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 20th March 2014
  #1201
Lives for gear
 
James Lehmann's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Nowhere in that article does it say that the labels have already recouped their remastering costs. You just made that up.
You are quite correct to draw attention to the 'made-up' nature of the statements above.

The wording I used in the post you quoted was: "most record labels have already absorbed the (relatively low) costs of re-compiling their back-catalogues in HD format, principally as a means of archiving their crumbling libraries of 2-track tapes".

I'll leave it to other folks here to determine which of us ought to be considering a career-change to authoring fiction.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1202
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Lehmann View Post
You are of course quite correct to draw attention to the 'made-up' nature of the statements above.

The wording I used in the post you quoted was: "most record labels have already absorbed the (relatively low) costs of re-compiling their back-catalogues in HD format, principally as a means of archiving their crumbling libraries of 2-track tapes".

Perhaps other folks here can suggest which of us ought to be considering a career-change to authoring fiction?
And the difference in absorbing and recouping in this context is.....
How clever to ignore the main point of both posts! (The expense of hi res vs. lo res)
Which is the question YOU asked in the first place!
Old 20th March 2014
  #1203
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I remember buying an album on the strength of a couple of singles. At first you mainly loved the singles and found it hard to like some of the other songs. Often what I found after say six months was I'd grown bored of the singles and a couple of songs I initially didn't like had grown on me
yeah, that happens. but it's certainly not the norm. most albums don't get listened to beginning to end more than a few times

Quote:
It's the difference between instant gratification and learning to love something. Single song purchases are based on instant gratification, and often a 30sec to 1 minute demo.
just instant gratification? i would say that our fave songs (the ones we love) hit us on the first listen. other songs may grow on you, but i bet few of those are on our personal top 100 list
Old 20th March 2014
  #1204
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
Of course there is virtue in the album format.

I prefer listening to full albums, but not because of "virtue.".
hmmm...

ok
Old 20th March 2014
  #1205
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyWithAnAvatarThatShowsHisIntelligence View Post
And the difference in absorbing and recouping in this context is.....
The difference is that it means something different.

The cost of digitizing their aging tape masters is just a business cost that they couldn't avoid if they wanted to keep access to the masters. (Regardless of the sample rate and bit depth used to digitize those masters).

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyWithAnAvatarThatShowsHisIntelligence View Post
If a current album in AAC (iTunes) format is approx. 300 mb to download and the same album in 24/192 is 1.33 GB to download from PONO, you can't see the difference in cost (servers, bandwidth) there would be to supply 24/192 to the entire planet as compared to AAC?
Really?
An extra gb of data per album millions of times a day for hi res downloads?
How much does that cost?
Not much. Certainly not as much as the extra cost for Hysterical-Rez versions mentioned about the Pono store.

Alistair
Old 20th March 2014
  #1206
Gear Maniac
 
gavriloP's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.R View Post
says who?

i don't think Schubert was "aiming for a hit" every time he wrote a song
That is something completely different and irrelevant. I was talking in the context of popular recorded music. We can leave classical aside as it is totally different thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.R View Post
Bohemian rhapsody was one of the biggest hit singles in the history of pop music
Well of course it was, I mentioned it exactly because of that. It is perhaps the biggest anomaly in single history. However as a part of an album that kind of song isn't so unique. It is the fact that they published "an album song" as a single that makes it special.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.R View Post
with digital, artists now have infinite room for art without feeling confined to the album format
Yeah, if we only think about the cost. I was talking about the songs themselves. You can take many single songs from Steven Sufjan's Illinois album but only the whole thing as a whole makes it a masterpiece IMHO, naturally. Usually you don't do singles with two minute intros etc. You could, but people won't probably listen to it. At least not as easily as when that kind of songs are part of a bigger picture.

But I think this is little OT. Sorry for that.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1207
Gear Maniac
 
gavriloP's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.R View Post
yeah, that happens. but it's certainly not the norm. most albums don't get listened to beginning to end more than a few times
You assume an awful lot. Of course people listen to albums. The only stuff that I might skip are useless bonus tracks on some CDs but all in all I've been listening albums all my life. And I'm not alone, I'm sure of it. Then again there are some crappy albums that actually do have only couple of good songs, but I personally don't usually listen them at all. That is, if those albums don't grow on me after few tries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.R View Post
just instant gratification? i would say that our fave songs (the ones we love) hit us on the first listen. other songs may grow on you, but i bet few of those are on our personal top 100 list
No correlation there. Our fave songs are our fave songs and the reason they are that varies. Some of them were instant hits, some of them grew on you and some of them just invoke good memories. But this is all personal and it is clear we experience these things differently. You want single songs that move you and don't like to "invest" in album listening and for me it is other way around. Both views are valid but not the norm. Well, like I said I do like singles too but you know why can't we have both in this glorious empowering digital age?
Old 20th March 2014
  #1208
I have had 1 thing cleared up that I just didnt get before...
I was under the impression that everything was gona be remastered to 24/192 and then argued its not gona be much better really.
Then I realised what Pono are doing is simple, they are a store that sells an exact lossless quality of what ever the master is, if they are given a 16bit master from the record company then its a lossless version of that, if they are given a 24/192 master then it will be a lossless version of that, the argument still stands that this is already available.
So it will be the best quality version thats humanly availabe , and then a pono player that will probly sound alot better than most peoples general PORTABLE digital media players. Thats about it
Old 20th March 2014
  #1209
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dabigfrog View Post
new vinyl records cost 24.99-34.99 and up.... Pono music seems to fall in this slot... Pono is portable vinyl in digital format.
It's not comparable.

Vinyl is not very popular so they're not printing hundreds of thousands anymore.

It's a niche product. It needs to be re-mastered for vinyl along with a whole bunch of other stuff that comes with making a physical product.

What are the additional costs associated with NOT dithering a 24 bit 192kHz file down to mp3?
Old 20th March 2014
  #1210
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I'm not particularly arguing for the album, but yes I think it had positives that have been lost.
I remember buying an album on the strength of a couple of singles. At first you mainly loved the singles and found it hard to like some of the other songs. Often what I found after say six months was I'd grown bored of the singles and a couple of songs I initially didn't like had grown on me, and they've often been the songs that have stayed with me years later. It's the difference between instant gratification and learning to love something.
Single song purchases are based on instant gratification, and often a 30sec to 1 minute demo. You never get to hear, let alone have to work to like, the deeper more difficult songs.
That's a loss to the audience and a loss to our industry/art form.
That's the problem with popular music in a nutshell.

Creating a song that is interesting and different while getting people to like it in 30 seconds or less.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1211
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Nowhere in that article does it say that the labels have already recouped their remastering costs. You just made that up.
He said "absorbed". Which means they already agreed to pay for it before Pono.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
If a current album in AAC (iTunes) format is approx. 300 mb to download and the same album in 24/192 is 1.33 GB to download from PONO, you can't see the difference in cost (servers, bandwidth) there would be to supply 24/192 to the entire planet as compared to AAC?
Really?
An extra gb of data per album millions of times a day for hi res downloads?
How much does that cost?
So the music has no value? We're paying for download bandwidth?

You do realize I can delete my entire iTunes library (about 3000 songs) and re-download it for free? Everyday.

Maybe we should do that to protest the extra charge for high res.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1212
Lives for gear
 
Salty James's Avatar
16 bit is a joke.
I am hardly surprised that some people are bashing it. Negative haters don't want anyone getting ahead if they can't.

Wanna REALLY hear 44/16 sound bad compared to 96/24 or better? Record sustained / driven tones like a Hammond with a piano etc. With ANY mp3 you will hear loss. With 44/16 it will simply sound weaker.

A 5 year old can hear it.

