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 13th March 2014
  #151
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Ah, so you're doing a format conversion specifically in order to improve the sound to your ear for mastering? Or did I miss something earlier?
Correct.
I guess I just like the low pass filtering in DSD capture better than the decimation filters in PCM for playback of my completed masters.
I have found that I can't reliably tell the difference between DSD and 24/192.

I was just pointing out that Sony created DSD to archive their masters, as they found magnetic tape to age poorly.
Old 13th March 2014
  #152
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
I remember hearing people talk about the "evil stair stepping" in digital audio.
I seem to remember Neil Young as being one of those people!!

Yet clearly there is no practical analog handheld downloadable player format to be marketed to the masses.

When Neil's alternative was first talked about, it was supposedly going to be DSD. What happened to that? I believe the file sizes ruled that out. IMO 24/96 is a compromise coming from a place where no such compromise was supposedly even possible because digital is evil and the 'pencil leaves the paper' . It's still PCM, it's hardly new, and it's not that big a difference. The people who "love vinyl" will not like this as it still lacks the distortions and roll-offs that characterize the format.


I tried a few songs from HD Tracks - which has been around for a while now - and frankly I was underwhelmed.
Old 13th March 2014
  #153
Lives for gear
 
sleepingbag's Avatar
the thing probably does sound better than a phone or ipod and god bless anyone who buys it. i just find the marketing deplorable + the fact that it's all 'neil young, tom petty, bob dylan, dave grohl' in there kind of drives home the point that this device is not for me.
Old 13th March 2014
  #154
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
Agreed.
Then people can draw there own conclusions.
But in my studio, I can reliably tell the difference.
Have you done a blind test? Not trying to belabor the point, but confirmation bias is a real thing for all of us.
Old 13th March 2014
  #155
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
the thing probably does sound better than a phone or ipod and god bless anyone who buys it. i just find the marketing deplorable + the fact that it's all 'neil young, tom petty, bob dylan, dave grohl' in there kind of drives home the point that this device is not for me.
heh

Me, too, and I'm old.
Old 13th March 2014
  #156
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I seem to remember Neil Young as being one of those people!!

Yet clearly there is no practical analog handheld downloadable player format to be marketed to the masses.

When Neil's alternative was first talked about, it was supposedly going to be DSD. What happened to that? I believe the file sizes ruled that out. IMO 24/96 is a compromise coming from a place where no such compromise was supposedly even possible because digital is evil and the 'pencil leaves the paper' . It's still PCM, it's hardly new, and it's not that big a difference. The people who "love vinyl" will not like this as it still lacks the distortions and roll-offs that characterize the format.


I tried a few songs from HD Tracks - which has been around for a while now - and frankly I was underwhelmed.
I use both DSD and 24/192. 24/192 file sizes are larger that DSD (2.8 MHz).
I just read that PONO uses the same DAC chip as the Mytek DSD DAC
Mytek Digital | HiFi

PONO could probably be made DSD compatable with a firmware upgrade, or even before they ship!

Last edited by CarmenC; 13th March 2014 at 12:34 AM.. Reason: Spelling...
Old 13th March 2014
  #157
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
When Neil's alternative was first talked about, it was supposedly going to be DSD. What happened to that?
I'd never heard that verified, I expected it was a non-PCM format like DSD... that is why I was particularly disappointed.
Old 13th March 2014
  #158
Lives for gear
 
bambamboom's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post

That video would get me rock hard if I didn't know any better. That's deceit.
Well said, along with many of your other comments. That video makes me sad as it is (seemingly successfully) promoting false hope to those who lack an understanding of the underlying issues.
Old 13th March 2014
  #159
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
Have you done a blind test? Not trying to belabor the point, but confirmation bias is a real thing for all of us.
I have a Korg MR2000BLK recorder.
It will capture 16/44.1, 24/48, 24/88.2, 24/96, 24/176.4, 24/192 and DSD (2.8 & 5.6 MHz).
I have mastered to each bit/sample rate the machine will do.
I concluded that DSD (5.6 MHz) sounds the best to me, but I also cannot tell the difference between 24/192 and DSD(5.6mhz).
With my 55 yr. old ears, anyway.
YMMV...
I'd like PONO to do DSD, but if it does 24/192, that works for me.
C
Old 13th March 2014
  #160
Lives for gear
All other skepticism aside, am I really supposed to take audio quality testimonials from DEAF ROCK MUSICIANS?
Old 13th March 2014
  #161
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by M4-10 View Post
All other skepticism aside, am I really supposed to take audio quality testimonials from DEAF ROCK MUSICIANS?
WHAT??? Said the deaf guy as PONO passes 2 million dollars in funding in less than 36 hours.....
Old 13th March 2014
  #162
Gear Addict
 
spurratic's Avatar
I didn't read all 6 pages of this forum, so this may have been said multiple times.....but I think the release of Pono is really important. First of all, the MP3 is a very old technology that wasn't even developed to compress audio....it was originally designed to compress data. It was adopted as a way to deliver files online in the days when you would have to wait a day to download a song. So quality was not even a concern.....
I realize that the average consumer doesn't really care about that....but why does Pono have to go after the average consumer?? Focus on Audiophiles, musicians, and people who DO care. Personally, I am hoping that the thing catches on enough that there is a good selection of music (I need to do some research on the software and how it works, etc). But I can see this as something that musicians, studio engineers, and other professionals buy and there may even be a day when owning a simple mp3 player is considered lame. (Kind of like recording on a PC.....just kidding). Also, the price isn't really that bad considering iPods aren't exactly cheap.

If the sound is what it claims....and all those music legends aren't just B.S. ing on that video, then consider me a customer. Sound quality is very important to me and i hate how my mixes sound after I have squished them into an mp3 container for online sale.
Old 13th March 2014
  #163
Lives for gear
 
bambamboom's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
We don't. We get the file at the original 24 bit/48kHz instead of a 320mp3. Worthwhile to my mind.
Comment retracted due to request.

Last edited by bambamboom; 13th March 2014 at 01:06 AM.. Reason: Bet offer removed
Old 13th March 2014
  #164
Quote:
Originally Posted by M4-10 View Post
All other skepticism aside, am I really supposed to take audio quality testimonials from DEAF ROCK MUSICIANS?
I up-thumbed that because it made me laugh -- but want to assure folks that I'm in my sixties and have some hearing loss. So I can kid.

But it highlights the problem of setting people up arbitrarily as authorities.

Neil is a beloved artistic icon. But he's manifestly no scientist, and, no matter what shape his ears are in, he's one guy with one set of ears. Why should we put any more faith in his ears than anyone else's?

If Neil wants to talk about art, I'll listen. When he's talking about sound technology, heck, I know enough to know he doesn't have a clue, God love him.
Old 13th March 2014
  #165
Lives for gear
 
sleepingbag's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by spurratic View Post
If the sound is what it claims....and all those music legends aren't just B.S. ing on that video,
well that's the thing they VERY CLEARLY are
Old 13th March 2014
  #166
Lives for gear
 
bambamboom's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
WHAT??? Said the deaf guy as PONO passes 2 million dollars in funding in less than 36 hours.....
Indeed. Brilliant marketing of a fallacy.....
Old 13th March 2014
  #167
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
well that's the thing they VERY CLEARLY are
I don't think they're necessarily BSing -- but, for sure, let's be real, we are talking show biz here. It is what they do.

But these folks are (or I assume since I only watched a tiny bit of one vid) not scientists or pretending to be, they're just, you know, celebrity musicians. They pay other people to listen to music for them. As the joke goes.

If they like Neil and like the idea of making better sound more readily available (I'm willing to sign on to that general principle, myself), it's probably not that much of a jump to saying something goofy about this new venture.

We can't judge them by normal people's rules. They're celebrities. heh
Old 13th March 2014
  #168
Gear Nut
Pono's agitation of the GS naysayers is enough to make me love it. Go Pono!
Old 13th March 2014
  #169
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spurratic View Post
First of all, the MP3 is a very old technology that wasn't even developed to compress audio....it was originally designed to compress data...
this is not correct
the Fraunhofer Institute developed the MP3 for high quality, low bit-rate audio coding, a project named EUREKA project EU147. From the beginning, the goal was perceptual coding of audio: making the file sizes smaller, yes, BUT with the least amount of noticeable loss of sound quality. During the development of the codec, repeated listening tests were employed to find the algorithms least objectionable to the human ear. It was never a purely "data" driven thing. In fact, some of the early attempts supposedly sounded just awful. That is to say, much much worse than what we ended up with!

Quote:
Also, the price isn't really that bad considering iPods aren't exactly cheap.
but iPods do a lot more than simply play back audio files. And iPods CAN play back uncompressed .wavs and aiffs.

How many people lining up to buy this have already taken $400, and the extra dough they would spend on the hi-res downloads - so maybe $800 - and bought a great pair of headphones to listen to uncompressed .wavs on their current device?

Show of hands?

That's how many people are already doing everything they can to maximize their listening experience.
Old 13th March 2014
  #170
spurratic was probably thinking of FLAC (and the similar AL) which are formats normally associated with audio but that do use special algorithms closer to the classic zip to losslessly encode data that contains a high amount of what can be thought of for data compression purposes as repeating information.
Old 13th March 2014
  #171
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarmenC View Post
I have a Korg MR2000BLK recorder.
It will capture 16/44.1, 24/48, 24/88.2, 24/96, 24/176.4, 24/192 and DSD (2.8 & 5.6 MHz).
I have mastered to each bit/sample rate the machine will do.
I concluded that DSD (5.6 MHz) sounds the best to me, but I also cannot tell the difference between 24/192 and DSD(5.6mhz).
With my 55 yr. old ears, anyway.
YMMV...
I'd like PONO to do DSD, but if it does 24/192, that works for me.
C
I was asking though if you can tell the difference reliably when you are not the one who is switching. What would be really cool is if you could have someone change between recordings on your device to different rates and then see if you can reliably tell.

You very well might, but that would make you the first (or one of 'em).
Old 13th March 2014
  #172
Lives for gear
 
Silver Sonya's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpony View Post
Pono's agitation of the GS naysayers is enough to make me love it. Go Pono!
Hahahahaha! For real!

- c
Old 13th March 2014
  #173
Gear Maniac
 
Traintrack's Avatar
 

Same people pissing on this great idea. Give it a rest, you're starting to sound like old grouch men. Thank goodness you don't make the decision on the future of recorded commercial music. I see progress, and cannot wait to have this player.

Get off my lawn!
Old 13th March 2014
  #174
It's not the product that annoys people, I don't think, for the most part.

It's the marketing nonsense.

There is a big difference. Some folks have a very low tolerance for obvious bull****.

I've been watching audio technology for a half century now and I have to say I hate marketing BS as much now as I did in the early 60s. There was a lot then. There's a lot now. These people pray on the ignorance and gullibility of people who just want to believe and who don't have the technological grasp to understand that someone is fast-talking them.
Old 13th March 2014
  #175
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
I up-thumbed that because it made me laugh -- but want to assure folks that I'm in my sixties and have some hearing loss. So I can kid.

But it highlights the problem of setting people up arbitrarily as authorities.

Neil is a beloved artistic icon. But he's manifestly no scientist, and, no matter what shape his ears are in, he's one guy with one set of ears. Why should we put any more faith in his ears than anyone else's?

If Neil wants to talk about art, I'll listen. When he's talking about sound technology, heck, I know enough to know he doesn't have a clue, God love him.
But he's not alone. Way too many people in that video to discount their opinions. Other than them being ridiculously off base.
Old 13th March 2014
  #176
Gear Addict
 
spurratic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
this is not correct
the Fraunhofer Institute developed the MP3 for high quality, low bit-rate audio coding, a project named EUREKA project EU147. From the beginning, the goal was perceptual coding of audio: making the file sizes smaller, yes, BUT with the least amount of noticeable loss of sound quality. During the development of the codec, repeated listening tests were employed to find the algorithms least objectionable to the human ear. It was never a purely "data" driven thing. In fact, some of the early attempts supposedly sounded just awful. That is to say, much much worse than what we ended up with!

but iPods do a lot more than simply play back audio files. And iPods CAN play back uncompressed .wavs and aiffs.

How many people lining up to buy this have already taken $400, and the extra dough they would spend on the hi-res downloads - so maybe $800 - and bought a great pair of headphones to listen to uncompressed .wavs on their current device?

Show of hands?

That's how many people are already doing everything they can to maximize their listening experience.
Ok, I concede that the "mp3" was developed for audio encoding....however that idea was lifted from researchers of general data compression for the purposes of transmitting sound digitally (for communications) and then applied to sharing music, and then arrived at the mp3 as a practical use for the technology. I read this in the book "Appetite for Self-Destruction: The Spectacular Crash of the Record Industry in the Digital Age" by Steve Knopper. Phew.
Old 13th March 2014
  #177
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traintrack View Post
Same people pissing on this great idea. Give it a rest, you're starting to sound like old grouch men. Thank goodness you don't make the decision on the future of recorded commercial music. I see progress, and cannot wait to have this player.

Get off my lawn!
Old 13th March 2014
  #178
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Traintrack View Post
Same people pissing on this great idea. Give it a rest, you're starting to sound like old grouch men. Thank goodness you don't make the decision on the future of recorded commercial music. I see progress, and cannot wait to have this player.

Get off my lawn!
Great idea? heh heh

As if high resolution audio is a new idea? c'mon

There's nothing new here.

It's an mp3 player. Whooo Hooo!!!!!!!!!
Old 13th March 2014
  #179
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Great idea? heh heh

As if high resolution audio is a new idea? c'mon

There's nothing new here.

It's an mp3 player. Whooo Hooo!!!!!!!!!
The PonoPlayer was designed with a “no compromises” approach to sound quality. We partnered with the engineering team at Ayre (Ayre Acoustics) to include some of their world-class audio technology in our PonoPlayer. The Ayre team describes their contribution to the PonoPlayer design as follows:

• The digital filter used in the PonoPlayer has minimal phase, and no unnatural (digital sounding) pre-ringing. All sounds made (including music) always have reflections and/or echoes after the initial sound. There is no sound in nature that has any echo or reflection before the sound, which is what conventional linear-phase digital filters do. This is one reason that digital sound has a reputation for sounding "unnatural" and harsh.

• All circuitry is zero-feedback. Feedback can only correct an error after it has occurred, which means that it can never correct for all errors. By using proprietary ultra-linear circuitry with wide bandwidth and low output impedance, there is no need for unnatural sounding feedback.

• The DAC (Digital-to-Analog Converter) chip being used is widely recognized in the audio and engineering community as one of the best sounding DAC chips available today.

• The output buffer used to drive the headphones is fully discrete so that all individual parameters and circuit values and parts quality can be fully optimized for the absolute finest sound quality. The output impedance is very low so that the PonoPlayer delivers perfectly flat frequency response and wide volume range using virtually any set of headphones

Same DAC chip as the Mytek DSD DAC.
Doesn't sound like your average MP3 player...
Old 13th March 2014
  #180
Gear Maniac
 
Traintrack's Avatar
 

Some people are embarrassing themselves big time, same tripe over and over and over..... WE GET IT you think it SUCKS

Obviously your format of choice is a Broken Record
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