Here is your 320kbps track bro
kino
>>106564612>watermarks music they don't own>they only have a license to distributewow. who would have thought getting music from a trash website would give you absolute trash? shocking. truly incomprehensible.
>>106564612Kek
>>106564612You (probably) can't hear anything over 16kHz if you are here anyway.
>>106565062>trash websiteslsk actually
>>106564612mp3 is obsolete, I don't see a reason to use it unless you have a very specific reason like playing mp3 cds in your car or something
>>106565062omegalul
>>106565214Then what should we be using?
>>106565334sex with this creature
>>106565350that's a regular snake retardit has a dick looking thing that's actually their clityou are a homo
>>106565120I use to hear 25khz, now i barely hear 18 lol.
>>106565408whats wrong with any of that
>>106565347opus, it's MUCH better than mp3 at 0-128k128k VBR should be transparent, if you're extra paranoid go with 192k
it's funny how long /g/tards have slept on embedding data into media here. Even cumg was just using file names iirc. Every retard got psyopted by the simple reencoding 4chan startgin doing decades ago which does basically nothing to stop embedding data using any anolog-like methods which can be arbitrarily complex so as to no be detectable.I think that is what that one group that was shilling here for a doing iirc.
>>106565493What do you mean by transparent?
>>106566401>Even cumg was just using file names iircnot pee
>>106566421>not peeExplain? I never actually used cumg
>>106566445https://archive.ph/ZQbJV
>>106564612how did they do this
>>106566477I guess I was wrong. Maybe I'm thinking of something else. IIRC they were just putting gelbooru md5s in the filename and had an extension to display it.
>>106566591audio files are just images basically. Idk what they did specifically but you can just "draw" onto an existing mp3 where the frequency is y and time is x.
>>106564612lmao>>106565120nta, but yeah, can't hear 16khz anymore. I still go for flac, but it's mostly because of habit at this point. sucks to be old.
>>106566632>audio files are just images basically
>>106566688Yes, audio is unironically just a one dimensional image.mp3 and jpeg are made with the same lossy compression algorithm in different amount of dimensions.When you hear mp3s, it's like hearing the audio with the artifacts a jpeg produces on an image.
>>106566750Blud thinks he can hear light.
>>106565120Yeah I just checked and I can hear up to around 16.5kHz
>>106566750>it's, like, all data and shit, bro
>>106566800How do you know the speakers are even capable of emitting over 16kHz at the intended loudness?The "you can't hear over 16kHz" is just some propaganda to sell you shitty equipment for full price.
How come 44100 Hz is 320 kbps instead of 8*44.1 kbps? Shouldn't that be 320 kbps = 40 kHz? All my files are variable bitrate.
>>106566599that's third eye
>>106566931sampling frequency has nothing to do with compressed stream's bitrate.
>>106566851That's bullshit. I have decent headphones, and it isn't hard to produce a high frequency sine wave, so it's safe to assume it can do it. But actually I just measured it out of curiosity, and it can absolutely do even 20k.
>>106566591easily. you generate your audio containing watermark using an image (many tools out there to convert image to audio spectrogram), they then mix that short segment into every song they get a license for. it's a really lame practice. many musicians allowing such faggots to license their shit, so DJs can play pretend while a computer does the work, they have no idea their work is being marked by third worlders and DJs don't have a clue either.
>>106566971oh yeah, thanks anon
>>1065668511. get headphones with good frequency response in the range you want to test2. go to https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/3. see if you can hear anything
>>106566931Think of the sampling frequency is the resolution of the audio.Lossy compression methods throw out data from the audio data in a way that it's less noticeable.The bitrate (kbps) is the size of the file (well, the average size of 1 second chunks of it).You can have a 1080p image of a black screen which you can compress to a few bytes losslessly with PNG. You can also have a 1 hour empty audio stream you can compress to a few bytes with FLAC, so the bitrate would be very low.VBR is just a method of varying the bitrate in each chunk because for some parts you can throw out more information and it would still sound fine.
