David Pogue and Pono: Part II
This is a continuation of yesterday’s post. Here’s a link to the first half. Yahoo Tech editor David Pogue reviewed the Pono player and did an informal test comparing the sound of a “regular resolution file” from Apple’s iTunes and a “high-resolution” version from PonoMusic’s web store.
David Pogue used a Radio Shack A | B switch (that costs $16.99) to alternate between the analog outputs of an iPhone 5 and the analog output of the Pono. The 15 subjects in his “study” were free to switch between the two sources and evaluate which sounded more pleasing to them. The results favored the iPhone. The fancy electronics of the Pono player that had all of Neil’s rock star friends amazed did nothing for the average music listener on the street. It doesn’t surprise me at all.
For on thing, the custom audio system that was installed in Neil’s 1972 Cadillac must have been very impressive. Robert Stuart told me that he had the opportunity to sit in the car and it was impressive…loud, immersive, and heavy in the bass department. Was it capable of high-resolution audio playback? Probably not, but it certainly was better than using ear buds or Sony MDR 7506 headphones as David Pogue chose to do.
David, a self proclaimed “former professional musician” and someone that claims to “know how to listen”, didn’t play any high-resolution audio in his evaluation of high-res vs. iTunes audio. All three of the sources were originally recorded on multitrack analog tape machines, mixed to stereo masters (also analog tape) and mastered using analog tape. By blindly accepting that the PonoMusic website is actually selling high-resolution audio tracks, David Pogue actually played “regular resolution” audio tracks packaged in a high-resolution bucket vs. very good quality Apple AAC versions. What conclusions can be drawn from his flawed approach? None. David and the Yahoo Tech site are all about pageviews and by the looks of comments (currently 440 plus); he’s managed to keep his employers happy.
David continues his review by pointing out that “Pono is going to extraordinary lengths to acquire remastered versions of the songs in its catalog. ‘If we are looking for a popular master and find it has not been sampled at the highest rate, we try to access it and, with the cooperation of labels and artists, maximize the recapture at the highest resolution,’ replied Neil Young. What are extraordinary lengths? By Neil’s own admission 99.99% of the available downloads are CD spec (not the 90% that David stated)? They get what they get from the major labels and sprinkle in a few dozen tracks that they have deemed worthy of new mastering session (“the most popular ones”). From what I’ve been able to find out…they have less than 10 albums that have been remastered.
In explaining high-resolution audio, Mr. Pogue once again veers immediately from the facts. He makes the tired claim that “higher numbers are better”…which is only true to a point. But my favorite line is the statement, “The songs you buy from Pono, on the other hand, go as high as 24 bit/192kHz. That means more bits of data per instant of sound, and more (smaller) instants per time period: higher resolution. It’s like having more color data and more pixels per inch in a photo. Yep, there it is again. The analogy that PCM digital audio is similar to digital imagery is simply not the case. Perhaps the tech geek at Yahoo should do a little more research before spewing misinformation in his reviews.
And his inclusion of the Meyer and Moran study as a “scientific study” is further proof that Mr. Pogue is an entertainment writer and not a reliable source of tech information. His assessment of the Pono player and PonoMusic web store has some valid criticisms…and I’m not shy about pointing out the flaws in Neil’s plan. However, there’s a lot more that David Pogue missed.
Near the end of his review he states, “When conducting the test with today’s modern music files, I couldn’t find even one person who heard a dramatic difference.” What’s modern about analog masters from the 70s? Try again David…or better yet let someone with some relevant skill in the area do it.
What an enormous waste of time this test was. So flawed in its execution and assumptions it makes a joke of David Pogue’s title of tech editor. Did he even realize the Sony MDR 7506 headphones he used have a rated responce of 10-20k. All other things you mentioned this test was domed to fail. We know the “emperors new clothes” status of Pono, but this article reeks of a setup job.
Here is what I wrote yesterday in a forum, where this article was discussed:
“Reading the article again, I wonder, what he/David Pogue wanted to test?
1: the Pono player (with it’s highres qualities) compared to an iPhone, or
2: if people can hear a difference between ‘highres files’, that have no origin in a highres recording and depend on an analog tape master, or – worse – on an upconverted 16/44.1 file AND the same files (if they were of the same origin), that are encoded by Apple for their store?
David Pogue is a devoted ‘reel to reel-ophile’ (for recording as well as for delievering).
He has no sense for (or understanding of) recordings made in 24/96 (or 192) PCM – recordings that are done with proper microphones and not devaluated during mixing and mastering processes afterwards.
If he tries to do 1: he can’t get any proper results, because he did not use real highdef material on that device!
If he tries to do 2: he failes, because what he compared wasn’t that differen – not enough for people to hear a difference.
Scientificly, what he did in that 2: case, was to state, that the participants could not hear a difference with the presented material, and that they in most cases very more pleased from the sound from an iPhone.”
These A/B tests does not tell us anything at all about the capacities of the Pono player as a playback device – and they don’t tell us anything about the differences of an iTunes file and a real highdef file!
How can he be a devoted reel to reel-ophile when it’s been MANY years since prerecorded tapes were sold. Recording from CDs or needle drops is no path to HiFi sources. His only option is doing live recordings but that really limits his oppertunity to obtain good music.. I don’t get it.
These guys collect, trade, copy, and swap reel to reel tapes or purchase tapes from The Tape Project.
I have no argument with your argument! Sadly, I believe most people won’t ever have the chance to properly evaluate a true high resolution audio file. At best they’ll probably do something similar to what David Pogue did and come to the same wrong conclusion – that high resolution files are either not better than CD quality – or that the difference isn’t worth the cost or trouble. So that’s “most” people. The question is, “are there enough people out there who still care enough about a high quality listening experience to make high resolution audio a worthwhile business endeavor”? Mr. Waldrep, you are an example of a businessman who must believe there are, and I’d like to hope you are correct!
Agreed, regarding Mr Pogue as an entertainment writer, rather than a tech person. If that is his idea of scientific studies and proofs, then we’re all in a lot of trouble. Soon, he be saying there’s a scientific study proving the audio tooth fairy is a scientific fact. Richard Feyman would have enjoyed putting him in his place regarding technology.
—-
A proper double blind test (subjective as it may be when it comes to music), would still be more objective and scientific than the way those describe tests were done.
—-
We need a real A/B test with real science behind it, by an independent party, without a financial stake in the outcome. A real side-by-side, specs-to-specs, real proper testing, with real proper results, real proper proofs using “the scientific method”,…. like we were taught in school. Not this pseudo tech stuff by the manufacturer of the device.
Hi-rez is inevitable and resistance is futile.
While we have low-rez streaming now, soon mid-rez CD-quality streaming will be standard, and bit by bit (no pun) as data pipes get cheaper and larger, hi-rez per Mark’s definition will be standard. And almost none will be the wiser, because the masses care only for BASS!!!!!!
Now, streaming multichannel, even at CD quality……. that’s when I get interested, personally.
Multichannel is great…I’m with you.