JustAnUnCoolCat

There is indeed a price premium issue. I am fully aware there are differing costs between flash memory and hdd storage, which affect prices, but that was NOT the premium i meant. The premiums come in a number of levels, all applicable here. 1. You pay as much for under 10Gb of flash memory as you can get 20Gb+ for, that is a premium price factor. Sure it's related to differing costs, but it's not a premium that's irrelevent. That's why back when i worked in the industry, i was never unaware of the price premium the different storage methods added to some devices. 2. Both Sony and Apple have a price premium on their products, not all Sony items are loaded disproportionally upwards to the extent that Apple do with their range, in fact - there have been some absolute bargains in the Sony range, where Apple stuff always seems to carry the premium on the high side. The N*no, Sh*ffle and iP*d all demonstrate that one nicely. antd have done consistently since day one they appeared. The NW-A series, at least they sit vaguely on a similar parallel of 'premium price for premium goods' to the saner premium priced goods. 3. Larger screen, sure.. the A800 series may have a 'large' screen vs most of the competition - but hell, the premium you pay for the screen and video on the move (in almost all video enabled players) is silly - it's like paying for downsized capacity when it comes to storage vs what is the norm for storage in the price range of the premium stuff. Then you pay silly money for a relatively tiny screen (and it is small really) that makes me think back to early casio pocket tv's in size terms (and premium prices they had too). Trust me on this, if a product is seriously worth every penny of what you pay out for it, i'm there giving such things the recognition they deserve, but i'm seriously not about to give any of those tiny screen pocket decks any recognition of value yet a while, because simply stink in value terms. If i was gonna lay out money on a pocket video enabled deck, i'd buy a PSP and add the optional HDD and extra battery capacity and mem sticks be damned. The PSP aint that wonderful value for money, in basic form, but at least the screen is vaguely on the right side of sanely scaled and you get a hell of a lot more for your money. But since my tolerence for tiny screens and frankly crap imagery which goes with a lot of the personal video players (the pocket ones anyway, and the cheapo bargain bucket DVD units) makes them a no-interest when it comes to my spending money on them, there's zero danger of me jumping on the pocket video enabled player bandwagon. And being housebound means such things would literally be gadget scale toys in my life. A PSP, if i had the inclination and was ready to spend a bit more on the expansion to give it decent capacity and battery life, would be my first port of call for Sony pocket video devices. But if i really have the desire to have a limited scope device, then i'd probably vote with something with a decent sized screen and 20+gB of HDD - at least the eye fatigue would be way down by comparision and i could actually have a decent sized collection on the storage. If you rate gadget value as value for money then i guess some would say those pocket video devices are good value - but when you do the sums and see what you get for the money, they aint that good value. In fact, they are pretty close to similar value proportionally that 1st gen HDD DAP's were vs multi-codec CD devices. For the price diff, back then, you could buy a crap load of CD-RW's for the diff in price between the two varieties of decks. Likewise, today, you can buy quite a quantity of mem cards of a decent size for the price diff between the HDD and Flash based video enabled players. 'Tom Kat'

Never ceases to amaze me how often such questions come up, when it's very well documented officially and unofficially that you use one of the transfer managers to load content on most Sony decks. And that amazement is coming from an old techy support veteran too Ah well... guess some things never change 'Tom Kat'

Ok, let's be honest here, Sony users are probably as determined in their choice as typically iPod users are sheep-driven in their choice. But hey, we made our choices..., so let's respect choices made. My only real comment that separates the difference between Sony obsession and Apple obsession is simple - Typically Sony kit is bought by people who want quality, Apple DAP's are heavily chosen by trend and fashion/coolness influences. If you are gonna pay on the high side, and in honesty .. both brands are high-sided on prices for what you get, at least you know where the money went to with the Sony What stops me buying an A800 to replace the A3000 is simple logic and value. I dont really need video support (but if it came in the package and wasn't the usual postage stamp low-qual joke, i'd use video now and then) so any premium proportion to the asking price due to video is totally not acceptable for a feature i'd hardly use. But the prices are pretty much in line with Sony HDD units and the iP*d/N*no market, so that premium issue is kinda settled. What kills it off for me, is value. Like i said, dont really need video... and would i trade off 50% or more of storage for a feature i dont really need..?? I may be mad, borderline insane some may say, but i aint stupid... so unless the A800 drops into a proportional price reflecting it's storage capacity, then it's a case of A3000 having a long secure place in the virtual cat basket. If you want Sony, video and the idea of insane money for Sony portable DVD unit dont figure into common sense, then i guess the A800 series is a good move. But like i said earlier in the reply, let's respect choices made 'Tom Kat'

Ok, i missed a posting that relates to this ... see :- http://www.atraclife.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2178>

