Red Mosquito

The PonoPlayer was designed with a “no compromises” approach to sound quality. We partnered with the engineering team at Ayre (www.ayre.com) to include some of their world-class audio technology in our PonoPlayer. The Ayre team describes their contribution to the PonoPlayer design as follows:

• The digital filter used in the PonoPlayer has minimal phase, and no unnatural (digital sounding) pre-ringing. All sounds made (including music) always have reflections and/or echoes after the initial sound. There is no sound in nature that has any echo or reflection before the sound, which is what conventional linear-phase digital filters do. This is one reason that digital sound has a reputation for sounding "unnatural" and harsh.

• All circuitry is zero-feedback. Feedback can only correct an error after it has occurred, which means that it can never correct for all errors. By using proprietary ultra-linear circuitry with wide bandwidth and low output impedance, there is no need for unnatural sounding feedback.

• The DAC (Digital-to-Analog Converter) chip being used is widely recognized in the audio and engineering community as one of the best sounding DAC chips available today.

• The output buffer used to drive the headphones is fully discrete so that all individual parameters and circuit values and parts quality can be fully optimized for the absolute finest sound quality. The output impedance is very low so that the PonoPlayer delivers perfectly flat frequency response and wide volume range using virtually any set of headphones.

malice wrote:

doone wrote:What I want to know is how does this differ from any other FLAC player?

it's not flat? that's about it I think.

I'm no expert and haven't read this entire thread but I think the pono music store will offer certain music licensed from major labels at a much higher quality resolution, up to 9216 kbps vs. the 1411 kbps of a lossless flac file which is equivelant to cd quality. Maybe the other players just offer the 1411 kbps flac is what I'm thinking. This is better than cd quality.

Rat wrote:

malice wrote:

doone wrote:What I want to know is how does this differ from any other FLAC player?

it's not flat? that's about it I think.

I'm no expert and haven't read this entire thread but I think the pono music store will offer certain music licensed from major labels at a much higher quality resolution, up to 9216 kbps vs. 1411 kbps on a lossless flac file which is equivelant to cd quality. Maybe the other players just offer the 1411 flac is what I'm thinking. This is better than cd quality.

at the start of this thread i mentioned that i'd buy one if it wasn't so expensive. i was just making a joke otherwise. if the price goes down on a next iteration, i would consider buying it.

I'm surprised that some of the artists still have any players left. Others, well...

Also, they say "Dave Matthews Band" but only show Dave Matthews' signature. Bummer.

This is encouraging news, though I'd have been thrilled just to have 16/44.1 (ie. CD quality) files available via iTunes.

http://www.macrumors.com/2014/04/10/hig ... downloads/

High Definition iTunes Music Downloads May Be on the Horizon

Earlier this week, a report suggested Apple was planning a "dramatic overhaul" of its iTunes Music store to combat declining music downloads, which could include an on-demand streaming music service and an Android version of iTunes.

Apple may also be planning to add high resolution audio downloads to iTunes as part of the revamp, allowing users to download lossless 24-bit audio files. According to music blogger Robert Hutton, who cites an unspecified source, Apple is going to roll out hi-res iTunes music downloads in early June, possibly at WWDC.

"For several years, Apple have been insisting that labels provide files for iTunes in 24 bit format - preferably 96k or 192k sampling rate. So they have undeniably the biggest catalog of hi-res audio in the world.

And the Led Zeppelin remasters in high resolution will be the kick off event - to coincide with Led Zep in hi-res, Apple will flip the switch and launch their hi-res store via iTunes - and apparently, it will be priced a buck above the typical current file prices.

That's right - Apple will launch hi-res iTunes in two months."

Apple has been working on offering music in a 24-bit format for several years, with a 2011 report suggesting the company was in talks with record labels to increase the quality of iTunes Music. Currently, Apple sells audio files on iTunes in 16-bit lossy AAC format encoded at 256 kbps to minimize file size.

High-definition 24-bit downloads are said to offer better detail, greater depth, and a deeper bass response compared to traditional 16-bit music downloads, but the file sizes are much larger.

Though Apple only offers 16-bit audio files at present, the company does encourage artists to submit music in a 24-bit 96kHz resolution, which it uses to "create more accurate encodes." Apple accepts the audio files as part of its Mastered for iTunes program, an initiative that has produced higher quality music for the iTunes Store. Because Apple has already accepted 24-bit files for years, it does, presumably, have a large catalog of high quality audio files that could be offered for sale, reportedly at a premium of $1 over traditional iTunes tracks.

Hi-res audio has been gaining popularity in recent years, with music sites such as HDtracks securing deals with multiple major record labels. Recently, musician and song writer Neil Young launched a Kickstarter project for the PonoPlayer, a $399 digital music player designed to play high resolution audio files.

