• 7Sea_Sailor@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    477·
    2 months ago

    Just use yt-dlp instead of relying on websites that shove ads in your face and may do what ever they want to the files you’re downloading?

    • bblfrnz@beehaw.orgEnglish
      355·
      2 months ago

      The worst ever suggestion and unfortunately the most upvoted. Do not ever download music from youtube, free-mp3-download was a front-end for deezer with flacs and 320 kbps mp3 and music on youtube is only about 160 kbps, that’s kinda okay for streaming but absolutely ridiculous if you want to download and keep it.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
        51·
        2 months ago

        You can tell the difference between 320kbps and 160kbps in a blind test?

        If you can tell anything above 160 you’re in a select minority (and using great equipment). Most people will never have any use for 320.

        • sus@programming.devEnglish
          6·
          2 months ago

          Youtube actually uses 128kbps opus, which should be significantly better than 160kbps mp3

          but the real problem is that you can’t know what quality the uploader used, it all gets recompressed by youtube.

        • Ilandar@aussie.zoneEnglish
          11·
          2 months ago

          I don’t understand where you guys get these conspiracy theories about the human ear from, you sound like the people who claimed the human eye couldn’t see a difference above 60 FPS. It’s just obviously wrong. Stop reading studies and telling yourself you can’t hear a difference. Use your ears.

    • Ilandar@aussie.zoneEnglish
      243·
      2 months ago

      Why do people still download music from YouTube in 2024? The quality is awful and it’s not even the easiest method of music piracy.

      • Sorse@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        142·
        2 months ago

        it’s not even the easiest method of music piracy.

        What’s easier than pressing 2 buttons in my YouTube app?

        The quality is awful

        It’s perfectly acceptable for me

      • Bellatired@beehaw.orgEnglish
        7·
        2 months ago

        Personally, some of the particular covers sang by Youtubers or certain compilations remind me of specific memories back when I was younger.

        Also there’s a lot of songs that are not available anywhere else

        • Ilandar@aussie.zoneEnglish
          1·
          2 months ago

          We could say the same thing for SoundCloud or any other music hosting service. It’s not a reason to do everything on that one platform, especially when better alternatives exist.

          • Bellatired@beehaw.orgEnglish
            2·
            2 months ago

            Nope. Not really. I speak two local languages for example and none of them are in Soundcloud, it was never popular in my region.

            • Ilandar@aussie.zoneEnglish
              12·
              2 months ago

              I’m not talking about you, I’m talking about the concept of using a service because it has content you cannot find elsewhere. That is absolutely why many people still download music from SoundCloud. Whether you do or not is completely irrelevant.

              • Bellatired@beehaw.orgEnglish
                31·
                2 months ago

                You: WHY DO PEOPLE…

                Me: (Answering your question) PERSONALLY…

                You: I’m not talking about YOU, your experience is irrelevant

                What a goddamn fucking clown 🤣 I swear you need to grow some braincells next time you encounter an opinion that’s contrary to yours.

      • RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        62·
        2 months ago

        I download it from youtube because that’s where I found it, and I’m not entirely sure what’s easier than just copying/pasting the link of the page I’m already on. I’m very confident other methods have better quality, but easier is a big statement.

        • Footnote2669@lemmy.zipEnglish
          41·
          2 months ago

          Plus, it’s more likely you’ll find music you want on YouTube than Spotify or wherever since the author just needs to upload a video

          • RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            Does it just add a download button on the YouTube video? Because copy/paste is a pretty hard process to beat for simplicity.

            • Ilandar@aussie.zoneEnglish
              2·
              2 months ago

              Soulseek uses P2P filesharing. You open whatever software client you’re using, search for whatever you want (with any additional parameters you want) and download. If you ever used one of the various Deezer downloaders it is a very similar experience. It is certainly a lot easier than repeatedly copy/pasting YouTube URLs for every song, or needing to play every single song so you can access some little download extension button you’ve added.

              • RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                1·
                2 months ago

                I mean, it means I have to search it elsewhere, but I can see the benefit if I already know a list of things I want. I actually do have to play each song I download because I find the music on youtube in the first place. I don’t know I want the song until I’ve heard it.

    • silent_squirrel@feddit.deEnglish
      17·
      2 months ago

      It was possible to download lossless FLAC files (they got them straight from Deezer) though, so higher quality than anything downloaded from Youtube etc.

    • ඞmirEnglish
      103·
      2 months ago

      YouTube is absolutely unacceptable quality. The difference is clearly audible even on $5 earbuds. I feel sorry for your ears if you don’t hear the difference, but the vast majority of those who care enough to download music will be able to tell the difference.

      I personally pay for Deezer HiFi and save the FLACs locally. Friends mostly do the same with Tidal, but both work well for this purpose.

      If you want to find FLACs without paying for a service you can check out rutracker. It has torrents for discographies from a lot of famous artists. Alternatively, you could find a stolen account for one of the previously mentioned services, but that goes too far for my morals because you’re hurting a normal person with a hacked account.

    • BreakDecksEnglish
      61·
      2 months ago

      Despite all the naysayers in the comments, this is the correct answer. No ad-riddled websites, no weird guis. just “yt-dlp < url of whatever you want to rip >” in bash.

      Lots of people responding to this need to acquaint themselves with the raw power of yt-dlp. It isn’t just for YouTube. You can rip Deezer and other streaming audio services. You can rip pretty much any video site. It even takes RSS and M3U8 links and will rip live streams.

    • authEnglish
      41·
      2 months ago

      On Android I use Newpipe for downloading audio-only.

    • hasty3827@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      7·
      2 months ago

      If you like cli try streamrip on github. Then you can download from deezer, qobuz, or tidal. Like you said, there lots of free arl for those online.

      A much simpler solution is using doubledouble for those not as tech savvy.

    • TenkardEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      Deezer sent out a mail that they are closing the free service so it may not work anymore (without a paid Deezer account)

      • LiveLM@lemmy.zipEnglish
        3·
        2 months ago

        Subbing for a month, then downloading Gigabytes of properly tagged FLACs doesn’t sound too bad tbh

      • southsamurai@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        9·
        2 months ago

        I got the impression that was more of a “oh, yeah, I read about that in magazine a” after someone mentions having read about it in a newspaper.