One other thought that's always beleaguered me about YouTube as a place for demonstrations - and this is really quite the logic cramp - is that gear or techniques are being shown under the pretext of critical listening. And that's all well and good until you factor in how much destruction takes place. That video was likely never even exported for upload without a significant amount of compression for file size. h264 is the "idiot proof" algorithm and, unless specifically changed by the user, it will compress the audio to 128kbps stereo (maybe 192). THEN, it's uploaded to YouTube and again, the CODEC is for streamlined delivery, not fidelity. And finally, the vast majority of YouTube is consumed via mobile or laptop computers. Maybe you're listening via Bluetooth (another codec), or the hardwired headphone amp (1/8" miniplug!).
Sorry, not trying to flex my .50 words list here. The point I'm driving at, is that it's a fool's errand to evaluate the sound of something when the audio has been hacked up and reassembled so many times. Imagine pulling a plate of leftovers out of your fridge, reheating it in the microwave, and then putting it back in - but doing this four times. Or dubbing a VHS tape to another VHS tape.... to another VHS tape... and then playing it back through a cheap television. This would be a terrible way to evaluate the original source, no? Especially when the 'source' is often using cheap mics, pres, and converters to begin with.
I mean yeah, I'm corksniffing here - but this is a forum of PRS owners, where we are prone to such things.