Sony NW-HD1 commentary

[Webmaster]

The won't-be iPod killer: Mark Bausch points out Forbes coverage of Sony's NW-HD1. They're rather underwhelmed, stating (of its MP3 incompatability): "This is similar to other Sony players that use Sony-only technologies like the Minidisc and the Memory Stick. This strategy is, we think, doomed." Even Sony execs don't seem to know the top from the bottom of their portable audio gear. See further info at Gizmodo, Engadget and c|net -- the general feeling is that its lack of MP3 playback is a fatal blunder.

http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/02/cx_ah_0702entech.html

http://www.minidisc.org/images/sony_press_nw-hd1.jpg

http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/sonys-firs...whd1-017091.php

http://www.engadget.com/entry/9784671601381992/

http://reviews.cnet.com/Sony_Network_Walkm...tag=cnetfd.plug

[Guest Anonymous]

I have to wonder if Sony would have ever even pursued the Betamax case if they had owned 'Sony Pictures' at the time.

[doclloyd]

It's amazing how almost nobody has anything good to say about Sony... ever. Not that I particularly care, but people are completely anti-Sony. I see it on Slashot.org frequently and other places on the Web. People boo ATRAC technology like it's the devil. Now I'm not personally 100% pro-Sony, but it's just interesting to watch. What do other people think?

[Christopher]

I think if they actually listened to the devices and not the criticism they'd probably not find it so disagreeable after all. I'm thinking middle-man consumer, not source-hungry audiophile. It's a good portable solution that doesn't sound so bad, honestly.

[Brewsky]

I agree, these reviewers and thusly the general public are stressing themselves on the fact that Sony has decided not to allow direct MP3 uploading to its products. But since the files are automatically converted to the ATRAC3 format during transfer, what's all the bother? The issue is speed. People want speed. People are lazy. Why do you think fast food joints are so popular? Most people don't care what's in their food, as long as they get it fast and it's near decent. This exact problem exists between the public and Sony's upcomming HDD players or even the new Minidisc walkmans. People read that the files are converted and instantly they think that this process takes longer. They don't care than the ATRAC3plus format has a MUCH larger capacity for music, rather they feel it is a waste of their "important" time. Ironically, I was at a friends house and she was comparing her ipod to my then excellent minidisc walkman (my cousin dropped it out of a 5th storey balcony, may it rest in peace). I had brought over a CD with me for her to copy it to her ipod, and I was surprised to see the time it took to set up everything and to transfer. It first had a problem with a copyright issue and finally when it worked, it went no faster than the transfer time for my MD. I think people look upon MD's as a tool for a nerd and look at the ipod in another light, seeing it as sleek, stilish and hip. Similarly, they may look upon an HDD using ATRAC3 as nerdy. I've turned a lot of people on to the minidisc, I just hope that this new HDD player takes off because Sony certainly does a great job with its electronics. I don't think there's a room in my house that doesn't have a Sony product, whether it be a TV, DVD player or even a shower radio and I've never had a problem with a Sony product. Contrastingly, the IMac's at my middle school were plagued with problems. I just hope people remember Apple's previous track-record in the computer industry and are not as dimwitted as I perceive them to be and make that connection. If I don't purchase the MZ-N900 on July 31st, I may wait an extra month and a bit and invest in Sony's new HDD player, and I suggest you look VERY closely at Apple's Ipod before you make a decision, because I'd hate for you to have to send your Ipod back when the almost useless 8 HOUR battery dies to get it replaced. Oh, and for you to pay for the battery AND the shipping. :grin:

[|/|3]

You've never had an optical block die, have you? It costs more than US$100 (probably closer to US$200) to fix. Gotta add shipping to that too.

Most people's record collection if on their computer is in mp3 format. To those that care about audio quality, transcoding removes some of that.

Sonicstage is terribly resource intensive. You're stuck with it. You don't have to use iTunes with an iPod. You could use ephpod for example.

That copy protected CD may have taken a while, but at least you don't have to spend your time titling it with (if Sony) a remote that's going to last less than half a year of titling before it starts peforming random errors such as pausing when you pressed play, and skipping two tracks instead of one like you asked it to.

How does the ATRAC3+ format have a larger capacity for music? 48Kbit is a shade less than pathetic sounding. You could fill a 20GB ipod up with bad sounding AACs and have the same capacity.

S'pose it doesn't matter to the deaf, in which case the HD1 will probably do quite well.

[Christopher]

That copy protected CD may have taken a while, but at least you don't have to spend your time titling it with (if Sony) a remote that's going to last less than half a year of titling before it starts peforming random errors such as pausing when you pressed play, and skipping two tracks instead of one like you asked it to.

