Michael Fremer defends Hi-Res digital while chewing out Gizmodo

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by violetvinyl, Jan 25, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Spitfire

    Spitfire Senior Member

    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    You might want to add another item: Cost. If somebody like me has a large collection of CDs, most of which have been carefully purchased over the past 20 years or so to get the the ones with the best mastering, it's cost prohibitive to repurchase these items again, especially when the mastering itself is questionable. I believe that Hi-rez is potentially better sounding but I'm not prepared to pay the high cost of finding out. I'm just going to keep playing my CDs plus rip them to FLAC to my hard drive.
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  2. Ham Sandwich

    Ham Sandwich Senior Member

    Location:
    Sherwood, OR, USA
    The obvious difference is in soundstage. The overall presentation of the soundstage. The openness of the sound. The PonoPlayer has a very noticeable set-back soundstage that sets you several rows back from the stage. There is depth. The soundstage envelops around your head. Contrast that with the sound of an iToy that presents the sound as if your head is right at the front of the stage with speakers right next to your ears. No depth. Very separated. The sound does not envelop your head at all. Flat.

    The difference is obvious. If someone can't hear it then I question whether they could even notice the difference between mono and stereo. The difference is so obvious and so much a part of the PonoPlayer sound that if they don't notice it I question whether they even listened to the player at all to do the review. This is a sonic difference that is as obvious as getting smacked over the head with a 2x4. It's just not possible to listen to the PonoPlayer and an iToy and not be able to notice a difference. I can accept that someone would prefer the sound of the iToy, and that's fine with me. But to say there is no noticeable difference is just not possible. This isn't subtle.
     
  3. Jack Flannery

    Jack Flannery Forum Resident

    Location:
    Houston, TX
    I have a mix. Ripped cd's, the rare sacd, vinyl, cd's, high rez, itunes stuff. Yeah, there is a difference but I pretty much enjoy them all. I'm certainly am not going to get my boxers twisted in a knot over it.
     
  4. Archimago

    Archimago Forum Resident

    Absolutely Spitfire. The cost structure has to make sense.

    Since I don't particularly feel that high resolution sounds *that* much better, I do not believe in spending lots more money on it... If an album costs $10 for a lossless 16/44 download, I might be willing to pay $13 for 24/96 or something like that (off the top of my head, don't quote me on it!) if it's a favourite recording.
     
  5. head_unit

    head_unit Senior Member

    Location:
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Yes, I remember that. I think it was Malcolm Omar Hawksford? OK, some research show not. But I'm pretty sure he wrote a paper with a similar conclusion of 60k.

    Here's some light reading for y'all "Bits is Bits":
    http://www.stereophile.com/features/396bits/
    I'm not sure how much of this applies to an outboard asynchronous setup, as a lot of the article is about jitter induced trying to recover the clock (or so it seems from my fast skim).

    I'm pretty sure 44.1 could encode all the frequencies most anyone can hear. The issue is really the time domain behavior of the associated filters* (predictable at the time), clock recovery related jitter (not predictable?), and noise modulation and other errors of imperfect D/A conversion. Early digital also suffered from encoding incorrect, LP-EQd masters, and relatively poor A/D converters. Remember, the first Philips player use 14 bit chips because nobody had really reached 16 bit performance. And before we slam Red Book too much, I'm going to assert it sounded far better than the vast majority of LP systems people listened to. Those of you who say vinyl sounds better probably have a better vinyl chain than normal people back in the day.

    *Some nicer filters were eventually designed, such as by Luxman and then-sister division Alpine (Google "Fluency DAC" and "Alpine 3900"). This
    http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue42/luxman_80.htm
    has some info about that like halfway down:
    "The difference between a non-oversampling DAC and a conventional oversampling DAC with the digital filter lies whether you attach importance on the accuracy in the time domain or in the frequency domain—"
    and this interesting digression:
    "When I produced Ginger Baker's first jazz recording at Ocean Way Studios back in 1994 (Going Back Home on Atlantic), I got a crash course in the relative sonic merits and shortcomings of both digital and analog formats. And while the three 8-track ADAT decks we deployed for safety back-ups, punch-ins, edits and overdubs might have more accurately reflected the sound coming through the enormous UREI studio monitors (you can hear the ADAT-processed tracks on "Straight No Chaser," "In The Moment" and "East Timor"), the sound of a Studer A80 ½" 2-track analog tape recorder running at 15ips (with no Dolby) was to my ears light years more musical.
    Accuracy versus musicality? In the process of saturating ½" tape with high levels of gain from electric guitar, acoustic bass and acoustic drums, one could upon playback could apprehend an audible degree of tape compression and other "analog artifacts" which most certainly altered the final sound, but to my ears in a good way, a human way, a musical way... I was particularly impressed by the low frequency extension, midrange richness, and high frequency detail—the Studer's top end while neither bright nor edgy, was much sweeter, more open, transparent and natural than that of the ADAT "

