Audio Quality in Streaming Media | Andrew Scheps | Talks at Google
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 окт 2013
- Lost In Translation with Andrew Scheps provides an engaging, revelatory and humorous presentation of current audio format comparisons. The demonstration showcases the auditory differences of master recordings played back in different formats such as vinyl, CD, MP3, AAC and online streaming models.
Scheps (www.uaudio.com/blog/artist-int...) has engineered and mixed for some of the biggest acts in the business, including Adele, Metallica, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Linkin Park, Green Day and U2. He is a two-time GRAMMY® winner for his work on the Red Hot Chili Peppers' Stadium Arcadium and Adele's 21 albums and was named the 2012 International Engineer of the Year by the UK's Music Producers Guild.
Funnily enough, this movie seems to have corrupted audio - at 43:46 the image glitches for a while and all the sound disappears till the end (despite the timeline preview still showing the audio "shadow")! Does any of you experience the same problem or is it just on my end?
same
Same here, super annoying. @talksatgoogle , please fix this!?
me too, funny that it happens on the video where someone tells youtube to get their product better
Ditto
Anyone else feeling the irony of watching this on RUclips?
Dude totally! I thought the same thing, hahaha.
whats a youtube?
Nah, he's talking about hi-fi music, this is Google Talk and RUclips is fine for that purposes!
i dont have any doubts that andrew schweps is communist
Sideburn Ernie not until just now!
Andrew Scheps is one of the most amazing persons in the industry. Every time I see and here him he makes me smile :)
So, I think this talk is devastated by the lack of examples. BMP/ASCAP couldn't part with 30 seconds of a song to get us interested in high quality audio?
It just dawned on me what an amazing invention recording is. It’s insane. Realy
Thinking it. You capture a moment in time.
First time they could listen back to the wax roll thing must have been crazy
Nice to hear someone so in tune with so many facets of the audio business. I love listening to Andrew speak about music and audio. Hes clearly a very passionate person and cares deeply about his craft and the future of music.
Andrew Scheps is my favorite engineer... that guy is so damn cool.
It's ironic that the sound disappears at about 40mins in. Gutted, I was enjoying that.
This was more interesting than I thought it would be. Andrew Scheps is a great teacher and speaker.
Best audio presentation I have heard in a very long time. Thank you
starts at 2:40
in google play store you can download the music only in MP3 we are in 2017 MP3 format has been discontinued...
Otto the bus driver really pulled himself together, man! Zepplin rules!
I just loooooove Andrew.
Andrew, I was intrigued to learn the brain has to work harder to decipher Lossy “music” once it reaches our ears making prolonged exposure to Lossy “music” mentally exhausting.
You contrasted the anecdotal description of a young man’s mental fatigue attributed to prolonged exposure to Lossy “music” (presumably in the form of MP3s he'd been listening to all day) with your own marathon session - a fifteen-hour experience listening to LPs you found relaxing, rather than mentally exhausting.
Without getting into the Analogue vs. Digital debate you suggested listening to vinyl is less taxing on the brain because the brain calls fewer neuro-cognitive processes into play when the reconstructed (demodulated?) signal or pressure wave reaches your ears.
You also suggested a threshold be agreed upon by content creators and providers or distributors. As an end-user I want my music to sound as intended by the Artist and the collaborative team that created it.
Bottom line for me is I don't want my music compromised by corrupting Lossy codecs or transcoding issues and I also don't want to suffer that mental fatigue or exhaustion described earlier. I want listening to be a pleasure rather than a chore.
I am trialling a Bluesound “Powernode 2” with Tidal and Spotify while my Pioneer SX-750 is in the workshop. I was planning to ditch my small LP collection, rip and store all my CDs as FLAC files in a Bluesound Vault 2, but now I'm reconsidering because maybe prolonged exposure to Lossless CD, ripped FLAC files and Lossy 320mbps MP3s are mentally fatiguing too.
Lossy codecs appear to corrupt the Artist/Listener relationship if the end-user (the "Listener") does not end up hearing the music as intended due to fatigue or other issues.
Many thanks.