Thus far, the project has earned over $5.7 million, suggesting there is indeed a sizable demand for hi-res audio. Should Apple choose to begin selling 24-bit audio tracks, it could quickly dominate competing sites given its existing user base and boost its digital downloads by appealing to audiophiles unhappy with the current quality of iTunes tracks.

It looks like they are gonna come up short of 6 million. I believe they are the 3rd most successful campaign in Kickstarter's 5 year history.

re apple: Isn't there an issue with the fact that ipods only have 16-bit playback at the moment? Wouldn't yoiu need a whole new ipod?

Oh wait, it's Apple. of course it requires a whole new ipod.

People still do the "oh wait" thing?

I do.

People do a lot of things still. Weird.

Is High-Fidelity Sound the Future of Streaming Music?
As Pono, Tidal and Deezer enter the U.S., will they find an untapped market or disinterested fans?


By Steve Knopper | September 19, 2014

As music shifted from CDs to downloads, and fans downsized from huge speakers to earbuds, sound quality devolved, as Neil Young said, into "a little above a Fisher-Price level — it's a toy stove." That's even more true with streaming — Spotify, YouTube and the rest mostly provide super-compressed audio files with tinny sound. But some streaming companies are taking up Young's cause. "High-fidelity sound quality is truly a natural evolution of the market," says Andy Chen, chief executive of Tidal, a Norwegian service set to expand to the U.S. "Music is probably the only entertainment-content format in which people have accepted lower quality than 10 years ago — we're saying that maybe that's not OK. Shouldn't it be the same level it used to be? Why should we accept less?"

Tidal and Deezer, the French music-subscription service that recently launched in the U.S., are the first to stream "lossless" files — with a CD-quality bit rate of 1,411 kilobits per second, as opposed to the 256 to 320 rates common on other services. Audiophiles, including Young, have been complaining for years that music files compressed into MP3 and AAC download formats have eroded sound quality to the point of painful listening. (Apple's iTunes sells high-quality lossless downloads, which are significantly larger and take up far more space on users' hard drives, in addition to compressed files.)

Executives from the new high-fidelity streaming services say they've identified an untapped market of music fans. "It was a natural fit to create a service that really targeted this segment of audio enthusiasts," says Tyler Goldman, North American chief executive for Deezer, which launched a $15-a-month "elite" service with the Sonos home-audio company this week. "We were quite surprised that others have not tried to address this."

The question for Tidal, Deezer and Young's high-fidelity download service Pono, is whether enough audiophiles exist to justify the costs of streaming much larger files. For the moment, they represent a small niche of music buyers — although they do tend to spend a lot of money on sound equipment, CDs and vinyl records. "It all comes down to, 'Can people hear the difference?' — in many cases they will and in many cases they won't," says Bobby Owsinski, a veteran mixer and producer who has worked on surround-sound projects for Young, the Who and others. "If I were CEO of one of those companies, I would have limited expectations." But he adds that the huge sales of Beats headphones indicate a larger number of music fans are gradually upgrading from low-fidelity earbuds.

Young's Pono service, which is supposed to open later this year, generated nearly $12 million in donations and equity through crowd-funding websites such as Kickstarter. Could streaming services raise those kinds of revenues by targeting audiophile listeners? It's unclear, but Deezer and Tidal execs are optimistic. "You're talking about a large amount of people spending a large amount of money not having the music," Deezer's Goldman says. "And now, having all those songs at high quality is a total game-changer."

How many are gonna buy that thing then listen to it with $10 headphones?

http://gizmodo.com/dont-buy-what-neil-y ... 1678446860

An interesting viewpoint.

This thing kind of bombed, right? All I keep hearing about it from music writers and the like is total ridicule. Unless they're Neil Young fans.

I read the article and kind of went 'Pfffft! Who'd bother getting one of those?' - then I watched the video again attached to the article that was on the kickstarter and found myself really wanting one.

Turns out I'm easily swayed

Rangi Guy wrote:I read the article and kind of went 'Pfffft! Who'd bother getting one of those?' - then I watched the video again attached to the article that was on the kickstarter and found myself really wanting one.

Turns out I'm easily swayed

This explains your religious affiliations

Just joshing Rangi Guy I you

theplatypus wrote:This thing kind of bombed, right? All I keep hearing about it from music writers and the like is total ridicule. Unless they're Neil Young fans.

Well, the first run of product sold out, so whatever the opposite of bombing is, that's what happened.

Huh.

i have one and im digging it. had a small listening party with some friends after i got. it came with NY everybody knows this is nowhere in 192/24. we did a blind compare with a virgin copy of the same record on reissued vinyl. both sounded amazing with the digital version all in all winning out with clearer highs and lows.

since then ive been downloading hi res copies of albums where available, things like sacd and dvd-a rips and it sounds awesome. its not going to replace my ipod classic obviously, but for the classic / favorite albums i think its a no brainer if you have the cash.