• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

YouTube Loudspeaker Demo Videos - Yes No Maybe?

audiomaestro

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
35
Likes
28
If my speakers have a character, and the speakers on youtube have a character - which character am I hearing?
It would be unwise to use your speakers, you should use quality headphones to eliminate your room. You would simply listen to the source track on your headphones, and then listen to the same track being played over the YouTube demo. Even if the headphone introduces some slight coloration, it doesn't matter, because that coloration would be present on the source track as well. If the source track and speaker demo sound nearly identical, then you would know the speaker can accurately reproduce the tonality of the source track without coloration. If the source track sounds completely different than the speaker demo, then either the speaker is not good enough or the demo was done poorly. There are tons of bad examples, but there are also some great demo videos where everything is done well.

An example below, done properly.

Speaker demo:

Source track:

They are nearly identical in tonality, they should sound almost the same on any quality headphone. This is far better evidence of the speakers tonality than some subjective review in some magazine.
 

audiofooled

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 1, 2021
Messages
530
Likes
588
Once I found what I thought was a good demo recording of a loudspeaker. It sounded good on my headphones so I thought I'd try and hear how would it sound when played back on my system. The "effect" was very strange, to say the least. Like in some kind of a "feedback loop", I could hear not the "character" of the loudspeakers on the video (it sounded fairly neutral), but the sound (decay) of the actual room they were set up in (as opposed to mine). Even more strange was the effect that the sound stage was confined exactly by the boundaries of my TV screen. Like there was a tiny person singing "over there". To me it sounded like If I would record a video of my system playing and when played back all of a sudden not only the room fits the screen, but also the sound. Weird. And I have no clue how this could happen.

Edit: Found it:


If you are interested, please try listening to this over your headphones and then your loudspeakers to compare the two. I would be most interested to hear what you guys think. If you hear similar "effect", is it due to the fact that these are open baffle speakers, dipole, or is it because it was made with (Sennheiser) binaural microphone? Or maybe something else?
 
Last edited:

ntsc525

Member
Joined
May 16, 2022
Messages
20
Likes
26
It reminds me of when they used to have TV commercials advertising the latest models, and expecting you to see how good they look... ON YOUR TV! "I don't see any difference between that color TV in the commercial, and the black and white one we're watching now!" (I'm old...)

I just bought my first new set of speakers since 1991. Back in the day, you used to be able to go into listening rooms, even at box stores like Fry's (RIP) and Best Buy (Federated, Cal Stereo, etc. in So Cal), and if you were careful enough to neutralize whatever amp they were using (set tone controls to flat, Loudness switch turned off), you'd have a pretty good idea what they might (*might*!) sound like at your home.

I'm sure there are still some audio dealers that will bring speakers to your home to demo them, but that's not in my sub-$1,000(US) wheelhouse.

So, to me, the only thing I relied upon was the reviewer's description of how the speakers sound. In my case, cheapaudioman gave me a clue I think is important, which is the description of "neutral" speakers versus "V" shaped, or "U" shaped speakers. Even though he says he prefers speakers with scooped midrange (which sells more speakers because the bass and treble jump out at you in a crowded store), he also describes which speakers on his list are neutral.

Based on that and my perceived consensus on line, I settled on the ELAC Uni-FI 2.0 UB52 speakers, and was happy. THEN I discovered this site, heard about the distortion / resonance issue in the 500 to 600 Hz range, and wish I could go back in time and make another decision.

First, you have to know what you want and like. I think many audiophiles, including, I believe, our reviewer Amirm, prefer flat (neutral) speakers (theoretically matching those used in the mixing studios when the music was created), but if you like them scooped, you should realize this and take it into consideration. You can see that in the reviews, and may choose a speaker even if it's not recommended here.

Of course, most popular music nowadays is already mixed heavily scooped, with dynamic range compressed, and distortion built in. I would still get neutral speakers and let the music's mix dictate how much booming bass and scooped mids you get when the mood suits.

I think the frequency response and distortion figures here, together with described listening experiences can help you make a good guess at which speakers you're going to like. I miss the demo rooms, back when even dedicated Hi Fi shops still had something for more modest budgets.

