A few reviews I made and I thought you guys might be interested.

Hey, folks. I have a website where I objectively test and review loudspeakers and drive-units. I am soft on audiophile buzzwords and heavy and data. I know in the world of audio that’s insane but I believe data is more useful than someone I don’t know telling me how they *think* a speaker sounds.


Likewise, there are countless YouTube reviewers of audio gear who… over the years … I have become untrusting of. So, I am working to create content in video form using the data from my website and discussing both the objective measurements and how they relate to what I hear.


I thought I would share a few of the videos with you guys who might be interested in following along. I just started the video reviews last week so I am still in the early stages of learning how to convey the message I want… and my ADHD isn’t helping me, lol. But, I’m having fun with it and I hope viewers are able to take something away from it that currently doesn’t seem to be provided elsewhere.


To start things off, I reviewed the Jamo S807 floorstanding speaker. I make no mystery of the fact this thing is terrible. There doesn’t seem to be many reviewers willing to call a spade a spade. I think it’s important to let people know what they’re getting and in this case, it’s a terrible product. I was really hoping it wouldn’t be, though.





Feedback is always welcomed but try to keep it constructive. I know I ain’t pretty… and facial surgery is too expensive. Like I said, I am starting out so I’m still feeling my way around all of this. I will continue to be objective-data oriented so if you’re looking for a person to use esoteric words to describe a piece of music that 99.9% of the world will never care to hear, I ain’t it. If you are looking for reviews founded in accurate data (taken using a $50k+ measurement system) with a sprinkle of what I heard and a legitimate attempt to correlate hearing with data then that’s me.

 

Then I reviewed the Buchardt S400 bookshelf speaker.

 

And most recently, I wrapped up my review of the $90/pair Neumi bookshelf speakers. These little dudes impressed me.

 

Here is my feedback. Making really good videos, is hard. Takes a lot of work, editing, etc. I started watching the Jamo video. I like that you state up front that this speaker is Not recommended. You don't hear that much anymore. But I would get to the point much quicker with your data argument. I'm about 5 minutes into the video, and my adhd is kicking in too. 31 minutes is too long overall. There's a reason that TED talks are maximum 18 minutes; our attention span wanders away quickly.

So I would show your data quicker, and why it matters. I'll keep watching, maybe there's more I'm missing. I would do closer up videos of the speaker, and right up front I would say what amps and source you are using, room size, and configuration. Also, how long have you run in the speaker before you really began analyzing it? You might not believe is speaker break in, but a lot of people do, and many well known speaker builders do as well. Can't hurt to give it a 50-100 hour break in period in any event, then do your tests. It might not make any difference in your data collection, but somehow it does make a difference in overall sound - very subjective, and that's the problem you're facing; Is data more important that actual listening tests? To you, it appears to be. Others, will argue against that. It's probably a case of a little of both.

But good luck, also and probably you have, but check out some others out there, Zero Fidelity, Steve Gutenberg, Tharbamar, etc. Just for how they put videos together, and their overall presentation. All helpful when I'm researching a piece of gear. In the end for me, none of it is a substitute for the actual gear, in my own listening room.

 

I appreciate the feedback.

Most of the questions you asked are answered in my video and my text-based review.

As for data vs listening, I tie the two together. And I prove the data is an excellent indicator. You'll see that as you continue.

I also agree that I need to be closer... in my 3rd video I got about 5 feet closer with the camera to get more of the speaker. The problem with the Jamo speaker is that it is a floorstanding speaker so I had to be quite a bit further away. But, yea, I agree, I need to be closer.

Yea, I have been thinking about how to frame the video. State my thoughts/data up front very clearly. I try to do that but maybe I need to make it much more distinct. Regarding the video length, I have tried to cut the time down to 15 minutes but when you are talking about data AND subjective terms it's hard. I see a lot of guys meandering on for 15-20 minutes about the "air" of a tweeter. And there is no discussion about actual, legitimate performance. I'm trying to do both so I'm having a tough time cutting the run time down and still be able to fully cover the points I want (objective and subjective).