>>106566851>noooo! you can't heart it! that means you don't need it!1would love for you to try telling this to an audio engineer or someone that isn't deaf. going by your dangerously high levels of retardation, and ignoring nyquist-shannon sampling theorem, all music should be released with no more than 12k? less? truly a genius. it's great that fucking morons like you are kept nowhere near musicians and audio experts otherwise we'd still be using 8-bit at less than 16khz. retard.
>>106567061No, it means you can't hear your high quality music if you use some shitty equipment. Have you tried using some high quality gear?
>>106566688>>106566632>"the human eye can't see above 20khz"
>>106564612>watermarked audiodisgustingly based
>>106565214unironically opus, or if you want higher comp vorbis. even aac is better, esp fdk aac which gets close to opus tier quality.
There really is nothing much to hear above 18khz.Or 12khz.
>>106565441I used to hear about 21 kHz on my right ear when I was 16, now my cutoff is at 19 kHz at 26 years old.
>>106564816>>106565120>>106567902>>106567989
>>106566688Retard>>106566750If you include the entire file its a regular 2d image, time is the x axis
>>106566767>Bludwas niggerspeak the end goal of redditspeak all along?
>>106568131One of my friends always keep the volume at 80 or 90 %.When we do a game night sometimes we can hear ourselves in the Discord call through his open back headphones.I believe many anons do the same thing.
>>106568533it's og british hivan
>>106564612Wood
>>106568131There is not much to be had on your side of the spectrum.I've been mixing down sound for 25 years.
>>106564612At least it’s trivial to delete, in audacity it’d just be - highlight range, choose duration, delete key.
>>106568105We are getting one brosky
>>106568105We are getting old brosky
>>106565214I don't see a reason to use opus unless you really care about ~25% storage space and file transfer savings. I want my files to work on fucking everything - whether it's a 2nd gen iPod Nano, Audiosurf, or some bitches 2013 macbook.
Let me guess you need more
>>106574113Actually yes
>>106574113Yes if you have good earplugs or speakers
>>106568288>If you include the entire file its a regular 2d image, time is the x axisThere is no y axis.x is time and the value is the air pressure at the moment in time.Why would it be 2D? Sound is a single wave or at most a handful of waves for stereo or surround sound.
>>106566591Just add some high frequency sine waves at the right time.For example to write an "L" you can add 19.0, 19.1, 19.2 and 19.3 kHz from t=0 to t=1 to make a 4 pixel tall vertical stem.Then keep just the 19.0 kHz between t=1 and t=4 to make a horizontal bar.Note that all waves and thus all sound waves are a sum of sine waves (read up on Fourier series if you want to learn more).And you can add or remove sine waves as you please.
>>106566767>he can hear lightWhat is toslink and/or s/pdif?
>>106564612gonna put greetz to all at 20khz as an easter egg like in mod trackers
>>106566750You can't see jpeg artifacts when using quality 80 or higher on a photograph.Maybe on text or Chinese cartoons, bit not on a real world scene.And likewise you can't hear artifacts in 320kbps MP3's of real world sounds.
>>106564612Zoomie here. Why would anyone care about this frequency thing and other stuff? Please spoonfed me, audiogods.
>>106567006I can hear 18hz-14.5khzis it over for me?
>>106574432>audiogodsBeing young you can probably hear a lot better than any of those older "audiophiles" who obsess over it.So you tell us: what's it like listening to 320kbps MP3 vs listening to uncompressed audio?
>>106574512no idea. friend of mine send me some flac files once and I couldn't tell the difference between this and the same audio downloaded from youtube as mp3.
>>106574541>>106574541>friend of mine send me some flac files once and I couldn't tell the difference between this and the same audio downloaded from youtube as mp3.Trvke
>>106574432it's incredibly important. to sample any sound reliably it needs to be sampled at twice (or more) of the original frequency. electronics manufacturers experimented with a whole bunch of higher and lower frequencies early on in digital recording history and eventually 44.1khz was chosen as it was divisible by the frequency of NTSC, as the first digital recorders used umatic/beta and vhs tapes as storage. losers and intellectually bankrupt frauds that know nothing about this subject will ramble on about "you can't hear anything past (Whatever) khz!1" but these are the same people that failed their first year of school and dropped out to become a child prostitute.
