Opus vs Mp3 comparison

Opus is the best, it outperforms mp3 in every way
Use opus instead of mp3

File sizes:
[ music in 16 bit 48khz ]
320kbps Mp3: 9,02MB
192kbps Opus: 3,63MB

64kbps Mp3: 1,55MB
64kbps Opus: 1,57MB

32kbps Mp3: 993kB
32kbps Opus: 0,98MB

320kbps Mp3: 18,1MB
94kbps Opus: 5,47MB
[Original codec of the songs: FLAC]

[imoutodaisuki]

OPUS is crazy. Even on 16 kbps it's still 'acceptable', unlike mp3 which at that point would just ruin your ear.

[patrickbuswell]

Man, the music selection is amazing! hahaha! Thanks for this comparison.

[petitkus]

Opus being the real man here, 96Kbps is like enough wow

[RotcodFox]

I legitimately would never notice any difference between 96kbps opus and 224kbps mp3. That efficiency is INSANE

[falkerhard]

I'm more impressed with the lower bitrates. It almost sounds like witchcraft

[shindousan]

MP3 is transparent at 192kbps. Opus is transparent at 128kbps. This makes Opus 33% more efficient than MP3 for high quality audio, and it is even more efficient for very low bit rates. That's 33% less bandwidth used when streaming music, or 50% more music files in the same storage space.

[BlighterProductions]

Did you know that frame time also makes a huge difference with the OPUS codec? A frame time of 40 ms is gonna give a significantly better quality than a similarly encoded file with e.g 2 ms. From 40 ms onwards, a 32 kb/s OPUS file already sounds at least 75% identical to a WAV copy, which is just insane.

[gasparmxm]

Now almost every video of Youtube is encoded to Opus, this video is encoded 112kbps Opus if you download the file and extract the audio.

[Exert]

Why Opus is not popular in streaming service

[KneelBBacon]

Opus is excellent for low-bandwidth streams like speech-only. I use LameXP (freeware) to convert to Opus and you can encode all the way down to 8kbps. If you have a bunch of audio books or speech-only podcasts, you can save a HUGE amount of file space. At 12kbps, I got a 10 hour podcast, that was originally a 576 meg MP3 down to a 57meg Opus file (10:1 compression). The codec did a great job picking out the voices but I noticed some subtle background noise (game sounds from the original podcast ) was missing in the converted file. Always check the converted file before deleting the original. You might have to go to a higher bitrate to capture it.

[abp]

Opus 64 Kbps is acceptable for just about anything unless you're listening on a high quality headset or speakers. So efficient at low bit rates.

[thwaller]

YouTube is re-encoding all your audio here anyway, actual differences cannot be determined.

[odddellarobbia]

me who isn't an audiophile
mmm yes, same.

except 32kbps mp3

[rentisme]

You know that you wont be able to tell a difference because youtube condenses everything down to 128kbps aac anyway.

[YourLocalCapybara]

mp3 at 32kbps sounds like something youd put in a meme but 32kbps opus is pretty much flawless

[DesertCookie]

Might look into replacing AAC with OPUS for my moving encodings. Usually use 768kb/s AAC for 7.1 surround tracks.

[MrApplewine]

Try to tell the difference between 96K opus and FLAC. I bet you can't.

[Noughtsgnik]

your download link takes forever to progress and the ads stop me

[volume]

so like, what if your .opus was at 320kbps? would it become the equivalent of an 4k image?

[RussellHernandez]

mp3 at even 320kbps is not agreeable to me often. Really dislike that format.