|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.126.5.126
In Reply to: RE: A final look at PONO... posted by Archimago on January 22, 2015 at 11:44:11
Your tests show the very thing I was warning about a few threads below: you go from 16 to 24 bits, but the file itself is even MORE dynamically compressed than it was on CD! LOL! You go from 44.1 to 192 and all you get above 20kHz is additional noise - at least on the files you showed. Yet, you will never convince some of the yahoos around here that 24/192 isn't always better a priori, no matter what other factors enter into the equation.And BTW, I myself am a BIG believer in hi-rez downloads - but only if the original recording is itself hi-rez. When I see a spectrograph (for instance of a 24/96 download) I want it to look something like this:
. . . where you've got actual musical signal going up to about 40kHz - something we can actually correlate our listening to.
So how about it? I'm still waiting to see a spectrograph of a "hi-rez" download from PONO that's actually hi-rez! They must exist, but I haven't seen one yet.
Edits: 01/25/15Follow Ups:
Audacity spectrogram looks good to me. Maybe a microphone artifact at ~30kHz but otherwise shows plenty of energy > 22 kHz. Reasonable dynamics for a pop/rock recording. Probably the identical file I could have bought from HDT.
But don't let anyone stop you from shizzing on Pono some more :\
That's all anybody is requesting.
Now you can just claim that this is a HDT file :P
. . . we'll have a better basis on which discuss the merits of the PONO files.
BTW, I of course buy from HDT too, but the classical albums I buy seem to be much less often afflicted with the various problems many have mentioned here (dynamic compression and the like), so maybe you have to be more careful buying non-classical. Having said that however, the two most recent 24/96 (classical) downloads I've obtained from HDT certainly don't take advantage of the extended frequency range: one looks clean, but does not exceed about 18kHz, while the other has "stuff" up above 20kHz, but it looks mostly like randomized noise.
:\
All I'm saying is that PONO is not a panacea - and in Archimago's article, he exposed some of the dangers that could put PONO on a par with other "hi-rez" download sites (such as HDT) in terms of restricted dynamic and frequency ranges even in so-called hi-rez downloads. These problems are not unique to PONO, but, as I said, it will be nice to get a critical mass of spectrographs to confirm whether a file being sold as hi-rez actually IS hi-rez. There is one small classical site (I can't remember the name now) that DOES provide spectrograph information on its site for every download that it offers. There's no reason that ALL download sites couldn't do this. I think there's also a part of the Computer Audiophile site where contributors are encouraged to post their own spectrographs of recordings they've downloaded - sometimes very useful.
As Merman wrote below : "The Pono release is only as good as the original master."
ie, Pono *is* on par with HDT and the rest in that they can only sell the files that they get from the labels. As far as I know Pono does not do any mastering, so why should Pono be held to a higher standard than other retailers of downloadable files?
The main benefit of Pono is all the publicity/awareness generated by Neil Young. If successful, we should see more and more new releases in 24 bit plus re-mastering of older material. But NONE of this will be done directly by Pono.
IOW, I think it is unreasonable to hold Pono to a higher standard than the other hi-rez retailers. They are neither better or worse, just with a bigger catalog and the gravitas to get artists/labels to release more titles in hi-rez.
..to add to your post...Pono WILL be encouraging artists and labels to improve their quality and as noted several times, will even try to commission some new remasters. None of the others have done this.
Secondly, they, unlike the others, allow user comments and reviews. Good and bad.
Thanks Beetlemania.Every title will have to stand on its own merit. The Pono release is only as good as the original master.
Archimago appears to want a guarantee that every title will be a hi-res winner. This is not going to happen. For his peace of mind and like thinking people, it is best that they turn their backs on Pono.
Edits: 01/25/15
> > > The Pono release is only as good as the original master.
Yup
> > > For his peace of mind and like thinking people, it is best that they turn their backs on Pono.
Indeed. And because 16/44 is overkill for what has been "proven" to be the limits of human hearing, they might as well stick with iTunes which, conveniently, also has the most titles.
;^)
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: