Why PONO and high resolution are important.

[Jud]

Concur,

 

I have fourteen box sets from Ahmad Jamal to Dennis Zeitlin. All so very listenable and artistically magical.

 

Ahmad Jamal,

Johnny Smith,

Django Reinhardt,

Joe Pass,

Modern Jazz Quartet,

Sonny Stitt,

Paul Chambers,

Charlie Mingus,

Sarah Vaughn,

Oscar Peterson,

Dennis Zeitlin,

Gerry Mulligan,

McCoy Tyner.

 

Their musicality notwithstanding the format that renders are treasures. One is free to reject music for whatever criteria serves their interests. And one is free to enjoy the same music of incomparable artists. If not hi-res, it is high artistry and very listenable, if not perfect.

 

Enjoying the music,

Richard

 

There's a Louis Armstrong set I have that's very nice.

[REShaman]

There's a Louis Armstrong set I have that's very nice.

 

That's next. Love Louis Armstrong. And his album with Ellington is superb. Heck, I am going there (Mosaic) now before there are none left. Going to pony up for my Pono. ?

Enjoying the music,

Richard

[REShaman]

That's next. Love Louis Armstrong. And his album with Ellington is superb. Heck, I am going there (Mosaic) now before there are none left. Going to pony up for my Pono. ?

Enjoying the music,

Richard

 

I will add Louis Armstrong and Hank Mobley to the list I just published when they arrive, having just ordered the available box sets for those two wonderful artists.

 

Following the thread of their music to present day is a course well worth the stops along the way. Now I just have to live long enough to listen to them all. ; >}

 

Enjoying the music,

Richard

[Teresa]

Mosaic Records is an archival company that releases jazz from the early 20th century to current day. Many outtakes, bonus tracks, and lost gems that would regularly never see the release of day.

 

Thanks for the reply, it sounds like Mosaic reissues much of the same jazz music from the 1950s and 1960s that the audiophile remaster companies do, only Mosaic adds unreleased stuff in their box sets. Mosaic also goes back to the Mono era in which I have no interest, I love early jazz but only if it is stereo.

 

I have never been satisfied with the alternate takes, outtakes and other bonus tracks included on SACDs and DVD-Audios to make the short playing time (30-40 minutes) of jazz and rock LPs from the era longer to justify the higher prices. When I saved my SACDs and DVD-Audios to my hard drive I saved the original album tracks only minus any bonus material. This is one reason I usually prefer the remastered LPs as they don't have this extra stuff after the traditional album ends.

 

As I said I am patient enough to wait for lovingly remastered versions by the best audiophile companies either on LP or high resolution digital.

 

That's next. Love Louis Armstrong. And his album with Ellington is superb. Heck, I am going there (Mosaic) now before there are none left. Going to pony up for my Pono. 

Enjoying the music,

Richard

 

Actually, there were two albums Louis Armstrong did with Duke Ellington, "Recording Together for the First Time" and "The Great Reunion" both remastered by Bernie Grundman on Classic Records 200 gram LPs and combined on a single 24/96 DAD DVD called "The Complete Sessions". I have that 24/96 DAD DVD copied to computer at 24/96.

 

I also have four other Duke Ellington recordings, one the Blues In Orbit MFSL SACD and the other three 180 gram audiophile remastered LPs.

[REShaman]

Thanks for the reply, it sounds like Mosaic reissues much of the same jazz music from the 1950s and 1960s that the audiophile remaster companies do, only Mosaic adds unreleased stuff in their box sets. Mosaic also goes back to the Mono era in which I have no interest, I love early jazz but only if it is stereo.

 

I have never been satisfied with the alternate takes, outtakes and other bonus tracks included on SACDs and DVD-Audios to make the short playing time (30-40 minutes) of jazz and rock LPs from the era longer to justify the higher prices. When I saved my SACDs and DVD-Audios to my hard drive I saved the original album tracks only minus any bonus material. This is one reason I usually prefer the remastered LPs as they don't have this extra stuff after the traditional album ends.

 

As I said I am patient enough to wait for lovingly remastered versions by the best audiophile companies either on LP or high resolution digital.

 

 

 

Actually, there were two albums Louis Armstrong did with Duke Ellington, "Recording Together for the First Time" and "The Great Reunion" both remastered by Bernie Grundman on Classic Records 200 gram LPs and combined on a single 24/96 DAD DVD called "The Complete Sessions". I have that 24/96 DAD DVD copied to computer at 24/96.

 

I also have four other Duke Ellington recordings, one the Blues In Orbit MFSL SACD and the other three 180 gram audiophile remastered LPs.

 

Hello Teresa,

 

I would not presume to contradict your preferences other than to add that mono recordings can provide a coherent sound stage and some very fine recordings have been produced, i.e., Miles Davis, Beatles etc. The thing about alternate takes, you may regard them as filler to justify added costs. Allow me to offer you another perspective: I will just refer to Bill Evan's body of work. He happens to be my favorite jazz pianist, although there are a few that are exquisite in their own style. The thing about alternate take is to listen carefully to a rendition of a piece. Then follow the same piece done differently and the choices that are made show a depth of musicality and creativity that I would reduce to filler material but to genius as I listen to an artist reinterpret what was just marvelous the first time around and now splendid the second time. And at times even more splendid the third time. You get my point.

 

My intention in not to correct you. Merely to add another perspective to what may be present that is not valued or appreciated that I know in other respects you value. Also appreciate you your references to other recordings you mention that I, too, own and thoroughly enjoy.

 

Sharing music and appreciating the enormous talents we recognize is always a pleasure. Filling up Pono SD cards should not take long. Though I prefer not to have to.

 

Enjoying the music,

Richard

[Teresa]

"We provide the best it can be and if the best it can be gets better, Pono will supply the new track for nothing. You get it. You already bought the best it can be, the best it can be just got better, so you don't have to pay a penalty." - From the article Hello Mr. Soul: My Interview with Neil Young by Michael Lavorgna

 

This is quite a guarantee and will be a historical first, you buy the music once and you're done.

[Boris75]

 

This is quite a guarantee and will be a historical first, you buy the music once and you're done.

 

To me this is a very strong point in favour of PONO. Buying the same stuff over and over again can be quite irritating.

[Jud]

Before people get carried away with the guarantee I would want to "see the fine print," so to speak. NY is describing an idea, and a laudable one. But I don't know whether it really means that you buy a track or album once and you're done. How far does this extend? To new masterings? If the track you bought came out as part of a different compilation? For example, if you bought a Beatles track in 16/44.1 and it subsequently appeared in a compilation like "Love" as a differently engineered and mastered track at 24/96, would the guarantee extend to something like that?

 

Even if it's simply that you buy a track at 16/44.1 and they find there's a version of the master at 24/44.1 so they make that available for free, that's a good thing. But I would want to wait for more details to be fleshed out before I start thinking I'll only ever have to buy a track or album once and then it's freebies forever on every new version.

[mav52]

Before people get carried away with the guarantee I would want to "see the fine print," so to speak. NY is describing an idea, and a laudable one. But I don't know whether it really means that you buy a track or album once and you're done. How far does this extend? To new masterings? If the track you bought came out as part of a different compilation? For example, if you bought a Beatles track in 16/44.1 and it subsequently appeared in a compilation like "Love" as a differently engineered and mastered track at 24/96, would the guarantee extend to something like that?

 

Even if it's simply that you buy a track at 16/44.1 and they find there's a version of the master at 24/44.1 so they make that available for free, that's a good thing. But I would want to wait for more details to be fleshed out before I start thinking I'll only ever have to buy a track or album once and then it's freebies forever on every new version.

 

Agree, NY is describing an idea his idea, that has driven almost 15k people to contribute almost $5million to Pono much based on his guarantee/idea. I hope it works but like you, without some hard facts on what this "idea" actually is or how NY and team will achieve it is a mystery at best, for now.

[Paul R]

Really? iTunes works that way. You buy it once it is yours. They will automatically upgrade you to the latest and greatest at no cost too. (i.e. when they went from 128KBS AAC to 256K AAC, everyone got new copies of everything they had purchased through iTunes.

 

If iTunes ever moves to CD Quality, I expect they will do the same type of deal.

 

-Paul

 

"We provide the best it can be and if the best it can be gets better, Pono will supply the new track for nothing. You get it. You already bought the best it can be, the best it can be just got better, so you don't have to pay a penalty." - From the article Hello Mr. Soul: My Interview with Neil Young by Michael Lavorgna

 

This is quite a guarantee and will be a historical first, you buy the music once and you're done.

[flatmap]

Really? iTunes works that way. You buy it once it is yours.

 

Optimistic!

 

Well you may be right, but iTunes make no such claim. They did upgrade to 256k... but also, not every track got upgraded.

 

I'm more inclined to see Pono's (apparent) guarantee as something unique. No one else is doing this.

 

Naturally, until October, we're all just running on fumes. We'll have to see how this pans out. But I really like the way they are talking about it.

[Audio_ELF]

Really? iTunes works that way. You buy it once it is yours. They will automatically upgrade you to the latest and greatest at no cost too. (i.e. when they went from 128KBS AAC to 256K AAC, everyone got new copies of everything they had purchased through iTunes.

 

If iTunes ever moves to CD Quality, I expect they will do the same type of deal.

 

-Paul

A caveat Paul ... when iTunes first moved to 256kbps it was a cost option (in UK 79p for 128kbps vs 99p for a "iTunes Plus" 256kbps file). It was only later that they upgraded everyone's files for free.

 

Eloise

[Paul R]

Granted, but I seriously doubt that every track Pono sells will be upgraded either. As you say, time will tell and we will see what we see.

-Paul

 

 

Optimistic!

 

Well you may be right, but iTunes make no such claim. They did upgrade to 256k... but also, not every track got upgraded.

 

I'm more inclined to see Pono's (apparent) guarantee as something unique. No one else is doing this.

 

Naturally, until October, we're all just running on fumes. We'll have to see how this pans out. But I really like the way they are talking about it.

[Paul R]

Really? I didn't know that.

 

Here it was that some new music went from $0.99 to a higher price, but if you already owned the music, your were upgraded to the highest quality file that iTunes had available. Nothing was restricted so far as I know, though some older tracks were not available in the new higher quality formats. Not available to iTunes I mean.

 

-Paul

 

 

A caveat Paul ... when iTunes first moved to 256kbps it was a cost option (in UK 79p for 128kbps vs 99p for a "iTunes Plus" 256kbps file). It was only later that they upgraded everyone's files for free.

 

Eloise

[Teresa]

Really? iTunes works that way. You buy it once it is yours. They will automatically upgrade you to the latest and greatest at no cost too. (i.e. when they went from 128KBS AAC to 256K AAC, everyone got new copies of everything they had purchased through iTunes.

 

If iTunes ever moves to CD Quality, I expect they will do the same type of deal.

 

-Paul

 

Thanks Paul, I had no idea that iTunes did that. Still it's an upgrade from lossy 128kbps AAC to lossy 256kbps AAC, we will have to wait to see if they upgrade your tracks for free if the iTunes Store ever goes to lossless 24 bit PCM.

 

Neil Young said that the PONO store will provide the best that be and if the best ever gets better you get an upgrade for free. On the other hand the iTunes store provides the worst that can be, do you see a big difference here?

 

I have no interest in the iTunes store since I abhor all manner of 16/44.1kHz PCM lossy and lossless and have it disabled in "Parental Control Preferences".

 

[Teresa]

From Neil young announces the launch of ponomusic I wanted to move this post into this thread because some of the items I wish to respond to might be considered off-topic for that thread but are very on-topic on why high resolution analog and digital are important to me.

 

I apologize for responding to a two day old post, however, it took me that long to write the response.

 

Recorded music does not need to be saved.

 

The feel of music for many of us lost it's "soul" with the invention of transistors and digital, for us recorded music does indeed need to be saved. I am appalled that recorded music was pretty much destroyed during the 16/44.1kHz low resolution years of the 1980s to the early 1990s. I feel all music should be recorded on 2 track 15 or 30 IPS analog reel to reel tape decks and for those to lazy to use razor blades for editing 24 bit 352.8 PCM or 5.6MHz DSD or higher.

 

It's been around for barely 100 years, and in any real meaningful way for 65 years or so. Humans got along just fine without recorded music before 1900.

 

Music was great from the invention of stereo from the mid 1950s up until the use of transistors and digital. And then some music became great again in 1995 when digital started to be recorded in 24 bit 96kHz PCM and higher.

 

Millions of people around the world would be extremely excited to have any form of recorded music available to them, and I'm pretty sure 128kb mp3s would deliver plenty of "soul" to them.

 

No I don't believe they will find any soul in any resolution of MP3 or AAC, on the other hand cassettes and 8-track tapes offer soul in the lower resolution formats.

 

The attitude of Pono is elitist and Pono offers very little out of the ordinary to the average human.

 

That statement is so wrong and so bizarre it boggles the mind. First Pono is not elitist but about bringing high resolution 24 bit PCM to the masses. Where ordinary people can enjoy the musical delights us so-called elitists do now.

 

It makes grandiose promises without any back up. No description of how it's going to "restore the soul to music," other than some silly hi-res stuff, as if the soul of music rests there.

 

First the Pono music store will provide the best sounding version of any music file and if a better sounding version comes out you get an upgrade for free!. Hi-res stuff is not silly but a way of restoring the soul robbed from music by low resolution PCM. The difference is between soulless, strident, unlistenable 16/44.1kHz PCM and real honest to God music with the soul and feeling of real music, analog and 24 bit PCM can do this, 16 bit PCM never could and never will.

 

Somehow concerts seem to get the soul of the music to us even when amplified and played through pa systems.

 

The soul of the music can easily be felt at acoustic concerts or electric concerts amplified by analog PA systems designed for music and not pushed beyond distortion. The best sounding electric sound I have ever heard is stacked tubed Marshall amps. 16/44.1kHz PA systems have no soul in my opinion.

 

I have nothing against hi-res, but it's only the glaze on the icing of the cake. If all recordings were suddenly great quality but they were only available in Redbook we would be 99.5% there. On the other hand if we just hi-res-ified all the crap (and good stuff) we have now, we'd hardly be any further along.

 

Chris

 

I believe everything is important for enjoyable comfortable sound. Redbook and crap dressed up as high resolution will never be acceptable.

 

Eliminating the digital nasties

 

For me what high resolution digital removes is considerably more important than what it adds.

 

All the increased resolution in the world would not help if it didn’t also remove or greatly reduce the digital nasties (strident, cold, uncomfortable sound, etc.). 24/48 decreases some of these digital nasties but it still sounds digital. To my ears a minimum of 24/88.2 is needed. As one goes up in resolution the music begins to sound smoother and more analog-like. The ideal is 24/192kHz or higher PCM and 5.6MHz DSD. If anything higher than 24/48 sounds digital just use Audacity to run a spectrogram and plot spectrum to reveal its true origins. On the spectrogram you’ll see the top of the waveforms sawed off instead of peaks ending naturally. On the plot spectrum you’ll see the waveform dropping like a tons of bricks off a steep cliff beginning at around 20kHz. This reveals the music file was either original recorded or transferred at some point in mastering to low resolution PCM. The sharp filtering is necessary to remove the upper ultrasonic overtones of natural instruments and ambiance as no frequency can exist at one half the sampling frequency, so sharp unnatural sounding digital filters must be used instead of more normal analog smooth sounding 3dB per octave filters. This is what many feel causes the digital nasties.

 

The highest resolutions of PCM and DSD are a win/win situation as they not only make music and the soundfield it is played in more realistic but makes it more comfortable and easier to listen to for long periods of time.

 

If I had to make a choice I would choose to get rid of the digital nasties, however I don’t have to make that choice as “authentic” high resolution PCM offers both non-digital analog-like and higher resolution sound. The problem is some of the major labels have been trying to push off low resolution upsampled to high resolution as the real thing, in my book this is fraudulent. My solution is to only get high resolution downloads from “real” audiophile companies such as Reference Recordings, or digital copies from pure analog LPs such as Direct to Discs, audiophile remasters that are pure analog from start to finish, and better pressings made before digital was invented which can be found by looking for the absence of the words “digital” and “digitally remastered” and the absence of a UPC code on the back of the cover and copyright date prior to 1978. Some of the major labels didn’t adopt digital until the mid-1980’s so most of their LPs

 

My hope is that the PONO music store will run spectrograms and plot spectrums of music files they receive to sell and tell us if any high resolution downloads are in reality from low resolution PCM before we lay our hard-earned money down.

[new_media]

Really? iTunes works that way. You buy it once it is yours. They will automatically upgrade you to the latest and greatest at no cost too. (i.e. when they went from 128KBS AAC to 256K AAC, everyone got new copies of everything they had purchased through iTunes.

 

If iTunes ever moves to CD Quality, I expect they will do the same type of deal.

 

-Paul

 

As others have already pointed out, iTunes initially charged a per-track or per-album fee to upgrade from 128 to 256 kbps.

 

On the other hand, they did recently release "Mastered for iTunes" versions of the Beatles catalog which are free if you have already purchased or matched Beatles' tracks in iTunes.

[speavler]

[Paul R]

As others have already pointed out, iTunes initially charged a per-track or per-album fee to upgrade from 128 to 256 kbps.

 

On the other hand, they did recently release "Mastered for iTunes" versions of the Beatles catalog which are free if you have already purchased or matched Beatles' tracks in iTunes.

 

 

Um no. There was no fee ever to upgrade music you had already purchased from 128kbs to 256kbs. As you noted, "Mastered for iTunes" also is being upgraded.

[SammyU]

Um no. There was no fee ever to upgrade music you had already purchased from 128kbs to 256kbs. As you noted, "Mastered for iTunes" also is being upgraded.

 

There most certainly was a fee, for a time. I paid 20 cents per track to upgrade iTunes purchases from 128kbs to 256kbs.

[cheezmo]

Um no. There was no fee ever to upgrade music you had already purchased from 128kbs to 256kbs. As you noted, "Mastered for iTunes" also is being upgraded.

 

When "iTunes Plus" came out, there was an option to upgrade your tracks for (I believe) .29 per track (if they were available in the new format). I remember about 80% of music was upgradeable, some was not (albums no longer available on iTunes, etc.).

 

Only when "iTunes in the Cloud" came out which allowed you to redownload any of your past purchases did it become possible to download for free a new iTunes Plus version of songs you originally purchased in the protected 128kbps format.

 

I worked for Apple at the time, there is no question at all that there was a fee. Please check your facts before "correcting" people.

[Paul R]

I was never required to pay for an upload, merely to re-download the files. But you know what, apparently other people had a different experience..

 

 

When "iTunes Plus" came out, there was an option to upgrade your tracks for (I believe) .29 per track (if they were available in the new format). I remember about 80% of music was upgradeable, some was not (albums no longer available on iTunes, etc.).

 

Only when "iTunes in the Cloud" came out which allowed you to redownload any of your past purchases did it become possible to download for free a new iTunes Plus version of songs you originally purchased in the protected 128kbps format.

 

I worked for Apple at the time, there is no question at all that there was a fee. Please check your facts before "correcting" people.

[cheezmo]

I was never required to pay for an upload, merely to re-download the files. But you know what, apparently other people had a different experience..

 

During the time period where you had to pay to upgrade to iTunes Plus, there was no option to redownload anything without convincing customer service that you had had some catastrophic hard drive failure and lost everything. If you were able to "redownload" things you are talking about the iTunes in the Cloud era which is only since October 2011. There were several years before that where you had to pay to upgrade and there was NO option for a typical user to redownload anything. When you bought an iTunes song you were responsible for not losing the file or you were out of luck.

 

And to be completely accurate here is the Apple announcement of iTunes plus in 2007 which describes the pricing structure...

 

Apple - Press Info - Apple Launches iTunes Plus

 

So, launch to 2007, DRM only no option to re-download, 128kbps DRM is all there was. 2007-2011 pay to upgrade to iTunes Plus. 2011-current, you can redownload anything you purchase and in most cases where you originally purchased a DRM file, the new version will be iTunes Plus.