This is a wonderful talk but what happened to the audio at 43:50??? It drops out and is gone for the rest of the lecture. I've tried on multiple devices and it's gone. Please repost this video with all the audio!
great info, especially for film production. thanks
Great to see more and more of this conversation getting exposure, I thank Neil Young for being a public face. I will now keep an ear out for Andrew Scheps mentions.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge so freely. You are amazing at what you do and I am learning so much so quickly. I have a fledgling label in SLC. You have given me a lot of hope and reassurance that I am on the right path.
***** Hey Jerone! I am in SLC as well, learning quickly and focusing on mixing and sound design. Currently I am honing my mixing abilities through Dueling Mixes, led in part by Graham Cochrane of the Recording Revolution, who I see you also subscribe to here on RUclips. I'd be interested to hear of how things are going with your label and other efforts. I am completely aloof when it comes to the SLC scene and it would be cool to have a local contact with similar interests. Hope all is well!
Best,
-Matt
the grammys suck and esperanza spalding makes boring music and I'm a huge jazz fan
Thanks Andrew for kicking RUclips's ass about the bitrate. Has the highest and lowest bitrate and it really does ruin so much of everyone's music discovery. No music upload guidelines either. They're really doing a disservice to all music culture while also providing a service, but it is such a crippled service, while also having the best bitrate right there in hd if someone clicks it. RUclips's low quality audio has made some really sad music lessons where I bring the HQ version to someone and they finally realize how bad YT. Hopefully one day YT will stop this nonsense!
The story about the guy who was exhausted listening to music, my jaw dropped. Amazing story. Andrew is the man! He brought a $10,000 D/A converter for some tests! To play the song that my dad played to get me into music. Roundabout! What a small world. I fucking love you guys.
Does anybody got the high quality music streaming service name that Andrew recommends by the end of the video?
I'm very respectful of Andrew Scheps for his experience and commitment to promoting lossless audio formats, and also promoting better quality audio (we need better quality audio!). I'm a bit worried about where he's getting his information from, because @ 16-bit 44.1kHz (for playback) all of the information for perfectly recreating an an analog sound wave is already contained in the digital file. Anything else is unnecessary. Check out xiph.org. The (I believe if I'm not mistaken) founder of xiph.org Monty is VERY knowledgeable about audio (analog and digital) and in this article (people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html) he explains in great detail why 24-bit 96kHz is very silly, and how 192kHz can actually distort audio. The gist is that for playback 16-bit 48kHz is most likely the maximum bit depth and sample rate you would even want to use for perfect analog sound wave recreation, and after that it's just useless. The reason that it is extended to 48kHz is for the DAC filter fall off I believe. That part is a little bit over my head. I'm not sure how Mr. Scheps can sit there and tell people that vinyl is superior to a digital format, and suggest that 24-bit 96kHz audio is superior to 16-bit 48kHz audio when science is clearly not supporting this. If you want further information also check out the neat video that Monty proving that 16-bit 44.1kHz contains all the information needed to recreate an analog sound wave. He even uses analog oscilloscope and and analog wave generator, then directly compares them to the digital counterpart. It's extremely informative. No disrespect to Mr. Scheps, but he should look further into the science of sound.
The resolution is higher across the entire bandwidth for one thing but there are many other reasons why some people believe audio at higher sample rates can sound better. With that said and science aside (I've read compelling arguments on both sides) I can hear the difference in my studio and that's all that really matters to me. I don't have an ax to grind one way or the other, if it didn't sound better I'd be happy to do everything at 16 bit 44.1 KHZ, it would certainly save a ton of space and processing power. I recommend before getting too caught up in technical papers to do some critical listening in a proper recording studio and hear for yourself if you haven't already.
I've got an HDSPe AIO and it's capable of all of all of the "common" sample rates (and everything in between, because you can adjust the DDP per sample). I've actually tested 24-bit 44.1 kHz vs. 16 recently with tools and there is a difference. This is probably due to quantization artifacts when truncating to 16-bits from 24. I'm doing some tests with oscilloscopes using iZotope's MBIT+ dither algorithm (oscilloscopes can "hear" better than we'll ever be able to). I need to investigate more. 192 kHz does sound different, but according to oscilloscope this is because it's imparting some sort of distortion. Maybe that's incorrect. But at first glance that looks like what's going on. I'm also not bashing higher sample rates for recording/processing because I've learned recently there are some advantages, like emulating analog synths (i.e. NI's MONARK). But truthfully, if you're hearing more accurate audio when comparing 24-bit 44.1 kHz to for example 24-bit 96 kHz for PLAYBACK. You'd be the first. As far as I understand NO ONE has ever successfully demonstrated this in a research setting. Please, (sincerely) let me know if I'm mistaken or wrong. The various scientific articles I've read state that (for playback) 44.1 kHz is even above what we already need. That with what some would argue is already overkill resolution 24-bit depth (but it doesn't add any type of distortion or problems so it's just fine to use in conjunction with any audio sampling rate) is all we'll ever need (for playback). I think that's good news! When I'm done with my projects I'll be exporting @ 44.1 kHz 24-bit depth. Because that's what the experts who build the tools are telling me I should do.
Seriously, watch this video:
www.xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
I'm totally not trying to diminish the art of mixing/producing (it's what I love the most!) but when it comes down to the technical details, I'm going to trust the electronics engineers, programmers, mathematicians, and psychoacoustic scientific researchers over a dude that USES the tools those experts build. Wouldn't you?
Also, you don't need to use lossless for the file that people actually end up listening to.
In a word, NO.
great job! thanx. i am always learning.
This is interesting to see - for the longest time, it's like the audio guys didn't quite understand what was happening on the data side, and the data guys didn't understand the audio ramifications of what they were working on... it seems like only recently, we're getting info that helps the two camps understand what is going on in the other camp. I guess it's thanks to talks like this, so thank you!
Excellent work, Andrew!
Come kick it in Detroit with yours truly sometime!
I do not expect HD audio to be widely available for a long time.
Please pray for me.
Andrew Scheps starts at 2:53 .
Has the audio track always been muted from 43:50 onwards?
In December last year it was announced that the will add music in 44.1 and 16. Has anyone heard about it?
Thanks for this great talk. Finally some real world common sense about streaming quality.
Would Love to hear the rest, but at ruclips.net/video/SXbH-yzGNfg/видео.html there is a encoding fail in the video and then the audio is gone, am i the only one ?
Great presentation! Very informational and well given.
But Fraunhofer is based in Munich, Germany. Not "up here".
But the Fraunhofer USA Digital Media Technologies is based in "up there"
spot on!
Great insight (or theory) starting at ca. 40 min: Listening to lossy audio may actually be WORK for the brain. While it DOES throw away the parts that a lossy encoder also throws away, it EXPECTS it, so if it's not there in the audio it fills in those parts. I had myself come to similar ideas about video encoding a long time ago. The point is that our playback mechanisms are BEFORE the brain's filters, so at that point the stuff about to be thrown away is still expected.
Very good!
I really wish I could hear the a/b as well. I'm in my studio trying to learn all of the things... The abstracts are, well, abstract, and I suppose it's nice to have a pointer to look at, it'd be nice to have the concrete examples Mr. Scheps is using.
ABX tests will fail you - use long term listening tests, and learn the tells of low-res ---- hi-hats, cymbals, timbre of instruments, number of voices you can hear before covering each other (losing the definition of each), etc.
easiest way to train your ears is to mix your own music. even a crappy never to be released song -- if you mix it yourself and listen to the material, then reduce it to mp3 and listen again, you should clearly hear loss and degradation all over it.
+ezrazski thanks for the tip.
awesome
Audio is fixed! And DSD gets a quick mention at the end, but it's not really a consumer format at the moment...
What was the name of the streaming service he mentioned towards the end of his talk where it's like dropbox? I've been trying to look for it, but so far no progress.
orastream
Thanks!
you can do a word search in the youtube transcript, you just have to have the transcript tab open first before you hit crtl + f :)
It's sad that Google edited out the music. The various bitrates of the music being compared is the whole point of this talk. :(
You wouldn’t be able to hear the difference anyway with RUclips encoding
@@ColbyHill721 you would.
@@massivebeatzz you wouldn't, RUclips encodes to a specific bitrate and sample rate as well as bit depth and it completely destroys audio, so the difference between something like 96k and 44.1k would be impossible to hear because it would all be pushed down to RUclipss encoding rate (I believe 44.1k).
@@ColbyHill721 That is not bitrate, that's sampling rate. bitrate is 64, 128, 256, 320 - and there is a difference that you can hear even after RUclips's conversion. To hear 44.1 vs 96, you would need a dedicated DAC or audio interface to even hear it outside of any streaming platform, and the best of best headphones to hear a difference. Recording / tracking in 96, and then mastering down to 44.1 would however give you a somewhat improvement, but even that - marginal at best.
@@massivebeatzz True, but Colby is ultimately right. RUclips does squash the bitrate, thus 320 and 256 MP3 would both sound the same through the video and they would both sound like 128 AAC if that's what the player is currently using. Bottlenecks are bottlenecks, nothing you can do about it.
great thanx!!
Interesting talk and I enjoyed it, but I wish Andrew had touched on the issue of streaming quality vs. copyright which I'm sure there's a connection - folks are less likely to buy if the incentive to own higher quality is removed.
Hooray for Opus!
His explanation of things tallies very well with my own experience. Personally I'm very happy with Spotify (ogg vorbis), 300 kbps, but I'm not happy with 160 kbps, and for MP3 I'm not happy with even 300 kbps, and MP2 is not acceptable at all, I'm also happy with ACC at 300 or higher. I never listen to music on youtube, so the problems there I was not familiar with, but I believe him.
I have a question, and anybody with knowledge is welcome to answer, I listen to production music over the internet from Production Music Libraries such as APM, Extreme Music and Audio Network to name a few and since I am NOT an industry related professional that is as close to these tracks as I'm going to get, I'd like to know just how bad the quality of what I'm hearing is, any suggestions would be appreciated.
I'm a little confused about what he meant about using zip folders. Should I not be compressing my track stems in zip folders? Is their a difference between the files pre zip and post zip? Sorry I'm kind of a novice at understanding this.
FLAC is better than zip files for lossless music compression.
The difference between CD and vinyl is just due to audio compression not been possible on vinyl and therefor sounding more dynamic. Bitrate and sample rates don't matter that much, CD quality is as good as it has to be. Andrew mixed the last RHCP album and that one sounded extremely bad due to extreme compression.
Andrew doesn't treat anything with direct compression. He runs everything in parallel, and usually maxes it out at around 4 db. At the end of the day though, it's about making his clients happy. If RHCP wanted the results he gave them then he did his job.
Jonathan Laird +4db? He must be a Clippers fan. haha
Well....since many engineers apply as much as 10 db to a vocal track alone, I'm gonna say....no.
FauxReal when Jonathan is referring to 4db, what he's referring to is 4db of compression, or a 4db reduction in the peak levels of the signal.
I disagree hyperliteBo about the RCHP record, I think it sounds fantastic. and I think bitrate and sample rates do matter, when you are dealing with digital files and streaming. also remember that the compression added in mixing is only one stage in multiple stages of compression before the actual product is released to the general public.
I will however, agree with you on the fact that there is nothing wrong with CD quality, as I usually track in 44.1khz, albeit I'm working in 24 bit mode (such is the way with the modern DAW), and I do sometimes have a hard time hearing the difference between 96 and 44.1 when I'm working in the studio
hyperliteBo , Yes, of course compression was totally absent on all vinyl before CDs arrived. Totally unheard of. That's obvious when you don't know what you're talking about.
There are a lot of factors affecting the way we hear music whether it's lossy or lossless. One is the equipment. A lossy compressed music may sound similar or marginally different from a lossless file if you use an inexpensive pair of earbuds. A lot of consumers are satisfied with this. Hence, a lossy file will be preferred due to its small file size and the difference to them is negligible. Another thing is we hear things differently. Making the lossy vs lossless topic a subjective discussion, in my opinion. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately to some) I can distinguish a lossy format vs lossless format through my headphones. So, I would prefer to have CD-quality compression played through a decent digital-to-analog converter then play into my headphones.
#1. Destin Bennett. From such a prestigious organization you need to learn how to present without reading verbatim from a piece of paper. You seem to represent the organization accurately.
#2 Google. Play the sound samples. Yes I know it will not sound the same. I can watch peoples reactions within the room. Perhaps you were too lazy to credit the sound clips in the video in order to adhere to your own AUP?
#3 Andrew Scheps: Thank you for an excellent presentation.
good video, thanks for hosting, google.
Sound disappear at 43:48 minutes. ?? Did not do first time i listened to this 5-6 years ago? Google?
capitan? orestream ? anyone know link?
