PDA

View Full Version : Why don't youtube normalize audio?



Macfunky
August 28th, 2010, 11:08 PM
I was over at a friends house recently and he was using a feature on youtube that allowed him to randomize his favourite videos. Clever feature although i wouldn't use it as a media player as he does. Audio quality aside he was complaining about the jumps in level between some songs which was his only problem with it. It got me thinking, why don't youtube normalize audio any audio that is uploaded? Even if people are not using youtube as some sort of media player, it is annoying even just watching videos and the levels jump from low in one to really high on the next.

So why don't youtube normalize videos as they are uploaded? Surely, with their servers, it would only add seconds extra onto the upload and make the overall experience less frustrating? Anyone have any thoughts on this?

cogar66
August 28th, 2010, 11:12 PM
It really has to do with the quality of the uploaded video. YouTube doesn't upload most of the music videos you see on their site; most videos are user uploaded.

tgm4883
August 28th, 2010, 11:48 PM
If I was a musical artist, I wouldn't want someone randomly messing with the audio on my files.

Spice Weasel
August 29th, 2010, 12:11 AM
Because YouTube wasn't intended to be a site to listen to music for free, it was supposed to be for.. Ah, let me think... Oh yeah! Broadcasting yourself!

Dayofswords
August 29th, 2010, 12:13 AM
normalizing audio is annoying if you ask me...

it becomes quiet and the sound is boosted(slowly-ish) til you can hear the vents in the room, they talk and it's deafing for a good 2 seconds

i rather do initial volume changes than that

MasterNetra
August 29th, 2010, 12:21 AM
I was over at a friends house recently and he was using a feature on youtube that allowed him to randomize his favourite videos. Clever feature although i wouldn't use it as a media player as he does. Audio quality aside he was complaining about the jumps in level between some songs which was his only problem with it. It got me thinking, why don't youtube normalize audio any audio that is uploaded? Even if people are not using youtube as some sort of media player, it is annoying even just watching videos and the levels jump from low in one to really high on the next.

So why don't youtube normalize videos as they are uploaded? Surely, with their servers, it would only add seconds extra onto the upload and make the overall experience less frustrating? Anyone have any thoughts on this?

To do that they would need to extract the audio track from the video, slice it up at the points where the volume differs, adjust the volume to those parts and put it back together. It would probably be just too much for their servers to handle, decompiling and compiling video + audio isn't exactly light on resources add to that their would be over 120 million videos and growing to shift through. But come to think about it, I am not sure its something that could be done by automation. I mean audio technically varies frame to frame based on the noise and the lack there of.

pwnst*r
August 29th, 2010, 01:31 AM
normalizing audio is annoying if you ask me...

it becomes quiet and the sound is boosted(slowly-ish) til you can hear the vents in the room, they talk and it's deafing for a good 2 seconds

i rather do initial volume changes than that

There's no varying audio in normalized audio playback. Everything is boosted/cut to a preset level.

Macfunky
August 29th, 2010, 01:57 AM
If I was a musical artist, I wouldn't want someone randomly messing with the audio on my files.

Messing? As someone has pointed out normalization does not cause varying audio. It ONLY brings audio up to a unified level. If every video was like that i think youtube would be a much better medium.

I would never use youtube for audio. I am a flac man. I actually hated that this guy was using his favourites on youtube as a media player as he is a very accomplished musician. Got on my nerves.

Would it really take that much server power? Maybe i'm a bit ignorant here. I know that normalizing audio takes seconds. To decode it if it is in a container format and the normalize the audio, would that take very long on powerful computers?

Rahbee Kannuhn
August 29th, 2010, 02:05 AM
My volume dial works, my E.Q. works, I like normalizing my own audio.

Macfunky
August 29th, 2010, 02:14 AM
My volume dial works, my E.Q. works, I like normalizing my own audio.

