You must log in or register to comment.
yt-dlp and VLC still work. I’m good.
Do you use VLC to play the downloaded YT videos from yt-dl or is there some method to stream directly from a given YT url with VLC?
i beleive you can open a yt vid straight into vlc, not sure on the specifics of how its done tho sorry
13 per month. That’s over 100 per year. Did not expect it to be that expensive.
That’s almost one cent per video. Outrageous!
If you watch 43 videos per day on every day, yes…
Some of us go to work or school or whatever and can’t therefore do that every single day, especially not when the videos are longer…
It is because it includes YouTube Music. A really crappy Spotify clone that nobody asked for.
I use both and find yt music is far better for discovering new music and artists and I love that it can play music from YouTube video as well. Everything else about it is worse though.
Which replaced Google Play Music, which was actually good.
Yeah that I think is the most upsetting part to me. Replace a perfectly fine product with a half baked one.
That’s been Google’s thing for decades now
I unironically use ytmusic more than spotify because finding niche artists is a lot more easier, which is basically the entirety of edm and its many subgenres.
I use revanced though because I dont like google that much
For some magical reason, YouTube music has less AI music than Spotify.
The playlists are significantly worse, but I haven’t really heard any AI Christmas music that has infested Spotify.
The package for couples is 25. I save a dollar.
Because of Google going out of their way to cripple YouTube in the name of advertisers, even going as far as to cripple Firefox’s performance just for using it because their videos would sometimes stop resuming, you’d need to refresh .etc
They aren’t seeing shit from me. I will use UBlock Origin as I please.
Friendly reminder: If you know how to use Docker, you can self host Invidious on your PC and have an experience better tgan YouTube for free.
Invidious alone has been working quite badly this year (stopped working for months until inv-sig-helper was invented, etc), but combined with FreeTube it almost always works; can recommend.
I’ve done this for about 6 months, I’ve had a very mixed experience with Invidious, mostly with YouTube constantly making changes without notice or the video stream not really supporting resuming if the connection breaks briefly.
This isn’t a comment on the Herculean effort the contributors are taking on, but new users should be aware that they need a very reliable connection, update the container regularly, and exercise patience in the current state of Invidious.
YouTube has litterally attacked it by blacklisting all know cloud IPs world wide when tmaccessing YouTube.
Self-hosting is the only reliable way. Sometimes, YouTube breaks something, but after a few hours, Invidious pushes a fix…
But if you target the latest tag of all relevant images, itms just:
docker compose pull; docker compose down; docker compose up
Yeah, anything to make that line go up on YouTube’s end.
The latest tag still doesn’t support multiple audio tracks, which might sound niche, but YouTube just rolled out AI dubbed audio tracks, and so Invidious can just play the wrong track and you can’t do anything about it and it’s been this way for about a month.
That being said, it seems that the team’s plan is to put more dev time into changing the back end to video.js so they don’t have to brunt the video retrieval workload, and video.js supports multiple audio tracks as far as I know. I look forward to when that happens, but in the meantime the latest tag is not 100% usable :(
I never noticed a quality difference on my phone due to the small screen, even 1080p to 720p wasn’t bad on my 4k TV. Also, when did they change the free trial from three months to one?
I don’t notice it on a 75" TV.
But when 99% of the content on YouTube is struggling to just get focusing right, pursuing higher quality bitrates is a useless priority. It’s all trash amateur TV. Resolution is not a factor here.
Isint higher bitrate better for busy scenes with lots of movement? Like games that have a lot going on or tall grass in the wind.
Yes
when did they change the free trial from three months to one?
When they decided FUCK YOU!!! PAY US MONEY FASTER!!!
This has been a thing for a while now, hasn’t it? I remember trying to watch the Noseferatu trailer a few months ago and seeing how shit it looked. Tried to up the quality only to see that it was paywalled
I’ve just seen it for the first time now. Might be because I’m situated in Europe? Or because I mostly don’t give a damn about the pixel count.
Possibly, I don’t think its on every video
Thought it was always that way.
It’s a year or two old at the most
Yes. And I thought that’s how it always had been.
At least according to YouTube, the enhanced bitrate option is higher than 1080p normal has ever been
But what about the new normal 1080p? Has it been reduced?
Personal experience, but I feel like it has. Especially on videos with a lot of still frames like 3blue1brown, you can see the still images become slightly better quality after all the animations stopped. I noticed a few months ago and saw 1080p premium as an option.
No, at least according to YouTube
It’s obviously noticeable from the ones they don’t pull this shit on.
trailer
I mean, that’s an advertisement. I feel like if you’re going to watch an ad, that the company trying to sell the product should find a way to have the ad in full quality themselves.
It looks like the official website does use YouTube, though.
As with most things in the modern world that have gone to shit. It is not the monetization scheme in of itself that is the issue. It is the never ending desire for more profit this quarter than last forever.
If it was acceptable to stop trying to make even more once the cost to operate is covered and some healthy profit is made predictably then a lot less people would have issues. And enshitification would slow down.
People can’t afford yet another monthly bill.
It’s like walking in Trador Joes for snacks. Oh, hey, this is only $3! And look, this is only $5! Get to checkout: $130 please.
Seriously, that’s how this nickel and dime subscription crap works.
More like $126, if you know what I mean
I don’t care that enhanced Bitrate is premium only. I do care that you still need to click “advanced resolution settings” to access this even for premium users on mobile.
And even if you select high resolution preferred in settings, they will absolutely serve that shit at a low resolution forcing you to manually select the resolution every damn time.
Yes YouTube my connection is absolutely fast enough to watch at the max resolution you can serve, don’t pretend it’s my connection to cover for your intentional bumping down in resolution.
The speed at which you are connected to the internet via your ISP is only part of the path to youtube’s content servers. You could easily have a fast connection to an ISP with a congested uplink, you could be located a long way from the nearest google CDN, or that CDN could be overloaded.
You aren’t wrong in the bigger picture, but the fact that I can change to the highest resolution and I get essentially 0 buffer time and it just automatically starts playing at the higher resolution tells me that the bandwidth is there between my device and whatever server I end up connected to that is hosting the data. Otherwise I would likely have a slight delay of a few seconds for it to buffer as it pulls down the data.
ReVanced :)
Grayjay.app :)
NewPipe :)
PipePipe :)
SmartTube :)
The worst part is that this doesn’t seem to be some sort of better quality. All of the other qualities seem to have tanked in the past year, so at best this just restores the previous 1080p bitrate.
Is this a vibes-based position, or did you actually check the bitrate of the segments?
100% vibes based. I’ve been noticing very atrocious artifacts. It could also be things like different encoding settings that are producing a worse result. Or I could be making the whole thing up and confirmed it in my mind for 1080p when the launched the higher bitrate and then was primed to see the higher resolutions drop in quality after.
Notice how they don’t post the bitrate, because even the higher one will be extremely low. Every streaming service has been dropping their bitrates over the years, Netflix and HBO are the worst offenders as I’ve noticed. It probably saves them a ton of money, and 90% of their customers won’t notice because they’re on their phone while watching in the background.
To make it weirder, I’m confident they boost the bitrates on their new releases to get the approval of the enthusiastic viewers, then drop it after the reviews are in.
So the reason no one posts the bitrates is because it’s not exactly interesting information for the the general population.
I’m highly skeptical of the claim that streaming services would have intentionally dropped their bitrates at the expense of perceived quality. There’s definitely research going on to deliver the same amount of perceived quality at lower average bitrates through variable bitrate encodings and so on, but this is sophisticated research where perceived quality is carefully controlled for.
It probably saves them a ton of money, and 90% of their customers won’t notice because they’re on their phone while watching in the background.
So this is fundamentally not how video streaming works, and I think this is important for the average person to learn - if you stream a video in the background or with your screen turned off, video data will stop loading. There’s literally no point in continuing to fetch the video track if it’s not being rendered. It would be like downloading the audio track for French when the user is watching with the English track turned on, i.e. nonsensical.
This subsequently removes this as a possible reason for any video streamer intentionally reducing their bitrate, as the savings would not be materialized for background playback.
To make it weirder, I’m confident they boost the bitrates on their new releases to get the approval of the enthusiastic viewers, then drop it after the reviews are in.
Depending on the usage patterns for the platform in question, this probably doesn’t make sense either.
the reason no one posts the bitrates is because it’s not exactly interesting information for the the general population.
But they post resolutions, which are arguably less interesting. The “general public” has been taught to use resolution as a proxy of quality. For TVs and other screens this is mostly true, but for video it isn’t the best metric (lossless video aside).
Bitrate is probably a better metric but even then it isn’t great. Different codes and encoding settings can result in much better quality at the same bitrate. But I think in most cases it correlates better with quality than resolution does.
The ideal metric would probably be some sort of actual quality metric, but none of these are perfect either. Maybe we should just go back to Low/Med/High for quality descriptions.
I think resolution comes with an advantage over posting bitrates - in any scenario where you’re rendering a lower resolution video on a higher resolution surface, there will be scaling with all of its negative consequences on perceived quality. I imagine there’s also an intuitive sense of larger resolution = higher bitrate (necessarily, to capture the additional information).
I can do all of them already without premium.
Pray tell how you have enhanced bitrate without premium.
Can’t yt-dlp download high bitrate videos? I think I saw this option in the list of formats.
Enhanced bitrate? Do you get smoother bits there? If it means “more cache”, that’s a setting in mpv.conf.
Better even, i have AI-upscaling.
YouTube already randomly drops me to 360p on my big-ass broadband sometimes because it just feels like it. What are the guarantees YouTube Premium won’t do that? ANSWER ME YOUTUBE, THIS IS CRUCIAL PRE-PURCHASE INFORMATION.
On mobile, many videos will start at 720 and I have to specifically select a higher resolution but it will stay there. It will have me wait for buffering if my internet isn’t capable but it won’t drop the resolution.
On pc it remembers the resolution you set last.
Premium user since Red launched.
Mobile defaults to 320p no matter what I do. I have to manually select 1080p each and every video
If your internet is flaky, there’s nothing YouTube can do about it. The alternative would be waiting for the video to buffer at 1080p.
i have 8gbps… youtube buffers nonstop for me. my connection isnt flaky, as I can maintain multi gigabit connections to upload and download sources without issue. youtube sucks
Check your browser
If it doesn’t work on Firefox, then it’s using non-standard web calls. Which Google is notorious for. That doesn’t make youtube suck any less.
Yuo, i have the same issue on ff. It just stops and buffers. Goes through fine on the same pc when i test on chrome (used for work). Plays fine on embed, it’s just their website.
I just close the window. Don’t need youtube.
That’s what I do more and more. I’ve had my own invidious setup, I’ve done grayjay. If I continue to have problems, I’ll simply not use Youtube at all…
I paid for youtube red until it wasn’t reasonable anymore. I tolerated the ads until it wasn’t reasonable anymore. I can only do so many mitigations to youtube’s bullshit before I just stop…
Right now I have YT-dlp setup to import some channels into my plex setup. That may be all my house has here soon.
I on 300 mbps internet and barely had YouTube buffering on me. I can even run YouTube videos while watching multiple streams on both YouTube and Twitch and it doesn’t buffer.
Clearly the problem is either your connection is flaky or your device cannot handle a YouTube video. Maybe it’s a video driver issue or you accidentally turned on the feature that automatically upscale YouTube videos using Nvidia cards, assuming you have one. I had some buffering issue when I used this feature when it was first released.
No. On all accounts.
Linux, 7950x3d, rx7900xtx, 64 GB of ram. I’m a veteran in the IT world. It’s not my system. Those same multigig transfers happen over https traffic on domains I have control over. As far as “drivers” go… I’m on kernel 6.11.10, which is stable. If I can push 200 fps on beatsaber in VR… and that’s somehow a problem for Youtube… guess what! That’s Youtube’s fault.
What it is, Google pushes chrome and nerfs Firefox. Plain and simple. They push everything they can into their ecosystem and that makes youtube suck.
It’s well known. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/youtube-responds-to-delayed-loading-in-rival-browser-complaints
Edit:
My system pushing 7.1Gbps out it’s interface… (note the ~2gbps steady transfer happening prior to the test)
No issues with speedtest… (my 8gbps minus the 2-3gbps I’m pushing on the backend here…)
My connection is fiber. Little jitter, no fuss anywhere else. Youtube runs like ass because it IS ass.
But I’m watching YouTube on Firefox without spoofing my browser and never had this problem. It’s funny how some people are downvoting me for suggesting some solution to your problem, but idk.
Another potential issue is that it’s your ISP that is causing the problem. I have a less powerful system than you and a slower Internet while using Firefox, yet I’m not having any buffering issue, so our different ISPs might be the reason.
It could also be that you have a stricter standard for what you deem buffering than I do, considering your experience with that good of an Internet connection and PC. Mine only buffers less than a second at the start of the video while it loads, but I’ve never considered that an issue.
It’s a 70/30 split. 30% of the video I watch will have issues. And those videos will often spend more time buffering than playing the video.
And nearly 100% of the content I watch should be in youtube’s caching system. As I almost universally watch new releases from my subscription page and don’t tend to let the algorithm recommend anything to me. This has been my normal for years.
Except lately it’s gone up to nearly 100%. I can’t load a damn thing anymore (as of the past month or so). It just sits and spins, multiple devices including phone on cell network. I can only get phone to work using something like Grayjay.
You can claim that my ISP interchange might be at fault… But that wouldn’t explain why I have no issues with virtually any other platform on the entirety of the internet that I exchange packets with. This would still be squarely youtube’s fault. My ISP is one of the big ones, Lumen (Centurylink/Quantum). Lumen owns backhaul. A lot of backhaul. While it’s possible my local interchange is completely crammed full in other situations, I happen to know it’s not. We’re not even 1/4 of the way through their build out in my area. And the fiber goes straight to the head end for my area. There’s capacity galore.
What’s likely, and has already been cited is the fact that youtube has been waging war again firefox for a long time. It’s well documented. Further Google also has a history of targeting specific users where an account simply being logged in will achieve the same effect of constant buffering.
Youtube is bad. Here’s the kicker… Other platforms? Never have an issue. Twitch, Odysee, Rumble (Cringe platform, but a couple people I watch went there even though I wish they went elsewhere), hell even most peertube instances work with better results than Youtube does for me.
At this point I’m not interested in help fixing it. It’s clear there’s no helping Youtube. The platform is broken, both in the business sense and technologically.
It’s pretty easy to check if this is caused by YouTube throttling Firefox. Just install a chromium browser for testing or check if the YouTube app is still buffering. Well, only if you’re actually interested in finding out the cause of the issue.
If you just disagree with YouTube’s actions, it’s best to just boycott them altogether. My personal anecdote is that I’ve only had issues with YouTube on Firefox but not any other browser for a short period, which does prove that they had history of throttling Firefox, whether intentional or not. It’s just hadn’t been a problem in my area of the world currently.
Yow answer after this message from our sponsor!
I just lost my premium subscription after about 2 years of paying $3/month in Argentina. Here it’s $24/month (family plan). YouTube is unbearable with all the ads. Sometimes a 10-minute video has 3 as breaks. I’m only using it for precise purposes now, not scrolling and exploring, and finding alternatives as much as possible.
OK, am I the only person that has a working ad blocker and doesn’t get YT ads? Literally never seen one.
Exactly. Why bother paying? Firefox + uBlock Origin on the computer, SmartTube Next on Android TV, ReVanced on Android phone. I haven’t been seeing ads on YouTube for years.
If you’ve used YouTube on anything besides a computer, then you would know that the experience is suboptimal.
There are ad blockers on mobile browsers, too. Besides, there are other ways to block ads, like DNS blocklists. Or if it’s just for Youtube use an alternative front-end like Piped or Invidious or Grayjay for built in ad- and Sponsorblock
wow, premium in the usa is expensive. it’s a little under $3 per month here in india for the family plan and even that’s after a recent 16% hike. the individual plan is even cheaper.
i guess these rates are in store for us as well in the future?
Depends on economies, they can’t really charge like double minimum wage, so countries like India have “cheaper” subscriptions. So for a minimum wage worker, it’s about the same in terms of expense (ignoring other bill differences).
So it’s probably going to stay about the same for you.
Is this something that could be gamed with a vpn possibly?
Yes. I’m in Europe paying Pakistan prices. You just need to find a location that doesn’t require a local payment method.
Does that require you to watch via vpn all the time or just when you make the account?
Would that be Pakistan? Asking for a friends dogs friends owner…
That’s the Euro symbol. Just FYI.
I can’t believe people still even use YouTube when shit like this is happening. Paywalling resolution? Get fukt.
Resolution is the same it has always been, they are just offering a higher bitrate stream with premium (except I think they offer 8K streams on premium? But like come on… who the fuck needs that).
Doesnt matter if the video is uploaded in 4K, you can watch that stream at 1080p with the same/better effect.
YouTube compresses the shit out of anything uploaded to it. More so than other sites.
Yes, which is why extra bitrate is valuable (depending on the video content) and the higher the resolution the video is, the higher the bitrate is. Which is why it is beneficial to watch a video at 4K even if you only have a 1080p screen.
I’m used to blu-ray and ultra hd blu-ray so now everything else looks like garbage to me. Google are cheap asses. Glad to know I’m not the only one who watches 4k videos on my 720p phone.
Yeah, I get that. Personally, it looks good for most of the content I watch and it’s free content, I really can’t complain. The compression these days is really good.
Paywalling a better resolution than the ones ALREADY present on the platform, may be the best way to approach the issue of it being fucking expensive to serve it.
Youtube has gone to shit and the enhanced 1080p bitrate is not one of the reasons