RUclips should use better sound quality.
Pretty ironic that were discussing streaming quality and the video glitches out at the 43/44 range and goes silent to the end
Andrew is my guru!!!
Awesome #musictheory
Andrew Scheps has said that he won the "Loudness War" with his mixes for Metalllica, had Bob Ludwig, mastering engineer, ask him why did you send a mix at +8 DB, and it is hard to take from him that he cares about quality sound.
+themotownboy1
I think he did explain himself pretty clearly regarding the loud stuff. Paraphrasing: "I work with it loud, because then you have no excuse when something sounds like shit - and you have to fix it right there and then".
+themotownboy1 When you're an engineer, as Scheps said, you work for your client. His clients in this case was Metallica and their producers. He made the record the way it sounded based on their opinions during the final process. He made it loud, he admits it. It would be worse if he said "well, it's not that loud really." Yeah, it's bricked but listen to some of his other more organic, dynamic records and come back to me with that argument.
All I can say is that i found another album mastered by Scheps, AFI -Burials (he also referred to this in the last 17 min) and the sound on both the CD and Vinyl are horrifically distorted where it should be clean. I love his talk here, but he needs to put some of preaching into practice.
He doesn't practice what he preaches and his mixes sound like balls to my ears. It's funny that the people "in the know" and the people doing these videos can't shake a stick at a mix by a guy like Russell Elevado who is only using tape and still gets more out of his mixes than all these guys doing these silly endorsements. It's as if they are too lazy to mix these days. They've gotten fat and given all this praise, so they think they don't have to work. Lets just collect a check from Waves or Slate and tell everyone these plugins are great, so we don't have to actually work! great!
He admits in a NAMM video that he does not take an audiophile approach to mixing, but its all about how it feels.
Tres informative! :D
43:48 why does The Audio cut out here?
43:47 audio cuts off for the rest of the video! 😢
It got me too :(
7 years have passed, internet bandwidth multiplied, high resolution audio recording/playback equipment is more popular than ever in history... and still streaming services are not transparent and/or competent about audio quality... Let alone loudness regulations! 🤦♂️
Holy shit. He nailed it.
Dear Google RUclips staff - are you listening? His comments about audio on youtube at ca. 30min are important! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE give uploaders an option to have a good quality audio stream in their youtube video independent of video resolution. Audio is MUCH more important for many kinds of content. Animal videos don't care about audio - but it's not just music videos where good audio is significantly more important than the resolution of the video stream. Lectures would benefit too!
The video editor thinks that it is more important for us to see him touch his fingers than show us his visual aids.
You are too kind. You should've written: SHOW ME THE DAM PRESENTATION SLIDES OF HIS MOFO, NOT HIS BEARD
Google couldn't afford to pay the licensing fees? Really?
I agree, i listen to music(mp3) when i study for long periods of time and i have discovered that the music actually drains me to the point where i have to turn it off. Now being a man, is it not a case of the brain straining to process the music while at the same time trying to understand my physics? I think its a solid arguement.
Sound drops half way this video!
Why can't we hear the samples?
I never cease to be amazed by some of the rank amateurs on this forum who either don't think Andrew has a valid point when it comes to favoring quieter mixes in favor of dynamic range or just don't have any valid reason at all. MP3 becoming the standard of audio is not as favorable as lossless, as of yet. There is no well-rounded, honest, music aficionado who would rather listen to something orchestral in 320 kbps than 96k. MP3 conversion may catch up in time, but it isn't there yet.
No, I don't actually. I understand subjects like this are, to an extent, subjective to individual taste, but I defy anyone to prove that the lossy formats offer more musicality through dynamic range.
+Jake E Hobbs
Famous audio engineer Bob Clearmountain disagrees with you. And so do I.
"Clearmountain, who now works out of Mix This! in Pacific Palisades, says that when he heard the vinyl test pressings of the albums he'd worked on in the studio, he always felt the same way: depressed."I'd just listen and go: 'Jesus, after all that work, that's all I get?' It was sort of a percentage of what we did in the studio," he says. "All that work and trying to make everything sound so good, and the vinyl just wasn't as good."Not only did records provide only a sliver of what he'd done in the studio but they also came with plenty of sounds that hadn't been there in the first place: ticks and pops."If you're a musician like Bob and I," Ludwig says, "and you get to do a mix and you listen to it and you love the way it sounds, and then it's transferred to vinyl and suddenly it's got noise and ticks and pops, for me that's an extremely unmusical event."
