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 14th March 2014
  #541
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
How does that even make any sense to you?

They spend their lives recording finished masters in top studios yet a $400 triangle sounds as good or better?
But it makes more sense to you that they're all liars?
Look how our world views shine through our opinions...
Don't make me do it....
Old 14th March 2014
  #542
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
But it makes more sense to you that they're all liars?
Look how our world views shine through our opinions...
Don't make me do it....
We all make our own world which we get to live in. I sure wouldn't want to live in that one.
Old 15th March 2014
  #543
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
We all make our own world which we get to live in. I sure wouldn't want to live in that one.
Truth.
Old 15th March 2014
  #544
Gear Addict
 
czoli's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
But as engineers, many of don't think using high res audio is that answer.

Do we make judgements based on intentions or based on what results will be revealed?

The loudness war combined with digital is the biggest problem in our industry. Modern pop tracks have a dynamic range of 1 or 2 dB. So we add a format that can take advantage of more dynamic range while send it the same 1 to 2dB of dynamic range.

Allow me to make an analogy. Let's say you lived in a country that had a huge healthcare problem. Costs are thru the roof and every family was one illness away from bankruptcy. And we had a leader who passed legislation that fixed this system by doing everything BUT, controlling costs. Sound like a good idea?
Kenny Gioia is right. The loudness war is a big problem. The second but bigger problem imho is about 1/2 the world uses Apple stock ear buds.
Old 15th March 2014
  #545
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
How come you get it and he don't?????.
It is clear by everything you posted that you are a convert. Why Karloff doesn't see it is beyond me...

Alistair
Old 15th March 2014
  #546
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Frustration from other's stupidity.

As if to say "do I really have to explain this?"

"Why can't everyone be smart like me?"
Old 15th March 2014
  #547
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Let me clear it up for you...
I AM a convert and proponent of Hi Res audio.
Just curious, which consumer Hi-Res audio formats do you currently listen to?
Do you have a DVD-A player? SACD? Do you buy stuff from HD Tracks? Got the Liztic Player?

When did you convert? Was it in 2000 when these Hi-Res formats came out? In 2008 when HD Tracks was launched? Or was it when you watched this video two days ago?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
"The world is flat".
At one point that was a fact, until we learned more.


nope, sorry. No scientist ever said the world was flat
the idea of a flat Earth is Pre-Science
every scientific "revolution" has built upon what went before - not "reversed" it.

case in point: Einstein may have "superseded" Newton for things going near the speed of light or next door to a neutron star, but Newton's equations still work. They did not become "wrong" the way the Earth became a sphere. They still work well enough to drop an ICBM on your head from 3,400 miles away.

what a measure of your desperation... that you now have to argue against science itself -like a Creationist- merely in order to justify your belief in the "magic" claimed for the product!
Old 15th March 2014
  #548
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
This entire thread is cognitive bias...
I'll let that just stand for a moment...

The only "cognitive bias" in this thread is, IMHO, those who say they are CERTAIN there is a difference AND they have not done a blind test.

I know you are being flippant and "cool".. but remaining ignorant is your choice.. a foolish choice IMHO.

Oh and for the record.. "the world was flat" was never a FACT. A fact is something that is proven. Obviously the world was never proven to be flat. Please understand the difference between fact and belief.
Old 15th March 2014
  #549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
Let's introduce a few points:
1/ CD and mp3 quality was based on the available technology/logistics of the time (although some people disagreed with that standard).
2/ Some people (listeners/musicians/producers) think CD/mp3 quality is good enough for the enjoyment of music - some people think higher-quality would provide a better experience of music.
3/ Technological capability/logistics has advanced since CD's/mp3's were introduced.
4/ Most products need to be advertised/hyped to raise awareness about their existence and promote sales and that doesn't necessarily have a bearing on their value.

Based on the points above I have a question: if current music formats/equipment are based on out-dated technology is it not reasonable to make advances and make available higher-quality products to those who think/believe/know that this will make a difference to their enjoyment and appreciation of music (given that those who do not discern any appreciable improvement can choose not to purchase/use that technology)?

I won't be offended if anyone disagrees with the premise- I'm just putting the question out there for discussion.
I would say that the limitations in stereo recordings vs. concert hall are not about bit depth or sample rate.

I will side with Kenny and admit that I can't hear the difference between my 24-bit mixes and the 16-bit mixdowns.

