'This is not a good representation on the tone because Youtube compresses the audio', what does it mean exactly?

[VergDan]

I think Youtube can be very helpful, along with some forum advice for selecting pickups, speakers, amps, guitars, etc. - Not that last word, but helpful.

Compression and fidelity aside though, you have to factor in the reality that if the person demoing the gear was sitting in the same room with you and then handed you the guitar so you could check it out, odds are what you heard through the amp with your playing would be different than what you heard from them.

I have too much experience with this. ...Handing someone a guitar and wondering how they're getting that tone from the gear we're playing. Also the reverse. I can make something sound fantastic and they sound... meh.

Youtube, sound clips and forums are helpful tools. But not the last word. Your experience, style and tastes are the last word for you.

That's very true. I used to believe every tone I heard in gear demo/reviews. I learned not to the hard way.

 

[rogue3]

I feel the accuracy of this statement could also be lended to the equipment the listener is using on the other end as well...

Big difference,yes! Does anyone listen to a stereo anymore?

Once i got this rig, my stereo,as good as it is,became somewhat obsolete, for music, and mostly just use it to watch movies.

To start,take the audio out from the PC(miccus blue tooth transceiver) and...



..I send it to this,with lots of options to shape the sound...400 watts a side powered mixer:

and play through a pair of these: 15inch bass , horn loaded bins:

i don't perceive anything missing in the sound. .Now quite uncompressed,my You Tube song mixes sound good!

 

[Rocco Crocco]

I would bet anyone who isn't an audio engineer would not be able to tell the difference between YouTube audio and the original source file.

 

[VergDan]

I would bet anyone who isn't an audio engineer would not be able to tell the difference between YouTube audio and the original source file.

That's a bold claim, but you might just be right, at least I can't really hear it unless I hyper focus.

 

[dadude]

No matter what that means, I believe I have developed a very good sense of how youtube sounds translates into actual in the room sounds. So It doesn't bother me.

 

[Freddy G]

In my opinion, the bottom line is that youtube's codec is pretty good. Like a decent MP3. If the file uploaded is stupid loud (ie. crushed limiting AKA loudness wars ) then you tube WILL automatically lower it to about -14LUFS. So smashing the dynamics in that case before uploading is not only a waste of time, but it will end up sounding smaller and wimpier than other files that were uploaded and mixed with the intended dynamics that meet the -14LUFS standard.
The thing that nobody mentions is the actual source recording. Ordinary people upload their recordings and videos....they are mostly not recording engineers, so they are using consumer iphones and cameras. And you know, an iPhone recording a guitar amp from 6 feet away is a whole different thing than a recording done to professional standards. Look at any Pete Thorn video and see if there's anything you can complain about regarding what youtube does to the sound.

 

[VergDan]

In my opinion, the bottom line is that youtube's codec is pretty good. Like a decent MP3. If the file uploaded is stupid loud (ie. crushed limiting AKA loudness wars ) then you tube WILL automatically lower it to about -14LUFS. So smashing the dynamics in that case before uploading is not only a waste of time, but it will end up sounding smaller and wimpier than other files that were uploaded and mixed with the intended dynamics that meet the -14LUFS standard.
The thing that nobody mentions is the actual source recording. Ordinary people upload their recordings and videos....they are mostly not recording engineers, so they are using consumer iphones and cameras. And you know, an iPhone recording a guitar amp from 6 feet away is a whole different thing than a recording done to professional standards. Look at any Pete Thorn video and see if there's anything you can complain about regarding what youtube does to the sound.

This is a bit off topic but I'll say this, I don't find Youtube gear review that helpful nowadays.
First of all, Youtubers sound different, one piece of gear can sound drastically different in Anderton's videos and The Tone King's videos.
Secondly, with microphones recording close to the amp speakers, the audio is not a good representation of how a gear would sound like in person. My Orange amp just sounds nothing like what was in Anderton's videos.
Lastly, after watching Ola Englund, who uses room mics to give the audience some idea of the room sound, I find it still not that close to the actual tone.
I gues I'm just ranting. Since there's no guitar store near me, I now buy gear mostly on faith.