What if they turn out to be nicely equalized or flat transfers from the best quality tapes with no DRC in a DRM-free lossless format that costs less than a CD?
The sanitized version of my thoughts is that it sounds like snake oil and manure. And is probably insanely overpriced, especially for what it's likely to be. And it wouldn't surprise me if it was technically inferior to CD.
Quote from: greynol on 05 September, 2013, 08:51:23 PMWhat if they turn out to be nicely equalized or flat transfers from the best quality tapes with no DRC in a DRM-free lossless format that costs less than a CD?Yes, because with current technology that is completely impossible to achieve.
Quote from: gib on 04 September, 2013, 07:59:44 PMmarketing-speak driven product of dubious valueI think at least some of the people involved believe what they are saying. While there's some hyperbole, they're not intentionally out to fool anyone. Unless you count the fact that they've probably fooled themselves.
marketing-speak driven product of dubious value
That remains to be seen.What if they turn out to be nicely equalized or flat transfers from the best quality tapes with no DRC in a DRM-free lossless format that costs less than a CD?
The mastering will still be bad. Not to mention the player.
Quote from: zumacraig on 06 September, 2013, 07:10:39 AMThe mastering will still be bad. Not to mention the player.The player will probably be decent; it'll have to be, 'cos people will test it and compare it the S4 and the iPhone5(S), which as I understand, are very good. See here for example: http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/iphone-5/audio-quality.htm(Speaking w.r.t. dynamic range compression:) Uncompressed masters with optional, adjustable compression at playback time could be a compelling combination. Maybe a format that stores the specific compression parameters for the track along with the uncompressed audio; playback processor then generates clean and smashed, with a fader between the two, set dependent on the ambient noise level.
Are we to expect Neil is going to attract a legion of new believers?
But what I am looking forward to is finding out how this compares to vinyl.
But we run the risk of him suckering a new batch of people into all this nonsense.
what exactly is Pono achieving that couldn't be done by the already established download services?
Apparently you and a few others already know so why are you asking me?
I'm just cranky after having a private discussion with an idiot espousing how 16 bits was inadequate for a format that has the equivalent noise of 13 bits on the best day of its life (vinyl) as well as the benefits of SACD over CDDA using arguments from authority to make his case.Never mind me.
Pono reportedly has backing from major record labels Warner, Sony, and Universal, and has signed a full agreement with Warner. In fact, the "Big Three" record labels, have reportedly all agreed to remaster their music catalogs for the device.
However, Flea of the Red Hot Chili Peppers said "It's not like some vague thing that you need dogs' ears to hear. It's a drastic difference."