The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Launch of Pono Studio Headphones
Old 21st April 2014
  #3571
Lives for gear
 
Dpro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 View Post
Didn't say you said he was a rube, but you did dismiss his experience and you treated him as an uneducated person. (=rube)

I'll make it simple. I think there is an opportunity to have consumers appreciate a higher quality portable playback system. As someone put it, an IPOD on steroids.

If it is effectively marketed to a large enough audience, (Neil's role) and the consumer decides that it sounds really good, it will create demand for music that is mastered to take advantage of the better hardware in these devices.

PONO is saying its about its DACS, they are saying its about the analog output stage, and yes, they are over emphasizing the sampling rate thing.

BUT most consumers buy and listen to CRUSHED MP3's, think CD's are for senior citizens and none of them have heard a finely re-mastered or mastered recording done at 24/96 with great dynamic range. I suspect they would be blown away whether this master was played back on a great system (ie PONO) at 24/96 or 16/44.1! "Hi Res" is an easier story to tell, no?

If I were a producer, or artist today, I would be SO bummed out that my work, my art, gets crushed down for loudness and squished into a lossy format like MP3. Then its only to heard through a very mediocre playback system like cell phones/IPODS and $10 earbuds! "sigh"

I said what I said based off his own statements I did not dismiss him. Nor did out right say he was uneducated. You need to stop sticking up for the man who had not taken offense to my comments. He made his own admissions I did not make them. I did question him the exact same way you did but I elaborated on the fact that they misconstrued possible facts to him. That is not calling him out . That is calling the Pono people out which a lot of us are doing for the sake of good science vs hyperbole.

Neil is doing the industry a disservice presenting it the way he is. It does not benefit the public to try and dazzle them with marketing bull**** . It leads to ignorance. Education is the key to all and truth leads to better education. Not bull**** marketing which leads the public to making stupid statements based off it.
Would you rather educate people with truth?
Do I dislike MP3's and the loudness wars? Do I want to see people listening to if her quality formats? Of course but I do not think they way Neil has presented Pono nor marketed it is going to help fight for it. Why because he is spreading marketing hype without facts and without proof . It could create quite the reverse of his intended ideal if it comes out it's not really the big deal.
That is the danger of marketing hype without facts.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3572
Lives for gear
 
Dpro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rd Degree View Post
Judging by their Kickstarter, the amount of blogs written about this, and how many on the net are speaking, I wouldn't call their marketing "poor".
Marketing is always poor when it's based on on truths spouted as facts. Go no further than the underwater example. It dis educates people. Which if they find out the truth usually react strongly in a negative backlash against said product.

No one wants to be played.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3573
Saw this in UK IT daily The Register today...

It has some interesting observations of concerted efforts by some religious, political, and commercial groups to undermine confidence in scientifically derived findings they find 'inconvenient' for their agenda:

Most Americans doubt Big Bang, not too sure about evolution, climate change – survey • The Register
Old 21st April 2014
  #3574
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dpro View Post
I think most of us here want to see proof and empirical evidence none of which has been completely presented to date. That combined with the plethora of science already showing that 192k is possibly completely unneeded does indeed cast a big seed of doubt.
Saying it sounds better or is the best I have heard while possibly being true to the subject without accurate information is subjective at best.
What I believe is bothering you is that PONO doesnt need to present proof and empirical evidence to "most of us" on Gearslutz to be successful.

It just needs to deliver sound consumers like better than what they have and are that they are willing to pay for.

You are still hung up on the sampling rate issue, but I note that you leave yourself a way out by saying "192k is possibly completely unneeded"

Ha ha ha .........."possibly huh" you are afraid that some one might come up with some "proof and empirical evidence" that 192 makes a difference?

And here you are criticizing someone, a music loover, no one smart as you, who reports that he heard the best recording and playback he's ever heard.

How do they say it? I am LOL? and ROLFO?
Old 21st April 2014
  #3575
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Saw this in UK IT daily The Register today...

It has some interesting observations of concerted efforts by some religious, political, and commercial groups to undermine confidence in scientifically derived findings they find 'inconvenient' for their agenda:
I don't think this is a big factor in this debate.
The argument is wide ranging from 'science proves this…' to 'I think I can hear a difference'.
The denial of science really is about billion dollar vested interests - tobacco, oil, etc…. Not about a very small kickstarter project that 90% of the general public don't know about or care about.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3576
Lives for gear
 
Dpro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 View Post
What I believe is bothering you is that PONO doesnt need to present proof and empirical evidence to "most of us" on Gearslutz to be successful.

It just needs to deliver sound consumers like better than what they have and are that they are willing to pay for.

You are still hung up on the sampling rate issue, but I note that you leave yourself a way out by saying "192k is possibly completely unneeded"

Ha ha ha .........."possibly huh" you are afraid that some one might come up with some "proof and empirical evidence" that 192 makes a difference?

And here you are criticizing someone, a music loover, no one smart as you, who reports that he heard the best recording and playback he's ever heard.

How do they say it? I am LOL? and ROLFO?
You sir are full of assumptions . The only thing that bothers me about Pono is the bold face marketing bull**** going behind it. I rather enjoy debate and science for the sake of facts as I do learning.

Facts are Pono does need to prove empirical facts to back up its claim. That is just a truth nothing more nothing less.
As far as 192k goes the apodizing filter as they are using it I find interesting and want them to show us how it might actually work. Would it interest you a bit to know that in order for it to work not only do they need the 192k? Though it also throws out the data above 48k in its filtering process as I currently understand it. That is the reason behind my possible statement. It would be great if they somehow pulled out a magic bullet with that filter. Though it has been around for quite awhile .
In science we are not closed off to possibilities even if we have possible evidence of impossibility. The fun part of science is testing things correctly and coming to new possible conclusions that lead us forward. Pono is not doing this. They are not providing testing to prove their claims.

Again I did not criticize him as much as question what he was bing told. I question his statement for clarifications sake because it came off incredulous.

I am not afraid of anything here while you seem quite defensive of a position with no facts. No reasons for me to be afraid. No do I judge and I love music as well I would not be an audio engineer if I did not.

Go ahead and rofl at me . The joke is on you because you would rather be baffled with bull**** in the name of better sound vs hard factual data.

Oh and you are willing to let the public be duped as well. Welcome to deceptive ness. Deceptiveness will only breed more deception if not called into question.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3577
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 View Post
You can come up with examples of over the top marketing in every segment of commerce. You cant tell me that it doesn't exists in your world of audio production equipment?
I don't really care, to be honest. If I see crappy BS marketing in ANY industry that amounts to snake oil, I call it out.

The marketing behind Pono will DETRIMENTALLY IMPACT the audio industry. This "underwater" BS HURTS the industry, because it is complete BS!

If you are selling pet rocks and expect to pull in a one time dividend by fooling the public, go for it. BUT THIS IS AUDIO, and this is an industry I care about. Sorry, I won't stand for it. It's complete BS and it's beneath ANYONE with a rudimentary understanding of how audio works.

Quote:
owever, its a lot easier to say that than explain its really mastering (or remastering) at the audio production standard 24/96, carefully, and with "art" and care, that makes the big difference.
You are making excuses for lying to the public. Sorry, that's your choice but I won't stand for it. It's BS!

Quote:
C'mon. dont tell me you guys are less influenced by marketing because your more regimented and scientific about your choices than Neil, as crazy as he is. Most AE's are actually human!
We are all people. I remember marketing bits. I remember the BS people used to say about how we all need to record at 192 because it's like a veil is removed from the audio. Those people have lost credibility. The audio industry cannot afford to lose credibility by selling snake oil! They have lost enough credibility as is!
Old 21st April 2014
  #3578
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I don't think this is a big factor in this debate.
The argument is wide ranging from 'science proves this…' to 'I think I can hear a difference'.
The denial of science really is about billion dollar vested interests - tobacco, oil, etc…. Not about a very small kickstarter project that 90% of the general public don't know about or care about.
I hear what you are saying, but it is related I think... the lack of science education is a related problem. I think the magical thinking is a direct result of the poor science education, and it's the same thing for the political crap.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3579
Gear Maniac
 
Decompress's Avatar
 

It's my understanding that people claimed to hear marked differences between early CD players with equivalent-quality analog stages. It's also my understanding that when people would make this outlandish claim, they were politely shouted down by the "we knowz all sciencez" crowd, who would point out that the simpleton rubes who had the audacity to listen to equipment with their ears instead of with test instruments and digital theorems, were simply victims of their own ignorance, had been misled by their biases, and had been tricked by the big, bad marketing departments of the evil CD player manufacturers. Because, after all, sciencez had all the measurements to prove that CD players sounded the same.

And then jitter was identified, found to be audible, and discovered to vary wildly between those CD players.

Oops.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3580
Just about every interface you can buy now offers 192khz.
You're implying every audio company on the planet is party to a giant deception.
I agree, the Pono team seem to be making outlandish claims. If it took off as a real alternative to iTunes and current audio players, I agree it could be very damaging to the music industry's reputation. But as it is, it looks more like it's going to be a niche product for a niche fanbase.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3581
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
I hear what you are saying, but it is related I think... the lack of science education is a related problem. I think the magical thinking is a direct result of the poor science education, and it's the same thing for the political crap.
If there was perfect science education, do you think the general public would be taught that the human ear can't tell the difference between 44.1khz and 192khz? I don't think so. It's not something that is a priority to learn as a life skill.
I mean everyone pretty much knows the best way to keep your skin looking young is to moisturise with a standard, over the counter moisturiser, but most women (and some men) still pay upwards of a hundred dollars for a boutique brand with a French name.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3582
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Decompress View Post
It's my understanding that people claimed to hear marked differences between early CD players with equivalent-quality analog stages. It's also my understanding that when people would make this outlandish claim, they were politely shouted down by the "we knowz all sciencez" crowd, who would point out that the simpleton rubes who had the audacity to listen to equipment with their ears instead of with test instruments and digital theorems, were simply victims of their own ignorance, had been misled by their biases, and had been tricked by the big, bad marketing departments of the evil CD player manufacturers. Because, after all, sciencez had all the measurements to prove that CD players sounded the same.

And then jitter was identified, found to be audible, and discovered to vary wildly between those CD players.

Oops.
It call can be answered with a simple a/b/x test. That's all we are saying. All "sciencez" means is, if there is something there, it can be tested. It can be evaluated.

SIDEBAR: the fact that someone on this board is belittling science by a silly misspelling is EXACTLY what I was referencing above... there really IS a glorified anti-science bias among some people here, which is exactly what I'm talking about

Back in the day maybe people could or could not hear the difference in a/b/x testing... I don't know. If they could, then... people would investigate why. They would know there is a real issue and they would solve it.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3583
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Just about every interface you can buy now offers 192khz.
You're implying every audio company on the planet is party to a giant deception.
Um. No. Not every mfgr made hype filled ads full of how amazing 192 is. Certainly nobody (or not many?) made ads about "underwater listening."

There is a difference between giving people what they want and misleading marketing practices.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3584
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I don't think this is a big factor in this debate.
The argument is wide ranging from 'science proves this…' to 'I think I can hear a difference'.
The denial of science really is about billion dollar vested interests - tobacco, oil, etc…. Not about a very small kickstarter project that 90% of the general public don't know about or care about.
You're absolutely right, of course -- it's good to keep some perspective.


That said, it's also part of the background of discussions like this across the web across a number of fields, with certain societal cohorts disputing the findings of science not by virtue of empirical evidence but rather by 'special knowledge.' So there's the precedent and context, seems to me.



