What's new

Which YT "Reviewers" Do You Trust?

Here are some annoying things that I've come across in reviewers (and educators) videos. Next time you watch any YouTube video, see how many you can spot - a bit like playing "spot the yellow VW Beetle" when on the freeway. (Note: If I created a review or educational video, I'd probably be guilty of many of them).

Choppy edits - cutting out phrases or words that were wrong and re-inserting without any transitions.

Reminding us to subscribe and hit that bell - as if we didn't know how YouTube works

Greeting viewers in a Livestream - Hi Sally, Hi Fred, Glad to see you Joe, Nice One Harry.

Videos spliced together from segments recorded in the car, on the train, on the toilet, walking the dog, opening the back gate etc.

Background music while reviewing a sample library and have it still going while demoing the library.

Lengthy doodling when demoing a patch. Ok, we already know you're a composer.

Leaving an introductory splash screen for minutes rather than cutting it out after a livestream is uploaded.

Sitting through recordings where the host has not tested the audio - Can everyone hear me? Can everyone see me? Why isn't my keyboard working?

Watching the entire software install or DAW render progress bar rather doing a fast forward edit.

Poorly balanced audio. Usually voice is too loud and you can't hear the music (or vice versa).

A self deprecating host or one that gaslights the audience (Maybe this one is ok!)

Slipping in some sponsorship at the wrong places - leave it to the end.

Creating videos on banal topics - 10 things you can do with middle C.

Having to sit through a first look, a preview, a review and a "one year after" postview. If any blame is cast on the review, its status is suddenly changed to "first look".

Sitting through piano roll play-throughs (a bunch of horizontal lines travelling in time) rather than a score.

Unboxing videos - here is the warranty card, here is a bumper sticker, here is my credit card statement (Did I really spend that much?).

Reviewers/developers telling you how great their new library sounds but if you close your eyes it just sounds like a barrel organ with a bit of reverb and delay.

The presenters face too close to the camera. Even worse if they are wearing beer bottle strength glasses.

Spending more time and effort on the clickbait thumbnail than the video itself.

Any others?
 
Last edited:
...

I will say that Groove3 is the manual alternative for me. ...
So cool. I may have just done the proverbial sea change today on my study approach as a result of you all.

On Groove3's +30 Kontakt vids now underway, instead of stressing out on "Will I remember the steps to handle the sample editor functions within the wave editor?" -- I now have the relevant user manual open and simply jot down "see Ch 19.8" . Next.

I forsee rapidly completing tuts on Reaktor, Blocks, Kontakt, Ozone and some others in short order, unstressed, oriented and settled on locating shit in a jiffy. Nice,
Bill
 
Choppy edits - cutting out phrases or words that were wrong and re-inserting without any transitions.
+1! Listening to someone speak for 10 minutes who never breathes... NOPE! It is a ridiculous trend and why do it? It makes no sense. Only machines could do this. I leave on purpose when I see that happening on purpose.

Also - turning a sponsorship spot into a 3 minutes review of the sponsor... Just... don't. Big turn-off for me.
 
you know, as someone who occasionally does play throughs (no talking, just playing, under 15 minutes normally) I think you have given me the idea to have a single thread that I will update if or when I add a video.. that way it's not contributing to the congestion on the site. Thanks!
That’s a good idea. But I’m just fed up with people trying to “grow their channel” by posting their “reviews” here on the forum. It seems that everyone and their dog are starting a Youtube channel these days.

Edit: I’m talking generally, not specifically about you and your channel.
 
That’s a good idea. But I’m just fed up with people trying to “grow their channel” by posting their “reviews” here on the forum. It seems that everyone and their dog are starting a Youtube channel these days.

Edit: I’m talking generally, not specifically about you and your channel.
I am not using this forum long enough yet to be able to judge how congested it can get here by the amount of posts, so I will note your observation and might eventually agree it would be nice to have some sort of organization. Other then that more POWER to anyone who wishes to start a channel. As frustrating it can get at some point trying to browse through all this noise to find the ones that you like I do believe that there will be more good talent to rise out of it. And also they will keep pushing the bar and not just necessarily for review channels but for anything that people can come up with creatively.
 
The thread is about youtubers and trust. Youtubers that are focused on generating views and engagement rather than the content itself - that doesn't build trust with me.
They’re not mutually exclusive though. You can focus on creating quality content AND maximizing your reach. 🙂
 
That’s a good idea. But I’m just fed up with people trying to “grow their channel” by posting their “reviews” here on the forum. It seems that everyone and their dog are starting a Youtube channel these days.

Edit: I’m talking generally, not specifically about you and your channel.
*quickly deletes my sample library review channel featuring my dog as a co-writer* 😱
 
They’re not mutually exclusive though. You can focus on creating quality content AND maximizing your reach. 🙂
I get it. I agree even. But I'm expressing my personal content consumer perspective, not how to hustle big on youtube, I have no expertise in that! :) The stupid thumbnails look vulgar and tasteless to me, I personally have a hard time looking past them. I'm probably an outlier though.
 
A proper "review" of Tallinn (should such a thing even exist) would absolutely require, I feel, a certain depth of engagement in the Estonian liturgical tradition upon with the library draws.
Sorry, ism, but which aspect of Tallinn possibly retains the Estonian liturgical tradition in its collection of samples? The choirs have soft "oohs" and other lovely sounds. The strings have a nice collection of soft articulations -- but there is no regionality present in the individually-sampled notes. The organ patch are the most distinct, but they capture the pipes of one specific church -- I have to imagine that if you went to any other church in Estonia that housed an organ, you'd find very different sonorities.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom