What's the point of you tube comparisons.

Tannin

Devil#20 said:

As an aside if they have been provided with the product for free or for review or are sponsored for it then it is a legal requirement to declare this in the video. Some admit they have but say their review is not influenced by that sweetener and is an honest review. Read into that what you will but I'm not convinced on the impartiality if they rave about it. 

I know this is true here in Australia, and from what you say also in the UK (I didn't know that, though I would have guessed), but I'll bet it isn't so in the States, where a lot of these videos come from. Over there they seem to take the view that any way a business can make more money is a good way and screw the poor bloody consumer. 

Mind you, having a law and actually enforcing said law are two different things. I noticed a couple of months ago this matter of undisclosed sponsorships hit the headlines here for a few days. Enforcement from the ACCC
(fair trade and consumer body) was (as bloody usual) dilly-dallying about and more bark than bite. And (also as usual) enforcement from the ATO (tax office) going after people who were getting a benefit (e.g., free restaurant meals in exchange for "reviews" on Facebook) without declaring it as income was much more effective and direct. 

crunchman

Devil#20 said:

Like the title says. You can't decide whether you want to buy speaker A or speaker B or even C so you watch a few videos on yt of somebody doing back to back comparisons playing a series of clean and crunched tones on all contenders. Finishes by not offering their own opinions but asking you which you preferred and why and if you like the video then click and subscribe?

All well and good but the sound has come out via your TV or computer speaker so I can't tell the difference between any of them. They all sound exactly the same (as you would expect). Am I missing something here? 

I'm a bit late to this, but speaker comparisons can be quite useful.

They pretty much always have some speakers that I've owned as part of the comparison.  That gives me a reference point.

They probably aren't as much use if you don't have that reference.

Blueingreen

Devil#20 said:

Like the title says. You can't decide whether you want to buy speaker A or speaker B or even C so you watch a few videos on yt of somebody doing back to back comparisons playing a series of clean and crunched tones on all contenders. Finishes by not offering their own opinions but asking you which you preferred and why and if you like the video then click and subscribe?

All well and good but the sound has come out via your TV or computer speaker so I can't tell the difference between any of them. They all sound exactly the same (as you would expect). Am I missing something here? 

Disagree with the premise.  Back in the 50s and 60s when many players with great touch and tone were making their reputation, the vast majority of music was listened to on fairly primitive systems with mediocre to poor speakers.  Old radios and radiograms, transistors, Dansette record players, old TVs.  Record producers of the era often admit that their goal was a recording that sounded good on a cheap radio.

If your premise was correct, the subtleties that made these players what they are would have been obliterated by the poor speakers they were usually being heard on.  Because there's no reason why a subtle tonal difference caused by a different guitar, or a different player, or a different amp should have a better chance of surviving than a subtle differences caused by the different speakers.

But all our experience tells us this isn't true.  People listening to Fleetwood Mac on Top of The Pops on their parents crappy telly knew that Peter Green had great touch and tone.  You'd pick up more of the subtlety on a decent hi-fi, but you'd still hear it on the TV.

By the time I was 15 I knew I preferred the sound of a Les Paul to a Strat.  I didn't work that out by playing these unattainable guitars, or even listening to other people playing them live.  I worked that out by what I was hearing on the very basic record player I had in my bedroom.  Later on I changed my mind, or at least things got more complicated, but that's because my taste changed, not because I didn't have a fairly accurate idea of how the sound of a Les Paul differed from a Strat.

I just think it's false that subtle tonal differences can't survive being heard on basic speakers.  Of course I'm not arguing that the differences you hear on your computer are exactly the same as you'd have heard if you'd been in the room when the recording was made.  But you don't need to hear them live to know whether you prefer the timbre of John Lennon's voice to Paul McCartney's: hearing The Beatles on your tiny transistor radio will do the job.

DrBob

Devil#20 said:

Jono111 said:

Sometimes I find that after watching enough comparisons I decide I don't really want anything, which is good.

I spent more time than I really should listening to amp speaker reviews yesterday. It was only when I connected up a Chord Mojo and Grado headphones to the laptop that I could discern the differences in various speakers. Listening through the TV or Laptop speakers is a complete waste of time. I've still not bought anything but think I'll take a punt on a Fane. 

I really like the Fane drivers in my Thornton “Fastback” 2x12 

ewal

It's marketing. Not science.

Tannin

Something I didn't mention before is the benefit where you have the same reviewer in the same session comparing two or three instruments. Sure, you don't know the room acoustics or the microphone and you may or may not be told about FX in post, but you are still hearing two or three guitars played by the same person, in the same room, with the same microphones, and the same FX (on the best channels, that's none). 

Particularly where one of the guitars is familiar to you, or at least something close to familiar, the comparison is really valuable.

Example: one where the player has three guitars by the same builder, identical except for top timber. What does American Plane sound like? (They call it "sycamore", which it certainly isn't, but Yanks are like that.)  Because one of the three guitars in spruce (unspecified but it would be Sitka) you can "calibrate your ears" to a known, standard sound, and from there you can get the best idea of what American Plane sounds like you are ever going to get short of actually flying 15,000 kilometres and playing one yourself.

Another example: the chap demoing Emerald alongside his Martin and Taylor instruments, doing his best to play the same way and sit in the same place. Again, really useful.

HAVING said all of that - most You-tube gear demos are barely worth the paper they are written on. But there are good ones.