Notification about “External YouTube Video Link Dropping”

[AdamG]

Forum Wide Notification:

We are strongly discouraging random YouTube and similar “Video links” being posted without some detailed type of description as to what you want to highlight, or what you think is important to our community. Another words, what in the video do you want to discuss/dissect/analyze. Also, provide a reasonable TLDR summary and if appropriate the Timestamp in the Video that you wish to highlight.

Starting a new thread with only a link to a Video will be promptly removed. Repeated Video Link Dropping without context will result in Warnings and possible Posting privilege revocation.

Shipmates, feel free to use this post and link to educate new members who do not comply with the rules above.

Thank you for your cooperation and understanding. This is intended to maximize our member’s time and energy.

On Edit: Decided to open this up to constructive feedback and criticism. We are happy to hear your opinions and suggestions.

Below guidance and sample suggestions provided by @antcollinet : (Copy and pasted) Thank you “Ant”

Suggested sections:

• Single line overall message of the video
• Short paragraph, more detailed description and highlights
• A few sentences about why the person posting is posting it. What they think of it, what point they are trying to make or open a discussion about by posting it. Highlighted sections with time stamps.

***************

An excellent video explaining the basics of how digital audio works, in particular, busting the myth that it is has "stair steps"

Monty uses all analogue test equipment together with a low end DAC to show how even this DAC perfectly reconstructs sound waves, perfectly smoothly. He shows how bit depth (resolution) only impacts the audio in terms of quantisation noise - rather then increasingly jagged steps - even going down to 8 bit audio to show this. He also demonstrates how dither and noise shaping used during sampling (or resampling) can dramatically reduce the audibility (and objectionability) of this noise.

Particularly fascinating for those like me who have a weak grasp of the maths of the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem are two particular demos

First - is the demo (at 5:35) of a perfectly reconstructed 20kHz sine wave with 44.1kHz sample rate - even thought there is only just over 1 sample per half cycle.

Second - (at about 20:50) is the demo that time resolution is not limited to sample rate. The edges of a square wave can be placed on a sample, on the next sample - OR - anywhere in between. No time resolution problems (at least not at the sample rate level)

This is a must watch for anyone who can't mathematically prove the sampling theorem backwards, but nevertheless wants to gain a near intuitive understanding of just how well it works.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

This is greatly appreciated!

If I may suggest something: in some threads, directly linking a YouTube video can take up a lot of screen space. Using the "Spoiler" function can help by displaying a small button instead of a large screenshot of the embedded video.

Spoiler: Link to ASR - Understanding Power Amplifier Measurements

This is raw linked:

 

[storing]

Even better would be if it were possible to specify video size. Especially for pure music videos it's a bit silly they're huge. I'm not sure this forum allows that though.

 

[guy48065]

Does this apply to the "What are we listening to right now.." thread where this exact behavior is common (and expected)?

 

[Multicore]

I would like if all video embeds have text to say what it is. There are a number of reasons why extending this courtesy should make you feel good about the effort. In "What are we listening to right now.." artist and title should suffice but I often extend this to say why I'm listening and what's notable about it.

 

[AdamG]

Does this apply to the "What are we listening to right now.." thread where this exact behavior is common (and expected)?

No.

 

[bluefuzz]

No.

Why not? I find it just as discourteous that people can't be bothered to write what or who they are linking to in music recommendation threads (and perhaps even more importantly, why) as in technical threads. As has been pointed out several times, not all YT videos (especially music videos) are available in all countries, nor is there any guarantee that they will continue to be available for any length of time. Much of the value of such threads is lost if you can't see what is being linked to.

There may also be other technical or accessibility reasons why people choose not to or are unable to show YT links or images. Also raw video embeds are not searchable through the forum software.

 

[AdamG]

Why not? I find it just as discourteous that people can't be bothered to write what or who they are linking to in music recommendation threads (and perhaps even more importantly, why) as in technical threads. As has been pointed out several times, not all YT videos (especially music videos) are available in all countries, nor is there any guarantee that they will continue to be available for any length of time. Much of the value of such threads is lost if you can't see what is being linked to.

There may also be other technical or accessibility reasons why people choose not to or are unable to show YT links or images. Also raw video embeds are not searchable through the forum software.

Firstly it’s not starting a new thread. It’s contributing to an ongoing Music Video recommendation thread. You already know what the video is. It’s a music video that needs no introduction or explanation. Let’s not make this overly complicated. We are discussing Talking Heads videos. We are talking about videos to external “Influencers and Reviewers and Creators (other than music) that are making money off of views. We are not here on a Member supported commercial free Site to drive views to these sites without good and understandable reasons.

If you personally feel that the author has not introduced the video adequately to meet your requirements. Don’t view the video. Music Video link drops are self explanatory.

 

[Multicore]

Firstly it’s not starting a new thread.

Is the new requirement only for thread OPs?

You already know what the video is. It’s a music video that needs no introduction or explanation.

Only if you can read the text in the preview display. Security settings in my browser make that a bother requiring two new tabs per video. Or do it for people using text reader tech, e.g. because of vision difficulties. And there's regional stuff as bluefuzz already pointed out.

