I know (almost) nothing
Member
What, nobody likes GR Reasearch?
Wow! -That's cunning of him!Ironic considering Crinacle's own headphone/IEM 'Technical Grade' ratings are beyond useless, (knowingly) perpetuating pseudoscience and primarily just a metric of his pricing bias.
Who? -What are they researching?What, nobody likes GR Reasearch?
And here is the list of reviewers I can think of, in alphabetical order. If you are game, you can include or exclude whomever you want, this is for reference only.
- BadGuyGoodRewiews
- CheapAudioMan
- Chrono
- Crinicle
- Currawong
- DankPods
- Darko
- DMS
- Gizaudio
- Goldensound
- iiwi
- Joshua Velor
- Julian Krause
- LTT / Linus
- Precog
- Resolve
- Super*Review
- Zeos
What, nobody likes GR Reasearch?
Interesting isn't it. As I said, seems like everyone has a different set of people in mind when they say YT audio reviewers.Strangely enough, even as someone who looks at a fair number of youtube audio channels, I hadn't heard of the majority of those listed above.
(I think I recognized only Dark, Cheap Audio Man and I've heard of Goldensound but don't know if I've visited)
he's like a big anime/manga fan and yeah it can look out of place or awkward at times.
his shooting room (or audio corner?) is like my audio wet dream. Realistically I would never need or be able to use that many headphones, but damn the collection looks more impressive than all the audio shops I've been to.
I think Hans is ill. Remember he posted a video about a treatment he received a year ago or so? I think it’s Parkinson or something similar.I was shocked how frail Hans looked in one of his recent videos. He has really aged as of late. Made me think how long I can do this before I look that way!
That is my fault, and I apologize for it.
That is very earnest of you and I appreciate that. I thought the metaphor chosen to refer to a large community of people was inappropriate indeed, and I think it says a lot about you to be able to admit that possibility . If you would like to remove that metaphor all together from the forum, I would have no problem deleting my posts referring to it, including this one.I admit I not only did not make correctly, but which I made by using a metaphor that was pejorative and possibly inappropriate
4) My views (and the foundations of them) go back many years, but the distillation is this: Subjectivism is worthless. It's worthless as regards audio, it's worthless as regards politics and it's worthless as regards science. It's worthless because it's a masquerade; it's personal opinion, frequently unsupported and unsupportable, masquerading as authoritative information. If the listener or reader is not properly grounded in the subject matter being covered by the subjective opinion, they can be (and frequently are) misled and deceived, and not to any small degree.
Jim
Thanks for this as well, I did not know about Archimago. Read a few of his reviews, good content but a blog in 2022.. It is a hard format to get popular with.
Personally, I find YouTube an astonishingly slow way to get the facts I need even if I double the playback speed.
I don't want to turn this conversation into a philisophy of science topic, however I think it would be very 4th century BC to believe there are ultimalte truths in life (or in science) waiting to be uncovered, and that objectivity in its pure meaning is actually possible. We made a lot of progress on understanding how we construct information from data since Plato's time, and I do subscribe to the modern notion that current science is merely a consensus, serving its time until it gets shifted out by the next paradigm.If I read you correctly, you evidently believe that subjective information - on various subjects, not just audio - is legitimate, and thus dissemination on YouTube is also legitimate.
I like equipment reviews that touch on as many factors as possible, preferably separated from each other. Measurements are necessary because manufacturers are not forthcoming or perhaps not even forthright with them.
As entertainment, I can understand that even if such things are not to my taste but I just can't get anything useful from someone telling me a particular DAC was "dry", "clinical" or "highly musical", especially if such phrases are simply repeated because that is what other reviewers also said about that product. It is impossible to separate personal bias from reality in such situations so they contain no useful information, IMO.I've always felt Stereophile's measurements contributed something very valuable there: testing the spec claims by manufactures. Some of the results are fairly shocking in terms of how far short various products fall from their stated specs - speaker sensitivity and especially amplifier output (especially tube amps). That's really valuable stuff to know.
As to youtube reviewers (and subjective reviews) I get it. For a certain mind-set I guess dry discussion of measurements a perfectly satisfactory. But hobbies are very often communal, and there's a shoot-the-sh*t aspect with fellow enthusiasts that can be really important to many. The subjective review crowd gets this and supplies a bunch of that, the sort of human side of just owning and "experiencing" using gear. It's also why many subjective reviews will involve personal stories or what may seem to be irrelevant-to-the-product-at-hand details. It's a sharing of experience and often of personal philosophy thing, which many audiophiles like to read. Or watch, in videos. Steve G's video interviews of audiophiles are very popular for good reason.
I did. If I missed anything let me know please.You may go back and expurgate your posts (or not) as you see fit.
Yes of course. I am not a reviewer so never thought I was owed one.I would like to point out that my apology was not aimed solely at you.