Haters best chill..
Old 20th March 2014
  #1213
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
And the difference in absorbing and recouping in this context is.....
How clever to ignore the main point of both posts! (The expense of hi res vs. lo res)
Which is the question YOU asked in the first place!
The difference is inconsequential on this scale and certainly not on par with the price difference.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1214
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by andypick68 View Post
I have had 1 thing cleared up that I just didnt get before...
I was under the impression that everything was gona be remastered to 24/192 and then argued its not gona be much better really.
Then I realised what Pono are doing is simple, they are a store that sells an exact lossless quality of what ever the master is, if they are given a 16bit master from the record company then its a lossless version of that, if they are given a 24/192 master then it will be a lossless version of that, the argument still stands that this is already available.
So it will be the best quality version thats humanly availabe , and then a pono player that will probly sound alot better than most peoples general PORTABLE digital media players. Thats about it
Yes. But who knows where that file started?

I mix in 24 bit 44.1kHz but last year I was given a record to mix that was recorded 16 bit 44.1kHz.

I up sampled it to 24 bits for the mix because it should sound better to process at 24 bit. I then sent 24 bit 44.1kHz masters to the mastering engineer.

He might be using an analog chain (maybe he ran it thru analog tape) that requires an AD at the end of it. For quality purposes, he might run that at 192kHz to preserve all the processing that he did.

So the final file is now 192kHz 24 bit. Is that worth paying for?
Old 20th March 2014
  #1215
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salty James View Post
16 bit is a joke.
I am hardly surprised that some people are bashing it. Negative haters don't want anyone getting ahead if they can't.
I almost spit out my coffee. heh

If they can't?

Yes. I'm still using a Pro Tools NuBus system that only goes to 16 bit. I hate that some of you are all fancy with your 24 bit systems. I feel left behind.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Salty James View Post

A 5 year old can hear it.

Haters best chill..
That would explain that $400 charge on my credit card form Pono Music.

Little Billy stole my wallet again.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1216
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salty James View Post
16 bit is a joke.
I am hardly surprised that some people are bashing it. Negative haters don't want anyone getting ahead if they can't.

Wanna REALLY hear 44/16 sound bad compared to 96/24 or better? Record sustained / driven tones like a Hammond with a piano etc. With ANY mp3 you will hear loss. With 44/16 it will simply sound weaker.

A 5 year old can hear it.

Haters best chill..
Salty hits the ring strong, with his chest out.... Love it. Not arguing.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1217
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
last year I was given a record to mix that was recorded 16 bit 44.1kHz.

I up sampled it to 24 bits for the mix because it should sound better to process at 24 bit.
The DAW does that automatically for you.

Alistair
Old 20th March 2014
  #1218
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
The DAW does that automatically for you.

Alistair
But what about the final mix?

It's not going to output a 24 bit mix from a 16 bit session is it?

Or are you suggesting I should have sent the 16 bit file to the mastering engineer?
Old 20th March 2014
  #1219
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
But what about the final mix?

It's not going to output a 24 bit mix from a 16 bit session is it?
Most DAWs will (or 32 bit or 64 bit...) but I think you are on Pro Tools and maybe you are recording the mix back to a new track in the same session? In that case you would indeed have to make the session 24 bit. (I don't know if Bounce-To-Disk let's you bounce to 24 bit in a 16 bit session as I never use BTD).

Alistair
Old 20th March 2014
  #1220
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Most DAWs will (or 32 bit or 64 bit...) but I think you are on Pro Tools and maybe you are recording the mix back to a new track in the same session? In that case you would indeed have to make the session 24 bit. (I don't know if Bounce-To-Disk let's you bounce to 24 bit in a 16 bit session as I never use BTD).

Alistair
Yeah. I do mix to spare tracks. Never BTD.

So (if I got this right) in many DAWs you can run a 16 bit recorded session, have all the processing happen at 24 bit (or better) and export a finished mix at 24 bit that not only takes advantage of the processing but will actually sound better (subjectively) than a 16 bit file just up sampled?

