EEVBlog Video Length

[Pete F]

I'll probably be shot down for this, but just my personal opinion as feedback I'd like to suggest to Dave he tries to keep the videos as close as possible to 15 minutes, max 20. It's difficult to edit that hard, and I appreciate it makes that side of things a lot more work. A lot of the videos run up around 1 hours etc. I typically watch at 1.5 x and a 15-20 minute video is something that can be squeezed in while having a coffee break etc. Watching a few 40-60 minute videos really chews into the time.

I'm sure plenty with more time on their hands will feel differently. Most of what is discussed I've covered previously, but it was typically served to me in boring as batshit lectures I'd try to stay awake through (generally unsuccessfully). I think Dave engages people brilliantly with passion and energy that is the mark of a skilled communicator hence I've taken more away from mere hours of Dave's content than I did literally years of hearing somebody droning on at the front of the room. I'd love to watch a lot more, but there's only so much time available. I'd personally rather see a complicated topic broken down into 2-3 shorter videos that follow in logical sequence vs one long one.

I know you get what you pay for, but the videos I get the most from are those discussing the theory/fundamentals/tutorials. By all means hack in to a Photocopier etc, but personally that just reminded me of work. However it would be good to see the fundamentals etc arranged in a logical progression, as it seems to me they jump around all over the shop.

Anyway, that's just my 2 cents worth. Overall it's a brilliant channel and it's no wonder there's so many subscribers. I've tried to throw a teeny bit of support in by buying another multimeter off him I probably didn't need, but it seemed to be one of those win/win situations (it has been a pretty good multimeter in fairness), and if a similar opportunity comes up again I'll do the same.

[Bud]

I do not mind longer videos, in fact i prefer them, as long as the creator does not repeat himself as Louis Rossman does. Short videos leave impression of been made in rush.

[mcinque]

I watch both length, as long they are interesting there is no matter of time

[Pete F]

They're fair comments, obviously it's only a matter of opinion, so everyone is different.

To give an example, I'm currently watching Dave's FPGA implementation video, it's 1 hour long. Now that in itself isn't remarkable, FPGAs are a whole can of worms (pun intended) and a person could (and there probably is) do a whole Youtube channel just on this one subject. However at minute 20:00 (where I'm currently up to), only the datasheet has been discussed. What ddid I take away from that 20 minutes? The FPGA he's using is weeny, read the datasheet, the programming voltage can be different to the operating voltage, read the datasheet, a basic layout of the chip, read the datasheet, and finally, read the datasheet. Now given Dave has dedicated a whole video to (quite rightly) reading datasheets I think about 15 minutes of that 20 could comfortably be edited out, replaced with a one liner about how important it is to read the datasheet, with a programming voltage vs operating voltage as an example if required, then move on. To get to that point has taken two breaks in my day, and I was watching at 2x speed.

I know it sounds very critical, but it is at least supposed to be constructive feedback. The attention span of the average punter, ie me. isn't very long at all. This is all very well known by Youtube and Social Media, and Dave would either have done a Youtube provided course/mentoring/feedback/etc, or with his subscription base could if he wanted to, where all this is discussed.

More is not always better.

[jancumps]

I prefer the current "long" style. The EE channels that stick to social media strategies and advised formats/lenghts don't seem to get a bigger audience from their adherence.

[Pete F]

I prefer the current "long" style. The EE channels that stick to social media strategies and advised formats/lenghts don't seem to get a bigger audience from their adherence.

Maybe they're not as good

[timgiles]

I believe that a good video is the right length! Not a specific length. For me there are plenty of channels I subscribe to that make 20 minute videos - and I do watch them. But - for electronics, learning, reviews, how to's, actually just about every video, if there is content that is relevant, I want it included and not rushed through. I suppose Dave could split up his videos once edited in to Parts 1 to X. But this is very distinguish.

Pete. Part of your argument is about time. So are you saying Dave waffles too much? Youtube remembers where you were with any video you have watched. So if you can only get 20 mins in to a video, you do not have to remember where you were, the exact second, you can just reload it the next time you have time.


Prehaps it might help if Dave added a list of timestamps to some of his longer videos. Linus Techtips do this with their weekly Wan Show video. Several supporters actually help and provide additional timestamps. So perhaps if a few of us offered to do this it would mean Dave would only have to update the description of the video.

Thoughts?

[EEVblog]

I'll probably be shot down for this, but just my personal opinion as feedback I'd like to suggest to Dave he tries to keep the videos as close as possible to 15 minutes, max 20. It's difficult to edit that hard, and I appreciate it makes that side of things a lot more work. A lot of the videos run up around 1 hours etc. I typically watch at 1.5 x and a 15-20 minute video is something that can be squeezed in while having a coffee break etc. Watching a few 40-60 minute videos really chews into the time.

I rarely make 40-60 minute videos any more. Exceptions would be huge reviews or shootouts.
I've explained several times recently how if a video comes in at say 22 minutes editing, I try to aggressively edit it to get under 20 minutes, it's psychological factor when people look at the length before watching. 
Having said that, my latest video is 26 minutes, and the two previous were 27min and 30min. I didn't want them to be that long, as I now go into shooting a video with the intention of it being 20 minutes or less. But, you know, I think of stuff to say when I press record...

I'd personally rather see a complicated topic broken down into 2-3 shorter videos that follow in logical sequence vs one long one.

I'm of the same opinion these days.

[EEVblog]

Pete. Part of your argument is about time. So are you saying Dave waffles too much?

That used to be a common complaint, and I think rightly so. But I'm a lot better at it these days, and I often challenge people who comment that I repeat myself and waffle too much to take my video, edit it without losing any content, and re-upload it to prove they are right. No one has yet taken me up on that.
Like I said previous post, when I try and edit say a 22 minute video down to under 20 minutes it's almost impossible to do without cutting content.

My videos could be shorter if I did my usual editing and then went back to re-shoot the same content to make it more concise, but it would double my time to make each video and continuity would often suck. But even if I did that, a 30 minute video isn't going to half to 15 minutes, if you want that content must be cut.
Many people ask why I don't just write scripts and get it right before I shoot the video, well that's not how I work, I can't just do that.

Prehaps it might help if Dave added a list of timestamps to some of his longer videos. Linus Techtips do this with their weekly Wan Show video. Several supporters actually help and provide additional timestamps. So perhaps if a few of us offered to do this it would mean Dave would only have to update the description of the video.

I've done this with mailbags recently.

[EEVblog]

I prefer the current "long" style. The EE channels that stick to social media strategies and advised formats/lenghts don't seem to get a bigger audience from their adherence.

Actually, they do. Great Scott for example follows the Youtube formula also precisely and has a bigger audience than mine. But it's in fairly large part a different audience to mine however.
And it's essentially one type of audience, as the content rarely varies. My content on the other hand varies massively. When I did the last survey I think I counted over two dozen different types of video categories that I do, so it's a much broader audience that subscribes for many different reasons.

[tautech]

Dave has to cater for a wide range of experience and understanding of his viewers and to cover any technical topic with a considerably condensed video is sure to do someone a disservice.
To maintain and grow audiences as he has is testament to his ability to pitch to many skill levels.
Some I skim through and others are beyond full understanding at the time I might have first watched them but we all age and understanding grows or stems curiosity to learn enough so we can go back and those videos again and take away what Dave conveys.
Carry on Dave doing what works for your channel, the $ and you.

[plazma]

Long videos huh?
Watch some Joe Rogan interviews
https://youtu.be/vGc4mg5pul4

[EEVblog]

Dave has to cater for a wide range of experience and understanding of his viewers and to cover any technical topic with a considerably condensed video is sure to do someone a disservice.
To maintain and grow audiences as he has is testament to his ability to pitch to many skill levels.

And to a big extent, also limiting my audience and making it harder for me to maintain an audience as a result. But that's the downside of any "broad interest" channel with an eclectic mix of video subjects and styles.

Carry on Dave doing what works for your channel, the $ and you.

As for the $$$, it really doesn't matter much what type of content I make or how many views, as the view based ad-revenue isn't a big contributor to my income. So I do have the luxury to do pretty much what I please. But any Youtuber doesn't want to ultimately make videos that people won't watch, so I do at least try to be conscious of the video length these days as a starter.

[PA0PBZ]

I have no problem with longer videos but I do like to watch them fully, so depending on the time I have I sometimes skip longer videos to come back and watch them when I have more time.

Like I said previous post, when I try and edit say a 22 minute video down to under 20 minutes it's almost impossible to do without cutting content.

So why not cut some content if you want to get to the 20 minutes? You will probably be the only one that knows that some content disappeared, don't worry too much about it.

[EEVblog]

So why not cut some content if you want to get to the 20 minutes? You will probably be the only one that knows that some content disappeared, don't worry too much about it.

Yes, but I usually think it's all valuable. Although my next video has maybe 10 minutes worth of stuff cut out of it.

[Pete F]

It's a fine line when editing. It takes a huge amount of time to edit, especially when cutting hard. Many content providers argue that time could be better spent making more content, and that's a fair argument. The "story" still needs to make sense and have continuity, so often cutting whole sections out is more difficult than it sounds.

Dave strikes me as somebody who would be receptive to feedback and constructive opinion, and I wasn't surprised to see him come up on the thread. How well the channel may/may not do is entirely his business and none of mine, but I do think he has an enormous amount of wisdom and is willing to share it. He's a great story teller, so deserves feedback; that's the way social media works ... otherwise it would be called Fairfax I'm grateful to receive some of that wisdom and hope it can be shared with even more people.

[PA0PBZ]

So why not cut some content if you want to get to the 20 minutes? You will probably be the only one that knows that some content disappeared, don't worry too much about it.

Yes, but I usually think it's all valuable. Although my next video has maybe 10 minutes worth of stuff cut out of it.

Of course it is all valuable, otherwise it wouldn't be there in the first place, but you have to stop somewhere or you will be found dead like the gamers after a 3 day session…

[EEVblog]

It's a fine line when editing. It takes a huge amount of time to edit, especially when cutting hard.

Yes. Editing is actually quite easy, but going through and cutting out a few minutes from a 20 minute video actually takes just as long as editing the original video in the first place.
It's an extra step that I haven't ordinarily done until fairly recently.

Many content providers argue that time could be better spent making more content, and that's a fair argument. The "story" still needs to make sense and have continuity, so often cutting whole sections out is more difficult than it sounds.

Indeed.
If you watch carefully in my latest video you might pick up a thing or two I might casually mention but you didn't see in the video because it was cut.
Many things don't make sense if you cut content, unless you go back an re-shoot or do a voice-over.
All my videos are shot the same way, I press record and then something comes out of my mouth. Rinse and repeat 50 times (an average video would have have at least 50 individual clips), and I basically record me going through a teardown step by step, or a repair step by step, or a tutorial step by step as I think of stuff to say.
So each video is basically a little journey I shoot in sequence.
I then take the files and edit them, cutting the odd thing here or there, but most stuff makes it into a video in the same sequence I shot it in. And it's quite difficult to go back and re-shoot if I need to fix something, so I usually make do with what material I have, or add a voice over or annotation occasionally to correct something.
That off-the-cuff style is just the way I've always done videos, and it's not the most flexible in terms of creating concise content.

Contrast that with say Great Scott which is a good example of the opposite technique. Ignoring any likely story/build planning steps, he would just shoot stock footage as he builds something and then puts together the entire video as a voice-over in editing. Whereas almost all my video is shot in real time with me commentating behind the camera, so it's never going to be as polished.



Behind the scenes shooting a teardown video

[mariush]

I personally think 10-15 minutes is too short, I wouldn't like to see videos "chopped" and edited to hell just to get below 15 minutes.

I often watch 25-30 minutes, don't mind it. 

If it helps with revenue and all that, I wouldn't mind if you split longer videos in 20-30 minute parts and release them 12-24 hours apart (only because i think it would probably help with Youtube if you seem to upload more often and with more consistent, more frequency, so if the videos are uploaded with some time between them it would probably be better)

[Mr. Scram]

I personally dislike how YouTube is full of videos that have been artificially stretched to get to the supposedly ideal 10 to 20 minutes. YouTube used to be refreshing for not treating the viewer like an idiot like television has done for years, but times have changed. It's now full of clickbait, inflating a minute of content into huge videos, ridiculous thumbnails and all the obvious things content makers do to come out on top.

Of course that's the opposite of cutting videos down, but it serves as a warning to not let the content be dictated by things that don't have to do with the content too much. Sometimes it just is what it is.

[EEVblog]

I personally dislike how YouTube is full of videos that have been artificially stretched to get to the supposedly ideal 10 to 20 minutes.

The average attention span time on Youtube hasn't changed much, and it still the 8-10 minute mark. My channel gets and average watch time of 10-12 minutes across all my videos.
What has changed is that the Youtube algorithm now values watch time. That doesn't mean that people are watching for longer, it's just that it now matters more. So those science youtubers who spent a month creating one highly polished 5-10 minute are screwed.
I doubt any channel has an average watch time in the 20 minute range, mine is on the high side.

[Pete F]

I definitely don't want to get involved with the financial side of things, none of my business and all of Dave's. If someone of his experience can manage to make a decent living and raise a family from his own business, which just happens to partly be providing video content, then all the power to him. I tip my hat for sure, as it's not easy. In the meanwhile I wouldn't walk in to my local butcher and start telling him how to run his business, so I'm not going to start here either

Dave I think you should just keep shooting like you do. It's your style, it works for you, and it clearly works for others or you wouldn't have over 500K subscribers. However every successful enterprise always looks to see how things can be done better, that's just the name of the game.

To be more specific on my feedback, I think there are different "markets" here, and it's possible to vary how "scripted" and edited the content is depending on the audience. As I mentioned in the beginning, I'm not personally in to teardown videos. Not that they're not good, but I just don't have the time to watch a lot of them. I have more than enough of my own teardowns to do, I don't particularly want to see more Many people on the other hand really enjoy them, and why wouldn't they. But I'd suggest they are watching them as "entertainment". 30 minutes, 1 hr, it doesn't matter, it's all good. It's interesting, it's entertaining, everyone is learning from it. Happy Days!

People like me on the other hand watch videos with an emphasis on education. We want to get in, get the education we want, then get out. Drill down deeper if it's required, and that's the place for multi-video coverage in my opinion. FPGAs for example, first video might be an overview. What are they? How are they used? Why would I want to use them? Examples of them being used, etc. That may be all I want to know. 10-15 minute video. It's covered the basics, I don't need/want to use them, move on. Maybe I would like to use them. Great, well "do we have a deal for you". Here's a 10 minute video on FPGA datasheets. Here's a 10 minute video on FPGA datasheets and the different voltages needed for programming vs operation. Here's another 15 minute video just on PCB routing to FPGAs. A lot of material can be covered in 15 minutes and somebody with an interest in that would gain a lot of tips to help them. On the other hand, somebody who just wants to know the how, what, why? of FPGAs doesn't need/want to know what size vias are needed for an xyz FPGA.

Like I said, that's just my opinion. I don't watch much TV and am away a lot for work. I don't think I've turned my hotel room TV on in more than 10 years! But I do watch a lot of Youtube, and have seen what seems to work and what tends to come and go.

[EEVblog]

Like I said, that's just my opinion. I don't watch much TV and am away a lot for work. I don't think I've turned my hotel room TV on in more than 10 years! But I do watch a lot of Youtube, and have seen what seems to work and what tends to come and go.

The problem is as I said, I have literally a couple of dozen different types of videos, and people subscribe for different reasons and want different content. In short, everyone has their own opinion of what they would like to see from my content and I have to please everyone.
The numbers for example actually show that educational tutorial videos are some of my least viewed videos (with some exceptions), so if I was a numbers/business guy and wanted to grow my channel, more educational tutorial content would not be the way to do it. Even 30-40min Mailbag videos are more popular than 15 minute tutorials.

And as I said, I am perfectly conscious of video length, what works, and what doesn't. I am trying to make my videos shorter and more concise, and I'm always refining my content in some way, and that's the best I can do. I can't be all things to all people, it's impossible. For every person who complains my videos are too long at 30 minutes and wants 15 minutes, if I then do that there will be two more people who will ask why I didn't cover X in the video. Then I have to explain to them that I did shoot that material but cut it out to make the video shorter. But why not just throw it into another video they ask. Well, that sounds great until you realise you had to have planned that and shoot an intro and some matching content, and it needed to be shot as a series, and that I didn't have the time or inclination to finish that because something else interesting came along that I wanted to make a video on. etc etc.
It's easy to say create a 10 part series on FPGA's, it's another thing to actually have the time an enthusiasm to do that at the expense of the dozen other types of videos a creator wants to do.

And making shorter content is often easier said than done, especially using my style of video making which I have no intention of, and would be foolish to change.
One electronics youtuber spends 30+ hours on one 5-7 minute tutorial video. Shorter and more polished content takes time.
Don't even ask how long it's taken David2 to create those short tutorial videos he's done, it's crazy, the more concise and polished you intend to make it, the more paranoid you get about making it so and getting it right. I do not want my videos to become a chore to make, if that ever happens that's when I give up the game.

Remember that Microphone tutorial series with Doug Ford? I split that into 7 shorter parts to make it easier for people to watch. What did that get me? Countless complaints from viewers about me "flooding" my channel with stuff they didn't want 

If it's short tutorial videos you want there are other channels that do that, mine unfortunately isn't one of them, but thanks for your feedback.

[Wolfgang]

Let the take the same risk of being shot here. Nevertheless, the motto of all this here is: No Fear, No Script, All Opinion !!!

I like this forum and I think that it is a very valuable resource for EE interested people due to its broad scope.
I am not too big a fan of Daves videos, because:

- They are LENGTHY. What is said there could be said in half the time, to say the least
- A lot of homecoming cows, new uncles, hunkey-dories, ... In a computer language it would be COBOL.
- Repetitive rants about foreseeable things (Cheap electrolytics, scraped chips, font and button styles, ...) of debatable importance

Of course I know that Dave (is this a joke ?) has a background in dramatic arts so all the above is probably inevitable and cannot be changed.
Furthermore, the indended audience is not pure academia, but a lot broader.

So - rant completed - you may start shooting now 

[mickmake]

I'll probably be shot down for this, but just my personal opinion as feedback I'd like to suggest to Dave he tries to keep the videos as close as possible to 15 minutes, max 20. It's difficult to edit that hard, and I appreciate it makes that side of things a lot more work. A lot of the videos run up around 1 hours etc. I typically watch at 1.5 x and a 15-20 minute video is something that can be squeezed in while having a coffee break etc. Watching a few 40-60 minute videos really chews into the time.

I tend to watch almost all YouTube videos at somewhere between 1.25 and 1.5. The only exceptions are short films, (which I’m a fan of). But for technical content; I’m always just searching for that one or a couple of nuggets in the video. Usually when I find it, I stop.

The YouTube algorithm is a complex thing, but we know that it does favour those videos that have an audience retention rate of more than 50% for more than 90% of the video. There’s some magic thing that kicks in once you hit that mark.
So I’m gathering Dave has adjusted for that metric.
There’s plenty of other metrics at play, but if you want your video to be visible in the sea of content being put up on YouTube, you have to aim for that audience retention metric first. Doesn’t matter how many subs you have.

[EEVblog]

- They are LENGTHY. What is said there could be said in half the time, to say the least

Yes, but who's going to spend twice, three, or five times as long to create that more concise content?
Would you like to do it?

- Repetitive rants about foreseeable things (Cheap electrolytics, scraped chips, font and button styles, ...) of debatable importance

Debatable importance to you, incredibly valuable info to others.
Also, if I repeat stuff across many videos it's because I have to assume that someone hasn't heard me mention that is some other video, that this video is the only one they will watch.

Of course I know that Dave (is this a joke ?) has a background in dramatic arts

  it's a joke.

so all the above is probably inevitable and cannot be changed.

It can't be changed, because I make videos the way I want to make them. And not every one is going to like that, and that's perfectly fine, I don't expect to be able to please everyone. In fact it is literally impossible to please everyone.

[mickmake]

I am not too big a fan of Daves videos, because:

- They are LENGTHY. What is said there could be said in half the time, to say the least
- A lot of homecoming cows, new uncles, hunkey-dories, ... In a computer language it would be COBOL.
- Repetitive rants about foreseeable things (Cheap electrolytics, scraped chips, font and button styles, ...) of debatable importance

I know of several people who listen to Dave’s videos in the background at 1x. Nothing wrong with that and it helps him out on the metrics.

[Terry01]

Is it just me thinking/doing this or do others do it too??

If a video is getting on a bit or if I need to head out or something like that.....I take note of the timer at the bottom of the video then watch the rest when I get back in or whatever.

It really isn't rocket science!

Do a video on it next Dave.... call it "How to pause a video"

If it's "The next big thing" and everybody ends up at it i want a mention!

[EEVblog]

The YouTube algorithm is a complex thing, but we know that it does favour those videos that have an audience retention rate of more than 50% for more than 90% of the video. There’s some magic thing that kicks in once you hit that mark.
So I’m gathering Dave has adjusted for that metric.

Nope, I don't try and follow the ever changing algorithm, I just make the content I want to make and it either gets views or it doesn't.
BTW, do you have a reference for that? I have not heard of something "kicking in" at that limit.
Also, a longer retention rate is antithetical to the new longer watch time metric the algorithm is favoring, you can't really have both.

[Wolfgang]

- They are LENGTHY. What is said there could be said in half the time, to say the least

Yes, but who's going to spend twice, three, or five times as long to create that more concise content?
Would you like to do it?

I might try one day, when I find a subject thats worth discussing. It would be my first video, howver .

- Repetitive rants about foreseeable things (Cheap electrolytics, scraped chips, font and button styles, ...) of debatable importance

Debatable importance to you, incredibly valuable info to others.
Also, if I repeat stuff across many videos it's because I have to assume that someone hasn't heard me mention that is some other video, that this video is the only one they will watch.

"Invaluable" information for a button labelled with a font you dont like is a bit much, dont you think ?
There should be a better line of discrimination between hard facts of engineering and pure matters of taste. Meddling those up devaluates the whole thing.

Of course I know that Dave (is this a joke ?) has a background in dramatic arts

  it's a joke.

Hard to believe (not serious), but of course accepted if you say so.

so all the above is probably inevitable and cannot be changed.

It can't be changed, because I make videos the way I want to make them. And not every one is going to like that, and that's perfectly fine, I don't expect to be able to please everyone. In fact it is literally impossible to please everyone.

Dont even try to please everyone. I you believe in your style, just proceed. There is still a fast forward button left for me. As long I can destill the information I need I'm fine.

Thanks anyway
  Wolfgang

[PartialDischarge]

Who cares about the length, its about the content delivered in that time. Dave is not slow explaining things, or speaking, so some topics will take 20mins another 1 hour.

However take MrCarlsons videos, although I enjoy them, they are so slow paced and repeats itself so many times that they could be edited into 1/3 of the time

[tautech]

Dont even try to please everyone. I you believe in your style, just proceed. There is still a fast forward button left for me. As long I can destill the information I need I'm fine.

Thanks anyway
  Wolfgang

THAT ^^^^ 

[Pete F]

I don't follow or understand the Youtube algorithm, but can do opinion

I'm always more than happy to share my opinion! Especially when somebody asks to provide that in the comments section or on their Blog. That's the way social media works. Those on the receiving end may agree, they may not agree but take it on board, or they may not agree and think I'm a dickhead. It's their train set so it makes no difference to me, I have no skin in the game and if somebody has a different opinion that's entirely their right to do so and I don't take it personally.

What I have noticed over the years is that algorithm or not, those who listen to their "customers" and people around them generally do well, those who don't listen often don't do so well ... and then generally wonder why it didn't work out. It's remarkable how often people will ask for feedback, then take it personally when that feedback doesn't coincide with their own opinion.

As Dave said, don't like it, watch another channel! That's fine, fair comment, and that's what I do. I see there's one of Dave's video suggested to me on sniffing an IR remote controller and using an Arduino to spoof the code. Sounds good and based on what I've been watching no surprise it was suggested to me. Guess what, haven't watched it. It's 24 minutes long. No doubt I will eventually, but it's late, I'm off to bed, I'm not going to watch a 24 minute video. A 10 minute one I probably would, and did. I watched instead a Great Scott video on I2C. Very much an intro video and I didn't really learn much, but at least I watched it I'm often grabbing content when I can in between doing something else. That's the way modern society digests information now ... and I'm an old fart, nothing modern about me!

[rt]

How many people watch Dave's videos at 1.25, 1.5 or even double speed?

The Aussie accent can get a bit harder (and high pitched ) at faster speeds but it gets you through sections with less interesting/known (to me) content to a piece of interest (e.g. Power supply teardown I'm waiting for him to take the can off the voltage reference).  Anyway, personal preference.

And Dave, can you as channel owner see who watches content at higher speed and if that makes a difference to their average viewing time?

rt

 

[Pete F]

Is it just me thinking/doing this or do others do it too??

If a video is getting on a bit or if I need to head out or something like that.....I take note of the timer at the bottom of the video then watch the rest when I get back in or whatever.

It really isn't rocket science!

Do a video on it next Dave.... call it "How to pause a video"

If it's "The next big thing" and everybody ends up at it i want a mention!

Well apparently it is rocket science mate, because you don't even need to hit pause, you close the window and Youtube knows where you stopped watching ... even across multiple devices.

The point I was making has nothing to do with pausing a video or coming back to it. I subscribe to what I believe is now over 100 channels, and I don't het the subscribe button willy-nilly. Most of them are from good people who spend a bucket load of their time putting up really good content. Most of them don't do it professionally and really don't make much money out of it, if any at all. I would love to show those creators respect and watch all that content but it is just impossible, it would be more than a full time job just doing that! So the reality is I watch those who can provide the best bang for the buck, and the rest just disappears into the ether. People who don't watch as much Youtube are possibly more than happy to wander back and forth or don't care if a video runs an hour. No right or wrong here.

[EEVblog]

What I have noticed over the years is that algorithm or not, those who listen to their "customers" and people around them generally do well, those who don't listen often don't do so well ... and then generally wonder why it didn't work out. It's remarkable how often people will ask for feedback, then take it personally when that feedback doesn't coincide with their own opinion.

I've been trying to patiently explain why content creators can't just magically takes viewers advice and act on it. I'll say it again, it literally impossible to do so.
Contents creators get hundreds of different (and contradictory) opinion and advice from viewers, we can't act on all of them or even a majority of them.
Ok, but your opinion is more important than other people's opinions, yours is more valuable than theirs, yours is more right than theirs, ok fine, but it's still impossible.
I don't "take it personally", quite the contrary. Here I am, past midnight, a content creator with over half a million subscribers patiently trying to explain things to a couple or viewers, and probably repeated for the hundredth time to people who have suggested the same thing. I care, if I didn't I wouldn't be here typing this. I'm just trying to explain why it's not as simple as you might think.

As Dave said, don't like it, watch another channel! That's fine, fair comment, and that's what I do.

To be fair, I don't say that to be smart arse, or I enjoy telling people to piss off, I say that because it is and always will be a practical reality of Youtube content creation. Every Youtuber has to say that (even if they don't) to X percent of their viewers.

I see there's one of Dave's video suggested to me on sniffing an IR remote controller and using an Arduino to spoof the code. Sounds good and based on what I've been watching no surprise it was suggested to me. Guess what, haven't watched it. It's 24 minutes long. No doubt I will eventually, but it's late, I'm off to bed, I'm not going to watch a 24 minute video. A 10 minute one I probably would, and did. I watched instead a Great Scott video on I2C. Very much an intro video and I didn't really learn much, but at least I watched it

I don't want to create videos that people just watch and don't learn much. Great Scott and others are welcome to those views. Welcome to Youtube were there is not only content to suit everyone, but were everyone wants content catered just to their own need.
You own example is classic. My video was too long at 24min, and 10 minutes was just the right length for you, yet you then complained that you didn't learn much from that highly polished content that Great Scott no doubt spent a dozen or two hours creating. Do you expect me or someone else to magically create a 15 minute version that teaches you exactly want you wanted to know? If not 15 minutes, how long? Do you think Great Scott could have done better in the 10 minutes?

[Wolfgang]

@MasterTech

If you want something speedy for a change  try "The Signal Path". from Shariar.

[PartialDischarge]

@MasterTech

If you want something speedy for a change  try "The Signal Path". from Shariar.

Yep, watch him too, an example of long and interesting videos
Another example would be Sam Ben Yaakov videos on power electronics, highly condensed stuff as he is a College professor

[EEVblog]

So the reality is I watch those who can provide the best bang for the buck

No, you don't. You said i yourself, you have a arbitrary time limit.
My longer video could easily provide greater bang-per-buck than someone else's shorter videos. But you've said you simply won't chose to watch longer videos.
What if my 30 minute video can teach you 5 times more than a 10 minute video?

[madires]

In case someone hasn't figured out how to use YouTube, you can pause and resume videos, or stop and watch the remaining part later or the next day. You can even fast forward. If people have such a short attention span to be able to watch videos for 12 minutes at maximum, how do they cope with their job working on something for more than a few minutes? And for me it's not just the EE content, it's also the entertainment provided by Dave (AKA waffling). If a topic is interesting I'll watch a 2 hour video. Much better than the BS broadcasted by TV stations.

[Wolfgang]

Too much of waffling can kill a good thing in the end. Maybe it is a good idea to open an "electronic comedy channel" that takes care of the people where entertainment is the top priority and to have more engineering in the others. I would suggest that John Cleese is hired as an actor for the electronic comedy channel. 

[ucanel]

I'd personally rather see a complicated topic broken down into 2-3 shorter videos that follow in logical sequence vs one long one.

I agree but of course not for the mailbag.
And timestamps is very helpfull.

Dave seems to talking much but he has to,
his nearly every word has a big background backstory
and tells us so many things in a short way.

Good work  Dave I am grateful for that hard work.

[Bud]

Too much of waffling can kill a good thing in the end. Maybe it is a good idea to open an "electronic comedy channel" that takes care of the people where entertainment is the top priority and to have more engineering in the others. I would suggest that John Cleese is hired as an actor for the electronic comedy channel. 

"Electronic drama channel", starring Louis Rossmann

[NiHaoMike]

Maybe it is a good idea to open an "electronic comedy channel" that takes care of the people where entertainment is the top priority and to have more engineering in the others.

Are Simone Giertz, Photonicinduction, and ElectroBoom not enough?

[Wolfgang]

What about the batteriser people ?
They have everything a good sitcom is made of:

- They are evil characters
- They have no clue how the world works
- They try to cheat everybody (probably even themselves) but they fail so miserably that is hilariously comic
- There are even animals in it (no cows, but snails).

... just an idea. 

[ttelectronic]

I'll watch Great Scott occasionally, but really I don't find his videos that useful. If it's something I enjoy of any youtubers videos I can watch them for an hour+ easy. Really for me it comes down to the subject. If it's something I'm interested in, I prefer a longer video. Sometimes I get more interested in a particular area then go back and watch videos I haven't watched normally.

I always do enjoy the mailbag and prefer them long. I'm sure some people don't find it as enjoyable. 

[Mr. Scram]

The average attention span time on Youtube hasn't changed much, and it still the 8-10 minute mark. My channel gets and average watch time of 10-12 minutes across all my videos.
What has changed is that the Youtube algorithm now values watch time. That doesn't mean that people are watching for longer, it's just that it now matters more. So those science youtubers who spent a month creating one highly polished 5-10 minute are screwed.
I doubt any channel has an average watch time in the 20 minute range, mine is on the high side.

10 to 12 minutes isn't enough for your type of content, so it doesn't seem to make sense to cater to it anyway. Or is it an attempt to cater to both groups?

[TheDefpom]

I, much like Dave, am conscious about video length.

When I first started I would just record the entire thing, and upload basically an un-edited video, they would easily get to an hour and a half, even 2 hours at times.

Then I started to look at the statistics and saw that very few people even made it to the end, so I started to shorten them.

I now keep them less than an hour, always, and if possible I try and get them below certain lengths, such as 44 minutes, 39 minutes, 29 minutes, 24 minutes, 19 minutes, 14 minutes, purely because people are more likely to watch a 29 minute video than a 34 minute one for example.

I stil try to ensure that the content I want to show is there so I don’t strictly go to any actual formula, I just try to get them down to a number that encourages people to start watching them.

The down side is that it takes a lot longer to edit whilst doing this, a 30 minute video may take me well over an hour and a half to edit.

[firewalker]

I do not mind longer videos, in fact i prefer them, as long as the creator does not repeat himself as Louis Rossman does.

You should watch Mr Carlson's Lab videos then!

[Bud]

Actually I used to watch him but the my problem with Mr Carlson is he takes his explanations too much down to earth. This is certainly valuable for newbies but not my level (no arrogance here).

[EEVblog]

The average attention span time on Youtube hasn't changed much, and it still the 8-10 minute mark. My channel gets and average watch time of 10-12 minutes across all my videos.
What has changed is that the Youtube algorithm now values watch time. That doesn't mean that people are watching for longer, it's just that it now matters more. So those science youtubers who spent a month creating one highly polished 5-10 minute are screwed.
I doubt any channel has an average watch time in the 20 minute range, mine is on the high side.

10 to 12 minutes isn't enough for your type of content, so it doesn't seem to make sense to cater to it anyway. Or is it an attempt to cater to both groups?

If I did short videos then it would be a deliberate attempt to appeal to short attention span viewers. Given that I have built over half a million subscribers on long form videos, there seems to be no major reason to change that formula much. It's not like I have the time to create another channel that targets shorter higher polished videos.

[IanB]

If I did short videos then it would be a deliberate attempt to appeal to short attention span viewers. Given that I have built over half a million subscribers on long form videos, there seems to be no major reason to change that formula much. It's not like I have the time to create another channel that targets shorter higher polished videos.

I run technical videos from many producers at 1.25x or 1.5x to increase the speed of information delivery, as I find the normal pace of speaking and presentation too slow. I wonder if YouTube counts watch time as real time or video time when I do that?

[TheDefpom]

I run technical videos from many producers at 1.25x or 1.5x to increase the speed of information delivery, as I find the normal pace of speaking and presentation too slow. I wonder if YouTube counts watch time as real time or video time when I do that?

I wonder if I should play them at 50% to balance that out, maybe I could keep up then lol 

[wilfred]

I, much like Dave, am conscious about video length.

<snipped>

I stil try to ensure that the content I want to show is there so I don’t strictly go to any actual formula, I just try to get them down to a number that encourages people to start watching them.

The down side is that it takes a lot longer to edit whilst doing this, a 30 minute video may take me well over an hour and a half to edit.

It must count for something if you take care to craft your final video. Surely I'm not the only one who can clearly see when someone has taken care with their final product. I respect them for it in return for the respect they have shown to me and my time. If I start to see the video is hastily thrown together and particularly if it follows a pattern of inconsistent quality that makes me think this guy is taking the piss if he thinks I'll watch anything, then my own internal algorithms will kick in and mark the channel down.

It's not strictly about the length. It's about the general vibe of how worthwile I find it to watch whether or not I will watch a long video. Mr Carlson's Lab and The Signal Path are good examples of channels that are produced to a consistently high standard but also have quite long videos. I can't say I watch them because I have an interest in vacuum tube gear or RF stuff. I do learn something I suppose, I do find it entertaining to watch a repair. But mostly it is enjoyable to watch and listen to someone share their passion. It helps me recharge my own at times.

More than the length of the video it is the effort that has gone into the video to reward the use of my attention that determines whether it is too long. If it leaves me wanting more then it is too short. No clock needed.

[Wolfgang]

I think you have to differentiate between real length and lenghtiness.

Even a short video can bore you to death if its mainly gossip and hardly ever gets to thee point, and even a long video can be very interesting because of the concentrated valueable information contained.

Its the bang per minute that makes the difference. If you have something to say, say it in few, understandable words. If you are not sure if you have enough to say or about the way you should say it, keep quiet and wait for a better moment. The internet is full of trash - why add something to that ?

[EEVblog]

I think you have to differentiate between real length and lenghtiness.
Even a short video can bore you to death if its mainly gossip and hardly ever gets to thee point, and even a long video can be very interesting because of the concentrated valueable information contained.
Its the bang per minute that makes the difference. If you have something to say, say it in few, understandable words. If you are not sure if you have enough to say or about the way you should say it, keep quiet and wait for a better moment. The internet is full of trash - why add something to that ?

Agreed, and that's one thing I've gotten better at over the years I think. But my off-the-cuff style still doesn't lend itself to conciseness, I'm not that good that I can churn out concise polished script comparable masterpieces live off the top of my head. But I like to think I do pretty darn well for the style of recording I do. Many people are amazed I'm able to do it way I do at all.

[joeqsmith]

I'll probably be shot down for this, but just my personal opinion as feedback I'd like to suggest to Dave he tries to keep the videos as close as possible to 15 minutes, max 20.

I don't follow Dave's videos like I used to but it's not because of the length.  Of the ones I do catch, I can't see shortening them up and still get the level of detail across that I would like to see.  If I find it entertaining or a topic I know nothing about, I will watch.  If not, I just don't watch.  There is so much content out there today,  I don't even know why anyone would suggest a change in Dave's format or anyone's for that matter.   

[EEVblog]

For those curious, I just did another editing pass that took me maybe 45 minutes, as it's actually a good (and fairly rare) example of what's possible with just editing.

Here is the 26min original that had already gone through a cut-down pass to cut out maybe 8-10 minutes worth of what turned out to be fairly dead-end circuit sleuthing.


And here is the released version with about an extra 3 minutes cut out, and I don't think I cut out any real info, so it was just the odd repeat or redundant clip, and taking out pauses etc.


Ordinarily my videos would skip both of these steps and it's first pass edit. But I've been doing a bit more 2nd pass edits to reduce the length lately. I think this is the first time I've done a third pass edit, but I thought this video was a good example to try that with.

[Pete F]

What I have noticed over the years is that algorithm or not, those who listen to their "customers" and people around them generally do well, those who don't listen often don't do so well ... and then generally wonder why it didn't work out. It's remarkable how often people will ask for feedback, then take it personally when that feedback doesn't coincide with their own opinion.

I've been trying to patiently explain why content creators can't just magically takes viewers advice and act on it. I'll say it again, it literally impossible to do so.
Contents creators get hundreds of different (and contradictory) opinion and advice from viewers, we can't act on all of them or even a majority of them.
Ok, but your opinion is more important than other people's opinions, yours is more valuable than theirs, yours is more right than theirs, ok fine, but it's still impossible.
I don't "take it personally", quite the contrary. Here I am, past midnight, a content creator with over half a million subscribers patiently trying to explain things to a couple or viewers, and probably repeated for the hundredth time to people who have suggested the same thing. I care, if I didn't I wouldn't be here typing this. I'm just trying to explain why it's not as simple as you might think.

As Dave said, don't like it, watch another channel! That's fine, fair comment, and that's what I do.

To be fair, I don't say that to be smart arse, or I enjoy telling people to piss off, I say that because it is and always will be a practical reality of Youtube content creation. Every Youtuber has to say that (even if they don't) to X percent of their viewers.

I see there's one of Dave's video suggested to me on sniffing an IR remote controller and using an Arduino to spoof the code. Sounds good and based on what I've been watching no surprise it was suggested to me. Guess what, haven't watched it. It's 24 minutes long. No doubt I will eventually, but it's late, I'm off to bed, I'm not going to watch a 24 minute video. A 10 minute one I probably would, and did. I watched instead a Great Scott video on I2C. Very much an intro video and I didn't really learn much, but at least I watched it

I don't want to create videos that people just watch and don't learn much. Great Scott and others are welcome to those views. Welcome to Youtube were there is not only content to suit everyone, but were everyone wants content catered just to their own need.
You own example is classic. My video was too long at 24min, and 10 minutes was just the right length for you, yet you then complained that you didn't learn much from that highly polished content that Great Scott no doubt spent a dozen or two hours creating. Do you expect me or someone else to magically create a 15 minute version that teaches you exactly want you wanted to know? If not 15 minutes, how long? Do you think Great Scott could have done better in the 10 minutes?

/*Addressing to Dave

WTF!!!

Dave I really hope you woke up in the morning, having been up past midnight "patiently trying to explain to me", and thought better of that post.

Firstly, I quite clearly said that I will provide feedback, that is MY feedback and therefore MY opinion. I don't speak for anyone else and stated in the opening line that I thought others will probably disagree. One of those "others" could well be you, and that's fine. I don't think my opinion is "more important" than anyone else's and don't know how I can make that any clearer. If it generated into a thread (as it has) and a conversation formed then do think it's reasonable to provide some background as to why I have formed that opinion, and have done so. You are free to have a different opinion ... and apparently do.

Nowhere here have I "complained" about your, or anyone else's video. Sometimes I learn nothing new from watching Youtube content, sometimes I learn a lot. In the case of your videos it's mostly "a lot", it it wasn't I wouldn't be here, and definitely wouldn't waste my time providing what I hoped was constructive feedback. In the case of the I2C video it was something I already use and are familiar with so I didn't learn anything new, that has nothing to do with the content quality.

Secondly, where in any of that quoted material have I addressed my comments at you personally? You are not the only person on this thread Dave, and I (as were others) were making general comments about Youtube in general. If you've read yourself into that story, well that's your concern, but it wasn't the intent. If I was addressing a comment at you specifically, I would address it to you. As I'm doing now.

Thirdly, where have I said this is "easy" Dave? Indeed not only did I not say that, I commented to another couple of posters on this thread this is NOT an easy gig. Shooting video is easy these day, almost everyone has a reasonable quality video camera in their pocket. Turning that into high quality content is NOT easy, especially if editing hard. That's why we have video production houses around the country who spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and months of their time making 1 hour documentaries etc. ... and before making any more assumptions and condescending comments about what I may or may not know about producing video, there's a serious hint as to what part of my electronics background was at one stage of my career

Finally, no I don't know what "bang for buck" I will get until after I have watched a video. That's the way it works. What I do however know is that I will get more bang for buck for the SAME CONTENT that has been edited down from, say 30 minutes to 15 minutes for example. That part of producing content is very difficult and highly time consuming. That's why video editing is considered a profession in its own right. What I do also know is what that particular content provider has historically provided on their channel. There's a fair chance it will continue that same way for subsequent content. That will influence my decision as to what I will watch in future or at any particular point in time.

You provide quite clear and concise headers as to what your video will contain, and kudos for doing that. One thing that genuinely does piss me off are providers who use false or misleading descriptions for their content eg. "You're not going to believe what happened today!!!". No I won't believe that, as I'm not going to invest 30 minutes of my time to find out!

If I did short videos then it would be a deliberate attempt to appeal to short attention span viewers. Given that I have built over half a million subscribers on long form videos, there seems to be no major reason to change that formula much.

As I've said Dave , a number of times on this forum, I think you're an engaging and effective communicator. Apparently also one who has it all figured out.

*/End comments specifically addressed to Dave [hopefully that made it clearer to whom I'm addressing Dave. This is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, let's not take things quite so seriously ]

The opportunity to have a highly experienced engineer ie Dave share specific and directed knowledge with those who have an interest is pretty much a unique experience that would have been considered unheard of only 10-15 years ago. We live in an amazing time and it shouldn't be taken for granted. For the price of a cup of coffee or two we can buy more processing power than put man on the moon not even a generation ago. We can travel around the world for a week or two's wages and know when we will arrive at our destination to within minutes ... versus being surprised to arrive at all within living memory. ...and we have a media and communication platform that provides pretty much the entire world's knowledge at our fingertips. All for free! The world is changing fast; Youtube? Well, I wouldn't want to be working for one of the free to air channels right now

There is so much content out there today,  I don't even know why anyone would suggest a change in Dave's format or anyone's for that matter.   

Because Youtube is SOCIAL media. If it wasn't social then it would just be ... media. Content providers invest their time in providing content. Viewers invest their time in watching that content and providing feedback. That's why Youtube has a comments section, and even if it's disabled the "thumbs up/down" feedback option is still available. Nobody is forced to do either. But because of the amount of Youtube I watch and engage with the providers I've got to know a few of the providers personally off-line. I've seen (and been a part of) providers go from (literally) working on the floor of their apartment to multi-million dollar enterprises. I've also seen some go from huge to has-been in the space of months. There is nothing "easy" about making a living from social media!

... and there goes another, apparently wasted, 1 hr of my time, and the opportunity to see if spoofing an IR transmitter video is good/great/ok content!

[TheDefpom]

I’m doing similar things Dave, clipping out pauses, repetition, etc. I now do an edit all the way through to the end, then do it again, the second edit will usually only trim off another 3-5%, with the first edit taking off up to 25% sometimes, but because people don’t see what it was, they do not know how much better it already is.

I would rather spend my time finding broken equipment and recording content, than editing the crap out of a video to save 2 minutes.

[joeqsmith]

Someone's thumb is raw.   

[EEVblog]

/*Addressing to Dave
WTF!!!
Dave I really hope you woke up in the morning, having been up past midnight "patiently trying to explain to me", and thought better of that post.

My post was fine.

I don't think my opinion is "more important" than anyone else's and don't know how I can make that any clearer.

I wasn't saying you thought that, I was just using your comments to promote general discussion. I do that a lot on the forum, it's my style.

If it generated into a thread (as it has) and a conversation formed then do think it's reasonable to provide some background as to why I have formed that opinion, and have done so. You are free to have a different opinion ... and apparently do.

Relax, you are taking this way too seriously and personally. I'm not taking it personally, if you think so then you have interpreted my responses wrong.

Nowhere here have I "complained" about your, or anyone else's video.

You said that you wouldn't watch video over a certain length, and that's fine, call it a "complaint" or feedback, it doesn't matter, thanks, taken on board. I'm just trying to explain why it's not easy to just make shorter videos, not to your specifically, you might already know this, but to everyone who reads this thread and the OP who raised the issue.

Secondly, where in any of that quoted material have I addressed my comments at you personally? You are not the only person on this thread Dave, and I (as were others) were making general comments about Youtube in general. If you've read yourself into that story, well that's your concern, but it wasn't the intent. If I was addressing a comment at you specifically, I would address it to you. As I'm doing now.

Again, relax, I'm not taking it personally, I'm just trying to explain things from a content creators point of view, something very few other creators bother to do.

Thirdly, where have I said this is "easy" Dave? Indeed not only did I not say that, I commented to another couple of posters on this thread this is NOT an easy gig.

Again, relax, I'm not addressing your specifically but am taking the opportunity to use your comments as general discussion point so that others and those who read this in the future can understand.

Finally, no I don't know what "bang for buck" I will get until after I have watched a video. That's the way it works. What I do however know is that I will get more bang for buck for the SAME CONTENT that has been edited down from, say 30 minutes to 15 minutes for example.

Sorry but I do not agree. Sometimes (often?) there is simply no way to make educational technical content more concise. And very often this can't be done at just the editing stage, you would have to go back and re-write scripts and re-shoot the material to make it more concise.

If I did short videos then it would be a deliberate attempt to appeal to short attention span viewers. Given that I have built over half a million subscribers on long form videos, there seems to be no major reason to change that formula much.

As I've said Dave , a number of times on this forum, I think you're an engaging and effective communicator. Apparently also one who has it all figured out.
[/quote]

I take that comment as meaning that I'm closed minded on this issue. That's demonstrably untrue. I've now probably spent half day on this thread and redoing my latest video to make it three minutes shorter. You're welcome. But it's still 23 minutes long, so you probably won't watch it, oh well.

*/End comments specifically addressed to Dave [hopefully that made it clearer to whom I'm addressing Dave. This is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, let's not take things quite so seriously ]

I'm not, I'm simply trying to constructive and educate people on what it's like for a content creator.

[EEVblog]

I’m doing similar things Dave, clipping out pauses, repetition, etc. I now do an edit all the way through to the end, then do it again, the second edit will usually only trim off another 3-5%, with the first edit taking off up to 25% sometimes, but because people don’t see what it was, they do not know how much better it already is.
I would rather spend my time finding broken equipment and recording content, than editing the crap out of a video to save 2 minutes.

Yes, 3-5% saving would be typical on a 2nd pass edit.

Reminds me of the Steve Jobs response (paraphrasing) to Macintosh engineers who said they couldn't get the boot time down any further - Multiply the number of users by that extra 10 seconds and you'll be responsible for a dozens human lifetimes wasted. Do you want to be responsible for THAT?
(The engineers shaved off the extra 10 seconds)

[joeqsmith]

Again, relax, I'm not taking it personally, I'm just trying to explain things from a content creators point of view, something very few other creators bother to do.

It's possible they are looking for some sort of diode in the feedback loop. 

[EEVblog]

There is so much content out there today,  I don't even know why anyone would suggest a change in Dave's format or anyone's for that matter.   

Suggesting change is good, but people just have to be willing to potentially hear the reasoning why that's maybe not a good idea, or why it's not so easy, or that other people won't like that etc.
As I said, even if you make every change everyone suggests, every content creator will eventually be forced to say "if you don't like it, don't watch it", it's absolutely inevitable because you can't please everyone.

[johnlsenchak]

This  is my  constructive  opinion here,  what I think  is that Dave being who he is, just over talks on subjects. He  tends to  interject  a lot of information  that real is not  needed when his  going through   what ever his talking about. He calls it  "waffling"  I call it  over talking.  He real needs to slow down and pause more so that he  doesn't  talk about  things that are not germane   to whatever the subject matter is  at hand

If he didn't  "over talk"  so  much then the length   of the videos  would be shorter

To me the real problem is that a lot of people  have a short attention span of maybe twenty to thirty  minutes .  If you don't  keep  people  interested  in  what ever you are talking about in that time frame, then they will  stop the video and move on

I  real  enjoy Dave's videos , I've been watching  them for years now. That's  my two cents

[Wolfgang]

Hi Dave,

of course you can always say that the fact that you run the largest (I suppose) electronic blog worldwide means what you did is probably OK.
Its certainly an achievement what you have accomplished, congrats for that.

The point is not that you are doing too little, you are probably doing too much per timeframe.

I could compare this a little bit with application notes from manufacturers. There is an ocean of lousy ones, but some of them stick out and shine for years to come,
like some from Jim Williams, Bob Pease, Walt Jung, ... They are the ones that have an impact on the industry. Not every single one can be like this, but from time to time
a key paper is a good thing. Speed or quantitative output is not everthing.

You had some memorable videos, too, like the ones about Batteriser (an Oscar for the best electronic comedy) or the early DP832 teardown videos. Lets have more of those.

Thanks
  Wolfgang

[Mr. Scram]

This  is my  constructive  opinion here,  what I think  is that Dave being who he is, just over talks on subjects. He  tends to  interject  a lot of information  that real is not  needed when his  going through   what ever his talking about. He calls it  "waffling"  I call it  over talking.  He real needs to slow down and pause more so that he  doesn't  talk about  things that are not germane   to whatever the subject matter is  at hand

If he didn't  "over talk"  so  much then the length   of the videos  would be shorter

To me the real problem is that a lot of people  have a short attention span of maybe twenty to thirty  minutes .  If you don't  keep  people  interested  in  what ever you are talking about in that time frame, then they will  stop the video and move on

I  real  enjoy Dave's videos , I've been watching  them for years now. That's  my two cents

It could be argued the tangents are what makes videos both more worthwhile and palatable.

Personally I don't care too much about topic. I do care about learning about things I'd otherwise unlikely learn elsewhere, and decent content density. I don't care about what people call waffling because it's intriguing content nonetheless and little nuggets of industry experience are part of the attraction.

[tautech]

This  is my  constructive  opinion here,  what I think  is that Dave being who he is, just over talks on subjects. He  tends to  interject  a lot of information  that real is not  needed when his  going through   what ever his talking about. He calls it  "waffling"  I call it  over talking.  He real needs to slow down and pause more so that he  doesn't  talk about  things that are not germane   to whatever the subject matter is  at hand

If he didn't  "over talk"  so  much then the length   of the videos  would be shorter

To me the real problem is that a lot of people  have a short attention span of maybe twenty to thirty  minutes .  If you don't  keep  people  interested  in  what ever you are talking about in that time frame, then they will  stop the video and move on

I  real  enjoy Dave's videos , I've been watching  them for years now. That's  my two cents

Well guess what, Dave's vids are NOT just about today's audience and the vast adult viewership he has but also the juniors that are becoming interested in EE. His style has to be the way he's developed it to cater for today, tomorrow and well into the future were his work will remain for a long time to come.

Want to pitch to a certain demographic, fine but don't expect the following Dave has earned.

[EEVblog]

This  is my  constructive  opinion here,  what I think  is that Dave being who he is, just over talks on subjects. He  tends to  interject  a lot of information  that real is not  needed when his  going through   what ever his talking about. He calls it  "waffling"  I call it  over talking.  He real needs to slow down and pause more so that he  doesn't  talk about  things that are not germane   to whatever the subject matter is  at hand
If he didn't  "over talk"  so  much then the length   of the videos  would be shorter

Sorry but I do not agree. If I think of something that is pertinent to the topic then I mention it. Many people may not agree it's relevant etc, or I'm going off on a technical tangent etc, or I've repeated what I've said in another video somewhere or something, and that's fine. But ultimately it's up to the content creator to decide what content goes into a video what doesn't.
And in my case I've had countless feedback that people love the technical tangents. e.g. In a teardown I might go off onto a general technical tangent about how PCB's are assembled or layed out. Nothing much to do with the product teardown to hand, but useful for those who don't know. And there are countless examples of this.
I think there is very little "wasted" "waffle" in my videos, I like to think it's all technically valuable.
Again, if you want to make the video much shorter by editing out "over talk", you ultimately must lose technical content.
Could I say the same thing in a more concise manor?, sure, but I've explained why that's not how I do videos, so in my case that's not really an option most of the time.

[Pete F]

Dave you quoted my post and addressed me in the first person. I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect you were therefore addressing those comments to me and it wasn't "general discussion points".

The summary of what you consider a "complaint" is that I made a suggestion that if possible the videos be more tightly edited. That's it. I subsequently provided the reason both for why I personally favour that, and why Youtube and other experts in this field suggest 10-15 minutes as the "ideal" video length, if not shorter. The irony is you actually agree with that, yet also seem intent on trying to turn it into an argument.

If you agree with that feedback, as you seem to, then we're done. On the other hand you may not agree and don't want to change, and that's fine too. It's your train set. the latter would seem to be suggested by the following:

Given that I have built over half a million subscribers on long form videos, there seems to be no major reason to change that formula much.

I have changed careers and am no longer in the electronics industry professionally. My current occupation involves receiving a lot of feedback, some of that feedback is critical. Trust me I know first hand that receiving anything other than positive feedback is difficult. In my case it comes with the turf, but it took a while to build a thick skin and a perspective that the person taking their time and effort to provide that feedback is generally doing so because they want the other person to be even better. On the other hand there are people who just want to hate on somebody to make themselves feel bigger. It's up to the receiver to determine what the person's feedback motivations are. I can assure you, as I've said repeatedly, that I think your content is excellent and I feel privileged that you're willing to share that. That doesn't mean the bar can't be raised higher still.

I've never said or claimed that I expect my own feedback to suddenly change a person's way of producing content ie I wasn't expecting you to suddenly change your content to suit me Dave. However the vast majority of posters here provided posts with a similar theme, so maybe there's some substance in that feedback. Maybe there's not.

Communicating via the written word is tricky and we miss a lot of intonations and substitute what we think that person may have meant, particularly when the subject is negative. I won't be going to ElectroneX as I'm busy those days, so won't get to introduce myself personally, however I'm only a few kilometres from your office as the crow flies and regularly ride my bike close by. There's a good chance our paths will cross at some point and it's quite likely you'll find upon meeting that I'm not a "hater". ... but as I said am not normally shy to offer an opinion.

[tautech]

Shit anybody reading this thread with a thought to produce technical YT content could be well and truly discouraged from doing so and we'd all be the poorer for it. 

I say get a life and let the creators get on with doing their best for one and all.
What guides them to make changes in their delivery are the YT stats, subs, views etc not the howls of "this doesn't suit me !"

[EEVblog]

Dave you quoted my post and addressed me in the first person. I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect you were therefore addressing those comments to me and it wasn't "general discussion points".

The summary of what you consider a "complaint" is that I made a suggestion that if possible the videos be more tightly edited. That's it. I subsequently provided the reason both for why I personally favour that, and why Youtube and other experts in this field suggest 10-15 minutes as the "ideal" video length, if not shorter. The irony is you actually agree with that, yet also seem intent on trying to turn it into an argument.

I'm explaining why things aren't always black and white.

If you agree with that feedback, as you seem to, then we're done. On the other hand you may not agree and don't want to change, and that's fine too.

Were done.
I like doing what I'm doing, I'm generally happy (but not always) with my video lengths, and I've built a huge successful career on long-form videos. Indeed, there are countless people who beg me for longer videos. Indeed there are just as many if not more people who say my videos lengths are perfect or not long enough as those who say they should be shorter, trust me.

If I could magically make all my videos 10-15 minutes to meet the average attention span limit, I would, but I've explained why I often can't or don't want to do that. But it's not like none of my video are that length, some are.
As explained I do actually often go into making a video with the intent for it to be under 20 minutes. Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn't. I even have a tape counter on the camcorder that I can see the elapsed recording time.

I have changed careers and am no longer in the electronics industry professionally. My current occupation involves receiving a lot of feedback, some of that feedback is critical. Trust me I know first hand that receiving anything other than positive feedback is difficult.

Do you think this is the first time someone has suggested I make shorter videos? Reality is I've heard it hundreds of times, maybe thousands of times over the last 9 years. Nothing new at all.
Trust me, I know (some/many) people like shorter videos, I know what the professional recommendations are and why.
There is no need to respond again, thanks.

[joeqsmith]

There is so much content out there today,  I don't even know why anyone would suggest a change in Dave's format or anyone's for that matter.   

Suggesting change is good, but people just have to be willing to potentially hear the reasoning why that's maybe not a good idea, or why it's not so easy, or that other people won't like that etc.
As I said, even if you make every change everyone suggests, every content creator will eventually be forced to say "if you don't like it, don't watch it", it's absolutely inevitable because you can't please everyone.

It's not much of a sample size but I see about 10% of the people will take the time to up or down vote.  Maybe 2% will take the time to post.  Then there is an even smaller segment that will take the time to try and control the content.  It's rare.    I already find myself using

if you don't like it, don't watch it

. 

I don't understand why anyone would bother versus just finding content that they would enjoy.  Ask them and the answer is always the same.  They feel they are being helpful.  What I also find interesting is that they feel their opinion outweighs the majority and they get defensive when you attempt to explain it to them.   

I've received some pretty good feedback since I started and have changed because of it.  It's actually drove me to making longer videos.      Oh well.

[EEVblog]

It's not much of a sample size but I see about 10% of the people will take the time to up or down vote.  Maybe 2% will take the time to post.  Then there is an even smaller segment that will take the time to try and control the content.  It's rare.

Yep, those are pretty common figures across most genre's of YouTube content.

I don't understand why anyone would bother versus just finding content that they would enjoy.  Ask them and the answer is always the same.  They feel they are being helpful.  What I also find interesting is that they feel their opinion outweighs the majority and they get defensive when you attempt to explain it to them.

I mentioned this before many times, but it bares repeating. When you give a creator feedback and they may be terse with you or some such, it's not because they don't appreciate the comment/suggestion, it's likely because they have heard the same thing hundreds or even thousands of times. The innocent person making the comment doesn't know that of course, it's just an inevitable output of having a large audience.

I've received some pretty good feedback since I started and have changed because of it.  It's actually drove me to making longer videos.      Oh well.

OMG, the humanity! 
My content has also shaped in countless ways by viewer feedback. In fact it's almost the only avenue for change, as looking at your own and critically analysing  it is hard/ impossible.

[xrunner]

Explaining how toaster ovens work = short videos

Explaining 4 channel digital oscilloscopes = long videos

OK you can close the thread now. 

[Bud]

Those proponents of shorter videos should first learn how to write short posts it seems.

[ttelectronic]

One thing it took me a while to realize, I'm not sure how long it took me. That joeqsmith functional tests the meter at every single step of the way to verify nothing broke on the tests. I was quite impressed with the dedication of time it takes to do that in itself. 

[Mr. Scram]

Those proponents of shorter videos should first learn how to write short posts it seems.

Not that easy, eh!

[TheDefpom]

My opinion as a video creator myself: let Dave do whatever the hell he wants, its his intellect, his content choices.

You can suggest what YOU would like to happen, but as Dave has already said, you cannot please everyone, my channel is 100th the size of Dave's, but I have already seen the effects of what this thread is all about, people have different tastes, you cannot cater to everyone, and there is no point in trying, it just sucks the life out of the thing you are trying to do, it really isn't worth it.

Listening to opinons, yep sure, often it can be helpful, but when it comes to changing video formats, sorry, that is the sole choice of the creator, we make what we want to make, and we always do our best to capture what we are trying to say, in the way we feel is most appropriate.

I don't watch all of Dave's videos, only the ones that I think will interest me, and ones where I learn something (so most of them really).

Dave does a great job of filling the blanks and spelling out things which some people may think are obvious (aka waffling), but actually may not be obvious unless you have already been told about it by say, I don't know, some electronic moving pictures medium.

[Pete F]

Shit anybody reading this thread with a thought to produce technical YT content could be well and truly discouraged from doing so and we'd all be the poorer for it. 

I say get a life and let the creators get on with doing their best for one and all.
What guides them to make changes in their delivery are the YT stats, subs, views etc not the howls of "this doesn't suit me !"

