In answer to your next to last question, yes, there are lots of people that think these videos are relevant.
Why on earth?
Answer me this: On You-Tube, there are endless of reviews, comparisons, and demos of equipment played in the creators room, recorded by a mic and published as if we could hear anything relevant considering we are listening to OUR stereo! Some of these have high play counts. Does anyone think they could hear differences in an amp or DAC picked up by some unknown mic, A2D, post processing and played back on their HT? Are we really that stupid?
39 responses Add your response
I guess there isn't too much difference between watching U-Tube and following internet forums when it comes to valuing comments and advise, or for that matter making comments or giving advice. Whatever floats your boat, its a personal choice made for reasons mostly unique to the individual. Don't watch if you don't like! You really don't need to piss on others for their beliefs. :-( |
@newbee +1 The current mindset(of many) is asserting one's opinion as the undisputed truth. YT can be informative with a sound clip giving one the basic characteristics of a given component or system. I attended Axpona 2023 and many sound clips replicate to a small degree what I heard in person. |
@newbee +1 I generally listen for consensus. For instance, if several reviewers comment that a certain speaker is a difficult load, I tend to file it away. Regarding watching YouTube as time well spent, I occasionally read a debate thinly veiled as an audio discussion forum, so what do I know? Just kidding, hope everyone has a good evening! |
There used to be a poster here on agon that evaluated speakers by listening to YouTube videos. He would also recommend speakers he heard using YouTube to others, claiming they were very good. I have never heard a YouTube video that I would trust it’s sound quality to buy even a $1000 pair of speakers let alone others costing 6 digits. |
@tvrgeek Yeah, I've thought about that. The better question might be, "are they stupid?" LOL |
I think it can be a valuable tool in some minor respects. Ana(Dia)log does some A/B comparisons where you can hear the differences I demoed equipment. Obviously everything is filtered though a less than ideal chain, but it does give you a valid idea of the differences in reproduction.
I don’t purchase based solely on this, but it help cut through so much noise on otherwise undemoable equipment… |
I guess the worst clips are those that try, well meaning but wrong, or intentionally false to sell their product, to be technical or objective. One well meaning attempt by a subjective reviewer to do an objective test of USB cables described a test where about the only thing not a variable was the cable. Well meaning, but a complete lack of understanding how A2D and DACs work. Even darn smart people, like a long presentation by a high end DAC designer had a couple serious mistakes. Suspicious as he used them to denigrate competing technology. Even out "favorite" objective scientific reviewer only does the measurements his box lets him do and yet the chief engineer of that test box emphatically states it does not measure everything and the measures it does make do not describe how we perceive sound. I guess those are more dangerous than some clown playing sound clips on two speakers. I use my and my wife's ears. The You-Tube has identified brands I never heard of, so that's something. Direct sales seem to be totally dependent of social media. The only help the old, mostly gone, print media had was one annual summary of manufactures. OH, one Audio article by Walt Jung was a big help in understanding caps for a noise problem we had at work. I used his lesson to solve a spurious NMI to a Z80 based system. Jan Didden's publication is very good but not exactly mainstream. Classical measures are a small help. Kipple or APx5.. measurements etc. Once half decent, then it is about hearing. |
I think the idea of this is to give you an idea of how they do sound. What really to me is a waste of time is to have a reviewer talk endlessly about his impressions of what he heard without a demonstration. You should be able to get an idea of maybe how they do sound because you are familiar with how your speakers present the sound that you have been listening to on the youtube video. Otherwise they are just moving air and wasting time to me. |
What you get is a crude combination of the characteristics of your playback system and room acoustics layered on top of a crude combination of the poster's system and room acoustics, plus the very crude characteristics of the microphones employed and recording techniques, etc. It is ridiculous to then try to isolate the difference one piece of gear makes in this mess. A friend of mine toured a recording studio and was shown a room full of microphones. There are some artists who will request a very specific microphone--not a particular brand or model, but a particular microphone because the difference matters to the artist. Do you think any of these posters have that kind of selection and special microphones to capture the essence of the gear being auditioned? The testing folks are also a bit unrealistic. They often post frequency response, waterfall plots, etc. of speakers and comment as though those tests give definitive results. Wholly apart from whether the tests really measure what we perceive and like, the tests themselves don't accurately measure what they purport to measure. Manufacturers looking for good measurements send their gear to a testing lab in Washington state that is built inside a nuclear reactor facility that was never commissioned. The main testing room is behind many feet of concrete and the room is gigantic (something like 450 feet long and wide). The testing facility certifies that it can accurately measure speaker frequency response down to 25 hz. Now tell me how some backyard or garage setup can give accurate measurements. |
Dog breeders post videos of adorable little puppies, frolicking around doing "puppy stuff" as if an amateur video will incapsulate a valid representation of the essence and personality of the puppy. Some people have the ability to visit the breeder in person and conduct a 20-minute "personal interview" with the prospective new (long term) roommate. Some order these furry creatures sight unseen not knowing if they are getting a cuddly ball of joy, a family treasure, or a narscistic little bastard that’s all about his own gratification that could care less about the emotional needs or time constraints of its new owners. I guess people who love puppies, are lot like people who love audio gear. Any morsel of an interaction that comes from the experience (via YouTube), regardless of how limited or compromised is better than no experience. "..... I sure would like a hit." Atleast picking the wrong DAC won’t poop on your floor, be a time vampire, or chew thru your internet cable. And, oh yeah, the grandkids love the puppy. And the internet is back up and running. Okay, we went for a cruise in one of my old cars yesterday with the top down and his little puppy face hanging out over the door with fur blowing in the wind. We’re good buddies now. Nevermind. |
| Post removed |
@macg19 +1 but... Wow... why does Everything need to be about Absolutism? So... the YouTube audio of a Demo'd item is not the Be All and End All. I am convinced most people who are Audiogon participants are aware of the technical limitations on display there. Is it So totally egregious as to be important enough to publicly denounce the attempt to demonstate a product/system (to total strangers) and go on and on about it? Is not a Taste better than a Whiff? I'd expect the Absolute Truth attitude from the patrons of a (Psuedo) Scientific Site or somewhere that everything gets reduced to Numbers, Ones and Zeros, graphs and measurements...Hmmmm |
We listen the radio for the music, information, and to kill the time in the car and truck every day. Does that make us stupid? You shouldn't confident too much for the sound of your hi-fi system. Why most women don't like to listen an expensive hi-fi audio? I believe non-audiophiles (wives) prefer the original music (w/ $30 computer speakers) than the sound of < $100K hi-fi system. Unless one has a true natural sound audio system like mine, I wouldn't insult Youtubers. Alex/Wavetouch |
No disrespect intended, but I don't understand your point or who/what it is directed to/at. |
If you have ever heard the careful tube rolling comparisons by Tyco Dogg on YouTube,, I think you might change your tune that one can’t hear meaningful differences on YouTube. You can. And the format may be lossy, but it’s not terrible, especially if you have listened to JRAD concerts and the like. I have used Tyco Doggs work to help select 6SN7 tubes for my three preamps. I became familiar with the 5692 and VT231 tubes through his work and understood how much better they sound than most new production tubes. |
@ticat got it, thanks. I think there is lots of useful/interesting content on YouTube, but social media in general, so-called influencers, Tik-Tok videos etc. are contributing to the decline of society - and it starts early - an iPad is now the babysitter. And way too much screen time + not spending enough time outside in the sun is contributing to the significant increase in Myopia... Thread hijacked (sorry) rant over. |
YT music, with or w/out vids, to me is like flipping thru the LPs’/CDs’ @ a b&m shop.... Sometimes with ’something in mind’, but open to the surprise....;) Using ’phones eliminates my speakers and the space that they and I am in. As for your speakers for listening to speakers in another space filtered by that to do so.... ...I posted a vid featuring my diy efforts a rather long while back (’15)....in G Search as the first image, 7x in the images page.... I apologize for the lousy audio, Sony P&S camera, mono from the mic onboard....noisy fluorescents, ceiling fan on low...at least on a tripod...*G* ....been a low priority to reshoot, and the subject has improved... Pre-Happy Labor’d Daze...J |
@tonywinga RCA did that! They over saturated the colors, loved the irony of those commercials! That's what comes from not teaching people how to, and the merits of thinking critically. Well, that and totalitarianism. 😉 |
" Never understood that one" It is in layman's terms "The psycology of advertising". Billions of dollars in research has been done to learn what motivates consumers to want to buy a product. Much of advertising is based on such research, which includes such factors as "association" (for example an attractive women in a car ad spreads her legs and says "Take me for a ride in your Lincoln". Or simple repetition has also been proven to work very effectively to manipulate people's perception of a product and their need for it. Just over and over repetition impresses the brain to believe and adopt what is being promoted. Logical, rational thinking has almost nothing to do with effectiveness of advertising.
|
