# Just did the Pono Kickstarter...



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

...and the pledge qualified for a limited edition artist series Pono player, expected shipping around Oct/14. Opted for the Lenny Kravitz series, as you get two free album downloads. Kravitz used a Neve console/Studer tape machine for great warm analog sound on several of his albums, so I'm hoping that translates well to the Pono format.

First heard about the Pono/PureTone concept last year on Letterman and read plenty about it in Neil Young's book on my holiday - intriguing concept, actually. If it lives up to its hype, it'll be worth every penny, I'm sure. If not, I may have an interesting historical anecdote on my hands. 

Link to the Kickstarter campaign with a video clip:


https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1003614822/ponomusic-where-your-soul-rediscovers-music


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Almost bought one the other night. Would have liked to get a Pearl Jam one but they were sold out. Foo Fighters too. Then there were some problems with making the donation. Some password issues. By then, I just said f*#^ it and closed the browser. May try again later. i was also afraid that I would not have the time to enjoy the device. There just isn't enough time in the day for everything I want to do!!!


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

I just really like the idea of notion of getting the sound/experience of vinyl in my vehicle in downloadable, digital form. Hope it's as it good as it sounds...:congratulatory::congratulatory:


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

This has been a passion for Neil Young for many years. I hope it does very, very well and works the way it should.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Yeah. I agree. Sounds like an awesome idea. I'm sure I will end up buying one. However, I found this article interesting:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57620489-93/sound-bite-despite-ponos-promise-experts-pan-hd-audio/

Back on the fence now. Lol...


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

I want to get one once I'm no longer broke; probably the Herbie Hancock edition if there's any left

it's also a killer piece of audio hardware, aside from the resolution they are pushing


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

Although I am all for any device or movement that brings us better quality music, I remain sceptical that this device is going to survive the test of time. 

The limiting factor for listening to high quality music is not the device, we have devices already that are capable of doing what this does. The real limiters are composition/musicianship/production/distribution/listening environment.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

They also mention that the quality of sound is limited to the quality of the master recording. I'm completely out of my element with recording, so does anyone know what a typical recording's kbps is?


----------



## hardasmum (Apr 23, 2008)

adcandour said:


> They also mention that the quality of sound is limited to the quality of the master recording. I'm completely out of my element with recording, so does anyone know what a typical recording's kbps is?


24 bit 48 kHz has been typical for recording (16 bit 48 kHz as far back as the early 80's!) but now 24/32 bit 192 kHz is becoming more common.

For decades the standard for mastering has been Red Book Audio CDs which are 16 bit 44.1 kHz so you have to down convert from your higher sample and bit rates. 

So one of the questions has been, is it pointless to record at higher rates if you have to down convert to play them back?

That article mentions the lack of success of DVD Audio and SACD but I think folks didn't want to have to replace all their CDs after just replacing all their vinyl and the majority of people want their music libraries to be computer files.

Ultimately I think HD audio is a niche market. 192 kHz isn't going to sound any better than 44.1 kHz on $10 earbuds and the general public seems content with listening to poorly encoded MP3's.


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

Pono does not offer anything that is not already available to is, should we wish to seek it out and use it. 

Although 192khz sample rate has been available to use in the studio for several years, few engineers have embraced it or actively support it as being a superior choice. There can be an argument made that a higher sample rate may offer the possibility of superior performance (to a degree, beyond that the law of diminishing returns comes into play), the reason few embrace it is because it doesn't survive cost v. benefit analysis. 

I spend a significant amount of each day recording, analyzing, encoding, decoding, and rendering audio for a variety of audiences. Most couldn't care less how much effort I put into crunching bits and bytes. I do, so I always try to deliver the best product I am capable of. I have spent a lot of time researching, designing and building a listening environment that allows me to detect variances that almost no one will hear. The attention to detail allows me to sleep well knowing that my small part in the process is unlikely to be a limiting factor to enjoyment of the end product.

i have the ability to record everything I do at 192 kHz 24 bit and work within a 32 bit editing environment. The majority of my recordings are done at 44.1khz 24 bit, with purely acoustic music (small ensembles, choral, solo acoustic) often recorded at 96khz 24bit. 99% of engineers do the same. 

I am rally happy that the launch of Pono has started conversations about audio quality and what can be done to improve the mass consumption of our art, but I hold almost no hope hat it will actually change anything.


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

ronmac said:


> Pono does not offer anything that is not already available to is, should we wish to seek it out and use it.


I think it could potentially offer a way to more directly connect the artist to the listener. Should the concept take off to any degree, it might just blaze a trail for recording musicians to once again get paid something meaningful for meaningful output. Let's hope this is the case...


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2014)

My only gripe with the Pono is that as long as mastering for the Pono digital format continues to be brickwall bullshit, it'll sound just the same as any thing you download from iTunes to your iPhone.

The difference between LP and digital is the physical constraints the LP format puts on limiting -- you just can't turn it in to an extreme roller coaster ride of peaks and valleys or you end up popping the needle out of the groove. So you have to master with a far lighter, and IMO musical, touch. If Pono can't preserve that, it's as doomed as the rest of the digital formats out there.


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

[h=2]I'm an audiophile. Explain what is so special about the PonoPlayer technology[/h]



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


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2014)

None of that matters if the recordings are brick wall limited. None of it. The biggest problem with digital music was it removed the physical limitations of turntables from the process and let limiting get way out of hand. On the whole, the A/D|D/A stuff is such a solved problem you can't tell the difference between a $2 DAC and a $20 DAC (and, let me say, a $20 Burr Brown DAC is _the shit_ when it comes to a DAC...).


----------



## hardasmum (Apr 23, 2008)

Some interesting points raised. For instance, I forgot that iPods supported wav files.


http://m.noisey.vice.com/en_ca/blog/what-pono-is-doing-to-the-music-industry-nothing


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

....meanwhile, the huddled masses (tethered to small white cords terminating in their ears) are oblivious and unmoved. 

Music has become a commodity, and the main challenge in entering a commodity market is distribution. A better product can often be lost in the mist if it can't move the masses.

As I stated earlier, everything Pono offers is already available. High quality music occupies a niche in the market, and will not become mainstream unless the already established distribution channels see a reason to promote it.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

This reminds me a bit of trying to keep up with the latest technology in TVs when at the end of the day, modern programming is so bad we're still watching Seinfeld.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

When it comes to music reproduction technology, there is a curious paradox. Most of us will likely do the overwhelming majority of our listening in highly adverse conditions, such as while driving, or going for a run, or on the bus, or while doing housework. Maybe we sprung a little extra for some better headphones, but we're listening over top of all sorts ambient noise. The era of sitting in a good listening space, with decent speakers, and suitable damping to kill room resonances, and actually listening to music (as opposed to merely having it in the background), seems to have passed for most people. Hell, 98% of my music listening involves AM quality audio through $10 earphones while something else is going on. If I can hear the melody and harmonies, and there is at least a hint of bass, I'm good. Not that I can't appreciate quality sound; I just never have a chance to do so.

On paper, the Pono idea is a good one. But is it an idea that adds value for the lion's share of potential listeners and potential listening contexts?


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

mhammer, excellent point about listening environment and conditions.

It is easy to mix music to have high dynamic range with a nice stereo image and depth. Most people don't want that. They want a "squashed" mix so that the detail isn't lost when listening in a noisy environment.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I may have mentioned it in past, but when commercial digital recordings first burst on the scene in the early 80s (and I rushed out to buy Ry Cooder's _Bop Til You Drop_, at that time), one of the deans in the audio mag world, either Len Feldman ( http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/15/obituaries/leonard-feldman-66-expert-in-electronics.html ) or Julian Hirsch ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Hirsch ), had a sort of op-ed piece in _Stereo Review _in which he looked critically at the dynamic range of digital audio, given real-world listening contexts. A 90db dynamic range sounds fabulous on paper, he argued, but most home listening milieus have a background noise floor of around 50-60db, when one takes ventilation, furnace, neighbour, house creaking, toilet flushing, and outside traffic noise into account. I imagine automotive contexts are even worse. The threshold of pain would be around 120db, essentially only 60db above the noise floor. So where do the extra 30-40db go and of what use are they to us?

Indeed, many of us end up futzing around with the volume constantly when watching DVDs, simply because the quiet parts are too quiet to be heard, and the loud parts too loud to tolerate.

Greater resolution and dynamics are terrific for avoiding distortion or other forms of signal corruption - I doubt anyone really appreciates distorted music playback, regardless of genre OR dynamic range - but we tend to lean towards a relatively compressed dynamic range when it comes to our normal listening preferences.


----------



## zdogma (Mar 21, 2006)

iaresee said:


> None of that matters if the recordings are brick wall limited. None of it. The biggest problem with digital music was it removed the physical limitations of turntables from the process and let limiting get way out of hand. On the whole, the A/D|D/A stuff is such a solved problem you can't tell the difference between a $2 DAC and a $20 DAC (and, let me say, a $20 Burr Brown DAC is _the shit_ when it comes to a DAC...).


Agreed. I have a copy of The Bends by Radiohead on CD, 24/96 download and vinyl. They are the same (in fact i think the analog is worse) because the master is SO compressed. For those who haven't seen it have a look at the DR database:

http://dr.loudness-war.info


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

At the end of the day, we shall see if there is any meaningful traction in the concept once the units start hitting the masses later this year. As I understand it, there are only five beta prototypes in existence at present and the the teams involved in design are still tweaking the final production design.

From the people that have actually heard the device, there are very positive, encouraging reviews, including those from many noted artists, producers and executives in the recording industry. From those that haven't yet experienced the device, there's all manner of speculation afoot. Indeed, some - including a few closed-minded folks here, have all but pronounced the concept dead before it even hits production. 

mhammer raised some interesting points about listening environment. That might be reflective of the quality of today's music in that it can't be FELT anymore - in effect, we've lost that tactile connection to our soul. I think many young people today are looking for something more from music today - hence the modern revival of vinyl.

ronmac - as far as the masses are concerned, they are not unmoved. The Kickstarter raised $6.6M which is a far cry from the $800K initial target to seed the project into production. I think that says enough about whether there's any real interest in the concept.

Time will tell...


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

gtone, while I admire your enthusiasm and hope I can't jump on this bandwagon. I love high quality music, and have found ways since the early 70s to enjoy the best formats and devices offered at the time. I am a techie and a gadget nerd, so anything that holds promise of upping the game gets my attention.

There has been a tonne of iink spilled in raising up and dashing the hopes of the Pono launch. I think that it was genius for the backers to start a very low figure Kickstarter campaign in the hopes of trumpeting great success when it overachieved their stated goal. Six million dollars may seem like a lot of money, but it is a mere pittance for someone to have in eir back pocket when they plan to manufacture, market and distribute a commodity product to a worldwide audience.

To put things in perspective, Apple sold 60 million iPhones and iPads in the past 3 months (numbers that are actually a little disappointing to shareholders). The Pono Kickstarter campaign was supported by 18 thousand. Definitely not the "masses", in this context.

As the Dragons say... "I'm out!"


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

ronmac - A little unfair to compare the sales of an Apple product to a new start-up dontcha think? And while $6M may be considered a drop in the bucket for the magnitude of the project that the Pono concept represents, you have to remember that much of the R&D has been underwritten by the backers to this point. My understanding is that the Kickstarter is just to help bring the project from where it is now to intial production. IMO, a business model that's lean, is developed and grown organically (ie at a grass-roots level) and highly unleveraged - all characteristic of the Pono project, has much better chances for success in a highly competitive market environment. 

While we can't underestimate the impact of marketing, the whims of the consuming public and in some cases, timing and luck, it's difficult to tell if this project will take flight or not. Since you quoted the Dragon's Den, I'll just add that for a buy in of $400, think I'll easily state "I'm in" and hope for the best since I'm a glass half-full kinda guy... ;^)


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

Hi gtone, hope all is well with you and yours. Any update on the Pono player?


----------



## sambonee (Dec 20, 2007)

Me too. I wanna know. 

And I want to mention that the tone and general attention to each post is so first class. This is one of the reasons that I enjoy this site so much. A group of like minded people who respect each other. 

My 2 cents are as follows. I'd listen to a crap bootleg of my favorite band over a perfect rendition of average music. 

I think that content trumps medium all the time. We need better writers and artists more than the need for a better medium. 

Happy new year GCers.


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

Could not agree more!

I expect that anyone who purchased one of these devices will have a better listening experience than listening to compressed material via a lossy format. My curiosity is in the area of music availability, cost and how the experience of listening to a higher quality file format offsets the convenience of the ubiquitous MP3 delivery systems. In other words, will there be enough consumers aware of and willing to pay for a better experience?


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

I'm all for a better playback format. But this is, IMO, a cure looking for a disease. A huge chunk of the population has the disease and don't even know it; they've never heard good audio reproduction and they don't miss it. Will they care about the cure? I doubt it. But I do commend NY for trying.

I bought a high-end SACD player 20 years ago. I've accumulated 50 or 60 discs and am always trying to find more. Most of them sound great, passing through a Linn, Threshold/Bryson and Magnapan signal path. Still good through headphones, but it misses something that being in the room with the sound has. Meanwhile the rest of the world seemed to want 1000 songs immediately accessible. Now they want 10,000. Or is it 100,000?

We here at GC are into quality sound. We listen to little changes in our guitar tone. Its something we care about. That isn't most of the population I'm afraid. If this can compete price-wise and convenience/feature wise with the currently available MP3 equipment, I don't think the majority of the buying public will justify it. They'll stick with more of what they've got.

My SACD experience (and the parallel DVD-Audio) really made me a pessimist.


----------



## Guest (Jan 12, 2015)

I follow Gareth Jones on twitter and he's had a broken one for other a month now with no response from Pono on why or how to fix it. That's a bummer. Getting famous producers in your corner would be a good PR move IMO.

https://twitter.com/geniusjones/status/554607641117622272


----------



## ezcomes (Jul 28, 2008)

Its funny that this just popped up again...gizmodo just posted this...

http://gizmodo.com/dont-buy-what-neil-young-is-selling-1678446860

i did a test on a different site...the difference is subtle..at least on that test...but i could hear it...i also like that its ONLY a music player...i dont think phones really need to be all they are...personally


----------



## pattste (Dec 30, 2007)

I'd be surprised if anyone could hear the difference between 192/24 and 96/24 or even 44.1/16 even under the best listening conditions. Most of my music listening is in the car on satelite radio, which is heavily compressed or on my iPhone on the train. In both cases the ambient noise is loud enough that MP3s of reasonable quality would give me similar results.

That being said, I am all in favor of Pono and any initiative that will get people to pay attention to sound quality and, more importantly, will increase the demand and availability of lossless WAV/FLAC files. I don't buy many CDs anymore, preferring FLAC (lossless) downloads from Bandcamp or HDTracks, mostly. A big percentage of the music I'm interested in isn't available from those sources yet. Many of these titles are listed as "available soon" on ponomusic.


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

Has anyone here downloaded any files from the Pono site? I am interested in the difference you may have noticed.


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

I've downloaded some hi-def FLAC files from ProStudioMasters. Ironically, they have far more hi-def content available online there than the Pono site which is still being populated, largely with CD quality (44.1/16 bit) titles at present. The Pono site's pitch is to buy content now at CD quality and they give you a free upgrade guarantee down the road should it later become available in a higher res format. Only problem is that one never knows what's going to materialize from hi-def masters/remasters down the road unless you have the inside scoop. Suffice it to say that there is precious little content available in 24 bit formats at present as the three major sources share much of the same content.

You do notice a sizeable increase in sound quality with the Pono player going from 16 bit to 24 bit. There is only a minute bit of extra detail going to 192/24 from 96/24, however, so it might not be worth the extra coin and sacrificed memory for a negligible increase in fidelity for many. By almost all accounts, the Pono has not disappointed. It has delivered on the audio performance front by a large consensus, but gets fairly low marks for some technological glitches (although a series of firmware upgrades are addressing many of these) and somewhat of a lack of user friendliness to the device's functionality. 

I don't leave home without mine and most folks listening to the player, neophytes and audiophiles alike, are quite impressed with the overall sound quality of the device, especially when plugged into the AUX input of my car sound system. I think it was $400 well spent... :^)

Now, if only we could access all our favourite albums in a high-def lossless format - oh, to dream....


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

FLASH SALE! From now through Friday 12/18/15 PonoMusic is offering an amazing deal on 64GB SanDisc Micro SD cards!

1 - 64GB Card = $19.99
2 - 64GB Cards - $29.99
3 - 64GB Cards = $39.99


----------