Tales of your disgruntled past? Just for the record, all titling should be done on the computer. :rasp:

How does the ATRAC3+ format have a larger capacity for music? 48Kbit is a shade less than pathetic sounding. You could fill a 20GB ipod up with bad sounding AACs and have the same capacity.

That goes without saying [48kbps atrac3plus], but 25+ hour battery life with ATRAC3plus 256kbps is something that you can't necessarily deem not respectable [as noted by av watch in a recent article]. This thing will probably be able to support PCM/wav, too.

[|/|3]

Yeah, I wasn't talking about battery life. I don't hate the HD1, just it's lack of mp3 support. Actually, I hate proprietry formats in general, including AAC, so I keep a .wav copy on my disc as well. GBs are cheap these days. I like the HD1 because of the battery life, design and size. I dislike just that mp3 support thing and the remote (It's pretty much guaranteed to break).

I was assuming this was a non-NetMD recorder being spoken about, in which case PC titling is irrelevant. They don't allow chinese characters anyway. I think this one does although probably only the Japanese version. Sonic Stage has to be hacked to allow it, and I couldn't even do that. Just a bunch of silly ????s.

If I filled up the HD1 with a bunch of 256K ATRAC files then it wouldn't have it's 13000 songs on it. Heh. Not that i'll get 3750 with my ipod. 800 or so and around 6GB. But organising itunes so that only the songs I want to listen to are on the pod is much easier than doing the same with sonic stage.

Tales of my disgruntled past? Absolutely. E10, R37, R900, E900. (not all mine, just my friends ones do the same damn thing. For US$65, I claim "what a piece of ...."). It's not the only thing i'm suspicious of either.

[Meryl Arbing]

Reviewers don't exist in a vacuum where they can evaluate products on purely objective criteria. They are subject to the same subjective irrationalities as the rest of us.

Those who have heavily bought into or invested in the MP3 format have a vested interest in promoting it over any and all competing technologies whether it is the 'best' or not.

Personally, I don't think much of the substandard audio quality of MP3s so I have absolutely zero investment in MP3 format music. I suppose if I had 370,000 purloined tracks I would want to protect that but I don't...so I don't care. Considering the quality loss, it would be a waste of my time to consider converting my music to MP3 and sound technologies that include MP3 as an option do not influence my buying decisions. In fact, I reject sound technologies that allow ONLY MP3. I could play MP3s on my Ipaq but, why bother?

We have here, a reviewer who has bought into MP3 technology and, as a matter of course, rejects anything that doesn't include that. The people that read him have also bought into MP3...they get validation of their choice by a (supposed) authority. I expect that, if you drink Instant Coffee long enough, then the taste of fresh perked coffee is too strong for you...once your standards have fallen it is hard to raise them since it would mean scrapping all of the substandard examples you have accumulated.

[jadeclaw]

once your standards have fallen it is hard to raise them since it would mean scrapping all of the substandard examples you have accumulated.

And exactly that is the problem.

CDs directly ripped to Atrac 256k outperform any MP3 of the same datarate, giving the HD1 the potential to be one of the best sounding HDD-players.

The discussion of MP3 playback always remind me of those, who complain that their old roof rack they had for their 1960's VW-beetle doesn't fit on their new Chevrolet...

[Thorgal]

this is a discussion which I've seen in several threads here and I keep repeating it's a misconception that atrac is better then MP3. Au contrary: it's the worst codec around. But Atrac has some good luck indeed: at 256 almost every codec is nearly perfect.

Again, look here:

http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat12...28/results.html

It's not a perfect test, but it's a very good one.

It's not that I am anti-Sony (i own minidisc sets for my car, home-stereo and walkman), but Sony is very obviously losing the game right now.

This NW-HD1 is a huge mistake. It's my own vison and one one can read this on almost every site on the Internet.

After working and listening to my minidiscs for years, I've really had it:

- The sound is not good enough for me. I use upper class equipment and Minidisc just doesn't sound as good as AAC, Ogg or Mp3.

- The software (even version 2 of SS) is crappy shit. It's better then 1.5 , but its still shit. It chrashes constantly.

- Indeed, converting from one codec to another takes my precious time. Time I rather spend in a more productive or relaxed way. Not converting.

- Converting from one codec to Atrac always means quality loss

- I hate this propriety stuff. I didn't hate it a year ago, but now I do. It's not of this time and people don't accept this anymore. Once on my minidisc (download) it's stuck there. A copy for safety reasons is just not possible. I can't live with that.

[anont]

And exactly that is the problem.

CDs directly ripped to Atrac 256k outperform any MP3 of the same datarate, giving the HD1 the potential to be one of the best sounding HDD-players.

The discussion of MP3 playback always remind me of those, who complain that their old roof rack they had for their 1960's VW-beetle doesn't fit on their new Chevrolet...

You're talking about an almost irrelevant matter (the very small sound quality difference at 256 kbps) like it's the central issue.

People prefer MP3 to ATRAC because it's what they already have, it's not DMAd, it works on almost every music hardware or software, and it doesn't lock them into an irritating Sony program that only works on Windows.

If people cared *that much* about sound quality, they would just be using a CD player, or a lossless format.

[rfs]

After all the fuss re ipod battery life/replacement etc ( cf up to 30 hrs for HD1 ) I was interested to see page 36 of the Sony manual for the hd1. Shows you how to replace the battery - not difficult at all!! Basically take 2 screws out, push out of case, one screw holding battery in, pull off small connector then reverse process with new battery. Sounds like a 5 minute DIY job! Certainly attracts me when compared with Ipod.

[grant420]

MP3 QUALITY IS HORRIBLE compared to ATRAC, which of course is also LOSSY compression. Sony may suck in terms of prohibiting us from making digital copies, but they got it right with ATRAC, folks, at least in terms of sound quality.

I am continually amazed at all the mistakes I see on here... people have all these strong opinions and yet they are based in bullsh*t, not fact. I wish the mp3 format had never been invented, it sounds that horrible (at least when played back at bitrates of 128 kb/s or less).

On the other hand ATRAC, of course, is doomed as well since compression is no longer necessary. GBs are cheap, so why bother to compress? Notice that PCM-WAV quality recording is now available on the new hi-md portables. Can you say, LOSSLESS, portable, sneaky recordings of live concerts? I can, and will offer up some nice boots for trade once I receive my MZNHF800 this month!

[|/|3]

Did you mean "Blade mp3 quality is horrible compared to ATRAC"?

LAME sure sounds good. ATRAC sounds good too. Certainly not a huge leap above it that you're making it out to be.

[skyther]

CDs directly ripped to Atrac 256k outperform any MP3 of the same datarate, giving the HD1 the potential to be one of the best sounding HDD-players.

Heh. That's like saying Sony's shitty CD players sound the best since they play PCM, not compressed.

http://www5.head-fi.org/forums/showthread....4883#post874883

The iPod mini seemed to on this audition beat both of the [Hi] MD players into submission, lots has been said already regarding this unit, so you are already probably more than aware of its capabilities, well - all the high praise etc that this unit receives is, in my opinion - more than justified... great little unit (let alone the iTunes software, clever bit of programming there!)

Since you guys don't bother listening to what I have to say, here's someone else saying it. And that's not from iPod lounge.

Face it. iPod = prima donna for quality portable audio, and nothing that's currently available in the market will match it. Apple did things right, Sony didn't, and they're trying hard to play "catch up" now. It's CATCH UP, boys, not overtake.

If people cared *that much* about sound quality, they would just be using a CD player, or a lossless format.

Exactly. I get to use both Apple Lossless AND PCM. 20GBs on an iPod isn't that much when you're loading files which are ~30 megs apiece, but ALAC brings that down to 20, so no, Sony's PCM support doesn't give it enough credit to beat the iPod.

After all the fuss re ipod battery life/replacement etc ( cf up to 30 hrs for HD1 ) I was interested to see page 36 of the Sony manual for the hd1. Shows you how to replace the battery - not difficult at all!! Basically take 2 screws out, push out of case, one screw holding battery in, pull off small connector then reverse process with new battery. Sounds like a 5 minute DIY job! Certainly attracts me when compared with Ipod.

Do your homework, say a Google maybe? Changing the battery on the iPod doesn't even involve any screws.

I am continually amazed at all the mistakes I see on here... people have all these strong opinions and yet they are based in bullsh*t, not fact

MP3 QUALITY IS HORRIBLE compared to ATRAC, which of course is also LOSSY compression. Sony may suck in terms of prohibiting us from making digital copies, but they got it right with ATRAC, folks, at least in terms of sound quality.

I am continually amazed at all the -------- I see on here... people who are full of -------- and can't seperate fact from fiction and claim their beliefs to be fact when 'scientific' tests (ie. ABX) have been performed to prove so otherwise.

http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat12...28/results.html

Fact. You = fiction.

[edited by Administrator for language]

[iceeedtea]

"please don't feed the trolls" - directed at all parties

[jadeclaw]

"please don't feed the trolls"

Good idea Ice.

*drops skytherx into the ignorelist*

[skyther]

There's no ignorelist on this board. If you don't like it, don't come here.

Just a little cocky line I learnt not too long ago from someone.

[Christopher]

I've spoken to some of the parties in the above discussion and this will not occur again. Please use what has occured as an example of the type of discussion we do NOT encourage here. Thanks, and this thread is locked because it's pretty evident the discussion has run it's course.