independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sat 20th Jul 2019 9:12am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Prince Music for PONO - Only if you care about QUALITY
« Previous topic  Next topic »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 06/10/14 10:58am

DownTheNeedleD
ownTheSpoon

Prince Music for PONO - Only if you care about QUALITY

Does anyone know if Prince will be making re-mastered total studio sound quality music available for the new PONO music player?You haven't heard about it????You need to check it out... Google PONO Music or Kickstarter and read all about it.I signed up in April, but it will not be released until Decemebr 2014.I would love to re-experience the entire librabry in this new format.Peace, G
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 06/10/14 3:22pm

sovembol

Lol. At first I thought it said porno.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 06/10/14 3:32pm

MIRvmn

avatar

lol
We are living in Orwell's 1984
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 06/10/14 5:09pm

EyeHatechu

avatar

sovembol said:

Lol. At first I thought it said porno.

Me too.
This Could Be Us But U Be Playin...
You Can Call It The Unexpected Or U Can Call It WOW
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 06/10/14 5:47pm

KlyphIsBackAga
in

avatar

Dude, really, DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE!!! Pono is just another in a long line of attempts to get people to purchase music they already have AGAIN in hopes that the listener will be able to "Hear the artist's breath or farts" or whatever. You won't hear a difference. You just won't. If the source is the same you have a better chance of winning a $400 million dollar lottery jackpot than being able to tell the difference between a high-res, redbook & high bit-rate mp3.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 06/10/14 5:49pm

savagedreams

while im all for complete lossless technology, i dont know why people expect it to be such an amazing new sound experience. quite frankly the average person cant tell the difference between an mp3 or wav file, and i doubt most will hear a difference with pono.

besides that, if you remaster an album, you will hear a difference on an system through any file type. the hype isnt about remastering stuff for pono, its supposedly that you will hear exactly what the artist hears in the studio. but i cant imagine there being any real significant difference.

[Edited 6/10/14 17:51pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 06/11/14 12:43am

udo

avatar

An affordable, simple player that does FLAC (also in 24-bit) is all we ever need.

Of course it will also play mp3z and do it all gaplessly.

Of course it drives your headphone perfectly...

.

So what is this player? Brand/type?

Pills and thrills and daffodils will kill... If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 06/11/14 12:48am

MrGooodNight

savagedreams said:

while im all for complete lossless technology, i dont know why people expect it to be such an amazing new sound experience. quite frankly the average person cant tell the difference between an mp3 or wav file, and i doubt most will hear a difference with pono.

besides that, if you remaster an album, you will hear a difference on an system through any file type. the hype isnt about remastering stuff for pono, its supposedly that you will hear exactly what the artist hears in the studio. but i cant imagine there being any real significant difference.

[Edited 6/10/14 17:51pm]

I'd agree with most of what you said except in that you will be able to see a huge difference between mp3 and WAV/FLAC if you play it on decent equipment.

If you play it on a cheap pair of Ipod headphones then there is no difference because the cheap headphone won't show you the range.

I have a set of Sennheiser HD650's and a DAC from my laptop. If I play an MP3 and a FLAC side by side then you will hear a huge difference. If I plug in my ipod headphones then no discernable difference.

Pono is at least an attempt to get lossless music on the agenda but if people try and play these files through crappy equipment then it really will be the emperors new clothes.

The remastering is also a scam unless people have the ability to bring out the depth of the music. With a set of over ear cans that are decent, you will hear the band all around you on a good remaster. With an MP3 it will feel flat and very hard to pull out certain instruments.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 06/11/14 2:00am

FragileUnderto
w

avatar

EyeHatechu said:

sovembol said:
Lol. At first I thought it said porno.
Me too.

Me three lol

Cant believe my purple psychedelic pimp slap pimp2

And I descend from grace, In arms of undertow
I will take my place, In the great below
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 06/11/14 3:11am

databank

avatar

sovembol said:

Lol. At first I thought it said porno.

Me four lol lol

We need to retitle this thread lol lol

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 06/11/14 3:12am

KlyphIsBackAga
in

avatar

MrGooodNight said:



savagedreams said:


while im all for complete lossless technology, i dont know why people expect it to be such an amazing new sound experience. quite frankly the average person cant tell the difference between an mp3 or wav file, and i doubt most will hear a difference with pono.



besides that, if you remaster an album, you will hear a difference on an system through any file type. the hype isnt about remastering stuff for pono, its supposedly that you will hear exactly what the artist hears in the studio. but i cant imagine there being any real significant difference.


[Edited 6/10/14 17:51pm]



I'd agree with most of what you said except in that you will be able to see a huge difference between mp3 and WAV/FLAC if you play it on decent equipment.



If you play it on a cheap pair of Ipod headphones then there is no difference because the cheap headphone won't show you the range.



I have a set of Sennheiser HD650's and a DAC from my laptop. If I play an MP3 and a FLAC side by side then you will hear a huge difference. If I plug in my ipod headphones then no discernable difference.




Pono is at least an attempt to get lossless music on the agenda but if people try and play these files through crappy equipment then it really will be the emperors new clothes.



The remastering is also a scam unless people have the ability to bring out the depth of the music. With a set of over ear cans that are decent, you will hear the band all around you on a good remaster. With an MP3 it will feel flat and very hard to pull out certain instruments.



Placebo. If there's a HUGE difference your Mp3's are encoded at something like 128. If they are 320 (hell, 256 really), nope. You're not hearing a difference. You're trying to convince yourself you are, but you're not. (And yes, I have good equipment)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 06/11/14 3:15am

udo

avatar

KlyphIsBackAgain said:

If they are 320 (hell, 256 really), nope. You're not hearing a difference. You're trying to convince yourself you are, but you're not. (And yes, I have good equipment)

You are deaf.

Your gear is sub-par (and I am not an audiophile).

Or some other cause.

But depending on the material the difference between 256 Kbit MP3 and uncompressed CD should be audible.

Pills and thrills and daffodils will kill... If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 06/11/14 3:29am

KlyphIsBackAga
in

avatar

udo said:



KlyphIsBackAgain said:


If they are 320 (hell, 256 really), nope. You're not hearing a difference. You're trying to convince yourself you are, but you're not. (And yes, I have good equipment)


You are deaf.


Your gear is sub-par (and I am not an audiophile).


Or some other cause.


But depending on the material the difference between 256 Kbit MP3 and uncompressed CD should be audible.



No, it shouldn't. And believe me, my equipment is far from sub-par. But it's like trying to convince a religious person there is no god. I could throw out all the science in the world but it won't change what you believe. So enjoy yourself!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 06/11/14 4:26am

MrGooodNight

KlyphIsBackAgain said:

udo said:

You are deaf.

Your gear is sub-par (and I am not an audiophile).

Or some other cause.

But depending on the material the difference between 256 Kbit MP3 and uncompressed CD should be audible.

No, it shouldn't. And believe me, my equipment is far from sub-par. But it's like trying to convince a religious person there is no god. I could throw out all the science in the world but it won't change what you believe. So enjoy yourself!

Dude - your opinion is fine with me. Until I made the leap and bought some reference headphones, a decent DAC and did an A/B test then I couldn't hear a difference. If you try and shove a FLAC file through a cheap set of headphones then it WONT work.

I am the same with wine - much more than £50 a bottle and its too subtle for me to know the difference. But going from £5 to £30 and oh yeah I can see whats going on.

I am not trying to argue the difference between 320kbps versus FLAC because that is the difference between the £50 and £55 bottle wine - too subtle and either needs expensive equipment or Dumbo ears.

The fundamentals of this argument are for me (for example) people having to buy a 192kbps single from Itunes versus a WAV/FLAC from the 3rdEyeGirl site (The Breakdown being a perfect example) - I'd rather they stuck it out in 256 or 320 but we get Apples sh*t 192 format instead. And that compresssion is fine for most cheap headphones but not if you can actually tell the difference with decent kit.

Actually - I'd love some new CD's or Vinyl from P but then I am just being too wishful.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 06/11/14 6:32am

KlyphIsBackAga
in

avatar

MrGooodNight said:

KlyphIsBackAgain said:

udo said: No, it shouldn't. And believe me, my equipment is far from sub-par. But it's like trying to convince a religious person there is no god. I could throw out all the science in the world but it won't change what you believe. So enjoy yourself!

Dude - your opinion is fine with me. Until I made the leap and bought some reference headphones, a decent DAC and did an A/B test then I couldn't hear a difference. If you try and shove a FLAC file through a cheap set of headphones then it WONT work.

I am the same with wine - much more than £50 a bottle and its too subtle for me to know the difference. But going from £5 to £30 and oh yeah I can see whats going on.

I am not trying to argue the difference between 320kbps versus FLAC because that is the difference between the £50 and £55 bottle wine - too subtle and either needs expensive equipment or Dumbo ears.

The fundamentals of this argument are for me (for example) people having to buy a 192kbps single from Itunes versus a WAV/FLAC from the 3rdEyeGirl site (The Breakdown being a perfect example) - I'd rather they stuck it out in 256 or 320 but we get Apples sh*t 192 format instead. And that compresssion is fine for most cheap headphones but not if you can actually tell the difference with decent kit.

Actually - I'd love some new CD's or Vinyl from P but then I am just being too wishful.

Well, actually, iTunes files are encoded in 256 AAC, so......

but yeah, I'd love some new vinyl too (don't really see the point in CD's anymore).

[Edited 6/11/14 6:34am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 06/11/14 6:37am

NoVideo

avatar

I don't think another digital format is really needed, but we'll see...

* * *

Prince's Classic Finally Expanded
The Deluxe 'Purple Rain' Reissue

http://www.popmatters.com...n-reissue/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 06/11/14 8:38am

DownTheNeedleD
ownTheSpoon

Well, thank you all for your comments. They are all welcome, no flame necesary.I appreciate the science of sound lesson as well.I just know that if Neil Young is in support of this enhanced quality, so am I. I did order my PONO which will be delivered in December. I promise to getback to those that commented and give you my honest to goodness feedback. It's all about the quality of the sound for me... and the quality of the wine smile I've got two sides, and they're both friends. Peace,G
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Prince Music for PONO - Only if you care about QUALITY