Sony 16GB Touch screen MP3 player

[Sony_Fan]

Like I mentioned in another post, I'm thinking of selling my MZ-M200 and getting a Sony Touch screen MP3 player. It looks really nice and it looks like it's suppose to compete with the iPod Touch. The unit also has 5-band equalizer and something called "clear bass." I hope that's like mega bass or something. Anyone have any experience or own one of these Sony units?

[sector001]

nope, don't think 16gigs is big enough for me, does it have a memory stick slot at least??? they should at least have a 32gb in order to compete with itouch...but knowing sony they'll probably botch it up somehow...

[Sony_Fan]

nope, don't think 16gigs is big enough for me, does it have a memory stick slot at least??? they should at least have a 32gb in order to compete with itouch...but knowing sony they'll probably botch it up somehow...

They do have a 32GB touchscreen mp3 player. It's $399 and I don't want to spend that much. Besides, counting all my Hi-MD discs and standard discs, I have about 16GB worth of space. 16GB is enough and of course, you can delete and upload new music whenever you want through windows explorer (drag and drop).

Edited May 15, 2009 by Chris G

[Sony_Fan]

Here's a link to the SonyStyle website. The touchscreen mp3 player isn't for sale yet. It will be released on June 20th.

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores...552921665869062

Edited May 15, 2009 by Chris G

[Sony_Fan]

Very disappointed with the lack of response from forum members. Sony is finally putting out a music player to directly compete with iPod and no one cares.

[gabgar]

It very interesting and looks very promising however, we still have to wait and see how it really sounds and how the reviews will make of it.

Exterior looks are great looking.I have heard that its even better in person in your hand.

I still like my Mz-m200 and don't think I will ever sell it.

[Levanel]

I can't disagree on Sony's exceptional dedication to sound quality but their practices in competing with other midrange to cheaper devices is pathetic in this time of technological convergence. For the same price, I can get Apple's iPhone 3G plus pretty much everything else the X series walkman is offering (besides the sound quality).

I'm not promoting the iPhone however but let's take the pointers listed on that link and compare them:

1. Picture quality - iPhone 3G may not have an OLED but it's got a bigger screen compared to other PMP-like devices in the market.

2. Touchscreen - iPhone got there first and revolutionized it, but now everyone's doing it. Kinda' late Sony?

3. Access podcast - I'm wondering whether there's 3rd party software/plugin involved and whether it'll evolve with the times..

4. Free personalized radio - Only 3 stations? I can listen to Pandora on my phone with many more stations (for free too).

5. Noise-cancellation - Well now there's something noone's been able to do but Sony. But my gripe is proprietary head/earphones. Unless you want to be hit by a bus, this isn't really needed unless on an airplane..

6. Battery life - We'll see... the iPhone's battery life SUCKS (I have to charge it at least once a day now).

..and it's a phone. I don't have to worry about carrying separate things.

[pata2001]

Very disappointed with the lack of response from forum members. Sony is finally putting out a music player to directly compete with iPod and no one cares.

1. It's not even out yet in the US. It's only out in Japan (NW models) and Europe.

2. The price is prohibitively expensive. Everybody knows that to compete with a major player (the pricing obviously targets the iPod Touch), you have to have a product that is a lot better and cheaper, not the same price. Also consider the state of the economy today.

3. Reading from the early impressions, it's nothing special outside the OLED screen and the so-called "sound quality." All the other features/lack of are disappointing (poor internet browser, limited video capability, no gapless playback, no lossless support, some awkwardness of the UI, slow transfer speed, etc). One have to think whether it's worth the asking price or not.

For the same price, the targeted competitor, the 2G iPod Touch is the better value for many, considering it's an actual mobile OS platform, and it will get major improvements with the upcoming 3.0 firmware, namely stereo bluetooth, before the Sony even officially ships in the US. The Sony X series is just a standalone MP3 player with tacked on wifi and internet. Heck, it doesn't even have bluetooth, something that Sony was heavily promoting on the previous lineup. Then, there's the iPhone.

Sony could've used the same "S-master digital amp," and simply make a cheaper regular audio player, without the touch screen and useless wifi/internet browser, and price it to compete with the likes of iPod nano/Zune/Sandisk, etc. IMO that would be a better move and value. The X series is just another sign how out of touch Sony is with the market.

Edit: Looking at the manual excerpts at Sony Insider, it seems the X series use capacitive touch screen (the manual said it won't work with gloves/stylus/finger nail). Interesting.

Edited May 18, 2009 by pata2001

[Levanel]

Unfortunately for me, I'm afraid of carrying an RH1 around.. it feels very fragile. I would bring my EH70 with me everywhere though.. and pack a few HiMD discs along with me.

But tbh, it's a tradeoff for me. Functionality vs. Quality. Maybe when I'm out of college will I learn to appreciate the quality more.

[kino170878]

Sony created the Walkman people, they know almost everything there is to know about sound quality. The Apple is a flashy toy compared to the Sony. Apparently the need to come up with a bunch of useless distractions is what sells products these days. not audio performance. A sad and sorry state of affairs but hey that's reality.

I definitely do want more on the gapless playback front but I think at least WAV files should be gapless. The touchscreen thing I couldn't really care for but if it works well enough then great. If nothing else this new product will push down the prices of the older NWZ A829 units so I can pick them up cheap.

