A New "Objectivist Friendly" Forum

[RRod]

So who thinks that Pono's "Revealer", which takes your 192/24 file and converts it to 96/24, 48/16, 44/16 and mp3 does a fair job, keeping in mind Pono also has an own highres music store?

 
I guess my questions would be:
.Why should any resampler not be good these days?
.Has no one made any measurements on it yet?
 
Given the pedigree, I'd expect plenty of roll-off before 20kHz to prevent the dreaded pre-ringing.

 

[Ruben123]

Are you aware of what the revealer is? It is an app for the Pono made to compare all sorts of file quality. Of course all the lesser qualities ("lesser") than 192/24 sound worse and worse. In the app it is.
I've read plenty of evidence that even 44/16 and 192/24 are not distinguishable, let alone all the steps from 192 all the way down! But in the Pono app the differences are audible. But hey Pono also sells highres albums so would they have any benefit in letting people think the differences are that huge?

 

[SoundAndMotion]

   
I guess my questions would be:
.Why should any resampler not be good these days?
.Has no one made any measurements on it yet?
 
Given the pedigree, I'd expect plenty of roll-off before 20kHz to prevent the dreaded pre-ringing.

To your first question, ​I can think of 2 possible reasons:
1-As Ruben123 implies, perhaps they have a "motivation" to produce different results for different sample rates. I know nothing of the "Revealer", but the Pono itself has, as you suggest, a roll-off before 20kHz:
see figure 3 here.
2-Just because "it is known", doesn't mean everyone knows it or properly implements it. That's why bad ignition switches (GM), airbags (Takata) and nukes (Fukushima) still exist, even if "it is known" how to do it better.
 
To the second question: just the Pono measurements in the Stereophile article. That doesn't mean they haven't been done, just that I'm unaware of any.

 

[RRod]

Are you aware of what the revealer is? It is an app for the Pono made to compare all sorts of file quality. Of course all the lesser qualities ("lesser") than 192/24 sound worse and worse. In the app it is.
I've read plenty of evidence that even 44/16 and 192/24 are not distinguishable, let alone all the steps from 192 all the way down! But in the Pono app the differences are audible. But hey Pono also sells highres albums so would they have any benefit in letting people think the differences are that huge?

 
Yeah I know what it is, and it would seem trivial to record output of the Revealer's conversion. I'd do it today if I actually owned the thing, but of course that's the rub: if you own it, you want to believe it, and if you don't believe it, you don't want to own it.
 
Put another way: I agree with you and I would be unsurprised if some trickery popped up.
 

 
To your first question, ​I can think of 2 possible reasons:
1-As Ruben123 implies, perhaps they have a "motivation" to produce different results for different sample rates. I know nothing of the "Revealer", but the Pono itself has, as you suggest, a roll-off before 20kHz:
see figure 3 here.
2-Just because "it is known", doesn't mean everyone knows it or properly implements it. That's why bad ignition switches (GM), airbags (Takata) and nukes (Fukushima) still exist, even if "it is known" how to do it better.
 
To the second question: just the Pono measurements in the Stereophile article. That doesn't mean they haven't been done, just that I'm unaware of any.

 
Believe you me, you don't have to sell me on the corporate interest angle. But either we prove trickery or we just keep re-affirming the opinion on the rest of the forum that us SoSci people are just fuddy-duddies who poo-poo products they haven't tried.