EEVBlog Video Length

[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.