POLL: EEVlabs

[EEVblog]

So I've had this idea for a few years now and you might have heard me mention it before.
Well, now I'm thinking about taking this seriously, but it needs community input and funding to happen.

The plan is to have a lab that takes test equipment and other product testing seriously and methodically, having standardised testing and product shoot outs etc in a controlled way.
Equipment could be given comparitive scores etc. The community would of course have input into all shaping all this.

This requires:
1) Set up a new company EEVlabs (for legal, accounting, and even just mental division reasons from the EEVblog)
2) Rent a big space, a combined office/warehouse/rollerdoor type space. My current lab is clearly not suited.
3) Hire at least one, possibly two full time employees to work on this. This would include an on-air talent (in addition to me, in fact they could be the lead presenter)
4) Set up a Patreon or some other monthly donate thing to bring in funds. Say $5/month minimum.
5) I doubt Patreon would be enough to pay for all this, so all videos would be sponsored where possible. Obviously this may creates conflicts of interest. It could be that no company that is being tested in that video gets to sponsor that video. This could mean taking unrelated to engineering sponsors.

I would of course oversee it all and participate, but the idea is to keep the EEVblog the same, just doing my random unsponsored stuff. EEVlabs either pays for itself or it dies trying.
It would of course need at least a few hundred thousand per year in funding to keep this afloat.
Another funding option might be for me to take sponsored videos on the main EEVblog channel to help pay for it, at least initially, as it's unlikely to suddenly get 100k subs and like 50k views per video right ff the bat? But I don't know, maybe if I just launched the EEVlabs channels with just me in my lab for starters and see what subscriber traction it gets?
If it works then I go bigger.

Yes, if you watch Linus Tech Tips you'll know that he's basically doing this with absolutely enourmous manpower and money, and it's working. But yes, that market segment is an order of magnitude bigger than the test gear and related markets.

Test equipment would be an obvious place to start, but doesn't have to be limited to that. Could be other markets as well.

Thoughts and comments please. Does this have a chance of succeeding or am I nuts?

[ehughes]

I think it would be helpful for pros making purchasing decisions for real equipment.     The EE market is small/niche.     Opening up the scope a bit to include test gear from other disciplines may make it more financially viable.    Acoustics, optics, materials science, etc.         

[EEVblog]

I think it would be helpful for pros making purchasing decisions for real equipment.     The EE market is small/niche.     Opening up the scope a bit to include test gear from other disciplines may make it more financially viable.    Acoustics, optics, materials science, etc.

Yes, I don't see it being limited to electronic test gear, but that's at least a place to start.
Solar/EV gear might be a market as well.
For those in Australia, think like a Choice magazine type thing.

[nctnico]

I don't think a 2 person team is enough. You'll need specialists in several fields in order to really dig down into the nitty-gritty of test equipment or whatever you are testing. Even equipment that is well researched as a collective effort on this forum, may turn out to fall short on basic stuff but which nobody cared to test. Just look at the huge amount of work that is done on the comparison of 3 oscilloscopes (can't find the thread right now). I have been doing some oscilloscope tests just to see what the basic functionality is and each one of them takes me a couple of days of work.

[EEVblog]

I don't think a 2 person team is enough.

I agree, but you have to start somewhere. Two would probably be a minimum, as I wouldn't be there 100% of the time, and it gets a bit unmotivating if it's just one on their lonesome.
Heck, an EEVlabs channel could be started with just me with the premise of all videos on that channel being sponsored. If decent money rolls in that it gets expanded.

[EEVblog]

Just look at the huge amount of work that is done on the comparison of 3 oscilloscopes (can't find the thread right now). I have been doing some oscilloscope tests just to see what the basic functionality is and each one of them takes me a couple of days of work.

I know, which is why I balk at product shoot-outs or even single oscilloscope reviews these days.
Guess why you haven't seen a through review of the new Tek 2 series I have...
Every time I look at it with the motiviation to do it, I just think of all the stuff I need to setup and do it, and it gets put into the not enough time basket.

[artag]

You could have guest engineers to do products from time to time rather than permanent payroll

I think sponsorship degrades the idea. Nobody trusts that. If you want to be a Which? of test equipment you need to be rigorously independent.

[Muttley Snickers]

<Big Snip...>
Does this have a chance of succeeding or am I nuts?

You're nuts!   

I don't know, but to give a fair and proper assessment or evaluation on any product really requires having extensive knowledge of the product itself and being completely versed in its operation and configuration.

Anything less than a full commitment from you or your staffs part will be heavily criticised with endless facepalms from the audience. It is very common for people to criticise that which they do not fully understand.

[Brumby]

I don't see it being limited to electronic test gear, but that's at least a place to start.
Solar/EV gear might be a market as well.

Solar and EV markets are in a good place for this sort of thing, IMHO.  I know I have questions about solar.

For those in Australia, think like a Choice magazine type thing.

That was my first thought after reading your intro.

No small exercise.

I think sponsorship degrades the idea. Nobody trusts that.

A fair comment - but, as Dave has indicated, there are ways to approach that.  For example, would a sponsor for solder wick be a bad thing if you were examining soldering stations?

Certainly, this is a big undertaking to be done properly and it's going to require baby steps at first to find a path that will work, with the ability to expand.

Does this have a chance of succeeding or am I nuts?

Guarded "yes" on the first part, resounding "yes" on the second.

Recommendation: Avagoyamug. 

[nctnico]

Just look at the huge amount of work that is done on the comparison of 3 oscilloscopes (can't find the thread right now). I have been doing some oscilloscope tests just to see what the basic functionality is and each one of them takes me a couple of days of work.

I know, which is why I balk at product shoot-outs or even single oscilloscope reviews these days.
Guess why you haven't seen a through review of the new Tek 2 series I have...
Every time I look at it with the motiviation to do it, I just think of all the stuff I need to setup and do it, and it gets put into the not enough time basket.

IMHO one of the problems will be how to produce an entertaining and to-the-point video from what is mostly running tests and presenting test results. In the end that is just bone-dry stuff. Maybe keeping on complaining about pet-peeves like Munro does on his car teardowns helps to lighten things up a bit.

Also editing the videos is a huge job that will require extra hands. Another one of my favorite Youtubers is producing a video every work day and he has someone filming and editing more than fulltime.

@Dave: IMHO this step takes you into content-production-firm territory where you really need to manage video production and do this on a regular / fixed schedule in order to keep videos being produced on time and revenue coming in. Are you ready to be a boss & manager? I think the comparison with LTT is correct but I bet it is not all fun & games behind the scenes over there.

[EEVblog]

You could have guest engineers to do products from time to time rather than permanent payroll
I think sponsorship degrades the idea. Nobody trusts that. If you want to be a Which? of test equipment you need to be rigorously independent.

It wouldn't be an oscilloscope shootout sponsored by Keysight or Tek or Siglent. It'd be all the usual sponsor suspects you see on other mainstread channels. I get contact by these companies daily and always turn them all down. The plan would be accept almots anything that pays the bills.

[EEVblog]

<Big Snip...>
Does this have a chance of succeeding or am I nuts?

You're nuts!   

I don't know, but to give a fair and proper assessment or evaluation on any product really requires having extensive knowledge of the product itself and being completely versed in its operation and configuration.
Anything less than a full commitment from you or your staffs part will be heavily criticised with endless facepalms from the audience. It is very common for people to criticise that which they do not fully understand.

Yes, but the whole idea is to develop a set of standardised tests, developed in conjuction with the community.

[EEVblog]

Just look at the huge amount of work that is done on the comparison of 3 oscilloscopes (can't find the thread right now). I have been doing some oscilloscope tests just to see what the basic functionality is and each one of them takes me a couple of days of work.

I know, which is why I balk at product shoot-outs or even single oscilloscope reviews these days.
Guess why you haven't seen a through review of the new Tek 2 series I have...
Every time I look at it with the motiviation to do it, I just think of all the stuff I need to setup and do it, and it gets put into the not enough time basket.

IMHO one of the problems will be how to produce an entertaining and to-the-point video from what is mostly running tests and presenting test results. In the end that is just bone-dry stuff. Maybe keeping on complaining about pet-peeves like Munro does on his car teardowns helps to lighten things up a bit.

