Now, that's funny!
Interesting PONO Article
- Thread starter shacky
- Start date
so_ein_pech
Well-Known Member
Fuel for the fire: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/02/pono-player-review-a-tall-refreshing-drink-of-snake-oil/
The author doesn't pan the Pono, but points out that most of the benefit you hear from Pono-specific HD content is that it is sometimes mastered better--which will translate to better sound on any player.
The author doesn't pan the Pono, but points out that most of the benefit you hear from Pono-specific HD content is that it is sometimes mastered better--which will translate to better sound on any player.
Naptown Rob
Ponographer
That's your argument, dude? Seriously?
That's boilerplate. Show me another similar website that doesn't have basically the same statement.
Can you make an actual contribution regarding your experience with the device?
As a wise man once noted, the surest path to ignorance is condemnation prior to investigation.
As far as I can tell you have a very firm, yet uninformed opinion.
The writer must be stone deaf with this comment:
"No amount of testing made 192kHz/24-bit FLAC audio sound noticeably better than high-quality MP3s."
ev13wt
Super Member
Here is another article about PONO from LA weekly: http://www.laweekly.com/music/why-cds-may-actually-sound-better-than-vinyl-5352162
Seems well researched!
Seems well researched!
But even if humans can hear or "feel" above 22 kHz, the experience of listening to high-resolution digital tracks is very different from listening to vinyl. If anything, it's closer to that of the CD.
Except of course that they are missing the biggest point - the inherent ringing heard well downstream of that found with the Redbook brickwall filter.
Reynolds531
Active Member
Point being, Pono can and does stae items clearly contrary to materials science, physics, and electrical engineering principals and their legal disclaimer shields them.
I don't need to test special green light bulbs to know that they don't improve sound reproduction. There are facts and there are cult like beliefs. Audio has both. Pono is cult
us.marantz.com doesnt appear to have the dislaimer
Do tell us in detail what we can and cannot hear.
Thanks for the all the humor you provide.
Naptown Rob
Ponographer
Again, you'll have something to add once you've heard one.
Til then, you've taken a position based on conjecture, and seem to have your own set of cult like beliefs. I'm perfectly up for critiques - you're simply not in a position to offer one.
BTW - Apple's disclaimers are about 30 pages long.
Last edited:
Why on earth would anyone actually need to hear a 192/24 source played back on a really nice system to be able to pontificate on its merits?
Well researched if you consider rehashing what you read on Wikipedia as gospel. He should try more listening....along with a lot more people.
A couple music production sites have taken the time to put up quality material that you can download in multiple formats. A chance to hear the same material at different data rates. If more would listen to those instead of regurgitating web lore, then these nonsense "science" based articles would be widely known for the bunk they are.
EV3
Reynolds531
Active Member
Why on earth would anyone actually need to hear a 192/24 source played back on a really nice system to be able to pontificate on its merits?
exactly! a really nice system won't sound better with 144db of dynamic range and the ability to reproduce 45 kHz
Sometime try pushing "Play" and see what you think. Then you'll know much more about how important it is for flat response and bandwidth and how good of a predictor as to sound quality they actually are.
EV3
Reynolds531
Active Member
you certainly cannot hear 45 khz, 35 khz or even 25 khz.
My PhD EE and physics friends also appreciate the humor in eviscerating audiophile nonsense
I think i will search the journals Nature and Science for a while. if Pono claims are true, they will be on the cover.
davidro
Lunatic Member
Well I've advised yet another kid that he don't need an outboard DAC if his source is a smartphone.
Just bypass the volume, and the sound will be great with his Audioengine active speakers.
If he has to spend more money (which isn't going to be more than a grand at max), then spend it on stuff that actually matters. Like acoustic treatment.
Just bypass the volume, and the sound will be great with his Audioengine active speakers.
If he has to spend more money (which isn't going to be more than a grand at max), then spend it on stuff that actually matters. Like acoustic treatment.
Naptown Rob
Ponographer
Dang. Did your subscription to Luddites Quarterly expire again?
Reynolds531
Active Member
I have never read Vinylphile magazine.
ev13wt
Super Member
Ultrasonic content can produce intermodulation distortion. Wouldn't you want a good anti aliasing filter in place?
You can test your system using xiphs files here: http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html#toc_1ch
Naptown and Reynolds, get a roooom
Why is the Pono so threatening to people who haven't heard one?
The negativity surrounding this product -- and it's a really good sounding product -- blows my mind. Who peed in these people's cornflakes? Why do they waste emotional energy on this topic? What do they have to gain by trashing it? Do they not realize that life is short and they could make better use of their time?
Does it make them feel smarter or something? In all reality, they just sounds obnoxious. And I gotta say, I've yet to meet an obnoxious person that I considered truly smart.
The negativity surrounding this product -- and it's a really good sounding product -- blows my mind. Who peed in these people's cornflakes? Why do they waste emotional energy on this topic? What do they have to gain by trashing it? Do they not realize that life is short and they could make better use of their time?
Does it make them feel smarter or something? In all reality, they just sounds obnoxious. And I gotta say, I've yet to meet an obnoxious person that I considered truly smart.