|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.85.148.53
In Reply to: RE: A final look at PONO... posted by Mercman on January 23, 2015 at 17:30:40
Yeh, what were thinking?
Follow Ups:
My takeaway is not what YOU guys got.
The FILE is the thing. You can uprez / up sample / up your XXX to the cows come home, but if you start with a Compressed / Limited / Brick Walled file to BEGIN with, nothing is going to help.
I would MUCH rather have 16/44.1 with GOOD, uncompressed / limited files rather than 24/192 with compressed and limited stuff.
Too much is never enough
Nobody in their right mind would argue with you. Where has anyone said anything differently?
Pono and HDTracks, and Qobuz, and Acoustic Sounds can only sell what they are given.
Neil Young has been trying to spread the word to his fellow artists that destroying the dynamic in the mastering stage sucks. Higher rez digital gives you a nice tool to work with and they should be taking advantage of it.
Yet, some evidence exists that PONO is NOT taking advantage of the possiblities.
And, for that matter, how good would 16/44.1 be IF 'they' took full advantage of THAT system?
The only rational way to compare is Best-2-Best.
Putting ruined remasters of EITHER against the same material in a pristine condition on the other system is ruining the test.
And yes, I think consensus has nearly been reached. Now, my question that remains is HOW do I find out about a given CD before purchase? Anybody have a database of CDs and which have been remastered to death? My favorite example is PinkFloyd DSOM which I know has been reissued a bunch of times. Any to avoid? Any 'stars' of remastering?
Too much is never enough
"Yet, some evidence exists that PONO is NOT taking advantage of the possiblities."
I don't understand this statement..can you clarify?
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: