Pono Music Store online and out of beta according to report

[firedog]

Just looked at https://ponomusic.force.com and found that top artists and albums are mostly recorded in the late 60 to early 80ies. These analog tapes have a frequency and dynamic range which is easily covered with 16/44.1 (maybe some would benefit of 48/24) if the digital mastering is done correctly (which is not happening too frequently). Hi res formats make to me only sense if the recording is high res. So selling Kind of Blue at 192/24 is only good for spending a lot on numbers!

 

Well then, you clearly haven't heard the 24/192 remaster of KOB. It is the best version available. Not even close (except for the DSD remaster, which is almost as good. Both higher res than Redbook.

 

Again, naysayers like you continually make the incorrect assumption that the only thing hi-res brings us is greater frequency response. I'd say that's the least compelling reason for it.

 

Look thru the site and read what some knowledgeable posters like Barry Diament and others have written about why hi-res is superior, even when the source is analog. You might learn something.

[goldsdad]

Well then, you clearly haven't heard the 24/192 remaster of KOB. It is the best version available. Not even close (except for the DSD remaster, which is almost as good. Both higher res than Redbook.

 

Again, naysayers like you continually make the incorrect assumption that the only thing hi-res brings us is greater frequency response. I'd say that's the least compelling reason for it.

 

Which 16/44 (Red Book) release is the 24/192 remaster, in your opinion, better than? Are you comparing different resolutions of one remaster, or comparing completely separate remasters?

[firedog]

Which 16/44 (Red Book) release is the 24/192 remaster, in your opinion, better than? Are you comparing different resolutions of one remaster, or comparing completely separate remasters?

 

I believe I've heard/owned pretty much all of them. Several different American ones, Japanese, European, also different SACD/DSD ones, a few different vinyl ones, etc. Multiple versions and from different countries. The recent 24/192 is the best sounding one of them all, IMO. You are welcome to reject my opinion.

 

I was just reacting to the post that said there was no point to Pono Music selling a 24/192 version of an analogue tape like KOB, and it would sound just as good in Redbook. BTW, I've downsampled one of the 24/192 KOB cuts to Redbook and it doesn't sound the same that way either. If you want to argue the same point as the poster I reacted too, save your energy. I have no intention of getting into another pointless argument like that, and this thread isn't about that.

 

Beyond that, I don't really care if the 24/192 is a different remaster or not. I care that it sounds better than the other versions available to me. I'm listening to it to get the maximum enjoyment out of the music, and not to confirm or disprove some theory/idea I may have about hi-res vs Redbook.

[goldsdad]

I believe I've heard/owned pretty much all of them. Several different American ones, Japanese, European, also different SACD/DSD ones, a few different vinyl ones, etc. Multiple versions and from different countries. The recent 24/192 is the best sounding one of them all, IMO. You are welcome to reject my opinion.

 

I was just reacting to the post that said there was no point to Pono Music selling a 24/192 version of an analogue tape like KOB, and it would sound just as good in Redbook. BTW, I've downsampled one of the 24/192 KOB cuts to Redbook and it doesn't sound the same that way either. If you want to argue the same point as the poster I reacted too, save your energy. I have no intention of getting into another pointless argument like that, and this thread isn't about that.

 

Beyond that, I don't really care if the 24/192 is a different remaster or not. I care that it sounds better than the other versions available to me. I'm listening to it to get the maximum enjoyment out of the music, and not to confirm or disprove some theory/idea I may have about hi-res vs Redbook.

 

Thanks. I have no wish to argue. I was interested in exactly what you compared in order to conclude that "hi-res is superior".

[woodford]

according to this article, hi res versions of the beatles catalog are coming to Pono:

 

Exclusive: Paul McCartney Reboots Beatles Catalog for Neil Young’s Pono Music Player | Showbiz411

 

these may just be the 24/44 files that were previously available on a USB stick, and they may also not be exclusive to Pono. if they're truly prepping new versions, perhaps they'll encode them with MQA as well.

[Hiro]

Am I the only one surprised by the flood of negative press Pono has garnered recently?

 

PONO WILL LIKELY EXIT HARDWARE MARKET

 

Engineers at Neil Young’s company admit doubts on music player

 

Don't Buy What Neil Young Is Selling

 

Does high-res sound better than CD? Pono execs reportedly aren't sure

[kennyb123]

Am I the only one surprised by the flood of negative press Pono has garnered recently?

 

There have been naysayers since the Pono was first announced. Or even going further back when music started arriving in higher resolutions and bit rates.

 

I use $100 Shure SE215s with my Pono. There's a degradation in quality when playing 16/44.1, so I tend to stick with high res.

[Jud]

Am I the only one surprised by the flood of negative press Pono has garnered recently?

 

PONO WILL LIKELY EXIT HARDWARE MARKET

 

Engineers at Neil Young’s company admit doubts on music player

 

Don't Buy What Neil Young Is Selling

 

Does high-res sound better than CD? Pono execs reportedly aren't sure

 

 

I really think none of the foregoing will matter if the below turns out to be true:

 

 

according to this article, hi res versions of the beatles catalog are coming to Pono:

 

Exclusive: Paul McCartney Reboots Beatles Catalog for Neil Young’s Pono Music Player | Showbiz411

 

these may just be the 24/44 files that were previously available on a USB stick, and they may also not be exclusive to Pono. if they're truly prepping new versions, perhaps they'll encode them with MQA as well.

[Boris75]

The Pono player really sounds great, much better than my iPhone 4, which sounds quite fine. This makes me confident that there is a future for quality portable players. In my view it is no accident that such a company as Sony is entering this market.

[Hiro]

There have been naysayers since the Pono was first announced. Or even going further back when music started arriving in higher resolutions and bit rates.

 

I guess what's new this time is that doubts about the whole enterprise come reportedly from within the Pono company. It's probably what activated the usual hi-res deniers.

[Jud]

The Pono player really sounds great, much better than my iPhone 4, which sounds quite fine. This makes me confident that there is a future for quality portable players. In my view it is no accident that such a company as Sony is entering this market.

 

Very much agreed. Though I understand Charles Hansen knows what he is doing, I was frankly surprised at how good the sound is. It didn't hurt to "discover" 24/192 versions of old Simon and Garfunkel albums. The production on those has to be some of the cleanest and most beautiful I've ever come across.

[tgdinamo]

Has anyone ordered and listened to Harvest and After the Gold Rush in Hi Res? Wow, I am very, very tempted to buy those two great albums.

 

I have both of those albums as well as all other Neil's 192/24 albums on Pono site covering 1968-1979 (all covering this period starting with his first album through Rust Never Sleeps). In my opinion all are phenomenal in hires and must have for any Neil Young fan, but 3 of these studio albums really stand out in terms of being a huge improvement compared to my CD's. These are 'Everyone Knows This is Nowhere', 'Zuma', and 'Rust Never Sleeps' (my personal favorite album by Neil Young). I still don't have two Neil's 88.2/24 Pono albums from this period (waiting for those to be released in 176.4/24 which is supposedly possible and going to happen eventually).

[Priaptor]

I have both of those albums as well as all other Neil's 192/24 albums on Pono site covering 1968-1979 (all covering this period starting with his first album through Rust Never Sleeps). In my opinion all are phenomenal in hires and must have for any Neil Young fan, but 3 of these studio albums really stand out in terms of being a huge improvement compared to my CD's. These are 'Everyone Knows This is Nowhere', 'Zuma', and 'Rust Never Sleeps' (my personal favorite album by Neil Young). I still don't have two Neil's 88.2/24 Pono albums from this period (waiting for those to be released in 176.4/24 which is supposedly possible and going to happen eventually).

 

My question is have these been remastered and if so by who and how to make them hires?

[tgdinamo]

My question is have these been remastered and if so by who and how to make them hires?

 

I have no idea and personally don't care - there is certainly no info of any kind on the store attached to these or any other albums at this time. My approach is to assume if Neil is fine with his best albums being put up for sale on his own site in 192/24 those are all automatic downloads for anyone who is remotely a Neil Young fan (assuming money is no issue). And I do know by now these are the best versions of these albums I have ever heard - whether this is due to hires vs cd resolution, and/or different mastering - I could not care less.

[Jud]

Has anyone ordered and listened to Harvest and After the Gold Rush in Hi Res? Wow, I am very, very tempted to buy those two great albums.

 

I have Harvest and Everyone Knows This Is Nowhere. Harvest is just fine, but I agree with tgdinamo that the sound on Everyone Knows... really shines.

[firedog]

according to this article, hi res versions of the beatles catalog are coming to Pono:

 

Exclusive: Paul McCartney Reboots Beatles Catalog for Neil Young’s Pono Music Player | Showbiz411

 

these may just be the 24/44 files that were previously available on a USB stick, and they may also not be exclusive to Pono. if they're truly prepping new versions, perhaps they'll encode them with MQA as well.

 

I find it hard to believe these are going to be anything other than the files previously sold as the USB stick 24/44.1. I hope I'm wrong and these are new 96 or 192 remasters. I'd love it if they'd release the hi-res digital transcriptions of the original analog masters.

[tubes59]

I have both of those albums as well as all other Neil's 192/24 albums on Pono site covering 1968-1979 (all covering this period starting with his first album through Rust Never Sleeps). In my opinion all are phenomenal in hires and must have for any Neil Young fan, but 3 of these studio albums really stand out in terms of being a huge improvement compared to my CD's. These are 'Everyone Knows This is Nowhere', 'Zuma', and 'Rust Never Sleeps' (my personal favorite album by Neil Young). I still don't have two Neil's 88.2/24 Pono albums from this period (waiting for those to be released in 176.4/24 which is supposedly possible and going to happen eventually).

 

I bought Harvest and After the Gold Rush and they are a definite improvement over the redbook cd and vinyl I have. I'll be buying more but wish a coupon would drop down in my lap somehow.

[baddog]

My question is have these been remastered and if so by who and how to make them hires?

 

Hi, I refer you to this Wiki entry for further details but my understanding is these albums were done by Neil et al for Blu-Ray distribution back when he was working on his Neil Young Archives in 2009. Thus when released they were in the same high resolution format as available today.

 

Further the Wiki entry denotes those albums from the series which have since been released on the PonoMusic site for purchase.

 

Barr

[ted_b]

I find the NY Pono 24/192 stuff to be excellent all around. Tonight I listened to Tonight's The Night (one of my all-time favorite NY albums), Zuma and Everybody Knows This is Nowhere. TTN is a literal breath of fresh air, with gobs of liveliness to it (I know, a depressing album but this remaster has a breathing live feel, as it should; it's almost a live album, and the subtle stuff is very loaded in the room). Zuma never sounded so good (take a listen to the acoustic guitar and the CSN harmonies in Through My Sails). And although EKTIN is a very early studio-based album (i.e a little flat compared to later things like Zuma) the cuts not already heard on the previously released Anthology series or his 24-96 Greatest Hits are like hearing them new. Round and Round is a favorite. Highly recommended stuff.

[firedog]

Got EKTIN based on recommendations above. Agree it is a big improvement over previous versions.

[Allan F]

I find it hard to believe these are going to be anything other than the files previously sold as the USB stick 24/44.1. I hope I'm wrong and these are new 96 or 192 remasters. I'd love it if they'd release the hi-res digital transcriptions of the original analog masters.

 

The 2009 reissues were remastered to 24/192 from the original master tapes and then downsampled to produce the 16/44 CDs and the 24/48 limited edition USB version. So, one can only hope that Pono will be offering the 24/192 versions of the 2009 reissues.

[ted_b]

The 2009 reissues were remastered to 24/192 from the original master tapes and then downsampled to produce the 16/44 CDs and the 24/48 limited edition USB version. So, one can only hope that Pono will be offering the 24/192 versions of the 2009 reissues.

 

That would be bigger news than everything Pono-related combined! Beatles in the original 24/192!! I kind of doubt it, but who knows. The USB was 24/44 BTW.

[firedog]

The 2009 reissues were remastered to 24/192 from the original master tapes and then downsampled to produce the 16/44 CDs and the 24/48 limited edition USB version. So, one can only hope that Pono will be offering the 24/192 versions of the 2009 reissues.

 

No, it's a lot more complicated than that.

 

They made digital transcriptions of the analog master tapes at 24/192. This "digital master" then had some basic edits and corrections made to it to take out obvious errors/mistakes. It wasn't EQ'd or remastered, etc. After the corrections it became the "archive digital master" (These are my terms, just to try and make the process clear). The idea was that this version was very close to the analog master tapes, and would be the basis of future releases, so they wouldn't need to keep working from the old original tapes.

 

The 24/192 "archive digital master" was then downsampled to 24/44.1. This 24/44.1 version became the "working digital master for release". It had all the EQ, compression, further editing, and remastering done to it. When it was done it became the "release digital master". The 24/44.1 "release digital master" was turned into 16/44.1 to make the CDs. The actual 24/44.1 "release digital master" is what was used for the limited edition USB stick. It is identical to the CDs other than the 24 to 16 bit change.

 

There was no 24/48 version. Until now no one has heard of another remaster being done from the 24/192 archive master. So for 24/192 or 24/96 versions to be released, they would either have to do extensive work on new digital release versions from the 24/192 "archive digital master" or just release the hi-res "archive digital master" as is. Essentially it is a flat transfer of the analog master tapes, other than some minor edits and corrections. Previously it wasn't considered suitable for digital release.

 

That's why I doubt what we are going to get from Pono is anything other than the previously released (on USB) 24/44.1.

I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt that Paul/Apple have gone to the effort to remaster the whole catalog.

 

Another complication is that at Apple, Paul, Ringo, Yoko (representing John), and Olivia (representing George) have to approve EVERY SONG remaster individually and unanimously in order for it to be approved for release. There were attempts at remasterings of some of the Beatles' albums (Sgt Pepper and the White Album) before 2009 that were completed, but not released because each of the principals approved/disapproved of different songs. When the stereo LPs of the catalog were re-released 2 years ago, they were mastered from the existing and already approved 24/44.1 "release digital master", precisely because the staff at Apple didn't think there was any chance the 4 principals could agree unanimously on the release of all new remasters for vinyl. The audiophile public and critics had a negative reaction to the digitally based LPs, so last years mono LP releases were made directly from the original analog masters (no new approval needed).

 

Again, I hope I'm wrong here and they are releasing true 24/96 or 192. Even if they announce the release of 24/96/192, I'd be a bit skeptical before buying and ask about the source, just to make sure it isn't coming from the 24/44.1.

[ted_b]

Dog, I agree (and stated above that the USB was 24/44, too). The unpublished archived 24/192 gets around Neil's claim that all Pono releases will be in the highest resolution available from the artist (i.e the 24/192 may indeed be higher, of course, but it ain't "available"). It will be interesting, because if the 24/44 are available only, it significantly reduces Neil's claims, IMHO, that he will influence this renaissance to the highest rez possible.

 

But oh, what a release it would be if they simply sent out the non-compressed archives (call it Beatles Raw or something, like LIB Naked, except really truly uncompressed....would be tough to do without some EQ though). I heard a sample from Steve Hoffman's demo collection (he was on the semi-finals list to be involved back in 2009) during one of his CES talks back then, and wow! Paul's bass on I'm So Tired was impactful. Release them at 24/96 so you still have some left in the tank to re-sell 5 years from now.

[firedog]

Release them at 24/96 so you still have some left in the tank to re-sell 5 years from now.

 

That sounds like something Apple would do. You have to leave something to make money from in the future...

 

And so far, I don't think anything Beatles related has been released in anything above 24/96. Certainly EMI is on record saying they think 24/96 is all that's needed for the best sound.

 

But like you Ted, I'd be happy hearing the not remastered 24/96 or 24/192, even though I don't think flat transfers from analog of pop/rock tend to sound that great.