Speakers are least important

[Rexp]

Contrary to some members thinking, speakers are actually the least important part of an average hi-end system ($30k). Take a listen to David Bowie's Lazarus track on these two videos, one system speakers cost double the other. Which performance do you prefer? 

7.40 in:

 

1.40 in:

 

 

[Rexp]

9 hours ago, esldude said:

Dumbest post of the year.

 

Dumb on multiple levels.

 

I would like to think that you don't believe this.

 

I would like to think that you understand using the videos as evidence for the idea is really dumb.

What is dumb, really dumb is comenting on a sound comparison having not listened to it. 

[Rexp]

58 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Anybody who thinks that you can properly judge a RECORDING of pairs of speakers using YouTube 128kbps 44.1kHZ Audio is having themselves on.

Ofcourse you can't judge a speakers performance via youtube, it is a comparison of system performance. For me, one delivers the musical message, the other doesn't and that is down to the source and amp not the speakers. 

[Rexp]

36 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 There is far more to the performance of a speaker than 128kbps is capable of revealing.

  Not all speakers are created equal in all areas either. We don't even know if the speakers are set up optimally in the room either.

 

 I didn't say anything about them sounding alike, as I couldn't be bothered even listening to such poor source material from unknown quality recordings,  to even attempt to judge the quality of ANY piece of equipment.

 

 

If you can't be bothered to listen, best not waste our time. 

[Rexp]

5 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

I prefer the first one (the second one hurt my ears).  However, I don't think this is a fair comparison, since the sound ends up funneled through an ADC/windows driver/my DAC/my speakers/my room. Further, importance (to me) doesn't necessarily correspond to an absolute dollar value ranking. 

Thanks for feedback, try listening on your phone +dac using mobile data. I find the first video boring in comparison to the second. 

[Rexp]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

Paul

 To me at least, they actually were glaringly obvious , but I don't agree with the premise that you can properly evaluate speaker or room differences using 128kbps .aac audio.

 

Regards

Alex

Yes the difference is obvious, don't think Paul has listened. Did you have a prefernce?

[Rexp]

2 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

Agreed, but the sibilance in his voice annoyed me with the second one.

Agreed the tonal balance of the 2nd is tipped up but it rocks. I much prefer it to the 1st which is probably suffering from a poorly set up turntable and is dull. 

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, esldude said:

Oh yes, let us judge turntable setup intricacies via compressed youtube video and audio done from a hand held camera.  Care to suggest VTA adjustments from your listening?  The idea is rubbish. 

Haha yes definately the VTA, what do you suggest the problem with system 1 is, needs better speakers? 

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, STC said:

Here are some lossless files for comparisons. AFAIK, Peter records them using a Sony microphone and then add them to the video. Even Stereophile recordings of the AV show was done similarly. Now let's see how much difference are there going to be in the YT sound when comparing these sound.

 

Unlike other videos of mine, these were processed with noise reduction and normalized. They were not level matched. Guess which audio sample that can be matched with the speakers?RoomC.wavRoomA.wavRoomB.wav

 

Room 1

 

Room 2

 

 

Room 3

 

 

 

Or can you even guess the TT sound?

 

 

A=2

B=1

C=3

[Rexp]

2 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Did you use headphones ?  

Yeah i am out so listen on my phone, so not even close? 

[Rexp]

25 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Well, lets just consider the recordings at say, 10:29 for the top one, and 3:49 (or roughly thereabouts) for the bottom one.  Besides having vastly different levels, different rooms, different electronics, and different speakers, exactly what conclusions would you expect to draw from these recordings? Would you expect to be able to decide which system to go and review based upon the sound you heard?  

 

Umm- my own personal opinion. While both systems are interesting, the audio on the recordings is simply lousy and that audio to draw conclusions about what either system sounds like is a fool's errand indeed. There are things you can learn from the recordings - for example you can decide if you like the look of both systems. But being able to pin down and say how the speakers sound radically different? No. 

 

Just bebopping through the recordings Dennis uploaded is a lot more fun to me.  

 

Apologies to the recordist, I was not commenting on your work, merely the audio reproduction possible from those recordings. Try level matching them as closely as possible then listening to them with the video not being visible. Its a trick someone here taught me years and years ago. It can really be a fun exercise!

So you personaly couldn't draw any worthwhile conclusions from the comparison. You don't need to advise others on what they hear. 

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

 

Not what I said.

 

I said that reasonable conclusions as to how those speakers sound can not be drawn from the videos. In specific conclusions used to make purchasing decisions.  I gave reasons why that is so. I did not tell anyone what they hear. If you don't agree, don't try to make out I am bullying anyone by vague comments like that. At least I am not trying to lead them down a path to bankruptcy.

 

That is my opinion yes, but one based upon years of audio research and listening. You can heed it or not, just as you will. But it is at least as valid as your opinion, and much more likely to avoid someone missing out on a speaker system they may really like or worse, buying one they think they will like but is really not to their taste at all. 

 

You are welcome to hear what you hear, and spend your money how you see fit. My Mom used to say that a fool and his money were soon parted. That saying would probably prove out true for someone who makes expensive speaker purchasing decisions based upon a you tube video like those two.  And yes, that is *also* my opinion. 

You can't audition speakers via youtube, not sure why you're stating the obvious. 

[Rexp]

9 hours ago, Paul R said:

 

Then what is your reason for listening to speakers and trying to discern sonic differences between them on you tube?

It is not about discernimg various sonic differences, it is about listening to two systems and finding one delivers the music and the other doesn't. 

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

I am sorry to have taken your valuable time to force you to respond to my posts. In any case, this is not about YouTube video but it is about audio recording of your system playback. I am always willing to give 24/96 but files used for my YT if you ever find the time. 

Yes please post a 24/96 and aac version of the audio from one your vids. Maybe in a new thread😬

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 

 It was a standard NTSC DVD format. 720 x 480 8,000kbps 29.97 FPS  1536 kbps Stereo 48kHz

 JRiver and VLC Media Player play it, as does the Dropbox player directly.

The mp4 sounds off, did you use this to exract the audio'

 https://www.onlinevideoconverter.com/

Maybe try aac instead.

[Rexp]

The upconverted version does sound better, why would that be? 

[Rexp]

58 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 That's a very good question. Perhaps the reconstruction with more data points is part of the answer, but the resident know-it-alls dispute that original explanation from the designers of CD.

 Incidentally, I can also get a small improvement from low bit rate .aac by upsampling it to 576kbps which is the highest resolution available in .aac for my Video S/W.

What I particularly like about is the complete lack of digital glare. What software did you use? 

[Rexp]

Yes back OT, the number one job of a high-end system is to deliver the emotion in the music, something that mid-fi can't do. Now if you spend more you can get great imaging, tonal balance etc. So say you audiion a SOTA system and it does it all but you can't afford it, you can substitute lower cost speakers into that system and it will still deliver the emotion. 

[Rexp]

10 hours ago, Paul R said:

 

You can replace any component in that high end system and still hear the emotion in the music. But, within reason, the speakers are always going to have the most effect on the sound. ✌️

Thats just not true, have you heard or owned a high end system? 

[Rexp]

2 hours ago, Paul R said:

 

It is absolutely true, and the answer is yes.  

Have you? 

 

You can hear the emotion in music over an elevator speaker. 

 

-Paul

 

 

Well yes, I even owned a high end audio store for a few years. Used to stock your Harbeth speakers which I do consider to be high end. 

[Rexp]

4 hours ago, MetalNuts said:

 

I am sorry, I have to disagree.  When one hears a music which appeals to him, the mind reacts with that music and will attribute whatever feeling it wants with the music.  It has nothing to do with the gear, it does not matter when you hear it live, through Hi-end equipment or from radio.  

 

However, a reasonable system with proper placement will surely produce music in a better quality, whether one can feel the emotion in the music has nothing to do with the gear but one's own mind. 

Wrong. Good high end gear presents the low level details in the music, like piano keys being gently caressed that creates the emotional impact. 

[Rexp]

5 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

But you think you can only hear the emotion in music on a very well crafted high end system?  Perhaps I simply misunderstood you? 

 

We often don't agree on things, such as RAM in a music server having an audible effect, but this is rather basic and I was surprised to see any disagreement at all. 

 

-Paul 

 

P.S. I do love my little Harbeths. But I also love the Maggies. And the ancient Advents.

 

 

You have a turntable Paul so I also appreciate your opinion if not agree, 

[Rexp]

54 minutes ago, MetalNuts said:

Your belief of emotions towards a piece of music comes from the quality of gear to reproduce the details is the appreciation to the gear's ability not the music itself.  I believe you will not enjoy our Chinese Opera even if it is play in the good high end gear, what emotion you will have.  So if you don't like the piece of music, it does not matter what gears are used to play it, your mind will not attribute any positive emotion to it.  You can disagree but who do you think you are to state that I am wrong. 

Maybe there is misunderstanding, you're free to tell me I am wrong any time.