14 out of 15 listeners can't tell the difference between PONO & iTunes Store downloads on an iPhone

For fun I'm going to put the Audio Fidelity version of Rush "Counterparts" on my iPod. And the HDtracks version of "Counterparts" on my iPod. Take the iPod to my local coffee shop along with my Sony V6 headphones. I'm going to ask 15 random people to listen to one minute of a song from both masterings. That will demonstrate which mastering is better and which the masses prefer. Then I'll ask each of them if they would be willing to pay $30 for the Audio Fidelity version. This will be fun.

Everyone will prefer the HDtracks version. It's louder. Nobody will even consider paying $30 for an Audio Fidelity SACD.
If anyone is willing to let those sorts of impressions be a guide for what is good audio then we will get what we deserve. We deserve the loud masterings. We deserve average consumer audio gear. We deserve what we're getting if that's what we let guide us.

Neil is aiming for better sound for those willing to accept it.

 

Neil is looking to line his pockets

 

That's a relief. For a moment I thought I was reading another "Manowar - underrated metal gods?" thread.

 

His company is offering a hell of a good player for the price....quite a value for anyone interested in a great-sounding portable device that can hang with much more expensive gear (from someone who has the device in question). His company also offers cd-quality and HD downloads at comparable prices to other such sites.

Either this device and web site fit your needs or they don't. Vinyl doesn't fit my needs...big deal...I don' t trash it.

 

I am comparing apples and oranges in terms of the mastering side of it. However, as far as I'm concerned, HDTracks is competing in a marketplace with other companies touting a high-end product, like MoFi, and touting themselves as a purveyor of superior sound -- but we all know that hi-res is not automatically superior unless the mastering is good. Therefore, the comparison is just. MoFi has a reputation, AP and AF have reputations. In my opinion, HDTracks needs to establish a such a reputation that is justified by what they offer. At least, to attrack my business, they will have to do so. Same for Pono. YMMV. And really, I think comparing HDTracks to a mom-and-pop music shop is an apples and oranges comparison, so right back atcha. .

 

Thanks for the info- verifies what I suspected....

 

I know- it's not really a valid comparison anyway, as the Pono is engineered specifically for great audio reproduction while the iPhone has to be a jack of all trades, master of none...

 

6 lb. VTF, that's how

 

You'd think that the thing would skip just while you were idling- rev the engine & the torque would slide the tonearm across the record for sure...

 

Ah- in other words, you get a couple of good plays before the needle cuts clear through to the other side of the record....

 

Okay then let's use your comparison then. Do you think Sony/BMG will change the way they are doing things because one mom and pop music store is demanding they do it? Chesky is an audiophile label that is owned by the same people that own HDtracks and if you look at and listen to their downloads they do it right. It's when it comes to the other labels that you get the issues. It would be like if Music Direct (who owns MoFi) went to Warner Bros. and told them they need to do a better job mastering and pressing their records or they won't buy from them anymore. Warner Bros. could care less about Music Directs demands. They just don't have the pull. Now if Amazon said something that's a different story since they are their biggest client of physical media.

 

Oh, no-- spherical stylus

 

~$800 if you want an iPhone 6+ with 128GB - quite a bit more than a Pono (which is the "good system" they've just listened to in the trial, I think?)

 

Whos trashing it? The previous post read "Neil is aiming for better sound for those willing to accept it."

And I simply stated Neil is looking to line his pockets. IMO, its a dying breed. As I stated earlier, people put there music on their phones. The few that dont wont keep the PONO afloat.

