Anyone else find video reviews annoying?

[andromedaaudio]

What conspiracy theory is this?

That the US is back engineering alien space craft .
If the truth comes out , nobody is gonna buy this low level tech /audio gear anymore.
Empty audio stores.

 

[Joe Whip]

That the US is back engineering alien space craft .
If the truth comes out , nobody is gonna buy this low level tech /audio gear anymore.
Empty audio stores.

I have heard that the alien audio tech is amazing And they use Unobtanium tubes for a truly holographic sound. Even better than Atmos. Don’t ask me who I heard this from as they may be listening..

 

[davidavdavid]

The video-based HiFi reviews i.e. YouTube HiFi Review channels can have many adjectives attributed to them, but let's stick with annoying: What could we find annoying with them?

1 -The lack of production quality
2 - The lack of personalization/humanization
3 - The lack of knowledge with respect to the core subject matter
4 - The lack of knowledge with respect to the history and the business
5 - The lack of professionalism
6 - The lack of genuineness/transparency
7 - The lack of presence/talent

Take your pick of any of the above. That's not to say that ALL HiFi video reviews and YouTube channels suffer from all of the above, but the same could be said about so many videos and channels devoted to other hobbies/pastimes/verticals/industries.

I wish I could take credit for the above list, but I actually started taking notes from various forums, not just WBF about how members/participants see and/or appreciate video-based HiFi reviews and YouTube channels. And what I have culled in the aggregate are the most common criticisms minus the expletives and colourful language.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron , Don't you get the invites to the secret meetings? Do you know the secret handshake? Do you have the decoder ring?

No, sadly. I'm not one of the cool kids.

 

[Al M.]

The arguments remain the same for four or five years now. Some members shout that "videos suck". Others say they find them useful, a tool, to help them better understand what they can not hear in person. My own videos helped DDK understand what each of my systems was doing in the context of my room, and he helped me remotely improve the set up based only on what he heard from the videos I sent him privately. Others have also benefited from a similar process. For me, system videos have a very specific purpose.

So it goes, round and round.

Of course, Peter, if those who like videos keep misrepresenting their opponents' opinions, as also you continue to do even though you have been corrected a number of times now, it will keep going round and round.

 

[Solypsa]

Back to the topic at hand-

Yes I find audio related reviews on video annoying, mostly. Here are a few thoughts:

Audiophile vocabulary is boring to me and its easier to skim over in text.

The essence of great audio will never translate to the visual medium well, they are in parallel realms. ( not touching on recordings with this comment ).

Video has a lot of power to influence ( for poor production audio reviews this means negatively but goes both ways ). I don't, as a side point, watch the news. I read it. Less extraneous info banging on my skull, more efficient imho.

If I were to be interested in something on youtube it is generally:

A) instructional. Fixing a car or a clothes dryer? A video can be so useful looking at a similar object and how someone learned to repair it.

B) Visually stimulating. Sure a high quality vid on supercars or amazing architecture is fun once in a while. Watching someone turn a bucket of rusty drill bits into a Damascus knife at their homemade forge is inspiring. Etc. Etc.

Watching ( emphasis : NOT commenting on listening to results ) an influencer go on and on about how a component sounds while showing a few angles of the rectangular boxes stacked up between two speakers is none of the above. When I look at, say tracking angle, and I want to read further but it says watch vid I leave. I just want to read through it. Maybe I am in a minority tho.

I do learn a lot about recordings I might want from 'system vids' but the actual visual content is extraneous to me. I look at those as 'recordings'. In fact on the occasion that I do listen to one I usually minimize the screen to avoid the visual distraction.

Anyway...carry on

 

[rando]

What could we find annoying with them?

After specifically calling out expletives and colorful language I decided to have a bit of forum specific fun. Highly suggestive!

1. Mannerisms culled from a two week charm offensive pitched beyond low arc it typically engenders by Pandemic dethroning Kingmaker _ a _ _ o.

One gets the feeling a lot of words were spent in vain to arrive at this sensible conclusion.

 

[Daverich4]

Like a number of previous posters here I prefer to read reviews while I listen to my system. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever watched a single review of an audio product. One thing I’ve been doing with written reviews for some time is having a reviewer saying he played such and such a song and heard this and that and then hopping on Qobuz if I don’t have that recording to hear what I can on my system compared to the reviewer’s. Well, that’s what I do for fun, YMMV.

 

[Rexp]

What conspiracy theory is this?

So you think the introduction of CD was a cock-up rather than a conspiracy? How about now, when digital can sound analog but rarely does, another cock-up?

 

[cjfrbw]

There are lots of babbling written reviews where it is hard to find the nuggets. Video reviews are fine if you view them as mostly entertainment.
My Samsung Galaxy 8 transcribed to You Tube gives a 'reasonable sketch' of my system's sound that does not offend me.