Thanks
Old 20th March 2014
  #1221
Pono Music

Regarding the last comment yes, at the time you Bounce To Disk you can change the format at which it “prints” the recording. At least that’s how it is on AudioDesk (a free DAW I got with MOTU 828)

Anywho… this is a long one but I feel it sums up the whole thread and may provide topic for further discussion… I read through every page of this thread, because I am genuinely curious about the audio industry's take on Pono Music. Lo and behold, hearing everyone's input on this thread (and others threads out there), I too have conflicting views - as many do in this thread.

First off, the Pono player is itself a FLAC, et. al. player to play all recordings from s****y mp3 up to 192/24. It really doesn't matter whether 192 vs 96 is necessary, or even if 44.1/16 is sufficient... all the arguments about what resolution is "enough" is irrelevant if you can play that resolution and more with a portable player that's easier to lug around than a Laptop and converters, or burning the mix to a CD. You can play CD quality lossless files (which may be all you need), all the way up to current high-resolution audio files with this player (even if its irrelevant).

With this music player I can record all my files at whatever resolution I want and export them right into Pono and listen in all my various environments to determine the overall mix. I personally do not limit myself to the highest quality converters, monitor and room treatment available. Sometimes it’s nice to hear my mix on ****ty ipod headphones, car stereos, lo, mid and hi-fi home stereos, etc. It’s important to mix our music so that it sounds good in all qualities of monitoring environments. To me that is the main bonus of this player; if all else fails about Pono, I will at least use it to audition my mixes anywhere I want without having to burn an audio CD or lug my laptop/converters around.

Secondly, there is no denying that in some way this is a ploy for more album sales and more revenue for past projects. I too feel Pono could have a better business model that more appropriately helps Consumers by providing a cheaper product (on par with iTunes pricing) or help future Artists by setting a "name your own price" situation all at little or no cost to the Artist. I would love to see a service like Bandcamp or Pono offer artists the ability to upload their files and sell their music at whatever quality they want at less than 15% (bandcamp's cut) let alone iTunes or Pono @ 30%.

In fact I would be more than willing to start up this service with any of you. Let’s create a platform that allows artists to upload files at whatever quality they want, and give an opportunity for fans to purchase the file at no cost to the artist but the actual cost of the service (credit card transaction fees/hosting prices for the song/album/catalog, etc.) Anything less than 15-30% will do. This service could also be used to release download codes for any desired resolution for all Vinyl purchases and we could license the service with current and future labels/distributors. This would be a better business model for new artists going forward...

Pono music, and all the other high-resolution digital distribution services, are backward thinking services for publishing re-masters of previous work – nothing is new, and I personally won't be buying many items from their store as I already have them on Vinyl and/or at CD quality or better. Going forward, however, artists/labels should be able to upload and sell their masters at whatever quality they desire.

It doesn't matter if we record digital in the Terabyte processing range... it will never be "perfect" it will just be "enough" won't it? If 44/16, or even 96/24 is “enough” then so be it, why bother improving the resolution of the delivery format? That’s what I interpret the scientists in this thread trying to say.

The way I see it, Pono Music is an attempt to bring the Consumerist notion that “getting HD Video (TV and physical/streaming Media) is necessary" to the Audio world. In the analogy, it doesn't matter if the consumer can only buy it on VHS or DVD, or stream over a slow network incapable of giving you HD quality; the consumer will purchase what the consumer wants and can afford/playback... the principal is the same... the ability to watch Blu-Ray or HD Streaming Content is still a trend that almost everyone I know has gotten behind. If they can afford to buy an HD TV then I think you can afford buying a CD-or-greater-quality audio from artists like myself and others too.

Ultimately, as an artist and an audio recording hobbyist, I might just stick to recording to tape and leave the digital transfer rates for the professionals and scientists to decide, or even experiment myself and post here for us all to judge.

What would have been a better approach to Pono music for Neil Young (to be true to his previous anti-digital stance) is to start a Company or Collective whose goal was to revisit Tape and Analog Recording technology, make transporters more stable, make the tape more durable and of higher quality, and make the heads stronger and more reliable. We went from Wire to Tape, from Cylinders to Vinyl... I think we can up the game and improve analog recording prior to stepping into the digital domain altogether. Or maybe that's just me…

All the diatribes of which digital format is "enough" for consumers is simply condescending at best. At the end of the day, as long as you have purchased the right to "play" and "listen" to the song... who cares if they come out with a DSD release of the file or some other monolithic converter of the future? It shouldn't matter what digital format you have, what should matter is the consumer-artist relationship, the artist getting paid for their contribution to society, and lastly getting paid appropriately at a reasonable price for the public consumption of their work.

Pono music doesn't address this, and it’s perhaps not the point of their business... I’ll get the music player for $300 as they currently stand on KS… I’ll use them to audition my mixes on the go, portably, anywhere I can take them; it is not a revolution - it’s a tool.

In the end, this "revolution" won't be digitized

-orenradio
Old 20th March 2014
  #1222
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
So (if I got this right) in many DAWs you can run a 16 bit recorded session, have all the processing happen at 24 bit (or better) and export a finished mix at 24 bit that not only takes advantage of the processing but will actually sound better (subjectively) than a 16 bit file just up sampled?

Thanks
All modern DAWs (including Pro Tools[1]) process at 32 or 64 bit float internally regardless of the bit depth of the session. When you export you just select the bit depth you want and the DAW dithers (if selected) and truncates down to the chosen bit depth from the internal bit depth. I suspect even Pro Tools allows you to do this if you Bounce-To-Disk but like you I always record to a new track so I haven't checked the BTD options in a while.

[1] The only exception is PT TDM which is limited by the TDM hardware to 24 bit interconnects between the plugins but I am not including TDM in modern DAWs. HDX and all Native version of PT do process at 32 or 64 bit float internally.

Alistair
Old 20th March 2014
  #1223
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
All modern DAWs (including Pro Tools[1]) process at 32 or 64 bit float internally regardless of the bit depth of the session. When you export you just select the bit depth you want and the DAW dithers (if selected) and truncates down to the chosen bit depth from the internal bit depth.

Alistair
If this is correct, why are we settling for 24 bit output?

If Mr. Young wants the original file, shouldn't we be outputting 64 bit files?

Or even (gasp) 32 bit (if you don't mind your music sounding like rubber bands.)
Old 20th March 2014
  #1224
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by orenradio View Post

First off, the Pono player is itself a FLAC, et. al. player to play all recordings from s****y mp3 up to 192/24. It really doesn't matter whether 192 vs 96 is necessary, or even if 44.1/16 is sufficient... all the arguments about what resolution is "enough" is irrelevant if you can play that resolution and more with a portable player that's easier to lug around than a Laptop and converters, or burning the mix to a CD. You can play CD quality lossless files (which may be all you need), all the way up to current high-resolution audio files with this player (even if its irrelevant).
If 44.1kHz 16 bit is sufficient, we can just use our phones. Or are you arguing that we need better D/A conversion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orenradio View Post
What would have been a better approach to Pono music for Neil Young (to be true to his previous anti-digital stance) is to start a Company or Collective whose goal was to revisit Tape and Analog Recording technology, make transporters more stable, make the tape more durable and of higher quality, and make the heads stronger and more reliable. We went from Wire to Tape, from Cylinders to Vinyl... I think we can up the game and improve analog recording prior to stepping into the digital domain altogether. Or maybe that's just me…
That would have been great but unfortunately we never progressed into making high end analog affordable. The last Studer made was their most expensive. Even the early digital recorders were crazy expensive.

At this point (and probably forever) digital is the best bang for your buck.

It still amazes me why some company can't figure out how to make an analog tape based front end for digital recording.

You'd make a fortune.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1225
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
If this is correct, why are we settling for 24 bit output?

If Mr. Young wants the original file, shouldn't we be outputting 64 bit files?

Or even (gasp) 32 bit (if you don't mind your music sounding like rubber bands.)
Because it would be utterly pointless. The vast majority of interfaces only accept 24 bit data streams so what you are listening to is 24 bit anyway. And don't forget that in a TDM system the link between TDM plugins is 24 bits. So even if the plugins process at 48 bit, the output of the plugin is dithered (hopefully) and truncated down to 24 bits. In large sessions this happens at many many places in the mix yet it never stopped competent engineers from making great mixes on PT TDM rigs.

All this Hysterical-Rez for delivery is a load of non-sense from people that don't understand how digital audio, DAWs and converters work with expectation bias and faulty testing methods thrown in for good measure.

Alistair
Old 20th March 2014
  #1226
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post

All this Hysterical-Rez for delivery is a load of non-sense from people that don't understand how digital audio, DAWs and converters work with expectation bias and faulty testing methods thrown in for good measure.

Alistair
But maybe we should print at 128 bit, just to be safe.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by orenradio View Post
With this music player I can record all my files at whatever resolution I want and export them right into Pono and listen in all my various environments to determine the overall mix. I personally do not limit myself to the highest quality converters, monitor and room treatment available. Sometimes it’s nice to hear my mix on ****ty ipod headphones, car stereos, lo, mid and hi-fi home stereos, etc. It’s important to mix our music so that it sounds good in all qualities of monitoring environments. To me that is the main bonus of this player; if all else fails about Pono, I will at least use it to audition my mixes anywhere I want without having to burn an audio CD or lug my laptop/converters around.
I bounce audition mixes to 320mp3s and stream them from dropbox to my iphone to listen in my car, home stereo, etc. Fast and free assuming you have an smart phone.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1228
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by orenradio View Post
I too feel Pono could have a better business model that more appropriately helps Consumers by providing a cheaper product (on par with iTunes pricing) or help future Artists by setting a "name your own price" situation all at little or no cost to the Artist.
That would be great, but since the Labels are involved and preparing to shoot themselves in the foot again, I'm not holding out much hope. I mean, I'm as shocked as anyone that they want to charge too much for their product , but I guess it's hard to let go of the memories of megabucks in the music biz. Also, it's hard to replace emotions (greed) and wishful thinking with rationality based on rigorous market research.

If the pricing model stands, Pono is destined to be a niche product at best. If they come to their senses, somebody might just make some real money from it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orenradio View Post
I would love to see a service like Bandcamp or Pono offer artists the ability to upload their files and sell their music at whatever quality they want at less than 15% (bandcamp's cut) let alone iTunes or Pono @ 30%.
I think Bandcamp is great for indie artists already. I don't see their cut (which goes down to 10% once your sales hit a modest level) as unfair in the least. If anything represents the future of music distribution, I'd say Bandcamp is it. Go Bandcamp!
Quote:
Originally Posted by orenradio View Post
I’ll get the music player for $300 as they currently stand on KS… I’ll use them to audition my mixes on the go, portably, anywhere I can take them; it is not a revolution - it’s a tool.
Good idea, but you are aware that you can buy such a player right now that does everything you describe, aren't you? Links have been repeatedly posted in this thread (and hats off to anyone who has managed to read the whole thing). Have fun!

Cheers,
Eddie
Old 20th March 2014
  #1229
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie TX View Post

If the pricing model stands, Pono is destined to be a niche product at best. If they come to their senses, somebody might just make some real money from it.
This is an important point. The one thing that services like iTunes do over stealing is add value to the sale. If my computer crashes, I can get all my purchased music back tomorrow. Including all my playlists and organization in iTunes. I own these songs forever.

Adding high res (BS or not) would make it that much more attractive. Especially since they would have the jump on the illegal sites. For a bit. And they'e attracting the fans that can afford to pay. They're the ones who care about fidelity.

People don't realize what a big deal it was for iTunes to get the Beatles collection. Sales were up across the board because of it.
Old 20th March 2014
  #1230
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gavriloP View Post
...all in all I've been listening albums all my life. And I'm not alone, I'm sure of it.
yeah. but how often do you listen to them front to back? that's my point (or one point). more often, you probably pick and choose songs

Quote:
Well, like I said I do like singles too but you know why can't we have both in this glorious empowering digital age?
agreed!

i just dislike this idea that albums are "the only way"
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