Dan
 

Digby

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
1,632
Likes
1,556
If my speakers have a character, and the speakers on youtube have a character - which character am I hearing?
The character of both. You probably know enough about your own speakers to guess which is which.

My claim is not perfect resolution, which seems to be the demand of some (perfect resolution or it is useless, which is a false dichotomy), but that you can evaluate, to some extent, what the general character of speakers are through your own speakers.

I admit, this is probably better to do through headphones, but it isn't impossible with speakers.

Given what people here say about how the room and equipment affects any recording of speakers, then you'd expect there to be wild swings in the character of a speaker from one video to the next, but this is not the case (a "dull" speaker will remain dull). It is easy enough to hear a continuity when comparing two, three or four different speakers recorded in room alongside the source material.

There is plenty of information here. It is not the last word in resolution, but I think it is often enough to narrow down choices of speakers for home audition.

More importantly our speech "hearing" has evolved to be ridiculously sensitive to speech/voice variation just so that we *can* recognise people by their voices.
And yet, through some of the worst transducers in the world (analogue telephones), we can recognise a person's voice in a fraction of a second. There is no need for anything approaching high fidelity to convey who it is we are talking to. If you can recognise a person over a telephone, then surely the same cues that alert you to whom it is you're talking to, can alert you to whether you will favour a speaker or not, and over a significantly better quality medium.

It is not perfect. It is not infallible, but then who said it was. The people that say nothing can be understood are just wrong. Are they being literal or just a bit slapdash in their language?
 
Last edited:

Digby

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
1,632
Likes
1,556
It would be unwise to use your speakers, you should use quality headphones to eliminate your room.
Yes, headphones are preferable, but I still think you can hear a general character of speaker over other speakers. It doesn't destroy the general quality to such an extent that useful comparisons can't be made.

People arguing about this are likely the same people who would say a 256kbps or 320kbps MP3 can be, as far the listener is concerned, practically transparent to the uncompressed source, so what gives? The mp3 takes away what it deems useless information. This technique (recording a pair of speakers in room) cannot convey all useful information, but there is still enough there on which to make reasonable judgement or comparison between speakers, at a low to medium level of resolution (ergo, it is not useless).

It is by no means a simple binary on/off switch (as some are representing it), in the same way lower and lower quality MP3s don't just present garbage information. They just provide lower and lower grades of resolution.
 

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,409
Likes
12,294
Location
UK/Cheshire
It can't be a false equivalence: microphones either pick up sonic differences or they don't. A playback system either reproduces those sonic differences or it doesn't. It doesn't matter if we are talking about a human voice or anything else.

I could just re-phrase the question referring to a recording of any musical instrument. If you take a recording of a sax, or a xylophone, or a flute, or a chime, and you can ask "IF my speakers have a character, and the recorded instrument has a character - which character am I hearing?

So it's a question that can't be avoided by claiming there is something special about the human voice. How would you answer that re-phrased question?

I mean, I certainly agree with skepticism as to getting a substantial read on the abilities of many speakers via such videos. But I'm just saying in principle some sonic information can come through.

It's quite clear from any number of speaker comparison videos that sonic differences are captured, that one can hear through one's own sound system.
Huge or tiny differences? At what point do the become so small that they are masked by the differences applied by your own speaker?
 

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,200
Likes
11,816
Huge or tiny differences? At what point do the become so small that they are masked by the differences applied by your own speaker?

Any imperfect system will have those fuzzy borders.

(FWIW: I record many extremely subtle sonic differences for use in my sound editing work).

As I mentioned earlier: watching youtube videos touring audio show rooms in my home theater, there was plenty of variety in the sonic character in the recordings of speakers in each room.
 

