5 ms·
I'm getting kind of tired of the pseudo-scientific smackdowns. I like my headphones just fine, and I couldn't tell the difference on them! So what? Those are
by stolio 12y ago
I'm getting kind of tired of the pseudo-scientific smackdowns.
I like my headphones just fine, and I couldn't tell the difference on them! So what? Those are consumer headphones, they're designed to sound _good_ not _accurate_. If you're testing two music players you might use a pair of headphones that's designed to give an accurate representation of the signal they're given.
Is 192kHz a sham? Probably. But so is going lalalala nothing sounds better than an iPhone, you idiots are buying snake-oil
- quesera 12y ago> I'm getting kind of tired of the pseudo-scientific smackdowns. Were you expecting a scientific treatise on Slate? Try this instead: http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
- stolio 12y agoI just want people who pretend to be scientific to take themselves seriously enough that if somebody says "Your headphones suck" that they say "do they? Why?" That article is better :) 192 is silly pretty much always, 24 bits isn't very useful for playback, but a music player with better digital-to-analog converters and a better amplification stage than an iPhone? That should make a difference. An iPhone does ten million things, there should be a way to make a better music player that only does one. (edit: now that I think about it 24 bits could be useful for playback.)
- csbrooks 12y agoFrom the article: "A note from Neil tucked inside the Pono box assures you that the Pono makes your music sound better no matter what headphones you connect to it."