Youtube audiophile hi res sounds MUCH better than my Eversolo streamer

Is it the same exact recording?  Different versions of the same song can sound very different depending on transfer, resolution, etc.

Well yes, I guess. I just played the album version. But I've never heard such a vast difference.  It's like every recording on Youtube is extremely high res or something.  Go search Audiophile audio system test or something like that. You'll find several 2+ hour long "videos"... All of them sound amazing compared to most all streaming I've done..  Youtube just sounds extra clean, crispy, and dynamic especially with percussion. I kills me to use this term but the streaming sounds very vailed.. This is NOT a small difference.  Again, I'm just wondering if youtube "HDRs" it's music or something.  

More info - my system:

Kef Reference 5 / Anthem STR pre / Parasound JC5 amp / Lumin T2 / Eversolo A6 master and A8.

How are you getting YT through your stereo?  It must be going through a DAC somewhere?

Is that thru airplay? Or Bluetooth? 
It’s possible it’s EQ’d when uploaded to youtube. 

No it's from my Sony tv's Youtube app.  I have it going through an Anthem AVM70 via HDMI ARC into the Parasound JC5 amp and to speakers.  I use HT bypass so my 2ch is similar except it uses the Anthem STR preamp..

So, from my tv youtube app, when I play these "audiophile hi res" recordings/videos, they sound significantly better and more "alive".. I'm not talking about a minor difference.

It has to be something other than simple bitrate. If you're a photographer, the difference is like taking a raw straight out of camera image and applying HDR to it but in a good controlled way.

I found this as I was demo'ing my speakers and didn't have 2ch set up.. i had to find something fast on Youtube and found all these audiophile recordings with really cool imagery.. Sounded great.. so I played similar tracks through Tidal on my 2ch set up and sounded just whatever.

You may very well be on to something. HIFI Rose has the youtube music app included on its streamers and many owners have the same experience to their surprise the experience is excellent and with the added benefit of the vid playing in the screen *if you consider that a plus. I own the A8 also (excellent streamer) and I find Amazon Music to be far superior to Qobuz across the board on my A8 despite Qobuz being touted as the best audiophile streaming quality vs other streaming services by many.  Trust your ears.

I would recommend using Audirvāna with Tidal, it will give you a noticeable better sound quality.

I returned my A8 because it just didn't seem to hold up to the hype.

I'd want to see a link to a YouTube video as an example. 

Are you referring to clips where the user mics a system playing back some track through a system?

Another good reason to own and play CD's - and DVD's! Who knows what processing the music/film data goes through before it's streamed?

There does often seem to be some phantom processing going with various media.  Radio and Sat sound highly bass boosted at times.

YouTube audio is lossy and compressed, not unlike an mp3 file. That can make the music sound "punchy" and some people prefer that quality.

I also have YouTube going through my 2-channel system via its app on my Sony TV, Not as good quality as my CD's or vinyl, but good enough that I'm fine with it and it's quite convenient. 

+1 @dr-boop It’d be most helpful if you could just share some specific links so we know exactly what you’re listening to.  The “audiophile” stuff I’ve found so far doesn’t seem all that. 

@soix @dr-boop

Find me any percussion on Tidal or Qobuz or anywhere that sounds this good.

Here's another one.  

Those are just a few.  If nothing else, the playlists are better than anything I've found on Tidal.  I just play them in the background and discover alot of new music, but when I go to Tidal to play it, it's disappointing.

YouTube definitely has amazing sound quality for many videos. Very comfortable to to channel listening.

I dont use Youtube but i know these youtube files and they are not far from audiophiles on my system 😊( low cost but vastly improved by acoustics basics, mechanical vibrations controls and EMI shielding ) .

I use only flac lossless files. 24 bits are the more easy to find and the better ...

So, from your first of three links above I was able to find the second song “Killing Me Softly” by Anne Bisson on Qobuz where it’s in 24/96 and it was obvious immediately from the first few notes that the Qobuz version was at a higher level entirely. By comparison the YouTube version sounded flat (both dynamically and dimensionally) and veiled and more like an MP3 recording — not even close. That’s all I’ve listened to so far and can’t comment on Tidal, but I’ll listen to some more and if I hear anything that sounds better than Qobuz I’ll revisit here. I agree that this is a great way to find more interesting and well-recorded music if nothing else and well worth it just for that, so thanks for clueing me into this new (for me anyway) resource.

Ok Soix thanks for looking. I'll try to do the same when I get home.  I do need more cross referencing obviously.  I've never heard a notable sound quality difference in Tidal vs Qobuz. 

Also, i'm not sure how much difference this makes but I do pay for Youtube Red.

YouTube subscriptions still shouldn't provide bitrates that are superior to other well-known streaming services, except perhaps Spotify.

Add to that the variability among masters of the same track/album (that generally are not stated in metadata / post descriptions), and I suspect it’ll be tough to compare stuff without quickly losing light down that rabbit hole. I agree it’s a way to find new tunes.