 

[bluefuzz]

You already know what the video is.

That's the point. I don't always know what the video is. In a thread like the aforementioned 'What are you listening to now' half the linked videos are simply a black box I have no clue what is being linked to.

We are talking about videos to external “Influencers and Reviewers and Creators (other than music) that are making money off of views. We are not here on a Member supported commercial free Site to drive views to these sites without good and understandable reasons.

OK, I mostly ignore those videos anyway. But if it's the commercial aspect of it that peeves you then simply disallow YT links period. Job done. I would have no problem with that except that YT links can be a useful (regardless of their their commercial aim) starting point for a discussion. I don't really discriminate whether the link is 'technical' (talking head) or 'artistic' (music vid).

Music Video link drops are self explanatory.

Again. No they are not if you can't see them.

While the scientific approach to music technology is the anchor of this site, it is the whys and wherefores of what people listen to (and why) on their gear that keeps me here ...

 

[rcstevensonaz]

We are discussing Talking Heads videos.

I assume this policy especially applies to Talking Heads videos that Stop Making Sense? [Sorry, i just couldn't resist]

Spoiler

 

[Multicore]

That's the point. I don't always know what the video is. In a thread like the aforementioned 'What are you listening to now' half the linked videos are simply a black box I have no clue what is being linked to.

for me they are all grey like this

Compare that with the way for example @Brian Hall does it like this. Thanks Brian! It's not a lot to ask. It's usually no more than copy-paste from the yt title.

OK, I mostly ignore those videos anyway. But if it's the commercial aspect of it that peeves you then simply disallow YT links period.

My guess is this isn't the problem. It's just annoying when someone embeds a yt without explanation and requests commentary and it turns out to be 45 minutes of some audio nerd talking to camera who eventually gets to the point that turns out to be some version of "the SINAD worshipers are stupid and/or heretics". It's unfair. OP spent 15 seconds drafting their post and the rest of us have to spend however long just trying to figure out what the question is. In all likelihood we'll have quite a spread of different guesses as to the question and argue cross purposes. You could easily conclude that OPs purpose was to cause some chaos.

Now I enjoy a pile on as much as the next guy. Having a go at tryhard youtube wannabees with their provocative antics is a fun thing to do. So I'm not against posting them but don't assign me ill-defined and time-consuming homework. I think the new requirement may help with this.

 

[AdamG]

 

[Blumlein 88]

My comment is. THANK YOU!

I know there is no mal intent by such posters, but asking we watch an hour long video and don't know why it is interesting is not helpful. Often not much of it is. I do see people post a video and point to some part like, "start just past the 16 minute mark for what is relevant". That is fine.

 

[staticV3]

This is greatly appreciated!

If I may suggest something: in some threads, directly linking a YouTube video can take up a lot of screen space. Using the "Spoiler" function can help by displaying a small button instead of a large screenshot of the embedded video.

Spoiler: Link to ASR - Understanding Power Amplifier Measurements

This is raw linked:

Alternatively, post the link like this:
[URL unfurl="rue"]<Video URL>[/URL]

Result: https://youtu.be/KBn1Qzk897Y

 

[danadam]

If I may suggest something: in some threads, directly linking a YouTube video can take up a lot of screen space. Using the "Spoiler" function can help by displaying a small button instead of a large screenshot of the embedded video.

Spoiler: Link to ASR - Understanding Power Amplifier Measurements

This is raw linked:

Even better would be if it were possible to specify video size. Especially for pure music videos it's a bit silly they're huge. I'm not sure this forum allows that though.

I solved that for myself by putting:

@-moz-document domain(audiosciencereview.com) {
    div.bbMediaWrapper {
        width: 600px !important;
    }
}

in my userContent.css. It looks much better now:

 

[restorer-john]

View attachment 421352

And then he posts a silly animated .gif with no content...

 

[Doodski]

Is the new requirement only for thread OPs?


Only if you can read the text in the preview display. Security settings in my browser make that a bother requiring two new tabs per video. Or do it for people using text reader tech, e.g. because of vision difficulties. And there's regional stuff as bluefuzz already pointed out.

Then relax your security settings. I for one dislike explaining what a music video is. If you can't get it in your region and you have overdone security then that's on you.

 

[antcollinet]

I very much appreciate this new policy and will take great joy in linking it to appropriate posts.

Perhaps an example description would be useful. I can try to create one if you like.


Many thanks.

 

[Multicore]

Then relax your security settings. I for one dislike explaining what a music video is. If you can't get it in your region and you have overdone security then that's on you.

What are we listening to right now..

Was just about to post this! I cannot believe they are still producing new music.

www.audiosciencereview.com

That wasn't so hard.

And I didn't ask in an impolite selfish way

There are a number of reasons why extending this courtesy should make you feel good about the effort. In "What are we listening to right now.." artist and title should suffice but I often extend this to say why I'm listening and what's notable about it.

Specifically for pasting yt music videos I noted

It's usually no more than copy-paste from the yt title.

But you're quite right, in the end the difficulty is on me and the others who can't easily see what you're sharing, for whatever reason.