How competitive are you with your system?

@cleeds

But the direct transfer undergoes the same transformation, so the two should be equivalent.

No one is talking the ultimate in fidelity.  I keep noting that there are qualities that cannot be conveyed (e.g., soundstage, imaging), but the general character and smoothness of the frequency balance, openness of the sound, etc. can be.  We/I are/am only listening to hear if they sound the same and where the differences lie.

If the direct cut is rich in bass and the system is not, accounting for some floor bounce, we got a problem.

If the system shows a peak or resonance that is not in the direct transfer..., we got a problem.

If the system sounds muffled or devoid of harmonics (heavily veiled), and the direct transfer doesn’t..., we got a problem.

The list goes on.

As I said, nearfield monitoring is best for this exercise.

Mihorn, ever seen one of these?  It’s a Wavetouch modified Oppo-95.  This one is available locally.

@cleeds For your reference, I have two high-end studio grade mastering systems here at home so I’m quite intimately familiar with what goes on during the mastering process and the loss in audio quality suffer through the YouTube process is not that detrimental when you start with a highly resolving system and make a good quality recording of its sound at the listener’s sitting position. 

Let’s put your theory to the test and tell us how the audio recording embedded in the video is different than what you hear in the room. Use it to illustrate, highlight, and point out the differences in sound quality that you proclaim.

@daveyf so what says you of systems that sound exceptional and great on audio recordings embedded in videos?

 Better systems inspire me to improve my own setup. 

Perfect example:

Sounds to me like someone wasted $340,000.

https://youtu.be/kVe9SEm69Fg

https://youtu.be/radHy4HhhNg