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 2nd May 2014
  #4501
Lives for gear
 

Are their opinions "valid"? Maybe.

Are their opinions "conclusive"? No.

Chris
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4502
Lives for gear
 

Old 2nd May 2014
  #4503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris93 View Post
Are their opinions "valid"? Maybe.

Are their opinions "conclusive"? No.

Chris
Sure. Absolutely right.
Nothing is conclusive 'til this thing is out in the wild in reasonably large numbers.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4504
j_j
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Sure. Absolutely right.
Nothing is conclusive 'til this thing is out in the wild in reasonably large numbers.
That's not what makes anything conclusive, either. That measures success of marketing above all else, i.e. how well the expectation was created. It also may measure the differences deliberately imposed in mastering.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4505
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

I think it's clearly more successful at this point than most people imagined. I think the question on my mind is what happens when (if?) people decide they can't hear a difference after all... and that bridge is burned?
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4506
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

You people need help. Seriously.

Wait, I'm one of you.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4507
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
I think it's clearly more successful at this point than most people imagined. I think the question on my mind is what happens when (if?) people decide they can't hear a difference after all... and that bridge is burned?
People will be comparing mp3 on their ipod to hi res on the pono. You don't think they will hear a difference?
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4508
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michael cleary View Post
People will be comparing mp3 on their ipod to hi res on the pono. You don't think they will hear a difference?


You have been reading the rest of the thread?
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4509
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_j View Post
That's not what makes anything conclusive, either. That measures success of marketing above all else, i.e. how well the expectation was created. It also may measure the differences deliberately imposed in mastering.
I obviously meant people (some in the thread) will conclude if it's worth buying or not. I'm not actually interested in proving the science.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4510
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michael cleary View Post
People will be comparing mp3 on their ipod to hi res on the pono. You don't think they will hear a difference?

Have you ever asked your non-audiophile friends what they actually think about Pono?

Most folks just look for emotions and suitable moods in music, imo. The sound quality has to be good enough to convey them. No more, no less. That's what 99% of the world really cares about.

Most people I know never EVER even realized that Youtube video streams are bit-reduced. They just go for the vibe. Yeah, there is a whole lot going on on a subconscious level, but we aren't psychologists.

Ask your peers after the next movie about the (sound-)quality and the music in general. You might be surprised.

Nothing against Pono in general. I think as computers and storage systems are getting smaller and more transportable this is simply the next logical step to go.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4511
Lives for gear
 
Dpro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I obviously meant people (some in the thread) will conclude if it's worth buying or not. I'm not actually interested in proving the science.
I think in the end we all want to know if it really sounds better. Much to my chagrin it will be hard for me to make that listening event here in Los Angeles due to prior commitments but I will try.
I also think to a certain extent yes the marketing has had some success on a minor scale in the overall big picture.
I just also think the people wanting proof of the science have a very valid claim. Whenever someone makes a broad claim without proof people want proof. Just because you don't and choose to accept Blind Faith does not change that.

This reminds me of the VCR Betamax war turned on its head depending on what side you stand on. In the end the lesser format won out on pricing of course.
It would be ironic if Pono failed to capture the general public overall for similar reasons. If Pono really does sound that much better.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dpro View Post
I just also think the people wanting proof of the science have a very valid claim. Whenever someone makes a broad claim without proof people want proof. Just because you don't and choose to accept Blind Faith does not change that.
You seem to continually project on to me.
I never criticised anyone seeking the scientific proof.
I'm also not accepting anything on blind faith.
I'm just saying people will make their own mind up, more often than not by listening to the product.

Personally, I'm in a middle ground. I probably won't be buying Pono, but there is a slim possibility I might. Why you keep quoting me and commenting as if I'm a full on believer, discrediting those who aren't, is a complete mystery.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4513
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post


You have been reading the rest of the thread?
It's 150+ pages long.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4514
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michael cleary View Post
People will be comparing mp3 on their ipod to hi res on the pono. You don't think they will hear a difference?
the Pono player WILL play mp3's

Quote:
You can play music from any source that is in a compatible format. We currently support FLAC, ALAC, mp3, WAV, AIFF, AAC (unprotected).
you should be able to compare the file formats directly, the only question of course is WILL THEY. The subjectivists seem to have a real problem facing even the possibility of placebo.

you can close your eyes and have your friend switch from the mp3 to the FLAC to the 384k. You will be able to tell which is which by just noticing which ones are 1000 feet underwater-sounding and which ones are like flying on angel's wings

Old 2nd May 2014
  #4515
Lives for gear
 

Old 2nd May 2014
  #4516
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
the Pono player WILL play mp3's



you can close your eyes and have your friend switch from the mp3 to the FLAC to the 384k. You will be able to tell which is which by just noticing which ones are underwater-sounding and which ones are like flying on angel's wings

But supposedly there is a also difference in the pono amp and converters which significantly affects the sound. At least according to the one guy that compared it to an iPod
Inside Neil Young's Crowdfunded Quest To Fix Your Disastrous MP3 Situation ? Co.Labs ? code + community
I quoted the part where he talks about it below.

For comparison's sake, I press pause on the Pono player in the middle of Neil Young's "Heart of Gold" and load up the same song on my iPhone, switching the headphones from jack to jack. Even at Spotify's "extreme" offline quality of 320kbps, the song suddenly feels one-dimensional. Instead of the finely separated mix, the instrumentation and vocals feel packed into a more finite space.

Here's the thing: The Spotify version doesn't sound bad. It's not like the early days of MP3s when the drums sounded warbly and certain tones would be notably absent from familiar songs. "Heart of Gold" on my iPhone sounds perfectly fine, as does the other music I download or stream at a high bit rate.