Correct. That's always a perpetual problem.

Also editing the videos is a huge job that will require extra hands. Another one of my favorite Youtubers is producing a video every work day and he has someone filming and editing more than fulltime.

It's actually not hard to film stuff as you do it.
Editing, yes, it takes time away. I wouldn't see a full time video editor in-house, but that could be contracted out.

[EEVblog]

Certainly, this is a big undertaking to be done properly and it's going to require baby steps at first to find a path that will work, with the ability to expand.

Yes, I totally see this initial feedback flopping, and I essentially know the result of the poll before even running it. I'm sure many people would want to subscribe to and watch such a thing, but it's almost certain that people wouldn't want to pay for such a thing on a scale that makes it viable.

So why did I even post this if I know the result? To float the dream idea out there and work backwards to what is viable.

BTW, there is also a poll on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/eevblog/status/1568763569529057280
Currently 72% would sub and watch, virtually one willing to pay for it, 13% not really interested, and 12% think it'll flop.

[EEVblog]

You could have guest engineers to do products from time to time rather than permanent payroll

Not workable I'm afraid, you need consistency of production and presentation.

[EEVblog]

As for starting small, the steps would be:

1) Work on EEVlab branding and have that set from the get go.
2) Have some content in the can. e.g. Tek 2 series, new Rigol scopes I'm getting soon.
3) Announce the EEVlab channel with maybe one unsponsored video and get an initial subscriber base. Tell everyone that everything teardown and review related will now be on EEVlab channel and it will be a (non conflict) sponsor funded channel.
4) Find sponsors based on the first video(s) response. It helps that I have a big established channel already, but I suspect sponsors won't come on board until the channel has an initial sub and view base.#
5) Find a good contract video editor so that time is taken away from me.
5) Produce content slowly as I have time. Build from there.

[Fungus]

The plan is to have a lab that takes test equipment and other product testing seriously and methodically, having standardised testing and product shoot outs etc in a controlled way.
Equipment could be given comparitive scores etc. The community would of course have input into all shaping all this.

To me: The most interesting part of "Test Gear" is the part that can't be tested with standardized testing.

If we're going to compare two multimeters using standard tests with bullet points then an Aneng can easily score as high as a Fluke.

How do you assign a hard number to "bang per buck"?

Edit: Take Joe Smith for example. I watch his videos because he does everything except test multimeters to see if they're bang on accurate. He rubs them with gasoline, zaps them with grill starters, twists the knob until it breaks, etc. It's fun to watch fancy $700 meters fail miserably where $50 meters survive.

[gnavigator1007]

So I voted I think it will flop, but I also want to say that I would be interested in the content and would contribute a small amount monthly.

Just look at how long it's been since a video was added to EEVdiscover & that the uSupply is still not available. You've clearly already got a lot going on. A project like you're talking about would be a much larger investment of your time and money. I'd worry that the rewards would be limited by the niche nature of the test subjects.

[joeqsmith]

I wouldn't waste your time with it.  If you have already put together a budget it would be interesting to see.     

[Fungus]

I haven't voted yet but it sounds expensive and but I can't see myself sitting through hours of Youtube videos to find information that I could find in two minutes on a web site like this one: https://lygte-info.dk/info/DMMReviews.html

Maybe you could knock together a pilot video showing the sort of thing you have in mind.

[EEVblog]

Edit: Take Joe Smith for example. I watch his videos because he does everything except test multimeters to see if they're bang on accurate. He rubs them with gasoline, zaps them with grill starters, twists the knob until it breaks, etc. It's fun to watch fancy $700 meters fail miserably where $50 meters survive.

My plan for a long time has been to have such testing facilities. Thermal/humidiuty test chambers, vibration tables, automated knob turners, ESD, mains brownout and spike testing etc.

EEVlab could be a torture test lab only perhaps?

