If YouTube recordings sound good, why do commercial digital releases sound so bad.

[JackD201]

when on the road, youtube music is my go to streaming service. Compared to Spotify or Apple Music it has a softer top end and a bit of a midbass hump. This makes it friendly for when signal is weak and bitrates drop. I think it is a conscious decision on youtube music's part.

On topic, well they are different. Saying "better" might be too strong a conclusion. The difference is in the reverberant soundfield between a recording with one added on it (system vids) or one with a live field captured (live) versus one created with effects (studio). The original file will most likely sound drier because it is. If that is a good thing or a bad thing...<shrug> ...depends how you want your music served, when and where.

For serious listening and as a student of the recording arts, give me the original. I'll make my own changes.

 

[Rexp]

when on the road, youtube music is my go to streaming service. Compared to Spotify or Apple Music it has a softer top end and a bit of a midbass hump. This makes it friendly for when signal is weak and bitrates drop. I think it is a conscious decision on youtube music's part.

On topic, well they are different. Saying "better" might be too strong a conclusion. The difference is in the reverberant soundfield between a recording with one added on it (system vids) or one with a live field captured (live) versus one created with effects (studio). The original file will most likely sound drier because it is. If that is a good thing or a bad thing...<shrug> ...depends how you want your music served, when and where.

For serious listening and as a student of the recording arts, give me the original. I'll make my own changes.

Did you hear much difference in the piano solo in these two vids of the same track?

Track starts 3.13

 

[JackD201]

No not really. Why?

 

[hopkins]

No not really. Why?

Because Rexp finds the sound of the second video "broken" in comparison to the first one, hence supporting his "theory" that somehow live sound recordings on YouTube are superior to "commercial digital releases", whatever that means. I am sure you can find examples of recordings taken in a live setting and published on YouTube (think "Tiny Desk") that sound good.

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/if-youtube-recordings-sound-good-why-do-commercial-digital-releases-sound-so-bad.38774/post-976152

I listened to the two videos and thought they were identical (it's the same recording) and I guess Rexp is looking for a third opinion to reassure himself? Will a different opinion change what I hear or what he does? I don't think so, and it is all of very little consequence. Assuming somehow "live YouTube" recordings sounded systematically better, would I stop listening to the thousands of albums I love and spend my days listening to Grace Kelly? Not a chance

 

[Rexp]

No not really. Why?

Because I find them very different and a good example of the musical flow that's missing in many commercial releases. It does depend on what I'm listening on, my car stereo doesn't cut it for example.

 

[Rexp]

Here's a version of the Jazz classic, Impressions, surprisingly gripping for YouTube:

 

[Rexp]

Frank sounding like Frank:

 

[Rensselaer]

My guess is that seeing the performers sing/play along with the music on YouTube (like live concerts on TV) adds to the illusion. Could be what makes some of us prefer “the sound” of that which is “visual” too.

 

[Rexp]

My guess is that seeing the performers sing/play along with the music on YouTube (like live concerts on TV) adds to the illusion. Could be what makes some of us prefer “the sound” of that which is “visual” too.

When comparing the sound of these videos to streaming versions I don't look at the screen.
The playback device is crucial though, for example, if I use wifi via the router instead of mobile data or use mains power instead of battery, the sound is degraded.

 

[hopkins]

The original version of "Change Partners" (from the 1938 movie "Carefree"):

A fun version by Shirley Horn:

 

[Rexp]

Propulsive sound rarely found on streaming services:

 

[hopkins]

Propulsive sound rarely found on streaming services:

Seriously?

 

[Rexp]

Love the musicianship on this one, really comes through despite Youtube limitations.

 

[Rexp]

Joe Henderson is another one of those artists who's music hasn't faired well when going from analog to digital.

 

[hopkins]

Joe Henderson is another one of those artists who's music hasn't faired well when going from analog to digital.

What does this even mean?

 

[Rexp]

With videos this good, who needs streaming!

 

[wil]

What does this even mean?

I don’t get it either. A horse is getting beaten over and over again, but the horse seems to be imaginary.

 

[Rexp]

I don’t get it either. A horse is getting beaten over and over again, but the horse seems to be imaginary.

Don't get what?

 

[Rexp]

I don’t get it either. A horse is getting beaten over and over again, but the horse seems to be imaginary.

Nothing to say Wii? I see you were agreeing with Hopkins who is the only person on WBF I have on Ignore, so what is it you don't get?

 

[wil]

Nothing to say Wii? I see you were agreeing with Hopkins who is the only person on WBF I have on Ignore, so what is it you don't get?

Nothing more than I don’t have the same experience as you regarding the quality of streaming. This could be due to a number of things such as the individual systems we use. This is probably a thread I should stop checking in on.