I understand just fine. And disagree with your motive. The title of your OP says it all.
What, in your opinion, should the rules be for YouTube Reviews?
Recently, the OCD Hifi channel posted a David vs. Goliath takedown of Constellation. He does not own the unit, has none to handle personally, and bases his critique upon his examination of publicly available photos and their website patter. His video reads Constellation the riot act for their paltry construction and then questions their chutzpah for putting lipstick on a pig and suckering people in. He then contrasts the Constellation by comparing it to Jeff Rowland’s stuff, which his dealership carries.
Personally, I don’t own Constellation nor would I pay $55k for an amp. But I’m wondering what folks here — with intimate knowledge of the differences between seeing photos and handling gear -- think about this kind of takedown.
I’m imagining a spectrum of argument, pro and con this video.
On one end of the spectrum, one might argue for the OCD guy — "Look," one might say, "this is just such an easy target that all he’s doing is calling out a scam based on evidence that is so obvious that anyone could see it. OCD has Constellation dead to rights and he just bothered to make it interesting with a video. He doesn’t need better evidence to do such an obvious takedown. This is called "market correction"." Or words to that effect.
On the other end, one might say, "A channel with 11k subscribers had some duty of due diligence. A take-no-prisoners critique of a product requires that he at least have one to listen to, open up, etc. His willingness to draw a contrast with his own line of products is more than a convenient point of comparison of his video — it’s the main point, however disguised. What this amounts to is an unfair takedown of a product and company to help boost his own sales."
Or maybe there are takes in between?
In short, here I’m wondering about these questions:
"What kind of evidence is necessary for a public-facing critique?"
"What are the responsibilities of a public-facing review?"
"What kinds of reviews are appropriate for dealers to do?"
Be interested to hear from those in the industry, consumers, or reviewers on this question.
71 responses Add your response
@mikepowellaudio Your video is clearly a critique of a product. It elevates another piece (that you carry). You may not be a "reviewer" but you have 11k subscribers and you're telling people what to buy or not buy. Seems review-y to me. Maybe others agree with you. Just my opinion. My OP posed a question -- part of it offered a defense of what the video might be up to ("On one end of the spectrum..."). Others are weighing in, for the record. Now you're on the record. Good, glad we're all on the record. |
@bkeske +1 to your posts. You understand. Back to music!!! |
Just a note on evaluating equipment by photograph. There are certain pieces of equipment, usually mechanical in nature, that can be evaluated to a degree by photograph. Tonearms and speakers are examples. There are certain laws of physics that can not be broken and when they are very specific results occur. I am not saying that you can determine what a piece of equipment sounds like, you can not. But it will have a certain characteristic because of breaking that law. There may be a trade off for something more valuable. Electronic gear photographs can give you information on how it functions and to some extent on how it is built but never on how it sounds. Maybe you need a preamp with 8 inputs. A preamp with 6 inputs is not going to work. Some of it is personal. I am only interested in one type of speaker, 8 foot, one way ESLs. This is an evaluation that can be made by photograph. You can tell to some extent how a speaker will image by photograph but not entirely. I bought Sound Labs ESLs without ever having heard them because of long experience with line source ESLs. I had a very good idea how they would perform and they perform exactly that way. I am considering the Strain Gauge cartridge. I have no idea on what it might sound like consequently, I am driving 100 miles out of my way to see and hear the cartridge in person. Just because an amp does not have a three foot thick faceplate does not mean it is poorly made and trying to imply what it sounds like from photographs is poppycock. |
@mijostyn , those experienced in electronics and the design of electronics products can view photographs and make generalized comments about the quality of designs, based on experience, good engineering practice and a bit of common sense. Like anything else, it is not perfect, but there is nothing wrong with it, and too many of what look like bad design decisions will make you question well what else is wrong. There is a quite heated argument going on (mostly unrelated) to the LSA GAN amp. A quick look at the pictures of the interior by someone knowledgeable suggests a really poor decision on the orientation of the AC supply, with a 180 flip reducing the length of the AC wires and their potential for noise coupling to audio, and the ability to shorten the wires (and potential noise interaction) for the DC wires out to the modules. We also see PCB mount XLR connector with wires soldered to them, no hold downs for the wires, no supplemental case grounding connection, etc. The modules appear off the shelf. When you couple the measured performance, the use off the shelf modules, and what comes across as a poorly engineered product, a conclusion similar to the video, i.e. this is over priced for what it is, is a viable conclusion. How will it sound? Like off the shelf modules in a box which you may or may not like. |
@cindyment , and there you are. I know very little about electronics so am unable to evaluate it from an electronic standpoint by photograph. I would hazard a guess that very few proprietors of audio stores know much more about it than I do. I am however killer with a soldering iron:) I do generally shy away from Class D amplifiers because I do not like the sound of off the shelf modules in a box or is that just the thought of it? |
"First rule: if ya don't like it, don't watch it!"
A great rule, that should be timeless. However the past 50 years have seen it being gradually revoked in favour of increased censorship. Perhaps we need to ask do we really want to return to the bad old days when books like Ullyses and most of Henry Miller's work were banned? When songs such A Day in the Life were banned by the good ol' BBC?
Does anyone even talk about the importance of a free press nowadays?
Freedom of expression is a basic human right for EVERY adult and those that seek to deny it better have very good reasons. |
And there we have it Dear Readers … obviously piqued by an earlier observation that the Rize of GlovePuppet ‘cindy’ has seem a commensurate decline in outpourings from Chucky we observe a slight flurry of material from MC himself unfortunately, not being smarter than the average bear we see an attempt at brevity from MC at 6.36pm tossing up the pitch for what he really wanted to say under his sock puppet account ‘cindy’ at 6.47pm … man for an ego the size of a small planet that 11 minute wait must have been excruciating. |
@femoore12 , come on!. This is not just a hobby. This is LIFE! Humans have not devolved. They just keep making the same mistakes over and over again. You would have thought that the written word would have stopped this. No such luck. And, the computer assures that we will continue along the same lines indefinitely. Climate change? We desperately need the next ice age. |
| Post removed |
There is typically some type of code of ethics required for professional associations. I don't think any reviewers are held to a nationally recognized standard. I'd guess some are making money from advertising hits, some are getting a magazine salary, some are in it for good deals to support a hobby. I spent a couple of hours yesterday listening to a pair of really nice horns. The music was so engaging that I stopped listening and completely fell into the sound. They smoked any product I've heard that has been reviewed. Mainstream reviewers review Outback steak house, the masses. If you want something really good for your tastes, it's not likely front and center on Youtube, or in a magazine. Sure, there are always a handful of exceptions. Ever know anyone that won't eat an egg from a backyard chicken because the mass produced supermarket egg is a safer bet? Many need the support. |
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is ... "time to reform" "time to reflect". -Mark Twain. (I see two slightly different versions of this so I included both endings. (Otherwise whichever ending I decided to use, some nothingbutnoise type may jump to correct me) 😄 bjesien, I agree fully. |
The funny thing about you tube is you have lots of people on the site ,who like to kid around and do videos that are not to be taken literally. Well a couple,I take everything with a grain of salt.But there are some I have subscribed to .I like and enjoy there reviews and have made a purchase because of there review. |