[LarryB]

3. Reading from the early impressions, it's nothing special outside the OLED screen and the so-called "sound quality." All the other features/lack of are disappointing (poor internet browser, limited video capability, no gapless playback, no lossless support, some awkwardness of the UI, slow transfer speed, etc). One have to think whether it's worth the asking price or not.

I was able to use the new X-Series Walkman for a few days recently and I can tell you one thing - the upload speeds were "glacially" slow. Honestly, it took just under 8 hours to load 27GB of songs on the 32GB player. Now I know Flash memory loads at a slower rate than normal hard drives as a rule, but the Flash Memory on the iPod Touch loads a similar amount of files in 1/3 the time if not even less.

What's more, while it is nice to have Slacker there, you must update your maximum of 3 stations over WiFi. Yet the Walkman seemed considerably slower across my WiFi network compared with an iPod Touch. Slacker updates are slow to begin with but yet again, it is even slower when being forced to update only via Wifi on this X-Series player.

The sound was certainly nice overall but not enough to make up for its sluggish performance in the areas mentioned. And since I have a large music library, I wanted to be able to regularly swap out songs on the player but I wouldn't dare at these speeds. Finally, photo display is also hampered with anything but medium sized photos as the player can accomodate large sized photos but often takes several seconds to display larger files.

The OLED screen did not wow me either, to be honest. I just find little to recommend this player. And certainly, unless you can fit your entire collection on the player so one overnight upload will suffice, I would stay away from the X-Series.

[Abby Normal]

I was able to use the new X-Series Walkman for a few days recently and I can tell you one thing - the upload speeds were "glacially" slow. Honestly, it took just under 8 hours to load 27GB of songs on the 32GB player. Now I know Flash memory loads at a slower rate than normal hard drives as a rule, but the Flash Memory on the iPod Touch loads a similar amount of files in 1/3 the time if not even less.

According to the manual (page 176) it is USB 2.0 "Compliant". There are numerous stories of Sony technology underperforming on non-Sony formats--like some sort of internal "hacktivism" by a loyal Sony engineer. Maybe this is what's happening here. I assume you were transferring MP3s. It wasn't converting to ATRAC during this transfer, right?

NWZ-X Series Operations Guide

They might also be using older, cheaper flash. Flash performance is all over the map. They might even only be using a single channel interface for their implementation.

Frankly, at this point, if I wanted the latest MP3 flash player I'd probably get the unmentionable here. I'm actually going to be switching cell carriers again soon and will probably get the unmentionable's phone product.

[LarryB]

Maybe this is what's happening here. I assume you were transferring MP3s. It wasn't converting to ATRAC during this transfer, right?

Yes indeed, my entire collection is made up of MP3 files encoded through Lame (files which load at a far more reasonable pace onto other players I have tried). I was not doing any type of encoding during the upload - none that I would have set to do myself anyway.

[Sony_Fan]

I was able to use the new X-Series Walkman for a few days recently and I can tell you one thing - the upload speeds were "glacially" slow. Honestly, it took just under 8 hours to load 27GB of songs on the 32GB player. Now I know Flash memory loads at a slower rate than normal hard drives as a rule, but the Flash Memory on the iPod Touch loads a similar amount of files in 1/3 the time if not even less.

What's more, while it is nice to have Slacker there, you must update your maximum of 3 stations over WiFi. Yet the Walkman seemed considerably slower across my WiFi network compared with an iPod Touch. Slacker updates are slow to begin with but yet again, it is even slower when being forced to update only via Wifi on this X-Series player.

The sound was certainly nice overall but not enough to make up for its sluggish performance in the areas mentioned. And since I have a large music library, I wanted to be able to regularly swap out songs on the player but I wouldn't dare at these speeds. Finally, photo display is also hampered with anything but medium sized photos as the player can accomodate large sized photos but often takes several seconds to display larger files.

The OLED screen did not wow me either, to be honest. I just find little to recommend this player. And certainly, unless you can fit your entire collection on the player so one overnight upload will suffice, I would stay away from the X-Series.

Well, hopefully they will release a second generation of the X-series, so I might wait til then. But you didn't mention the most important feature of the unit: what about the BASS??? Heavier than RH1? Or weaker (the way some forums members like it)?

[netmduser]

I have a nwz-a815 and zune 8gb, still a cheapie n420d netmd sounds better.

[Sony_Fan]

I have a nwz-a815 and zune 8gb, still a cheapie n420d netmd sounds better.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with you. My NetMd DN430, just stomps all over the RH1 bass.

[Levanel]

So wait, you want the new Sony 16 gig flash-based player over the almost equally priced RH1/M200?

Wouldn't it be better to get an Apple Touch of the same capacity? (I'm thinking along the terms of functionality over quality, but with this the distinction is abit blurred).

[Sony_Fan]

So wait, you want the new Sony 16 gig flash-based player over the almost equally priced RH1/M200?

Wouldn't it be better to get an Apple Touch of the same capacity? (I'm thinking along the terms of functionality over quality, but with this the distinction is abit blurred).

I'd like to have the new Sony MP3 player, and because it's Sony, I'm sure the sound quality is better than any iPod. I'll probably wait til prices come down. My local stores don't have them in stock yet.