AfterDawn: News

High fidelity Pono portable music player crushes Kickstarter funding goals in less than a day

Pono, the high-fidelity portable music player, has already surpassed its Kickstarter goal.

The player had a goal of $800,000 which was reached in under 24 hours, and 6,476 backers have contributed $2,112,066.



Pono Players will cost $399 when they launch at retail in October, but 100 lucky backers got it for $199 and all other Kickstarter backers can get it for $299.

What is Pono?

Pono's mission is to provide the best possible listening experience of your favorite music. We want to be very clear that PonoMusic is not a new audio file format or standard. PonoMusic is an end-to-end ecosystem for music lovers to get access to and enjoy their favorite music exactly as the artist created it, at the recording resolution they chose in the studio. We offer PonoMusic customers the highest resolution digital music available. PonoMusic is more than just a high-resolution music store and player; it is a grassroots movement to keep the heart of music beating. PonoMusic aims to preserve the feeling, spirit, and emotion that the artists put in their original studio recordings.

We are pursuing this vision by building a system for the entire music listening experience – from the original master recordings to the PonoMusic.com Store to the portable PonoPlayer. So now you'll hear the nuances, the soft touches, and the ends on the echo – the texture and the emotion of the music the artist worked so hard to create.

The device has two output jacks, one for headphones and a stereo mini-plug analog output for home audio. The Pono Music store offers music in FLAC with quality ranging from CD lossless quality recordings: 1411 kbps (44.1 kHz/16 bit) FLAC files all the way to Ultra-high resolution recordings: 9216 kbps (192 kHz/24 bit) FLAC files.

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 12 Mar 2014 22:59

• Previous article

• Google acquires Green Throttle Games, controller maker for Android set-tops, tablets

• Next article

• Amazon Prime membership going up to $99 per year

• 41 comments

• Dragon3000

  It looks like a pile of do do to me!
  

  ZX Spectrum 128K

  13.3.2014 03:50 #1

• zxe

  have to say nothing new, nice blurb, but not really saying anything

  13.3.2014 06:39 #2

• ivymike

  It IS something new when an online music store actually sells Hi-Def FLAC song tracks for digital download. How many other music stores do you know of that do that???
  

  13.3.2014 07:03 #3

• rocky38

  ...for those special occasions....
  

  13.3.2014 07:41 #4

• scorpNZ

  Interesting the spec edition has your choice of signed unit by a number of artists,neil young it seems is the founder of pono music,i hope this unit succeeds however it will require a lot more storage space than currently provided that & an fm tuner & i'd buy one at a later date,
  "64GB of internal memory and a removable 64GB microSD card included (128GB total)"
  

  AD Guides: http://www.afterdawn.com guides/
  Console Mod Tuts: http://www.realmodscene.com/
  
  

  13.3.2014 17:05 #5

• DarthMopar

  Originally posted by scorpNZ: ...i hope this unit succeeds however it will require a lot more storage space than currently provided that & an fm tuner & i'd buy one at a later date,
  "64GB of internal memory and a removable 64GB microSD card included (128GB total)" Good specs don't necessarily mean success. i.e. Zune.
  That being said, I'm still rockin' my 120GB Zune, but I admit it's getting long in the tooth. I absolutely refuse to buy an iPod to replace it, but this Pono look like a nice upgrade.
  

  13.3.2014 17:44 #6

• ivymike

  There was an earlier news article here on AfterDawn about 128 Gb MicroSD cards......Hopefully they will be compatible with the Pono. If not would be a big no-no.
  

  13.3.2014 18:01 #7

• DarthMopar

  Yeah,64GB is not very much room for FLAC tracks..
  

  13.3.2014 20:14 #8

• Morreale

  So what puts this thing above other currently available audiophile players?
  

  *\\\****//\\\***//\\\*****
  **\\\**//**\\\*//**\\\*******
  ***\\\//****\\\ ****\\\****

  13.3.2014 21:39 #9

• SuckRaven

  Doubles as a High Fidelity door stop.
  

  SuckRaven

  13.3.2014 22:59 #10

• Jemborg

  Originally posted by ivymike: It IS something new when an online music store actually sells Hi-Def FLAC song tracks for digital download. How many other music stores do you know of that do that??? It comes down to that I guess. You should be able to buy the tracks for any device that can play it.
  
  $300-400 and I actually find it a bit uggers.
  

  Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
  
  
  

  13.3.2014 23:41 #11

• xtago

  it needs to do other formats.
  
  so far the sony walkman is the best I've seen so far.
  
  this has the 2 outputs which would be good, but with only 1 format and mem card only there's not much going for it.

  14.3.2014 10:14 #12

• Jemborg

  Surely it does other formats.
  
  I think the real point is the Hi-Def FLAC store.
  
  
  

  Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
  
  
  

  14.3.2014 10:24 #13

• MRI3T

  Originally posted by Dragon3000: It looks like a pile of do do to me! Why so many haters? There are a lot of ppl that actually like quality hi-def high quality music, instead of all of the lossy 192kbps crap that u download. It's not like its a Samsung!
  

  Music is Life!

  14.3.2014 11:54 #14

• seths

  This is an audiophile device, you are not going to find an FM tuner or any stupid BS like that. There is a large demand in the audiophile community and at this price point it is a great deal for those specs. There are plenty other companies offering similar devices that will compete with this, but not to the extent that Pono has taken it. They should be able to sell a few hundred thousand to people that will actually use it for it's intended high end purpose. And surely many more than that will buy it because it looks unique but will only load it with shitty mp3's, lol
  

  14.3.2014 13:37 #15

• scorpNZ

  They really need to do something about the shape, for a port device i would'a thought flat would be more sensible than a triangle in your top pocket or wherever ,it would've been better to have a recess incorporated into the rear for a hinged stand type thingy ,instead it looks like it's more for bench/desktop etc display,portable it may be practical it ain't especially if you want to use it while working & you want to listen to music thru a headset i.e a building site,outdoors etc
  

  AD Guides: http://www.afterdawn.com guides/
  Console Mod Tuts: http://www.realmodscene.com/
  
  

  14.3.2014 15:47 #16

• Mrguss

  Originally posted by xtago: it needs to do other formats.
  It play: FLAC, ALAC, mp3, mp3S, WAV, AIFF, AAC.
  
  Originally posted by xtago: ..this has the 2 outputs which would be good, but with only 1 format and mem card only there's not much going for it.
  
  
  It miss an USB port.
  
  When they made a FLAC-Player with speakers ["It could sound better that Bose"] :) ♥ ♪ ♬ ♫ ♡ ♥ & change their stupid triangular shape: I'll probably buy one. (Oh & please NO-Yellow).
  
  Others 8 FLAC Players:
  http://www.techshout.com/features/2012/27/best-flac-players/
  Other FLAC sources:
  http://www.musiczeit.com/
  http://zunior.com/
  http://www.linnrecords.com/catalogue.aspx?format=studio
  
  
  I just happy that the NEX series from Pioneer DJ-VJ player & the Euroradio network already are supporting the FLAC Format.
  BUT:
  1.- FLAC still a loss-less Digital-compressed format at 50% to 60% (-2x) of his original source & decompressed back to his original source.
  Unless http://www.ponomusic.com/ do it directly from the Master-recording one song at the time it can be "convinced". Any other option: I just skeptical a 100%.
  2.- Audio engineers, citing scientific studies that found NO audible difference between a CD Format at 16-bit/44.1kHz and FLAC Format at 24-bit/192kHz formats.
  3.- I don't think people will re-buy their music on Vinyls or CD's again, like it happen with the VHS -> DVD -> BR formats !?
  4.- "Probably" very few people will start buying only new music on FLAC.
  
  P.S.
  I think the New FLAC hype. is just a FAD just like it was the -7x Digital compressed MP3's. or MP3 players long time ago; or the laughable conversion of 2D movies to 3D.
  
