• GenosseFlosse@feddit.org
        15·
        1 month ago

        Top car will start to loudly beep and light up the dashboard like a christmas tree with SERVICE NOW!!! warnings whenever the windshield wiper fluid is low, seat belt is not fastend or a brake light is out. Has controls for radio and clima hidden 3 levels deep behind a touch screen interface. Comes with an app that will somehow stop working after 5 years when the car is no longer sold, or after you upgrade your phone. Has a subscription that allows you to go faster and use the heated seats you already paid for when you bought it.

        Bottom car will run as long it has fuel, dosnt judge you like a fuckin audi would and lists engine oil as “optional” in the manual.

        • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
          1·
          1 month ago

          Exactly. Dude looks so much cooler and badass.

          The girl looks like someone who spent 20k on a spoiler and runs for their Honda civic, and it doesn’t do anything special.

          If you need all that shit, you suck at shooting.

      • weeeeum@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        1 month ago

        Yeah, he doesn’t need any fancy gadgets to perform. Just a gun and a dream

    • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
      5·
      1 month ago

      Ita not about cool, I think the intent was more ‘Spotify Premium to get on the go access to all of my music’ being akin to the additional equipment used by the shooter on the left, versus the ‘youtube to mp3 converter because free’ being bereft of all bells and whistles and equipment on the right.

      Also…you could have gotten the joke and I’m overexpla8ning, one of the two.

  • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
    23·
    1 month ago

    They both have shitty audio quality, but Spotify is less shitty than YouTube’s horrible data compression.

    • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      27·
      1 month ago

      YouTube uses Opus 160kbps which is decent enough. YouTube also allows uploading videos with lossless audio.

      So it’s more about what happens with the audio before it gets to YouTube. Someone uploads a video clip with 128kbps AAC, YouTube re-encodes it to Opus160, someone downloads it as 160kbps MP3, makes a lyrics video and whatever tool they used makes it into 96kbps Vorbis, it gets put on YouTube, Opus160 again, you download it as whatever bitrate MP3 again and it sounds like shit.

      Just an example, there may be way more lossy re-encode generations going on.
      It’s more about the generations rather than YouTube.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        7·
        1 month ago

        I dunno’, I hear a distinct difference between any YouTube video and the CD, even ones posted by the artists or labels directly.

        Though I do not pay for YouTube premium and never will, so maybe it’s better if you pay the beast.

        Either way, fuck the beast. … and not in a good way.

        • festnt@sh.itjust.works
          5·
          1 month ago

          i believe the youtube to mp3 thing isabout downloading it using yt-dlp or something, not yt premium downloads

      • Cassa@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        1·
        1 month ago

        yea, it’s also just up to 160

        using grayjay to download wham:last christmas gives us up to 134kbps opus. which is fine, it’s the official channel and all, so upload is pretty good.

        Just talking, is more like 118kbps, a gresham lecture came in at that.

        Opus is variable, which is pretty good. saves bandwith and all.

        also to point out, youtube reencodes a lot of videos, so the older it is - the more likely it has been re-encoded. and youtube is not encoding from an old master file.

        Point is, totally agree on the generational thing, which you (mostly) avoids with spotify.

        it’s good enough for most audio setups if you find the decent audio on youtube first

    • Goat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      11·
      1 month ago

      This is horseshit, Opus 130k stereo is perceptually lossless according to many public listening tests. All responsibility for poor quality rests on the uploader and sometimes on idiotic downloaders that still dare to shit out MP3 in the year 2024.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        2·
        1 month ago

        The codec used for transmission is a tiny part of the production pipeline. Perhaps it is publishers choosing to mostly push lesser quality to YouTube, or videos uploaded before they started using better codecs, or any number of reasons.

        The truth still stands that YouTube’s videos (at keast almost) universally have shitty audio quality.

        Besides, look at it this way: YouTube can be accessed for free. Why would the publishers want to push a perfect replacement for buying the music on a free platform? They’d make less money.

      • BearGun@ttrpg.network
        1·
        1 month ago

        That may be so, i don’t know the theory, but i hear a distinct difference between songs on YouTube vs Spotify. And I’m talking newly released, direct from publisher. Stuff just sounds bad on YouTube.

    • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
      8·
      1 month ago

      I’m like an anti-audiophile in how little I usually care. I don’t use high quality equipment most of the time anyhow, so it doesn’t bother me at this point.

      • Klear@lemmy.world
        5·
        1 month ago

        I tend to buy cheapest earbuds possible since I tend to destroy them fast. Bought some better ones recently, since I had a gift card from a contest and what do you know! My phone’s headphone jack died… =/

    • jabathekek@sopuli.xyz
      6·
      1 month ago

      There are two Japanese bands that I can only listen to on Youtube, so I have to listen to them offline at 129kbs. ;_;

    • BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee
      2·
      1 month ago

      plus the fact some of the songs i can only find on youtube have sone of the most god awful quality imaginable

      i think packet flier by terrorhorse takes the cake, or one of the songs off of kenza by khaled that literally has the cd skipping the entire time. and then 2 others are shitty bootleg live recordings, 1 from moby grape and the other from throwing muses. funny enough both were from self titled albums by bands that had 2 self titled albums, with 1 of the self titled albums on spotify while the one i wanted to listen to not on spotify

    • ElCanut@jlai.luOP
      20·
      1 month ago

      Do you think I own a laptop capable of reading a CD like some sort of caveman?

      • GraniteM@lemmy.world
        15·
        1 month ago

        I’m out here advocating for physical media in 2024, so it’s safe to assume that my tech has not advanced much beyond smashing rocks together and yelling at the moon.

        • tempest@lemmy.ca
          2·
          1 month ago

          The problem is I have one somewhere so I don’t want to buy I new one but I also don’t want to find the one I own

  • Yuri addict@ani.socialEnglish
    14·
    1 month ago

    And the turkish athelete won a silver mdeal in the shooting competition imagine the power if he had the same gear as the other atheletes

  • Caesium@lemmy.world
    11·
    1 month ago

    Im currently a spoofy premium gal, but I’m moving to downloading my music. It’s just gonna take a lot of time. And a lot of money because I do want to support the artists I love