    I think the biggest difference of high sampling rates is that you can design more benign D/A filters…AND also A/D filters, let us not forget. As a matter of fact, I've always wondered, if you had an 88 or 96k playback, what would happen if you just dispensed with the lowpass filtering entirely. Noise? Aliasing? In theory yes-but in reality how much would really impinge on the audio band?
     
  6. Veni Vidi Vici

    Veni Vidi Vici Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Right. Which track might best illustrate that and what specifically should be looked for?
     
    lukpac likes this.
  7. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    This is the one thing everyone needs to remember when interacting with another human being. Everyone's perception of reality os colored by our life experiences.

    No, I have nothing to add to this mess, only that I want someone to run out and buy more popcorn and snacks. I just wish there wasn't so much vile comments posted toward Mr. Fremer. You, or I may not agree with him, but he really doesn't deserve the hostile comments he is getting here. In turn, Mario Aguilera doesn't deserve the venom Fremer unleashed on him, either.
     
    2xUeL likes this.
  8. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    Fremer has never said he doesn't like digital. But, hi-rez must be that good if he is defending it. One thing I have noticed over the years is that Fremer is not a technically-oriented person. He may understand the details, but he isn't good at expressing them. But, I have seen enough of what he writes, or heard him speak to know that he does understand digital.
     
  9. Ham Sandwich

    Ham Sandwich Senior Member

    Location:
    Sherwood, OR, USA
    Symphonic classical music recordings will bring that out to a great degree and make the set-back style soundstage very obvious. Choral recordings will too. The soundtrack recording for Glory by James Horner and is a good demo for this since it has a stronger center of the image than a typical classical music recording, yet it still manages to present the set-back style imaging very well.

    But you don't need to use those sorts of recordings to hear the set-back soundstage. That set-back sound is present in everything played. Even AC/DC "Back in Black" (which I'm listening to right now on my PonoPlayer, Barry Diament's mastering of Back in Black). The orchestral style recordings though will bring out that affect much more.
     
  10. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    According to your post, please do not be offended if I don't consider your opinion of audio very seriously in the future. Why? I don't agree with you. Likewise, i'm sure you won't be paying any attention to my views when it comes to audio.
     
    darkmass and ubiknik like this.
  11. brimuchmuze

    brimuchmuze Forum Resident

    Nor the tech reviewer who actually listened to the PONO hardware but didn't find a compelling difference.

    Why people whom one does not agree with, or don't have the same listening experience, are labeled "putz", I am not sure. Would forum members be treated the same way?
     
  12. Ham Sandwich

    Ham Sandwich Senior Member

    Location:
    Sherwood, OR, USA
    It's not about disagreeing. I have no issue at all with anyone saying they don't like the sound of the PonoPlayer at all or that they prefer the sound of their iPhone. The sound style that the PonoPlayer does has faults and is not appropriate for all music. Eventually I'll write up something with my opinions about what those faults are. But first I need to listen to it more and I especially need to try it in balanced mode before digging into criticisms like that. Cause balanced mode apparently offers some improvements in some of the areas I'd be criticizing. And I'm not a putz who would go around criticizing without having given it a fair listen.

    What if someone came to the forum here and was unable to hear a difference in any mastering or remastering of an album? What if they came to the conclusion that all of the various audiophile masterings from AF, DCC, MOFI, and others were all a sham, make no difference, and in fact there is no compelling reason for them to even exist? And then got on YouTube to spout all that nonsense? They'd be a putz.
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2015
    ubiknik likes this.
  13. ubiknik

    ubiknik Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL USA
    For me, I would like very much to have this porno player..
    [​IMG]
    ..it has the sexy angles and uses the high revolutions I am hearing

    Celebrity endorsements count, right?
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2015
  14. darkmass

    darkmass Forum Resident

    Under the implicit forum rules, Michael Fremer wouldn't do that. He is a forum member here you know.
     
  15. head_unit

    head_unit Senior Member

    Location:
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Well, recall I said "Stereo enthusiast" (i.e. assembling a system to sit and listen to intently). I see a LOT of kids, and they are doing nothing of the sort. Music is still very important, but it is a background or adjunct activity unless actually at a concert. When I say "system" I mean like room-filling home speakers plus amp and source, not a phone feeding a single Bluetooth speaker, nor headphones. I believe sitting in a room in between the speakers doing nothing but listening to the music coming out of them has pretty much gone the way of the dodo…and maybe was never as popular as us Hoffmanites might think.
     
    Grant likes this.
  16. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    Yeah, they just have to find more subtle ways of saying "putz". :)

    The guy who listened to the Pono should not make judgements for everyone. Just because he can hear little difference does not mean everyone is the same. The whole thing could have been avoided if someone had just said "Listen and judge for yourself if the Pono is worth it or not.". But, no one will do that.
     
  17. Ghostworld

    Ghostworld Senior Member

    Location:
    US
    Oh, believe me, it was plenty popular. I remember going to friends house where we would just sit around and listen to albums. I mean, really listen. We'd put on a news Beatles or Bowie or Stones album and just sit and listen. You might break that up with a Cheech and Chong album. Hard to believe now in today's hyperactive, multi-tasking world, but it's true. In the same vein, I just went on a trip to a cabin and three kids learned how to play cards for lack of video games and cable. Completely new experience for them. When I was that age -- 12 or 13 -- we'd sit around for hours on weekends playing hearts or spades. Almost inconceivable now kids would be entertained by something so UNPLUGGED. So you can imagine how spinning album's on someone's dad's stereo was a damn TREAT!
     
  18. EdogawaRampo

    EdogawaRampo Senior Member

    For my friends and myself, that was pretty much one of our favorite things to do 1973~to some time in the 80s when we all moved to different spots on the globe.
    Stereo was central part of lives, especially our social lives. Parties centered around good sound systems. New music was an event and it was shared. Very different world.
    I loved it. And what's left of it, I still love.

    Things like 'gone the way of the dodo' and 'maybe never as popular as us Hoffmanites might think' clearly speaks inexperienced age demographic and assertive ignornace. That's dodo.
     
    Ghostworld likes this.
  19. Matt A

    Matt A Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Now might be a good time to remind that all of the senses we possess are nothing but translators to the brain. Of which no two are alike.
    So when someone hears something differently, it's not that their hearing is whack, it's that they process it in their own unique way. And that's perfectly ok, as far as I'm concerned.
     
    Grant and moops like this.
  20. drbryant

    drbryant Senior Member

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I hear you. I think that the last sentence is
     
  21. Shiver

    Shiver Forum Resident

    Location:
    UK
    I know very little about Fremer, and I haven't read this whole thread, but I did skim through the linked article.

    Quoting Fremer '...The reason audiophiles are held in esteem one step lower than pedophiles is because we lay back and take it (bad metaphor in that context but true). We need to fight back every time we read this crapola.'

    Really? What an abhorrent, incomprehensible view to take and way to express it.

    Call me sensitive or whatever.
     
    timind, funhouse and Halloween_Jack like this.
  22. Bill

    Bill Senior Member

    Location:
    Eastern Shore
    Like I posted, he's a charmer. Hopefully working off some of that New York rage today shoveling his driveway.:goodie:
     
    Micke Lindahl, timind, moops and 2 others like this.
  23. EdogawaRampo

    EdogawaRampo Senior Member

    So are you Billy. Glad to see you back.
     
  24. violetvinyl

    violetvinyl Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Mikey likes to play the crying game. If I am an audiophile, and i'm not sure if I am, I don't care or even believe that people would look down on me. Isn't it somewhat elitist to claim to be persecuted for such a 'first world' hobby?
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2015
    2xUeL and timind like this.
  25. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

    I like turtles.
     
    Bill likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine