I don't know whether people here have been paying attention, but Christelle and I have been carrying on a low-level competition on YouTube in the matter of total views and channel subscribers. The competition began on her end, but once she pointed out that she had more total video views than me--and more than anybody else on YouTube, and was therefore deserving of attention, honors, plaudits, and praise, I realized that she had, in fact, done a hell of a lot of work.
But, as it turns out, when you put the word "harmonica" in the YT search engine, sort for channels, and then sort for total views....well, America beats France. She falls off the screen entirely when you repeat the exercise with the words "blues harmonica."
If there's a lesson here, it's that getting on YouTube early (2006 in Ronnie's case, 2007 in the case of Christelle, Hakan, and me) is one key to achieving dominance. Another is the sheer number of videos you put up. Hakan: 526 videos! You've got me beat.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on May 27, 2015 12:12 PM
It is interesting to see that a lot of the guys who appear in the top 10 or 12 don't have that many videos. Steve Baker is #10 with only 20 videos. What this tells me is that it takes more than just a YouTube channel. You have to have a website besides YouTube and give people more avenues to subscribe to your channel. ---------- Tom Halchak www.BlueMoonHarmonicas.com
I don't have a dog in this fight but you need to analyse by the data not search order. Christelle covers a much wider harmonica spectrum so it's no surprise she might not show up on a more specific "Blues Harmonica"
I'm also not sure what criteria google is ranking the search order on. It can't be subscribers because Ronnie is behind JP.
Adam 37,456 subscribers 12,759,276 views 511 videos
But to the numbers A vs C difference Subscribers +3476 Views -2,688,311 Videos +138
So objectively Adam has 3,476 more subscribers with 138 more videos but 2,688,311 less views which is objectively a very big difference.
Why? Assuming is always a dangerous thing but if I had to guess I'd say it's because she covers a wider range of music which generate way more views. Views are only partly related to subscribers so the big difference in views would indicate she's reaching a wider audience as well.
The comment about her lack (or not) of gigging is irrelevant as the the quality of her playing is evident from the videos...and the view count.
Gigging experience is important to me.Adam is in another class because of his performance experience. Playing in shows like "Big River" in big tours lends him stamp of a professionalism.
I only have 70,000 views and 84 subscribers but I've been seen and heard in TV and radio by a lot of folks let alone thousands of gigs.
A casual non harp player browsing Youtube sees an image of a guy playing harp and a woman playing harp. Which is more interesting to the average person? I say the female harp players gets more first time views out of curiosity. ( also, sex sells )
Another example.
My daughter did a series of reality Youtube blogs. The one that got the most views had the preview window where she put on a low cut shirt and showed a little cleavage. Again, sex sells.
I agree with some of the comments above and also some conversations with a few other blues harmonica players. I think if I'm honest Christelle gets a lot of curiosity views that's the truth and although she is a good player but it's a very eclectic mix. I bet Adams is almost 100% about the harmonica and blues!
I don't think Christelle's sex has anything to do with the hundreds of thousands of views that she's consistently getting with her performance videos. I really don't. I think she's getting views because she has carefully cultivated an audience (as have I, or at least I did for the first 2-3 years) for her solo, in-the-bedroom performances. She's got a beautiful tone for the repertoire she's covering; and she's consistently mowing 'em down, in terms of offering new, listener-friendly material from a very wide pop spectrum. In short, she's got her thing, she's working it, and it's working. And she knows it--and lets me know it. :)
As a data-driven scientist, I find this kind of thing quite interesting. I like Komuso's numbers-driven approach, but I think the summary statistics being used (only three metrics) tell only a small part of the story. To get the extended statistics, one has to go into one's "Creator Studio" page at YouTube, and click the "Analytics" tab (make sure to select "Lifetime" in the pulldown tab to get the full timerange of stats). Epistemologically, it's quite important, also, to fully understand what each metric tells us. Let's break it down here:
Number of subscribers: These are people who viewed the content of the channel, and deemed it worthy to come back to later -- potentially on a regular basis. The other portion of this metric is the number of gains and losses over time (the rate of subscription). That would show how continually interesting the channel is over time (a measure of long-term value of the channel contents).
