|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
65.19.76.104
In Reply to: RE: PONO: What it is REALLY about posted by Chris from Lafayette on January 16, 2015 at 09:22:54
Here's the libelous quote. Mark Waldrep had better have some evidence or he should expect to get his ass sued for making a libelous remark."What you will not hear is how 99% of the Pono catalog of “so-called” “master quality” albums or “high-resolution albums” will be nothing more than rips of standard resolution compact discs. I doubt that Neil will talk about his belief that using different sampling rates creatively during the recording process or the fact that his own catalog will never be available in high-resolution audio (because it wasn’t recorded in high-resolution!)."
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Follow Ups:
thank you Tony.Totally incorrect, and a total fabrication.
Like I said previously, an AGGRESSIVE and NEGATIVE campaign against Pono.
Part of his problem, and it is HIS problem..is that he defines hirez as only music recorded in 192 Khz natively.
The fact is a 192 capture of any analog source also qualifies, since it is superior to the standard, which is CD quality.
When a film is mastered for BluRay from the original negatives, it is the HIGHEST resolution that film will ever be available in.
He has no right to force his definition on every one else.
Edits: 01/16/15
Are you saying Waldrep defines hi-rez as music recorded ONLY at 192 KHz natively? If that is indeed what you're saying, then you're pretty free and easy with the attributions yourself.
And BTW, who is FORCING definitions on everyone else?
The Waldrep quote above says Neil Young's catalog doesn't count as hires because it wasn't recorded in hires. I have heard others make this stupid claim that analog master tapes are not hires. They are idiots.
That being said, he is right about the fact that there will be lots of titles that are only 16/44 if that's all that exists for those titles.
I would have to agree that anyone who says SOTA analog is not high resolution is well..
As far as 44/16, as you said if that is all there is, that is all there is for certain recordings. And Pono has been upfront about this.
There must be a whole lot of folks who feel threatened by Pono..I don't see the reason for some of the negative spin.
such as glitches in Pono Music World software and the Pono player firmware (these bugs are being worked out as they come up). Also, the Pono store could be easier to browse (eg, by genre or file resolution). But, hey, they just got started . . . no doubt they will continue to evolve.
But, yeah, some of the press and posts in this thread are way over-the-top in their criticism. IMO, Pono is a HUGE boon for computer audiophiles.
Absolutely! There are valid criticisms!
I will be the first one to admit nothing is grouped by category..resolution, artist, genre...etc...in the works.
But they have been open TWO WEEKS!
There are several SIGNIFICANT advantages over HDT and SHR:
-first, as you mentioned, if a title is only available currently in 44.1/16 and later becomes available in higher resolution, you get that, free.
-there is a MESSAGE BOARD...users are free to post REVIEWS and discuss releases.
-There are STILL no user reviews allowed at the competition.
-Titles not available anywhere else
-long out of print or import only CD tiles
-Constant communication from management on their blog posts
-There will be 4 Million tracks available by the end of the year. Dwarfing HDT after 5 years and others.
GOOD RIDDANCE TO THE SHORT SIGHTED!!!
About to make my first purchase today..
both 24 bit, paid $30 including tax. Not bad compared to HDT. There was some funky interaction btw my copy of JRNC, which was open, and PMW which is required to DL. But, otherwise, it went smoothly.
Thanks for that info!
One album (Wilco's Yankee Foxtrot Hotel) was $16.29 - about identical to HDTracks after the 10% coupon. The other was a 24/44 from Kasey Chambers ($12.29)that is NOT available from HDT.
Don't tell Abe . . don't want to give him a reason to shop PonoMusic ;P
Don't worry I won't tell Small Thinker.
I think he got his panties in a bunch because I dared indict his beloved Apple in their role in the destroying audio quality.
"Don't worry I won't tell Small Thinker.
I think he got his panties in a bunch because I dared indict his beloved Apple in their role in the destroying audio quality."
Not to defend Abe because he is often a putz and in this thread is pretty wrong as usually... It is not just Apple. The average consumer never listened to anything close to decent quality. Maybe you are too young, but in the good old days...what do you think most people listened to 45s... and on what equipment? Ask Tony. Most people did no have anything approaching hifi, and the mass market sadly is where the $$$ is.
Hope the Pono thing works... We would benefit.
You make a good point that many consumers never had anything near good fidelity in their homes, but many did.And going back to the era of 45's, is really not applicable here.
There was a period between 1989 and around 2002 where CDs sounded very very good, with plenty of dynamic range in the mastering and the use of the original master tapes, along with superb boutique mastering from Mobile Fidelity and DCC, and great labels like Telarc.
Along comes Apple and flips over the apple cart, er, so to speak.
It is certainly NOT all Apple's fault, It takes two to tango, and consumers were convinced by shrewd marketing, and finally musicians caved in too.
I appreciate you saying that regardless of whether you give a damn about Pono or not, ultimately all of us will benefit...more selection, competition, and new remasterings done with care. Where is the downside?
Edits: 01/18/15
"There was a period between 1989 and around 2002 where CDs sounded very very good, with plenty of dynamic range in the mastering and the use of the original master tapes, along with superb boutique mastering from Mobile Fidelity and DCC, and great labels like Telarc."
True, lots of very good stuff... Some people did actually care and and mastered properly.
I forgot about Jobs' Sacred Cow that made mp3s the de facto format. That, indeed, might explain Abe's insistence that there is no reason for Pono to exist.
and you bought the CD-rez from Pono, they will give you the higher rez file for free.
Uh Huh..try that at HDT or SHR.
With respect to Pono, Waldrep has zero credibility as he has made several completely incorrect statements. So let's leave him out of this thread.
Let's go back to the original discussion - if there is evidence that a critical mass of hi-rez downloads from PONO is indeed hi-rez, as confirmed by spectrographs, then I will gladly concede the point and we can move on. OTOH, if most of it is CD-rez recordings in hi-rez containers, then I'm sure you will do the same. ;-)
And I am certain you are going to examine all of Acoustic Sounds, HDT, and Qobuz files as well for good measure?
When HDT first opened their shop their were numerous upsampled files found, and these were outed by customers..HDT had to realize that the expense of hiring someone to spot check was needed.
I am sure the Pono organization is sitting on pins and needles waiting for you to check they are not selling upsampled CDs so you can concede and they can move on. Right now they are in a living hell of a holding pattern waiting for your results.
with everything he buys.
I suspect PONO will be living at the whim of whatever resolution the record companies decide to send their way.
That's where QOBUZ and TITAL find themselves now, as regards CD quality streams. Just because there is an analog master somewhere in a vault does not mean a record company is gonna take the time to make a new hi rez digital master to send out to PONO when they can use the 16/44.1 that's handy.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: