islander wrote: 
That distinction has always seemed odd to me. It's like saying "I used to take great care in barbecuing my steak but found myself focussing on the flavors instead of the nutritional value."

I've worked to make the music sound better and for me it's done nothing but make the music more enjoyable.  

 BillG wrote: 
I used to spend a lot of time, money and energy on gear. I rebuilt my amps with a physics book and AVS philosophers print outs in front of me. I wound my own speaker wire...  I eventually found that I was listening to the sound, and not the music.  My current metric for quality is Good/Bad. There are lots of things I'll still listen to when they are bad.

Neil Young’s SXSW Keynote Derailed By Simple Question About Pono

During the buildup to Pono, his new high-resolution digital music player, Neil Young and his bevy of rock star pals have presented his new product as an advancement for music fans who want real quality from their recordings. Yesterday, during a keynote speech at SXSW Interactive, Young upped the ante, basically arguing that the MP3 and its reduced sound quality has put many music professionals out of work and that a return to the hi-fi sounds of yore would revive the flagging music economy. His case was essentially that the entire music industry stands to benefit from Pono. But things got very awkward when someone asked how much Young stands to benefit from it.

As Billboard reports, after Young’s speech, Pono CEO John Hamm took the stage for a Q&A with Young and USA Today technology reporter Mike Snider. After answering questions about the PonoPlayer’s triangular shape (they wanted something “iconic”), its file format (FLAC), and whether it can play existing digital music libraries (it can), Young and Hamm waffled awkwardly when the subject of money came up. Per Billboard, it went like this:

Taking the microphone, a young man asked: “What’s your cut?” — referring, of course, to Apple’s now-famous 30% cut of sales on the iTunes Store.

Hamm, after a flustered moment, responded that, “It surprises most people that everyone who buys music from the record labels pays exactly the same amount.” At this, several audience members shouted, “What?!”

“That’s a delicate question, isn’t it?” asked Young.

Shortly thereafter, Hamm turned to the moderator, slightly flushed at this point, and said “We can end it.”

“You can answer the question if you like,” Snider said.

Hamm shook his head slightly before Snider closed the discussion.

It’s only a delicate question if you make it one, Neil. Don’t these guys know radical transparency is all the rage?

So reportedly the device is $400.
Who came up with that name?

 BillG wrote: 
I'm not smart enough to the know the difference in the techie stuff...but I will say most of my 16/44.1 Mobile Fidelity CDs are as good or better than many SACDs and DVDA.  So I would tend to think you are correct sir.  I havent really gotten into the high res digital stuff, but I have heard mixed reviews of sites like HDtracks.  Again, probably more a function of the source/mix, than the data bits.  Still, there are many crappy standard CD digital mixes, especially some of the early ones. 

With that being said, I believe Neil was more about rallying against mp3 files, than standard CDs?

Thought he'd given up on this. Maybe he'll sell a few to the same folks who buy $100 AC power cords & magic speaker wire.

The truth is that the only reason some "high resolution" digital files sound better than a CD (or well encoded high-bitrate MP3, Ogg or AAC file) is that they were sourced from cleaner — or remixed — masters. There are some fabulous SACD versions of the mid-period Stones albums (Sticky Fingers & Beggars Banquet in particular) that blow away the earlier CD versions, but it has nothing to do with the sample rate or the number of bits.

I guarantee that if Neil himself was to do a double-blind A/B/C test — with A being the original analog master, B being a Pono version of same, and C being a 44.1kHz 16bit version — he could not tell them apart. 

This guy lays it all out a lot better than I could:  http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html 

Neil young announces the launch of PonoMusic

(and given a less than enthusiastic response from the peanut gallery)

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/neil-young-announces-launch-ponomusic-19703/

Haven't you old farts lost enough hearing that it doesn't matter anymore?

Besides he would have more credibility in my eyes if he was sitting on a 1960 Caddy instead of those overdone 1959s 

What Does A Song That Costs $5 Sound Like? : The Record : NPR

Neil Young Expands Pono Digital-to-Analog Music Service

Neil Young: The Fresh Air Interview

Here is one of the EAC guides I ran across when I used to use EAC exclusively when I still used a PC. EAC is the best ripper program out there though it is a pain to set up initially. The Mac ripper MAX is much easier to use but can not be tweaked to perfection like EAC. I always rip to .flac and then if I need an mp3 of it I convert them as needed.
EAC Guide 

 fuzzy wrote: 
The first post in this thread indicates that VBR is the default, and for usual purposes, VBR is better, but of course RP rejects VBR, so go with 320 CBR...

 fuzzy wrote: 
I don't know EAC but on the website, it says "Remember that EAC does not supply a MP3 codec; you may use the LAME, Gogo or the BladeEnc DLL’s (or FAAC Dll for AAC compression) by copying them into the same directory where you copied EAC. " So whatever you have, you need to refer to its FAQ for answers. But 224 smells like VBR to me. See if you can find a setting for CBR and that should fix it. 