But Pono does sound different. It surfaces new things to the listener. As many have pointed out, the sound is "warm," not unlike the analog sound of high-quality vinyl. The results will undoubtedly vary from album to album and speaker to speaker, but on the whole it does sound fuller and more pure than the audio files we're used to.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4517
Lives for gear
 

You can't compare a lossless format to a lossy format and be surprised that it sounds better, the questions arise when one lossless format is said to be better than another.

Chris
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4518
Lives for gear
 

Old 2nd May 2014
  #4519
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris93 View Post
You can't compare a lossless format to a lossy format and be surprised that it sounds better, the questions arise when one lossless format is said to be better than another.

Chris
But the point I'm trying to make is, a large market for this is people who only listen to mp3s on their iPod. They should obviously hear a difference from mp3 to hi res, especially if the amp and converters are better than their iPod. Some folks on here are trying to claim people will hear no difference.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4520
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cakewalk View Post
I have but I lost track of the players. I take it you are in the "no audible difference between hi res and mp3" camp?
I'm in the "I can't tell a difference between 320kbps mp3 and 44.1/16 and 96/24 after trying a bunch of a/b/x tests" camp.

I'm also in the "AES testing of 16/44 vs 24/96 vs. DSD showed people couldn't tell the difference" camp.

I'm also in the "maybe some people can tell or maybe there is more to learn... my mind is open" camp.

I'm in more camps than a boy scout troop.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4521
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cakewalk View Post
They should obviously hear a difference from mp3 to hi res, especially if the amp and converters are better than their iPod. Some folks on here are trying to claim people will hear no difference.
I thought there would be a huge difference myself.. then I tested it. Have you thought of taking the pepsi challenge yourself?
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4522
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cakewalk View Post

For comparison's sake, I press pause on the Pono player in the middle of Neil Young's "Heart of Gold" and load up the same song on my iPhone, switching the headphones from jack to jack. Even at Spotify's "extreme" offline quality of 320kbps, the song suddenly feels one-dimensional. Instead of the finely separated mix, the instrumentation and vocals feel packed into a more finite space.
What would be a true test is for you not to know which is which for this comparison. Otherwise you are likely just demonstrating the existence and impact of expectation bias.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4523
Lives for gear
 

I think most of the claims of "there won't be an audible difference" are towards the idea that the extra ultrasonic content not present on a CD will help the sound quality.

I would actually agree that the majority of the public wouldn't notice the difference between 320 and 16/44 unless they were told to listen for it (and then you get into expectation bias), but there is definitely a difference within the audio band whether it's noticed by most or not. I can't reliably tell the difference between 320 and wav unless it's something I'm very familiar with and it's dynamic music with space, reverb tails etc. The fact that there is that difference is enough for me to prefer wav over mp3.

My view is that I absolutely want 16/44.1 rather than lossy anything, but anything more than that is a waste of storage space because it's content I can't hear.

Chris
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4524
Lives for gear
 

Old 2nd May 2014
  #4525
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
I'm in the "I can't tell a difference between 320kbps mp3 and 44.1/16 and 96/24 after trying a bunch of a/b/x tests" camp.

I'm also in the "AES testing of 16/44 vs 24/96 vs. DSD showed people couldn't tell the difference" camp.

I'm also in the "maybe some people can tell or maybe there is more to learn... my mind is open" camp.

I'm in more camps than a boy scout troop.
Lol, at least you are flexible...
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4526
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
What would be a true test is for you not to know which is which for this comparison. Otherwise you are likely just demonstrating the existence and impact of expectation bias.
Sure, but there are two things at work here. How does the pono compare as a media file player and how do the actual files compare to each other. As someone else mentioned it would be interesting to compare the same song at different resolutions on the pono as well as compare the same song on an iPod to the pono.
Old 2nd May 2014
  #4527
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris93 View Post

My view is that I absolutely want 16/44.1 rather than lossy anything, but anything more than that is a waste of storage space because it's content I can't hear.

Chris
But that doesn't take into account the different filter converter technology in the Pono player......you're arguing from the context of a standard converter with brick wall filters.
Old 3rd May 2014
  #4528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris93 View Post

My view is that I absolutely want 16/44.1 rather than lossy anything, but anything more than that is a waste of storage space because it's content I can't hear.
It depends on the cost of storage space too.
I happily use 96khz/24 in my studio because 1TB drives are under $500.
I put Apple Lossless files on my iPod because I didn't need 3000 songs on there. i was happy to fill my iPod with favourite music i would want to listen to when walking the dog, flying somewhere, or sitting in a hotel room with only foreign language content on tv.
Old 3rd May 2014
  #4529
Lives for gear
 
TREMORS's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
It depends on the cost of storage space too.
I happily use 96khz/24 in my studio because 1TB drives are under $500.
I put Apple Lossless files on my iPod because I didn't need 3000 songs on there. i was happy to fill my iPod with favourite music i would want to listen to when walking the dog, flying somewhere, or sitting in a hotel room with only foreign language content on tv.
I dont think the file size on personal storage is much of an issue.
Its downloading it.
Lots of people in the world may have caps or bandwidth limits or limited access that make the quality/cost tradeoffs a bit different.
Old 3rd May 2014
  #4530
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cakewalk View Post
Sure, but there are two things at work here. How does the pono compare as a media file player and how do the actual files compare to each other. As someone else mentioned it would be interesting to compare the same song at different resolutions on the pono as well as compare the same song on an iPod to the pono.
Indeed it would!
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