[Jack Mono]

No, I don't want to hear the notes! I want to enjoy the music! I don't use a BEYER as a headphone because I know better, they don't make cans for listening music, they make them for studio work. SONY is making magic and makes the music sound better, just as you said. What is wrong with that? Why oh why Steve Jobs doesn't push for some DSP magic? So, we could say, Apple doesn't do DSP (Digital Sound Processing). Too bad, they should. We are using "low quality" digital rips of live music, they can definitely help some DSP to sound more pleasing to the human ear. Isn't that the ultimate goal?

 

[grawk]

It only helps if you're using lousy headphones,and can't hear what they're doing.

 

[estreeter]

This has less to do with the technical aspects of their products than the fact that Sony Corp just cant market their technology, while Apple will market the living crap out of anything they can - do you really need a camera on your iPod ? Both are too keen on building proprietary fences around everything they make for mine.

For all that, I want to see Steve get better and take Apple by the horns again. The bastards showed him the door the last time things werent going his way.

 

[david1978jp]

Did those reports ever take cheapo mp3 players into account? Furthermore, if we count whole world, not just US, what will those numbers be? I don't really blame US news media hype iEverything, Apple seems to be one of few companies left to be proud of.

 

[estreeter]

I dont want to have to buy a phone or a PMP just to have DAP functionality, but I suspect that the beancounters at Sony and Apple will move in that direction within the next 5 years. Other than gamers, audiophiles and creative muso types, how many computer users still go looking for a dedicated soundcard ? The 'music is our first priority' DAP is the soundcard of the noughties - they wont disappear, and someone will always turn a profit from making them, but they wont be on everyone's shopping list. I'm a flat earther - still carry a portable camera when most use the camera on their phone - but many people want one portable gizmo that does it all. If Apple gets the iPhone pricing down to the RRP of the 32GB Touch, more of those folk will get their wish.

 

[Jack Mono]

Well, I don't know what good it makes to drag down SONY either. There are many people here on this very forum who will swear by it being way superior to the iPod, and no matter what cans you are listening with. Using DSP is bad? What do you think those 14 trucks are full of when Pink Floyd or Pat Metheny pulls up in front of Medison Square Garden? News Flash! Black boxes with DSP gear! Why? They want to sound better. SONY might loose out on the portable market in the US (as long as it still up at all before the really smart phones arrive), but they have a big chunk of home electronics, music label, Game Station, blue ray and what not while Apple make overpriced computers for those who don't know better or have money to burn. How exactly SONY is not innovative that's beyond me! I am amazed by Apple's design, really like their innovation, however I believe my ears before anyone else's and DSP or not, an iPod is just not fun to listen to. The Touch was a really great step towards a portable computer, but short of being great as a DAP (no matter how fluid or fun its OS is).

For the original question, if Apple stole the portable market from Sony. Well, I think that Apple more like created the portable market than stole it. I always had a portable gear since the 80s, but as I remember it was always a very small group of people who cared to run around with cassette filled pockets. The iPod came around the right time and Apple had a great marketing to bring portable music to the masses and convinced them that they need such a thing. The two decades before that it was hobby of a few. You needed to record your cassettes, MDs and that was technical enough to keep most people away. Having the iTunes store and giving people the option to buy a song for a buck was the great idea right after they killed Napster. They don't care how it sounds (what do they sell, 128 kbps? that's the proof alone!) the iPod is good enough for most.

 

[estreeter]

Apple Store now sells at a minimum of 256K AAC - Apple argues that this is as good as 320K VBR in terms of SQ. While many here would prefer that it was nothing less than ALAC, I dont know how long it will be before that becomes feasible for those of us in areas where broadband internet access is neither cheap nor 'unlimited'.

 

[Jack Mono]

Quote:

Originally Posted by estreeter /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apple Store now sells at a minimum of 256K AAC - Apple argues that this is as good as 320K VBR in terms of SQ. While many here would prefer that it was nothing less than ALAC, I dont know how long it will be before that becomes feasible for those of us in areas where broadband internet access is neither cheap nor 'unlimited'.

Exactly, 8 years after the Apple store opened. It was never a question of quality but space. How would they sell more GBs if they kept the 128 kbps songs?

 

[trondis23]

I think that many would argue that Sony's first portable player, NWHD1, was technically superior to the then-current iPod: Better sound, perfect gapless playback, longer battery life, better buildt etc. Even their proprietery format, ATRAC3+, was probably better technically than MP3. But MP3 was established as a the general format already, and they had a program that everybody hated - Sonicstage, plus they had a stupid DRM system. So Sony did many mistakes. In those days the AAC file-format wasn't around, and I think that Atrac probably could have had the same status as AAC today if they hadn't kept it to themselves. I see no reason why Atrac couldn't be drag and drop either, so I don't understand why they dropped the format and let all their international customers down when they introduced their new NWZ-series. I would have sticked to Sony if they hadn't done this. Now I have to re-rip all my stuff to make it "future-proof" when my NWHD1 and NWHD3 breaks down.

 

[me7]

Although Sonys marketing claims ATRAC to be superior to mp3, blind listening tests have prooven these claims to be wrong.

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by me7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Although Sonys marketing claims ATRAC to be superior to mp3, blind listening tests have prooven these claims to be wrong.

*ahem* public blind listening tests have proven this, but sony-sponsored blind listening tests 'proved' that the sony 64kbps Atrac3Plus is better than 128 mp3 of unknown origins, both played back on CD players rather than supporting hardware.

You are right. Atrac3Plus is hardly competitive anymore. Maybe 5 or 6 years ago when Sony went to market their 'new' codec as superior, it stood up well, but I haven't taken part in or viewed the results of a single public open test which proved anything but that the ATRAC is behind the times even when compared to non-respected codecs.

 

[tds101]

The person who re-ignited this thread never bothered to check that it's actually from 2006. Funny really, as the topic is still so widely debated to this day.

 

[shigzeo]

Great album in your avatar nywytboy... I noticed on page 3 or so,,, but hell, what a great debate still. Depeche mode fan eh?

 

[Jack Mono]

Yes, because the actual question is going to be always relevant. What the hell happened to SONY, what was the network Walkman about and how Steve Jobs pulled the iPod out of his Genius arse? And then everybody just run and bought one because it had a white earbud. And they never stopped! Now the iPod is in 15 colors, there are 10 different kinds, it is hard to decide which one has more flaws than the other, but it is flying off the shelves. Not so much in Europe as their market is saturated with better and cheaper cellphones and also more cheaper DAP offerings are available from the German market, but the US is clearly dominated by the iPod.

 

[maporter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Mono /img/forum/go_quote.gif For the original question, if Apple stole the portable market from Sony. Well, I think that Apple more like created the portable market than stole it. I always had a portable gear since the 80s, but as I remember it was always a very small group of people who cared to run around with cassette filled pockets. The iPod came around the right time and Apple had a great marketing to bring portable music to the masses and convinced them that they need such a thing. The two decades before that it was hobby of a few. You needed to record your cassettes, MDs and that was technical enough to keep most people away. Having the iTunes store and giving people the option to buy a song for a buck was the great idea right after they killed Napster. They don't care how it sounds (what do they sell, 128 kbps? that's the proof alone!) the iPod is good enough for most.

Spot on, you hit the nail on the head!

Okay I apologise for re-igniting this thread, I had been using the search function and forgot I wasn't reading the current threads - I only realised my error after submitting my reply - But it I have to admit I'm now finding it interesting

I had been a long term user of Sony Mini Disc devices. In my mind Sony simply missed the boat by a couple of years, assuming it's long-term customer base for portable audio would be happy to stick with Mini Disc players; and would continue to do so.

MP3 swiftly won universal acceptance whilst Sony continued to mess about with ATRAC & mini Disc players; which I'm sure didn't really help.

But as you say Steve Job's pulled the iPod out of his arse and the rest is history - Right place, right time & above all superb marketing, suddenly it become 'cool' to own and MP3 player as long as it was a white iPod.

Your right the average iPod user doesn't give a **** about audio quality, which is why they walk around with stock white buds.

Apple superbly marketed the iPod and iPhone range, they continue to do so, and for that reason alone it'll continue to sell in large volumes.

Sony's marketing department need to take a leave out of Apples book & a good kick up the arse at the same time - LOL

P.S. Had the lovely Sony MZ-RH1 been more aggressively priced at the time of it's launch I'd have purchased one, I still drool everytime I see a picture of one!