you tube resolution?

[keeper of the quays]

Hi, can someone tell me what you tube resolution is please? I stream hd hq and sacd? From you tube thru my ipod..if it says hd or hq or sacd? Are these titles nonsense! Is it all mp3? I stream the sacd music sites and the sound is fab! Is it just very well recorded mp3?

 

[steve_1979]

Clicky

 

[keeper of the quays]

?

Clicky

thankyou..er..so are they mp4s? Im still confused? Its a age thing..lol

 

[steve_1979]

The video part is MP4 but the audio part is AAC. If you scroll down it tells you in the tables exactly what you're listening to and at what bit-rates (it varies depending on what resolution video you're watching).

You only hear MP3 if you watch YouTube at the lowest 240 resolution. At all other resolutions it uses AAC which is similar to MP3 but a little bit better. AAC is what Apple use for their downloads.

Clicky

 

[keeper of the quays]

The video part is MP4 but the audio part is AAC. If you scroll down it tells you in the tables exactly what you're listening to and at what bit-rates (it varies depending on what resolution video you'r watching).

You only hear MP3 if you watch YouTube at the lowest 240 resolution. At all other resolutions it uses AAC which is similar to MP3 but a little bit better. AAC is what Apple use for their downloads.

 Clicky

so this hd hq sacd is a nonsense? At best im listening to a slightly better than mp3? So my sony walkman hi res player which i have some hi res music got from linn..should be a lot better?

 

[steve_1979]

so this hd hq sacd is a nonsense? At best im listening to a slightly better than mp3?

At best you're listening to 192kbps AAC. Which is actually very good quality dispite the low bit-rate.

So my sony walkman hi res player which i have some hi res music got from linn..should be a lot better?

Hi res is technically better but in a blind comparison I bet you'd struggle to tell a good 192kbps AAC rip apart from a lossless codec.

Yet despite AAC being a very good codec on its own I've always found that YouTube's sound quality is a bit below par so I think that there must be something else effecting it too. IMO YouTube is certainly well below Spotify's sound quality even when Spotify uses the lower quality 160kbps bit-rate stream that plays with the free version of Spotify.

 

[keeper of the quays]

so this hd hq sacd is a nonsense? At best im listening to a slightly better than mp3?

At best you're listening to 192kbps AAC. Which is actually very good quality dispite the low bit-rate.

?

?

So my sony walkman hi res player which i have some hi res music got from linn..should be a lot better?

Hi res is technically better but in a blind comparison I bet you'd struggle to tell a good 192kbps AAC rip apart from a lossless codec.

Yet despite AAC being a very good codec on its own I've always found that YouTube's sound quality is a bit below par so I think that there must be something else effecting it too. IMO YouTube is certainly well below Spotify's sound quality even when Spotify uses the lower quality 160kbps bit-rate stream that plays with the free version of Spotify.

not sure i can tell the difference between my hi res stuff and the well recorded stuff on you tube..both sound great! Modern technology is a marvel...makes my wind up 78 player seem very old hat! Haha..

 

[steve_1979]

not sure i can tell the difference between my hi res stuff and the well recorded stuff on you tube..both sound great!

A big part of the problem with YouTube is the amateurs putting up videos with no knowledge or experience of the methods used to ensure the quality is kept intact.

Some of the music such as the EVO music channels is pretty good though. But even they seem to fall a bit short of CD and Spotify quality.

Modern technology is a marvel...makes my wind up 78 player seem very old hat! Haha..

It sure is.

BTW do you really have a wind up record player? Or is it just a wind up?

 

[keeper of the quays]

not sure i can tell the difference between my hi res stuff and the well recorded stuff on you tube..both sound great!

A big part of the problem with YouTube is the amateurs putting up videos with no knowledge or experience of the methods used to ensure the quality is kept intact.

Some of the music such as the EVO music channels is pretty good though. But even they seem to fall a bit short of CD and Spotify quality.

?

?

Modern technology is a marvel...makes my wind up 78 player seem very old hat! Haha..

It sure is.

BTW do you really have a wind up record player? Or is it just a wind up?

yes i have one..have a few 78s too! I even have a 78 signed by john macormack! Very cool...thing with 78s you know where you stand with them, scratchy tinny sound...but authentic? Some of my newer 78s (newer? Lol) sound a little better..very low res..hahaha..but its never perplexed me..you know what you get! But with these new fangled gizmos..does my head in..i cant distinguish between hd you tube well recorded and uploaded jazz and my hi res walkman..think ill end up wandering around hastings with my 78 player on a pram..playing scratchy gigli and muttering..is this the deserved end for hifi dinosaurs? Ill probably wrap a duvet round me too..tennents extra anyone? Lol....

 

[steve_1979]

Dispite the poor sound quality I bet that 78 has a certain charm that digital could never have.