In Reply to: RE: Excellent - Let's see it posted by Beetlemania on January 25, 2015 at 16:08:18:
. . . 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.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Thank you - I think once we get a critical mass of these. . . - Chris from Lafayette 18:55:54 01/25/15 (4)
- So, HDT = good, Pono = bad ??? :\ nt - Beetlemania 19:29:26 01/25/15 (3)
- Not what I'm saying at all - Chris from Lafayette 21:38:53 01/25/15 (2)
- RE: Not what I'm saying at all - Beetlemania 09:00:49 01/26/15 (1)
- RE: Not what I'm saying at all - Sprezza Tura 10:39:10 01/26/15 (0)