Kvalsvoll

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
878
Likes
1,643
Location
Norway
It would be unwise to use your speakers, you should use quality headphones to eliminate your room. You would simply listen to the source track on your headphones, and then listen to the same track being played over the YouTube demo. Even if the headphone introduces some slight coloration, it doesn't matter, because that coloration would be present on the source track as well. If the source track and speaker demo sound nearly identical, then you would know the speaker can accurately reproduce the tonality of the source track without coloration. If the source track sounds completely different than the speaker demo, then either the speaker is not good enough or the demo was done poorly. There are tons of bad examples, but there are also some great demo videos where everything is done well.

An example below, done properly.

Speaker demo:

Source track:

They are nearly identical in tonality, they should sound almost the same on any quality headphone. This is far better evidence of the speakers tonality than some subjective review in some magazine.
Good example to show why such recordings can never be more than casual entertainment.

Tonality is not the same. The recording adds a brightness, and overall hardness.

Highs loose resolution, there is a coloration added to the voice. There is coloration in lower mid.

Bass looses air and weight. That weighty attack on the bass notes is merely lost in the recording.

Spatial properties of the original is mostly lost, the recording is smaller, the reverb from the recording looses its 3D depth. Instruments loose that solid feel that makes them sound real.

Those are quite significant differences, and it is not obvious where those differences comes from - is it the microphones, mic placement, room acoustics, or the speakers.
 

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,409
Likes
12,294
Location
UK/Cheshire
...watching youtube videos touring audio show rooms in my home theater, there was plenty of variety in the sonic character in the recordings of speakers in each room.

Just out of interest - how much (would you say) of those sonic characters were down to the speaker, and how much to the room and speaker placement?
 

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,200
Likes
11,816
Just out of interest - how much (would you say) of those sonic characters were down to the speaker, and how much to the room and speaker placement?

I don't know. Sometimes the room sound seemed more evident than others, though with a speaker tone still seemingly coming through.
(You can for instance often hear some of the original recorded acoustics/reverb character in the recording - e.g. reverb added to voices, instruments, the hall reverb for an orchestra etc, even though the speakers may be in a relatively small room).

Here's one of the videos I watched. They generally recorded from seats right in front of each pair of speakers:


As I mentioned, on my big screen with my HT speaker system, it was a really cool visual/sonic impression of "visiting" each room.
 

Jim Shaw

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 16, 2021
Messages
616
Likes
1,159
Location
North central USA
I have baled on this conversation-turned-shouting-match. It has become what my favorite lawyers would describe as "argumentative". Little is to be gained from this -- certainly not for the likes of me. Arguing this topic is like mud wrestling a pig; you get all dirty and soon learn that the pig enjoys it and has nothing better to do. The wise move is to capitulate thus saving self-respect.

PS: I have long since unsubbed from any YT channel propounding internet listening comparisons. But they need subscribers and will welcome you.
 
OP
Rednaxela

Rednaxela

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 30, 2022
Messages
2,052
Likes
2,676
Location
NL
I have baled on this conversation-turned-shouting-match. It has become what my favorite lawyers would describe as "argumentative". Little is to be gained from this -- certainly not for the likes of me. Arguing this topic is like mud wrestling a pig; you get all dirty and soon learn that the pig enjoys it and has nothing better to do. The wise move is to capitulate thus saving self-respect.

PS: I have long since unsubbed from any YT channel propounding internet listening comparisons. But they need subscribers and will welcome you.
Come on @Jim Shaw, you can’t call others argumentative and then bow out with an argumentative remark. That’s unfair.

Feel free to have the last word, but at the risk of coming across as argumentative myself, I want to have said that I only see a constructive and civil conversation here. What I see is people doing their best to express themselves with care, stay on topic, and back up their views with helpful examples. Going through today's What's New list, I think there are quite a number of less refreshing and enjoyable threads to take part in. This is thanks to everybody’s contribution here, including yours.

So thank you for having taken the time to share your views, and should you be stepping out because of something I wrote - my sincere apologies.
 

audiomaestro

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
35
Likes
28
Good example to show why such recordings can never be more than casual entertainment.

Tonality is not the same. The recording adds a brightness, and overall hardness.

Highs loose resolution, there is a coloration added to the voice. There is coloration in lower mid.

Bass looses air and weight. That weighty attack on the bass notes is merely lost in the recording.

Spatial properties of the original is mostly lost, the recording is smaller, the reverb from the recording looses its 3D depth. Instruments loose that solid feel that makes them sound real.

Those are quite significant differences, and it is not obvious where those differences comes from - is it the microphones, mic placement, room acoustics, or the speakers.
You're not going to be able to compare many of those things from a YouTube video comparison, but you will absolutely be able to discern whether the tonality is on point or not. There appears be confirmation bias in your perception, because I think most people will admit the general tonality is very well matched.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,751
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
I go against the flow and say yes! Yes, insofar as it is more interesting to get a small idea of the appearance of the speakers, than to just look at still images. Sound-wise nop, of course. It is seldom known which recording microphone is used, for example. Bad mobile phone/ tablet microphone or better "real" recording microphone?

Edit:
How do you know if the sound is really recorded with a microphone just for those speakers in the video and not just mixed directly into the video? Fake that is.
(If it sounds too good can be an indication).
 
Last edited:

Bleib

Major Contributor
Joined
May 13, 2021
Messages
1,254
Likes
2,252
Location
Sweden
There are some videos that are well made in which you can hear that one of the speaker is worse than the other. Example:

So it's not all useless. Having owned Alesis I can spot its defective sound instantly
Obviously need to listen to clips like these with great headphones.
 

fineMen

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
1,504
Likes
679
At all, or only to a certain extent?
Somebody else pointed to where it starts to become messy. The microphone - type, position, orientation, brand, amplification ... so the problem arises at the very start of the procedure. Of course an audiophool would say, that the problem is the cable from the amp to the speaker, and localise the nonsensical bits even earlier in the chain ... wise guys!

On the other hand, a forum member once posted dummy head (binaural) recordings of several speakers in-room. These were of some value when compared.

The youtube stuff is mostly to generate clicks and make money by that--or plain advertising. You could and should always ask if the content is honest at all. Fraud and nonsense on "social media" is not commonplace today and in the future, but the rule. People decided for that passively ...
 
OP
Rednaxela

Rednaxela

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 30, 2022
Messages
2,052
Likes
2,676
Location
NL
The youtube stuff is mostly to generate clicks and make money by that--or plain advertising. You could and should always ask if the content is honest at all. Fraud and nonsense on "social media" is not commonplace today and in the future, but the rule.
That's a good point, thank you.

I do think though that both can also be the case: genuine intentions and a desire to generate clicks. Or, genuine intentions without a desire to generate clicks. But yeah they may be rarer than we might think.
 

fineMen

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
1,504
Likes
679
That's a good point, thank you.

I do think though that both can also be the case: genuine intentions and a desire to generate clicks. Or, genuine intentions without a desire to generate clicks. But yeah they may be rarer than we might think.
If someone would like to be honest, he would easily see that a real test would need very much more effort than he is remotely able to invest. See dummy head recording, room treatment maybe, the program material, ... and still a lots of thought, that then has to be explained and exposed to the public for honest criticism.

There are lots of "speaker tests" around that focus on a pleasant voice of the reporter, some vivid, but not too much, engagement, a show for entertainment. Not more, really, show-makers. What else do You expect? It is free!
 
OP
Rednaxela

Rednaxela

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 30, 2022
Messages
2,052
Likes
2,676
Location
NL
If someone would like to be honest, he would easily see that a real test would need very much more effort than he is remotely able to invest.
For me, that would be too negative a world view.

I believe that dishonesty and not meeting a set of quality standards are two different things. Sometimes one is a sign of the other but surely not always.

For example, if you scroll down here to Update 16/9/15, you'll see two links to loudspeaker demo video's that may be flawed in many ways, but not produced or shared with dishonest intentions.
 

Weeb Labs

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jun 24, 2020
Messages
604
Likes
1,417
Location
Ireland
One might as well take a set of anechoic data and use it to generate a convolution for the desired speaker. That would at least eliminate room modes and reflections from the demo.

Its usefulness would still be rather limited (particularly in the case of non-uniform directivity) but the listener would no longer be hearing two rooms simultaneously.
 
Top Bottom