>>106566409it sounds the exact same as flac in blind tests
>>106564612how do i write a message like bangerz army on any sound file
>>106576739generate sine waves at several frequencies, and sum them. that way you will get several horizontal lines on a spectrogram. time it right and you will get an image.
>>106564612is bangerz army a PORNO website??????
>>106577177HWABAG
>>106574145>coldplayyou should be banned from hearing. pleb.
>>106574957>ramble on about "you can't hear anything past (Whatever) khz!1"Testing which frequencies you can hear is super easy.And I don't know about other countries but we had standard hearing tests at school so millions got tested and out of those millions, essentially the entire population, not a single child could hear above 20kHz.You also don't hear anyone complaining about dog whistles at the park, which would be a massive annoyance if you could hear them.
>>106577177I see potential of adding jump scares.
>>10656700617Hz-16kHzearly 30s
>>106577833You can't directly perceive frequencies below a certain threshold, and yet, testing shows conclusively that if you play those frequencies for long periods, it makes people irritable and otherwise uncomfortable, as does playing frequencies above the audible maximum for long period. There is a level to sound perception that happens beyond conscious awareness of it. I'm no audiophile by any stretch, but I am a musician, and I've dabbled in recording myself, and learned the hard way that if you record at too low a frequency, it sounds like shit.
>>106566688That's actually correct.
>>106565120I can still achieve 18khz at 32, but one ear only goes to 16khz because of some hearing damage. Sucks ass.>>106566668FLAC is good for archiving and converting for different reasons. My car only reads MP3 for example while I use AAC on my phone.>>106567934Isn't QAAC better than FDK AAC though?
>>106565120>>1065670067Hz-16.5kHz(?)Sennheiser HD 560S31yoI had to crank volume to max, and on the low end I might just have been hearing the drivers moving rather than the actual sound, but 10Hz was super clear at typical volumes. Didn't bother testing above 16.5k because it was painful, but it was clear enough that I could have gone higher if I hated myself. Didn't hear anything at 17k.
>>106567006Look at those mud cannons
Just use V0, you don't need more
>>106580559You mean V3
>>106580653You mean v2.
>>106574113>1 gigasample per second OPUS lossy encodingi would say that's a glowie RF intercept with how wideband that is, but that would be lossless.
>>106580559>>106580653>>106580668What are you guys talking about?
>>106565347aac / .m4a is probably the best all around codecopus is more efficient but the support is pretty poor. aac is much better than mp3 and only slightly worse than opus and it works just about everywhere
>>106581696I get problems with music players reading the artwork off m4a files
>>106581718m4a was never anywhere near as popular as mp3 so support for it is generally trash compared to mp3.
>>106581718Thankfully you tend to listen to music and not watch it
>>106581718That’s unrelated to the audio codec (.m4a may not even contain aac/mp4 audio data, it could be mp3 etc.).m4a is a container format (and is identical to .mp4 or .m4v, and similar to .mov)
>>106581204vjuice
>>106565214Compatibility
>>10656700628yo45Hz-15kHzI love the tv!
>>106567006I can still hear at 20hz, it hurts my ears even at lower volumes. Is this gonna destroy my hearing?late 20s btw
>>106564612>qobuz 24/192 rips
>>106565182>he doesn't download lossless and verify with CUEToolsYou can transcode files you've downloaded.
I could only hear up to 16khz when i was 18, i don't even want to know how fucked my hearing is now. Still only use FLAC though.
>>106575159I can hear the difference when not blind testing
>>106565214This. I only listen to music if it's encoded using ATRAC.
>>106582832>Is this gonna destroy my hearing?it could if you blast it too loud. just because you can't hear it, doesn't mean it isn't raping your ears.
>>106581204mp3
>>106567006can perceive 8hz-11hz as an uncomfortable feeling and audibly hear everything above 12hz to 16215hzI have a pretty bad tinnitus, too
