YouTube offering higher quality video / Stage6 ends services!

[reez]

right the nonfmt one is more defined, while the fmt one's bass is all that's defined..why is that? It shouldn't be since it went "UNTOUCHED".
I just thought i should mention it since this Topic is dedicated to SCRUTINIZING yt

[reez]

Of course it would. Youtube re-encodes the original FLV1 & compresses the audio of the &fmt=18 mp4, and generally makes it sound like shit.

ahh..well as long as they don't remove MY flv1

[atropine]

That's what I'm hearing. It's just a little louder.

GUYS!! You're not understanding what's gong on. Why am I the only one to understand the truth and the evil behind youtube's .mp4 audio. It's like i'm taking crazy pills!!, and i'm noticing stuff that doesn't exist or something. But it's real, you guys just aren't' noticing it.

.mp4 AAC audio IS COMPRESSED. check out the graphic waveforms off both versions of that miley cyrus song. You'll see the FLV1 has a reasonable dynamic range which is how it would have been originally mastered, while the other is compressed as hell, and the dynamic range is eexceedingly limited.

PLEASE STOP STAYING THEY SOUND THE SAME.

[rajman]

YouTube DOES NOT put ads.. NO ADS - ZERO on videos that are not by partners.. and ONLY puts ads on Partner videos.

DAMN YOU...i was about finished but this one ticked me off


check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKSxHYK_wfs

it's called the video ID system. The company submitted that episode to youtube for "fingerprinting" then when they find your video, instead of REMOVING IT, they "monetize" it, put an ad on it, and make some money.

we must now kiss and make up..or i will be banned from this forum..as i am the one who starts the most off topic topics.

Yes you are right...I had a video on my Youtube account that had 'Matched 3rd party content' next to 'Live' on the 'My Videos' page, I clicked it and said thhe name of the copyright holder and that they permit it on Youtube and there may be an Ad on the page, and yupp there was! Kinda annoying so I took the video off XD

[atropine]

Yes you are right...I had a video on my Youtube account that had 'Matched 3rd party content' next to 'Live' on the 'My Videos' page, I clicked it and said thhe name of the copyright holder and that they permit it on Youtube and there may be an Ad on the page, and yupp there was! Kinda annoying so I took the video off XD

They got me on 3 videos. I took down 2 of them, on principal, I don't want to be advertising their shit, and the other problem I have is that I wonder if they eventually get a , in my case sony/bmg guy to look at each video and if the encoding is decided to be too shit, then they just say 'oh we'll delete this one' or maybe if you have high quality stereo in your video, the music company may not like it, and just delete your video.

I don't believe this auto video ID system ends with just the ads. I have 2 copyright infringements against me already, the next will kill my account. So I took down 2 that I didn't' really care much about, and just hoping sony/bmg don't turn on me for the remaining video.

[reez]

you guys are starting to suck..i mean i know i'm not the best but at least i do some research before i talk...*sigh*

Kinda annoying so I took the video off XD

they will never stop, everytime you upload they will put an ad on it. Although I was trying out the "Wanted" trailer while it was being monitored. I got the 1st 40sec up, more than that and it gets recognized.

I don't want to be advertising their shit

when did it become YOURS?

if the encoding is decided to be too shit, then they just say 'oh we'll delete this one'

:/ ..do you 'remember' what they did BEFORE this system...REMOVE YOUR VIDEO WITH NO HESITATION

I have 2 copyright infringements against me already, the next will kill my account.

at this moment THEY DON'T COUNT! I started a channel and uploaded "indiana jones", "wanted", "Speed racer" trailers and they all got taken down by the system but the account is STILL STANDING. so they don't count.
I like this system, alot more videos get to stay than get taken down and getting you suspended. You guys sound like this guy i saw today saying that he's gonna sue MegaVideo because he didn't get the money he was promised for his little "rewards points".

MegaVideo is one of the few video hosting services that have NO TIME LIMIT! What kinda brat would want to kill that

Leave the system alone..for it is awesome

[atropine]

y

I have 2 copyright infringements against me already, the next will kill my account.

at this moment THEY DON'T COUNT! I started a channel and uploaded "indiana jones", "wanted", "Speed racer" trailers and they all got taken down by the system but the account is STILL STANDING. so they don't count.

Was it the same copyright owner though? Before the new system came into to place. I got 3 of my videos deleted by 1 copyright holder, but it was counted as 1 strike, then whoever owns the rights to edward scissor hands got me on the 2nd strike. technically I have 4 strikes and a deleted account, but youtube seem to accept multiple copyright infringements from a single corporate at the one time as only a single infringment.

Youtube have made a statement that the new system does not apply to copyright infringements only videos that are deemed unacceptable due to nudity porn etc, and that's where the strikes expire after 6 months, but copyright infringement deletions never do.

[rajman]

Wow the 'HQ Link' is appearing really fast now....I just uploaded a video as a test, with specs of 480x360, 2MBs using x264 and 128 Kbps MP3 audio and I got the HQ link within 10 minutes
Heres the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMyuu-2WFJU

[Denizzje]

That's what I'm hearing. It's just a little louder.

GUYS!! You're not understanding what's gong on. Why am I the only one to understand the truth and the evil behind youtube's .mp4 audio. It's like i'm taking crazy pills!!, and i'm noticing stuff that doesn't exist or something. But it's real, you guys just aren't' noticing it.

.mp4 AAC audio IS COMPRESSED. check out the graphic waveforms off both versions of that miley cyrus song. You'll see the FLV1 has a reasonable dynamic range which is how it would have been originally mastered, while the other is compressed as hell, and the dynamic range is eexceedingly limited.

PLEASE STOP STAYING THEY SOUND THE SAME.

Isn't this because .mp4 AAC is only 112kb/s stereo, but the FLV mp3 is 96kb/s mono and thus has much more bandwidth availible for the single channel it has to encode?

[benrtc]

AAC vbr can peak much higher, hence the variable bit rate.

[atropine]

AAC vbr can peak much higher, hence the variable bit rate.

well the youtube encoding off it sure is unimpressive, almost DELIBERATELY unimperssive.

[reez]

here's one that doesn't have an fmt alternative. Why? since you said YT craps out an mp4 version even if it's under radar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXxZg5sLDNk&fmt=18

The other one from before was untouched but still has an mp4 version, this is also untouched but doesn't have an mp4 version

[atropine]

I was looking at a new youtube partner video just then. 'Normal quality' video, BUT No HQ flv1,BUT HQ .mp4 (Like the miley video). His 'normal quality' video was encoded by youtube though. Strange.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5hUcgvoC_NM (normal Quality)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5hUcgvoC_NM&fmt=6 (normal Quality)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5hUcgvoC_NM&fmt=18 (HQ .mp4)

[reez]

STRRANNNNNNGEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

..i say this is all viral marketing for X-Files 2

[atropine]

Even miley and Mandy, don't get HQ FLV1 even though their latest video has over 2 million hits

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ngBLWZFTJ7E (normal) (Default)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ngBLWZFTJ7E&fmt=6 (normal)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ngBLWZFTJ7E&fmt=18 (HQ MP4)

Crazy!!

Could this mean what some of you have been saying. They've been experimenting with both HQ formats, and are to ditch HQ FLV1, and replace it with HQ MP4?? If they do that, it will be a travesty, considering the low quality of both video and audio (currnetly)

gUYS this is even crazzier. YOU CAN'T FASTFORWARD WITH THE MP4 VERSION????

This is a step in the wrong direction.

EDIT: I think i'm now able to confirm, Youtube are going with MP4 as HQ only, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST.

The miley and mandy video before the last one was in HQ flv1, as well as HQ MP4, but the latest is only in HQ MP4
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=AL5X1SuE_Xc (previous video to current one -HQ flv1)

[benrtc]

AAC vbr can peak much higher, hence the variable bit rate.

well the youtube encoding off it sure is unimpressive, almost DELIBERATELY unimperssive.

That's correct. Their "degrader" is unfortunate. There's a few (I didnt' bookmark them - arrgh) that don't have the compressor or the background noise would have been very high.

[atropine]

Some of the AAC examples just sound low bitrate and compressed, and there's nothing we can do about that, but the other seemingly deliberate induced audio fault is to clip the peaks of the audio. I think that's the correct term, where the peaks distort. That is particularly annoying to me. It might be possible to have a peak volume audio effect at the beginning and end, and then say encode the the rest of the audio of your clip -3db below. That might get around that problem.

[benrtc]

Some of the AAC examples just sound low bitrate and compressed, and there's nothing we can do about that, but the other seemingly deliberate induced audio fault is to clip the peaks of the audio. I think that's the correct term, where the peaks distort. That is particularly annoying to me. It might be possible to have a peak volume audio effect at the beginning and end, and then say encode the the rest of the audio of your clip -3db below. That might get around that problem.

I tried a 6Hz sine <.1 thd. Couldn't hear it in beyer DT770 headphones, vegas meters -3dB peaks, however YT's aac peaks were clipped - sounds like a 6Hz clicker. A music test clip with peaks set -6dB was worse - levels just wandered up and down. Another at -9dB; their threshold is set so low I just gave up. They insert an audio "degrader" to kiss riaa's ass. But this doesn't make sense since they have to always dish out higher bandwidth aac whether degraded or not. IMO, it'd be better to just offer 48Kbps (58Kbps in player) aac for non-partners or whoever (some at shoutcast 48Kbps aac not too bad). YT could just roll off at 10-12KHz without a compressor - they'd save bandwidth while not seeming like a facilitator for music trading. They don't mind if you roll your own flv with lame vbr however.

[legendhouse]

I hae posted 2 videos in the last few days on another channel. 480x360 WMV 3mbps. They recieved the little HQ tv in a very short time. Now the HQ option is missing on both! It gives a text option to "watch in low quality" but it already looks terrible! It did look crystal clear. I give up.

[Livewire-]

YouTube DOES NOT put ads.. NO ADS - ZERO on videos that are not by partners.. and ONLY puts ads on Partner videos.

DAMN YOU...i was about finished but this one ticked me off


check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKSxHYK_wfs

it's called the video ID system. The company submitted that episode to youtube for "fingerprinting" then when they find your video, instead of REMOVING IT, they "monetize" it, put an ad on it, and make some money.

we must now kiss and make up..or i will be banned from this forum..as i am the one who starts the most off topic topics.

I did at one time have two of those thingy underneath my viDs but Youtube has now only
allowing me one. So my newest viD at one time had the "watch in high quality" link but for
some strange reason they went ahead and remove it.

Dramatic look <--- umm is there a special len on your cam becus that viD look really nifty!

Livewire- :P

PS.. on the low/low do you remember that little tibbit I posted a while ago?
Well woman you never responded back!!!

[Livewire-]

Please notice for clarification on the viewers player and the Youtube rating system (above pic) was completely
modify and strictly was done for pure humor sake (Yea I do wish have those Numbs!) and nothing else was
modded. :wink:

[Livewire-]

Yes you are right...I had a video on my Youtube account that had 'Matched 3rd party content' next to 'Live' on the 'My Videos' page, I clicked it and said thhe name of the copyright holder and that they permit it on Youtube and there may be an Ad on the page, and yupp there was! Kinda annoying so I took the video off XD

Oooh snap so that what Madonna - "Message to YouTube" - was gearing up for?!? Meaning Madonna is relating
to us as users "cleanliness" (it doesn't make much sense but that what i'm gathering). So in returns Madonna does
make some revenue earning shares on all unaffiliated Youtube channels,.. umm kinda like what happen to you?!,..
hmm that very interesting indeed. The viral marketing deployment is a beautiful thing soOo inotherwords it's a
mostly hit or miss on these copyright infringements viddeo thingy w/Youtube user accounts.


So the underlying concept is there...


Livewire- :P

[-Sandro-]

I still don't understand why AAC 112kb sounds so crappy. They should improve it!

Anyway the embedded player with mp4 video still has problems

[Denizzje]

I just noticed they got a new beta player. Looks much nicer then the old one if you ask me.

And the AAC audio isn't that bad right, listen to this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=gNDkGYLewtM&fmt=18 . You are not going to tell me the sound quality is bad.

[legendhouse]

I'm more into the visual quality. What in the world does it take to have a CLEAR video now?

[Denizzje]

I don't know because I am not the uploader. But I do notice it is only 320x240... so uploading to 640x480 does not always mean that the quality will be good as I notice here. I think I am not far away from the correct answer that is is WMV video with WMA audio since that is used alot in South Africa.

I'm more into the visual quality. What in the world does it take to have a CLEAR video now?

I think you are suddenly confuzed by the good looking video and my the format it uses because you editted your post :P, but as you see it is quite unsharp/fuzzy. An unsharp video is much easier to compress/encode then a sharp video like those about a rock somewhere in this thread. It was a very sharp video but the h.264 encoder of youtube couldn't handle it sometimes and there were some compression artifacts.

[NerdWithNoLife]

I tried a 6Hz sine <.1 thd. Couldn't hear it in beyer DT770 headphones, vegas meters -3dB peaks, however YT's aac peaks were clipped - sounds like a 6Hz clicker. A music test clip with peaks set -6dB was worse - levels just wandered up and down. Another at -9dB; their threshold is set so low I just gave up. They insert an audio "degrader" to kiss riaa's ass. But this doesn't make sense since they have to always dish out higher bandwidth aac whether degraded or not. IMO, it'd be better to just offer 48Kbps (58Kbps in player) aac for non-partners or whoever (some at shoutcast 48Kbps aac not too bad). YT could just roll off at 10-12KHz without a compressor - they'd save bandwidth while not seeming like a facilitator for music trading. They don't mind if you roll your own flv with lame vbr however.

Yikes, I hope you're wrong - that would really stink for me. My videos are original content so the only thing being sabotaged is my stuff!

I'm better at video than I am at audio so I can't discredit your assessment. But perhaps if their encoder is similar to a bad automatic gain control, dynamic range compression could help? It seems though everything nowadays is run through DRC excessively so you would think if it did help, you guys would have noticed already.

[-Sandro-]

I just noticed they got a new beta player. Looks much nicer then the old one if you ask me.

And the AAC audio isn't that bad right, listen to this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=gNDkGYLewtM&fmt=18 . You are not going to tell me the sound quality is bad.

Of cource it's not bad! It's mono!

[legendhouse]

Honestly,I only care about the visual...well, mostly.It looked great the first time then an hour later it looked fuzzy.I tried it with the new beta player, the old one,&fmt=18 and &fmt=6.It just stayed crappy.I swear to you that it was perfect the first time I viewed it, hence the upload question.
The best visual quality that I can come up with is what I used on my last post...and I spoke my mind about it in the vid. 640x480 WMV Bit rate 2000 kbps , CBR 96 kbps (Cheezy I know) 29.970 fps 3 minutes long with 8 minutes of a fixed picture to lower the bit rate. It runs good with no hesitation.The twin in FLV version of it looked terrible.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1tN8LfBy7A

[Denizzje]

The &fmt=18 version of that video looks quite good IMO...

I just noticed they got a new beta player. Looks much nicer then the old one if you ask me.

And the AAC audio isn't that bad right, listen to this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=gNDkGYLewtM&fmt=18 . You are not going to tell me the sound quality is bad.

Of cource it's not bad! It's mono!

That may explain it. I just stumbled on that video, put &fmt=18 behind it and I heared quite some high tones/details. But ofcourse, 112-128kb/s for one channel is more then enough for good quality. Didn't know it was mono, it sounded a bit like stereo to me.