The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Launch of Pono Studio Headphones
Old 21st March 2014
  #1441
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arksun View Post
Listening to a 16/44 file from a different device wont necessarily sound the same as listening to it burned to redbook audio CD. Stored as a data file it will be 100% bit accurate and be processed as data packets that are well bufffered (ie sound at its best).

Listening to cd audio in your car will be subject to several quality stages, how good was your cd burner?, the quality of the cdr, how does your car cd player play the cd, realtime 1x streaming audio? if so then it can be subjected to additional errors and jitter related issues. How old is this car cd player, does it have poor D/A with less than pleasent sounding filter @ 44k?. Could your cars CD player, streaming at 1x speed off a cdr with additional jitter and error compete with the D/A of your Korg MR2?.

Which dither and sample rate converter did you use?

Far too many variables going on here to deduce it must be solely the bit depth and sample rate. How about instead you play the 16/44 also off the Korg MR2, that would make a much more fair comparison.
Korg dither and Korg AudioGate SRC.
I'll try both sets of files from the MR2.
Good idea.
C
Old 21st March 2014
  #1442
And the lower file size advocate most repeatedly linked to in this thread is politically aligned to a free internet and free sharing.
Epic fail.
Old 21st March 2014
  #1443
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
If it's expectation bias, and I expect 24/192 to sound better, and so to me it does, then, SO WHAT?..

well at least we see your true colors!! Kudos to you for finally admitting your perceptions about high-resolution audio are completely imaginary. The next time you are sick, you can save a bundle on medicine and just take a sugar pill. Next time you are broke, write yourself a check for a million dollars.

Quote:
.If it's just my imagination that makes it sound better, why is that less valid than any test measurements?
Because you are stating your completely subjective totally imaginary beliefs as if they were scientific facts.. Because Pono is asking people who don't believe in fairies to pay EXTRA for this resolution and some of us would like to make sure we are not fooling ourselves! If you want to fool yourself.. and even brag about it, go right ahead!

What you are admitting here is that you do not need to buy a Pono or play a high-res file in your car. You only need a file that SAYS the words "192kHz" on it. A 44.1 file upsampled to 192kHz will do just fine for you, because what is important to you is just that you believe it works. You don't even care if it actually works or not. "So what" is what you said! That's what you just said. Why should the grown-ups 'join' you at your imaginary tea party? Many of us would like to drink real tea.


Quote:
“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”
Albert Einstein
I believe in this thread, Einstein would be considered a religious fanatic.
Albert Einstein would be the last person to stop at what he 'believed' to be true and not TEST it. Albert Einstein formulated his theories based on the results of previous experiments. Rigorous non-opinion based experiments. Einstein's theories were proven by further experiments so it wasn't just imagination or even just math. You have neither the experimental NOR the theoretical underpinnings for your Tinkerbell beliefs. <DELETED BY MODERATOR> You have some nerve quoting Einstein.

Quote:
I also believe for a/b testing to be meaningful, all the people being tested should have the EXACT ability to hear audio.
unnecessary - if nobody can hear it, then nobody can hear it. If one person can hear something, then that person can hear it. Where is that one person? It can't be you because you have not even tried to do a fair test. It can't be you because you are HAPPY to fool yourself.
Old 21st March 2014
  #1444
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post

well at least we see your true colors!! Kudos to you for finally admitting your perceptions about high-resolution audio are completely imaginary. The next time you are sick, you can save a bundle on medicine and just take a sugar pill. Next time you are broke, write yourself a check for a million dollars.

Because you are stating your completely subjective totally imaginary beliefs as if they were scientific facts.. Because Pono is asking people who don't believe in fairies to pay EXTRA for this resolution and some of us would like to make sure we are not fooling ourselves! If you want to fool yourself.. and even brag about it, go right ahead!

What you are admitting here is that you do not need to buy a Pono or play a high-res file in your car. You only need a file that SAYS the words "192kHz" on it. A 44.1 file upsampled to 192kHz will do just fine for you, because what is important to you is just that you believe it works. You don't even care if it actually works or not. "So what" is what you said! That's what you just said. Why should the grown-ups 'join' you at your imaginary tea party? Many of us would like to drink real tea.




Albert Einstein would be the last person to stop at what he 'believed' to be true and not TEST it. Albert Einstein formulated his theories based on the results of previous experiments. Rigorous non-opinion based experiments. Einstein's theories were proven by further experiments so it wasn't just imagination or even just math. You have neither the experimental NOR the theoretical underpinnings for your Tinkerbell beliefs. That makes YOU the Creationist here. You have some nerve quoting Einstein.


unnecessary - if nobody can hear it, then nobody can hear it. If one person can hear something, then that person can hear it. Where is that one person? It can't be you because you have not even tried to do a fair test. It can't be you because you are HAPPY to fool yourself.
Nice selective editing of my post...
Einstein said that knowledge is limited.
I agree with him.
It's easy for anyone to see that you've just put words in my mouth.
<DELETED BY MODERATOR>
Are you suggesting you've never fooled yourself?
That people fooling themselves when listening to music doesn't happen everyday?
It's all personal and subjective.
Did you just read what you just typed?
Are you rolling yourself right now?
Old 21st March 2014
  #1445
Maybe we need a better, but still affordable player?
I doubt either my iPhone or iPad are HQ players.
The other boutique brands mentioned earlier in the thread are around $800 or more.
I can see a use for a portable player with large storage I can use on a plane, in my car, in my studio and plumbed into my living room hi-fi.
Then perhaps a nominal 'upgrade' in digital format, 96khz/24bit?
But the price of the music has to be inline with mainstream retailers like iTunes and Beatport.
Old 21st March 2014
  #1446
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Even though it already knew cigarettes caused cancer, the tobacco industry employed a group of scientists to run research programs and produce hundreds of documents refuting the link.
Let's see some un-conflicted evidence on digital music quality.
Wow, you're really reaching here with the comparison to big tobacco. You want "un-conflicted evidence"? Right here:

http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee104/shannonpaper.pdf

2nd page of the PDF. Disagree with Shannon at your own peril.
Old 21st March 2014
  #1447
Quote:
Originally Posted by bogosort View Post
Wow, you're really reaching here with the comparison to big tobacco. You want "un-conflicted evidence"? Right here:

http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee104/shannonpaper.pdf

2nd page of the PDF. Disagree with Shannon at your own peril.
It's not a reach, it's a clear and utter conflict of interest.
Are you claiming that Shannon's standards can never be eclipsed?
Science and technology are always being revised. We know things about the body today we didn't know five years ago. The technology we have today wasn't achievable ten years ago.
You're asking me to accept the digital music standard settled on thirty years ago is as good as it gets. End of story, case closed?

I'm not an audiologist or a digital scientist, but I'm merely pointing out that in every other area of science, computing and digital technology we are constantly evolving, improving our knowledge and our tools. But in audio, no?
Old 21st March 2014
  #1448
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
The other boutique brands mentioned earlier in the thread are around $800 or more.
I see the FiiO X3, a portable player fully capable of playing 24/192, selling for $200 at several online retailers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
But the price of the music has to be inline with mainstream retailers like iTunes and Beatport.
Right on!

Cheers,
Eddie
Old 21st March 2014
  #1449
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
It's simply unbelievable that at the dawn of digital music retail (CD), we stumbled across the perfect digital format 44.1khz, 16 bit. Never to be bettered.
Then you must find it absolutely bewildering that the minimum digital format specifications were discovered some 40 years before CDs were invented!
Old 21st March 2014
  #1450
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Maybe we need a better, but still affordable player?
I doubt either my iPhone or iPad are HQ players.
The other boutique brands mentioned earlier in the thread are around $800 or more.
I can see a use for a portable player with large storage I can use on a plane, in my car, in my studio and plumbed into my living room hi-fi.
Then perhaps a nominal 'upgrade' in digital format, 96khz/24bit?
But the price of the music has to be inline with mainstream retailers like iTunes and Beatport.
I think album file sizes on iTunes and hd tracks or PONO differ by as much as 1 gb or more.
If a hi def album is 1.33 gb and the same album on iTunes if 300 mb, hi def will cost more per album in bandwidth for the store to deliver to the customer.
Should the hi def store just eat that cost?
They will pass it to the consumer.
Old 21st March 2014
  #1451
Quote:
Originally Posted by bogosort View Post
Then you must find it absolutely bewildering that the minimum digital format specifications were discovered some 40 years before CDs were invented!
Whatever.
You can continue to chip away at my comments and lack of historical knowledge, but the fact remains in other technologies quality, resolution and detail continues to advance year on year.
Whether it's needed (regarding audio appreciation or pixel peeping in video/stills) is another debate. More subjective.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1452
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
And the lower file size advocate most repeatedly linked to in this thread is politically aligned to a free internet and free sharing.
Epic fail.
you still have not explained HOW his political stance makes him LIE about the value of high-res files. In the absence of a clearly defined conflict of interest, or even the most tenuous one, his science ought to be taken at face value.