Number of views: This, IMO, is the most misleading statistic on Youtube. That's because this number includes "views" of even less than a second. Let's face it, there are a lot folks who just randomly click on something, see it's not what they thought, and then close it. The accompanying metric that clears this muddiness is the "estimated minutes watched". This secondary metric actually shows how long, on average, people spent actually looking at the video content. That actually shows, again, the compelling-ness, and usefulness of the videos themselves. People watch useful videos for longer than they do unuseful one (regardless of whether the "use" is instruction or just a compelling performance to watch).
Number of videos: This is just a measure of the prolific-ness of the channel provider. It says nothing about the quality of the content. A better secondary measure would be the number of likes and dislikes (either in sum total, or average per-video). This would inform, albeit somewhat subjectively, about the quality of the videos. Ideally, one would make a measure of the quantity/quality ratio, which could then also be used to normalize the differences in the other metrics.
Finally, I, too, have no dog in this fight. I like all the folks listed in the top tier of YouTube harmonicists (though, admittedly, I have no real experience of JP Allen). And, just in the interests of transparencey, I disclose that I do have a modest YouTube channel myself. My metrics are nowhere near as impressive:
Date channel created: June 24, 2007.
644 current subscribers, 671 gained since 2012, 116 lost since 2012 (stats for these last two aren't available before then). Ratio of gain/loss = 5.78
480,713 views, with 413,045 minutes watched. That's an average of 51.6 seconds per video. YouTube says it's 2 minutes, 13 seconds per video since 2012.
103 videos, 971 likes, 97 dislikes. (971 - 97 ) / 103 = average of 8.5 likes per video.
Finally, I've gotten 877 comments, or an average of 8.5 comments per video. This, potentially, shows how "buzzworthy" my videos are (or how controversial).
I do have ads on my videos. I've earned $339 since I montezed the channel at the start of 2012. That's about a hundred dollars a year, more or less. I use that money to buy MOAR HARMONICAS!!!!
I suspect there are many multiples of people who enjoy listening to the harp than there are trying to learn to play the damn thing. This may account for the difference between kudzu's and Christelle's stats. Adam's teaching videos require effort on the viewer's part. With the vast majority of Christelle's you can just sit back and listen, although she has done some lessons.
Excellent points. Mine was a very thin analysis with untested assumptions. Creator channel analytics would provide a much more detailed picture. Especially the video drop off rate. Engagement stats and sentiment analysis are good points too.
I can understand why some people feel they need to get into pissing contests for marketing positioning needs, but as Issac points out you would really need the detailed analytics to back it up.
But it's really comparing Apples to Oranges anyway, as Kudzu and Bronze point out.
They're both video channels about harmonica but one's primarily an instruction channel in a single genre and the other primarily a virtual performance channel across genres focused on hits and classics. Some of Adam's could have more repeat views from same viewers due to their instructional nature, but you might say the same thing about people listening to well known tunes too. I would also hazard the bulk of listeners are from different target markets too (with some crossover) which also makes it a bit silly to do a direct comparison.
Yes, sex does sell but I think that's a minor factor and it's more about hearing well know melodies played..well, well!
Both perform a very valuable service in exposing people to the instrument in a good way. What's to complain about?
I understand digg's point about gigging but I suspect most youtube viewers couldn't care less about that. And honestly a gigs a gig now day's whether it's on the street, a stadium, or studio via the bitstream.
I think that only 5% of my so-called subscribers are actually active. I think lots of people who subscribed years ago have lost interest. I think this because most of my videos accrue no more than 1500-2000 views in the first month. Every now and then one breaks out, and a few have remarkable endurance: the one with the opened up harp that has 1.6 million views, the "Crossroads Blues" video, one where I'm playing on the streets of Clarksdale on a very hot day, and one where I'm sitting in front of my truck at the crossroads, singing "Pride and Joy." Plus a bunch of the very early teaching videos which somehow hung in there and have over 100,000 hits.
Christelle, by contrast, has 19 performance videos with more than 200,000 hits each, and probably three times that many with 100,000+. That's damned good. Many of them have been out 4 to 6 years, but she's got "Acoustic Blues in G" with 250K hits, and it's been out a year. She is a force to be reckoned with.
Yes, we are trying for somewhat different audiences. As far as I'm concerned, it's a draw--and I'm tickled pink by that.
As for my 500+ videos: believe me when I say, I'm not bragging. I don't know how they got there. Way too many Blues Doctors vids, most likely.
I'm way behind with 157 subscribers and 80,000+ views. I have lots of videos. I think Tony Eyers Trio is definitely the one to watch. ---------- HARPOLDIEāS YOUTUBE
Bear in mind Christelle's audience demographic will be different to Adam's purely based on the kind of music being played. Europeans (France, Germany, Poland etc) will be more interested in Christelle's melodic playing whereas more Americans will dig Adam.
I'd love to see the global layout. I bet Adam will be mainly US and Christelle Europe.
Last Edited by Stevelegh on May 29, 2015 5:49 AM
another point, (similar to to what Stevelegh said)
Spoken vs Non-spoken affects international acceptance.
The Beck Wegner clip uses no spoken instructions. It can be used around the world. In most of Christelle's clips, language is not important to enjoy them.
Adams instructional videos require a knowledge of the English language
Adam, do you get breakdown on subcribers and views on a geographic level. If so it would be great to see. I know Christelle doesn't post here, but I'm sure someone could contact her and ask if she'd be willing to participate.
yeah, I think language neutrality is a big part of the success of the Beck Wegner clip. Also, I think the fact that she is a young person likely helps too. I bet a lot of young folks (teens, preteens, etc.) get a harmonica and go on YT to learn how to play it. They see several clips of folks their parents age (or older), and then young Beck here. I'd wager that they click on Beck first, because she seems like a peer showing them how to do it, rather than an elder "teaching" them. ----------
I think there's a few language assumptions there that need to be challenged.
Do you think they only speaky english in America?
English is spoken *quite well* by most Europeans. Even the French, though they won't always admit it.
In Asia it varies, but South East Asia in areas is very english fluent. India and Pakistan as well. Japan is one of the few countries that still has a hang up about english, despite it's long history of so called english "education". 10x worse than the French. The Chinese don't seem to have that hangup either.
It's also instructional video with lot of talking (english or otherwise) vs song performance. Big difference in intent and different audience based on needs. Not to mention Christelle speaks *generally* in English!
Issac's point about age and peer is more valid, but I also think video presentation could/would nullify that to a large degree.
Well there you go. 35% US vs 65% Rest of the world is not a "mainly US" audience. It makes sense being the largest county percentage given the overall population and % online as developed economy.
It would be interesting to break those country figures down by % of total population but you would have to factor it by % of population online to be accurate, not overall population. But it would also need to be aggregated by unique viewers not views to be really useful insight.
But interesting that Japan, which is probably the worst country in Asia for english education, is the only Asian country on the top X list! Japanese love their music though. If I had to guess I'd say it's due to diatonic being played in Japan to some degree (including being home to two of the main harp manufacturers) while Tremolo harp is actually the standard in the rest of Asia.
I think there are two different audiences for Christelle and Adam, of course with significant overlap. Most of Adam's videos are instructional (for people playing or learning to play harp). Most of Christelle's vids are simply performances, which appeal to people who like to listen to the music (many of whom may not own a harp, or don't play seriously). I have non-playing friends who have sent me links to Christelle vids. I doubt that any of them have ever heard of Adam. But every harp player/learner using YouTube has probably watched at least one of Adam's vids.
The Beck Wenger success does not surprise me at all. There is a huge population of people with a harp sitting in a drawer, with no idea how to play it. (That includes many guitarists I know). And the video does not require you to understand English, which connects to a huge audience around the world.
So its all down to market segmentation...
Last Edited by A440 on May 29, 2015 11:30 PM
i bought all AG's YT vids as a download, so i could access without connecting to YT. when i see CB's stuff its usually when i search on a song name and harmonica...
i agree they are somewhat different markets and experiences
Very impressive stats from Adam. His stuff is damm good, and there is lots of it. I've watched, enjoyed and learnt from many of his videos.
But let's put that aside for a while. We're baring our respective online chests here. While my YouTube channel may in time be a threat to the big guns, it has a long way to go.
Not so my harmonica sites. Up since 2008, mostly based around teaching, and in various languages, they have had around 3,000,000 visits. As per below
---------- Tony Eyers Australia www.HarmonicaAcademy.com everyone plays...
Last Edited by Harmonicatunes on May 31, 2015 3:20 AM