It's so weird because I could have sworn I saved that thread from 5 years ago to web.archive.org and/or archive.is, but I checked both and saw nothing:
>https://archive.is/https://archive.nyafuu.org/wsr/thread/699331*
>https://archive.is/http://archived.moe/wsr/thread/698760*

>>1510791
No mention of that in genius.com:
https://dumb.ducks.party/Duck-sauce-nrg-lyrics

>image
Screenshot from https://archive.palanq.win/wsr/thread/699331/

>YouTube's 480p video
I learned more about this somewhat recently. YouTube's 360p and 480p videos look like shit. This isn't so much due to having only 360 or 480 rows of pixels; it's more due to the low bitrate or otherwise crappy/blocky quality that YT applies to those video streams. Look at every episode of "Malcolm in the Middle" as 360p:
>magnet:?xt=urn:btih:4e30f1a7cfc67eddac8f49252da9ac5d1912d83b&dn=Malcolm%20in%20the%20Middle%20S01-S07%20%282000-%29
The episodes really don't look too bad. On the other hand, YT's 360p videos are sometimes very bad quality or unwatchable, and YT's 480ps are significantly better but still bad quality. (So go with YT's 720p videos or 1080ps when you can.)

>>1510791
>- [Woman:] [sorta unintelligible]
ana, where have you been?
>- [Preteen girl:] grandma, grandpa [kinda unintelligible]
grandma, grandpa, can I have dinner?

>>1510791
>also heard it in this 2010 movie, un-credited:
>"#1 Cheerleader Camp" at 58:50 to 58:59
open video in any sound editor, select 58:45-59:04, trim, save, upload to https://vocaroo.com/upload

>>1510797
Musical works or compositions sometimes have multiple versions for the "exact same" track. So "NRG" by Duck Sauce has a music video version with it's unique audio and a studio/album release (sometime the same as the "radio edit") with different audio. Here's the non-FLAC/raw album release audio of "NRG":
https://inv3.nadeko.net/watch?v=CN-_-KvzZq8

That genius.com page is about the studio release of "NRG", as far as I can tell. Said non-live release does not have that audio at the start (and it doesn't have the infomercial guy saying things).

>>1510799
>ana, where have you been?
yeah
>>- [Preteen girl:] grandma, grandpa [kinda unintelligible]
>grandma, grandpa, can I have dinner?
probably

>>1510793
full images from 2019-08 also gone

>>1510805
*with its unique audio

>>1510803
OK, I have a copy of that part of the audio:
>$ ffmpeg -hide_banner -i /ipfs/bafybeievmpto7emixvxvqcqfxnswimvptz7wacch5xcb27rkqc2l2hi3by -vn -ss 00:00:11.803 -to 00:00:18.894 temp.aac
will see about uploading it to audiotag.info and vocaroo.com/upload

>>1510803
>>1510806
https://audiotag.info/ : temp.aac : Uploaded audio file is too short
https://vocaroo.com/19hKLloFOpN1 : https://media1.vocaroo.com/mp3/19hKLloFOpN1 : nothing detected

Or you wanted me to upload it there just to have the soundbite? AAC file:
>ipfs://bafkreigywvtw6h77vot6dzrbcun5urxzy5onuw34nwiqarrsg2vwba25ey
>https://ar-io.dev/6bQsxIF664V3q-scPWDtra56TfZW5jgouQUzqqYoIlg

>>1510806
>Full images from 2019-08 also gone
Those were these three WebMs:
>2MiB, 1920x1080, Duck Sauce - NRG [Official Video]-J2ouQMCcOz4 2.webm at https://archive.palanq.win/wsr/thread/699331/ -> https://archive-media.palanq.win/wsr/image/1564/99/1564990558277.webm = wX4JoPaaiUm68lLIlk7Xtg
>3MiB, 1920x1080, Duck Sauce - NRG [Official Video]-J2ouQMCcOz4 2-2.webm at https://archive.palanq.win/wsr/thread/698760/ -> https://archive-media.palanq.win/wsr/image/1564/83/1564839579430.webm = gw1qCjkthqlvPa24Lw4Sxw
>3MiB, 1920x1080, Duck Sauce - NRG [Official Video]-J2ouQMCcOz4 3.webm at https://archive.palanq.win/wsr/thread/698760 -> https://archive-media.palanq.win/wsr/image/1564/84/1564840775296.webm = X70th_IwmjKnJRmsFG7y2g
I created those video clips like 5 years ago (probably by using FFmpeg). I may have lost those files since then, so here's the full 1080p video, which was downloaded today (playable with ?filename=.webm in Chrome):
>https://upload.lurkmore.com/z/oPKatXtT.mkv
>https://ipfs.ssi.eecc.de/ipfs/bafybeiah6he75uogqoobuz3qukhpb27zzq7q5v3tyke7krsfqi5qhvzeru

No mention of it in this thing
>https://megalodon.jp/2025-0119-1436-46/https://en.namu.wiki:443/w/NRG(duck%20sauce)
which links to
>https://tpa.mares.workers.dev/?output=html&id=ugfCkqXdBok

Also not this, which has similar text:
https://www.subtitlecat.com/subs/55/Prime%20Suspect%20s01e12%20Aint%20No%20Sunshine.eng.html

>>1510791
So it's in that music video and that movie ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2299302 ). Perhaps it's part of some stock footage (or stock audio?) for 1900s movies or something. Therefore, not a real movie or TV show.

>>1510923
>1900s
I meant "20th century". Also, in the NRG music video the TV only shows the infomercial.

Latest known date that this audio has existed: 2010. NRG is a 2014 video.

No mention of it at
https://antifandom.com/recordcollector1972/wiki/Duck_Sauce_-_NRG_(HQ_Audio)
https://antifandom.com/musicvideo/wiki/NRG_(Duck_Sauce)

*Latest known date that this audio could have been created in

Bump

>>1510813
I was going to write more about that.

Page 7 bump

Maybe this is unimportant. However, I wanted to know in the past and am in 2025 still curious about this unknown or obscure info. We have the work (partial), the transcript, and "tags". The rest of this post is some thoughts on metadata; it's unrelated, but I am writing this down because I feel like it.

Details on library science or information science. Tags are subjects (like a word of phrase) describing a work such as an image file or artwork. They are sometimes delimited by commas or semicolons. Tags can be simplistic or system-specific/complex, and they can vary in scope. Titles are more sentence-based than tags. A title conveys more of a cohesive meaning in regards to the work than the tags. Titles typically try to convey what is important or defining about the work. Like tags, titles can be formed based on what is self-evident in the work, or they can be based on outside knowledge, such as the name of the artist; the episode of something that it's of or based on; the joke or meme that it's a part of; etc. Of course, what is "self-evident" is subjective: it is related to a posteriori knowledge; it is common knowledge or experience (which may be vastly different to people millennia after now in current year 2025). Anyways, many significant or notable works are untitled. Many works do have a title. A title can be made up on-the-spot for a work in either type, and a work thought to be untitled sometimes does actually have an official title (you just have to look harder to find it). Captcha: WG8W

More unrelated/off-topic thoughts which do not answer OP's question.

>>1511828
> tags
(Sometimes tags too do not detail low-importance aspects.)

> what is "self-evident" is subjective: it is related to a posteriori knowledge; it is common knowledge or experience (which may be vastly different to people millennia after now in current year 2025).
About common knowledge, as opposed to uncommon knowledge. Much of what 4chan /wsr/ tries to do is get those with uncommon knowledge/data to give media or info to those who seek it.

Tags can be like a random assortment of details about an image: detailing the insignificant or less important while at the same time detailing the aspects of it which the author/artist believed to be important. A title can be or be like a synopsis or short description. Unlike tags, a title usually does not detail "unimportant" aspects of a work. A title is basically not a medium-length description or long description. The mind exudes thoughts like the stomach excretes bile. Some titles are lazier than other possible titles for the same thing, and some works are harder to think of a title for. Sometimes official titles for things are lazy, bad, misleading, or non-descriptive; other times they're great. Terms "library science" and "information science" both have entries in at least one online dictionary.

Bump

Bump. Seven-character captcha: 80HA28T