It is OK for the relativism of dynamics and articulation, frequency relationships EXCEPT for the bass and upper bass. Where they fail is spaciousness, height, width, depth, roundness, ultimate imaging comparison, organic succulence etc. Also, they were recorded at a specific volume level which would have to be normalized or equalized by the listener to get the best impression.

My bass also ripples my booty, which is kind of impressionistic in the vids.

 

[Lee]

The video-based HiFi reviews i.e. YouTube HiFi Review channels can have many adjectives attributed to them, but let's stick with annoying: What could we find annoying with them?

1 -The lack of production quality
2 - The lack of personalization/humanization
3 - The lack of knowledge with respect to the core subject matter
4 - The lack of knowledge with respect to the history and the business
5 - The lack of professionalism
6 - The lack of genuineness/transparency
7 - The lack of presence/talent

Take your pick of any of the above. That's not to say that ALL HiFi video reviews and YouTube channels suffer from all of the above, but the same could be said about so many videos and channels devoted to other hobbies/pastimes/verticals/industries.

I wish I could take credit for the above list, but I actually started taking notes from various forums, not just WBF about how members/participants see and/or appreciate video-based HiFi reviews and YouTube channels. And what I have culled in the aggregate are the most common criticisms minus the expletives and colourful language.

Just some observations on this. We did a lot of YouTube watching before we launched the TAS channel. We found that production quality largely doesn't matter but the personality of the presenter may matter most of all. Some people just have an on-screen presence that is electric. It does help to have a great story or interview people with great stories and experiences. It also helps to be early on introducing a hot product that intrigues people. We also found that videos that offer setup advice are incredibly popular such as speaker placement, room acoustic treatments, etc. That has the advantage of appealing to folks on all budgets.

 

[exupgh12]

Some people just have an on-screen presence that is electric. It does help to have a great story or interview people with great stories and experiences.

This should be a guideline for every video/podcast on the net, it is not as easy as some think.

We also found that videos that offer setup advice are incredibly popular such as speaker placement, room acoustic treatments, etc.

this is the part I like the most as I can try things at home.

 

[audioresurgence]

I enjoy watching Herb Reichert on YouTube but not when he’s shackled to Steve Guttenberg.

Paul McGowan is fine, mostly because he keeps his content short. I can listen to anyone if I know it will end in under 6 minutes.

 

[Ron Resnick]

We found that production quality largely doesn't matter but the personality of the presenter may matter most of all. Some people just have an on-screen presence that is electric.

I think Danny Kaey (a dear friend of several of us in Southern California) has by far the best on-screen presence.

In my videos I think I still come off a little bit too serious.

 

[Ron Resnick]

So you think the introduction of CD was a cock-up rather than a conspiracy? How about now, when digital can sound analog but rarely does, another cock-up?

I am sorry, but I literally don't know what "cock-up" means.

CD was introduced as a new technology and a new product to sell to consumers by companies seeking to generate net profits for shareholders. That's called Business 101. Definitely no conspiracy there!

Many devotees of digital audio believe that "digital can sound analog" and often does. A lot of for-profit companies manufacture and sell digital components for this very reason. Definitely no conspiracy there!

 

[Lee]

I think Danny Kaey (a dear friend of several of us in Southern California) has by far the best on-screen presence.

In my videos I think I still come off a little bit too serious.

I like Danny and he is a friend. We talk often.

Ron Brenay and Steve Huff both have a great screen presence.

 

[Alrainbow]

Audio god must be jay he conveys a god like persona. hands waving talking to us as if we all
Need to pay attention and yet little content is given.
of the few you tube audio channels for me the least value and most annoying to watch. in this hobby we learn till we stop but his channel makes me feel I need to stop. I’ve only been able to watch a few and it is painful till it’s over.
ocd is good and a few others. Ron’s I think are best in value and honesty I am amazed of some of his questions. Tough questions like wow how can they answer him. but they do and little fudging.
perhaps audio god might watch some if Ron’s or ocd.
there is no audio god nor should anyone be made to feel there is.
if you want to see an audio godly episode look up him showing a failed experiment on a woofer and asking all of his kingdom to make it a must to do as he did lol.
he is a nice man person and I get he is trying to make a name perhaps he has one already but does not know it

 

[hopkins]

I find the hosts on these two channels, for example, to be articulate and relaxed:
45 rpm audiophile
The Vinyl Attack

 

[Elliot G.]

Stuff like this would be great for the audio business. Its not complicated but its entertaining, not shot in 4k and he has over 4 million followers and the business he started he sold for 37million
But video is a waste LOL

 

[Lee]

I find the hosts on these two channels, for example, to be articulate and relaxed:
45 rpm audiophile
The Vinyl Attack

Michael at 45rpm is great.