EDIT: And let me hasten to add that I'm certainly not drawing any equivalencies here. I well understand that there is no monolithic set of views on either side of any aspect of this 'divide.' My stake in this whole discussion is primarily supporting the idea that when someone makes a statement they claim as fact but that contradicts accumulated evidence and understanding, the burden of proof is on that person.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3585
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
A thousand things that would have caused me to hear something different between two different schemes for recording and playing back music. EVERYTHING you can think of except the possibility that THEY ACTUALLY SOUND DIFFERENT.
for this entire thread you have BRAGGED about your ability to hear the differences between formats that even the Audio Engineering Society's subjects failed to do in carefully controlled tests.

each time you are queried on the nature of your "tests", it turns out that you took a CD and put it in the CD player, you took an SACD and put it in the high-res player and then you said you can "tell" which is which!

The problem is, under the circumstances that you have described, a deaf person could also "tell" which is which "every time"! So this great accomplishment of hearing acuity you present to the group is identical to the performance of a person who cannot hear. Anyone can "tell" under these circumstances without even turning on the speakers!!

Your are like a "magician" waving his hands at a red traffic light and "making it turn green"!

The SACD remasters sounded better on my living room stereo than the mp3 from the original release sounded in my car, therefore all of the differences that I hear are caused by sample rates

Quote:
Proving that digital 44.1/16 recording is the ultimate way to record music
straw man. Nobody said that. People have said that under normal listening conditions it is more than adequate as a delivery medium.
Old 21st April 2014
  #3586
But if there is 100% iron clad scientific data to show no benefit from 192khz, and the Pono team are taking part in the most cynical marketing that lies to the public over the benefits of 192khz, then every audio interface maker is also guilty of exaggerated claims.
Why was 192khz ever included in an audio interface, let alone 96khz?
I'm not arguing about the science, I just think some of the bashing of Pono is a little extreme, especially as everyone from Avid, to Apogee, to UA, to prism have happily marketed 192khz and never been accused of damaging the reputation of their industry.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3587
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
But if there is 100% iron clad scientific data to show no benefit from 192khz, and the Pono team are taking part in the most cynical marketing that lies to the public over the benefits of 192khz, then every audio interface maker is also guilty of exaggerated claims.
Why was 192khz ever included in an audio interface, let alone 96khz?
I'm not arguing about the science, I just think some of the bashing of Pono is a little extreme, especially as everyone from Avid, to Apogee, to UA, to prism have happily marketed 192khz and never been accused of damaging the reputation of their industry.
<High end converter manufacturer hat=ON>
Er... because everyone knows that more is better. Right? We can't have people in the industry realising that 24/96 is more than enough as a delivery medium, they'd never upgrade to the new model converter...
<High end converter manufacturer hat=OFF>
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3588
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
each time you are queried on the nature of your "tests", it turns out that you took a CD and put it in the CD player, you took an SACD and put it in the high-res player and then you said you can "tell" which is which!

Back in the 80's, when I had gone through my CD stage (bought a player, thought it was great, started buying CD's, finally realized something was missing, sold all the CD's and went back to vinyl) something interesting happened.

I bought Steve Windwood's 'Roll With It' record. Now this is a great record, which I still listen to, in fact I now have a Simply Vinyl limited edition.

However I thought something was weird, even though I was listening to vinyl, I couldn't help feel that it wasn't quite right. It sounded a bit like a CD. And then, after a bit of investigation, I found out it was digitally mastered. Turns out I was listening to a CD on vinyl, and that is what it sounds like.

This WAS a blind test as I had no idea of this when I listened to the record. However I noticed the difference within seconds. And this was in the late 80's.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3589
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post

Quote:
Proving that digital 44.1/16 recording is the ultimate way to record music
straw man. Nobody said that. People have said that under normal listening conditions it is more than adequate as a delivery medium.
Not a straw man at all. Either the format produces a flawless recreation of the original, or it doesn't. So which is it? You can't say it does, but "under normal listening conditions". As soon as you admit that there are conditions where you CAN hear a difference, your argument is gone. And it looks as if that is what you have just done.

Case closed.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3590
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
I don't really care, to be honest. If I see crappy BS marketing in ANY industry that amounts to snake oil, I call it out.

The marketing behind Pono will DETRIMENTALLY IMPACT the audio industry. This "underwater" BS HURTS the industry, because it is complete BS!

If you are selling pet rocks and expect to pull in a one time dividend by fooling the public, go for it. BUT THIS IS AUDIO, and this is an industry I care about. Sorry, I won't stand for it. It's complete BS and it's beneath ANYONE with a rudimentary understanding of how audio works.



You are making excuses for lying to the public. Sorry, that's your choice but I won't stand for it. It's BS!



We are all people. I remember marketing bits. I remember the BS people used to say about how we all need to record at 192 because it's like a veil is removed from the audio. Those people have lost credibility. The audio industry cannot afford to lose credibility by selling snake oil! They have lost enough credibility as is!
I am sure this will not be a satisfying response, but you are hysterical, and not in the funny sense:

"The audio industry cannot afford to lose credibility by selling snake oil! They have lost enough credibility as is"

Oh, snake oil claims have never been made, and been successful, in the audio industry? Give me a break!

"You are making excuses for lying to the public."

No, PONO is trying to get people to buy a better music delivery system that requires better mastered recordings from people like you. Are you up for that challenge?

" BUT THIS IS AUDIO, and this is an industry I care about. Sorry, I won't stand for it."

I can see you stamping your feet like a three year old when I imagine you saying this Jeesh,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
<High end converter manufacturer hat=ON>
Er... because everyone knows that more is better. Right? We can't have people in the industry realising that 24/96 is more than enough as a delivery medium, they'd never upgrade to the new model converter...
<High end converter manufacturer hat=OFF>
Consumer audio playback manufacturer hat on:

"How do we get people to upgrade to the new iPod/Pono?"

In short....
If you are a musician selling a record at 192khz you are a liar and a cheat.
If you are Apple, or Avid, or Apogee - you are understandably marketing your newer, 'better' product.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3592
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
But if there is 100% iron clad scientific data to show no benefit from 192khz, and the Pono team are taking part in the most cynical marketing that lies to the public over the benefits of 192khz, then every audio interface maker is also guilty of exaggerated claims.
Why was 192khz ever included in an audio interface, let alone 96khz?
I'm not arguing about the science, I just think some of the bashing of Pono is a little extreme, especially as everyone from Avid, to Apogee, to UA, to prism have happily marketed 192khz and never been accused of damaging the reputation of their industry.
Yes, Yes , Yes! Chrisso

Holy crap!

"I like the guys from Apogee, so holy crap, their 192 stuff must be better than crappy old 96! Get out the freakin check book! Got to have that ****."

This isn't an example of marketing,(maybe even a little snake oil) just like PONO?

Oh you say its different because you are pros? ha ha

Wow, I really hope PONO makes it to market so we can see if consumers like it. They may not, but I am really afraid that well engineered, mixed and mastered music will continue to be marginalized if not.

It STILL blows me away that a lot of the pros on this thread that would benefit in their career from an increased appreciation and demand for great sounding audio are threatened by PONO.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3593
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post

In short....
If you are a musician selling a record at 192khz you are a liar and a cheat.
If you are Apple, or Avid, or Apogee - you are understandably marketing your newer, 'better' product.
I'm confused, is this sarcastic or was that serious?
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3594
Gear Head
 

I wish I never would have commented about the Pono as I think I caused a lot of the arguing with my comments. I joined the forum to learn how to make my own diffusers, and how to make the HT we are building sound the best I could. I stumbled on this thread, and thought I could add my opinion on it not realizing the trouble it would cause.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3595
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellisr63 View Post
I wish I never would have commented about the Pono
Why?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ellisr63 View Post
as I think I caused a lot of the arguing with my comments.
Yeah, well get in line, bub. heh
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3596
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 View Post
Oh, snake oil claims have never been made, and been successful, in the audio industry? Give me a break!
The point is the recording industry, in case you haven't noticed, is going through a rough time now... both from a success perspective and a PR perspective. It has been doing better I think in the court of public opinion.

If you think it's a good idea to hype a new technology that is more expensive and is demonstrated scientifically to make no audible difference, then I have a bridge to sell you. That's OK if you want to believe it magic... it's a human choice, an individual choice, and is your right. I'm not goin' there with ya.

Quote:
No, PONO is trying to get people to buy a better music delivery system that requires better mastered recordings from people like you. Are you up for that challenge?
I didn't yet read anything or year Neil Young say in his talks about how they are requiring people to maintain a certain dynamic range in their recording. I could have missed it though, so please educate me where it says there will necessarily be "better mastered recordings."
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3597
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellisr63 View Post
I wish I never would have commented about the Pono as I think I caused a lot of the arguing with my comments. I joined the forum to learn how to make my own diffusers, and how to make the HT we are building sound the best I could. I stumbled on this thread, and thought I could add my opinion on it not realizing the trouble it would cause.
A lot of readers will be glad you did - your post was probably the most relevant one in the entire thread...the first poster to listen to Pono and describe it.

The truth is that some posters have criticized you personally to try to discredit your opinion about Pono; this has happened to other people who have spoken positively about Pono.

I wouldn't take the criticism personally; it says a lot more about the critic.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3598
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Why was 192khz ever included in an audio interface, let alone 96khz?
Why do people sell expensive wines even though they can't tell the difference?

...because companies stay in business giving the people what they want.

192 was, as others said, another way to convince you to buy a new device. Pure capitalism.
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3599
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
This WAS a blind test as I had no idea of this when I listened to the record. However I noticed the difference within seconds. And this was in the late 80's.
I don't doubt your example. Not at all. I don't doubt you heard something.

But that's far different than actually doing an a/b/x test which, it appears, so far you have not done. Why not??
Old 22nd April 2014
  #3600
Lives for gear
 
Dpro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
A lot of readers will be glad you did - your post was probably the most relevant one in the entire thread...the first poster to listen to Pono and describe it.

The truth is that some posters have criticized you personally to try to discredit your opinion about Pono; this has happened to other people who have spoken positively about Pono.

I wouldn't take the criticism personally; it says a lot more about the critic.
No one criticized him personally. To take you back to the comments, he stated what they told him. Which was rather vague and quite misleading.
At which point he was asked if he was a sound engineer. Purely from the standpoint that if he was? He would have most likely said wait a minute guys stop talking vagaries and spit out the facts. Maybe not I those words but that is the gist.
At which point it was explained that a sound engineer would do that because they basically spoke nonsense that would be questionable.
At which point he admitted not knowing the technical aspects . Therefor not being able to question them.
At which point it was pointed out that they might be blowing smoke up his ass and he would not have possibly known better by his own admittance. Now yes I used colorful language to basically explain they could have lied to him. But I never personally criticized the man. That is basically criticizing the Pono people for being less than truthful in my opinion.

Now as for the statements about if 192k is not needed why does it exist? The 192k argument started the minute the chip manufacturers were able to start making chips that went that high in freq response.
Why because digital was the brave frontier and they rushed into it headlong before the research proving it was warranted had even been done. It was all it's got to be better lets do it. As that happened some people started using it feeling it was needed at the time some the converter manufacturers obliged. Give the customer what they want.
Research down the road would come out by converter manufacturers themselves which suggested that while it was there it turned out it was most likely not needed.
Oh I am sure a lot you would claim Dan Lavry does not know what his talking about. Even when he states that through his own research 60k is probably the maximum one needs for accurate good sounding audio production and or playback.
Yet he has the technical background, experience and knowledge to speak from. But you will all call bull**** on that without even possibly possessing the learned knowledge or the trained ear.
Pono may sound great but that is not the gist of this whole discussion. The gist lies in the fact that they are saying everything else sounds like **** except Pono because it's using 192k. Therefor it's the new paradigm.

I am not against higher res audio being released to the public. I am not against stopping the loudness war and a return to dynamics.
I am against bull**** marketing claiming something is the new god send without even giving real science to prove it and showing test data and files for everyone to hear. Not just a select group of rock stars and ordinary people all but excluding audio pros. Who I might add they will expect to fall into line, because guess what? Some engineer is going to have to do the remaster work for Pono if it succeeds.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump