Anyone backing this?

[behndy]

their site is confusing. is it reissuing music in higher quality? because you can do FLACS from lots of sites, like BandCamp. or torrent for those.

ODD.

[woolyh]

FLAC is so digital it almost sounds analog :0

[cedarskies]

Wow I'm just now realizing that it is just a FLAC player.

Now I am just confused.

[behndy]

yeahhhhhhh...... i think someone else already said it, but iDevices will play FLAC already ne?

[coldbrightsunlight]

Was wondering if this would ever happen after Neil Young went on about it loads in his book. I dunno, I love the guy but honestly mp3s high enough quality for me if they're nice recordings played through decent speakers. And this thing as a portable player is gonna be pointless if like most people you use shitty headphones.

idgi

[D.o.S.]

Plus Neil Young spent how long playing next to a cranked amp?

I applaud him for fighting the good fight, and turning people on to high quality music, but it's silly if you already know what's going on.

[Achtane]

Generally speaking, mp3 files have a bit rate of 192kbps or 256kbps.

Only if you suck.
The best part about this thing is that it looks like a Toblerone.

[zRobertez]

I listen to Neil Young on my iPhone like every other day

[wdinc01]

From the FAQ:

The PonoPlayer is designed to play PonoMusic with stunning clarity. However, the player can play almost any kind of music track including FLAC, ALAC, mp3, WAV, AIFF, AAC (unprotected).

I feel like they found a way to completely destroy their purpose. The only way I would buy it is if the player had a self destruct function if it detects an MP3 on the hard drive, or anything below a 6,000kb/s bit rate (or whatever the fuck is supposed to be high quality).

And I also like the fact that it looks like a Toberlone.

[rfurtkamp]

I'm trying to figure out where they'll not just get the highquality masters for albums that don't have them and the time to remix them to hear the grandness, and why I'd want to buy "Live Rust" yet again when my original vinyl copy is just fine.

And so is the 320 and FLAC rip of it I have.

The high quality thing is a joke - shitty source, shitty mixing, doesn't matter if it's 320 or 666 or 999 kb/s.

Irony is a lot of FLACs seem to settle in at the 600 range tops.

I've done blind tests on the player and can't tell the difference on reference headphones. And my hearing tests good to 16k+ as of December.

[theavondon]

I don't even know which part of this is funnier.

- Dave Matthews Band Signature FLAC player (perfect for my godmother!)
- The fact that they acknowledge that it's Toblerone shaped
- Pono=Porno
- The idea of paying $400 for a digital media player as if this was 2004 or something

[woolyh]

This will all be irrelevant soon anyway once Blu Ray audio catches on.



FLAC don't stand a chance against 22,000kps audio.

[hazelwould]

Seems like some people want it...

2 million raised? Wowzers...

[Gone Fission]

This will all be irrelevant soon anyway once Blu Ray audio catches on.



FLAC don't stand a chance against 22,000kps audio.

Oh hell, you mean I'll need to re-buy all my DVD-As and SACDs? Are they now up to 7.1 surround mixes now?

[leaves turn]

I buy CDs and rip them in 320kbps VBR. Good enough for me.