OPUS vs. MP3 bit rate?

Shakedown

Active Member
I'm working with 160kbps OPUS music files.

From what I heard at lower bit rates, OPUS just shines.

I'm converting the OPUS files to mp3, and I may be going crazy. I've converted them to 160kbps mp3, and 256kbps mp3. I can hear the difference between the two MP3's on my headphones, but how is that possible if the original OPUS file was only 160kpbs? The 160 mp3 definitely sounds more compressed.

So that begs the question, are low resolution OPUS files equivalent to higher resolution mp3's?
 
Last edited:
It depends on the choices that the developers of those encoding standards made. It may be that the OPUS encoding fits well with your equipment & ears. It appears to take a higher bitrate MP3 to preserve that sound.

Mark Gosdin
 
I'm converting the OPUS files to mp3

Why?

Any transcoding from one lossy compression format to another lossy compression format will only further degrade sound quality.

So your 160k MP3 will sound worse than the 160k opus, whether they are equivalent compression rates or not.

I'm not familiar with opus, but other algorithms, such as AAC, are more efficient than MP3, so a 160k AAC should sound better than a 160k MP3. Similarly, if opus is as efficient as AAC, the decompressed audio will still benefit from the higher rate MP3.
 
But how are you getting the Opus-compressed files in the first place? Can't they provide you with a more widely supported format to begin with?

Most modern car stereos will support MP3, M4A (AAC), and WMA... sometimes even Ogg Vorbis, WAV, and FLAC. And MP2 and MP1 often work as well, because many MP3 decoders are backwards-compatible with them.
 
OPUS is a streaming format.
Good one. And.....?

Pray tell, what bearing/illumination as such bring does this to the subject at hand?

Like any other format, OPUS is primarily a digital storage format. While some are more universal in many usage respects, all lossy codecs (MP3, AAC, Vorbis, etc.) are inherently "streaming" formats. ;)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom