How competitive are you with your system?

carlos269

It is obvious that our understanding of audio recording, playback, and CODEC technologies are on different planes ...

That's probably true.

My advice to you is to head over to WBF and join the herd there ...

No thanks. Herds aren't my thing.

I post my audio recordings and let them speak for themselves, what more can I do to drive my point home to you?

I have no issue with you posting your recordings.

carlos269

It is obvious that you have not listened to the audio recordings of my systems. The biggest takeaway from listening to them is the inner detail, low level detail, nuance, and resolution of the system’s sound qualities ...

I understand that’s what you hear. I don’t dispute that at all.

When I listen to the audio recordings embedded on videos I’m listening to the sound.

You’re watching a video so what you see can influence what you think you hear. That’s "expectation bias" and it’s silly for you to think you’re absolutely immune.

You seem to be argumentative without any logic or substance.

YouTube is lossy - dynamically compressed, limited in high frequencies, and lacking in resolution. I understand if you think that's not substantive, but you'll have to accept that others think differently.

Why don’t you tell us about your system and how it sounds, and contribute something constructive for a change!

I have thousands of posts on A’gon. Please feel free to familiarize yourself.

carlos269

... how do you explain the exceptional, great and outstanding sound quality of the audio recordings of my systems and those of others?

That's easy. It's either or both of the following:

1. You have a preference for lossy, compressed recordings. That is not at all uncommon - many prefer the SQ of sources such as Spotify and YouTube, which are inherently compromised by design so as to limit file size.

2. You're watching a video of an audio system, so what you see influences what you think you hear, a/k/a "confirmation bias."

mihorn

... I think lossy media isn't that bad ...

I understand! Many people agree with you and I have no issue with that at all. As I've mentioned, there are some listeners who actually prefer lossy audio and I have no issue with that either. 

What's puzzling is that some who are enjoying lossy audio simply can't accommodate that others find it lacking. Preference being what it is there's really no need for anyone to justify his preference - it's purely subjective and there is no right or wrong, even when the preference is for something of provably inferior quality.

carlos269

... the loss in audio quality suffer through the YouTube process is not that detrimental ...

That’s a subjective assessment and of course you’re entitled to it. In fact, the design of lossy audio software - such as used by YouTube, Sirius/XM, and mp3 files - is specifically designed to minimize the apparent loss of audio quality and it is very, very effective. It that sense it’s rather amazing that those sources don’t sound worse! It’s fine that you rely on those sources for evaluation, but it’s silly to suggest that the loss of fidelity is insignificant. 

Let’s put your theory to the test ...

It's not a theory. YouTube uses lossy audio and for some listeners it is r-e-a-l-l-y obvious.

toddalin

If you make a recording, it should be true to the original direct transfer, regardless of what you are listening on.

Of course. But if you use lossy media (YouTube, Spotify, mp3 files), the recording will not be "original" at all. Rather, it will have discarded data for the purpose of reducing file size. Fidelity is also lost in the process - even though many will find the result pleasing.

Making a truly high-fidelity recording is not as easy as some here believe.

carlos269

Why do think or speculate that the system audio recordings of my systems and of others don’t sound like trash?

They don’t sound like trash to you because many people actually prefer the sound of compressed lossy files, which is what you get from YouTube, Spotify, and mp3s. And you are watching a video of the system as you listen, so confirmation bias creeps in. It's pretty simple.

isellgoodgear

All it proves is a video proves NOTHING 

It tells you what a system looks like, which perhaps helps feed confirmation bias.

toddalin

... a good YouTube video can go a long way, and while you’ll never portray all the nuance, you will hear anomalies in the response and get a good idea of what the system is capable of ...

YouTube uses lossy audio - not unlike mp3 files - and it sounds like it. The visual component adds no value. YT just can’t tell you much about how a system sounds. Of course many people are happy with lossy audio. Just look at the popularity of Spotify!