Neil Young Trumpets High-Quality Digital Music, With Steve Jobs’ Blessing

 DaveInVA wrote: 
Doin' what Neil does best!

Cool!

Here is streaming video from Neil Youngs website showing a jam session that showcases his analog studio complete with a Studer A827 24 Channel reel to reel for mastering.

 

 KurtfromLaQuinta wrote: 
Built-in speakers have come a long way. They're not all converted PA speakers anymore. Worth considering, for marital harmony.

 fuzzy wrote: 
Audio on a budget is certainly a bitch.

First, define your needs.  What are you trying to accomplish ?  Main system, w / wo video support.  Spare room, workshop, garage ?  Stereo or surround and if surround, at what level ?  And what are you going to be listening to the most ?  CD's, Internet streams, mp3's, vinyl, cassettes or your computer ?  Once you have defined your needs, then you can begin to build something around them. 

Don't know if you are in a rural or urban area.  Go to a shop that sells high end stuff and listen to the good stuff.  One key to this process is to bring a CD of your favorite stuff with you, music that you are most familiar with.  Don't expect to be able to listen to all the tracks, hope for a couple.  Back in the day, the early 70's, I would take with me a copy of Aqualung on vinyl.  I forget which track it is, but there is a difficult bass part that I would key in on while listening.  This would apply to anything you might consider buying, provided you have the opportunity to preview and actually listen to before buying. 

The other part of going to a high end shop and listening is to find out how good your hearing actually is and if you can even hear a difference in the first place.  Its not so much how the stuff sounds loud as it might be at quieter levels.  So many people think that if it sounds bad low, they can make it sound better by turning it up louder.  Louder isn't better, its just louder.

I would build a new system around the speakers first and work my way back to the source and then the amplifier / receiver part last.  Your speakers are prolly going to be the one component you have the longest.  Here we are talking about 20 to 40 year old speakers and how to repair them.  Speakers are what are always going to sound the same, pretty much regardless of what they are plugged into.  Tinny will still be tinny and boomy will still be boomy assuming a decent receiver.  Become familiar with the frequency specs of speakers ( go to Crutchfield and read their explanations and specs) and claims of bass reproduction, especially from a 2 way (tweater / woofer only) speaker.  A 3 way (tweater / midrange / woofer) is usually always a better choice, especially at the low end.  A 2 way woofer has to do more stuff than it is really designed to do and something along the way is usually sacrificed.  Beware a two way system that claims a low frequency response of say 40 hz with little distortion.  More than likely they are lying.  Anything down to 80 is prolly going to be reasonable and honest.  None of this applies to buying a box like a Bose, yet.

Ultimately since we are talking budget.  Think 2.1 which has two seperate small mid and high speakers and a seperate subwoofer.  This frees up the mid range to do what it was intended to do and be more accurate.  The bass woofer does what it is designed to do which is usually between 200 and 40 hz.  Accuracy matters, a lot.  Bass does not need to be stereo.  The lower frequencies are almost impossible to tell which direction they are coming from.

Once you have found out what you are capable of still hearing, then you can start buying.  Be prepared to buy stuff and take it home and take it back.  Stuff will always sound different at home than the place you are listening to when buying.  That is what the listening CD is for when shopping.  After you have hopefully got to hear a few good rigs in a high end shop, take your CD to a Bose outlet and give it a good listen, they should be more than happy to let you do it. If yer happy with what you hear at the Bose store, remember that for what you pay for that Bose, you can go to Sam's Club or Best Buy and pick up a reasonably decent home theatre package with entry level Blu Ray for the same price as a Bose all in one CD / radio unit.

On the cassette part, if your cassettes are factory, I wouldn't bother trying to save and convert them, unless you made them yourself and they are in excellent shape.  Factory cassettes were more about convenience than audio quality.  Too many variables in mass producing to anticipate.  Work on saving your vinyl.  Better and more predictable results in the end.

Prolly TMI, but what the hell, its a slow morning ...

 islander wrote: 
My wife likes speakers you can hear but can't see.
She's always trying to hide them with plants.