International Association of Internet Broadcasters - IAIB

News Updates
October 2, 2013:
Bambuser Adds Restrictions To Free Streaming
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: Youtube Live : Will they take over Live streaming?

  1. #21
    Senior Member oscarmartz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Corona NY
    Posts
    208
    How is Youtube live working for internet broadcasters. Everyone I have spoken to says its still not ready
    you best get steppin

  2. #22
    Senior Member cseeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by oscarmartz View Post
    How is Youtube live working for internet broadcasters. Everyone I have spoken to says its still not ready
    It's impossible to interpret "not ready." What's not ready? Please be specific.
    It's not without "fault" be ever service has their advantages and disadvantages for a given producer's needs.

  3. #23
    IAIB Networks gfqnetwork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Queens NY
    Posts
    30
    We would like to use Youtube live but can't for a number of reason.

    Terms of Service - Youtube states that you can not have a 3rd party ad placed anywhere on the show. No live reads, no Billboards

    Strict Streaming Guidelines- Youtube requirement for "HD" broadcasting is much higher then most CDNs. In order to do 720p youtube Requires you to stream 2000-4000kbps

    36 hour limit for stream - We stream 24/7. Youtube live would require us to restart the stream.


    Follow Us on Twitter: @gfqnetwork
    Check out the GFQ Network : Guysfromqueens.com

  4. #24
    IAIB Pro Broadcaster thetechbuzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    42
    I think that for me, having advertisers, it's not something that will work for me do to their TOS with adverts. Not to mention without the script that I posted a while ago I got from a google developer on embedding your youtube feed on your site. I've seen some sync issues, as well as delayed videos. I think for people using hangouts as their broadcasting platform it's great, or someone that doesn't want the pre-rolls that jtv and ustream have.
    Stephen Heywood
    Host/Owner of
    The Tech Buzz www.thetechbuzz.net
    and
    TTB Network www.ttbn.tv

  5. #25
    Senior Member cseeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    332
    YouTube's business model is to monetize with their own advertising FWIW of course.
    They're also geared towards "events" rather than 24/7.
    Alas like most CDNs each has their own business model.
    The advantage of YouTube is that it costs nothing.
    All factors that need to be weighed.

    I wouldn't call that "not ready" so much as YouTube is quite ready to implement their own business model which is not suited to those looking for monitization control.

    I can't speak to the bit rate issue because because I'm not absolutely sure what you send is what the viewer receives. Since they are doing re-encodes I'm not sure that they're not doing a re-encode of the "master" data rate one is sending.

  6. #26
    IAIB Broadcaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    277
    I tried it yesterday for my weekly show (That VidBlaster Guy!) with mixed results.

    The set up process was relatively clear using FMLE separately. I had to make some adjustments in FMLE that I don't normally do (baseline to main, 3.1 to 4.1, keyframes to 1 sec). I streamed 864x480 @ 1000kbps and that part worked fine.

    I embeded the YT player on a webpage and it could be viewed at 864x480 as the default, but the YT page used 640x360 as the default.

    YT provided three options for live viewing: 480p, 360p, and 240p. A fourth option is now available on my YT page: 144p.

    Some European viewers were disappointed as the show was not available to them. Germany for sure, not sure which others.

    The biggest flaw for me was the delay from live. Some viewers reported a 20 second delay from live, some over a minute. That made chat interaction very frustrating.

    All in all, it was a great experience, but I will probably not use it again, at least not for a talk show format.

  7. #27
    IAIB Pro Broadcaster
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    110
    [QUOTE=TomSinclair;5477]I streamed 864x480 @ 1000kbps and that part worked fine.

    I embeded the YT player on a webpage and it could be viewed at 864x480 as the default, but the YT page used 640x360 as the default. /QUOTE]

    FWIW, I've like to point out the 864x480 is not a resolution that YouTube (or really anywhere else) actually uses. 864x480 is actually 10 pixels too wide to be 16:9. I would set your video software and FMLE to be 854x480.

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by TomSinclair View Post
    I embeded the YT player on a webpage and it could be viewed at 864x480 as the default, but the YT page used 640x360 as the default.
    Tom, where does one find this embed code for the livestream, or is it an aftermarket player?

  9. #29
    Administrator andrewzarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Queens NY
    Posts
    1,702
    Its amazing that this thread was made over two years ago and youtube has not taken over the entire live streaming market. It says something for sure.

  10. #30
    Senior Member cseeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    332
    Setting up an Event is awkward compared to just having a channel you can go live to anytime.
    While an Event can be embedded, it's on an event by event basis. it's much easier to embed a channel as can be done with other services.
    Their text posting doesn't have the same feel as having a live text chat.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
© International Association of Internet Broadcasters All Rights Reserved.
Follow Us