I suspect I could train myself to hear the differences between those 24-bit mixes and the 16-bit mixdowns if it were the least bit important. As theblue says, you can focus on reverb tails at high volumes. For sure, recording has to be at 24-bit to lower the noise floor.

I also admit that I can't hear the difference between that 16-bit mixdown and a 320kbs MP3. It might be night and day for many here, but you guys should admit you're listening for clues. Not the material. I think I could train myself to listen to the clues too.

But there were night and day changes in our time. Cassette copies of LP's were horrible, and none of us who made them would deny that. FM radio wasn't close to an LP. CD's were controversial because they extended the frequency range and lowered the noise floor considerably, opening up possibilities that vinyl didn't offer. So they sounded different, and maybe they weren't mixed optimally at first. But digital is different, and actually offers more possibilities. If you would like your digital to sound exactly like an LP, all you have to do is record your LP. It makes no sense to compare the original LP to the digital remaster because they changed the digital remaster.

We're not listening to digital in any situation; we're listening to analog produced by the converters. And I do believe, based on experience, that digital recording from analog sources, and conversion back to analog output, is perfect, as far as the limits of our hearing frequency range is concerned. For sure this was not the case in the beginning, and I'm not talking about any MP3 data compression here. Now, MP3's, yes indeed, there are compromises that we can hear. 128-bit isn't good enough. But 320, well I say it is. But as others have pointed out, not worth arguing; FLAC is fine with me; we have the disk space and the streaming capability. (but it's so much better than FM was even in the old days before they were broadcasting MP3's).

Now that is not to say that there is not a night and day difference between live music and recordings; rather that this discussion has nothing to do with that difference. Do this: listen to Rite Of Spring on your best home stereo just before you go to hear the NY Phil play it. If you don't think that is night and day, well why are you here at Gearslutz, to quote someone earlier?

What's different? Reflections, hall, performance dynamics, stuff beyond my stereo mixdown knowledge. But for sure, it's not 192 vs. 44.1. I think there are people at work to capture that audible difference, but they are not working on sample rate or depth; rather they are working on speaker placement and room response.

Modern rock and its derivatives are based on two speakers, but a concert hall is not.

OK, what did I just say, in short? Sample rate - not very important any more. Bit depth - not really a factor in a mixdown. Hall? The next frontier.
Old 15th March 2014
  #550
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
It is clear by everything you posted that you are a convert. Why Karloff doesn't see it is beyond me...

Alistair
I'll say it again...
I AM a convert of high res audio.
I have many high res audio playback devices and I'm a big fan.
I can't be a convert of the benefits of PONO, because I haven't heard it yet.
I ordered one, so perhaps I'll be converted when I hear it.
Check back with me in October.
Does that help?
Old 15th March 2014
  #551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
I appreciate your reasonability...
Thanks for your response (and previous responses) Kenny - much appreciated! I will respond in full tomorrow. Duty calls for now.
@Early21 - thanks too. Tomorrow :-)
Old 15th March 2014
  #552
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
Just curious, which consumer Hi-Res audio formats do you currently listen to?
Do you have a DVD-A player? SACD? Do you buy stuff from HD Tracks? Got the Liztic Player?

When did you convert? Was it in 2000 when these Hi-Res formats came out? In 2008 when HD Tracks was launched? Or was it when you watched this video two days ago?





nope, sorry. No scientist ever said the world was flat
the idea of a flat Earth is Pre-Science
every scientific "revolution" has built upon what went before - not "reversed" it.

case in point: Einstein may have "superseded" Newton for things going near the speed of light or next door to a neutron star, but Newton's equations still work. They did not become "wrong" the way the Earth became a sphere. They still work well enough to drop an ICBM on your head from 3,400 miles away.

what a measure of your desperation... that you now have to argue against science itself -like a Creationist- merely in order to justify your belief in the "magic" claimed for the product!
Already answered...
Old 15th March 2014
  #553
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
It is clear by everything you posted that you are a convert. Why Karloff doesn't see it is beyond me...

Alistair
Let me help you then. It's because I don't project automatically that things might be religious just because someone chooses to focus on the other side of the same tree.
Old 15th March 2014
  #554
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
But it makes more sense to you that they're all liars?
Look how our world views shine through our opinions...
Don't make me do it....
You are just being the jester now. Why? Is it fun?

They are not all liars. As I said, it's either:

- cognitive bias
- a different master
- or they are being nice to Neil because they respect him as a human

There is one other possibility, but it's the slightest.

- they can all hear something nobody in the rest of the world has been able to hear

It's possible. Highly improbable. If I THOUGHT I heard it, I would test myself to eliminate cognitive bias... oh wait, I already did that. I failed the test.

Maybe they all have much better hearing than I, after all their years of touring and loud music?
Old 15th March 2014
  #555
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
You are just being the jester now. Why? Is it fun?

They are not all liars. As I said, it's either:

- cognitive bias
- a different master
- or they are being nice to Neil because they respect him as a human

There is one other possibility, but it's the slightest.

- they can all hear something nobody in the rest of the world has been able to hear

It's possible. Highly improbable. If I THOUGHT I heard it, I would test myself to eliminate cognitive bias... oh wait, I already did that. I failed the test.

Maybe they all have much better hearing than I, after all their years of touring and loud music?
I was responding to Mr. Gioia..
You don't know if it's cognitive bias..
A different master..
Or they are being nice to Neil...
Those things are in your imagination.
That doesn't make them real.
Old 15th March 2014
  #556
Lives for gear
 
FeatheredSerpent's Avatar
 

Nearly 3 and a half million raised with about a month left to go.
They're definitely hitting a nerve.

As a relative layman, there's a few interesting things about this.

First it seems like the kind of marketing that only really appealed to pro and home studio enthusiasts is really working in the mainstream - the whole 'this tech is going to make the sound seem like it was sung into your ear by a nymph that simultaneously licks your earlobes' kind of thing.

So music production has found a place in the consumer psyche the way that DJs did in the late 90's early 00's.
This is a good thing, I think.

But as mentioned above, the loudness war and the resulting quality of final output really ruins it.
And by the way, when everybody in the trade seems to have finally agreed that 2dB or even 6dB of dynamic range is not a good thing in general, why does it continue? What is the magic first step to reverse this process? Who has to take that step for all others to follow. Don't you guys have a union or something that can make the call and bring some sanity back?
I know it's not that simple, but seriously, it's time to end this madness.

Staying with quality of final output, these players and any other player with decent conversion are absolutely meaningless for as long as people still use earbuds or crappy headphones for listening. I'm sure the trend is growing for consumers using better headphones, but many people have never heard music on anything other than these or relatively poor quality speakers.
They are probably expecting that a Pono will break through all these obstacles and deliver god-like sound. Shame.
Someone that has a newish HTC phone for example with a decent (£80+) pair of headphones will have a better listening experience with a 320kbps mp3 than someone using a Pono with 24/96 files and in-ear or sub-par headphones.

Maybe the people that buy these players will have the wherewithall to buy decent headphones to match with it. You'd hope so.

And re higher sample rates - there was a post somewhere on GS recently that linked to a fairly cutting edge study that showed that we do in fact perceive ultrasonic frequencies, and that they do enhance our perception of music, but frequencies in the range from around 20KHz to 60KHz are not capable of being transmitted to the brain via our ears, but in fact are transmitted through our eyes.

That is quite a revelation. And of course, renders headphones useless in terms of getting that added value anyway.
Old 15th March 2014
  #557
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Correct. But if it's incorrect, than we have a situation where dozens of audio professionals have discovered what already exists and lost their mind about how amazing it is which is something that has never happened anywhere else before.

I've never seen anyone freak out like that over higher sample rates. Yet all of them do. Hmmm.
But that is your opinion based on a video you saw.
Do you refuse to believe that any of them are sincere?
Really.. Any of them?
Old 15th March 2014
  #558
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
I was responding to Mr. Gioia..
But you ignored my valid argument. Why?

Whether there is a difference between CD and 192/24 is not an emotional question. It's easily measurable using equipment you may already have.

Knowing what do (or should) know about cognitive bias... try it yourself. Try and hear the difference. It's the only way to truly judge for yourself. I'm sure you also understand moving your head just an inch in any direction can drastically change the sound of a recording as you experience comb filtering/etc.

But as been said before... if it's all about creating nicer masters, we're all in. You don't need 24/96 there either... but that's OK.
Old 15th March 2014
  #559
Lives for gear
 
tekis's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
We don't know the bit rate of the MP3s. Are the MP3s being played back by Pono or iTunes (as iTunes is mentioned)? If it is iTunes, what are the settings? (The default settings affect the sound). What is playing the "CD"? Is there any sound enhancement being performed by the Pono player? Etc. Etc.