That's a headache in it's own right. Havent actually tested SS under WINE or other Win Emus (ok, i know the official line is they aint emu's, but we know that's pretty much what they are). But i'm pretty sure there are things that are installed into a Windows environment (by Windows, by the Sony software, or both) that are not present or handleable 'yet' under Wine and suchlike. Could very well be a driver issue that's simply not substitutable at this time. That said, it was a good while since i read anything on people's attempts to get SS running in Linux, so maybe my recollections are wrong. *prepares self's virtual furry ass for the incoming kicking/flaming ... if info given is inaccurate* Shame really, if it simple aint happening, being able to run SS under Linux, as that would be one simple gesture (to get it WINE friendly and some Linux device drivers) - as the no. of Sony users who do run Dual OS systems is not infinately tiny, and i'm sure there are plenty of long term users who (especially in the MD circles) who would love to simply run SS under WINE and add appropriate driver/handlers to their Nix installation for device use. Sounds like a classic Dual Bootable OS setup to me, Windows for Sony and other non-Nix compliant soft, Nix for what you can get reproduced on the Nix side of life. 'Tom Kat'

Well, it's not a flag that Windows Media uses to define DRM-protected vs non-protected. DRM protection of content is implemented in WMA/WMV/ASF by encrypting the content during file creation. So to all intents and purposes, you need the license or some way of recreating the key to the encryption to be able to do bugger all with the encrypted/protected files. Also, converters and players need to be built to handle encrypted/protected media to be able to play em back or convert the files if they are protected. That's why many cheap and non-compliant decks cannot handle DRM protected files, because they aint programmed (in the handling/decode side) to deal with the encryption. Likewise, that's why a lot of audio playback software cannot handle DRM protected content, because they dont know how to handle the encryption. And hence why each time the DRM method is altered substantially, usually substantially rather than a minor change, the non-destructive DRM workarounds need to be modded and/or rebuilt if DRM methods change. Anyway, that's the short outline of how DRM works in WM formats... and other formats too (i suspect that something along the same lines is the case with ATRAC and OpenMagicGate - but i aint swearing to say i know for sure re Sony formats). So in essence.. You pretty much can't to bugger all with copy protected WM format files, without having the license there and available so that the software which (assuming it supports DRM) can interact with it according to license. If it can't, the file is considered unusable/corrupt/....... (fill in appropriate term, since not all WM format utils report the right version of the case). So assuming you cannot use the files due to licenses gone AWOL (that's why you have a license backup facility... to allow you to backup licenses so you can transport files and licenses between machines... within the migration scope the licenses allow for), then it's pretty much end game, give up and obtain the content another way from another source. Funnily enough, ATRAC users who inadvertently applied copy protection to their content and migrated files without migrating licenses (can't recall how it's done in OpenMG and SonicStage software) face the same prob. The reasons why it's end game, really, for DRM protected files and no licenses available, is :- 1. Without the license associated to the file, the player/converter etc wont do anything with it... til it gets the right credentials/authoristation from the migrated or present license. 2. If you cannot get the file to demux/decode, which requires that it can be decrypted and decoded, then it's pretty much end game as far as even trying to transcode it via 'analog loop' or API methods goes too. 3. Likewise, no chance of playing it back via the soundcard output and recording via a real analog loop to recreate the content. All the methods out there that work, 'analog loop' or non-destructive DRM removal based methods, all require that you have the license for the content so the player/converter/decrypting util can authentically decode/decrypt the content. End game, sadly. I highly doubt the original (otherwise useless now) DRM hack that worked with windows media 7/8 encodings that were DRM protected (and the DRM now aint the same hence why the old hacks dont work) will help here if you could locate it. As again, it would require a license being current to the content as i recall. Definately end game. Your only real option, to get past the non-usable DRM barrier, assuming it is due to DRM not something else entirely, is to resource the content from alternative sources. I learnt the hard way, many many moons ago... back when WMA and DRMed WMA was still a new thing 'Tom Kat'

Hi Ceres .. For sure, it would indeed be a logical step. No arguments from me in that department. But as history is proving as it's written/recorded/rememebered, 'logical' never seems to figure into the overall Sony philosophy. In that respect, the corp are almost mirroring teenagers and the teenager 'iPod is the cool only choice' irrational non-thinking with the dogged devotion to ATRAC as their primary focus. No way would i back any pressure group movement to force Sony to scrap ATRAC mind, the horrors of the Ogg Vorbis hollering at iRiver/Reigncom and the irrationality that went with the screaming is something i never want to envision being repeated over ATRAC and it's demise in favour of something else. But i'd support any rational move to look at the best of what exists universally in the existing products, and ensures that core support of what legacy users need as well as the best integration of more flexible codec support is also nicely surgically put into the support mix. Definately, low-bit-rate AAC-HE would be the non open-source choice of low-rate codec support to supercede 48/64K ATRAC3Plus. Ogg Vorbis would be the open source counterpart - but if the move went in that direction, you can bet that as sure as bears crap in the woods, that the extremist part of the advocates of open-source codecs would kick up hell as usual, so Ogg Vorbis would also have to considered too to keep that lot quiet. Of course, no matter what is potentially up for grabs, adoption wise, noone will settle for a part-adoption, because these days those with the loudest voices and the ability to create the virtiual wagon train of bandwagon jumpers, simply wont settle for anything less than perfect (aka their preferred clean-build open license code choice with total past/present/future/infinate support scope). Which is kinda remarkable given the fact that the majority of users of the products, simply get on with using the damn things... not obsessing over the purity and perfection of what code is used to get the support in the device. I would happily agree with any rational moves, provided choice remained in the outcome of a rational move on on the part of Sony/Awia. But i aint holding my breath on that one. And yes, i would agree that a battery efficient implement of codec support (any codec support, in my way of thinking) is a must. After all, the improvement curve of practical battery technology performance improvements is a shallow one, so where we aint really gonna see massive improvements in battery capacity and power output potential and i pretty much feel that (for the most part) that power consumption on the hardware side is not gonna improve in leaps and bounds yet a while (again talking practical, not lab-rat technologies), then it's gotta be down to getting efficiency in discrete terms (such as more efficient codecs, more efficient handling etc, more efficient code overall) that's our only real hope of battery-efficient improvements. Ok, Sony did pull a bit of a rabbit out of the hat with the VME approach which kinda caught attention notably with the first gen of ATRAC CD Walkmans. That was one of the clever approachs to some kind of efficiency move, since it did indeed deliver results. In fact, I experienced 'beating the specs' battery endurance on the D-NE1, the D-NE20 never seemed to quite hit the same OTTness of battery efficiency... but that was a single battery deck vs the D-NE1's twin battery source. If they could learn from that VME sucess, and apply it to whatever is the equiv to VME these days and make it work for an integrated batch of codec support that reflects the future/recent present such as AAC support, then that would be a parallel step in the right direction along with more intelligent and rational mix of codec support. But we come back to the thick-skinned barrier that seems to keep the corporate philosophy operating in a reality the rest of us dont live in. Seen that too many times working in broadcasting and working in the DAP industry, so am amazed on one paw that Sony still survive the way they do... and on the other paw, i know that it's not unlike the broadcasting world where adoption of new and existing logical progressions are a bit like childbirth... long, slow and painful..., and with (referring to the corporate philosophy and attitude) and totally unforgiving and inward thinking mother bearing the new born. It's no fun being the 'nice guy' when you gotta keep one paw in the corporate philosophy and one paw in the side that's arguing for rational thinking. It just takes years off your life in terms of stress related damage. Hopefully sense will prevail on many accounts. 'Tom Kat'

Can't blame anyone wanting to take advantage of HE-AAC especially for generating really compact audio files - if the A3000 supported low bitrate HE-AAC i'd use it instead of 48 & 64K ATRAC3Plus any day. Using Q .35 (approx 100kps VBR) AAC-HE files with my NAS & Streaming Audio standable receiver/media player these days, and for sure, there's definately a lot of the stuff that would translate to 48K & 64K HE-AAC equivs nicely (on the SQ and compact accounts). My most listened to radio station (internet only) uses low-mid rate VBR HE-AAC and it sounds nice regardless of what i listen via, cans or the hifi. Sure was an opportunity missed there by Sony with their more quality audio products, but they didn't miss it on some of their 'toy' audio products.. such as phones with media players.. Then again, they also did likewise with ATRAC3Plus, and DVD Players - if they had such overwhelming confidence in the ATRAC3Plus codec and the low end of the encoding rates, why didn't they add the support to their later DVD units and the integrated audio player mode..?? Well, i guess history proves itself reliable, that Sony never seem to do what's blindingly obvious... Ok they fixed some issues on SonicStage, and god knows they could choke to death on the written and unwritten comments and complaints of SS (which is, as most would admit, way overdue for replacement.. or rebuilding from the ground up). But that's another example of how the philosophy at Sony works, it's way too obvious to consider... Oh well, i guess it's a damn miracle they bothered to even release AAC supporting firmware, let alone the tool that could manage the transfers of AAC to supporting devices. I can see so vividly, an alternative parallel scenario where they add support to firmware, but give no means to transfer AAC to the devices... Frightening thought, but that's corporate philosophy for you.. best never entered into on a bad day 'Tom Kat'