But if your audio is on youtube would you not like it at a unified level along with everything else? Youtube uses compressed formats. If you want your audio out there in good quality surely youtube is not the way to go?

If you have it up there would it not make sense to have it sounding on par levelwise with everything else? If you are concerned with audio quality would you not be better going elsewhere? Audio on youtube will never sound good cause it doesn't accept uncompressed formats.

tgm4883
August 29th, 2010, 02:29 AM
Messing? As someone has pointed out normalization does not cause varying audio. It ONLY brings audio up to a unified level. If every video was like that i think youtube would be a much better medium.

I would never use youtube for audio. I am a flac man. I actually hated that this guy was using his favourites on youtube as a media player as he is a very accomplished musician. Got on my nerves.

Would it really take that much server power? Maybe i'm a bit ignorant here. I know that normalizing audio takes seconds. To decode it if it is in a container format and the normalize the audio, would that take very long on powerful computers?

I think you are talking about replay gain, rather than normalization (admittedly, the OP was probably talking about replay gain as well).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_normalization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replay_Gain

Marlonsm
August 29th, 2010, 02:40 AM
That would be nice.
I don't think that adjusting the volume of videos when they are uploaded would be a problem.
The problem would be processing all the zillions of videos they have.

Macfunky
August 29th, 2010, 02:56 AM
That would be nice.
I don't think that adjusting the volume of videos when they are uploaded would be a problem.
The problem would be processing all the zillions of videos they have.

I completely understand that but why shouldn't they start now? Or have they already done something towards this that i haven't heard about?

sundybest
August 29th, 2010, 02:57 AM
It really has to do with the quality of the uploaded video. YouTube doesn't upload most of the music videos you see on their site; most videos are user uploaded.

agreed!

___________________
celebration realtor (http://www.***********.com/)

Delvien
August 29th, 2010, 03:51 AM
ITT: Half of the posters don't properly understand what the OP is talking about, and then post their arguments.

:popcorn:


Read and comprehend BEFORE replying please.

spupy
August 30th, 2010, 11:11 AM
My volume dial works, my E.Q. works, I like normalizing my own audio.

I'm listening to some metal right now and my fingers are constantly on the media keys. MUST NORMALIZE

magmon
August 30th, 2010, 12:28 PM
I was over at a friends house recently and he was using a feature on youtube that allowed him to randomize his favourite videos. Clever feature although i wouldn't use it as a media player as he does. Audio quality aside he was complaining about the jumps in level between some songs which was his only problem with it. It got me thinking, why don't youtube normalize audio any audio that is uploaded? Even if people are not using youtube as some sort of media player, it is annoying even just watching videos and the levels jump from low in one to really high on the next.

So why don't youtube normalize videos as they are uploaded? Surely, with their servers, it would only add seconds extra onto the upload and make the overall experience less frustrating? Anyone have any thoughts on this?

The word you have been looking for is doesn't.

Don't be offended, it's the OCD talking.

eriktheblu
August 30th, 2010, 02:02 PM
I'd much rather see http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/3999/ (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/17387/)

chriswyatt
August 30th, 2010, 02:40 PM
Normalising would be annoying, it would ruin the dynamics. If they had it as an option that could be quite useful though.

del_diablo
August 30th, 2010, 03:59 PM
I want replay gain.
And somewhere to listen to music that does not constantly sparkle like dust.

tgm4883
August 30th, 2010, 04:16 PM
Normalising would be annoying, it would ruin the dynamics. If they had it as an option that could be quite useful though.

That would actually be Dynamic compression, not normalization (nor replay gain)

chriswyatt
August 31st, 2010, 03:26 PM
That would actually be Dynamic compression, not normalization (nor replay gain)

Oops. I always get these things mixed up. I suppose normalisation wouldn't work in all cases then. I'm always surprised that most MP3 players don't have on-the-fly normalisation or dynamic compression. Tried to listen to some classical music on the train once and it was too quiet even at full volume.