Thank you for the life lesson, my post was hardly a "howl of it doesn't suit me!". I provided feedback and an opinion in a very respectful manner; that's how this format works. Are you seriously suggesting that people should not provide feedback to Youtube creators? Mate, this is SOCIAL media, the intent of it is to be two way process  Dave specifically finishes many of his videos by ASKING people to leave comments. This forum is here to leave comments about the EEVBlog.

There are untold other platforms around where people have the ability to post videos and there is no interaction with those viewing. Youtube is not one of them. I have no idea how many times somebody has suggested cutting videos harder, so don't see why someone should get all beat out of shape when it's suggested.

The formula is pretty simple, don't like the video length, don't watch it. Don't like somebody's post length, don't read it! However if somebody specifically invites comments and feedback, some of that feedback isn't going to be blowing sunshine up one's clacker!

[Brumby]

Sometimes (often?) there is simply no way to make educational technical content more concise. And very often this can't be done at just the editing stage, you would have to go back and re-write scripts and re-shoot the material to make it more concise.

Bingo!

No matter how you present a subject - some people will say it is too long; some will say it is too short; some will say it rabbited on about things "everybody" already knows and others will say it missed out on some important details.  It's never about pleasing everybody, but trying to find your place somewhere that is useful - even if not the optimum.

I don't enjoy every video Dave puts out - but I don't expect that I will.  I especially don't expect him to do anything different on my account.  He has a style that I don't mind and I have seen it evolve over time.  His confidence and comfort in front of the camera have increased, allowing a more flowing conversation - especially for those presenters that have one very important asset: Knowing their subject.

I'm sure Dave will take note of many of the opinions offered - and then produce content in a manner that feels right to him - and I wouldn't want it any other way.  I have no desire to see him wrapped up in a straight jacket designed by internet committee (talk about a double whammy) and then struggle to say something useful.

Thankfully, from what I've seen, Dave isn't going to wear that  and while he may take an interest in some points, I do not expect him to take on wholesale changes for what amounts to "opinions under a bell curve".

Dave - just keep doing what you're doing and you're fine in my book.   

[Brumby]

... my post was hardly a "howl of it doesn't suit me!". I provided feedback and an opinion in a very respectful manner; that's how this format works. Are you seriously suggesting that people should not provide feedback to Youtube creators? Mate, this is SOCIAL media, the intent of it is to be two way process 

That's the thing about Social Media ... the difference between a "howl of it doesn't suit me!" and "feedback" is very often hidden in the tone of voice - and you can't do that very well via a text medium.  For some people, the ability to express this accurately via the written word is difficult - and the reader may interpret things differently from their different cultural background.

I would suggest you take a page out of your own book and chill a bit.  You seem to be taking any opportunity to interpret responses to your posts as being attacks - when, from what I have read, the discussion hasn't headed down that avenue except from reactions.

It's social media.  If you make a comment, expect a response - and harden up a little.

[tautech]

Shit anybody reading this thread with a thought to produce technical YT content could be well and truly discouraged from doing so and we'd all be the poorer for it. 

I say get a life and let the creators get on with doing their best for one and all.
What guides them to make changes in their delivery are the YT stats, subs, views etc not the howls of "this doesn't suit me !"

Thank you for the life lesson, my post was hardly a "howl of it doesn't suit me!". I provided feedback and an opinion in a very respectful manner; that's how this format works. Are you seriously suggesting that people should not provide feedback to Youtube creators? Mate, this is SOCIAL media, the intent of it is to be two way process  Dave specifically finishes many of his videos by ASKING people to leave comments. This forum is here to leave comments about the EEVBlog.

There are untold other platforms around where people have the ability to post videos and there is no interaction with those viewing. Youtube is not one of them. I have no idea how many times somebody has suggested cutting videos harder, so don't see why someone should get all beat out of shape when it's suggested.

The formula is pretty simple, don't like the video length, don't watch it. Don't like somebody's post length, don't read it! However if somebody specifically invites comments and feedback, some of that feedback isn't going to be blowing sunshine up one's clacker!

Haha Pete, my comment was NOT directed specifically at you, if it was Id have quoted you just as I have now.

Well then I challenge you to go get creative and try and conjure up some technical online content of your own, something that isn't seen as biased and also cater for a wide demographic and diverse cultural audience, it just ain't easy.
Over my good few years on this forum and thousands of posts and the lessons learnt of how to be informative and factual has taken some good time to develop just as Dave's style has changed in the 1100+ videos he's done.

He's listened and heard it all before and from earlier posts you've made about your age indicates you should already know how to vote...........with your feet.

[Pete F]

Thank you, you guys are evidently right and I apparently "need to chill". I'd thought some respectful feedback about the channel might be taken onboard and considered. I didn't think I'd get much support, if any, but clearly it wasn't well received and I should have predicted that. I will certainly not be offering any feedback in future and have definitely learnt my lesson there. 

For what it's worth over lunch I did finally get to watch the #506 IR/Arduino video. I'll have to go through the sketch when I get a chance. Obviously I can't comment on the video lest it be construed as feedback.

Please accept my apologies for wasting 4 pages worth of people's electrons.

[Brumby]

I will certainly not be offering any feedback in future and have definitely learnt my lesson there. 

....

Please accept my apologies for wasting 4 pages worth of people's electrons.

Good grief.  I said harden up - not spit the dummy.

[mickmake]

The YouTube algorithm is a complex thing, but we know that it does favour those videos that have an audience retention rate of more than 50% for more than 90% of the video. There’s some magic thing that kicks in once you hit that mark.
So I’m gathering Dave has adjusted for that metric.

Nope, I don't try and follow the ever changing algorithm, I just make the content I want to make and it either gets views or it doesn't.
BTW, do you have a reference for that? I have not heard of something "kicking in" at that limit.
Also, a longer retention rate is antithetical to the new longer watch time metric the algorithm is favoring, you can't really have both.

This is what's been quoted to me by several people from YouTube, whether it's just a case of Chinese whispers or not... dunno, but I have seen more ads being run on my videos as a result.

I guess there's different metrics for different goals and as you've said several times, ad revenue isn't one of them for you.

Also, a longer retention rate is antithetical to the new longer watch time metric the algorithm is favoring, you can't really have both.

Well, a better retention rate would lead to longer watch time, but there's other factors that are just as important if you want visibility - thumbnail images, metadata and follow-on watch-time.
Metadata is actually pretty important, and I've been pretty lazy with my videos. I've changed tags and titles on a couple and seen a huge improvement.
Follow-on watch-time is all about how much more someone stays on YouTube after watching your videos. IE: If they abandon YouTube after yours, then it is lowered.

Having said all this: I doubt very much whether YouTube themselves actually know what's going on 100%. They have a massive amount of data to process.

[mickmake]

I’m doing similar things Dave, clipping out pauses, repetition, etc. I now do an edit all the way through to the end, then do it again, the second edit will usually only trim off another 3-5%, with the first edit taking off up to 25% sometimes, but because people don’t see what it was, they do not know how much better it already is.

I would rather spend my time finding broken equipment and recording content, than editing the crap out of a video to save 2 minutes.

I first run through the video as a rough cut and at that point I don't even look at the video - it's all audio. I make sure the audio is continuous and understandable.

Then I go back and add Broll. So much quicker than the way I was doing it before.

Then I render and run through a final QA - cause my machine is slow and can't play in real-time.
Sometimes I'll have to go back and re-edit, but not often.

[timgiles]

Hmmm, millennial snowflake alert!?

[EEVblog]

Thank you for the life lesson, my post was hardly a "howl of it doesn't suit me!". I provided feedback and an opinion in a very respectful manner; that's how this format works. Are you seriously suggesting that people should not provide feedback to Youtube creators? Mate, this is SOCIAL media, the intent of it is to be two way process  Dave specifically finishes many of his videos by ASKING people to leave comments. This forum is here to leave comments about the EEVBlog.

There are untold other platforms around where people have the ability to post videos and there is no interaction with those viewing. Youtube is not one of them. I have no idea how many times somebody has suggested cutting videos harder, so don't see why someone should get all beat out of shape when it's suggested.

A assume you are talking about me "getting bent out of shape", in which case I have explained myself over and over. You provided feedback, I've thanked you for that feedback and tried to in-depth explain to not only yourself but everyone in general, the issues surrounding that suggestion because it comes up a lot. It's done.

[EEVblog]

Thankfully, from what I've seen, Dave isn't going to wear that  and while he may take an interest in some points, I do not expect him to take on wholesale changes for what amounts to "opinions under a bell curve".

And that's the issue here. I have built my entire channel over 9 years and over 1100 videos based on a long form off-the-cuff approach.
Changing to rigid 10-15 minutes regardless of the content would be a "wholesale change" that many people will not like.
Sure I might pick up some new audience because of that change, but I will also definitely loose others.
And I do make videos of the suggested length, just not that many.
That is why it's best to do what I've always done, and continue to be conscious of the length of my videos and do my best, but ultimately not sacrifice the content to match some arbitrary deadline. Channels like Great Scott and Afrotechmods very deliberately cripple their content in a technical educational sense in order to meet the "Youtube formula", and that's fine, and they have large fanbases because of that. But if every electronics channel did that we'd have no in-depth long form content, everyone would be chasing the algorithm and a more mainsteam audience.
Go on The Signal Path channel and try to suggest 10 minute videos and you'll beat over the head with a CRO probe.

I get Pete's point about perhaps making many more shorter videos, but I've explained why that's maybe not the best option either.

[EEVblog]

I first run through the video as a rough cut and at that point I don't even look at the video - it's all audio. I make sure the audio is continuous and understandable.

Yes, I edit based on the audio. I almost don't even have to look at the video because I remember what I shot and I've quite careful about framing and the like so it's always right out of the camera.
In fact for most videos I wouldn't even need to listen to the audio, I could simply join clips together, take out the dead space, and be 95% confident the final video is a wrap.

Then I render and run through a final QA - cause my machine is slow and can't play in real-time.

I never watch my video after the render, I just edit in sequence and rely on my ability not to goof up that process.
Someone will tell me within 30 minutes of uploading if I've monumentally goofed something. Probably only a few percent of the time I'll have to pull a video and re-edit a goof.

[EEVblog]

Thank you, you guys are evidently right and I apparently "need to chill". I'd thought some respectful feedback about the channel might be taken onboard and considered.

It was considered, very carefully and thoughtfully with detailed explanations and personal attention from a busy Youtuber with over half a million subscribers. What more did you want?

[Fungus]

Reminds me of this:

[joeqsmith]

I will certainly not be offering any feedback in future and have definitely learnt my lesson there. 

Someone provides you with a little helpful feedback in return and this is how you choose to react?  I will say from my own limited experience, I am not surprised. 

Are you going to ask how to delete your account too?

[joeqsmith]

Explaining how toaster ovens work = short videos

I could do a year long course on how a toaster oven works and still not scratch the surface.   Not to mention the amount of research I would need to do on the subject.  We would need to start with the basics of electricity and work up from there.   

[IanJ]

I like the long video's...…..but usually I'll skip through them at first screening and then later let it go for the whole thing when I am ready to give it my full attention.
I don't much like segmented video's, the same way I don't follow many Tv 'series'.......I like a movie where there is a beginning, middle and end all in the one sitting. Exceptions to this are follow-up videos.

Dave's video's are technical in nature so my gut feeling is they don't completely fit the YT 'ideal length'. The revenue generated may show something else though.

Dave's waffling?...….keep it coming Dave, it's more like having you in the same room than watching a show on Tv.

My own video's, I try to keep them under 45mins.......and if they are longer I can usually trim some stuff out.

Ian.

[EEVblog]

I like the long video's...…..but usually I'll skip through them at first screening and then later let it go for the whole thing when I am ready to give it my full attention.
I don't much like segmented video's, the same way I don't follow many Tv 'series'.......I like a movie where there is a beginning, middle and end all in the one sitting. Exceptions to this are follow-up videos.

I also don't like series, as there is a continuous "commitment" in order to get it all. When I sit down to watch something of an evening I want full closure within the two hours, so movie it is.

[joeqsmith]

One thing it took me a while to realize, I'm not sure how long it took me. That joeqsmith functional tests the meter at every single step of the way to verify nothing broke on the tests. I was quite impressed with the dedication of time it takes to do that in itself. 

Yes, that's pretty much what is going on.  It takes me a few days to run a decent meter now.  Life cycling the switches requires several days by itself.    Then it gets boiled down to about an hour.    Then someone will post how the videos are too long while others are asking to see even more tests added.      

