Totally Ridiculous....Auditions on YouTube!

Audible differences between two types of component platforms can easily be heard on the following You Tube video. Even on a cell phone even without earbuds. Listen again thru your real device your High Fi.

This type of simple and easy comparison could be performed and reviewed repeatedly by the listener, who is unsure of what they are hearing or searching for in musical quality.

In this instance, it’s easy to hear the difference between these two products in the same category and close to the same price points.

Why hasn’t a magazine or reviewer taken this comparison style on since I started asking for this type of review 20 years ago? I asked several over the years

Everyone would have saved a lot of time, angst, and money if someone had the brains and balls to perform such a service to the audio community.

Doesn’t a designer manufacturer want to know how their products stand up to the competition before they go to market? It appears they create a storyboard as a tool for those to see and read about rather than using a simple recording and playback method.

These manufacturers present misconstrued and poorly designed products to an audience who trust their brains and eyes failing to use their ears. After all, being a music lover is primarily about what information we experience through our ear canals and body feel. OK so let’s hear the comparison rather than reading about someone else telling us about how they experienced the product.

There are at least 2 other You Tube videos from the same reviewer that present more info on these 2 products and how they differ in operation. Tom

@noromance 

😊

I've been listening to the jaysaudiolab channel on YouTube exclusively through my Samsung 4k tv via toslink to my big rig since he started. He plays enjoyable and resolute music. I've also watched/listened to countless other audio channels maybe almost 500-800 videos I'm guessing. The 2 outstanding channels IMO are jays and alphaaudio (the Dutch guys)

Yes I hear small differences between his many multitude of megabuck amps, preamps, speakers, dacs, cables, servers etc. But they were small and hard to decide which was really better, only different, EXCEPT on 2 occasions that was blind (not knowing what brand or price), until the reveal.

Jay demonstrating these 2 items took his rig to the next level to my ears and musical connection in 2 series of demos and were the most memorable/enjoyable and I could instantly tell they both served the music as it should be. So yes you can tell outstanding gear via YouTube but you have to slog through countless videos to find the real gems to aspire to, that are truly next or 2 levels up in the service of music.

OK I'll end the suspense and tell you the 2 *whoa, what?* series of videos they were.

1) His Magico S7s

2) His new line of relatively reasonably priced cable looms he just started representing but can't remember the brand, they're from a smaller European country if memory serves me right

BOTH OUTSTANDING and worth looking into IMHO.

YMMV..

@theaudiotweak 

Why hasn’t a magazine or reviewer taken this comparison style on since I started asking for this type of review 20 years ago? I asked several over the years

Everyone would have saved a lot of time, angst, and money if someone had the brains and balls to perform such a service to the audio community.

The audio press today is little more than a standing joke, a mere ongoing entertainment barely propped up by the odd scant technical data here and there.

I'd personally love to read about a direct comparison between the Q Acoustic Concept 500s, the Wharfedale Elysian 4s and the rather enigmatic Pearl Acoustics Sibelius.

Given the unwillingness of the audio press to upset potential advertisers, friends, dealers, manufacturers etc this is never going to happen.

Frankly there's rather more chance of the JFK assassination files being finally released.

The magazine writers themselves are not stupid, they must know that something needs to change but other than move to a YouTube/ online channel, they or their employers, seem to be frozen totally unable or unwilling to take a risk with the printed media.

I would guess that decades of a near monopoly in the printed media has resulted in a shocking level of risk aversion complacency which might now take its toll.

Imagine that I took a pic on my cellphone of two different shades of white color samples from a paint store.  Even on the worst uncalibrated computer monitor, you would be able to tell that there is a difference, and maybe even say one is slightly lighter, or slightly more blue.  But SO WHAT!!  

If I were to then ask, "which color is better?", there's NO way you could assess that, because the photo is tainted by the light in the room, the camera used, and finally the monitor you are looking at.  The .JPG compression and transmission of the photo does relatively little to make the whole thing meaningless. 

It's pointless to blame YouTube's bitrate in any of this.  Even if they provided 24/96k, it would still all be meaningless.  I would agree that you could say Speakers A are slightly brighter than Speakers B.   But SO WHAT!!