Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › PONO - Neil Youngs portable hi-res music player
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PONO - Neil Youngs portable hi-res music player - Page 2

post #16 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkubota1 View Post

 

Also, when you make statements like, "The MP3 only has 5 percent of the data present in the original recording. … The convenience of the digital age has forced people to choose between quality and convenience", you lose a lot of credibility.

Why is that ?

The number is pretty much correct and people ARE choosing convenience (small file-size) over quality  ??

post #17 of 882

The endless digital vs analog war well always continue.

 

I think apple using lossy files should be the less of your concerns when you guys buying music, when you purchase that music you are not the true owner, the ownership right of the tracks you have purchased will die with you!

meaning for those of us who likes to collect fine music out collection cannot be passed on to other people after we die. 

post #18 of 882

Only 5% just turns the whole thing into a BS claim. Even if data is lost, a 95% loss is a ridiculous. BS I say,...

post #19 of 882

Forgive the amateurish line of questioning here, as I'm simply trying to educate myself.

 

Rolling Stone has, within the past few days, published an in-depth article about Pono, wherein they state that Warner music has recently converted 8,000 of its' albums to hi-res in anticipation of this project.  Now, I don't know if these were previously prepared unreleased SACDs or if they were genuinely worked on specifically for this format, but the one question  I keep returning to is this:

 

Let's say that a recording was originally captured at 24/88 or even 24/96 before being dithered down to the redbook standard of 16/44.  How is it then possible to "convert" anything to a bit width or sample rate greater than that to which it was originally recorded?

 

The common answer I've read to my inquiry is that the original master, whether captured digitally or otherwise, was first recorded at a given bitrate, then mixed through, say, an analog setup, after which it is then transferred in the desired bitrate before being sent for mastering.  I know that's extremely vague, but I'm hoping others more knowledgeable in this area than I can fill in the gaps.

 

Also, one thing I'd like to offer up some speculation on are the dual outputs on the device.  We know the hardware itself is very much akin to the iBasso DX100.  Storage, decoder, dac, amp, all in what looks like a mini Toblerone box.  Although I personally feel that a standalone PMP is quite obsolete, I'm fine with this.

 

What I haven't heard many mention is the fact that the second jack is more than likely a line-out.  I'm envisioning this scenario.  You're commuting, it's a DX100.  You return home, plug it into your computer, line out to speakers, now it's an iBasso D7 with storage, an outboard DAC/headphone amp enabling any PC, Mac or home hi-fi to handle all of that hi-res goodness.  One device for commute/office/home.  Choose your own software for playback on a computer.  The store is merely a website, if not a dedicated iTunes-like client.  It would certainly appear the store/delivery mechanism is undoubtedly going to be the main focus, so the whole idea of multi-function hardware seems to make sense.

 

I'm also going to post this elsewhere to try and gather as much insight as possible.  Thanks if you've read all the way through.


Edited by oneway23 - 10/1/12 at 12:37am
post #20 of 882

sorry for the double post...odd.


Edited by oneway23 - 9/30/12 at 11:50pm
post #21 of 882

very good player to pair with ADL stride... both triangle-shaped =)

post #22 of 882

Personally I hope it's a game changer. The proof is in the puddin' though,...

post #23 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneway23 View Post

Forgive the amateurish line of questioning here, as I'm simply trying to educate myself.

 

Rolling Stone has, within the past few days, published an in-depth article about Pono, wherein they state that Warner music has recently converted 8,000 of its' albums to hi-res in anticipation of this project.  Now, I don't know if these were previously prepared unreleased SACDs or if they were genuinely worked on specifically for this format, but the one question  I keep returning to is this:

 

Let's say that a recording was originally captured at 24/88 or even 24/96 before being dithered down to the redbook standard of 16/44.  How is it then possible to "convert" anything to a bit width or sample rate greater than that to which it was originally recorded?

 

maybe what they have transfered is from tape, digital recording only really started mid-80's

post #24 of 882
Very much looking forward to this. Knowing how Neil is very fastidious in his studio and recording quality and also knowing he is one of the few out there in the music business with a history of integrity in what he does I have a feeling this is going to be rather special.
I am certainly going to explore it further once we know price and such.
post #25 of 882

Could someone please explain this for me:

 

 

Quote:
The device will enable users to convert their digital music catalogue into high quality analogue tracks, with the intention to bring listeners the true sounds of the recordings, fresh from the studio.

 

From this article: http://www.tonedeaf.com.au/news/international-news/207261/neil-youngs-new-audiophile-music-player-could-be-ipod-killer.htm

 

 

So what analogue media is this? A tiny tape spinning around inside the device that you record songs on through line in?

post #26 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danneq View Post

Could someone please explain this for me:

 

 

 

From this article: http://www.tonedeaf.com.au/news/international-news/207261/neil-youngs-new-audiophile-music-player-could-be-ipod-killer.htm

 

 

So what analogue media is this? A tiny tape spinning around inside the device that you record songs on through line in?

It is just poor understanding of the author of that webpage. What Neil was talking about is the same thing HDtracks has been doing for a long while, accessing master tap and remaster it to 24/192 (which is the highest that any current device can play). I just hope Neil was refering to 24/96 files not flac files (in contrast to the apple lossy format offered in itune)

post #27 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by audionewbi View Post

It is just poor understanding of the author of that webpage. What Neil was talking about is the same thing HDtracks has been doing for a long while, accessing master tap and remaster it to 24/192 (which is the highest that any current device can play). I just hope Neil was refering to 24/96 files not flac files (in contrast to the apple lossy format offered in itune)

Audio, would you please explain "I just hope Neil was refering to 24/96 files not flac files (in contrast to the apple lossy format offered in itune)"

I don't understand in contrast to ALAC? Isn't FLAC and ALAC the same SQ?

post #28 of 882
ALAC & FLAC are BOTH lossless,...so there'll be no difference between the 2 where sq is concerned. The claims of the pono player are, currently, like reaching for the stars whilst standing in a ditch. See what happens when it comes out, THEN see if it lives up to it's claims. So far, it's all hyperbole.
post #29 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saraguie View Post

Audio, would you please explain "I just hope Neil was refering to 24/96 files not flac files (in contrast to the apple lossy format offered in itune)"

I don't understand in contrast to ALAC? Isn't FLAC and ALAC the same SQ?

itunes only sells lossy AAC. I know Neil complain was that. I am just hoping his device is not a device which is capable of playing back flac and alac at low res, as we already have many capable DAP which can do that. 

 

It is still unclear to me what exactly is he comparing the apple lossy files against, to redbook standard or 24/192 standards?


Hope that explained what I meant. 

post #30 of 882
Quote:
What I haven't heard many mention is the fact that the second jack is more than likely a line-out. 

 

I'm thinking it's a line-in (based on the David Letterman interview), so maybe a 24/192k ADC?  

 

I think there is only 1 output - a  headphone out, but that can serve as a line-out (set the volume to max)

to feed the AUX input of a lot of equipment.  You can do that with an iPod, but it's better sounding bypass

the volume control and headphone output stage and go with a true line-out IMO.

 

Based on the interview, it sounds like Pono is a DAP that can play all kinds of digital files, up to 24/192k.  

 

Without AT LEAST 256GB of storage, it wouldn't be practical if you are loading up on 24/192 albums (where 1 song

can easily be 0.5GB large!)

 

I have no opinion of Pono yet - but if it brings awareness to the record labels, iTunes, etc. that more people DO care

about the audio quality of the music they purchase, then that's good!

 

Vinnie

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › PONO - Neil Youngs portable hi-res music player