- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
We backed up Spotify (metadata and music files). It’s distributed in bulk torrents (~300TB), grouped by popularity.
This release includes the largest publicly available music metadata database with 256 million tracks and 186 million unique ISRCs.
It’s the world’s first “preservation archive” for music which is fully open (meaning it can easily be mirrored by anyone with enough disk space), with 86 million music files, representing around 99.6% of listens.
I wonder why Spotify and not YouTube Music, Tidal or Apple Music all of which are higher quality.
They said this in the linked blog post:
Seems like reason enough to choose to scrape Spotify to me.
And Spetify’s catalogue is the broadest too.
Spotify has lossless now. Although if you’re listening on anything with Bluetooth then you probably won’t notice anyway.
well bluetooth always adds additional compression, so it could still make a difference
Spotify claims to offer lossless quality on much of their catalog; is this claim false or is there something more I’m missing here?
That’s for premium accounts, which they probably aren’t scraping with. And I think it’s still not FLAC quality
They were trying to keep file sizes down.
No one can tell the difference beyond 320kbps
…depends on the material; i’ve consistently double-blinded very obvious differences at 320 VBR vs lossless and my ears are far, far from golden…
Yeah but until two months ago Spotify was 24kbps
I’m sure there are some, namely audiophiles, but that is not who I am so I’m good with this lol.