[FFBookman]

i'm not alone with pono, almost all musicians and recording engineers can hear it. they might not think it's needed for the average consumer, but they can hear it. most have been tracking and mixing at 24bit for over a decade now. and when played through a proper signal chain, oh looky there, sounds better. who cares about math. you should work on sorting out mathematically why it sounds better instead of telling people who hear it in the simplest terms that they are crazy. you are flat earth types here, relying on common sense to disguise the flaws in your argument.
 
the quickness that you people dismiss people who make, record, and mix music for a living is amazing to me. they are the experts in music and emotional sound, not you, yet because they don't can't translate it to high-end physics and formulas you disregard them. do you think the people who provide enjoyable sound for you have math degrees? very few of them.
 
but we can all hear and can understand quality if it's provided to us. we all get ear fatigue and can detect digital distortions, and we can all detect spatial differences. maybe you don't care, maybe you haven't figured out how to hear it yet. but you can and whether or not you've figured out how to get your antiquated formulas rewritten in enough time for anyone to care, we shall see.

 

[FFBookman]

I can get on board with that. Corporate-driven science often has to find "good enough".  Why not rely on voice and hearing loss studies to determine our hearing limits, and ignore all music and biology experts that hear deficiencies at 16/44?
 
Because in the late 1970's they knew that a 24bit DAC was going to cost over $1k per chip. No one would buy a CD player if it cost over $2500 retail, no matter how cool the new technology was, or how great it sounded.
 
Gotta get that cost down. Gotta make compromises. First there is cost of DAC, 16bit far cheaper than 24bit in 1980's.
 
Also there's storage -- Redbook could hold about 760mb of data per disc, which would have translated to about 5 songs @ 24/96. Shorter run-time than cassette or vinyl. Nope.
 
All great arguments for 16/44. All tied to ancient tech and ancient practices. All expired in 2015.

 

[RazorJack]

I knew I wouldn't regret subscribing to this thread

 

[Tuco1965]

 

[RRod]

He's just mad because he knows if we down-sampled some hi-res Ponostore material to 16/44.1, put it on the speakers, had him walk in the room, and told him "hey listen to this hi-res Pono track, isn't is so good!", he'd go "oh yeah, way better than Redbook!"

 

[limpidglitch]

 
i'm not alone with pono, almost all musicians and recording engineers can hear it. they might not think it's needed for the average consumer, but they can hear it. most have been tracking and mixing at 24bit for over a decade now. and when played through a proper signal chain, oh looky there, sounds better. who cares about math. you should work on sorting out mathematically why it sounds better instead of telling people who hear it in the simplest terms that they are crazy. you are flat earth types here, relying on common sense to disguise the flaws in your argument.
 
the quickness that you people dismiss people who make, record, and mix music for a living is amazing to me. they are the experts in music and emotional sound, not you, yet because they don't can't translate it to high-end physics and formulas you disregard them. do you think the people who provide enjoyable sound for you have math degrees? very few of them.
 
but we can all hear and can understand quality if it's provided to us. we all get ear fatigue and can detect digital distortions, and we can all detect spatial differences. maybe you don't care, maybe you haven't figured out how to hear it yet. but you can and whether or not you've figured out how to get your antiquated formulas rewritten in enough time for anyone to care, we shall see.

 
But the earth is flat. As θ approaches 0, sinθ approaches θ.
Simple, even Archimedes knew that.
 

  I can get on board with that. Corporate-driven science often has to find "good enough".  Why not rely on voice and hearing loss studies to determine our hearing limits, and ignore all music and biology experts that hear deficiencies at 16/44?
 
Because in the late 1970's they knew that a 24bit DAC was going to cost over $1k per chip. No one would buy a CD player if it cost over $2500 retail, no matter how cool the new technology was, or how great it sounded.
 
Gotta get that cost down. Gotta make compromises. First there is cost of DAC, 16bit far cheaper than 24bit in 1980's.
 
Also there's storage -- Redbook could hold about 760mb of data per disc, which would have translated to about 5 songs @ 24/96. Shorter run-time than cassette or vinyl. Nope.
 
All great arguments for 16/44. All tied to ancient tech and ancient practices. All expired in 2015.
 

 
Audiophiles have been singing this song for as long as CDs have existed, and yet no-one has managed to demonstrate the purported shortcomings.

 

[bigshot]

 
i'm not alone with pono, almost all musicians and recording engineers can hear it.

 
Did you know that you were speaking to a person who has worked professionally as a sound engineer right now?

 

[castleofargh]

my mom payed me 5 francs(old frog money) when I was a kid so that I would stop playing the recorder at home. being payed made me a professional by definition.
fear the cursed tool of evil!!!!!!!

 

[FFBookman]

   
Did you know that you were speaking to a person who has worked professionally as a sound engineer right now?

Congratulations, friend. I too have made and published music, I don't doubt the size of your multitrack. Can you tell me what dither is?
 
I'm sure you use it, please explain to me what it is doing and why I need it when going from 24bit audio to 16bit audio?

 

[FFBookman]

Do you doubt my redbook breakdown?  
 
Do you really believe that it was scientifically proven by "pure science" that there was a digital sampling rate that represented all that humans could ever detect
 
or do you believe there were real limitation to both storage on the small optical disc as well as DAC cost that drove 16bit as the standard.  Phillips wanted 14bit and smaller discs but Sony cockblocked and moved it to 16bit with larger discs. Phillips had already retooled their factory for their size 14bit discs, Sony scored some points. 
 
All cool and logical in a business sense, but this farce about there is nothing more than that in the DSP realm is crazy. We all know it's there, that's why sound cards and every mixing gear in 15 years has done 24bit. Are you calling every person that works in audio anywhere where 24bit is used guilt of snake oil? 
 
Crazy. It's 2015. We were hearing the 24bit difference in the studio by the mid,late 90's. 

 

[James-uk]

Do you doubt my redbook breakdown?  

Do you really believe that it was scientifically proven by "pure science" that there was a digital sampling rate that represented all that humans could ever detect

or do you believe there were real limitation to both storage on the small optical disc as well as DAC cost that drove 16bit as the standard.  Phillips wanted 14bit and smaller discs but Sony cockblocked and moved it to 16bit with larger discs. Phillips had already retooled their factory for their size 14bit discs, Sony scored some points. 

All cool and logical in a business sense, but this farce about there is nothing more than that in the DSP realm is crazy. We all know it's there, that's why sound cards and every mixing gear in 15 years has done 24bit. Are you calling every person that works in audio anywhere where 24bit is used guilt of snake oil? 

Crazy. It's 2015. We were hearing the 24bit difference in the studio by the mid,late 90's. 

Can you provide any evidence to back up your claims?

 

[FFBookman]

Can you provide any evidence to back up your claims?

Google it yourself. Read up on redbook creation, read up on laserdisc and other optical disc development in the 70's. I don't keep links handy because I'm not paid to do this.
 
Also read up Nyquest. He worked for the phone company most of his life developing early digital telephony concepts and sampling rates needed to transmit mono voice. Great work but not the foundation of hearing science or having anything to do with simulated stereo music production that we all listen to.
 
He is always pulled out of context because his theorem is inflated to infallible when it knows nothing of stereoscopic listening and vibration sensing. It knows nothing of the room and position of the ears. It has none of that contextual depth.
 
The evidence is when I hear 24bit on my pono player, played through almost any set of speakers. They are alive and full of depth and do this magical thing - they start to disappear. 

 

[RRod]

 
Do you doubt my redbook breakdown?  
 
Do you really believe that it was scientifically proven by "pure science" that there was a digital sampling rate that represented all that humans could ever detect
 
or do you believe there were real limitation to both storage on the small optical disc as well as DAC cost that drove 16bit as the standard.  Phillips wanted 14bit and smaller discs but Sony cockblocked and moved it to 16bit with larger discs. Phillips had already retooled their factory for their size 14bit discs, Sony scored some points. 
 
All cool and logical in a business sense, but this farce about there is nothing more than that in the DSP realm is crazy. We all know it's there, that's why sound cards and every mixing gear in 15 years has done 24bit. Are you calling every person that works in audio anywhere where 24bit is used guilt of snake oil? 
 
Crazy. It's 2015. We were hearing the 24bit difference in the studio by the mid,late 90's. 

 
So why are you ignoring the fact that there's a difference between mastering at 24bit and delivering content at 24bits? No one begrudges engineers for doing the former, but the latter is unnecessary, especially if they're going to charge the prices they do for HD content.
 
Actually, nm, I know the answer already.

 

[limpidglitch]

 
Also read up Nyquest. He worked for the phone company most of his life developing early digital telephony concepts and sampling rates needed to transmit mono voice. Great work but not the foundation of hearing science or having anything to do with simulated stereo music production that we all listen to.
 
He is always pulled out of context because his theorem is inflated to infallible when it knows nothing of stereoscopic listening and vibration sensing. It knows nothing of the room and position of the ears. It has none of that contextual depth.
 

 
Could you explain why going from mono to stereo (and presumably to surround) would make a difference to this, and why bit depth is of such importance to spacial cues?
 

  my mom payed me 5 francs(old frog money) when I was a kid so that I would stop playing the recorder at home. being payed made me a professional by definition.
fear the cursed tool of evil!!!!!!!

 

 
Ah, memories 

Are these infernal devices as prevalent in US primary schools as they seem to be in European?

 

[lamode]

 
your tests lie to you. give you bad data. you base your entire argument on that bad data. people can hear better than an ABX test will ever show because the test itself assaults our natural hearing processes. 

 
Music assaults our natural hearing processes?