In the end,  I run them out of my own interest, using the metrics I want to see and then offer the results to the few people who are interested in the data I collect.  I don't ask for any handouts,  there are no ads and I make nothing off the channel. 

[b_force]

I don't mind long videos as long as there is good information in it.
What I only see very often (including Dave's videos) is that things repeated many times or a lot of time is spend on things that aren't important to the video.
That just makes the video unnecessarily long and I personally find that frustrating to hear somebody saying what he already did 3-4 times before.
Even harder to keep focused if the story goes all over the place.

Practically I do think more than 20-25 minutes is stretching it for a YouTube video, unless it's a good documentary/classroom style video.

Yeah, sure you can say let people do the things as they want.
But I don't understand what's wrong about improving yourself?
Guess some people just still like living in caves.

[Hugoneus]

This has always been a challenge for channels like mine. Especially because my videos are generally focused on more advanced topics. But because my content is focused this way, people don’t mind long videos. I don’t think anyone has ever told me my videos were too long even though they are often 1 hour long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wolfgang]

Hi Shariar,

IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:

- no gossip. No fast forward needed.
- only relevant info, not matters of individual taste or fashion
- interesting insights into complicated matters. The level is advanced, but adequate for EEs. Nothing wrong with that.
- Your videos are long. Yes. But you never feel bored because its really packed with good info.

I like it !

Best regards
  Wolfgang

[rsjsouza]

I also don't like series, as there is a continuous "commitment" in order to get it all. When I sit down to watch something of an evening I want full closure within the two hours, so movie it is.

I usually release a "series" when I have all (or most) material already shot and it becomes a matter of editing and staggered publishing. In the past I did a series about a repair and almost crashed and burned when my schedule increased by a lot and I couldn't find time to shoot the additional parts. I couldn't also shoot other smaller things that interested me, given that all my space was taken by the repair project.

I read the initial posts of the OP and find the points well put - however, I see that over the years Dave have improved a lot regarding redundancy and waffling, which reduces the fat of his videos and increases the proportion of actual information conveyed (and opinions as well). IMHO, having more information is always more desirable as you can always skip to whatever interests you. Several heavily edited and wonderfully produced videos leave a lot to be desired to me.

Also, a long video may have a lot of information already mentioned in previous videos, which caters well to new audiences unfamiliar with the channel. However, it can be seen as boring by the regulars. Conversely, a short video can be quite dense and unpalatable to a new guy.

[EEVblog]

I don't mind long videos as long as there is good information in it.
What I only see very often (including Dave's videos) is that things repeated many times or a lot of time is spend on things that aren't important to the video.

Aren't important in your opinion.
Something being "important" in a video is a not a matter of simple demonstrable fact, i.e. it's true or it's not, it doesn't work like that.

But I don't understand what's wrong about improving yourself?

Again, making videos shorter (and hence an "improvement") by cutting out content is again not a simple demonstrable true or false thing.
Some people will agree it's an improvement, but others will think it makes the content worse.

This isn't like improving the quality of your audio or video, or removing umms and ahhs where everyone will agree it's an improvement.
And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

[EEVblog]

Hi Shariar,
IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:
- no gossip. No fast forward needed.

What does "gossip" even mean?

[EEVblog]

Also, a long video may have a lot of information already mentioned in previous videos, which caters well to new audiences unfamiliar with the channel. However, it can be seen as boring by the regulars. Conversely, a short video can be quite dense and unpalatable to a new guy.

That's the thing, I have to try and strike a balance here. You'll often hear me say "I covered that in another video I'll link in here". But if it's short to explain the basic then I'll re-tell it then and there.
e.g. if I'm troubleshooting an opamp I'm not going to explain how opamps work. But if I'm doing at teardown and I see some solder thieving pads then it would take me just the same amount of time to point people to another video as it would to simply explain it's so the solder wave doesn't get trapped and create a short as the board goes through the machine.

[Wolfgang]

... information irrelevant for the subject. I'm German, and I probably borrowed a British English term, sorry.

[b_force]

I don't mind long videos as long as there is good information in it.
What I only see very often (including Dave's videos) is that things repeated many times or a lot of time is spend on things that aren't important to the video.

Aren't important in your opinion.
Something being "important" in a video is a not a matter of simple demonstrable fact, i.e. it's true or it's not, it doesn't work like that.

But I don't understand what's wrong about improving yourself?

Again, making videos shorter (and hence an "improvement") by cutting out content is again not a simple demonstrable true or false thing.
Some people will agree it's an improvement, but others will think it makes the content worse.

This isn't like improving the quality of your audio or video, or removing umms and ahhs where everyone will agree it's an improvement.
And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

People giving feedback and listen to what they have to say (because some of them here actually have experience in giving lectures/workshops or running YouTube channels) is also a form of improving.

Btw, besides that some things are factual unimportant (like talking about sea turtles in a scope review) there is also something more about how to give a proper and smooth talk so your audience won't get bored after 5-10 minutes.
So the "factual" discussion is a bit of a non-argument to be very honest.
Than you're missing the point and nit picking words.
There are tons of well written and interesting literature about this subject.
Sidetracking to much (so non relevant information) is one of the biggest pitfalls.

Unfortunately I have to say that most of the well meant feedback given in this topic by multiple people doesn't seem to be taken serious.
Maybe it's just how it reads for me personally, maybe it's a cultural thing? 

[rx8pilot]

I like longer technical videos in general. I like details, which takes time to present. I don't want the content creators to be burdened with the planning, scripting, and editing that is required to abridge a complex topic.

[Mr. Scram]

This has always been a challenge for channels like mine. Especially because my videos are generally focused on more advanced topics. But because my content is focused this way, people don’t mind long videos. I don’t think anyone has ever told me my videos were too long even though they are often 1 hour long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think I've told you this before, but despite their length your videos are never tedious. It's all about pace and information density. Besides, there are too many "quick and easy" videos around. I cherish the channels who take their time.

Some people make much shorter videos that make me tear my hair out due to their endless repetition, gratingly slow pace or low information density.

[EEVblog]

... information irrelevant for the subject.

Ok, please provide specific examples.
I'm sure there are BTW, I often go off on tangents, but that's because I think they are important.
Sorry if you don't like that, it's just my style and I think it's valuable, so I'm not going to stop doing it. I already think I strike a good balance here.

[wilfred]

This has always been a challenge for channels like mine. Especially because my videos are generally focused on more advanced topics. But because my content is focused this way, people don’t mind long videos. I don’t think anyone has ever told me my videos were too long even though they are often 1 hour long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You've clearly got a plan that you follow and people know what to expect before they have made the decision to watch a long video. Your audience trusts you to make good use of the time. As long as you preserve that trust you will not receive complaints. There is no single ideal time for a video, the complaints aren't really about the actual time.

[EEVblog]

People giving feedback and listen to what they have to say (because some of them here actually have experience in giving lectures/workshops or running YouTube channels) is also a form of improving.

And that's precisely what I'm doing, listening.

Sidetracking to much (so non relevant information) is one of the biggest pitfalls.

Also, it's one of the things I get the most compliments about. Those little tangents I go off on during videos, many people see then as valuable nuggets of information.

Unfortunately I have to say that most of the well meant feedback given in this topic by multiple people doesn't seem to be taken serious.

So me spending hours in this thread listening to and replying to people shows I'm not taking it seriously? Really? Perhaps I should just stop?

[EEVblog]

You've clearly got a plan that you follow and people know what to expect before they have made the decision to watch a long video. Your audience trusts you to make good use of the time. As long as you preserve that trust you will not receive complaints.

LOL, it's Youtube, people will always complain about something.

There is no single ideal time for a video, the complaints aren't really about the actual time.

No, the "complaints" are essentially about people not getting exactly what they want. This is inevitable.

[Wolfgang]

Dave,

In would say we agree to disagree. Its pointless to provide examples of waffling, because you like it anyway and you feel it belongs in your videos.
Fine with me, its *your* channel, *your* work and *your* content.
There is enough other valuable info on your site, so I will continue using it as long I can learn something.

Thanks
  Wolfgang

[wilfred]

Unfortunately I have to say that most of the well meant feedback given in this topic by multiple people doesn't seem to be taken serious.
Maybe it's just how it reads for me personally, maybe it's a cultural thing? 

I don't think it is a cultural thing. I think it is because it is actually deeper than just measuring the video length with a stop watch. As long as the deeper issues go unresolved the problem remains.

Take the channel that produces low light blurry handheld videos, you could complain or just choose not to watch or you would watch without complaint. But which option would you choose? And why? I think it would depend on your expectation and whether you felt cheated and had your time wasted by someone who normally would do better but decided their time was more important than yours.

If you wanted to help them you might take the time to suggest what your expectations are and what they could do to meet them. Either they work harder to meet them or you lower your expectations. Or you go elsewhere.

If you'd paid for the service based on a preexisting belief of the standard you should expect you would not hesitiate to complain if it failed to maintain that standard. If you are only investing your time then you have to be prepared to withdraw it. Fortunately on YT that is very easy to do.

[EEVblog]

In would say we agree to disagree. Its pointless to provide examples of waffling, because you like it anyway and you feel it belongs in your videos.

No, deliberate intentional and valuable technical tangents are one thing, waffle and non-value adding side talk is another thing.
Please provide an example of what you think is particularly non-valuable side waffle and I'll look at it and tell you if I agree.
I do not want non-valuable waffle in my videos any more than you do.
Seriously, I want to know so I can improve my content. Simply saying I waffle on too much etc does not help me, only specific example can help me understand were the line is.
That goes for others too, please provide specific examples with time stamps. This is a two way street, I cannot improve if I'm just given vague complaints.

And please, make it fairly recent video example because I have been tightening up my edits in recent times. I admit that I used to do this a lot and didn't bother to edit out stuff. Now I spend more time editing and am conscious of getting the time down and taking out non-valuable information.

[joeqsmith]

I don't mind long videos as long as there is good information in it.
What I only see very often (including Dave's videos) is that things repeated many times or a lot of time is spend on things that aren't important to the video.
That just makes the video unnecessarily long and I personally find that frustrating to hear somebody saying what he already did 3-4 times before.
Even harder to keep focused if the story goes all over the place.

Practically I do think more than 20-25 minutes is stretching it for a YouTube video, unless it's a good documentary/classroom style video.

Yeah, sure you can say let people do the things as they want.
But I don't understand what's wrong about improving yourself?
Guess some people just still like living in caves.

I've make a channel out of rinse and repeat.   It's boring to watch but there's nothing glamorous or exciting about testing. 

[Wolfgang]

Hi Dave,

Challenge accepted.
I will look at a video not more than 6 months (is that OK ?) old and write a detailled critique about it. I must confess that I did not look at the recent ones so much, you know why.
It will take a while, however. Still, dont feel obliged to change anything just because of me.

Regards
  Wolfgang

[EEVblog]

Challenge accepted.
I will look at a video not more than 6 months (is that OK ?) old and write a detailled critique about it. I must confess that I did not look at the recent ones so much, you know why.
It will take a while, however. Still, dont feel obliged to change anything just because of me.

Thanks, 6 months is probably ok.
No need for detailed critique (e.g. I think you should have explained this circuit this way etc), just some timestamps to something I said and the reason you think that didn't need to be in there.
Same for anyone else, please provide examples, I will watch and take them seriously.
And please, no "you could have said that in fewer words" etc, that's not what we are talking about here. It's about information that is redundant to the video and could have been edited out.

Take #1116 for example (How to Remove Power Supply Ripple)
That one is much longer than I thought it would be. But during editing I don't recall finding anything I didn't think was valuable to include.
That being said, I haven't actually watched it after I edited it.

[Muttley Snickers]

Since everybody suddenly feels the need to spill their guts, one of the better archery channels I subscribe to has recently decided to do more live streams which I don't or won't watch for anybody or anything regardless of the content. I fully appreciate that these provides a great medium and opportunity for creators to engage with their audience but I always get the impression that the creators feel compelled to string these out for a hour or two, sorry but generally speaking most of it is waffle and not my cup of tea. 

[G0HZU]

Hi Shariar,
IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:
- no gossip. No fast forward needed.

What does "gossip" even mean?

