with various checksums with zpaq and after having added ECC with dvdisaster. I keep mp3s created with --preset insane as personal copies to carry around. mp3 is the only codec I'm 100% sure will work on all my day-to-day devices.
I use cdcat to keep a catalogue of the original file's location. The DVDs are then stored in a cool, dry and dark place. I've the equivalent of ~4200 double-layer DVDs accumulated in these years. I keep some the most valuable FLACs on a small RAID as well.
Keeping a master copy in a lossy format doesn't make sense. I'm mildly triggered by people resorting to lossy for this purpose. If you can't afford to keep a master copy, don't try to keep master copies.

Could you recommend the options to use for Vorbis, if you're saying that it's better than Opus for music?
Because I tried Opus 128 kb/s VBR (which is transparent) vs. Vorbis -q 10 and the later gave me an audio file bigger by 4 MiB.

What music is good enough to receive this treatment?

This is bullshit. There is no point in compressing FLAC again. If you want better compression, use a harder specialized format (WavPack, or something).

I regularly gain ~2% on FLACs already recompressed with --best and trimmed of unwarranted/non-standard metadata. I tried .wv and found it simply not worthy for my purposes; also I've already a structured workflow and the transition costs are simply too high. zpaq will beat any other compressor tool, any other source format and will add some niceties. I weren't seeking validation about my archival process on a taiwanese pedo forum to begin with.

masterpieces, live events, rare stuff I've collected in the last ~25 years

opus is deemed to replace vorbis and it's suggested by anyone. Get your source in 48000 Hz or use -af aresample=resampler=soxr:precision=28:cheby=1 and build on that. And here I assume you have golden ear and that you're hopefully not using a lossy format for archival purposes. Use whatever works for your devices.

128 is far from transparent.

Especially if you listen to the amount of lower song details like hall or echo effects.

Even 256 kbps in Opus 1.2 does not deliver fully.

512 kbps is the most closest thing to lossless - even i can't find a difference between a source file and a 512 kbps Opus.

Still... 512 is too bloated. Recommended trade between file size and almost perfect quality is Opus with a bitrate of 256 kbps.

That's what i use for all files i encode into Opus. So far zero complaints quality wise. I am more than happy :)

...

Still.. Opus does beat MP3 and Vorbis. Both the 256 kbps and 512 kbps variants are beating each the similar setting level of both Vorbis and MP3.

Mp3 misses even at the highest setting tons of minor song details because they are cut off by default. Opus 256 has more minor song details as compared with Vorbis q8 (also 256 kbps). And Opus 512 easily beats Vorbis Q10 (also around 500 kbps).

So, encoding music as Opus files does make sense as Opus is the best lossy codec around.

I like it clear and visible :P

Flac is bloated :P And there is no recognizable difference between Wav/Flac and a 512 kbps Opus file :P

And to make it even better, the resulting file is much smaller than your Flac :P

Did you do a proper blind test?

...