PONO - digital sound quality at last?

a148pro

So I've long had a bug in my bonnet about how, bizarrely, the more technologically developed we became, the poorer our sound quality got. Its remarkable to think that from the 70s to now we have walked away from what (is said) to have been the best medium, vinyl, to inferior CDs, through minidisc and now on to vastly vastly inferior MP3.

I mean MP3s sound utterly ****, even to me and I was never listening to them on a fantastic system. And even though music hasn't become less important to people or society, we've all just accepted this. Mainly, imo, because of the white plastic that made Apple such a hit in the first place. WTF? Does no-one find it puzzling that notwithstanding that we live in a consumerist society and that music is to the fore in popular culture, there are no dedicated hi fi shops in Dublin? How the fcuk did that happen?

Recently I made the switch back to CDs, in the sense that I started listening to them again. I turned on an amp and CD player, and my parent's 40 year old KEF speakers, that hadn't seen much in the line of static running through them for a while. And the difference was quite noticeable to me (relative to MP3s played through a logitech squeezebox on the same system). Sure, some CDs that are badly produced sound crap (in fact a lot of them do), but I have, for example, a Dominic Eulberg CD and it just sounds organic compared to MP3.

Anyway, I had resolved to buy CDs from now on, and was looking doing so to be honest, but then I heard about this PONO thing.

Not only is it being pushed by a man who I have serious respect for and reckon is a decent claimant to the title of greatest living musician (Neil Young), but it is claiming to have very high quality digital sound.

The blurb is here, and while a lot of the lads seem to back it with the enthusiasm of a charity promotion (i.e., just endorsing it without actually evaluating it to any extent) it seems unlikely he'd get this much support without it actually being good. Moreover, I actually agree with the theory that this is about people who are into music reclaiming what has been taken from us by the market.

http://www.ponomusic.com/#message

Some articles here:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/music/neil-youngs-pono-hi-def-mp3-player/#!z33lL

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbyowsinski/2014/03/12/what-neil-youngs-pono-needs-to-succeed/

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/neil-young-on-pono-his-new-album-and-using-lps-as-roof-shingles-20140314

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pono_%28digital_music_service%29



I see two main problems (for me) - I now listen to music on a smartphone and I reckon in the future people are not going to be carrying around separate devices for separate things, so this needs to be doable on an app.

Secondly, since the thing I listen to the most is DJ mixes we need to be able to record in PONO....

What do people think?

milltown

As I've said elsewhere:
Why the hell wouldn't all these artists lend their name to a new endeavour that will either never gain enough traction to sully their names, or take off and get people paying $15-25 (mooted) per album for works they have already recorded and whose distribution costs are practically zero?

Granted, I haven't clicked your links yet but is there any difference between this and FLAC, or any lossless format which already exists?

a148pro

I hadn't thought of that actually. But I strongly doubt Neil Young is in this for the money.

We could put the q another way - is MP3 sound quality crap and is its hegemony acceptable to us or should it be acceptable to our musicians?

Re FLAC or other formats, I'd love to know how they compare.

As a matter of interest can you get download FLACs easily? And ultimately will most of them not come from CDs anyway?

gctest50

http://www.linnrecords.com/catalogue.aspx?label=linnrecords&sort=releasedate&order=desc

Studio Master: The Ultimate Download

A 24-bit Studio Master download is the highest quality music file on the market. They have a bit depth of 24-bit, and at a sample rate of up to 192 kHz - which gives you over six times the music data you get on a CD.

ghostdancer

i'd be pretty certain that 99% of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between these 24bit/96khz and 24bit/192khz FLAC files from the studio masters and FLACs taken from a CD.
i'd be pretty certain that the same amount wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them and 320kbps MP3s.

good speakers/headphones are more important IMO.
even in your OP you describe listening to the MP3s through a logitech squeezebox, hardly something that will give a particularly good audio experience.

can't see any hope of this taking off really. people can't notice any difference, so won't care.

a148pro

Well I'm listening to them on a smartphone and an iPod also. But what are my options to play mp3s on an amp and speakers which would improve on the squeezebox?

I'd also like to know if you can tell the difference. I suspect I'm just going to have to wait and see.

ironclaw

But theres the crux of it. Whats the point of having a 24bit/192khz FLAC if you have to downgrade it to play it off your iPhone? Or if you happen to DJ with it, is the entire transport from hard disc to speaker able to match the quality? Sound cards, Amp, even down to the wiring to the speakers themselves. I've had the privilege of working for Bose, and I have amassed a collection of headphones from high end to low end for my Thesis (And myself), and yes there is a massive difference in file formats. However, it all comes down to the system producing them and the last bit before you ears. The biggest single difference you'll make is the headphones, it doesn't matter how good the file is.

Beyond studio work, I've never seen the need for high quality FLAC or WAVs. For the average use 320kb MP3 is more than adequate. And I doubt many Irish club systems would be suitably high spec or tuned to warrant the use of higher grades.

a148pro

ironclaw wrote: »

But theres the crux of it. Whats the point of having a 24bit/192khz FLAC if you have to downgrade it to play it off your iPhone? Or if you happen to DJ with it, is the entire transport from hard disc to speaker able to match the quality? Sound cards, Amp, even down to the wiring to the speakers themselves. I've had the privilege of working for Bose, and I have amassed a collection of headphones from high end to low end for my Thesis (And myself), and yes there is a massive difference in file formats. However, it all comes down to the system producing them and the last bit before you ears. The biggest single difference you'll make is the headphones, it doesn't matter how good the file is.

Beyond studio work, I've never seen the need for high quality FLAC or WAVs. For the average use 320kb MP3 is more than adequate. And I doubt many Irish club systems would be suitably high spec or tuned to warrant the use of higher grades.

You'll forgive me if the most important line in your post, to me, is "yes there is a massive difference in file formats".

The first point is if I can hear the difference on my system between an mp3 and a cd, or between a badly produced cd and a well produced one, then I'm listening to it on a good enough system to notice it.

The second point is the whole idea behind this device is it has very high end technology in it to play high end digital music and remember it has head phone and line out jacks so it's obviously meant to be played into an amp.

The next point is that as people who are into music should we not aspire to having the best quality possible rather than accepting something, inferior to what we have had in the past, because the Market has dictated it to us? I mean it's that complacency that almost annoys me more than anything. We don't start listening to ****e music because it's popular or tops the charts, so why do we accept ****e quality recordings of music?

So even if I'm wrong on the second point, and you have some greater knowledge to the effect that I won't be able to hear the difference unless I'm in a studio and that I'm being naive in thinking that that can ever be recreated in portable form, the point is that technology is developing constantly and is shrinking in size constantly so at the try least this could lead to a situation where in ten years we could have ultra high quality listening device and / or smart phones, with studio quality sound. And that's something I think we could all do with.

Plus what's the point in saying you would only need that in a studio if none of the mediums we're listening to the stuff on goes close to catching the sound quality?

kumate_champ07

ghostdancer wrote: »

i'd be pretty certain that 99% of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between these 24bit/96khz and 24bit/192khz FLAC files from the studio masters and FLACs taken from a CD.
i'd be pretty certain that the same amount wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them and 320kbps MP3s.

good speakers/headphones are more important IMO.
even in your OP you describe listening to the MP3s through a logitech squeezebox, hardly something that will give a particularly good audio experience.

can't see any hope of this taking off really. people can't notice any difference, so won't care.

100% wouldnt be able to tell the difference

old_aussie

PONO looks like WavPack released under a more comercial name with it's own dedicated hardware player.

ironclaw

a148pro wrote: »

The first point is if I can hear the difference on my system between an mp3 and a cd, or between a badly produced cd and a well produced one, then I'm listening to it on a good enough system to notice it.

I think anyone would notice to be fair. We've all got a blast of a YouTube rip to know the feeling. But the point is, on the vast majority of the market, who would actually care? A 320kb MP3 doesn't need special equipment and sounds pretty decent to most ears. Changes depending on your headphones but all told, its good. Same for WAV, AAC and FLAC, decent on any format and will easily scale to a decent sound system.

The second point is the whole idea behind this device is it has very high end technology in it to play high end digital music and remember it has head phone and line out jacks so it's obviously meant to be played into an amp.

But what if the next stage was a crap Amp? Or a set of SkullCandy headphones? The entire train from hard disk and ear has to be ultra high quality. Even the difference between a Bose and Linn system would be huge. And honest, who has the money to even contemplate that? In addition, forget mobile applications. You just won't have the driver spec and noise isolation ability to justify it.

The next point is that as people who are into music should we not aspire to having the best quality possible rather than accepting something, inferior to what we have had in the past, because the Market has dictated it to us? I mean it's that complacency that almost annoys me more than anything. We don't start listening to ****e music because it's popular or tops the charts, so why do we accept ****e quality recordings of music?

Absolutely not. I insist on high quality and I'm right behind you on not accepting bad recordings or quality. However, we have to be reasonable on the level of quality that is presentable in the mobile scenario. Remember, its not just the quality of the recording. You need the demodulation and analogue system to be top notch as well. And thats all well and good, but if the headphones can't isolate noise from the environment, then your snookered. If you are working in a studio or on a home system, its not as big a deal but again you will need the finances to match.

So even if I'm wrong on the second point, and you have some greater knowledge to the effect that I won't be able to hear the difference unless I'm in a studio and that I'm being naive in thinking that that can ever be recreated in portable form, the point is that technology is developing constantly and is shrinking in size constantly so at the try least this could lead to a situation where in ten years we could have ultra high quality listening device and / or smart phones, with studio quality sound. And that's something I think we could all do with.

Current smart phones are capable of producing quality beyond what most listeners could discern between (I mean in very high quality formats e.g. 320 MP3 Vs FLAC etc) And yes, they will continue to get better. But again, a phone is mobile so it doesn't matter how good it can reproduce sound if the delivery system (Headphones) is not up to the job. You would need multiple headphone drivers and serious noise attenuation to get the very best. Something that is financially beyond most users.

Plus what's the point in saying you would only need that in a studio if none of the mediums we're listening to the stuff on goes close to catching the sound quality?

Well, there will always be a place for this tech in studios. You need the very best, extreme standards before mixing down to the lower grades. I have no issue with that. You need the best at the start to get the best at the end

My personal belief is the 'next big step' is high quality audio files that have a much smaller footprint i.e. WAV quality in MP3 size. I believe that has a big future.

kunst nugget

I can't see the point of this beyond pandering to audiophiles who have money to burn. Buy your CDs and convert them to FLAC if you want to put them on to an audio player. The Pono player looks absolute gick to be honest.

As The Frank and Walters say: The rich buy dearest because the want to be sure, the poor can't afford to be that insecure.

ironclaw

I think if PONO made a chip that could be licensed to the likes of Apple or Samsung, then it would have a future. But asking someone to completely change their eco system, not going to happen or at the very least, a very minimal market. Reading the tech specs and reasoning, its all very impressive if it delivers as it should (Its holy grail stuff here). But there are other techniques that make sound envelope a user and sound 'better' that require no tampering with the audio itself.

A great device, Yes. A mass market device, No. Would I buy one? No.

a148pro

Thanks for that detailed response iron claw. I think ultimately I'm just going to have to try and hear this and see if it's worth it. I live in hope, and I'm tired of listening to poor quality stuff. Ironically it seems to be mp3s of guitar based music, either bought online or ripped from cds where I notice it most. live recordings of dj mixes, which is actually what I listen to the most don't annoy me as much. Presumably that's down to the actual sound of the sound or the monotony of dance music.

Scubadevils

I've been using the Fiio X3 for about 4 months now and it's an incredible DAP... there is an amazing difference playing in the car using the line-out rather than the headphone jack. Plus I can drive headphones (Sennheiser HD650 for example) that I could never use previously on smartphones or other MP3 players such as the Cowon S9. FLAC all the way too! The X3 has 8GB internal memory and a micro SD with support up to 64GB. There is an X5 on the way though with 2 micro SD slots supporting 128GB each :eek::eek::eek: I'll be needing that when funds allow...

X3
http://www.amazon.co.uk/FiiO-X3-Portable-MP3-Player/dp/B00DQBWY04/ref=pd_sim_sbs_ce_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=1MXKW9MTRZZVVEAY0EX4

X5
http://www.amazon.co.uk/FiiO-X5-MP3-Player-DAC/dp/B00II0VJQ8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1395357186&sr=8-1&keywords=fiio+x5

The X3 is a really basic player with an oldskool folder system for files, no apps, touchscreen or even a clock - just a bloody good music player! My one and only slight gripe is the ten hour battery, but I can live with it.

Don't know how it compares to the Pono but certainly a great option for anyone who wants to enjoy a premium sounding DAP.

kumate_champ07

Ive been using Sennheiser hd595 with Cowon D2+, cant imagine it gets better than that

I rememeber looking for the DAC used by Cowon a while ago and it was more expensive than the D2+, they must get a very good bulk deal on those chips!

Owenw

Around the turn of the millennium Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio high res disc formats were released as the CD was almost a quarter of a century old and the underlying audio technology dated from the mid 70s.

How did the general public respond? They chose MP3. Why? Internet access was for the first time just about quick enough to download tracks.
Music was available in vast quantities, in all genres and for free via Napster and later KaZaa and Limewire.

SACD and DVD-A were expensive at €25-40 per disc, very difficult to find, mostly limited to classical, jazz and remastered older artists and required a new player at €500-5000. Both Both formats flopped.

The reasons IMO that Apple in particular we're successful : they made it easy and slightly less expensive to acquire legal tracks (you weren't forced to buy the entire album as had been the case with physical formats). They made desirable DAPs, they are masters of hype and promotion - white headphones became cool. They are very good at user interface design. iTunes was relatively easy to use and soon had a built-in music store. They applied this strategy to the clunky smartphones of the day...

Nowadays, most ordinary people listen to music while doing other things - travelling to work or college, whilst browsing the net, etc. they don't notice and don't care if the sound is pristine master quality and sure as hell won't pay for €25 high res albums and several hundred for a new expensive audio player. If the tech is included in smartphones (i hope this happens) it will mostly be ignored because as I said, most people cannot tell or don't care.

However, the recent interest in vinyl, backlash against the loudness wars and a growing interest in high res DAPs, uncompressed digital audio downloads and quality headphones gives me hope that a there is a big enough niche for high res audio to be embraced by musicians and record labels.

SamAK

For me the biggest step up in terms of sound quality while listening to downloaded/streamed music through my modest setup (Laptop -> Technics Amp -> Mission 2 way bookshelf speakers) was when I ditched the 3.5mm jack to RCA and instead got myself a dedicated audio interface -

http://www.thomann.de/ie/focusrite_scarlett_2i2.htm


Depends on the source though too, a lot of youtube stuff sounds awful no matter what. But I definitely don't ever intend on going back to relying on the stock sound card in my laptop.

I've also got into vinyl in the last year, and have to say.....whenever I throw on a record on the 1210 it's like sweet fuzzy warm thumping analogue nectar for the ears in comparison to digital files.