As for other reviewers, yep, I watch a lot of them. But TBH most are not the style I want to present. Too much weight placed on esoteric words. But that is the norm in the audiophile community, unfortunately. I still enjoy some of them but grow tired of hearing them tell me how the midrange was "warm" with 30 different synonyms. It's honestly annoying to me. It sounds more like salesman talk than an actual review.

I have had some good feedback from manufacturers and they were impressed enough to be willing to send me some speakers that I could never afford. So, maybe they are appreciative of the depths of analysis. But, yes, I need to see if I can shrink the run time down. Experiment and learn what works best for folks.

Thanks again for the feedback. I appreciate it.

 

Another suggestion: Try not to use clickbait tactics (i.e., emotive language, big arrows, obnoxious facial expressions, large fonts) on your YouTube videos.

 

Yea, I try to avoid that stuff at all costs.

Did you see a specific example in my videos that I need to look at so I know what to avoid doing again.

 

My suggestion would be to have a succinct script and to stick to it. Judging by your posts, it sounds like it takes a while to get the point and by being more to-the-point, you'll cut down on lots of meandering blabla and your videos will inevitably be way shorter.

 

I edit a good bit of meandering out. I think I do a reasonable job of staying on topic. It's just there's a lot of ground to cover. The actual objective testing takes me about 10 hours. The review takes 2-4 hours to write. So, it's quite an intensive review. And that's before I even begin thinking about a video.

 

Going a little deeper, I'll start with this ;

1) Forget the pre-intro. Start with your music and start the review.
2) No need for anecdotes, that you bought it from Amazon, what you hoped it would be, that sort of thing.
3) Reviewing specs listed on the website one at a time is a tough thing for me to sit through. They're readily available with minimal effort. If you want to do this, list them in one screenshot that you present the viewer and go through them as fast as you can, if they matter at all.

That's just in the first couple of minutes.

 

Perfect! Excellent feedback. Thank you very much!


I do want to explain a little bit about that, though, and I wonder if it might change your perception.
1) That's a good point. I think I like that idea!
2) I try to let people know my motivations for the review. But, I think I agree with you here. I'll absolutely give it some consideration.
3) This one is a bit tougher for me. I want to hold manufacturers accountable. In the case of the Jamo S807, the specs listed are practically outright lies. I feel that by not pointing those out then I am giving them "a pass". Thoughts?

 

I can only speak for myself but the motivation doesn't matter to me at all. All you need to market is that you're not paid by anyone and these are your own thoughts. That's it.

A huge chunk of your video will be taken by the marketing BS that nearly every manufacturer dishes out. Honestly, it's expected as no manufacturer will say they're making a harsh blaring speaker. No need to do this at all.

Again, list the specs if you want in one screenshot and focus on the only ones that matter, then launch into your thoughts.

I'd also recommend not going into a speech about what you'll do or how or why you do it since this will pretty much be standard fare for all your videos and it'll just take up more time in each one.

Doing it this way, we just cut about 5 min of time... and I only watched 7 min! The longer the video, the more aimless it'll likely get, and the more difficult it'll be to keep your viewer's attention.

 

Nothing too specific, though I'm not sure about the "Conclusion: Do NOT buy" blurb on the Jamo speaker review.

Personally, I like clean YouTube video thumbnail and using straight-forward video titles in one of my favourite channels like Lazy Game Reviews: YouTube

Hope this helps.

 

So I just watched the Buchardt video, the first 17 minutes. I'm not a technical guy, I'll just state that. Some here on this forum are. And you yourself, have stated that you don't like the jargon that goes into all sort of adjectives describing the sound. Fair enough. Start with your strong suit then, the data. I actually found your graph at about 16 minutes quite helpful, and how you shaded the grey and blue areas. That made sense to me.

I also find that at times, certain videos use too many adjectives. But don't dismiss it either. I think a balance of data and subjective experience is best. But in your case, start off with the graphs, just not too many. Earlier in the video you mentioned that it was a 4 ohm speaker, and that your AVR stopped working in one channel. I think that is hugely helpful to know. I didn't know that (though I'm not in the market to buy them either). So you could probably overlay the basic stats in the beginning. I also wanted to know what other amplifier(s) you were using after the AVR. Was that mentioned? I don't recall it.

Another thing you might want to copy or tweak, I forget who know, but they have their 5 favorite tracks they use to test a speaker, usually a wide variety of female vocals, certain jazz, rock and either pop or hip hop tracks that can put speakers through their paces. Maybe rate each on a 1-5 scale. I dunno, just thinking out loud here. This would be in your second part of your video, the subjective section. Because I notice, you do give your opinions here and there, you might not even realize it. Part one, purely data and objective. Part 2, subjective, opinions.

 

Noted.

I do list all of the tracks I use in my subjective evaluation and I mention that the list can be found via my website review and I also mention a few of them in the subjective review.

To be clear: I am not anti subjective reviews. I am more anti subjective-only reviews. My goal, and I state this in each of the videos I believe, is to correlate subjective with the objective data. That way, hopefully, people can get to the point where they are more willing to view data as a helpful thing instead of viewing it as the devil. There is no reason there should be such a stark divide in the audiophile community. Both subjective and objective have their place. I just place more emphasis on objective because that's a *fact*. It measures a certain way. We may interpret the results differently in some regards (ie, hot treble instead of subdued midrange) and the speaker's interaction with the room is dependent upon placement that I cannot test. However, if we all have the same reference we can understand attributes that will be similar from room to room.

 

Based on the feedback and some of my own thoughts I am leaning toward trying to structure future videos in this format:

1) Intro Video (with my tag line and music)
2) BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) – What did I like about it and what didn’t I like about it? Do I recommend trying the speaker or not?
3) Product Photos/360° video (short; probably 20-30 seconds tops)
4) Features/Noteworthy Specs
5) Performance

a. Objective Data
b. Subjective Analysis tied to Objective Data​

6) Conclusion/Parting Thoughts

Or, I could save #2 for the end and tie it with #6? I'm thinking that might be best. Save a few minutes and don't give the ending away.


I believe following this format consistently will set the viewers up to always know what to expect and when to expect it as far as how the review is constructed. And maybe doing this will cut out 5-10 minutes.


I’m wondering, would it be preferred for me to include a ‘slide’ as a section break between the above elements? Literally, a blank screen that says: “Bottom Line Up Front”, “Features”, etc. Or should I not have those clear divisions? I’m just thinking it might help to keep the review clearly structured so there’s no chance of run-ons between sections.

 

This is not short. This is a lifetime. Besides, this consider your production time to create 20-30 seconds of content. There is absolutely no reason other voiced over content isn't included with during this.

If you have some kind of branding to your video, do not use the cliché of a intro. Figure something else out. Move that content to the end of your video anywhere but the beginning. Whatever, people don't want to watch this stuff. If your intent is to be factual, using time wasting gimmicks is hypocritical. You do know that people click on the right arrow key to skip content on Youtube. The skip is 5 seconds. Do not give your viewers a reason hit this button. If this kind of content is more than 5 seconds it's too long.

Also don't explain what you're going to tell your audience. This is exposition. Skip this kind of content, just say what you're going to say and don't explain why it's important. Everything you say should be important and limited explicitly to the reviewed item. And don't explain the same thing over and over again in each video. Make a separate video for redundant content. I tried to watch your video, you went on about explaining how a speaker works. Don't do this in a review. This should a separate video. Put a link below your video and reference that link in your video. It would probably a good idea watch your videos and make notes about redundant content. Then make separate videos for that content. Then take down your current videos an redo them without the redundant content.

 

Agreed. I plan to make a video using an example set of data explaining what to look for and how to read it to help cut down on the coverage of the data itself. Otherwise I risk explaining the same thing over and over... and not in the same way which can confuse people.


Also, I was trying to think how to voice over a photo/spin... I agree that voicing it over needs to be done.


The cliched intro. Is that a reference to my video intro? If so, noted. I can move that to the end or something along those lines. I've been watching a lot of Rick Beato's videos. I love how he lays them out. He does meander a bit but his edits are frequent enough where he cuts that down. Still enough to seem like a human (instead of a robot) but no minutes worth of side talk. He just seems like a cool dude instead of an internet salesman like so many audio reviewers.


Thanks for the suggestions and feedback.

 

Hi Erin, i can say that i've very much enjoyed your first 5 minutes ...i like that you take apart the "box marketing" thats exactly what i want to know about if i'm the ave joe who doesn't have much knowledge and is sorely missing from many reviews .... and for those of us who do know that much of what's on the box is often purely marketing will be really engaged if you should actually find that it is telling the truth so for me definately keep that begining ....

 

Agree.

@ErinH make an introduction video and let us know about yourself, where/how you acquire the gear you review and a little about your testing methodology and then refer to that video at the opening of your actual review videos and paste a link to it in the comments section for each video that you post so people can reference it.

Overall I like the info you're putting out, it's interesting, refreshing and I think you have a good perspective in the niche of things. I also like the measurements, in room response (such as cone and woofer breakup, beaming, etc.). Try to keep things between 15-20 minutes max (millennial attention span is $hit these days ) and then refer back to your website for further measurements.

Also let us know here on the forums each time you post a new review.

 

Erin,
Very nice technical explanation - you sure know your way around a speaker! It's always nice to learn something when you watch a review and not just a sales pitch disguised as a review. I do value the technical aspects and measurements portion of a speaker review. They are a great starting point (for me) to see if you are in the ball park for what interests you- especially frequency response, polar response, impedance and phase angle, enclosure resonance and distortion.
Associated equipment also gives us a glimpse as to what could be causing certain aspects of the subjective qualities- e.g. a brighter sounding amplifier or source that could result in hearing some brightness during listening. Also setup and positioning- were they at the manufacturer's recommended height and distance from walls (for example). Positioning is a critical reference point.
I also value the subjective portion of the review too- hearing someone's subjective opinion is important- even if we all have our tendencies and preferences, we want to hear the reviewer's.
I have heard these speakers at length and have my own subjective comments- they were dry and dull sounding with rolled off high frequencies and no brightness at all and lacked the midrange transparency that we value. I suspect that this was because of the characteristics of the amplifier- which is why associated equipment is important.
Subjectively we get to describe the product's essence, what does it bring to the table, what is it trying to accomplish- in terms that are important to the audio and music lover. Things like transparency, refinement, detail and natural (or not) and of course imaging, coherence, coloration, and frequency segment quality.
After hearing these for a few minutes their essence came through loudly and clearly- to provide the bass response of a small tower speaker in a monitor form factor. Did they succeed?

 

Thanks for the feedback and replies. They are all useful and important to me in guiding how I go forward with future reviews.

In every (text based) review I list the listening conditions and even provide an overhead layout of my listening space (attached below) along with photos of the room. The text based reviews are referenced in each video review because they are considerably more in-depth than I have time to cover in a video and I really encourage people to go to the site and read the review in full if they are interested in more than the "quick" analysis I provide in the videos. But I understand many don't have the understanding to make sense of much of it so I still do my best to explain briefly what I feel is important for each speaker. Especially since speaker designs and goals can vary.





I also made an "About Me" video a few months before I started doing reviews which lays down my goals and my background. This was made before I knew how to edit anything and was shot on my iPhone. I think I'll re-do it and probably delete the old one.







I appreciate all the feedback, guys. Truly. It means a lot that you would take your time to help me out with this venture. Gathering data, typing up reviews and then shooting a video is not easy. I spend a minimum of 8 hours for a single speaker test and that's before I start even typing up the review and way before I start the video aspect. But this is something I really feel is lacking in the audio review world and I hope that through honesty and objective testing I can provide meaningful information rather than just being another glorified salesman for the big brands or latest toys the way I feel so many reviewers are.

 

I didn’t mind the intro, but my first thought was, “What do you expect for $280? Of course it’s terrible!”

Good luck with the videos, and thanks for making them! I love you tube.

 

Watch the Neumi video. Far better linearity from a $90/pair of speakers. There’s a definite V-Curve to these speakers. Painful.

 

I've been reading since I was 4. That would be 67 years now. I can read a review much quicker than watch one, skipping parts that don't interest me. So, as others have said, keep it concise.

Also, consider putting index points into the video so watchers can find the important sections. I don't know if that's possible, but the inability to go (back) to a specific section of a review is one thing I greatly dislike about video reviews.

I do like the measurements-heavy approach.