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 16th March 2014
  #811
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Lehmann View Post

there's probably no need to start a new 'standard' around 20/60k when 24/96k is already quite ubiquitous and surely has enough margin in it to be future-proof and put the discussion to rest?
Actually. CD has been a pretty good standard for the last few decades. Let's stick with that. It's better than what iTunes sells, the radio plays and is as good as 99% of the consumers could ever want.

Then we could go back to creating better content in that container and stop limiting the sh*t out of our masters.

That would actually improve the sonics of the end product and we wouldn't need to lie to our customers.

Deal?

I would honestly love if someone would post a snippet from one of those HD tracks of a popular song (that is produced well) that is sold at 192kHz 24bit and also truncate it down to 44.1kHz 16 bit and upsampled right back to 192kHz 24 bits again.

This way we can hear it for ourselves and we can poll to see who can tell.

I have no doubts about the info from j_j.

I do have doubts about whether it can be discerned in a listening test.
Old 16th March 2014
  #812
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
@Joeq - I think this topic needs a lot more research before any definitive conclusions are made either way.
How much more research would you like? There have been hundreds of studies already done, and all the replicable ones agree on about 20kHz as the upper limit to human hearing. So what do we do, keep on going forever until you get the result you like?

The research that you linked to says nothing about human perception of ultrasonic frequencies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Physiological tests do not need the patient to consciously respond.[3] For example, when performing the brainstem auditory evoked potentials, brainstem responses are measured when a sound is played into their ear.
If any perception was occurring, even subconsciously, would not such a test pick it up? Yet such studies have shown it does not.

Why the obsession with ultrasonics anyway? The tenacity with which some people will keep clinging to the idea that some hypothetical "new" study will find a higher value for human hearing is frankly a bit disturbing to me. You are supposed to do a study to find out what the truth is, not to prove the idea you want it to be!

Quote:
What I'm saying is, when different experiments give you the same result, it is no longer subject to your opinion. -Neil deGrasse Tyson
Old 16th March 2014
  #813
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Sonya View Post
I'm not gonna return fire, sorry to disappoint.

This kind of recidivist intelligence-insulting is really becoming exasperating on this thread. I had to dismiss a dude last night for this kinda thing.
I honestly don't see what is "intelligence-insulting" in questioning the depth of your understanding based on my interpretation of your words on an online board. Seriously.

I know, it couldn't possibly be you don't get it... and it can't possibly be you haven't been clear. Your expectation is it's someone else's fault, and indeed that's how you chalked it up... waitaminute... you see what I did there?

Quote:
That video --- the one that has caused so much nerd rage --- has been tremendously impactful. And I love it for precisely that reason.
It's impactful, that's for sure.

Quote:
So far, Pono has successfully presented a charismatic node of dissent against a society that increasingly treats music and the art and craft of sound as disposable.
OK, but... but... what about when they find they can't really tell the difference? I guess you can count on the same level of sophistication as the audiophiles and their $500 power cables? Is that what you're counting on?

Because as others have said before, you really have one time to get it right... one time to sell them something real. If they feel it IS snake oil, you won't get them to take the real improvement seriously.. if/when it comes. Boy who cried wolf and all that.

They have tried 2-3 times (depending on how you count) since the invention of the CD to get you to re-buy music yet again. SACD/DVD-A and surround. People couldn't hear, or didn't care, about the difference.

I would welcome a new system that treats music with more respect, but hey... for me, this ain't it, because it's built upon a false premise.

Quote:
No other audiophile initiative in my lifetime has had this kind of cultural penetration.
... other than, say the CD.
Old 16th March 2014
  #814
Lives for gear
 
FeatheredSerpent's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
OK, but... but... what about when they find they can't really tell the difference? I guess you can count on the same level of sophistication as the audiophiles and their $500 power cables? Is that what you're counting on?

Because as others have said before, you really have one time to get it right... one time to sell them something real. If they feel it IS snake oil, you won't get them to take the real improvement seriously.. if/when it comes. Boy who cried wolf and all that.

They have tried 2-3 times (depending on how you count) since the invention of the CD to get you to re-buy music yet again. SACD/DVD-A and surround. People couldn't hear, or didn't care, about the difference.

I would welcome a new system that treats music with more respect, but hey... for me, this ain't it, because it's built upon a false premise.
This is important.
It's an opportunity to right a lot of wrongs, but most people are going to be disappointed, unless expectation bias reaches the levels of mass hysteria..

This might be slightly off-topic, but let's not bandy the word 'perception' around like it's something we all have a handle on.
'Perception' and 'scientifically repeatable' are not words that sit together very well, as anyone that has taken mescaline will readily agree with.
Perception is something that touches on different levels of consciousness, and nobody knows enough - nobody - to start stating what is and what isn't perceived or perceivable.

Pretending that you know what depths human perception reaches, based on a few medical studies is ridiculous.

As for studies, here is the one I referred to before:

http://www.tinnitusjournal.com/image...f/v13n1a02.pdf

It is fascinating, that's all I will say about it.
It could be proven right, it could be proven wrong, but this is no hack study - there are serious implications here.
But is it relevant in terms of earbud listeners, at whatever samplerate?
No.
But in the wider scheme of things, these studies should not be sniffed at, and everyone should be keeping an open mind, because nothing has been proven either way - yet.
Old 16th March 2014
  #815
Gear Maniac
 
gavriloP's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
I'm impressed with our ability to create this myth.

I understand you said "if" but isn't it similar to me saying…

I'm not sure how good this unit will sound but if it gets people to buy music again, saves the girl from King Kong, and finally rids my neighborhood of mosquitos, I'm all for it. heh
I wasn't creating any myth. It was only wishful thinking about the future of music mastering. They did it with SACDs and DVD-audio (both being dead systems now and I missed both of them in the first place ). I just really hope I could listen to modern music and enjoy it with my hi-fi system. I'm no audiophile but I hate that limited sound (like most of us I'm sure), it just sounds bad. It really made me mad when I bought stuff like Porcupine tree and it was mastered to abysmal especially when I knew that with those SACDs and such versions they made much better and more dynamic masters.

Thats the only reason I embrace these hi-fidelity digital formats (while knowing CD is enough). The possibility to get better masters.

The most comical thing in modern days is that they are doing more dynamic vinyl masters! If that isn't backwards I don't know what is.

Nowadays with digital delivery it would be so easy to have different mastered versions for different customers.

Sorry for the OT. Perhaps there was just something lost in the translation
Old 16th March 2014
  #816
j_j
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Pretending that you know what depths human perception reaches, based on a few medical studies is ridiculous.
So, then, would you settle for a few thousand, in regard to auditory perception?
Old 16th March 2014
  #817
Lives for gear
 
T'Mershi Duween's Avatar
 

Well played Mr. Gioia, well played...

Kenny, as much as I disagree with you sometimes, I still enjoy a lot of your posts. I just thought that you were being kinda dick-ish and contrarian just for the hell of it.

In fact, you've been much less negative, snarky and sarcastic on this thread lately. I appreciate that. Your insights are much more eloquent and useful when you are being sincere.

(and I tend to be a negative, snarky and sarcastic bastard myself)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Old 16th March 2014
  #818
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween View Post
Well played Mr. Gioia, well played...
I agree. Lovely takedown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween View Post
... you've been much less negative, snarky and sarcastic on this thread lately.
One day I'm sure he'll say the same for you.
Old 16th March 2014
  #819
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by skira View Post
Lovely takedown.

The essence of the thread in one.
Old 16th March 2014
  #820
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
How much more research would you like?
You obviously misunderstand science; there will be many more studies...it will be ongoing. It has nothing to do with what I want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
...There have been hundreds of studies already done, and all the replicable ones agree on about 20kHz as the upper limit to human hearing. So what do we do, keep on going forever until you get the result you like?
...or perhaps demonstrate that hearing and perception of sound is more elaborate than you claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
...The research that you linked to says nothing about human perception of ultrasonic frequencies
...but they do demonstrate that ultrasound, if present, is a component of the process of hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
...If any perception was occurring, even subconsciously, would not such a test pick it up? Yet such studies have shown it does not.
Ultrasonic masker clarifies ultrasonic perception in man
Inaudible High-Frequency Sounds Affect Brain Activity: Hypersonic Effect | Journal of Neurophysiology
A Note on the Audibility of Intense Ultrasonic Sound
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
Why the obsession with ultrasonics anyway?
Obsession or interest? My reading on this topic shows that thought processes involve an ultrasound component - this is why companies patent related technologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
T...he tenacity with which some people will keep clinging to the idea that some hypothetical "new" study will find a higher value for human hearing is frankly a bit disturbing to me.
A well-intentioned and uncorrupted researcher will study a subject in order to advance humankinds understanding...why you would find that disturbing is of little relevance to myself or Pono.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
...You are supposed to do a study to find out what the truth is, not to prove the idea you want it to be!
You have a basic misunderstanding of the scientific method: such a study should primarily set-out to prove the null hypothesis, that is, you try to disprove your theory. If you had done that you would realise that there really isn't enough evidence to make a definitive conclusion either way; which is my point.
Some claim it is impossible to hear components of audio above the recognised human hearing range but scientific papers demonstrate that physiological mechanisms which process ultrasound are a component in human hearing. If the ultrasound component is not present in a test (and the experiment design does not account for this) then the pathways which normally process that information are not engaged.
Old 16th March 2014
  #821
Here for the gear
 

what new in Pono?

allow me to summarize the story of Neil Young's Pono project ;

Neil Young and co. will launch a player that can play flac 24/192 and other formats in late 2014

more than 20 exist on the market today.....

they will eventually also sell tracks and albums in flac 24/192

30-40 or more sell such tracks today....

they have made the most hopeless player which is triangular as a Toblerone , nobody else have done that

you can not change the battery as you can in, eg. mobile phones and since it is a weak part of this kind of equipment, it is not so smart to say the least

so the only " news " is that they got 2 mio USD from a lot of people who think it's a novelty, aided by a lot of journalists who quite uncritically brings the same " news " and helps to hype it

thats no news either but just another example of how no-news spread through the media, social media etc

and almost everybody jump in with both feet , hmm.....
Old 16th March 2014
  #823
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gavriloP View Post
I wasn't creating any myth. It was only wishful thinking about the future of music mastering. They did it with SACDs and DVD-audio (both being dead systems now and I missed both of them in the first place ). I just really hope I could listen to modern music and enjoy it with my hi-fi system. I'm no audiophile but I hate that limited sound (like most of us I'm sure), it just sounds bad. It really made me mad when I bought stuff like Porcupine tree and it was mastered to abysmal especially when I knew that with those SACDs and such versions they made much better and more dynamic masters.

Thats the only reason I embrace these hi-fidelity digital formats (while knowing CD is enough). The possibility to get better masters.

The most comical thing in modern days is that they are doing more dynamic vinyl masters! If that isn't backwards I don't know what is.

Nowadays with digital delivery it would be so easy to have different mastered versions for different customers.

Sorry for the OT. Perhaps there was just something lost in the translation
I understood you perfectly. I said "our" ability to create the myth. I'm just as responsible as anyone in this thread of suggesting it could happen. They just haven't said it. But I wasn't blaming you at all. I'm just surprised by how excited we're all getting about a feature that was never promised.

As far as vinyl, it does make sense not to smash it. It has to be remastered anyway, and there's no "I have to make my record louder than their record" competition.

Thanks
Old 16th March 2014
  #824
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween View Post
I just thought that you were being kinda dick-ish and contrarian just for the hell of it.
It's not for the hell of it. I want to hear people's passionate response.

About the subject matter. It's never personal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween View Post
In fact, you've been much less negative, snarky and sarcastic on this thread lately. I appreciate that. Your insights are much more eloquent and useful when you are being sincere.
I'll work on it.

Enjoy.
Old 16th March 2014
  #825
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Lehmann View Post
JJ appears to be suggesting somewhere around 20/60k as being pretty definitive. . .
"Pretty definitive"? That's an unfortunate choice of words.

Quote:
. . . but perhaps he would agree there's probably no need to start a new 'standard' around 20/60k when 24/96k is already quite ubiquitous and surely has enough margin in it to be future-proof and put the discussion to rest?
The very notion of future-proofing sampling rate and word length is misguided; human hearing is what it is. But if you just can't stand the thought of 16/44.1 and you want ubiquity, then go with 24/48 as our brethren in film have.

