warrenpridgeon
I'm putting this here cos it's related to the recording side... but mods please move it if it's in the wrong place...
http://www.ponomusic.com/
I'm not sure what to think of this... We know MP3's lose some quality...
One of their FAQs lists this:
"Generally speaking, mp3 files have a bit rate of 192kbps or 256kbps. These are highly compressed files, and are smaller in size than higher resolution music files. The good news is that you can keep a lot of them in a small amount of storage on a portable player or mobile device. The bad news is that they’ve lost a lot of the musical information that often reveals the most pleasant and satisfying aspects of the music – mostly it is the sense of realism, and dynamics, and detail that higher resolution recordings typically capture.
On the “low end” of higher resolution music (CD lossless, 16 bit/44.1kHz), PonoMusic files have about 6 times more musical information than a typical mp3. With ultra-high quality resolution recordings (24 bit/192kHz), the difference between a PonoMusic digital file and an mp3 is about 30 times more data from which your player reconstructs the “song”. "
doc-phil
I don't remember where I read this, so take it with a pinch of salt, but I read about a study that was conducted where among about 500 participants, very few, almost none if my memory serves correctly, could tell the difference between the playback of a 16 bit/44.1kHz recording and and 24 bit/192kHz recording.
I believe that 90% of people can't tell the difference between a 192kbps mp3 and a 320kbps mp3. I know from my own experience that only once bit rate goes below 192 can I start noticing a loss in quality (and this normally only occurs once it gets down to 128kbps).
That pono device made some waves on kickstarter, and I would be very interested to listen to one myself. But if all it does it play a digital music format at 24 bit/192kHz then I'm sceptical.
The talk on the website of no early reflections and all that stuff sounds a bit gimmicky, but the proof will be in the pudding as they say!
Mixerboy
Not only that but most people (audio pro's included) can't tell the difference between 320kbps MP3 and 16bit 44.1k wav especially when level matched.
This should pretty much answer all your questions and more:
http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
warrenpridgeon
My feelings were that most people won't easily tell the difference between a CD and pono... And then the playback would have to be on a very good system.
In the video they talked about "better stereo separation" at one point... I think that might just be the device creating a "wider" pan...
I'd also like to test one of these suckers out... I'm guessing a lot of the "better quality" the people were hearing was some clever eq and stuff for the car environment they all listened to it in...
Mixerboy
With most of the audiophool stuff the caveat is that you always need a really "good system" to be able to hear it which for me makes most of the delivery medium redundant right away, it's like some new visual format that you can only truly experience IF you buy some fancy R125 000 television, for everyone else with a normal tv you won't be able to experience the superior quality so you might as well stick with what works.
It's like the whole speaker cable debacle, it always ends up with "them" saying something along the lines of:
"Well if you can't hear the difference/improvement your speakers obviously aren't that good"
Or:
"If you can't hear the difference/improvement then your room obviously needs treatment"
In which case wouldn't it make more sense to rather spend that speaker cable money on buying better speakers or improving the room.
Attila
yeah man I wanna test one too
NorioDS
I'd love to test this for myself - particularly if I can listen to my own MP3 of a favourite track and then hear their version, PLAYED ON THE SAME ("Pono") DEVICE.
I think that'll be a good test. Some music I just listen to for fun/background noise while I work. Other music transports me. If this can help me enjoy the latter more, then I reckon it's worth it.
AlanRatcliffe
While we could do with moving away from lossy formats like MP3 for the mainstream, and I'd love to see a higher quality of playback device become standard, this is more a marketing thing than actual science.
I remember Neil Young talking about this tech a while ago and it struck me that it's all based on his nostalgia for the relatively low fidelity of vinyl, which used to be part of the music-making process - pretty much like our valves are for our guitar amps. Going higher sample rate and bit depth for digital won't fix that, but it might have a chance of convincing the luddites and hipsters. ?
Ultimately, to succeed, these guys just have to convince enough people that it is better, like Apple does. I can see the music industry getting behind it - they love the opportunity to sell all the same music again. They've done it often enough in the past.
Attila
I see that Walkman is/has tried to pip them to the post on getting product to market first
warrenpridgeon
Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
While we could do with moving away from lossy formats like MP3 for the mainstream, and I'd love to see a higher quality of playback device become standard, this is more a marketing thing than actual science.
I remember Neil Young talking about this tech a while ago and it struck me that it's all based on his nostalgia for the relatively low fidelity of vinyl, which used to be part of the music-making process - pretty much like our valves are for our guitar amps. Going higher sample rate and bit depth for digital won't fix that, but it might do a chance of convincing the luddites and hipsters. ?
Ultimately, to succeed, these guys just have to convince enough people that it is better, like Apple does. I can see the music industry getting behind it - they love the opportunity to sell all the same music again. They've done it often enough in the past.
A lot of the people in their testimonial vid seem to hipsterish and quite a few referred to how it "sounded like vinyl, man!".
People will believe a lot of stuff if you are just very convincing...
I refer you to the following clip:
=
Mixerboy
So it comes with free noise, hum, scratch and dirt emulation and the sound quality gradually degrades the more you play the tracks........nice.
Here are some common vinyl myths:
http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)
The whole DSD thing was a MUCH better idea for the advancement of digital audio and that went nowhere.
Gearhead
Hi I'm Gearhead and I am an audioholic.
Now that we've got that out of the way - I don't know how people cannot tell the difference. I can, in double blind test, hear the difference between SACD and CD from the same device; never mind differences with compressed stuff. All one needs to do is close their eyes and visualise the singer, the band, the instruments and amps and the acoustics of the room - if you can picture everything in your head it's good reproduction. As soon as the picture falters (think 'Matrix' glitches) there's trouble. Could be the recording itself - different takes in different acoustics or artificial wet added to parts of the mix etc. Chances are if it's a pro studio recording that any trouble is caused by the equipment you're reproducing from.
Modern audio gear is so full of compromise it's just not funny - and not even cheap either. The power supply is too slow and too small, stages are very nonlinear, there is too much local negative feedback to make up for that, the routing is awful, caps are crappy, on the digital side timekeeping is hideous, cables are junk, speakers are the worst ever with tiny flabby plastic housings and flabby cones with oval coils in tiny magnets, compensated by equalisers full of phase issues, and so on and so on and so on - it's not the audiphiles who are crazy but the general public buying these horrible 'sets'.
Out of curiosity I got some 6-channel BluRay thing the other day. It sometimes makes me nauseous listening, its so bad. I guess I needed a reminder to finish off my Nelson Pass F4 triplets. Poor consumers that cannot build amps.
doc-phil
Gearhead wrote:
Out of curiosity I got some 6-channel BluRay thing the other day. It sometimes makes me nauseous listening, its so bad. I guess I needed a reminder to finish off my Nelson Pass F4 triplets. Poor consumers that cannot build amps.
Sorry to hear about your condition ?
AlanRatcliffe
To be fair, there are extremes on both sides. There are the terrible "consumer" grade things that you mention, which do sound truly horrendous (I've got one, but heaven forbid I actually use it for music - or anything other than making movies louder). And don't get me started on badly ripped 128KB MP3s played on overpriced iPods... Or people who think that audio quality is measured solely by how much your windows rattle...
On the extreme end, way over on the other side, there's your marketing and pseudoscience driven purchaser who will "invest" tens of thousands in wooden knobs and directional AC power cables with flux capacitors to guide the midichlorians, simply because a glossy magazine ad or flash banner ad told him it will make everything sound that much better. The "listen with their wallet" types and the emperor's new clothes types...
But there's plenty of middle ground, ranging from good to "wow!". We do need something much better than MP3's on an iPod for the mass market too. Listening is a skill that gets better with practice and until the general public starts being exposed to better quality audio (and music), they are never going to know any better.
warrenpridgeon
Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
To be fair, there are extremes on both sides. There are the terrible "consumer" grade things that you mention, which do sound truly horrendous (I've got one, but heaven forbid I actually use it for music - or anything other than making movies louder). And don't get me started on badly ripped 128KB MP3s played on overpriced iPods... Or people who think that audio quality is measured solely by how much your windows rattle...
On the extreme end, way over on the other side, there's your marketing and pseudoscience driven purchaser who will "invest" tens of thousands in wooden knobs and directional AC power cables with flux capacitors to guide the midichlorians, simply because a glossy magazine ad or flash banner ad told him it will make everything sound that much better. The "listen with their wallet" types and the emperor's new clothes types...
But there's plenty of middle ground, ranging from good to "wow!". We do need something much better than MP3's on an iPod for the mass market too. Listening is a skill that gets better with practice and until the general public starts being exposed to better quality audio (and music), they are never going to know any better.
Sigh...I only started listening to music towards the end of highschool so I lost a few years of practice... lol...
So I often have conversations with our keyboard player where he is like "can you hear that electric guitar riff in there?" and I am like "uh... nope", then he'll hum/whistle it and then I can hear it... I can already hear a lot more detail than say 5 years ago... but I still need a lot of practice!
Attila
too true Warren, I am guilty of hearing and not taking the time to listen properly
AlanRatcliffe
Keep at it and eventually you'll reach the stage where you can clearly hear individual instruments - your "conductor's ears", if you like.
You can also reach the level of "Producer's ears", where you get to hear the individual elements of the sounds (if it's double or triple tracked, where each is in azimuth, where the "space" around it is in the "space" of the mix, etc.). Helps if you listen to a lot of later era (Wall to Final Cut) Floyd repeatedly. ?
I suppose there's also an ultimate level I haven't reached yet - mastering engineer's ears. But I'm kind of scared of reaching that one as it'll probably make most of the stuff I like unlistenable - it seems that each level raises your expectations of the recording and a lot of the classic stuff just doesn't pass muster any more. I already can't listen to any Hendrix...
And back to audiophile level stuff - once you have producer's ears, hearing a familiar recording on another good playback system becomes an absolute joy - akin to hearing it for the first time again. How a different system can change a mix is quite a revelation.
Bob-Dubery
A potential problem for Pono, it seems to me, is the CEO. Young might be a great visionary, but the original CEO stood aside and Young took over. Can he play the corporate game? Already there are rumblings from early investors who bought in on the basis of an experienced business man running with Young's vision rather than into a company being run by Young.
Mixerboy
I think overall it will have it's place (up until now if you wanted high quality portable music as far as I know you never really had much option so it's a good thing), as far as mass consumers go it has the same chance of replacing MP3's as fine dining gourmet food has of replacing McDonalds.
warrenpridgeon
Attila Barath wrote:
too true Warren, I am guilty of hearing and not taking the time to listen properly
I bet if you ask ANY of our wives they will attest to this... HAHAHAHAHA ? ?
