Who is going to buy this $1200 audiophile Sony Walkman?

[de.das.dude]

People still buy dedicated audio players?!?

Moto g with noise cancellation plus sennheizer earbuds ftw.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

You are all not audiophiles though so of course its not worth it and you won't get lossless files playing on a thirty quid one so their is likely a very small market hid somewhere for this just not us.
My uncle pays loony tunes money for stereo gear to play proper records on and in general thinks My decent setup sounds ok but shit in comparison to his and ya know what he's right cos if all you ever hear is compressed, frequency cut tunes, through class d amps and whatever grade speakers how you goingto know.
Price defo bad but learnup some stuff, some of yall sounding teanybopperish to me.

 

[de.das.dude]

You are all not audiophiles though so of course its not worth it and you won't get lossless files playing on a thirty quid one so their is likely a very small market hid somewhere for this just not us.
My uncle pays loony tunes money for stereo gear to play proper records on and in general thinks My decent setup sounds ok but shit in comparison to his and ya know what he's right cos if all you ever hear is compressed, frequency cut tunes, through class d amps and whatever grade speakers how you goingto know.
Price defo bad but learnup some stuff, some of yall sounding teanybopperish to me.

good. but i think the point others are trying to make is how good portable audio amps that are built in can really be.

 

[EarthDog]

Look at the price of this thing not marketed towards me or what I think its marketed towards...

I hate forums sometimes...

 

[AsRock]

You are all not audiophiles though so of course its not worth it and you won't get lossless files playing on a thirty quid one so their is likely a very small market hid somewhere for this just not us.
My uncle pays loony tunes money for stereo gear to play proper records on and in general thinks My decent setup sounds ok but shit in comparison to his and ya know what he's right cos if all you ever hear is compressed, frequency cut tunes, through class d amps and whatever grade speakers how you goingto know.
Price defo bad but learnup some stuff, some of yall sounding teanybopperish to me.

Yes sure hifi gear any day of the week if i could afford it but this o hell no.

 

[rtwjunkie]

People still buy dedicated audio players?!?

Absolutely! I refuse to have my phone memory clogged up with music files and have my battery life sharply curtailed. I appreciate the 24 hours I get out of my battery now.

 

[Chetkigaming]

I am. But, Sony Xperia z4 would be with S-Master HX, so i`ll need to think. 1200$ still a high price for this thing, curious how it sound compared to a z4.

 

[AhokZYashA]

I am. But, Sony Xperia z4 would be with S-Master HX, so i`ll need to think. 1200$ still a high price for this thing, curious how it sound compared to a z4.

the sony ZX1, which is around 800USD, is one of the best DAP currently on the market today,
the sound quality trumps any phone, or any dedicated audio player under 1000USD

i know this, because i have tried pretty much all audiophile grade players out there.
and im using the same track to test, which is from stockfisch recording.

 

[Chetkigaming]

Spoiler

the sony ZX1, which is around 800USD, is one of the best DAP currently on the market today,
the sound quality trumps any phone, or any dedicated audio player under 1000USD

i know this, because i have tried pretty much all audiophile grade players out there.
and im using the same track to test, which is from stockfisch recording.

Yes ofc, but from now on z4 with s-master HX can be equal to zx dap.

 

[The Von Matrices]

That is a different argument though. Digital photography is working towards fully uncompressed hi res images. Currently digital music is working towards compressing audio as much as possible and make it as loud as possible!

The misuse of a technology should not be confused with an inherent flaw in said technology. Your argument is equivalent to saying that we should still be using film cameras because people are taking crappy digital images with crappy smartphone cameras. There is nothing wrong with digital recording; you're just conflating the advent of digital recording with the "loudness wars" since they both occurred around the same time. You can have excellent digital recordings of music, as long as they are mastered with sufficient dynamic range. I wouldn't condemn high resolution audio just because music production isn't tailored to the medium.

Well yea, but a lossless copy of a crappy mastered track just means you have a really great version of a crappy mastered track!

That's not quite true. I have dozens of 24/96 albums, and in most of them there is different (better) mastering compared to the CD/iTunes version. You can downsample them to 16/44.1 and there is still a clear difference between them and the CD/iTunes version. The music industry seems to realize that people who want 24/96 audio also want better mastering as well, while the general consumer who buys CDs and uses iTunes just prefers loud music.

 

[Steevo]

http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
Placebo effect for 99% of it, the 1% applies in music like Pink Floyd Speak to me Breathe where the dynamic range might get slightly compromised.

 

[BUCK NASTY]

It's like 4K for the ears....LOL

 

[revin]

As The Von stated:
Untill the industry starts to follow long with Mark Waldrep, it's just a crap shoot.
Scott Wilkerson and Mark have done lot of work trying to get more in the industry involved and some are starting to come around.
But with so many "limited" good analog masters around it hurts.
When the "CD" boom hit they[recordist} thought OMG 16/44 is the shit.
Untill lately since Mark has been able to show them blindly that 24/96 minimum brings back missing dynamic range, an tonal quality.
16/44 up scaled to 24/96 just don't cut it, it MUST start at the Master and follow thru entirely, and even then it's for the "better" end not just High End, component's to bring that to the audience.

The new JBL M2 System Bi-amped with Crown amps @1Kw/channel for Pro, and a Mark Levinson set for home.{ I remember in the 80's S.R. took a M.L. amp and WELDED with it !!!]
When the engineers and producers heard the difference's they knew it's time to get back to the roots of Hi-Fi.

 

[HossHuge]

I'm surprised this thread has gotten this far without a comment from BumbleBee........

 

[xorbe]

Holding out for quad-HD curved audio.

 

[remixedcat]

Unless its for weather, traffic or news updates - who actually listens to radio anymore? I know a load of people who just stick 500 songs on a usb stick and plug it in when they go for a drive and music only stops when it comes to the regular hourly traffic update.

Not even using the radio for traffic since I got apps like Inrix for that

 

[AhokZYashA]

BumbleBee is mainly using her desktop setup,
im pretty sure she isn't as interested as that.

the newly announced Audez'e EL8 might though.

 

[rooivalk]

I'm not audiophile, so what about the actual sound quality? is it good or is it crap?

I mean, there's $2000 amplifier or $4000 headphone or $20k speakers, $1200 (if it's good) seems normal price among audiophile-grade stuff to me.

 

[Jetster]

BumbleBee is mainly using her desktop setup,
im pretty sure she isn't as interested as that.

the newly announced Audez'e EL8 might though.

I think she would disagree with this statement but maybe not

 

[Drone]

Mr. Kojima would love that

 

[Crap Daddy]

First, all digital stores should offer only CD quality losseless format downloads. This is where it should all begin. It might be that 44.1/16 is all we need but let's have it in digital download formats at the same price as a retail CD.

I mean when I buy a game from Steam I get the same textures and settings in a game as if I buy a boxed DVD of the same game. It's not a stripped down version because "anyway you don't have an UHD monitor so you won't see those textures".

It makes me sick to think of all the people who actually paid money to get a crappy digital 128kbps version of their favorite albums. The worse thing is not that Jobs and his guys made a lot of money from this scam but they launched a trend in how you listen to music. It took years and years to somehow claim back the quality we had with CDs and vinyl records.

You see, before this digital mess, bitrates and Khz and bits, a vinyl record had the same quality regardless if you played it on a cheap record player or a state of the art stereo system. Everything the artists wanted to be on the record was there and sounded like they wanted it to sound.

 

[claylomax]

Digital music is not audiophile. If you are a true audiophile you only listen to analog music on analog equipment. And those recordings have to all be prior to 1995 before the loudness wars started.

THIS.
No matter the player, sound card or equipment you use, the music comes messed up from the studio. Most of the cd's and files from online shops are remastered (aka "as loud as it gets").

Try and listen Metallica's Death Magnetic on that walkman thing and let me know; you would think that there's something wrong with the player and/or heaphones.

Here's a link for those who avoid remastered albums:

http://dr.loudness-war.info

 

[qubit]

A 24/96 recording mastered properly aka the best quality equipment and no stupid artificial loudness or other crap added would definitely sound better than any analog recording. It simply has to since the resolution is so much higher along with the incredibly low noise floor.

Additionally, this article reckons anything more than 16/44.1 or 16/48 won't sound better, is a waste of resources and can actually degrade performance due to the presence of very high frequency ultrasonics. It goes into a lot of technical detail, the maths to prove the theory and gives evidence of blind listening tests to make its case, but I'm not convinced this is right without comparing for myself.

http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

 

[revin]

A 24/96 recording mastered properly aka the best quality equipment and no stupid artificial loudness or other crap added would definitely sound better than any analog recording. It simply has to since the resolution is so much higher along with the incredibly low noise floor.

Additionally, this article reckons anything more than 16/44.1 or 16/48 won't sound better, is a waste of resources and can actually degrade performance due to the presence of very high frequency ultrasonics. It goes into a lot of technical detail, the maths to prove the theory and gives evidence of blind listening tests to make its case, but I'm not convinced this is right without comparing for myself.

http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Neil and Pono are pushing the new player but are trying to say "Hey we have Hi Res files", that are just ripped CD's
As I mentioned here , Mark and Scott are showing that there IS indeed a benefit to the 24/96, it's just that the 'Loudness wars" are still going on.
I know the first time I heard Rush Exit Stage Left on cd, I wanted to cry
To me hearing that was like using a "regular" phono needle, and using Shibata tip......
Same for the beloved Wish You were Here, so much dynamic range, the cd just don't feel it...............
Very interesting interview,
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/138-a...3938-avs-aix-high-res-experiment-results.html

 

[WhiteNoise]

Hey I still listen to the radio daily! I also love AM talk radio.

Anywho...this player is nice looking and though many here can't justify it; many others will. I for one am not much for loading up music and playing it portable style. When I want good music I sit down at home.


Oh and that Pono player...I watched this on kickstarter. Watched Neil's video where he had all of these rocks stars claiming it was like going back to the studio...analogue style.

Then the thing released and the couple of solid reviews I read do not mimic what those rockers and neil seem to say. Not to mention the quality of the unit is subpar, (build quality that is)