FWIW I'm mainly interested in teardowns and reviews of high end RF test gear and I appreciate the time taken (by both Shahriar and Dave) to make these videos. However, I slightly prefer Dave's teardowns because his closeup camerawork is better and he gets closer to component level analysis with the commentary and the camerawork. Often, he takes time to read out the part numbers on the components and even uploads the datasheet and also provides links to high res still images that can be studied in detail. It must take a lot of effort to do this and I really appreciate it because I can then study the design in more detail at my own pace. I rarely watch any of these teardowns in a linear fashion and I'm often guilty of initially skimming them to the best bits where the gear is actually being taken apart with plenty of closeup RF camerawork. Ideally, I want to see inside the gear as if I was taking it apart myself and Dave's teardowns and still images get me the closest.

One obvious difference is that Shahriars videos tend to be teardown/repair videos and the focus is often on the symptoms and the fault diagnosis and subsequent faultfinding and repair and test. But Dave's teardowns are purely about what is in the box and what looks good/bad from a design point of view. So I think this is why I slightly prefer Dave's teardowns because they suit my needs better. But that is just my opinion and I don't expect everyone to agree with me  

I guess what I'm saying above is that I think it would be harder for me to edit/shorten Dave's teardowns because there is generally more interesting stuff going on that is relevant to me.

[mickmake]

Hi Shariar,
IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:
- no gossip. No fast forward needed.

What does "gossip" even mean?

Mate, your channel is full of goss! What are you on about?

[james_s]

He can make his videos any length he wants. Sometimes I do end up thinking "ok cool now get on with it!" and then I realize there's a transport bar so I can skip ahead to the next interesting bit.

[Fungus]

He can make his videos any length he wants. Sometimes I do end up thinking "ok cool now get on with it!" and then I realize there's a transport bar so I can skip ahead to the next interesting bit.

Yep.

The same goes for people saying, "I'd personally rather see a complicated topic broken down into 2-3 shorter videos that follow in logical sequence vs one long one."

Isn't that what the "pause" button is for? 

[b_force]

Unfortunately I have to say that most of the well meant feedback given in this topic by multiple people doesn't seem to be taken serious.
Maybe it's just how it reads for me personally, maybe it's a cultural thing? 

I don't think it is a cultural thing. I think it is because it is actually deeper than just measuring the video length with a stop watch. As long as the deeper issues go unresolved the problem remains.

Take the channel that produces low light blurry handheld videos, you could complain or just choose not to watch or you would watch without complaint. But which option would you choose? And why? I think it would depend on your expectation and whether you felt cheated and had your time wasted by someone who normally would do better but decided their time was more important than yours.

If you wanted to help them you might take the time to suggest what your expectations are and what they could do to meet them. Either they work harder to meet them or you lower your expectations. Or you go elsewhere.

If you'd paid for the service based on a preexisting belief of the standard you should expect you would not hesitiate to complain if it failed to maintain that standard. If you are only investing your time then you have to be prepared to withdraw it. Fortunately on YT that is very easy to do.

Ehm for the record, I was talking about people giving well meant feedback and that they have to defend it so heavily.
Which is also considered pretty rude in some cultures btw (for your information).

It's also the point were I lost Dave.
He once said in a video that he couldn't care making certain videos anymore because no-one is watching them.
At the same time I don't feel he is considering feedback from people who actually care to nicely write down their arguments.
So at one point it does seem audience matters, but in this discussion it feels more like just do whatever he wants.
I find that very confusing and contradictory. 

Like I said, maybe I just misread it or it's a cultural difference.

He can make his videos any length he wants. Sometimes I do end up thinking "ok cool now get on with it!" and then I realize there's a transport bar so I can skip ahead to the next interesting bit.

Yep.

The same goes for people saying, "I'd personally rather see a complicated topic broken down into 2-3 shorter videos that follow in logical sequence vs one long one."

Isn't that what the "pause" button is for? 

I think we had a similar discussion before.
Pausing a video is absolutely not the same as an intended rest in a talk or speech.
That even goes for breaking things down into sections, sometimes certain theories, explanations or things need to settle down for a few days before continuing.

[wilfred]

So at one point it does seem audience matters, but in this discussion it feels more like just do whatever he wants.
I find that very confusing and contradictory.

If you go back far enough the EEVBlog was mostly claimed to be Dave doing whatever he wants. For better or worse it has seemed to do that in spite of whatever intentions strike Dave's fancy from time to time.

[nixfu]

Short videos are for people who are making content for the masses with short attention spans on topics like "Top 10 Types of Cheese Sandwiches".

Keep the long videos for gods sake.

[madires]

I'm waiting for someone making short videos titled "Top 10 jelly bean trannies" or "Top 10 power MOSFETs"

[Pete F]

And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

For the record Dave, Pete didn’t get “so upset about this”, In fact Pete couldn’t give less of a shit if he tried. What Pete in fact did was to offer some respectful feedback of his own experience and personal opinion in the hope of helping the the receiver. Meanwhile I would ask you to provide a quote where Pete has said, implied or otherwise asserted in any way that that he claimed the “improvement “ was obvious.

If you want to turn this in to some sort of federal case and argument, please leave my name out if it Dave, I have no interest in this sort of BS. I like your channel and value you experience, but have no interest in becoming involved in this type of discussion.

[Mr. Scram]

For the record Dave, Pete didn’t get “so upset about this”, In fact Pete couldn’t give less of a shit if he tried. What Pete in fact did was to offer some respectful feedback of his own experience and personal opinion in the hope of helping the the receiver. Meanwhile I would ask you to provide a quote where Pete has said, implied or otherwise asserted in any way that that he claimed the “improvement “ was obvious.

If you want to turn this in to some sort of federal case and argument, please leave my name out if it Dave, I have no interest in this sort of BS. I like your channel and value you experience, but have no interest in becoming involved in this type of discussion.

If I'm totally honest a lot of your posts in this thread sound frustrated and upset. It really doesn't come across as if Pete is not giving a shit. Maybe it's a total communication breakdown.

[bsfeechannel]

People, please, leave Dave alone. His yapping has a hypnotic effect.

I suffer from insomnia. So I watch one of his videos and then I fall asleep in 5 to 10 minutes. It's infallible. No need for sleeping pills.
The next day in the morning I resume watching the video again. And while I sleep I dream of microcontrollers, electrolytic capacitors, oscilloscopes, multimeters, etc.

Please, don't spoil my hypnotherapy!

[bitseeker]

How to give feedback:

1. Write your feedback in a concise, but informative, manner and include specific examples whenever possible.
2. Submit the feedback once. Don't expect a personal reply.
3. Go on with your life.

 

I admire Dave's patience.

[jancumps]

And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

For the record Dave, Pete didn’t get “so upset about this”, In fact Pete couldn’t give less of a shit if he tried. What Pete in fact did was to offer some respectful feedback of his own experience and personal opinion in the hope of helping the the receiver. Meanwhile I would ask you to provide a quote where Pete has said, implied or otherwise asserted in any way that that he claimed the “improvement “ was obvious.

If you want to turn this in to some sort of federal case and argument, please leave my name out if it Dave, I have no interest in this sort of BS. I like your channel and value you experience, but have no interest in becoming involved in this type of discussion.

Didn’t this post change tone after the “you don’t listen to the customer” part? For me, that’s when you started acting as if you are the customer of the video.

[Brumby]

There were a couple of us talking to Dave at the meetup last night and he made it clear that he DID take notice of comments and other feedback and that he does try to improve.

It would seem somewhat obvious that he will not be able to accommodate EVERY single suggestion for any number of reasons.  There are going to be some that directly conflict.  There are going to be some that involve extensive preparation which he will not always have time for.  There are going to be some that simply do not fit with his personality - such as running to a script - and if he tried, we wouldn't see the same Dave ... and his head might explode with the strain.  There could be some that are just plain silly.  Then there are those which are offered by people who have no appreciation of the real challenges of the art - the armchair experts with all the ideas and none of the practical experience.

Take video editing for example.  I've only done two videos that required an amount of editing, but in that very limited experience, I learned a lot about the considerations necessary for even a half-decent result and the effort required to achieve that.  It can take a lot of time - and it became clear that this would be so even for somebody with the experience, equipment and software.

With everything thrown at Dave (including threats) he has, out of necessity, developed a thick skin.  He mentioned last night that there were some big YouTubers that had to walk away because they couldn't handle the comments flung around.  You might expect that this would result in a content producer happily ignoring comments and criticism - and I'm sure there are some that do - but Dave not only reads them, but often responds.

The fact that Dave has engaged as much as he has here shows he is truly interested in showing an interest in his viewers and developing an understanding of why some things are done the way they are and why other things aren't done.

The bottom line is that Dave cannot take on every suggestion.  That is simply impossible and if it means that some people get their nose out of joint - that's not Dave's problem, it's theirs.  When Dave offers reasons why a certain suggestion is impractical, he is speaking from experience - so please don't feel affronted if he "shoots your idea down".  It's not a personal attack.

This post is, I feel, a perfect summary of how to deal with the topic:

How to give feedback:

1. Write your feedback in a concise, but informative, manner and include specific examples whenever possible.
2. Submit the feedback once. Don't expect a personal reply.
3. Go on with your life.

I admire Dave's patience.

As do many of us.

[Pete F]

And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

For the record Dave, Pete didn’t get “so upset about this”, In fact Pete couldn’t give less of a shit if he tried. What Pete in fact did was to offer some respectful feedback of his own experience and personal opinion in the hope of helping the the receiver. Meanwhile I would ask you to provide a quote where Pete has said, implied or otherwise asserted in any way that that he claimed the “improvement “ was obvious.

If you want to turn this in to some sort of federal case and argument, please leave my name out if it Dave, I have no interest in this sort of BS. I like your channel and value you experience, but have no interest in becoming involved in this type of discussion.

Didn’t this post change tone after the “you don’t listen to the customer” part? For me, that’s when you started acting as if you are the customer of the video.

Please quote where I said that.

[jancumps]

in this post: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-video-length/msg1795412/#msg1795412

[Pete F]

in this post: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-video-length/msg1795412/#msg1795412

That is not correct. I appreciate English may not be a first language for you, however for the record, nowhere in that post did I ever say Dave did not listen to customers. What I in fact said was, “those who don’t listen to their customers...”. It was not referring to Dave, obviously, as he is quite active in this forum and engages with his audience, and was in reference to the discussion at that time about following the YouTube algorithm.

[EEVblog]

And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

For the record Dave, Pete didn’t get “so upset about this”, In fact Pete couldn’t give less of a shit if he tried. What Pete in fact did was to offer some respectful feedback of his own experience and personal opinion in the hope of helping the the receiver. Meanwhile I would ask you to provide a quote where Pete has said, implied or otherwise asserted in any way that that he claimed the “improvement “ was obvious.

As we say here in Australia, it's "The Vibe".

[Hugoneus]

I know I missed a ton of conversation here. But a few other points:

I have watched nearly every single video Dave has made, fully. Often I watch YouTube videos on 2x speed just because my time is limited. What I care about is information density, essentially the entropy of the content. I like Dave’s videos.

Rossman for example, I just cannot watch, his style and comments don’t suit my taste. But I am sure he does a lot of good work.

The highly polished short videos can be fun, but the devil is in the details, which you miss a lot of times in those videos.

The content I just can’t watch are the 30 minute videos which can easily be made into 5 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hugoneus]

Hi Shariar,
IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:
- no gossip. No fast forward needed.

What does "gossip" even mean?

FWIW I'm mainly interested in teardowns and reviews of high end RF test gear and I appreciate the time taken (by both Shahriar and Dave) to make these videos. However, I slightly prefer Dave's teardowns because his closeup camerawork is better and he gets closer to component level analysis with the commentary and the camerawork. Often, he takes time to read out the part numbers on the components and even uploads the datasheet and also provides links to high res still images that can be studied in detail. It must take a lot of effort to do this and I really appreciate it because I can then study the design in more detail at my own pace. I rarely watch any of these teardowns in a linear fashion and I'm often guilty of initially skimming them to the best bits where the gear is actually being taken apart with plenty of closeup RF camerawork. Ideally, I want to see inside the gear as if I was taking it apart myself and Dave's teardowns and still images get me the closest.

One obvious difference is that Shahriars videos tend to be teardown/repair videos and the focus is often on the symptoms and the fault diagnosis and subsequent faultfinding and repair and test. But Dave's teardowns are purely about what is in the box and what looks good/bad from a design point of view. So I think this is why I slightly prefer Dave's teardowns because they suit my needs better. But that is just my opinion and I don't expect everyone to agree with me  

I guess what I'm saying above is that I think it would be harder for me to edit/shorten Dave's teardowns because there is generally more interesting stuff going on that is relevant to me.

When the video is a dedicated teardown video, I go over the full design with block diagrams. When it is a repair video, then I focus on the trouble finding and repair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk