Damage

Except they're comparing apples and oranges, or in this case, MP3 vs. WMA. So of course, the numbers are going to be skewed in favor of MP3. The more proper test would've been to compare WMA vs. WMA-DRM, or AAC vs. Fairplay-AAC. Rubbish and hot air all of this is. And since DRM is part of ATRAC to begin with (at least AFAIK), it has little bearing on Sony units (say, vs. bitrates).

Twisty ties, or I just use the cable itself to tie it into a little knot or something. It is rather long though, and the cloth textured cord doesn't help matter.

MDs and HiMDs always had gapless playback ability with recorded materials and materials compressed with ATRAC. With MP3s, there's still a gap, but not as horrible as the white DAP. There were units in the Past (MZ-NH800F being the last) with AM/FM/TV radio tuners, but it was unable to record the radio programming when in radio mode. And finally, there is a bit of a odd way of doing on the fly playlisting via bookmarks, but I think you're limited to 32 (or 60?) tracks per disc, and it has to be selected on an individual basis. This does need to be improved, but this actually happening is slim to nil. Finally, I think I speak for few of us that believes that having a HD Digital Amp on the unit is a must... I think I'm spoiled rotten by the MZ-NH1.

Might be interested: They are performing live in the Wiltern theatre in Los Angeles, Mar 23.

1. Yes, original CD Audio 2. Yes, be it a HT Deck, your PC, or a standalone DAC, if you want to use Digital Out, you'll need some way to convert that digital signal to analog signal. By the by, all of the digital outs use Mini TOSLINK (aka mini optical or some variation of digital audio optical), and most TOSLINK cables that you buy off shelf will have a converter plug.

Considering that their collective noses are up StevieJ's RDF buttcheeks (in one way or another), it's not surprising at all.

Damn you, B(h)angraman, Damn you straight to hell for cryptic hint dropping! (see: here)

D-NE1 and possibly D-NE9 (Can you confirm this pata?) D-NE10/900 D-NE20/920 Digital Out is only enabled for Redbook Audio.

It might be. But again, it is one of very few music/cameraphone that gets everything right (ATRAC thing aside). For many who has 0 tracks encoded w/ ATRAC (the majority), this phone will make a good replacement for the iPod and such, if properly marketed and priced.

Stuge, that is the Walkman w800i. By the by, the phone's firmware can be upgraded in the future, so once the whole DRM thing gets settled, we may see such upgrades in the future. However, this is less likely for phones since the Carriers want to enforce their own DRM and their own music store. We'll see.

But it may just save Walkman's ass. Preliminary impressions: it can drive the MDR-SA1000 decently at around 70% of the volume level, and the Sound Quality holds up quite well, probably very close to iPod Nano. The Amp is rather inefficient (dunno if having to use the port and the like is negatively affecting things) and needs to be bumped upto at least 40-50% to drive the Ultimate Ears Super.fi 5s (a very efficient phones). I think it is slighty noisy, but it's something that I wouldn't necessary consider showstopper either. The phone is slightly longer and wider than the iPod Nano, and about 3x as thick. It feels good in the hands, but the keypad is tad slippery. Phone conversation quality was rather good, and the mic that is required to use the headphone's exceeded all of my expectations. The volume keys do not behave as expected, and that's rather annoying. Understandable, but annoying. Will it replace my half dozen MP3 players? The magic 8 ball says "Looks Good!" Provided you have a lot of patience, as it takes ages to on a normal Memory Stick Pro to move data (think USB 1.1 ish speeds and filling up a HiMD and you get the idea). I think I need to invest in an Ultra memory stick. Preliminary grade of: A. It's one of the best convergence gadget, period.

Slightly OT, but I think if marketed properly (and that means getting subsidy w/ carriers), the new Walkman Phones have that ability to bring Sony and Walkman brand back into the competition. At least, that's my thinking after couple of hours playing around with the Walkman Phone (w800i).

I believe the last D-NE8XX that made it to these shores were the 1st Gen D-NE810/CKs. Outside of that particular release, the US did not see the D-NE8xx/7xx series. To make things more complicated, the D-NE9 did not receive a US release either. Nonetheless, the 9s subsequently became the 2nd flagship model (i.e. not top tier). US, when it gets PCDPs, has received D-NE1/1X/2X, D-NE9XX, D-NE5XX, and D-NE3XX, which invariably gets labeled with lifestyle brands such as PSYC and LIV. The Japanese/Tourist and maybe European Market gets the 8/7s along with other numbers. So, I don't expect the 830 and 730 to be released in to the US market. However, I do expect, if they are released, D-NE30 and 930 to hit these shores if past is any indicator of things to come.

The only thing that remotely fits the criterias that you set out would be Panasonic HJE50, but they retail for $30. I'd stay away from Koss Plugs/Sparkplugs, they're all bass and nothing else.

Yay me! One of my buds got me a pair of Super.Fi 5 Pros. You bet ya I'm going to post those reviews... When I get to it. And the Walkman phone I got myself (because I bumbled and lost my phone... ). I'm looking forward to that even more.

Holy Crap, it's my birthday? Where does the time fly?

How about allowing all bitrates across the board for all ATRAC devices? Obviously, the ATRAC CD players are capable of playing all the bitrate (or at least, I think they have the capability to). We also know that the Codec in HiMD Devices can also play all the bitrates (with the recent opening of 192 and 352kbps). But make it uniform, and open up all the bitrates, so no one device gets left out over other devices.

Nope, the Search Button is limited solely to D-NE20/920 (and other D-NEX220 that are capable of using LCD remotes) series of units. The Search button works only with those units, and not with any HiMD or MD units (confirmed with MZ-NH1 and MZ-RH910)

Procedure MZ-NH1/Shuffle/D-NE20 -> RM-MC40ELK -> Monster iSplitter -> SA1000/XD400 1 single HiMD (300MB) with random U2 tunes, Chihiro Yonekura: Colours (Redbook), Some random stuff on Shuffle. Ergonomics Both the MDR-SA1000s and MDR-XD400s are comfortable. The XDs, as you're aware, uses two spring loaded levers attached to the rubber headband/gasket thing. The width of said gasket is fairly wide, so it disperses the weight evenly across your head and makes the whole unit very light on your ears. The earcups are lined with pleather/leatherette. The SA1000 likewise uses similar strategy to disperse the weight. However, instead of using auto adjusting headband, it uses a fixed headband frame. Between the frame goes a cloth that's reminiscient of athletic jersey, so the whole contraption is breathable, keeping your head cool. The drivers are attached to the said frame, and each cups are individually adjustable, whereas the XD-400s are auto-adjusted by the two springs. The earcups on the SA1000s are covered by a rough cloth, not quite the velour that graced the CD580s. One more note, the earcups on the SAs are filled with urethane foam that reminds me of the hottest thing on the foam market, the Memory Foam. This does help to distribute the weight of the SAs more evenly across your face. End result is that both the XDs and the SAs are very light and comfortable on your head. While you're more aware of the XD's being on your head because of the rubber gasket thing, the cloth earcups on the SAs betrays the unit's otherwise excellent build and comfort. Overall, the XDs go on your head with less fuss and less muss because of the auto adjusting headband. Isolation Neither the XDs nor the SAs are closed, with the former being semi-closed with a switch on the back, and the latter being totally open. Therefore, the SAs will not only leak out more of the music you're listening, but will let in more ambient noise. The XDs aren't all that better when it comes to isolation. However, the fact that it is closed when the switch is in MUSIC mode gives the XDs a bit of an edge in isolation. This, we'll see, will become critical in the future. Drivability XD-400s were seemingly made for portable use. MZ-NH1s can easily drive the XD400s to satisfatory levels with volume only need 15/30 whereas the SA1000s require at least 23-25/30. At same volume levels, the XDs are either entirely too loud, or the SAs entire too quiet. If you're looking for a set of phones for portable gears, you're better off with XDs. Sound Quality Bass - The XDs are known unit when it comes to bass. Deep, impactful, visceral, occassionally overpowering. All of these characterstics make the XDs perfect for casual listening, movie watching, or otherwise, grooving to tracks that need bass one way or another. The SA1000s on the other hand, is leaner on bass, less visceral, less overwhelming. However, where it lack on body, it makes up for it in spade with detail. Compared to the XDs, the bass on the SAs are much more refined and detailed. Or, rather, the bass on the XDs are sloppy and one-noted vs. the much more refined and detailed presentation of the SA1000s. It has more faster and deeper impact on the snare drum sets vs. the XDs, making these ideal for Rock/Metal genres. Not to say that it's totally lobsided in favor of SA1000s. I think that for casual listening and enjoyment, the lean bass on the SA1000 will put off many listeners (after all, Sony's been guilty of pushing MEGABASS = GOOD!). Given the two, I think the visceral bass of the XD400s are ultimately more enjoyable than the detailed but lean offering of the SA1000s. Midrange - The all important vocals, strings, horns, and other instruments. The XD-400s and XD line in general, has a very nasal vocals. In my original review, I thought that the nasalness of the XDs had went away. However, compared to more relaxed and natural offering of the SA1000s, the XD-400's vocal come off still rather nasal and claustrophobic, even cluttered. On the other hand, the SA1000s vocals are quite natural, closer to hearing the actual recording or performance than any headphones I've heard. Quite a feat, even with compressed files. Likewise, acoustic guitars, and most instruments also sound quite natural, from the modestly compressed MP3s to uncompressed Redbook/PCM files. Suprisingly, the XDs and SAs do represent these instruments similar to one another. Whereas the XDs represent the instruments in more impactful manner, the SAs represents them in a more natural and detailed fashion. It's quite easy to pick out a single instrument and follow along with the SAs (Not to say that you couldn't enjoy the total picture with the SAs, mind you), though I think you'd get a better, bigger picture with the XDs. I'd say they are both fairly even here, though I like the SA's in this area more than I do the XD's. However, XDs nasal vocals are leagues behind the SAs-1000's superior vocal representation. Trebles - Whereas the XDs seemingly has a veil over the upper frequencies, the SAs has a way of showing every nook and cranny of a recording, compressed artifacts, errors, warts and all. Here's where the codec of your choice becomes crucial. Use a poor codec or low bitrate, and chances are, you're more likely to be forgiving of the final results if you're listening through the XDs. Using the SAs, I was able to immediately pick out compression artifacts with even modestly compressed files. Sibilance due to poor mastering or otherwise poor compression becomes very obvious with the SAs. SAs are quite unforgiving in these aspect, and will force you to be very picky when it comes to your music. To say that the SAs are a bit bright would be an understatement. Sibilant? Only on certain tracks, probably those that were poorly mixed or mastered I think. But it's not overly bright to the point where it's intolerable. There's more impact here with the SAs versus the veiled Trebles in the XDs, but considering the frequency response (8-80000Hz), you'd expect this to be the case. Soundstaging - While the Soundstage on the XD is quite impressive, even more so when you consider that it is closed, the SAs trumps the XDs. It is simply wider, more natural (ah-ha!), and more accurate compared to the XDs. Overall - This is a rather crude snapshot of the XDs and the SAs, I'll have a more detailed write up on the SA1000s in the near future. However, which can you'll like will probably more dependent on your taste rather than techinical merits in this case. The SAs offer a much more natural and accurate musical representation when it comes to soundstaging, vocals, and instrumentations across the board. This is enough for some to declare that the SA1000s are much better than the XD400s. Unfortunately, I don't think I can that's the proper case here (though personal preference for me lies with the SA1000s). If you want a more relaxed, impactful, and entertaining representation, the XDs are much more suitable in that regard vs. the more technical and accurate SA1000s. However, irregardless of the leaner (and tighter) bass and bit of a let down on entertaining aspects, the MDR-SA1000s are much more cleaner, detailed, accurate (at least my understanding of it), and natural cans that I've encountered. Not even the bright and exciting Grado SR60s can't top the SA1000s in overall presentation. Winner: MDR-SA1000, though not as overwhelmingly as I thought it would be.

Seems as though iPods have an unquenchable hunger for right drivers in many headphones. What I want to know is, where's the freaking outrage over this? If this situation happens with Sony, Creative, Rio, Sandisk, the ENTIRE INTARWEB would be up in arms. When it's apple, where's the outrage? Oh wait, I did forget that Apple can do no wrong. Silly me.

How about a friendly rival?

Run away while you still can, C++ is piss poor at what's its supposed to accomplish: OOP. Think C# and Java.

YGPM

http://www.craftster.org/forum/index.php?topic=76605.0 Enjoy

This will be gruesome folks. But a moment of silence for the MDR-E888s, they decided that they did not like me at all and committed seppuku. Now that that's done and over with, it's about time I pitted the MDR-SA1000s vs. some other phones to see how the new HD drivers stack up vs. other units, particuarly from Sony's vaunted XD line of cans. Or, in this case, MDR-XD400s. Those of you that read my previous review pitting the XDs vs other line know that I am very biased towards the XD's rather open sound, great detail, and the impactful bass. How will the SA1000's fare vs. the reigning champion of the previous deathmatches? Read on. Procedure MZ-NH1/Shuffle -> RM-MC40ELK -> Monster iSplitter -> SA1000/XD400 1 single HiMD (300MB) with random U2 tunes Ergonomics Both the MDR-SA1000s and MDR-XD400s are comfortable. The XDs, as you're aware, uses two spring loaded levers attached to the rubber headband/gasket thing. The width of said gasket is fairly wide, so it disperses the weight evenly across your head and makes the whole unit very light on your ears. The earcups are lined with pleather/leatherette. The SA1000 likewise uses similar strategy to disperse the weight. However, instead of using auto adjusting headband, it uses a fixed headband frame. Between the frame goes a cloth that's reminiscient of athletic jersey, so the whole contraption is breathable, keeping your head cool. The drivers are attached to the said frame, and each cups are individually adjustable, whereas the XD-400s are auto-adjusted by the two springs. The earcups on the SA1000s are covered by a rough cloth, not quite the velour that graced the CD580s. One more note, the earcups on the SAs are filled with urethane foam that reminds me of the hottest thing on the foam market, the Memory Foam. This does help to distribute the weight of the SAs more evenly across your face. End result is that both the XDs and the SAs are very light and comfortable on your head. While you're more aware of the XD's being on your head because of the rubber gasket thing, the cloth earcups on the SAs betrays the unit's otherwise excellent build and comfort. Overall, the XDs go on your head with less fuss and less muss because of the auto adjusting headband. Isolation Neither the XDs nor the SAs are closed, with the former being semi-closed with a switch on the back, and the latter being totally open. Therefore, the SAs will not only leak out more of the music you're listening, but will let in more ambient noise. The XDs aren't all that better when it comes to isolation. However, the fact that it is closed when the switch is in MUSIC mode gives the XDs a bit of an edge in isolation. This, we'll see, will become critical in the future. Drivability XD-400s were seemingly made for portable use. MZ-NH1s can easily drive the XD400s to satisfatory levels with volume only need 15/30 whereas the SA1000s require at least 23-25/30. At same volume levels, the XDs are either entirely too loud, or the SAs entire too quiet. If you're looking for a set of phones for portable gears, you're better off with XDs. Sound Quality Bass - The XDs are known unit when it comes to bass. Deep, impactful, visceral, occassionally overpowering. All of these characterstics make the XDs perfect for casual listening, movie watching, or otherwise, grooving to tracks that need bass one way or another. The SA1000s on the other hand, is leaner on bass, less impactful, less visceral. However, where it lack on body, it makes up for it in spade with detail. Compared to the XDs, the bass on the SAs are much more refined and detailed. Or, rather, the bass on the XDs are sloppy and one-noted vs. the much more refined and detailed presentation of the SA1000s. It has more faster impact on the snare drum sets vs. the XDs, making these more ideal for Rock genre. Not to say that it's totally lobsided in favor of SA1000s. I think that for casual listening and enjoyment, the lean bass on the SA1000 will put off most listeners. Given the two, I think the visceral bass of the XD400s are ultimately more enjoyable than the detailed but lean offering of the SA1000s. Midrange - The all important vocals, strings, horns, and other instruments. The XD-400s and XD line in general, has a very nasal vocals. In my original review, I thought that the nasalness of the XDs had went away. However, compared to more relaxed and natural offering of the SA1000s in the vocals, the XD-400's vocal come off still rather nasal and claustrophobic. On the other hand, the SA1000s vocals are quite natural, closer to hearing the actual recording or performance than any headphones I've heard. Quite a feat, even with compressed files. Likewise, acoustic guitars, and most instruments also sound quite natural, from the modestly compressed MP3s to uncompressed Redbook/PCM files. Suprisingly, the XDs and SAs represent many instruments fairly close to one another. Whereas the XDs represent the instruments in more impactful manner (like in the general bass), the SAs represents them in a more natural and detailed fashion. It's quite easy to pick out a single instrument and follow along with the SAs, though you get a better, bigger picture with the XDs. I'd say they are both quite even here, though I like the SAs in this area more than I do the XDs. Trebles - Whereas the XDs seemingly has a veil over the upper frequencies, the SAs has a way of showing every nook and cranny of a recording, compressed artifacts, errors, warts and all. Here's where the codec of your choice becomes crucial. Use a poor codec or low bitrate, and chances are, you're more likely to be forgiving of the final results if you're listening through the XDs. Using the SAs, I was able to immediately pick out compression artifacts with even modestly compressed files. Sibilance due to poor mastering or otherwise poor compression becomes very obvious with the SAs. SAs are quite unforgiving in these aspect, and will force you to be very picky when it comes to your music. That is, to say that the SAs are a bit bright would be an understatement. Sibilant? Only on certain tracks, probably those that were poorly mixed or mastered I think. But it's not overly bright to the point where it's intolerable. There's more impact here with the SAs versus the veiled Trebles in the XDs, but considering the frequency response, you'd expect this to be the case. Soundstaging - While the Soundstage on the XD is quite impressive (even more so when you consider that it is closed), the SAs trumps the XDs when it comes to this. It is simply wider, more natural (ah-ha!), and more accurate compared to the XDs. Overall - This is a rather crude snapshot of the XDs and the SAs, I'll have a more detailed write up on the SA1000s in the near future. However, which can you'll like will probably more dependent on your taste rather than techinical merits in this case. The SAs offer a much more natural and accurate musical representation when it comes to soundstaging, vocals, and instrumentations across the board. This is enough for some to declare that the SA1000s are much better than the XD400s. Unfortunately, I don't think I can that's the proper case here (though personal preference for me lies with the SA1000s). If you want a more relaxed, impactful, and entertaining representation, the XDs are much more suitable in that regard vs. the more technical and accurate SA1000s. However, irregardless of the leaner (and tighter) bass and bit of a let down on entertaining aspects, the MDR-SA1000s are much more cleaner, detailed, accurate (at least my understanding of it), and natural cans that I've encountered. Not even the bright and exciting Grado SR60s can't top the SA1000s in overall presentation. Winner: MDR-SA1000, though not as overwhelmingly as I thought it would be.