It seems quite solid and there is no embedded agenda that I can detect. Does he say "no benefit to hi-res audio, therefore music should be Free?" Is that conclusion even mentioned or implied ANYWHERE in the article? You could read that whole article and never get a whiff of "sharing" advocacy. In the absence of conflict of interest why should the science not be considered on its own merits? He could be a member of Fred Phelps' Westboro church or the Ku Klux Klan or or any other hateful organization. Such as the Justin Bieber fan club! Should not matter.

There is nothing about Pono and other high-res audio that is any 'better' for artists rights. All DRM-free resolutions are equally stealable in the end. If he feels entitled to "share", he can still feel entitled to share hi-res files as well as low res ones. He has no dog in that fight. Your objection to this very well thought-out article is based only on your emotional reaction to the guy himself. Its an ad hominem.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1453
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Should the hi def store just eat that cost?
If the goal is to outdo iTunes and Spotify. And is supported by name musicians as a way to attract members of the public away from 'cheap and cheerful' music to a more valued musical experience? YES.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1454
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Nice selective editing of my post...
Einstein said that knowledge is limited.
I agree with him.
I guarantee Einstein would not have refused to test his premise the best he could, even if it only provided results of limited value.

Your religion is simply belief it appears... nothing wrong with that, some people think willful ignorance is a good thing.

Knowledge is indeed limited! There is no need to WILLFULLY limit it even further.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1455
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
I think album file sizes on iTunes and hd tracks or PONO differ by as much as 1 gb or more.
If a hi def album is 1.33 gb and the same album on iTunes if 300 mb, hi def will cost more per album in bandwidth for the store to deliver to the customer.
Should the hi def store just eat that cost?
They will pass it to the consumer.
Yes, but I think it's been established that the labels set the prices, not the vendor. Besides, I suspect a Hollywood movie in HD is a much bigger file than any hi-res album, and those go for $20 or less. There's no good reason for the high Pono prices.

Cheers,
Eddie
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1456
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
you still have not explained HOW his political stance makes him LIE about the value of high-res files. In the absence of a clearly defined conflict of interest, or even the most tenuous one, his science ought to be taken at face value.
It's not his political stance, it's that the site he's publishing his theories on is avowed to counter copyright and the music industry.
The format he's claiming is the best, is the same format the pirates use, and a format that would best suit Spotify, Google, Apple and any other technology company looking to make big bucks out of music.
Secondly, when someone publishes outrageous and questionable generalisations to back their political leanings, you have to call into question everything else they publish.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1457
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Nice selective editing of my post...
Einstein said that knowledge is limited.
I agree with him.
It's easy for anyone to see that you've just put words in my mouth.
Science is your religion.
Are you suggesting you've never fooled yourself?
That people fooling themselves when listening to music doesn't happen everyday?
It's all personal and subjective.
Did you just read what you just typed?
Are you rolling yourself right now?
I take it from your avatar, your sig, your absurd use of facepalms, and the general flavor of your posts that you're a teenager. Nothing wrong with that, we all go through it. But as cool as it may seem to scoff at science and "conventional thinking", you really have to bring a lot more to the table than cheesy Einstein quotes for anyone to pay attention.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1458
Here for the gear
 
Sean M Robinson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I'm not an audiologist or a digital scientist, but I'm merely pointing out that in every other area of science, computing and digital technology we are constantly evolving, improving our knowledge and our tools. But in audio, no?
But audio processes HAVE continued to evolve, even if the container medium has reached its useful threshold! It's not surprising that audio would max out earlier than video--it's comparatively simple and less resource-intensive. Whereas the push for higher-res video, the difference really is night and day, and video resolutions will no doubt continue to climb. Go watch a 70 mm print of Laurence of Arabia and then watch it on your Bluescreen in 1040i at home. Not quite the same experience.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1459
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Even though it already knew cigarettes caused cancer, the tobacco industry employed a group of scientists to run research programs and produce hundreds of documents refuting the link.
Let's see some un-conflicted evidence on digital music quality.
I would say the AES study was pretty non conflicted. Over a year and nobody could reliably tell the difference.

