So having looked at the video you posted I must start with what seems plainly manifest to me; this video is not an apples to apples comparison between the Tridentine and Vatican II (as I like to call it) liturgies. The choice of background music (for the T Rite it's moving and subtle, for the V2 Rite provincial), the lighting (warm and a bit dark vs neutral), the priest (young and handsome vs older and bit homely) the church building and the angles used all serve to make the Tridentine Mass look far better than the VII mass. You need to find a fairer video.
I too grew up post V2, so I did not get to experience the older rite, but I did spend 2 years in the seminary back in the 90's and got to talk to plenty of priests who did serve both before and after V2, and as Paul said in a different topic there was plenty of abuse going on with the mass before V2. Not only that, but there was plenty of rotten stuff in general throughout the Church, much of which has been purged from the Church.
Nowadays all the abuse is in the new rite mainly because it's really hard to get the old rite even started. If someone wants to do the old rite they need to find priests to do it (and they need to learn the rite) get the proper vestments and such. The only priests who celebrate the old rite are the ones who really like it. If we still used the old rite then I believe there would be the same amount of abuse, perhaps more.
Several years back I was traveling with a friend who had converted to the Catholic faith and whom I had sponsored. We went down to St. Louis where I had gone to college and went to mass at the St. Louis Basilica. If you have never been there it is an absolutely gorgeous church covered with amazing mosaics. A priest friend of mine was saying mass and after the mass we were talking with him at the after mass social. My friend loves the Eucharist (in fact he goes to daily mass and has logged every single Eucharist he has received and the intention he offered the mass for- it's cool looking through his log and seeing on such and such a date when it was intention offered for you!) Anyway Fr. asked my friend how he liked the mass. My friend said it was really nice, but if it had been a weekday mass in the basement of some rural parish it would have been just as awesome, because Jesus would have been present in the Eucharist. Fr. paused, gave a thoughtful look, and said "Nah, this is better."
Of course they are both right. Regardless of the "quality" of the mass or the rite, Jesus is fully present. That includes the 30 some rites in use by the Roman Catholic, Eastern Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches. For someone to claim a rite 'hurts" people is insane. On the other hand our response to the gift of Christ in the liturgy can be better or worse.
My main issue with the old rite is that it was give to us when the average parishioner was an illiterate European peasant. I've never felt that Jesus was particularly more present there, and I felt that my ability to respond to the love of God is absent. The new rite was given for a cosmopolitan Church. Yes, it is more adaptive. That's a good thing. St. Therese tells us that God loves the humble daisy as much as the noble rose, and the current liturgy reflects that. It can be celebrated in a way that speaks both to the daisy and the rose. Not only that, but a person who is a rose can appreciate the well done liturgy of the daisy and vice versa.
I have been to new churches which should be demolished. I have been to new churches that lift me to Heaven. I have heard contempory choirs that made me want to stuff my ears and contemporay choirs that moved my soul. I have heard traditional organ/Chant masses that made me want to stuff my ears and ones that moved my soul. One of the most moving masses I went to was at a predominantly African American parish in Denver. The music was gospel yet very Catholic and teh people incredibly warm and and Christ was so obviously present in not only the Eucharist but also the people. That was the mass you should have contrasted with the Tridentine Rite, and you would have found the same sense of mystery and yet I believe the sense of community even more visible.
Your post was a pleasure to read for many reasons including the tone. I find that if anyone supports tradition in the Forums that it is often attacked and those defending tradition are labelled with the "P" word. Any web links provided to support a position are not read but at the same time refuted?
I am aware that no two people have the same experience so generalisations can be unfair but in the video I posted, the Novus Ordo Mass is very similar to the approximate 5,000 Novus Ordo Masses I have attended all over the world including memories as an Altar Boy as a youngster when I was "closer to the action". I accept your point of view and cannot comment on your experiences. In my local Archdiocese I am very disappointed that anyone that supports tradition (including priests) are generally looked down upon and considered to be a little odd. I particularly find it sad when a TLM priest is mocked and laughed at behind his back by his brother priests. My experiences with those priests are nothing but positive and they are great role models to me.
Very few people claim that the Novus Ordo Mass is invalid. I stay away from it for many reasons but I do not think lesser of those who attend that Mass. I just question why the Church has needed to innovate so aggressively and in the process create division. The division is evident by the many different points of view here. Who is right? The politically correct answer is that we are all right. The infiltration into the Church by various anti-Catholic forces is also something that is widely accepted, even my more "liberal" Catholics. Have those forces had an impact on the Church?
It does delight me when people discover the TLM because it has had a profound impact on me and I wish that impact to be experienced by others. Many I have spoken to feel the same and we are blessed to have access to the TLM on a daily basis where it was non-existent 15 years ago.