Archimago wrote:
> As for the "Jazz In The Pawnshop", does anyone know where the history of
> this one began in terms of the audiophile psyche? Something about it
> being featured in some Hong Kong audiophile magazine or something like
> that?
>
> I agree - it sucks. But I do have it around for
Archimago wrote:
> Yeah. That's a good one! Will be very interesting to see what happens to
> Pono now in the public eye. No surprise for folks who've tried tests
> with hi-res audio. As suspected, very possible to see a public backlash
> for the unrealistic silly hype. I still just hope the impo
kidstypike wrote:
> https://www.yahoo.com/tech/it-was-one-of-kickstarters-most-successful-109496883039.html?src=rss&utm_content=buffer60e10&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer
> :( :rolleyes: ;)
Yeah. That's a good one! Will be very interesting to see what happens to
Po
ralphpnj wrote:
> My audiophile card was revoked the first time I heard "Jazz at the Pawn
> Shop" and promptly declared that it was pure dreck and that I much
> prefer to listen to Louie Armstrong's Hot Five and Sevens recordings.
I second the motion. The music comes first -- a wonderful recordin
kidstypike wrote:
> https://www.yahoo.com/tech/it-was-one-of-kickstarters-most-successful-109496883039.html?src=rss&utm_content=buffer60e10&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer
> :( :rolleyes: ;)
Thanks for the link! A very thorough review (and bashing) of the much
hyped
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/it-was-one-of-kickstarters-most-successful-109496883039.html?src=rss&utm_content=buffer60e10&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer
:( :rolleyes: ;)
kidstypike
1 x SB3 - 1 x Boom - 1 x (Squeezebox) Radio - 2 x Touch - 2 x
piCorePlayer
-
Squeezemenicely wrote:
> Archimago as usual your views and research are a very interesting read.
>
> Being a listener with relatively good hearing, I have often asked myself
> if there really is a difference between a CD flac and 24/96. Often it is
> the better remaster that makes the "big" diff
CharlieG wrote:
> WOW!
> I'm so glad you posted this. I can't get into "Jazz at the Pawn Shop"
> either.
> I thought maybe it was over my head!
For some very strange reason I don't think that the sound of people
eating and glasses clinking is music, no matter how lifelike and well
recorded t
Julf wrote:
> Except when they are just conversions from 44.1/16
ralphpnj wrote:
> Oops I forgot about those gems.
In many cases, not even the best 16/44 masters.
Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/
SB Touch
--
ralphpnj wrote:
> My audiophile card was revoked the first time I heard "Jazz at the Pawn
> Shop" and promptly declared that it was pure dreck and that I much
> prefer to listen to Louie Armstrong's Hot Five and Sevens recordings.
WOW!
I'm so glad you posted this. I can't get into "Jazz at the
My audiophile card was revoked the first time I heard "Jazz at the Pawn
Shop" and promptly declared that it was pure dreck and that I much
prefer to listen to Louie Armstrong's Hot Five and Sevens recordings.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater
pablolie wrote:
> if he lives long enough and sticks true to his record of living off his
> legacy and not writing any new music, but rather pimping HR msuic stuff,
> i am sure in 3 years he'll tell us pono sounds like sh*t and his new
> 48bit 284kHz XHD biz is finally the truth in all things mus
Mnyb wrote:
> No I thought it immoral to do soo I did not want peddle snake oil myself
> , this stuff actually sits very well in the dumpster :D
Wow. A man of principle! Impressive!
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
-
Archimago wrote:
> Ouch. Couldn't you resell some of that stuff and get a few bucks back?
> That's what a friend did... Got rid of all his expensive wires, stayed
> with some Mogami's. Tells me he has been happy to be free of the cable
> obsession since.
No I thought it immoral to do soo I did n
Mnyb wrote:
> I think my audiophile card got revoked when I put my high end cable
> collection in the recycling dumpster including a set of audio quest
> caldera speaker wires
>
> Anyhow I do sometimes buy the HiRez version of something if it's aviable
> , but I rarely go above 24/96 that's
I think my audiophile card got revoked when I put my high end cable
collection in the recycling dumpster including a set of audio quest
caldera speaker wires
Anyhow I do sometimes buy the HiRez version of something if it's aviable
, but I rarely go above 24/96 that's good enough .
Archimago wrote:
> Didn't ya hear, N.Y. said 'MP3 sounds like sh*t'
> (http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2014/03/11/pono).
>
as far as i am concerned, he always did. whether as vinyl or early
itunes or 48/384 (which i am sure must sound decidedly better than
24/192) :-D
...pablo
Se
pablolie wrote:
> i got the 24/192 on hdtracks indeed. the other one must be the '98
> version.
>
> funny we're talking bill evans. i am just playing "best of bill evans",
> and i love it, and i just checked and it's a [gasp] 192k MP3 from my
> dark early iTunes days :-D to me that shows it's pr
Squeezemenicely wrote:
> Archimago as usual your views and research are a very interesting read.
>
> Being a listener with relatively good hearing, I have often asked myself
> if there really is a difference between a CD flac and 24/96. Often it is
> the better remaster that makes the "big" diff
Julf wrote:
> Good luck with that - they seem to belong to the "science is only good
> when it supports our views" club...
>
>
>
> Excellent! What Sibelius piece, and who is conducting?
Vancouver Symphony tonight is 'Bramwell Tovey'
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bramwell_Tovey) conducting the
RonM wrote:
> I see there are two releases available on Amazon, 2008 and 1998, both
> purporting to be remasterings. Do you have a recommendation?
>
> I also see that HD Tracks has a 48/24 version for sale, I wonder if that
> suffers from the same faults as your 192/24?.
>
> r.
i got the 24/1
Julf wrote:
> Except when they are just conversions from 44.1/16
Oops I forgot about those gems.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Ene
ralphpnj wrote:
> One thing that has been touched upon but not delved into is the fact
> that many of the high resolution downloads available on both HDTracks
> and Pono are labeled as "remastered" when in actual fact they are not
> really remastered but just repackaged versions of previously ava
One thing that has been touched upon but not delved into is the fact
that many of the high resolution downloads available on both HDTracks
and Pono are labeled as "remastered" when in actual fact they are not
really remastered but just repackaged versions of previously available
high resolution re
Squeezemenicely wrote:
> Also maybe the placebo effect, still sometimes I prefer the 24/96files.
> The difference is slight, but somehow it seems there is more audible
> space in the higher frequencies - no idea how to put it - probably
> sounds silly anyway.
> I find it is best heard on a solo v
Mnyb wrote:
> That's a thing about science the results are true even if you dont like
> them or believe in them .
>
> extremely annoying when your job is to push/peddle opinions or if your
> are elected just because your disconect with reality suits a large
> voting population ?
I don't w
There is also a factor with badly desiged equipment, a DAC or AV amp
could actually sound different with diffrent source formats , how is it
with DSD for example .
High end or not , bad design can pop up anywhere . But high end is
actually a more likely place more cultish design done by ear inste
Archimago as usual your views and research are a very interesting read.
Being a listener with relatively good hearing, I have often asked myself
if there really is a difference between a CD flac and 24/96. Often it is
the better remaster that makes the "big" difference.
Also maybe the placebo ef
ralphpnj wrote:
> I believe that every member of the US Congress and Senate is a charter
> member of the "science is only good when it supports our views" club.
That's a thing about science the results are true even if you dont like
them or believe in them .
extremely annoying when your job is
Julf wrote:
> Good luck with that - they seem to belong to the "science is only good
> when it supports our views" club...
I believe that every member of the US Congress and Senate is a charter
member of the "science is only good when it supports our views" club.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAud
Archimago wrote:
> Plus there's *no way* I can honestly let Michael Fremer and Lavorgna
> drag up the ghost of the Oohashi paper after a decade and a half or just
> declare the Meyer-Moran stuff "debunked" like this as if they know what
> they're talking about!
Good luck with that - they seem to
pablolie wrote:
>
> (2) Grover Washington - Winelight. i actually seem to defualt to the
> 192/24, seems an ounce better, perhaps a better master tape or a little
> volume boost.
> ...
>
Interesting you mentioned this one in 24/192. One of the few 192kHz
DVD-A rips I've actually kept in the na
Ralph: Indeed the high resolution audio stuff has become heated of late.
But in this activity and interest, hopefully reasonably rational
discussion can take place so as to at least "nudge" towards change that
could be beneficial.
Plus there's *no way* I can honestly let Michael Fremer and Lavorg
Nicely done Archimago
I'm always amazed at the tempest in a teapot that high resolution audio
has become. I say this because the vast majority of people listen to
their music with those freebie headphones that come with their smart
phones. That is when they are actually listening to a song or alb
Of the 20 or so albums I was potentially interested in from HD Tracks,
most had actually a -worse- DR than the best CD available according to
DR Database! Obviously I can only go by the albums I was interested in.
There were a couple that seemed to offer a superior DR, these were
American Idiot an
pablolie wrote:
>
>
> (3) John Coltrane and Johnny Hartman - one of my favorite recordings of
> all time. i prefer the 16/44 rip, the 192/24 seems artificially sharp at
> worst and pointlessly volume boosted at best, sounding a bit like a DDD
> CD from 1990AD (shiver).
I see there are two rele
and the other question is...
has listening to a good 16/44 recording ever imposed a limit of my full
enjoyment of a great performance?
there are several recordings i own in two versions: the first ripped
from the original CD i owned (16/44 flac), the second the HDtracks
version at 24/192, and i
darrenyeats wrote:
> If I were at some point to hear a convincing demonstration (probably
> also involving sighted and blind) of an audible difference between 16/44
> versus hi-res, then I'd change my position. Simples.
Indeed. The only people I'll chat with about this stuff now is friends
and I
darrenyeats wrote:
> These internet arguments are tiring. I just take a personal approach. So
> far I've decided through my own listening (some sighted some blind) that
> lossless 16/44 is better than Spotify (albeit slightly) but I've not
> heard any convincing demonstration of an audible differ
These internet arguments are tiring. I just take a personal approach. So
far I've decided through my own listening (some sighted some blind) that
lossless 16/44 is better than Spotify (albeit slightly) but I've not
heard any convincing demonstration of an audible difference between
16/44 versus hi
Thanks guys for the discussions over the last few weeks... Lots of
heated discussions over the last while from Pono apologists vs.
tech/general sites! Time to go a little beyond the superficial and look
at some literature and summarize all I really need to say about HRA I
think... :-)
'
MUSINGS:
41 matches
Mail list logo