I don't think anyone is suggesting no further improvements are necessary or possible.... I think we are saying let's wait until we find a real improvement that is measurable and true. Anything is possible!

Maybe we will find some secret ingredient to audio nirvana? So far though, in a/b/x testing 24/192 is not it.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1460
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Nice selective editing of my post..
No, you actually said all those things and you meant every word of it. You totally outed yourself there.

Quote:
.
as others have noted, you are rapidly closing in on the Gearslutz record for most pathetic overuse of the facepalm. It really doesn't mean that much when you overuse it like that. And it means even less when you are dead wrong.

Quote:
Science is your religion.
spoken like a true Creationist. Science is not anybody's religion. It is science. Clearly you do not understand what science is, or how it works. You think it is just another set of beliefs that is simply "less fun" than the ones you employ.

Quote:
Are you suggesting you've never fooled yourself?
I am suggesting that before I spend $24.99 on a 'better' version of an album I already own, I want to make sure I am NOT fooling myself. You would deprive me of that opportunity by insisting that testing my ability to hear the difference "doesn't matter" or is "just another religion". Or that it can be done by peeking at the labels!

You are ON RECORD as saying you don't care if you are fooling yourself or not. That is the essence of religion. Belief without the necessity of proof.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1461
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
It's not a reach, it's a clear and utter conflict of interest.
Are you claiming that Shannon's standards can never be eclipsed?
Science and technology are always being revised. We know things about the body today we didn't know five years ago. The technology we have today wasn't achievable ten years ago.
You're asking me to accept the digital music standard settled on thirty years ago is as good as it gets. End of story, case closed?

I'm not an audiologist or a digital scientist, but I'm merely pointing out that in every other area of science, computing and digital technology we are constantly evolving, improving our knowledge and our tools. But in audio, no?
Surprising as it may seem, it's true: the case was closed in 1948. You're correct that science evolves, but the amazing thing about the sampling theorem is that it's not based on empirical evidence; it's a mathematical theorem. And mathematical theorems are forever.

In the PDF I linked, in just a few short paragraphs, Shannon proves why 44.1 kHz sampling captures all the data in 20 kHz audio. Of course there are real-world catches, like there is no such thing as a perfectly band-limited signal. But these are engineering concerns, and we've solved them.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1462
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Let me try to put it this way.
When I play an CD of Neil Young's Harvest in my car at a loud volume, it hurts my ears.
I find it unpleasant.
When I play a 24/192 file of Neil Young's Harvest in my car at a loud volume, not only does it sound great to me, I want to turn it up.
Can you please use science to explain that?
It might be confirmation bias. Test it yourself, find a way to do an a/b/x comparison that is blind.

Test it at high volume and see... but you have to eliminate your prior knowledge of which is which to be able to tell whether that ear hurting is expectation bias or real.

I'm not saying which one, but neither can you until you test it blindly.

People aren't making up confirmation bias... it's the real thing.


Quote:
If it's expectation bias, and I expect 24/192 to sound better, and so to me it does, then, SO WHAT?
If it's just my imagination that makes it sound better, why is that less valid than any test measurements?
Nothing wrong with it at all, if you understand it is belief and not truth.

Quote:
I also believe for a/b testing to be meaningful, all the people being tested should have the EXACT ability to hear audio.
Since everyone's ability to hear audio is different, I say such a test would be subjective to each listener.
I refuse to believe that Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles don't have a better ability to hear audio than I do.
When you run a race against a clock, you are racing yourself.

In an a/b/x test,you are not testing against someone else. You are testing your OWN ability to hear the difference. Nobody else's opinion matters. Why would it?
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1463
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
I guarantee Einstein would not have refused to test his premise the best he could, even if it only provided results of limited value.

Your religion is simply belief it appears... nothing wrong with that, some people think willful ignorance is a good thing.

Knowledge is indeed limited! There is no need to WILLFULLY limit it even further.
I have never suggested to limit knowledge.
Einstein stated that knowledge is limited.
I agreed.
I never stated what my religion was.
I said, and say again, that listening to music, in fact, living your life, is a subjective thing.
People here tell me that it is not.
That science has set the limits and that's that.
I disagree because the human mind is also involved when listening to music.
Since I believe the human mind's ability to imagine is unlimited,
listening to music, enjoying a painting, or just about anything you do, is a singular experience for the person doing the activity.
Subjective.
Neil Young has his vision.
I have mine.
You have yours.
Subjective.
Go back and read all of my posts.
That's all I've ever said when it comes to sound quality.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean M Robinson View Post
It's not surprising that audio would max out earlier than video--it's comparatively simple and less resource-intensive.
It's claimed it maxed out at the first iteration, 44.1khz/16bit.


Quote:
Whereas the push for higher-res video, the difference really is night and day, and video resolutions will no doubt continue to climb. Go watch a 70 mm print of Laurence of Arabia and then watch it on your Bluescreen in 1040i at home. Not quite the same experience.
70mm is film, like 2" tape in the studio. Not quite the same experience.
The same argument is to be had in other digital art forms though….
Is 4k video so much better that it's worth the huge storage necessary?
Does a stills camera need 13 stops of dynamic range when the camera is probably better than the operator using it?
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1465
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

This thread with very few exceptions is a superb depiction of a race to the bottom. An exercise in petty squabbling and point scoring. Like a bunch of kids...."MY dad says it is like THIS! And your dad is wrong!"...."NO!!! You don 't know what you're talking about. You believe in fairies. And they don't exist. Everyone knows that bla bla bla bla, if you don't know that you're a fool!" ......next is grabbing the sand and throwing at each other's faces.....

Great stuff, keep it coming. Like Celebrity Deathmatch.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1466
Lives for gear
 
Hyder boy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Nice selective editing of my post...
Einstein said that knowledge is limited.
I agree with him.
It's easy for anyone to see that you've just put words in my mouth.
Science is your religion.
Are you suggesting you've never fooled yourself?
That people fooling themselves when listening to music doesn't happen everyday?
It's all personal and subjective.
Did you just read what you just typed?
Are you rolling yourself right now?
It's your lie, tell it how you like...
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1467
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
It might be confirmation bias. Test it yourself, find a way to do an a/b/x comparison that is blind.

Test it at high volume and see... but you have to eliminate your prior knowledge of which is which to be able to tell whether that ear hurting is expectation bias or real.

I'm not saying which one, but neither can you until you test it blindly.

People aren't making up confirmation bias... it's the real thing.




Nothing wrong with it at all, if you understand it is belief and not truth.



When you run a race against a clock, you are racing yourself.

In an a/b/x test,you are not testing against someone else. You are testing your OWN ability to hear the difference. Nobody else's opinion matters. Why would it?
Because if you do the same test on five people and get five different results based on those people's ability to hear, it's now subjective opinion rather than Fact.
Human hearing is a variable, unless we all hear things exactly the same.
We don't.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1468
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
It's not his political stance, it's that the site he's publishing his theories on is avowed to counter copyright and the music industry.
Whatever. If you can't directly debunk the science, you attack him?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with his science. His paper on digital audio and his video showing what happens to a waveform in digital audio are 100% accurate.

Feel free to intelligently critique is work rather than try and raise FUD based on your political views. Either he is right or wrong, and it's clear to me he is right.

What is he wrong about when it comes to digital audio?
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1469
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Nice selective editing of my post...
Einstein said that knowledge is limited.
I agree with him.
It's easy for anyone to see that you've just put words in my mouth.
Science is your religion.
Are you suggesting you've never fooled yourself?
That people fooling themselves when listening to music doesn't happen everyday?
It's all personal and subjective.
Did you just read what you just typed?
Are you rolling yourself right now?
Dude. All beefs aside. Joeq just took you for what you said.

Those were your words and his response was reasonable based on them.

If your argument is that you're happy hearing what you think you hear, then it only applies to you. Most of us in this thread are looking for some truth.

Yes. Music is mostly subjective. But when it comes to digital audio, it's all math. Math isn't usually subjective.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #1470
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Because if you do the same test on five people and get five different results based on those people's ability to hear, it's now subjective opinion rather than Fact.
Human hearing is a variable, unless we all hear things exactly the same.
We don't.
The AES did this test already, and they didn't get five different opinions.

It's not subjective opinion yet. So far, in a/b/x testing nobody could tell.

Again, the entire point is to test to see if YOU or I can tell. Maybe there are outliers who CAN? Maybe you are an outlier with hearing up to 25k? You don't know until you try... belief is not knowledge.
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