 

Chris, Kudo's on a very well written post. And all the points you made I also agree with. When I had a SACD player I did my own a/b/x test and this is how I did it.
I took the Toslink fiber cable optical output of the SACD player and fed it to my 24bit resolution Tascam Professional CD recorders Toslink input. Then I popped on a SACD disc of Stevie Ray Vaughn and recorded onto the Tascam, a 16/44.1 version of the downconverted DSD signal from the SACD player. Then I burned the cd, finalized it, and sync'd both players up to start playing their discs, the SACD in the SACD player and the CD redbook CDR I just burned. Using both the speakers in my system (mirage omd-28 flagship) and my Bose headphones I could NOT detect any discernible difference between the two sources, concentrating on soundstage, depth, frequency dispersion across the audio bandwidth, and noise.
After this I sold my SACD player and concentrated on discs-some of them SACD Hybrids, that contained music that was MASTERED WELL. Indeed, what Steve has said over and over and over again is true, Mastering is THE most important thing besides using clean electronics.
the beave

 

I normally use it on the train or on walks with in-ear phones, but on occasion I plug my top of the range Sennheiser headphones into it and the sound quality is superb too.
I would guess sound wise, it's even on par with the Pono. At $360 cheaper as an alternative, I will hold out on buying a Pono until they stock their website with Hi-res.
I even think the Sandisk can play Hi-res. Never tried it though.

 

The Sansa can play hi-res FLAC with Rockbox installed. The Sansa Clip was my portable player for years but I just switched to using the Neutron Music Player on a Samsung Galaxy tablet and Neutron really makes hi-res sound like hi-res. The Sansa Clip is more portable though - it's tiny and can clip onto your belt or lapel.

 

Thank you. The most important parts in any comparison is level matching, and that the person performing the test not know which one is being heard - that is the essence of "double blind" tests, otherwise the person administering the test can, even unconsciously, influence the opinion of the person being tested.

The scientific method is not perfect but, like democracy, is better than any alternative anyone has ever tried.

 

It can play them but the DAC isn't hi-res. They get down sampled to play just like 24bit files do on an iPod.

 

These are my 2 portable players as well. Neutron on an LG G2 for hires, Sansa for everything else. Like them very much. Still might go the Pono route someday though.

 

Right-- and as I asked somwhere upthread, can you level match using headphones?

 

The Sandisk DAC has a bit rate/sample frequency of 24/48000 hz, so better than CD quality. It does me fine.
All my flac's are from CD's, so my Sandisk is overkill anyway.

 

If you're attempting to replicate the test I mentioned. The output of the high-res source goes to a distribution amp, and hopefully the two outputs are matched, one goes to input A of the comparator, the other goes into the input of a excellent quality device that will resample the audio to 16/44.1. Pretty much any device will have level controls, and you can tweak those levels. The output of that device goes into input B of the comparator. Play sample levels and tones on the high res player, and use a meter on the amplifier, hitting the switch on the comparator over and over again while adjusting levels on the 16/44.1 device until there is no meter movement at all.

Alternately, one could record the high res file onto a high res capture device, like a ProTools system, and make a lower res copy, copy both onto two tracks of the audio workstation, and randomly mute and un-mute tracks. Maybe someone has a piece of software that does this.

The problem with the latter, or indeed any scientific approach, is that people with a vested interest in there being a difference will always question the equipment. The comparator uses reed relays with gold contacts, and it about as clean as anything in audio, and the AES is a peer-reviewed journal. It was good science.

 

I'm simply going to point out that 15 people picked at random are a useless stat.

I have no reason to believe the 80/20 isn't still in effect.....in the 80s, 80% of sales were cassettes. NO ONE will defend cassette as sounding better than vinyl or CD. 80% of the market for music values convenience over sound. This hasn't changed.

I point that out, because the only important/relevant testing is to test ONLY the 20% who DO care about how things sound....and see how they do. Here's how you do that....with anyone over 30--"when did you get your first CD player"....if the answer is after 87'ish, they don't care. For under, "how many recordings do you ONLY possess on mp3 or AAC"? Any answer synonymous with "lots" or "all"....they don't care.

Cassette buyer don't get a seat at this table. They already HAVE the convenience format of the next generation. Streaming. Why bother even buying stuff? Why bother paying artists? It's so cool--you can listen to anything you want on demand any time on your phone. Sweet! YOu can't GET any more convenient or cheap.

 

I don't think so. I think Neil, like a lot of people, believes that people are still listening to those 128k mp3 files that flooded the internet a decade ago. Beyond that, I think Neil (like many here) has put his trust in the audiophile consensus of the present day (high res is dramatically superior to redbook, all lossy codecs are evil etc.) and had based his product development on these judgements.