Delivery with 96 kHz just doesn't make sense: it doubles the audio bandwidth, which means we get exactly the same amount of music as 44.1 and twice the noise.
Old 16th March 2014
  #826
Lives for gear
 
James Lehmann's Avatar
 

Good article - thanks for linking.

I'm particularly interested in the role played by the record labels, because as the article points out, they hold all the high (res) cards and are the elephants in the room in this entire debate:

"While they [Pono] haven't said anything about it publicly, there's no such thing as a digital music startup for which licensing content is not an ongoing challenge. Those deals with labels will undoubtedly continue to be negotiated over the next few months… To get superior sound, Hamm tells me that they "get the highest quality digital master possible" from the record labels. In many cases, that means they're getting an album at a higher quality than the CD version. But not always. The range of quality is "all over the place" but generally always better than the MP3s and streaming services. Whatever the purest available master happens to be is what they'll sell through the PonoMusic store. Prices will vary depending on record label preferences, but on average they are expected to range from $15 to $24 per album." (http://www.fastcolabs.com/3027720/ne...3-situation/?h)

As explained above, the whole (and hardly new) hi-res enterprise is entirely at the mercy of a few overpaid suits at the big four, and they won't move on any of this unless they see the guarantee of enormous $$$ signs in their eyes. Brace yourself to pay through the nose if you want to "hear what Neil Young hears in the studio", and even then the record companies may never agree to release it in DRM-free FLAC. (Who introduced DRM in the first place? Why, the record companies of course!)

"PonoMusic is more than just a high-resolution music store and player; it is a grassroots movement to keep the heart of music beating" say Neil Young and his buddies. And yet they seem to be content to direct their considerable energies, profile and talents towards telling us that good old 24/96k is a whole new concept in audio, and how cool their 'signature series', high-res iPods sound in a car!

If they really want to start "a grassroots movement to keep the heart of music beating" why are they not talking to us more about organising just such a movement to persuade their lethargic and greedy record companies - who have been ripping us and them off for decades - to release a proper product that was "recorded at a much higher resolution than what you got. You've now purchased the right to recognize the song. But that's about it. What you're missing is the music". Young's words not mine.

To put it another way, what Neil Young is effectively saying here is: "You gave my record company money to have my song, but they didn't give you the music. Please give my record company more money and you can have the music too."

And there's something about that that sticks in my craw.
Old 16th March 2014
  #827
Lives for gear
 
noiseflaw's Avatar
 

It all seems very niche market.

I'm certainly not going to re-pay for my existing libraries to meet the format.

Plus - I'm used to a nice big clear screen to view my product on, etc etc. It will be interesting to see the take up of Pono.
Old 16th March 2014
  #828
Lives for gear
 

Good article. That is the first hands on description of the listening experience from a non celebrity endorsing the product.
Old 16th March 2014
  #829
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michael cleary View Post
Good article. That is the first hands on description of the listening experience from a non celebrity endorsing the product.
I agree. Well done.

One other question. Why is the music going to be $15 - $24?

Why not keep it competitive with iTunes?
Old 16th March 2014
  #830
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by noiseflaw View Post
It all seems very niche market.

I'm certainly not going to re-pay for my existing libraries to meet the format.

Plus - I'm used to a nice big clear screen to view my product on, etc etc. It will be interesting to see the take up of Pono.
If you already have a CD collection you can convert the files to FLAC yourself and have a library of lossless audio files. If you have an MP3 collection well... you're stuck with it. I have never paid for an MP3 because they're not worth money! Sound like ****.
Old 16th March 2014
  #831
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
As for studies, here is the one I referred to before:

http://www.tinnitusjournal.com/image...f/v13n1a02.pdf
you clearly did not read, or at least did not understand this study.

the researchers plainly said the subjects were unaware of the presence of the ultrasound. There was NO PERCEPTION of these frequencies. Only potential damage. Read the study. It does NOT say you "perceive" sound through your eyes.

the study merely shows that ultrasonic sound vibrates through the head - that's all it shows - it is relevant to the subject of tinnitus which is why it was published in a tinnitus journal. It is immaterial to the question of perception because in any situation where you would have sound hitting your eyeballs that sound would normally also hit your ears. Whether it hits your eyeballs or your ears, you still don't react in any way, consciously or subconsciously. You still don't perceive it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone
...but they do demonstrate that ultrasound, if present, is a component of the process of hearing
The humans who hear it are not consciously aware of it, nor does it register with nerve impulses in the brain stem. Nor do they demonstrate a statistical preference for music with (or without) ultrasonic content. No matter what "mechanisms" are "discovered" the result is not going change until humans evolve better ears. Perhaps someday people will splice their babies' genes with those of a bat.

Quote:
If the ultrasound component is not present in a test (and the experiment design does not account for this) then the pathways which normally process that information are not engaged.
But this is exactly the format of many many of the tests made to date. Not just test-tones, but Ultrasonics being included and removed from musical content. Even when asking the participants how it made them "feel" - asking them about their "enjoyment" of the music! Even when hooking the participants up to electrodes implanted in their brain stem! Bupkas.

At any rate, discovery of a 'new mechanism' will not change the upper frequency itself until humans change. You could "find out" that there is a big spring inside the Earth, making it turn around, it would not change the measurement of the length of the day.

Quote:
You have a basic misunderstanding of the scientific method: such a study should primarily set-out to prove the null hypothesis, that is, you try to disprove your theory.
oh please, there is no "theory" involved here, it is a measurement. You are the one with a theory (that humans can magically hear higher than they can hear) and you have no evidence to support your theory.

for my own part, I do not have a theory! I am however willing to accept the results of the many many studies whose measurements all agree and converge upon 20kHz as the upper limit of human hearing. To reject these studies and cling to the hope that some new thing will someday reverse those findings is pure Audio Creationism.

20kHz is not a "theory". It is simply a measurement. Like the distance to the moon. The moon is not going to get any closer if you come up with a new theory about it. Much less because you desperately WANT it to be closer.
Old 16th March 2014
  #832
@joeq - you seem pretty set in your opinion and I've no desire to change that. I've learnt to be open-minded about science and realise that often principles once set-in-stone can change as new understanding develops.

What is certain is that ultrasound plays a role in hearing and thought processes.

So why do people hear a difference with Pono? It could be a placebo effect and it could be argued that even if it is then as long as people enjoy music more then that's a good thing. However, it could be some other factor and IMO that needs to be investigated.

Personally I hear a clear difference between high-quality and lower-quality music and I'm intrigued as to why that is.
Old 16th March 2014
  #833
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philter View Post
If you already have a CD collection you can convert the files to FLAC yourself and have a library of lossless audio files. If you have an MP3 collection well... you're stuck with it. I have never paid for an MP3 because they're not worth money! Sound like ****.
That gives me a great idea. I'm going to write a CD to Pono convertor program to make the task of converting CDs to 192kHz 24bit FLAC files quick and easy.

Then I can finally hear those frequencies I've been missing.
Old 16th March 2014
  #834
Lives for gear
 

How in the world have they already raised almost 4 million dollars? Is the audiophile market really that big? I don't see who else would be in on something like this. Surely your average joe and jane with an iSomething doesn't care at all.
Old 16th March 2014
  #835
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inverted314 View Post
How in the world have they already raised almost 4 million dollars? Is the audiophile market really that big? I don't see who else would be in on something like this. Surely your average joe and jane with an iSomething doesn't care at all.
Take a look at the custom signature players offered by each band participating. 500 units per band @ $400.00 each and most are sold out. It appears to be mostly fans buying these. Quite an ingenious marketing plan and they can just continue to sign up more bands as it gains steam. Listed on the right hand side...
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...iscovers-music
Old 16th March 2014
  #836
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inverted314 View Post
How in the world have they already raised almost 4 million dollars? Is the audiophile market really that big? I don't see who else would be in on something like this. Surely your average joe and jane with an iSomething doesn't care at all.
It is because there is this false music business illusion cloud coloring what people should think about music and coloring what people think that people think about music. For instance there is this idea that people in general cannot here a difference between mp3 and CD. That depends on who you ask. I have asked a lot of persons that question and I have been able to successfully map the answers in such a way that I can understand why they say what they say. It has to do with the persons, the audio is the same. The persons can go from hearing the difference to not hearing the difference and the other way around. All you have to do is to place them in a context with the right conditions for either one of those. So what I came to understand is that this is not a matter where some are born with a special talent that others are without. What has happened during the last year or so is that the conditions in the overall context have shifted in such a way that more people can now hear the difference. It has to do with the fact that major truths are leaking out in the world and people are waking up, this waking up process really is a tuning of truth sensitivity that also applies to all senses.

If you find yourself in the situation that you are frustrated about not hearing a clear difference between mp3 and CD when others can, this is what you should do to make the shift:

Close your eyes. Then think internally the following: Jesus Christ, the unconditional love that you are, is the way the truth and the life, the cosmic truth. I ask you to fill my heart with that kind of love, so that I align to that state of being, let your love flow through me to everyone I meet so that their ears are opened to the truth.
Old 16th March 2014
  #837
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothVibe View Post
It is because there is this false music business illusion cloud coloring what people should think about music and coloring what people think that people think about music. For instance there is this idea that people in general cannot here a difference between mp3 and CD. That depends on who you ask. I have asked a lot of persons that question and I have been able to successfully map the answers in such a way that I can understand why they say what they say. It has to do with the persons, the audio is the same. The persons can go from hearing the difference to not hearing the difference and the other way around. All you have to do is to place them in a context with the right conditions for either one of those. So what I came to understand is that this is not a matter where some are born with a special talent that others are without. What has happened during the last year or so is that the conditions in the overall context have shifted in such a way that more people can now hear the difference. It has to do with the fact that major truths are leaking out in the world and people are waking up, this waking up process really is a tuning of truth sensitivity that also applies to all senses.

Evolution.
Old 16th March 2014
  #838
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
@joeq - you seem pretty set in your opinion and I've no desire to change that. I've learnt to be open-minded about science and realise that often principles once set-in-stone can change as new understanding develops.
These are results, not "principles". Principles it is true, may change, but measurements will not. Einstein has superseded Newton - but objects still fall at 32 ft/second per second. To reject those measurements that do not fit into your pre-conceived principles is not only unscientific, it is anti-scientific. Audio Creationism.

I do not have an "opinion". Rather, I have accepted the results of scientific measurement. Many scientific measurements - ranging from touchy-feely questionnaires, to electrodes implanted in the brain and everything in between.

Quote:
What is certain is that ultrasound plays a role in hearing and thought processes.
Get back to us when you have scientific measurements of human perception that support your certainty.
Old 16th March 2014
  #839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inverted314 View Post
How in the world have they already raised almost 4 million dollars? Is the audiophile market really that big? I don't see who else would be in on something like this. Surely your average joe and jane with an iSomething doesn't care at all.
I'm trying to stay out of this thread, as... well... nothing is being accomplished except a lot of folks are revealing how profoundly incapable of rational, critical thinking they are.


But I will say this, 4 million dollars is chump change when we're talking about company startups. This rents the garage, as they say.

But this -- as a number of Kickstarter 'activists' and others have pointed out -- is not a 'real' kickstarter use -- it is established business entities coming in, setting a super low 'goal ($800K, which is virtually nothing in terms of manufacturing company startup costs) in order -- in the thinking of these critics -- to create an artificial 'overnight success' -- basically the criticism is that established business interests are using Kickstarter as a form of 'guerilla marketing.'
Old 16th March 2014
  #840
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothVibe View Post
For instance there is this idea that people in general cannot here a difference between mp3 and CD. That depends on who you ask. I have asked a lot of persons that question and I have been able to successfully map the answers in such a way that I can understand why they say what they say. It has to do with the persons, the audio is the same.
See, back to confirmation bias. That's why I questioned your understanding. Lots of people *think* they can hear a difference, but that doesn't mean they really can.

I think it IS possible to hear the difference BTW, I have done it, but it takes learning over time, and it's easiest with certain recordings.

We come back to the same place ultimately... if some people can and some people can't tell the difference, and you have to learn to hear the difference, then the difference is not "night and day." Thus even going from MP3 to 24/192 will not "blow away" anyone unless they are experiencing confirmation bias.

This is why I think it's a mistake. People will figure out the emperor is naked, and you've lost an opportunity you may not get again.

I really think they should have waited until DSD was possible/affordable enough.
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