And as someone else pointed out, are they actually listening to the same versions of the tracks (excluding the Pono and encoding aspects)? Are they even listening to the same tracks?

If you have any experience with how videos, TV shows or films are made you would know that it is very easy to pull quotes out of context.

So I repeat: We do not know what they are listening to. But feel free to believe any and all marketing videos you see if that works for you...

Alistair
Yes, technically we don't know those variables, but I trust Neil Young. I can't see him "stacking the deck." He's above that. He heard/is hearing a difference, and he's standing by that. I think Jack White and Justin Meldal-Johnsen have integrity too. I'm sure they checked that things were level matched and "what is what." Those two are very close to the whole recording process. No one could get away with a deception on this level. Thurston Moore told me that when Sonic Youth opened for Neil Young, Neil's engineer mixed them quieter. When Neil found out, he was angered and set things straight. This guy's in our corner. I guess it's only fair to be devil's advocate and all that but calling Neil Young a liar? Really. I can't see it.
Old 15th March 2014
  #560
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
I'm suggesting the great minds of the world didn't follow the rules.
Empirical evidence and proven theory are not rules. Of course they "followed" them, it's not like anyone gets to decide what's real and what isn't. Get 100 people in a room and let them blindly A/B different file formats... if no one can tell the difference more often than chance would predict, then that's a reliable data point that pretty much throws cold water on the whole thing. I think a telltale sign of a great mind is a willingness to follow where the evidence leads you, even if it is contrary to your own biases.
Old 15th March 2014
  #561
Lives for gear
 
Silver Sonya's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Correct. But if it's incorrect, than we have a situation where dozens of audio professionals have discovered what already exists and lost their mind about how amazing it is which is something that has never happened anywhere else before.

I've never seen anyone freak out like that over higher sample rates. Yet all of them do. Hmmm.
Again: speculation and bias, not science. Just because it's cynical speculation does not make it credible.

- c
Old 15th March 2014
  #562
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
But that is your opinion based on a video you saw.
Do you refuse to believe that any of them are sincere?
Really.. Any of them?
Sincere and insincere are not the only possible outcomes. How about self-deluded? Every person I have ever gotten to know has displayed some degree of self-delusion. I get self-deluded often enough when I'm tweaking an e.q. on a channel I'm not monitoring and believing I'm hearing a difference. Who knows what these people are hearing? And the problem is compounded by the fact that every single one of the recording artists on that list stands to gain financially if people start buying old crap in a new format.

Oh and I like Neil Young. Been a fan since I was a kid. But take his word on something like sample rates and bit depth? No.

Quote:
Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard. The authors report on a series of double-blind tests comparing the analog output of high-resolution players playing high-resolution recordings with the same signal passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz "bottleneck." The tests were conducted for over a year using different systems and a variety of subjects. The systems included expensive professional monitors and one high-end system with electrostatic loudspeakers and expensive components and cables. The subjects included professional recording engineers, students in a university recording program, and dedicated audiophiles. The test results show that the CD-quality A/D/A loop was undetectable at normal-to-loud listening levels, by any of the subjects, on any of the playback systems. The noise of the CD-quality loop was audible only at very elevated levels.
Quote:
The test results for the detectability of the 16/44.1 loop on SACD/DVD-A playback were the same as chance: 49.82%. There were 554 trials and 276 correct answers. The sole exceptions were for the condition of no signal and high system gain, when the difference in noise floors of the two technologies, old and new, was readily audible.

Audibility of a CD-Standard A/D/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback". E. Brad Meyer and David R. Moran. JAES 55(9) September 2007.
Old 15th March 2014
  #563
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
It's because I don't project automatically that things might be religious just because someone chooses to focus on the other side of the same tree.
I don't need to project. The guy has three pages of posts in this thread...

Alistair
Old 15th March 2014
  #564
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
But you ignored my valid argument. Why?

Whether there is a difference between CD and 192/24 is not an emotional question. It's easily measurable using equipment you may already have.

Knowing what do (or should) know about cognitive bias... try it yourself. Try and hear the difference. It's the only way to truly judge for yourself. I'm sure you also understand moving your head just an inch in any direction can drastically change the sound of a recording as you experience comb filtering/etc.

But as been said before... if it's all about creating nicer masters, we're all in. You don't need 24/96 there either... but that's OK.
I did not ignore your argument.
You snipped out my response when you quoted one line only from my response.
There's is a difference to me..
I do it every day.
Look at my signature.
Go to iTunes and listen to the previews of my album.
Mastered in 24/192... Bounced down to iTunes distribution format.
I sent in 16/44.1 to iTunes src'd down from 24/192...
Believe me...I can tell the difference.
Old 15th March 2014
  #565
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by tekis View Post
Yes, technically we don't know those variables, but I trust Neil Young. I can't see him "stacking the deck." He's above that. He heard/is hearing a difference, and he's standing by that. I think Jack White and Justin Meldal-Johnsen have integrity too. I'm sure they checked that things were level matched and "what is what." Those two are very close to the whole recording process. No one could get away with a deception on this level. Thurston Moore told me that when Sonic Youth opened for Neil Young, Neil's engineer mixed them quieter. When Neil found out, he was angered and set things straight. This guy's in our corner. I guess it's only fair to be devil's advocate and all that but calling Neil Young a liar? Really. I can't see it.
I'm not calling him a liar. I am suggesting he is human. Also, I trust his musical abilities and taste but after 50 years of gigging and him being close to 70, I don't really trust his hearing that much.

I see an iPad or whatever in the car and I would not be surprised if they are comparing two different devices in their listening tests. Also, Neil Young isn't exactly a scientist or anything. So many people manage to fool themselves and others with all sorts of placebo and expectation bias. Again, the guy is human and this is a marketing video.

I will be interested in checking out the Pono device once it hits the market but that video really is a lot of hype.

Alistair
Old 15th March 2014
  #566
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
With extraordinarily few exceptions, no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat.
At that point in history, what percentage of the worlds population was well educated?
Old 15th March 2014
  #567
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by tekis View Post
Yes, technically we don't know those variables, but I trust Neil Young. I can't see him "stacking the deck." He's above that. He heard/is hearing a difference, and he's standing by that. I think Jack White and Justin Meldal-Johnsen have integrity too. I'm sure they checked that things were level matched and "what is what." Those two are very close to the whole recording process. No one could get away with a deception on this level. Thurston Moore told me that when Sonic Youth opened for Neil Young, Neil's engineer mixed them quieter. When Neil found out, he was angered and set things straight. This guy's in our corner. I guess it's only fair to be devil's advocate and all that but calling Neil Young a liar? Really. I can't see it.
Old 15th March 2014
  #568
Lives for gear
 

On right material i tend to think 24/96 or is a meaningful improvement over CD, but what annoys me re: Pono is there is no mention of aggressive limiting/clipping.

It seems pretty ironic to have the foo fighters and mettalica championing hi-fi sound when they have put out such smashed albums of late.
Clipping to -4 RMS is surey a bigger deal in terms of degrading audio quality versus a well encoded compressed file conversion of a clean dynamic master.

It would be great if Pono could have teamed up with the "turn it up" movement or similar, so that pono store users knew they were getting a hi-res file that was mastered for listening pleasure and not competitive loudness. Seem like a wasted opportunity to me.

Anyway..

I find myself wanting one - i'm sure it's an awesome sounding piece of gear. Given how many they are going to sell i would imagine economies of scale mean it's going to outperform quite a bit of of semi-pro/ pro hardwear in terms of conversion and the HP amp.

What would be awesome is if it could serve as a class compliant USB interface as well as a portable player.
Old 15th March 2014
  #569
Lives for gear
 
Silver Sonya's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
I will be interested in checking out the Pono device once it hits the market but that video really is a lot of hype.
You are to be commended, sir, for astutely noting that a promotional Kickstarter video is indeed attempting to promote the product.

- c
Old 15th March 2014
  #570
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philter View Post
Sincere and insincere are not the only possible outcomes. How about self-deluded? Every person I have ever gotten to know has displayed some degree of self-delusion. I get self-deluded often enough when I'm tweaking an e.q. on a channel I'm not monitoring and believing I'm hearing a difference. Who knows what these people are hearing? And the problem is compounded by the fact that every single one of the recording artists on that list stands to gain financially if people start buying old crap in a new format.

Oh and I like Neil Young. Been a fan since I was a kid. But take his word on something like sample rates and bit depth? No.






Audibility of a CD-Standard A/D/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback". E. Brad Meyer and David R. Moran. JAES 55(9) September 2007.
So I have to ask, are you implying that Neil Young got each one of these people to lie, exaggerate, or even misrepresent how they feel about PONO's sound quality, so that they can all make more money?
Or that maybe they even all are self- deluded?
All of them?
Am I understanding you clearly?
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