YouTube and the GREAT BAROQUE HOAX

[Avon]

I’d be interested to learn the best way of creating YouTube content from a WAV file. It just needs to have a static background picture and be converted to an MP4 I think. Any tips for getting a decent “audiophile” rendition? The quality of posts varies considerably, to say the least, and there’re many different WWW suggestions given on how to do this. So, is there a recommended way, such that I can control the bit rate of the audio content? I normally use Adobe Audition for audio work. It can read MP4 files, but I don’t think it can create them, as they’re a video format and not audio. Perhaps I could use FooBar2000?

I’m hoping this isn’t a stupid question. I’d like to put up a needle-drop on YouTube. The recording is “The future of baroque music. A lecture recital by SOL BABITZ. Serving to complement the enclosed book: the GREAT BAROQUE HOAX. A guide to baroque performance”. It was issued by The Early Music Laboratory, Los Angeles © 1970 Sol Babitz. As far as I can tell, that society no longer exists, and neither does Sol. The recording quality is primitive, though at the same time, compelling to me at least. I realise that YouTube will content match it and reject if there’re copyright issues. I don’t see a recording of it anywhere else, yet Googling it gives a bit of information, including a couple of owners on Discogs.

I’m not looking for legal advice, but I’m curious as to what I should do. Should I just post it, and see what happens, or should I attempt to contact someone first? The recording would be of historical interest I think.

 

[hifinutt]

you could try and post and see if youtube pulls it . highly likely they will but you never know !!

 

[DGP]

There's a copy of the book online at:
https://archive.org/details/latimes-babitz-sol-clips-01/page/6/mode/2up

Don't know if that'd inform your decision
DGP

 

[Avon]

Thanks both for your responses. They’ve encouraged me to report my findings, which I wouldn’t have done otherwise. Hopefully this’ll help others. I’ve downloaded the PDF of the booklet, though I do have the paper version with the LP anyway, but I never had the patience to read it through. I like the analogy of some harpsichordists playing mechanically, as if they’re operating a sewing machine.

I find it curious that no one here seems to have created YouTube “audio-only” videos. Can this be true?

Anyway, let’s not derail the thread. We can’t just upload an MP3 containing a static picture, as that isn’t accepted by YouTube. Instead, the WWW suggests using the likes of Mac iMovie etc., to create a MOV video. The problem here is we have no way of controlling the bit-rate of the audio, which is what matters to me at least. From a 320Kbps MP3 source and a static background picture, I ended up with a 128Kbps audio stream, plus the file was more than twice the size of the plain MP3.

So I abandoned that and decided to use ffmpeg instead, which is a free command-line utility. On a Windows PC, I used the following command to create a 320Kbps MP4 file, directly from the original WAV. There are versions for Mac and Linux too.

ffmpeg.exe -loop 1 -i "Background Image.JPG" -i "Audio File.WAV" -r 1 -shortest -b:a 320K "Output.MP4"

When played in FooBar2000, the AAC audio bit-rate of that MP4 hovers around 320Kbps (as set by -b:a) i.e. it’s constant. Its file size is slightly larger than a 320Kbps MP3 containing a static picture. I believe the embedded AAC stream is better than MP3 quality, as it’s a more modern implementation. Note that ffmpeg uses the “second-best” AAC quality, unless it’s recompiled, which I didn’t do. The flags used are essential, otherwise YouTube rejects the post with “Processing abandoned. The video could not be processed.” The order of those flags matters too (-r 1 sets the video refresh rate to 1Hz, -shortest with -loop 1 stops the video at the end of the audio). The size of the JPG file I used was 1080 pixels tall, which corresponds with the selectable YouTube "quality". It takes a long time to create the MP4 (probably longer than it does to play it), so I started with a short excerpt while testing.

With the first objective achieved, I then had to upload it to YouTube. All of this may have led you to believe you’re going to get some amazing sound quality, but original recording is primitive, so that’s what you’ll hear. If you don’t like baroque violins or ancient harpsichords, then perhaps you shouldn’t listen! Also, I have no idea what YouTube will have done to manipulate my original upload. It guards its hand well.