In looking at the YouTube premium subscription I noticed they do say that it provides higher 1080p video resolution so maybe it’s possible it offers better audio quality too, but they didn’t mention it which would be beyond stupid if better audio was also included.  Maybe someone who cares more will bother to look into this further.

I am familiar with these YouTube videos. I actually play them a lot during the day as background music & have saved a few to my favorites. I run my TV thru a Dac into a 2.1ch system in my living room. When my dac gets the signal from YouTube the highest quality I ever see is 16/48...normally 44.1khz. Even if the resolution is lower than that my dac will still show 16/44.1.  16/48 is still pretty good and very pleasant but I wouldn't put it on the same level as Quboz or Tidal. While some people may not even be able to distinguish between best quality YouTube Music & Quboz I certainly don't feel Quboz or Tidal sounds inferior to YouTube. 

In my living room with the TV I have a Primare Prisma NP5 with upgraded PS, one of the better budgets streamers I've tried (& I've tried a bunch) but it's not of high end status...& I can tell the difference between the TV app & Quboz. Blacker background, better imaging, etc. Now I really do enjoy those certain YouTube videos & the quality of music but it can't replace my streamer. Not to mention that a lot of the music in those videos are something I don't always want to listen to. Sounds great though..I have one playing right now. I can understand why you enjoy it. 

Thanks @mattw73.  I do think one difference is those tracks on YT are cherry picked to be the best sounding/recorded versions of each song. I've had a really hard time finding those exact recordings in Tidal (and I tried some other platforms too). They seem to be specially made recordings originally designed for superior audio quality.

Bitrates aside, I'll be using this to demo my speakers I sell from now on if possible.

Thanks for sharing the clips. Agreed they sound great. I'm curious if anyone will track down some info on these. I'm wondering if they were simply transcoded from some lossless format, or EQ'd with some DSP along the way.. 

     So a bit of googling shows U-Tube at 750p maxes out at 128kbs AAC and YouTube Premium (old Red) maxes at 256kbs ACC.  YouTube accepts hi res up to 96kbs Flac lossless, but these are transcoded to the above levels.  They recommend submitting the best res files you have for better sound.

  That said the NBR examples info are showing 24/192 files and I find setting my Pontus II to that res does sound slightly better.  No where near my own 24/192 Wav or AIFF files, or even well recorded 16/44.1 via I2s from an OPPO player.

  I really like user supported RadioParadise.com for their 16/44.1 FLAC channels that have some added processing.

If you go to Audiophile NBR Music channel he lists some contact info if any questions or requests. I think he has like 3 different music playing channels. Then there are channels like Best Acoustic Voices, SOUND HD, Lossless Quality Audio, & more I can't think of. There are a few Jazz only channels like Don's Audio as well as some Asian channels with good quality. They will start popping up in your feed the more you start listening to them. 

@dtximages this is what I use as well when listing equipment with videos or when people come by to demo to make sure something works. Hi res music can show weaknesses or be too transparent. I find that those YouTube videos sound good on everything. Maybe they have been remixed before posted..I dk. 

I’ve have similar experiences with my Apple 4k tv streamer (DAC via HDMI) beating many dedicated streamers when using the Youtube and tidal app on it. sure its only cd quality but it seemed to best the Roon Nucleus and an Aurender A10 I had and sold. Only a dedicated and optimized Mini PC was better then all the rest. yup admitting a Apple tv box streamer is better then many others was a hard hit to accept. Not to mention its by far the easiest streamer to use, granted you have a TV in the same room. I love the fact I can use voice search to find tracks.

Still on the market for a good/easy to use streamer. looking at HiFi rose now.

Try inverting the XLR polarity on your Eversolos. 

05-21-2024 at 11:57am 

 Hooray !, somebody finally got down to the facts and just the facts ma’am. Sometimes here on Audiogon, it’s like the Tower of Babel . One thing I do believe is music that is recorded strictly to be attractive to the audiophile market is boring.I don’t believe in creating music to show off the capabilities of a studio. To me it’s not the medium it’s the message.  
Member Old Ear gives it to us by the numbers and his actual experience  

The facts and just the facts ma’am. 

OLD EARS “So a bit of googling shows U-Tube at 750p maxes out at 128kbs AAC and YouTube Premium (old Red) maxes at 256kbs ACC.  YouTube accepts hi res up to 96kbs Flac lossless, but these are transcoded to the above levels.  They recommend submitting the best res files you have for better sound.

  That said the NBR examples info are showing 24/192 files and I find setting my Pontus II to that res does sound slightly better.  No where near my own 24/192 Wav or AIFF files, or even well recorded 16/44.1 via I2s from an OPPO player.

  I really like user supported RadioParadise.com for their 16/44.1 FLAC channels that have some added processing.”

I'm pretty sure the percussion on this album will equal or exceed anything you can get on YouTube.  If it doesn't sound fantastic on your system you are doing something wrong.

https://open.qobuz.com/album/wnhlpchice5oc

@pinwa

Cool album… sonic effects oriented.