Nah, you are gonna have to bit the old bullet there.. Assuming the content of those discs is still available in other original forms, reconstruct ATRAC files from source and keep em archived somewhere (remember, DO NOT COPY PROTECT). Otherwise, it's grab em (non-ATRAC) copies from whereever... , or connect the output of your ATRAC CD player (assuming you still possess one) and record (destructively, sadly) back to PC and import the cut recording segments to SS and make suitable ATRAC's out of them. If you possess the means to defeat the SCMS on the ATRAC CD deck, use a optical --> optical link... if the deck possessed an optical output. Better still, however you get the audo back into SS, maybe it's worth using WMA LSL for keeping your original library copies stored in (remember, don't copy protect). That's suggested as whilst you use DRM-free encodings in WMA LSL, there's zero issue importing on a whim any time to SS at a later date. You aint alone, believe me, i'd bet everyone who possessed or used an ATRAC CD Wallkman fell foul of the one-way only nature of the .ATP files used on the ATRAC CD discs. I did, sadly, and it was my demo disc of audio restorations that ended up there, after i had a serious mishap and lost my remastered/restored analogue transfers kept on Audio CD. Add countless lost hours due to ferked up Audio CD's (a fire destroyed em and the original recordings), on top of the prob you are facing, and you sure feel like doing something drastic... *looks for a suitable victim, and spots an iP*d owner....passing by* Good luck, and here's hoping you sort some alternative to the destructive recording route. Be Cool, or at least don't let the inner demons steer your choices 'Tom Kat'

It'd be dead simple if you just wanted to create lossy ATRAC files for transfer, then it'd be hello to something like MediaCoder - last time i looked, it featured FLAC AND ATRAC3 conversions. Just mentioned that in case a similar case, but wanting lossy ATRAC files, occurs to someone else. Next option, assuming it still exists.... :- Highly expensive and overkill, for this purpose, and that'd be Sound Forge (or whatever Sony, since grabbing it, have called it). There's a free plugin for ATRAC handling (inc Lossless) and i vaguely recall FLAC supported (dont quote me on that, i dont think the virtual scorched fur can take much more flaming these days). Somewhere in between, for simple file conversion, there used to be (available standalone and for use with SF) a product called Batch Converter from Sonic Foundy and i assume it carried over to the Sony side of the buyout too. A lot cheaper than SF, and it should (all things being equal) support the ATRAC plugin mentioned earlier. Alternatively, and now we are at least three paws into piecemeal conversion :- 1. Burn Audio CD's to RW's, from FLAC remembering to use CD-TEXT (which SonicStage reads on CD-TEXT enabled discs) and reuse to discs (aka burn, import to ATRAC LSL using SS, wipe/reuse RW). 2. Alternatively, use any good convertor (i tend to favour dBPowerAmp, but MediaCoder is there and a nice do-all alternative) to :- i) Arrange copies of the FLAC files, arranged nested by the tag info (so you can fill in missing info based on where the files ended up on the hard drive), but ensure the filenames read something like [artist]-[track] (leave out the [ and ], those just are field representations for example, if using dBPowerAmp to define layout using 'Arrange Files' plugin). ii) Batch convert the FLAC copies, again assuming the use of dBPowerAMP for consistency, to WAV (generating same filenames in .WAV) - writing these to same location as source file and deleting the conversion copy FLAC's (not the original set), so you end up with .WAV's with the equiv filenames. iii) Import these one album/disc worth at a time and use SS's facility (i forget what it's called) to lookup track info based on the filename (this is why i suggested the filenaming arrangement i did) - and what it can't ID or gets wrong, you can correct in SS's Db and when that's done, set SS to batch convert the whole damn lot (and it'll take time) to ATRAC Lossless where it'll write the dB held tag info to the resulting ATRAC LSL files. 3) The simplest option short of reripping or doing all the previous conversion mess mention above in my post, is to bit the bullet and convert to a LSL format that is importable directly (WMA Lossless for sure, maybe Apple Lossless.. but i wont swear to that one). In your shoes, i'd go with option 3, as typically i find people with a desire to import/transfer FLAC collections have a huge personal library and a direct LSL-->LSL conversion and import to library is often the least painless option short of native re-ripping in SS. Time isn't an issue for me, these days, so i would personally use whatever version suited my needs if i had to do a non-supported import. But like i say, i can go for unwieldy options, as i have lots of time to kill (literally). Be Cool Always, and dont let it get yer down. 'Tom Kat'

Well, i think Lyssnare hinted at an important point. It highly depends on what you encode, as to what works well with a bit rate/sample rate combo. Ok, so you dont have the sample rate choice with ATRAC, just encoding choice of bit-rate. But definately, some of the more taxing examples of music (from across the board) definately (in my experience) test the limitations of 64K encoding (in any codec) let alone 48K. But if you are trying to get n amounts of tracks into the balancing act of SQ vs size, then almost certainly the SQ is effectively gonna be down in the interests of keeping the audio file size compact. But it also matters where you listen. ATRAC3 105/132 is where i would (general purpose) go for simplicity (all ATRAC units can handle those) unless the audio content dictates differently and then i make a rational choice between listening comfort and compact file sizes. Clearly it also depends, the balancing act, on how much you are trying to eek out max use of battery endurance and/or storage. Even though i dont do a lot of outdoor recording using MD, got way better kit for that purpose where the recording is seriously important, now and then i still need to use a MD recorder. In which case, even if it means a disc change now and then , my lossy choice is generally ATRAC3 132 (i forget which mode that is, LP2 or something like that i guess). But that's only because i prefer to err on the side of caution and have a better recording than i need for the end result. After all, if the recording is overly HQ (relatively speaking), that helps when it comes to any mastering and editing and audio processing. Makes all the diffference, in my mind, when it comes to spoken word.... I'd rather have something overly sharp and precise to take away and process/edit/remaster to a more compact end form than risk super low recording bit rates and find the result is barely good enough by the time i get indoors back to the edit suite. Two very different sides of the bitrate dilemma.

In most respects, if you use a good set of phones that fairly proportional respond across the range, then most music translates pretty well without EQ. Clearly, use EQ to make the audio a bit more prominent where you are used to hearing it in a certain way (VeggieMonster cited a good one, orchestral pieces... especially if you are used to hearing live performances, then having the right feel is kinda important). Or use the EQ to compensate for phone deficiencies and/or hearing deficiences, if needed. Clearly, listing to audio where there is quite a bit of background ambient noise/sound, almost certainly will have you EQing or raising vol, unless your phones are pretty good at attenuting outside sources. But working on the principle of a quiet indoor use, i tended to test with classical orchestral (so many subtle and dramatic parts, it makes sense to include in a test) and really HQ live performance recordings. Examples i would cite, of live stuff, was my legally legit recording of the Everly Brothers (a year or two old) when they performed at the Royal Albert Hall, and recordings of Joe Brown and The Bruvvers, Marty Wilde and The Wildcats, and same again on a different show combining the talents of all. Definately no EQ required on the indoor setup, when playing back, definately no compelling reason to use EQ on my preferred cans - about the only examples of phones i'd eq with would be the MDR-EX71's or MDR-E818s. But since i dont use em no more for listening (the 71's sometimes get used as discrete monitoring items when i do outdoor stuff.. where 'cans' aint exactly subtle or discreet). Generally speaking, without EQ, on the indoor setup or the decent cans, it's as close to being there as you can get (sure, there's a difference, there always will be, but good enough for me). But no doubt, as i get older (bordering on 40 at the moment), my hearing will deteroriate and lose senstivity in some areas, so maybe in twenty years it'll be the reverse for me.. needing some EQ most of the time, but for now... well, it's not the case. As i said before somewhere, go with what works

Use whatever works for you, given the phones you have and what you are used to. Me, it's whatever (on a given deck) translated to neutral/flat all the way The cans i use do a pretty damn good job of taking neutal/flat EQ and reproducing just fine. Guess it's definately a subjective thing this. 'Tom Kat'

I can agree with the observation that it may not have been smart (from a public 'gotta have cool toys' perception) to have required SS as the transfer app.. and likewise i doubt the average 'cool toy' junkie would have wanted ATRAC as the (as is usually the case with Sony kit) native format supported.. let along supported at all. Shame mind, i'm sure there are people who may have loved the idea of a W series phone and ATRAC support .. particularly if they were say ex-NetMD users who already had a ready ATRAC library. Oh well, and thanks for pointing out the non-ATRAC support, that writes of the W series if i do look for a new phone. *considers the wisdom of sending a virtual demonic hellcat hit squad to Sony HQ to show one virtual cat spirit's opinion of their inspired decision to not support ATRAC in W series phones* Be Cool 'Tom Kat'

Recommendations eh..?? 1. Total waste of space, those domestic VHF FM transmitters, if the idea of having a quality bit of kit linking a quality audio deck to an quality car deck's VHF FM radio is concerned. Ok, if it's the only way you can link up - fair play, but the nicest 'fair on all' method (aka causes least RFI) is what's commonly referred to as a 'modulator' solution. I can't recall any product examples to quote, offhand, but what a modulator variation does is plug between the antenna lead coming into the car deck and the antenna (so it's in-line) and the second input is the audio input (usually either line-level or intended for phones aka pre-amped level). The output from the 'modulator' (it's an RF output) goes into the antenna input of the car deck. Then it's a matter of tuning the radio into the output freq of the modulator, and to tune to any other radio service in the band, tune appropriately. If you are stuck with a radio solution, this is the nice-guy method as it's a really localised transmitter and provided the whole coax run is good and not leaking, the amount of residula RF leakage to the outside world is so low that in the common instance of cars with metal bodies, bugger all of any really measurable level of RF will leak beyond the car itself. Remember, folks, just because using an untethered transmitter proper may not cause interference to surrounding buildings, it sure can create unnecessary and not-desirable interference to other nearby vehicles re their in-car VHF sets. So if you must go VHF FM link, go with a cabled modulator - dont consider inductive types (these use a coil that takes the RF output and induces the signal into the cable run via the coil, as the actual output level you need to overcome inductive losses makes em pretty damn ropey performers). 2. If it costs you something for an MBUS adaptor or whatever equiv it needs to allow you to adaptor a phones out/line-level into the (assuming it's present) CD Changer input (intended for input from a sep mount multi-changer unit) - then that's a way better option. In general.. Go with the least interference solution if going with VHF FM linkups. In preference, adapt the AF (audio) output of the portable deck to suit an available aux or cd/line level input on the car deck. For the benefit of those thinking of buying a new in-car deck - look for something with a CD-changer input and an available adaptor.. and budget for that instead (cleaner and way better quality), or for simplicity, go with a in-car unit with a front-panel aux input... It costs nothing to research and find simple options, a lot cheaper than retrofitting Hope this all helps, and i make no apologies for crapping over the utterly dire quality of domestic VHF FM transmitters - i've done a lot of (under workshop test-bed conditions that were fully legal to do, unlike acutal in-car use, in the UK.. and they all stink big time.. to a serious radio user's POV) . Be Cool .. 'Tom Kat'

Not sure about that unit.. I do remember seeing the version in the UK that was destined for the A series, really no more than than a BC-1 with an amp and speakers built in... Hardly worth shedding a tear over.. Get a BC1, it has plates to go on the base to fit the 1000 and 3000 models (using a 3000 here, so know this to be the case), set the deck's audio out to 'line' and plug in any good pair of active speakers or a proper amp and speakers into the line socket on the BC1. Way better value 'Tom Kat'

*hisses demonically, at seeing the Pussycat Dolls being included in a Rock Station...* Yeah, but regardless of what i think, or what you think, at the end of the day, genres are kinda treated as opened ended and the accepted constraints of the classifications do kinda get abused somewhat. Take for example, modern use of the R'N'B genre.. It's become the classic catch-all, give some creditability, genre almost everyone in music likes to essentially label their quasi-dance/ not quite blues.. not quite soul, not quite anything but plain old visual and aural fake attitude from 'i am too cool for words, so much it hurts' acts. What really gets to me about that is, and i guess it means much the same for the totally devoted Rock fans to see the Rock genre being used like the example in the screenshot, that it's almost diluting what tends to constitute 'Rock'. One of the few exceptions i tend to except as a crossover into Rock that really deserved to be one-paw in the genre, was the Run DMC cover of Walk This Way, as it was 50% performed/recored with a real rock band/blues band Didn't do Aerosmith any harm did it, to have one of their classics revamped with a fresh and harder-hitting sound ?? Pussycat Dolls, the mere fact someone could dare to put them one-paw into the general Rock genre, is a sin.... May their inner kitten spirits hang their heads in shame, and purr sadly for eternally.. 'Tom Kat'

I'd say, none of the above.. If you feel like the V-700's are a pain, then i would have thought any of the better Sony units (aka the DJ/Pro orientated stuff... often much bulkier) will also not suit you. Dunno about the Bose stuff, dont use the brand. All i know on the Bose score is, whatever you look at in the range, there is often an equivilent that's near enough to equal from another brand.. and often cheaper (aka not hyped in price to suit the brand's rep). Take a look, maybe, at the modern equivs of the Seinheisser EH2200's, or similar spec stuff from other brands. These, particularly the EH2200's (which i use often.. when not indulging in the four-driver per channel repro from me Medusa phones.. way to bulky from most people's POV the medusa units, but hell they score up in the stars from the near-speaker feel reproduction score), are almost as isolating as the more serious Sony V series items, a damn sight lighter.. and more comfortable for portable deck use. In fact, the EH2200's score well as walkman cans as you almost forget you are wearing them.. and can literally wear them for 8 or more hours at a time without the usual fatigue caused by physically wearing cans (clearly, you will be audio fatigued as per any other cans over that kinda time span from listening). The main market for the EH2200's was for semi-serious musician and studio use, and let's face it, anything you can wear in a booth when monitoring and playing your instrument along to in a recording session.. and not be getting aggrovated by physical fatique and heaviness, is a good thing that translates to portables well. The EH2200's cost me about 50 UKP locally when i got mine about 2 years ago now, never looked back on them - mind you, they did need some use before they really came to life (i aint a believer in the obsessive art of burning in cans and drivers.. but these units definately opened up a bit from use). Many options, you just gotta figure out what it is precisely on the current units you wanna lose, what you wanna keep.., and find alternatives that fit both improves-on criteria or at least gets you the comfort without losing the quality/performance. 'Tom Kat'

I only vaguely looked at CP, and it really made me think of the OpenMG Simple MD/Sonicstage Simple Burner soft of old that we used to use as standard with ATRAC CD decks til SS 2.0 came along, and some people still use for direct CD to MD transfer on Net MD. Basically, consider Connect Player to be the 'simple mode' choice of software, if you dont need to support any other types of deck and/or dont need the extras of SS, then you may feel happier to stick with CP. Personally, i reckon most dont regret moving to SS CP and happily discarded the original CP to the virtual trashcan I work with three types of ATRAC deck, CD Walkman and NW-A's and Net/Hi-MD's, so really SS is the only game in town for transfer/management unless i want to crud up the machine with two or more instances of essentially the same thing with diff levels of facilities. Go with your instincts, that's the best advice i can give. 'Tom Kat'

A nice feature, whilst not overly big on the want-it list, would be to maybe add the ability to be able to drag and drop complete ATRAC CD content rips... or at least read and send those to the deck without conversion. The reason i suggest this is, there may be some people who are ATRAC CD Walkman users who are interested in the beastie.. and this kinda feature would save a whole lotta effort from this group of users. Secondly, ATRAC CD content (provided you drop and drop the whole content of each disc as seen in it's ISO-9660/Joilet view via a CD/DVD drive - one CD per folder per ATRAC CD inclusion) would also have embedded indexing and associated track and album and group data already present - and it's no leap of faith to add a scan and catalog function to make an indexing/catalog handler in the HDD deck then add the cloned ATRAC CD content to it's onboard DB. Ok, so the correct ATP handler would need to be added too, but given that the CD decks aint that mega-smart in technology terms, it's also no leap of faith to support ATP in the new deck. Likewise, it would also be good for future DVD player releases (indoor or portable) to actually support ATRAC CD discs .. as these decks would be the spiritual sisters/brothers to the ATRAC CD series. Oh yeah, to follow on the DVD deck theme, how about the inclusion of a audio player mode that looks like it weren't a last-minute after thought of zero priority or interest - god knows, i hate DVD Player audio deck modes purely on that account alone. 'Tom Kat'

As a rough rule of claw/thumb ... If the tagging in the files is complete enough to precisely ID the content and it's album/pressing source, it usually gets the album art (where available) right, SS i mean. Clearly, though, where the info it works from is ambigious or worse highly vague, SS is doing like any other manager soft does for locating album/track info and art.. it makes a not so clever guess. And given that the info stored (mostly due to way too many badly submitted CD data entries, which vary from total crap to plain lazy-assed efforts) in the Gracenote CDDB is ranging from dead right to highly vague at times, i aint suprised when i get poor results and totally missed hits from the CD info lookup. FreeDDB aint a huge amount better, but there at least, people do sometimes take time out to correct bad entries when they come across them. As i said somewhere else, many many moons ago, if the publishers of the commercial media made a point of ensuring there was an official entry in the CDDB's of the media at release time, at least when you get bad results, it simply would mean the lookup failed due to some bad reading/guesswork at the client end.. or the return data was one of a number of bad user entries. But if the official submission was right, it shouldn't be the case of getting bad results. Hell, if the publishers asked me nicely, and offered a token gesture sum to help me towards my household bills, i'd happily take all their back-list and current release info and go cross-ref and correct to ensure there was at least some kinda correct official entry that could be relied on. Oh well, that's life - people rarely consider the obvious 'Tom Kat'

In addition.. For future purposes with stuff you add to the library (aka rip to, import from other supported formats, or record into SS from source or WAV), a huge amount of avoiding the use of copy protection (when you convert, you can set the encoding to not copy protect), gets you around many many 'cant import it due to license' issues And since it's only probably Connect Store downloads, if we are talking legit not-messing download sourced copy-protected stuff, that would be copy-protected stuff you can directly import - well, you'll just have do things the right way in future to avoid license issues for that stuff When the content is not copy-protected, you can simply drag and drop the whole SS library location (aka where it stores the localised ATRAC files.. when we talk about ATRAC stuff) off the original HDD and simply drop into a suitable place in the new HDD. Two options then, when you do that.. 1. Keep the new protection-free copies elsewhere... 2. Drop em directly into the SS library folder on the HDD and reimport 'em. Beats the hell out of messing with copy-protected stuff, and in the event you ever want to send c-p'd versions to a deck for any reason, if you keep the original non-atrac stuff on store, you can always generate c-p'd versions in ATRAC for times when they are needed. Simply really 'Tom Kat'

Well, overall when it comes to packaging, i see things this way.. Bubble packs, the spawn of Satan.. as in, what happens the the boss man himself takes off from the holding of the demonic reins and leaves a demon in charge Otherwise.. Boxed packaging - well, i really aint too fussed if it's white-boxed (aka like OEM stuff) or in a nice fancy packaging personally. But for sure, a nice neat well-thought out presentation box (and that's for sure one nice way to describe what most of us got our NW-A's in) definately looks the part, and would never look tacky sitting in a display case (just a shame it shows nothing of the content unless left open). It's the same kinda impression you get with a good piece of audio kit in general, neat and functional and almost point-of-sale smooth definately helps reinforce the fact that a quality buy is just that, if someone went to the effort to design a decent box..., at least some part of the supply process had a touch of 'coming from the heart' in it But given that, unless you keep for resale or collectable purposes, most packaging is discarded at least by the time the kit is out of warranty, i guess it really dont make a lot of difference how the packaging form evolves and arrives. That said, as i came to learn, it's still worth keeping the packaging if poss, just in case some poor soul decides to cash in on the newly-collectable status of an older unused bit of kit and see's a quick buck or three to be had - for sure, then, they want their quality original packaging.. and they will pay a handsome sum to obtain your unwanted intact/shop-condition junk packaging. Collectors and cash-in junkies.. you gotta love em really, as long as they play fair and offer you something fair for what they desire.. aka the intact packaging they so desperately covet 'Tom Kat'

Now if we were talking a Cell Processor based transportable PC or similar, such as that proof-of-technology comms system based on the processor technology made for military application, now we'd be talking serious virtual kit-e-kat funds being diverted to the sourcing/buying cause, as such a beast would certainly be purrfect a basis for many a project once the programming ref etc was there to be got But all this, to waste on a mere games/entertainment unit (bearing in mind that all the features of the PS3 have been, in some shape or form, replicated with far less unknown quantity super processers and the careful choice of good specific hardware, and in some cases, damn simple RISC based chips in embedded app scenarios) is almost a crime in my book. Think of it like this - Sony produce mega-bucks laptops and desktops, so surely this architecture that's gonna be squandered on gaming mostly..., would have been the purrfect way of introducing a new processor type in power user applications - hell, if this processor type is a fraction of what it's been hyped out to be, it'd be easily capable of running native code in MT type use in supercomputer kind of performance levels, and most certainly could be running x86 software in emulation (or 64-bit stuff non-native under an emulator) much like the DEC Alpha-based PC's did - only a hell of a lot better performance under the emulation/compatibility layer use. Hell, what linux hacker out there wouldn't want to get paws dirty with a cell-proc based unit (or even a butchered PS3) and implement a full Deb or similar distro rolled for the processor type.. and add all the currently common Linux enviroment compatibility/emulation layers.. Who knows, in that scenario, there could even be scope for an emulation to almost be as quick as say a high-resource-demand 64-bit game or app (ordinarily needing one mega top-spec PC in memory/chipset/processor terms) and only running on what is essentially.. a console (admittedly, of near or the top of the pecking order for evolution). Personally, despite it's relative 'ordinary' (by comparision) base hardware, i strongly suspect the XBOX 360 will become the box of choice - after all, what was done with the old XBOX to free it's POSIX heart of it's software into a full-blown Nix box is almost certainly gonna be replicated in time with the 360 maybe to better effect. And as anyone involved or a fan of *Nix knows, a piece of kit aint dead or pointless til it's literally serving no purpose at all - so the console that can be reprogrammed and re-applied to other purposes when it's commericial heyday is long a matter of computing prehistory, is definately the winner in my eyes for innovation that works and did something really right beyond being 'the baddest dude' on the circuit. Anyone who, at this time, feels the urge to (at risk of seeming nuts or insane) not go doing a lemming impression to hand over life blood to have their fav new Sony toy in their sweaty paws like it was a real honour to have one of the initial release in your country, is a cool character in my book. If it is the true killer device it's hyped to be, it will be still so a year or so later when prices and availability are in the region of sane. 'Tom Kat'

At the end of the day, it's kinda as grey an area for AllOfMP3 to fight as it was for those setting out to prove the legality of AllOfMP3 in the first place. Where the legality of the supply/transactions/supply was in question, re AllOfMP3, was highly hampered by the non-disclosure aspect they employed vs those investigating (noone with nothing to hide, hides behind the law like they do), the reverse face (the topic in question) is a little more clear cut.. yet still grey. After all, there are contractual issues/grounds that the operation can use to try to support an apparently unjust and possibly unfounded action by the credit operators. But i suspect at the end of the day that the mere protection vs money laundering rules and legislation that the financial world are supposed to employ, will be the argument the CC providers and handlers will use. After all, there is still lot of unclarified (mostly because the people behind AllOfMP3 aint talking to defend themselves) aspects which leave certain people (myself included) to wonder how much of the operation is really funding stuff worse... such as criminal activity. After all, it's not a total exaggeration when it's said there's almost nothing going on out there in the Fed that involves money transactions that aint been tainted at some level by the carrying/passing/use of highly dodgy cash at some level (intentional or otherwise). Well, putting aside what i think..., as long as the CC providers and handlers can claim potential suspicion of the operation being a money launderer or part of a front of operations that is effectively funding less desireable activities, there aint a lot that can be done to make a case vs the CC operators/handlers til the suspected do indeed go full disclosure to totally disprove all myths and suspicions etc. But AllOfMP3 aint known for their desire to do such a thing, hell they hide behind generic 'legality' disclaimers which are so transparent they are laughable, and rarely say a word in public terms unless it's attention seeking Well, time will tell. Mind you, i'll expect the evangelistic 'bible-bashers' of the AllOfMP3 fan base to come screaming and shouting in defense of the company/business/operation/farce 'Tom Kat'