Read more by Googling Do CDs Sound Better than Vinyl? Pay special attention to the fact that he said early digital, thanks to conversion technologies, wasn't great. The bottom line? From frequency response to dynamic range and distortion, digital beats vinyl.
+Jonathan Laird
I'd rather listen to a mix with a nicely preserved dynamic range any day, than listen to an uber-limited over-squashed mix in favor of "LOUD". I hear some of these mastered mixes, with a DR of -4 to -2 and to me it's just noise. The musical part has all been wiped out. The last album I mixed, I adhered to the LUFS standard and the mastering engineer who I sent it to emailed me a "thank you" note. LOL In the end, the mastered album had an RMS/DR of around -14 to -12, and it was wonderful to listen to sonically.
+Çerastes You are absolutely insane.
DR is, thankfully, coming back. The last project I mixed had a DR of 12db, and that was AFTER mastering... and NO ONE has complained. Too the contrary, the artist and I are getting compliments as to how nice the mixes sound.
And, Hi Res waves are always going to be the best bet. We all know this. Unfortunately, with the MP3, it's the best of the devils available to us for convenient upload and online distribution at this time. I would encourage those who do digital downloads to choose a FLAC format, if they are given the choice and if their media player supports it.
There is no audio for me after 43:47
Nice M2 monitors
Uploaded in glorious 720P
seems like the audio drops out at about 42 minutes?
"Let's listen to some Yes" Great band selection when discussing audio quality. Their 90215 album was mixed exceptionally well. As someone who's mostly a rap fan, that album is one album that I was impressed with, both in sound quality and creativity. One of my all time favorite albums right there.
No audio after 43:47. Please! Please! re-upload this.
I hope RUclips learned something.......5 YEARS AGO - Is there any Audio choices for Music uploads now??
Enjoying this, however at about 43:47 the sound completely goes away.
The lights just got dimmer , man
Pre-100%-In-The-Box days!
Don't know about this... when he mentions how astonishing Blue Note recordings are that put me off in a big way (as a Blue Note label fan)... orastream seems a bit dated with aac and opus having improved so much at low bitrates
He missed the biggest point "Dynamics" it's not always the codec, For example Andrew worked with the newest RHCP album and it doesn't matter how high resolution you play it will always sound terrible and crushed because it doesn't have the necessary Dynamics to make it sound "great".
Diego Mendivil same thing with the AFI album he references.
Agree....I think dynamic range compression is much more noticeable and unpleasant than file size compression.
Funny then this, dynamic range compression, is something you can do something about yourself. If your clients agree.
Diego Mendivil and they suck, hard!
i like the part where i dont here the examples
The man who won the loudness war 👍
Such a great talk! I stopped listening so streamed music, as I was sick of low quality sounds! I kept changing headphones and spending money on sound systems, but still don't get that satisfying experience!
what is the streeming service he did show at the end? thx
Sigh...my hero!
I always switch to hd when listening to Music, if it's available.
The sound fails at 44min. Even better irony
Audio cuts out at 43 min? Niiiiice RUclips 😅
As far as I understand it. It is impossible to have something coming out of a speaker to be digital.
Too bad we can't listen to the tracks he played in this session.
Everyone better watch this lecture in 1080p.
Niquist said: "2.5" not 2.
im watching this for a class but I was alrdy 25 min in when I opened it interesting I dont remember watching this video at all!
Too bad the soundfiles were edited out.
43:47 can’t hear any audio after 43:47
Maybe as many as 200,000 years of music.
Give any topic to Andrew he will make it cognitive speech to listen therapy for hours! I started listening just he talks! I don't even know why!
recording is a delayed effect..what...crazy
I watched it in HD....
it aggravates me that the video editor clipped out where he plays the actual bits of music towards the end of the talk. he's using them as heard examples, so to cut them out, is almost making the knowledge he's imparting with them, irrelevant, is like cheating. also, they are not showing what he has on the screen enough, either.
? maybe its for copyright purposes
I would be a waste of time hearing those audio examples as the audio quality in this video is only 128kbps anyway. You would not hear any difference at that low resolution.