  Just saying.
  

  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  14.3.2014 16:41 #17

• Jemborg

  Originally posted by Mrguss: Just saying. Interesting and thanks for the links.
  
  
  
  
  

  Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
  
  
  

  14.3.2014 20:58 #18

• Mez

  Originally posted by Mrguss: Originally posted by xtago: it needs to do other formats.
  It play: FLAC, ALAC, mp3, mp3S, WAV, AIFF, AAC.
  
  Originally posted by xtago: ..this has the 2 outputs which would be good, but with only 1 format and mem card only there's not much going for it.
  
  
  It miss an USB port.
  
  When they made a FLAC-Player with speakers ["It could sound better that Bose"] :) ♥ ♪ ♬ ♫ ♡ ♥ & change their stupid triangular shape: I'll probably buy one. (Oh & please NO-Yellow).
  
  Others 8 FLAC Players:
  http://www.techshout.com/features/2012/27/best-flac-players/
  Other FLAC sources:
  http://www.musiczeit.com/
  http://zunior.com/
  http://www.linnrecords.com/catalogue.aspx?format=studio
  
  
  I just happy that the NEX series from Pioneer DJ-VJ player & the Euroradio network already are supporting the FLAC Format.
  BUT:
  1.- FLAC still a loss-less Digital-compressed format at 50% to 60% (-2x) of his original source & decompressed back to his original source.
  Unless http://www.ponomusic.com/ do it directly from the Master-recording one song at the time it can be "convinced". Any other option: I just skeptical a 100%.
  2.- Audio engineers, citing scientific studies that found NO audible difference between a CD Format at 16-bit/44.1kHz and FLAC Format at 24-bit/192kHz formats.
  3.- I don't think people will re-buy their music on Vinyls or CD's again, like it happen with the VHS -> DVD -> BR formats !?
  4.- "Probably" very few people will start buying only new music on FLAC.
  
  P.S.
  I think the New FLAC hype. is just a FAD just like it was the -7x Digital compressed MP3's. or MP3 players long time ago; or the laughable conversion of 2D movies to 3D.
  
  Just saying. I agree. People can spend their money anyway they want and there are pleanty of people that like to believe they can tell the difference between lossless and a well made lossy but none that I have met are willing to blind test. I know one who claims he can tell wave from flac and prefers wave. Lossless, will faithfully reproduce up to 20,000 hz. High end mps faithfully reproduce up to 19,500 hz. Even if you could hear either of them which you can't unless you are a teenager, is like claiming you can taste a 2% less salt in a bowl of chile. These people are technically ignorant and prefer to stay that way.

  14.3.2014 21:07 #19

• scorpNZ

  Your friend is not telling the difference between format types more likely the bitrate,If anyone really wants a headache about sound perception take a gander at the link,personally it's all greek to me all i know is an mp3 of any kb rate sux,flac rocks & multi channels the best if you want real depth as tho you were there
  
  
  
  http://www.indiana.edu/~emusic/acoustics/pitch.htm
  

  AD Guides: http://www.afterdawn.com guides/
  Console Mod Tuts: http://www.realmodscene.com/
  
  

  14.3.2014 22:57 #20

• Tarsellis

  FLAC doesn't do you squat when the master is over-compressed and crap anyways. Nice advertising, fail function. Until the studios start changing how things are mastered, and start using more than two channels, then we'll still be stuck with noise for mass consumption, instead of music for private listening.

  15.3.2014 13:46 #21

• Mrguss

  Originally posted by Tarsellis: FLAC doesn't do you squat when the master is over-compressed and crap anyways. Nice advertising, fail function. Until the studios start changing how things are mastered, and start using more than two channels, then we'll still be stuck with noise for mass consumption, instead of music for private listening. Agree:
  But music is like Hollywood Movies. Low budget studios for shitty music and Big budget studios with shitty Audio engineers making the Master-Recordings.
  
  Very few Master-Recording albums have a great sound (Out of 10K albums, I can count them with my fingers) and we can hear it on printed Vinyls or CD's first batch.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
  

  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  15.3.2014 17:29 #22

• Jemborg

  Originally posted by Mrguss:
  Very few Master-Recording albums have a great sound (Out of 10K albums, I can count them with my fingers) and we can hear it on printed Vinyls or CD's first batch.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
  
  Dammit! I actually like some of those artists on the end list.
  
  
  

  Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
  
  
  

  16.3.2014 00:09 #23

• Mez

  Originally posted by Tarsellis: FLAC doesn't do you squat when the master is over-compressed and crap anyways. Nice advertising, fail function. Until the studios start changing how things are mastered, and start using more than two channels, then we'll still be stuck with noise for mass consumption, instead of music for private listening. They compress the music so it can be played louder. Most music lovers prefer louder music because you can hear the highs and lows better so it actually does sound better. Better is different so some consider that tainted. I don't get bent out of shape about it. Some liken this to some subversive plot. They ougt to try selling both versions for some of the more popular recordings.

  16.3.2014 19:35 #24

• Mez

  Originally posted by Mrguss: Originally posted by Tarsellis: FLAC doesn't do you squat when the master is over-compressed and crap anyways. Nice advertising, fail function. Until the studios start changing how things are mastered, and start using more than two channels, then we'll still be stuck with noise for mass consumption, instead of music for private listening. Agree:
  But music is like Hollywood Movies. Low budget studios for shitty music and Big budget studios with shitty Audio engineers making the Master-Recordings.
  
  Very few Master-Recording albums have a great sound (Out of 10K albums, I can count them with my fingers) and we can hear it on printed Vinyls or CD's first batch.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war Mrguss, what do you consider great sound? Music is about as subjective as any art. I don't think a dot on a canvas is art but many do.

  16.3.2014 19:40 #25

• scorpNZ

  Richness & depth of sound & preferably live however that would all be dependent on the equipment you play it on
  
  Agrre with MrGuss:
  On regarding quality of copying recording to album, a perfect example is pink floyds delicate sound of thunder dble alb that was a horrible sounding mash of crap & it was live too,thankfully a few years later they released pulse dble live alb to i assume make up for it & it sounds pretty good,nice crisp clean sounding & the multi channel dvd is even better
  

  AD Guides: http://www.afterdawn.com guides/
  Console Mod Tuts: http://www.realmodscene.com/
  
  

  16.3.2014 20:16 #26

• Jemborg

  Originally posted by scorpNZ: ...a few years later they released pulse dble live alb to i assume make up for it & it sounds pretty good, nice crisp clean sounding & the multi channel dvd is even better That's probably because most of the "live" album probably wasn't!
  
  
  

  Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
  
  
  

  17.3.2014 00:27 #27

• Mrguss

  Originally posted by Mez: ....what do you consider great sound? They are 3 Categories on Recording Music (Sound) on a professional label:
  OK, Good & Great.
  
  Great music is the one that Sound Analog = Like you are there with the musicians playing live (In the recording studio or real live) right in front of you and you are in the first row.
  
  Of course; using a dissent equipment to playing it back. lol
  
  Originally posted by scorpNZ: ..On regarding quality of copying recording to album.. Very few albums made it to be print on 24Kt Original Master Recording CD's. & they sound a lot better that regular CD's & it just to take 3 months to make them (one track at the time).
  http://www.audioinvest.no/tt_vinyl/suprdisc/omr_sd.htm
  http://www.mfsl.com/
  
  I never shop any Super-Audio CD's. but it sound that they are in their way back on the Digital version FLAC.
  

  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  17.3.2014 17:49 #28

• Jemborg

  Playing live? Like with acoustic instruments?... because it's ALL processed music otherwise. Maybe you're a classical music buff? Or are you just talking about going back to pre Phil Spector days?
  

  Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
  
  
  

  17.3.2014 18:23 #29

• Mrguss

  Originally posted by Jemborg: Playing live? Like with acoustic instruments?... because it's ALL processed music otherwise. Maybe you're a classical music buff? Or are you just talking about going back to pre Phil Spector days? Well today we have all this DJ's recording Electronic-Music (Techno, Rave, Tribe, Hard-Core, Dub-Step, etc.) still live but no too so. lol
  
  My favorite music is Jazz. But I leasing and play all kind of music from 1917 'till today. I'm just another DJ: Playing Dance music (Club, Hip-Hop, Pop, etc.)
  
  No Classic music for me. More like Heavy, Hard & Alternative rock, etc.
  

  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  17.3.2014 18:27 #30

• Jemborg

  I like Sibelius to Sex Pistols and beyond. But funnily enough not Jazz... well the sort that after a solo everybody's meant to clap.
  
  
  I find it amusing that while many may not be fond of Classical they are all really familiar with it unknowingly. Essentially because of all the movies we see.
  

  Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
  
  
  

  18.3.2014 02:14 #31

• scorpNZ

  Not a big fan of classical the real classical not mood music..lol..however instruments sound great when you get an orchestra onstage with any number of rock bands i.e sting,moody blues,deep purple etc
  

  AD Guides: http://www.afterdawn.com guides/
  Console Mod Tuts: http://www.realmodscene.com/
  
  

  19.3.2014 20:48 #32

• Mrguss

  Originally posted by Mez: Mrguss, what do you consider great sound? @Mez
  "Out-Of-Topic"
  Hello there:
  I had reading your answers on the 2 Digital Audio Forums ( Audio & High Resolution Audio). My sincere respect!
  
  Last days I have being playing with WAVe, FLAC & mp3.
  Using Audacity: analyzing them, by overlay them & Zoom in them all the way up etc.)
  Bit by bit is not diff. between WAV at 792MB & FLAC at 579MB.
  ...I gonna keep compressing FLAC all the way to 50% from my own Mix CD's (79.5mins. Edit-less: I'm good at it) ...then stream them.
  
  Any recommendations?
  Thx. in advance.
  

  Live Free or Die.
  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  22.3.2014 17:25 #33

• Mez

  I LOVE it!
  
  1) There should not be a difference.
  
  2) Document your test and stick it in the top sticky in the audio forum. Too many including myself, don't do enough testing before they open their mouths.
  
  3) In the top sticky, there is a link to the TAO analyzer. That might be useful in your testing. You can guess if a downloaded lossless file is really from a lossless source or from a ripped CD burned from a lossy source. I say guess because ultra-high quality (maxed out LAME or Helix) preserve up to 19.98-19.99 kHz vs 20kHz for lossless. The difference is negable and probably not noticeable even with a great measuring tool. The other wrinkle is most music does not contain ant 20,000 Hz tones.
  
  Back to the topic...
  Try listening to a Blackmore's night CD. I think these recordings have the best quality I have ever heard. The music industry despises Ritchie Blackmore as a childish prema donna (AHole). The industry doesn't want art they just want something the masses can identify with. I doubt that they have enough taste to recognize great when they hear it. Much of his music requires high-end play back devices to hear the music properly. He tends to use base drums and other instruments that produce background notes so low they do not register on an ipod using STD ipod buds. The industry wouldn't even sell elitist music like that. However, Ritchie funds and does everything except for the mastering himself. You can hear that the art of mastering is not dead but the patron must want quality not junk. Although he lives on Long Island I think you still need to buy his CDs from importers.

  23.3.2014 13:05 #34

• Mrguss

  .
  

  Live Free or Die.
  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  24.3.2014 17:34 #35

• Mrguss

  .
  

  Live Free or Die.
  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  25.3.2014 15:02 #36

• Mrguss

  I post my 1 week testing testes Final Results about the diff. between CD to mp3, CD to wav & CD to flac. Using diff. Free-CD-Ripper:
  http://forums.afterdawn.com/t.cfm/f-37/...t_50_50-973129/
  
  Hope are acceptable :)
  

  Live Free or Die.
  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  28.3.2014 16:08 #37

• Tarsellis

  Still doesn't mean anything when the master leaves a lot to be desired.
  
  Sure, flac, ape, ogg, etc stay closer to the wav. What about the master already resembling an mp3 before the wav is put on CD?
  
  Convince me you're getting different or better masters, and I'll look at your store. Give me shovelware that it takes $1,000 per speaker and a $2,000 amp to hear the difference between flac and mp3, and I'll pass. FFS, we're talking about using ear buds and ear phones with drivers sized in fractions of inches. Sadly, at this point, you're lucky to hear differences between 128k and 320k mp3s and flac rips.

  28.3.2014 18:09 #38

• Mrguss

  mp3 Codec and files in general: Always gonna be GARBAGE even at so call +500Kbps compression & leasing to them by using small ear buds, pro head set, night clubs or concert equipment: in compare to waw or flac lossless at level 5-6 compression.
  
  No only by leasing to it; but also you can see the big diff. bit-by-bit on a simple free-program like Audacity graphics (at diff. Modes & Zoom's) when the music files to compare: are overlay them in.
  
  The main problem is that who sale mp3 music files & the mp3 players makers are brainwashing the people to make it sound like the mp3's are a big deal to increase $$$ Corp. revenues, when in reality mp3's are just a big pile of fresh & stinky sh*t.
  
  I bet you that anybody can have almost the same results using a 24K Original Master Recorder (Gold CD Disc) or better [Probably a 5.1 DVD-Audio, if it could be possible > indirectly speaking], as you original source.
  

  Live Free or Die.
  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  28.3.2014 19:28 #39

• Mez

  My 2 cents...
  
  Lossless is lossless and that is a fact! Anyone that says different is ignorant and has no grasp of the concept.
  
  As far as bad masters, there is a big stink that masters are compressed so that they sound BETTER. I can appreciate purists that are offended by that. They want clean unadulterated music. They can apply an equalizer to achieve that same effect. Most persons don't have good enough equipment to do that. Music is made for the masses. I am not even slightly offended by this. If you want to hear music not made for the masses you will need to buy music that is produced by artists not the industry such as Blackmore's Night.
  
  I have bought ear buds for 7 USDs that reproduce a sound range comparable to 3K per speaker. In an industry where looks is far more important than performance, price has little to do with quality.
  
  Depending on the music, most persons listening to a 'faithful' playback can tell the difference between 120 BR and lossless. Most probably can't tell the difference between 160 Constant BR (CBR) and probably no one can tell a 160 VBR (Variable Bit Rate). VBRs are the most compressed but have the most fidelity of any lossy format. A 190 VBR has the equivalent quality of 500 CBR. MP3s and OGGs can have this compression.
  
  In the audio forum a poster was wanted to remove hiss from his audio. Apparently he had been f*cking up his lossless audios for 5 years by normalizing them. Normalization is for lossy. Normalization of an mp3 cant effect the quality because it doesn't touch it. It only changes a metadata value. To normalize lossless you completely alter the audio and can easily ruin the audio. Altering audio is what all the 'bad master' stink is about. This process can be sloppy since only a complete moron would do something like this. Morons are not very dangerous unless the have a gun or a bomb. He bought a new set of ear phones and now he hears hiss. This is the typical person that listens to lossless audio, a 24 carat moron. Not all that listen to lossless are morons but most are. The ones that are not morons do not claim they can hear a difference. Hiss pitch is at the high end of real music about 5 kHz. Garbage equipment will reproduce that. His equipment had to be super garbage. Hiss pitch is literally light years away from the difference between a maxed out VBR and lossless. In the top sticky You too can be an audio expert in the audio forum has more details about most of the above.
  One important link is to 'Audio Myths'. The takeaway concept is 'because of the way your brain processes audio you will ALWAYS hear what you expect to hear'. They explain that in detail. If you think you can hear the difference between lossy and lossless you will even though that is scientifically impossible. If someone switches the lossy and lossless your brain will hear that the lossy is superior to the lossless.

  29.3.2014 12:08 #40

• Mrguss

  Originally posted by Mez: My 2 cents...
  Lossless is lossless and that is a fact! Anyone that says different is ignorant and has no grasp of the concept. Well. I easily find out that FLAC is The Superior Codec compared to other lossless & popular codecs out there.
  My challenge was to find out the best FLAC Ripper and THE WHY ? (The main important question); That's why I make my little test: CD > FLAC using diff. rippers.
  My own final ANSWER is: EAC & dbpoweramp are the absolute winners!
  
  Originally posted by Mez: As far as bad masters, there is a big stink that masters are compressed so that they sound BETTER. Music in general is compressed to a CD's, or else (mp3, etc.)'cos the main reason for the Music Corporations is to increase profits no to sale quality.
  Also by compressing more, they have the ability to "sale" more, since more will fit in their players. lol
  
  They know that very few people will buy the over-priced high end quality music products: that's why they are not so interested to make that effort to make just a few bucks so far.
  
  Like you say: "Music is made for the masses" = More profits for them: offering cheap quality music.
  
  
  Originally posted by Mez: ...price has little to do with quality. If you talking about compression or even payback "gadget" or even a simple good free source download. probably you right.
  But I don't agree if we talking about the Original-Source format as a physical form.
  
  
  Originally posted by Mez: Depending on the music, most persons listening to a 'faithful' playback can tell the difference between 120 BR and lossless., etc.
  
  I agree. Only the hard core music lovers can some how know it.
  Yup. VBR (Variable Bit Rate) is better.
  
  
  Originally posted by Mez: In the audio forum a poster was wanted to remove hiss from his audio. Apparently he had been f*cking up his lossless audios for 5 years by normalizing them. Yep. The more we play with the files the worse it get.
  Simplicity always gonna be better.
  
  Compressing CD to FLAC: I run the Ripper on a Pro-Mode to let it work on it own full potential.
  
  No all Morons are bad. (They are diff. for sure) But few of them are analytical or radical & generate great points of views for humanity.
  
  
  Originally posted by Mez: ...listens to lossless audio, a 24 carat moron. Not all that listen to lossless are morons but most are. Ha,ha,ha.
  Well last night a compress 3 (Queen - The Game, Pink Floyd The Wall & Michael Jackson - History all on 24K Original Master Recording) CD's to Flac Using diff. rippers
  - I had a hard time comparing the differences between the flac's. using the simple Computer speakers.
  - So I opted to use a high end Pioneer headphones at half volume on the Computer & the player. (I post my finding at the Audio Forum as my "6th. test")
  http://forums.afterdawn.com/t.cfm/f-37/...t_50_50-973129/
  
  
  Originally posted by Mez: ....The takeaway concept is 'because of the way your brain processes audio you will ALWAYS hear what you expect to hear'. I was not expecting anything at the beginning of my test.
  
  - I always had leasing to CD's. Since I almost own most of the popular music out there. At home, Deejing at private parties, Night Club or in my Car.
  - Never pay or free download a mp3, ringtone or else.
  - This is the first time I challenge myself to experiment and find out what is the Best Codec to transfer a CD to a more portable format (load my Internet-Radio-Servers with it) to stream music at the highest quality level possible. And possible use Virtualization to save money on cooling power, etc.
  
  
  
  Originally posted by Mez: impossible !? Nothing is Impossible.
  Some things are easy, other are hard to accomplished, other take longer time to get it done or require more money, afford, etc.
  But for sure Nothing will stay impossible for ever.
  
  
  FLAC vs. MP3 Side-by-Side Comparison:
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA_tUCnmry4
  

  Live Free or Die.
  The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
  Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.

  29.3.2014 15:54 #41