Rather than wait for Pandora or Logitech to blink, try this work around
- Use the Pandora One desktop applet (a very nice impovement over Open
Pandora). Because it's coming off your PC and not SqueezeCenter your
Pandora stream should be 192. Pipe it to the SB via your wave input
entry in
DaveWr;507823 Wrote:
Why you are already a subscriber, what do they gain?
Dave
Happier customers. A higher guarantee of renewed subscriptions.
Offering a better, more consistent service (what else are they going to
do, offer FLAC streams but only to browser based clients?). :-)
I think it
I agree with your second statement, that indeed would affect revenues.
However trying to sort their international side might provide
significantly greater opportunities. i believe licensing is now
slightly better.
On a more positive note looks like AndyG has been on Twitter with their
tomjtx;488133 Wrote:
However the majority of people can be trained to hear those diffs, as
proven through years of musicians improving their aural skills in ear
training classes.
Sometimes ignorance is bliss :-). It's for this reason that I've never
done serious ABX testing.
On my home
pablolie;508478 Wrote:
...what else are they going to do, offer FLAC streams but only to
browser based clients?). :-)
Actually, what I want, as a paid subscriber, is the ability to use
their Music DNS with my own music, the way I use MusicIP.
I realize that this could be a big development job
upstateaudio;488136 Wrote:
I emailed Pandora regarding 192kbps and received a prompt response that
they are a small organization and need to allocate their resources as
such. They did thank me for the feedback. Perhaps if enough of us
contact Pandora, it would persuade them to devote some
Why you are already a subscriber, what do they gain?
Dave
--
DaveWr
DaveWr's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9331
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71602
jmpage2;488027 Wrote:
They obviously offer the 192 kbps streaming for their paying customers
for some reason, I doubt they would spend the money on placebo affect.
Of course they might. Imagine a consumer who knows nothing about sound
quality and is listening on $5 computer speakers. If they
No, I'm talking about very serious BLIND ABX listening tests with high
quality equipment conducted by serious folks. I'm not talking about
average joes happy with AM radio. And I'm not saying that no one can
detect the difference between an mp3 128 and original source, just that
it typically
andynormancx;488067 Wrote:
It doesn't matter if they don't know anything about bitrates or the
fact that the 128k service could sound as good as the 192k service
depending on the encoder used. They are still likely to be swayed by the
bigger number.
Agree! And this affects the average
garym;488116 Wrote:
No, I'm talking about very serious BLIND ABX listening tests with high
quality equipment conducted by serious folks. I'm not talking about
average joes happy with AM radio. And I'm not saying that no one can
detect the difference between an mp3 128 and original source,
I emailed Pandora regarding 192kbps and received a prompt response that
they are a small organization and need to allocate their resources as
such. They did thank me for the feedback. Perhaps if enough of us
contact Pandora, it would persuade them to devote some resources to this
project.
--
tomjtx;488133 Wrote:
I have done quite a few blind tests that I have distinguished between
128 and 192 or higher listening to well recorded classical and jazz.
Most commercial pop recordings are so bad that it doesn't seem to make
much diff.
It takes an experienced listener with a well
garym;488140 Wrote:
agree on all your points (in particular the ear training...with some
basic training to listen for mp3 artifacts, you can train yourself to
detect differences on even some of highest bitrate mp3 files). And in
fact for lossy files (used on my IPODs) I actually convert to
As has been suggested, how well the file has been encoded matters as
much as the bitrate. I hear many 128k stations that do not sound as
good as some 96k stations, and I'm guessing the encoding method is
likely the main difference. As a general rule (and as I do) searching
for the higher
For the sake of the OP, let me say that I fully agree and would love to
get the 192k version of Pandora on my multiple SB equipment.
On the subject of increased quality, any well recorded jazz or
classical album will truly allow one to hear the difference between 128k
MP3 and the original. The
garym;488116 Wrote:
No, I'm talking about very serious BLIND ABX listening tests with high
quality equipment conducted by serious folks. I'm not talking about
average joes happy with AM radio. And I'm not saying that no one can
detect the difference between an mp3 128 and original source,
more support for the appropriate folks to get in touch and make it
happen. if pandora worked at 192 on my squeezeboxes, i would listen much
more often. and am already a paying subscriber, but barely ever use it
because the quality is so low.
--
chroma
garym;487335 Wrote:
There's plenty of discussion of this on the web by very informed folks
(in this forum and other places), so I don't want to turn this thread
into a repeat of all that info. You may have amazing hearing, but there
is lots of scientific evidence that clearly indicates that
I am more concerned about the tightness of the Logitech guys and the
Pandora guys, but I agree that 192kbs would be an enhancement.
Especially when Pandora will be available for Dutch citizens. :(
--
-Stef-
Yamaha - Chario - MJ Acoustics - Squeezebox - Beresford
I am a paying Pandora One account holder, which means that when I'm
listening to Pandora on my computer I am treated to 192kbps audio that
sounds notably better than 128kbps garbage.
Unfortunately this enhanced audio quality does not work on the
Squeezebox platform.
I contacted Pandora support
The ball is in Pandora's court, we're waiting for an updated API.
--
andyg
andyg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3292
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71602
Thanks Andy.
Maybe if more people complained to Pandora we could get this sooner
rather than later.
--
jmpage2
jmpage2's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41
View this thread:
jmpage2;487304 Wrote:
Maybe if more people complained to Pandora we could get this sooner
rather than later.
It's only going to come at the insistence of higher ups at Logitech.
Not from one developer emailing another and asking Dude, where's the
new API? and getting a response, Dude, I'm
jmpage2;487289 Wrote:
it's a real drag to listen to low quality garbage on my mid-fi and hi-fi
setups.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but 128kbs is not exactly lo-quality
garbage compared with 192. There is lots of evidence that most normal
human beings can't ABX mp3 128 compared back to
garym;487315 Wrote:
Not to put too fine a point on it, but 128kbs is not exactly lo-quality
garbage compared with 192. There is lots of evidence that most normal
human beings can't ABX mp3 128 compared back to original CD in a blind
test (visit hydrogenaudio forums for lots of info). That
There's plenty of discussion of this on the web by very informed folks
(in this forum and other places), so I don't want to turn this thread
into a repeat of all that info. You may have amazing hearing, but there
is lots of scientific evidence that clearly indicates that it is fairly
rare for any
JJZolx;487311 Wrote:
It's only going to come at the insistence of higher ups at Logitech.
Not from one developer emailing another and asking Dude, where's the
new API? and getting a response, Dude, I'm swamped.
Agreed. I thought the Squeezebox guys and the Pandora guys were tight,
but
28 matches
Mail list logo