[maxwell3e10]

This would be a great undertaking if it results in more quantitative evaluation of test equipment. I think a good example is https://www.audiosciencereview.com/ Amir deserves a lot of credit for pushing audio equipment manufacturers to improve their products in measurable ways. As a result, there is often more quantitative information available on the performance of an $100 consumer DAC than professional test equipment costing 100 times more. In the old days manufacturers (e.g. HP) would include a lot of info and plots in their datasheets. Now they focus on making datasheets to hide the weak points.

From the practical perspective, evaluating audio equipment is easier because there are only a few types of equipment. Amir's approach is to run exactly the same tests on all similar pieces of equipment and present plots in exactly the same way. This makes it faster to do and easier to compare. He does it all himself and I don't think it's his source of income. But with standardized procedures one could train a tech to run the tests on common pieces of equipment (oscilloscope, function generator, power supply) in a few hours. The goal would be not to play with equipment in an entertaining way, but to get hard data on its performance quickly. 

P.S. Perhaps one can encourage people to subscribe by letting patrons request specific additional tests.

[Black Phoenix]

To be sincere I didn't voted because I'm conflicted.

I would like to see such project. Normally I take instead how Gamer Nexus been doing such kind of stuff with his standards for reviews and equipment they now own and use in his new office building.

I don't talk about LTT because I, although was a subscriber since the beginnings (coming from NCIX) I unsub them when they were moved to the new big warehouse (before they had the adjacent one converted to a machine tool shop and this new LTTLabs) since the format I liked was starting to dissappear. Also the cringe YouTube thumbnails and clickbait titles is something that is a pet peeve of me. Although I understand the reason why they do I still think that for something who tried to look professional it diminishes the quality of the production (but that just me). And other reasons regarding Linus itself and how he tackles some stuff, but that's for another day.

But at the same time I fail to realize, other than having a standards for reviewing stuff, how did this new Labs stuff (that a lot of people now is thinking on doing) is going to differ of a normal indepth review or round up I see other reviewers do, some of them with equipment and standards on par with the best.

I would not mind supporting it or even providing man hours to the cause to be sincere.

[Warpspeed]

Choice Magazine is a good example of this type of activity, and I did subscribe to that for about a year.

The problem was, they hardly ever reviewed anything I was even remotely interested in.

Its main value to me was at the local suburban library that held all the back issues.
If I ever did decide to buy an ironing board, or a mouse trap, I could always research it for free at the library.
That was back in in ancient times before the internet. 

Likewise, If I was in the market for a soldering station, or a multimeter today, a quick internet and U-tube search would turn up a lot of very useful info.

Its a great idea, but the practicality and expense of it all, hardly seems justifiable.

[manicdoc]

<Big Snip...>
Does this have a chance of succeeding or am I nuts?

You're nuts!   

I don't know, but to give a fair and proper assessment or evaluation on any product really requires having extensive knowledge of the product itself and being completely versed in its operation and configuration.
Anything less than a full commitment from you or your staffs part will be heavily criticised with endless facepalms from the audience. It is very common for people to criticise that which they do not fully understand.

Yes, but the whole idea is to develop a set of standardised tests, developed in conjuction with the community.

It's an interesting idea, although I would think those who are the most interested in such test results would be in a position to get their mits on equipment to test for fit to the required purpose OR know someone who can help them reduce the choices to sufficient a degree that the differences left can be overcome (questions on this forum about what test equipment to get would in effect be in competition). As in the more expensive the kit (talking well North of 10k here) the more seriously someone would be in picking it. What you do might have some bearing on their decision-making, but not sure it would be critical I think, with that amount being spent it has to be directly justified. Plus the number of people doing this rapidly tails off...

Remember Linus has a whole ecosystem of interchangeable PC bits to play with and contrast & compare with on a very dense set of price/feature curves (he has literally 100's if not 1000's of things to compare and the infrastructure to do so) - plus an audience who are pure fanboys for their bit of beloved kit. For him, it makes sense to produce what is essentially mental button-pushing precision comparison clickbait as he wins whoever ends up foaming at the mouth; it's a critical mass comparison war and he makes $$$ no matter what.  A bit like the entertainment fight arena in Altered Carbon, but with slightly less blood & tissue damage, and more measurements...  He knows exactly what he is up to.