[Redcarmoose]

Every once in a while the audiophile world looks back. Sure there are a ton of inventions which are better left as fond memories. Still from amps to speakers to headphones, every year we are reminded of classic audio stuff from the past. Due to possible contruction restraints much of this old "junk" ends up being priced at 50 times it's original asking price. If you look at the guitar world they have made an entire industry reintroducing old style gear, made out of new parts. Moog synthesizers got back together a couple years ago and reproduced the giant modular model, and so on and so on.


Obviously our world is constructed of DAC chips made in limited runs and in finite amounts. Every year an old iPod was made it used the standard technology and parts from the time but used design and electronic equipment which was slightly different from normal. Many looked at the products as revolutionary art. Some thought they were dumb and not useful or hard to use.

Many then and still now think Apple stuff is overpriced. So the question is why would anyone pay even more for dated technology? The trend the last eight years has been more sound for less cash.


So why?


Maybe it's true that iPods can be fixed and have new memories and longer life batteries put in. Maybe there is the fact that many other manufactures have taken things to a better level with less cost.



Still I personally think Apple should at least reintroduce the iPod Shuffle 1st Generation. The player was small low weight, sounded great and today could have a much larger memory put in at the factory.

Even many may get into the retro design of older iPods with an enhancement of sound or stronger battery life. It's a pretty good guess they could reach a special level of sound too as the over all technology has improved.



But maybe Apple only cares about iPhones, Internet Radio, MacBooks and Watches? What do you think?







http://hifiheaven.net/shop/Klipsch-Klipschorn-70th-Anniversary-Edition-Floorstanding-Speakers?language=en&currency=USD&gclid=CJX5l87t5tICFciKswodbXAJAQ



https://www.worldwidestereo.com/products/klipsch-lascala-ii-heritage-series-floorstanding-speaker-each-walnut-1000996?sku=149099&CAWELAID=120216570000065347&CAGPSPN=pla&CAAGID=26328189721&CATCI=pla-96906226801&catargetid=120216570000065376&cadevice=m&gclid=CJKhn_Xt5tICFcSIswods-cIjQ



Koss Pro4/AA
http://buffalonews.com/1999/01/07/reintroduced-at-koss-and-fisher-they-do-make-them-like-they-used-to/

 

[Riolist2]

IMO Apple re-introducing old models wouldn't work, that is, wouldn't justify the cost of re-tooling. There's a difference between the main stream market and the nostalgia market, the latter of which by definition is a niche market, the former by definition the opposite.
 
When Apple introduced the original ipod, they became mainstream because they exploited the available technology in a more innovative way, backed up with strong marketing, than most other players. The ipod wasn't innovative across the board; there were other companies more innovative, for example in terms of software (Rio), but in key areas, such as ease of use and integration, areas that appealed to the masses needing a soft introduction to a new technology, in other words, some degree of hand-holding to counter the unfamiliarity with a new technology. That, more than the technology itself, is what Apple provided. They served to prime the pump so to speak of a new paradigm in personal audio, but once that pump was primed, it wasn't possible to exploit a public naivete that no longer existed, that's why they moved on to cell phones and their trend towards integrating the truly personal computer into its rectangular shape.
 
Today, personal digital audio has been assimilated into the mainstream consciousness at the same time the devices themselves have left the mainstream market. The fact is that high-res or high-quality audio is a niche market, though well and widely understood compared to when Apple entered the market.
 
In short, Apple re-introducing its old products would be like trying to turn the clock back, it might work on some level, appeal to some people, but the energy input required could never be recovered by the results produced.

 

[Redcarmoose]

IMO Apple re-introducing old models wouldn't work, that is, wouldn't justify the cost of re-tooling. There's a difference between the main stream market and the nostalgia market, the latter of which by definition is a niche market, the former by definition the opposite.

When Apple introduced the original ipod, they became mainstream because they exploited the available technology in a more innovative way, backed up with strong marketing, than most other players. The ipod wasn't innovative across the board; there were other companies more innovative, for example in terms of software (Rio), but in key areas, such as ease of use and integration, areas that appealed to the masses needing a soft introduction to a new technology, in other words, some degree of hand-holding to counter the unfamiliarity with a new technology. That, more than the technology itself, is what Apple provided. They served to prime the pump so to speak of a new paradigm in personal audio, but once that pump was primed, it wasn't possible to exploit a public naivete that no longer existed, that's why they moved on to cell phones and their trend towards integrating the truly personal computer into its rectangular shape.

Today, personal digital audio has been assimilated into the mainstream consciousness at the same time the devices themselves have left the mainstream market. The fact is that high-res or high-quality audio is a niche market, though well and widely understood compared to when Apple entered the market.

In short, Apple re-introducing its old products would be like trying to turn the clock back, it might work on some level, appeal to some people, but the energy input required could never be recovered by the results produced.

Yes, I do realize that bringing back retro is only supplying the small segment retro market. Like the links to the speakers I posted, as they are a comodity wanted by a few.

Interestingly too though you hear of companies making products to gain brand loyalty at a young age. That young kid of 13 will not be able to get an iPhone till 16 ( don't correct me, there are actually a few 13 year-olds without iPhones). What happens at 16 is the iPhone is what they choose due to early subjected brand loyalty.

Apple too may be the last company to go with any kind of retro marketing. It works for cars but Apple seems more concerned with having a style way ahead of time. In fact a wave of retro gear from them could send shivers down the spines of shareholders looking at it as only a cheap backpedal.

If there really is no more interest in new DAPs from Apple, which seems to be the case the past couple years, then I guess we can write it off as pleasure and fun, never to return again.

 

[PETEBULL]

What Apple should or should not do is irrelevant. They just do what they please.

 

[Riolist2]

Yes, I do realize that bringing back retro is only supplying the small segment retro market. Like the links to the speakers I posted, as they are a comodity wanted by a few.

Interestingly too though you hear of companies making products to gain brand loyalty at a young age. That young kid of 13 will not be able to get an iPhone till 16 ( don't correct me, there are actually a few 13 year-olds without iPhones). What happens at 16 is the iPhone is what they choose due to early subjected brand loyalty.

Apple too may be the last company to go with any kind of retro marketing. It works for cars but Apple seems more concerned with having a style way ahead of time. In fact a wave of retro gear from them could send shivers down the spines of shareholders looking at it as only a cheap backpedal.

If there really is no more interest in new DAPs from Apple, which seems to be the case the past couple years, then I guess we can write it off as pleasure and fun, never to return again.

Well I'm sure Apple sold many copies of its iPod across several generations to single individuals who were introduced to the first models at an early age who then chose to remain with a known quantity granting that they were satisfied with the technological progression that Apple provided. That was part of the advantage that Apple earned for their original innovation in simplifying a complex technology, something no other company was able to do, at least as well. But that was all part of the priming of the pump of public awareness that any new technology undergoes when first introduced, it just so happened that Apple was able to position itself to ride that wave better than anyone else, and thus extract the greatest amount of energy from it.
 
As a technological sophisticate the iPod never appealed to me, though I could appreciate its exquisite industrial design, aligning as it did with exactly what the technology was, unlike, say, Archos, who made their players look like, and be the size of, cassette walkmans. You could see the absence of innovative thinking in those players as clearly as you could see its presence in the iPod. Nevertheless, as I said before Apple aimed their product at technological neophytes, so someone like me who could comprehend the technology easily saw the limitations that Apple was required to embrace in order to have mass appeal.
 
I think you're right about retro not being in Apples DNA, and today when the technological playing field is more level than it was at the dawn of the iPod, it might make investors nervous.
 
You have to remember, Apple didn't create the technology, they just exploited it, or used it if you prefer a more civil term,  more cleverly, and read the public better than any other company, but the technology was there, new, and available for anyone to do so, everyone saw it, but Apple saw what it was for. 

 

[Riolist2]

  What Apple should or should not do is irrelevant. They just do what they please.

LOL You may be right, heaven help us.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Sony is maybe a bad example here or maybe not. Their claim, especially in the 1980s was miniature technology, thus putting everything in your hand. As well as regular home A/V stuff in normal size.

So it's funny in 2017 how they reintroduce the Walkman in multiple price point areas. The public maybe for the first time in a long time has come embraced to these new players. And for the right reasons as they are good, both in sound and design. But the older name has somehow gone along with the party. As far as marketing the name is now a fixture in mental cognition.

Is it still a nitch? Maybe the early models this year were nich, but you can now see their sights are on the mainstream. But maybe your right the technology is widely used so no ONE company is ever going to be the past's iPod.


I can almost see those guys in the Sony boardroom laying claim to the MP3 DAP market now that Apple has died.

In many ways Sony was the Apple of the Eighties. Those tiny handheld B/W TVs, those super expensive Walkmans for tape the size of a deck of cards. It was very much science fiction for the consumer.

 

[Riolist2]

Sony is maybe a bad example here or maybe not. Their claim, especially in the 1980s was miniature technology, thus putting everything in your hand. As well as regular home A/V stuff in normal size.

So it's funny in 2017 how they reintroduce the Walkman in multiple price point areas. The public maybe for the first time in a long time has come embraced to these new players. And for the right reasons as they are good, both in sound and design. But the older name has somehow gone along with the party. As far as marketing the name is now a fixture in mental cognition.

Is it still a nitch? Maybe the early models this year were nich, but you can now see their sights are on the mainstream. But maybe your right the technology is widely used so no ONE company is ever going to be the past's iPod.


I can almost see those guys in the Sony boardroom laying claim to the MP3 DAP market now that Apple has died.

Yea Sony is interesting. They owned personal audio for better than twenty years, longer than the reign of the iPod, even though the Walkman gradually became a $9.99 commodity by the end of its technological arc.
 
Some people would say the mp3 era was Sony's for the taking due to their legacy with cassette Walkmans and it's technological heirs dat and minidisc. That would be true except for one thing, Sony was also a media company. You have to remember the panic that spread through media companies when the first mp3 player was introduced, arriving just as the world was getting online and perfect digital copy file sharing was gathering like storm clouds on the horizon. This put Sony into a paralyzing internal conflict that opened the way for Apple to represent a technology that was inevitable but just too disruptive for Sony to embrace in time to remain on top. So today Sony is left looking for veins of gold in a mine that Apple has long had the rights to and has largely ceased operations on.

 

[Redcarmoose]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal


Haha, great point, I had forgotten about that mess in 2005, where they took it to the level of selling everyone secret rootkits. There is also maybe the factor of design coolnes. Cool design seems to be sort of hit or miss and Apple was providing a lifestyle statement that was not only on the outside but slowly ingrained itself into daily life. I think when ever a product has such penetration it's tough for the consumer to even look elsewhere. Sony Watchmen TV or the Walkmen players represented a lifestyle with their name. The Walkmans were a first and seemed to perform at a reliable level, thus when the CD Walkman came out again it was a classic.


Thus like you said we have already seen Apple give us many upgrades to the original iPod. I'll admit that they are still a big part of my lifestyle, though there seems to be no talk or even a whisper of new models. In a way the lifestyle ends. And most are creatures of habit and don't want to shift brands.

And in many ways we can't blame Sony for the copywrite paranoia as it was an industry pandemic in 2005. It's just that they simply crossed the line. Where Apple took the paranoia and came up with the iTunes Store to remedy everything and achive another grand win on their parts. So on Apple's regard we see them again provide a music purchasing platform and going one step farther to integrate everything into one lifestyle.

 

[Riolist2]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal


Haha, great point, I had forgotten about that mess in 2005, where they took it to the level of selling everyone secret rootkits. There is also maybe the factor of design coolnes. Cool design seems to be sort of hit or miss and Apple was providing a lifestyle statement that was not only on the outside but slowly ingrained itself into daily life. I think when ever a product has such penetration it's tough for the consumer to even look elsewhere. Sony Watchmen TV or the Walkmen players represented a lifestyle with their name. The Walkmans were a first and seemed to perform at a reliable level, thus when the CD Walkman came out again it was a classic.


Thus like you said we have already seen Apple give us many upgrades to the original iPod. I'll admit that they are still a big part of my lifestyle, though there seems to be no talk or even a whisper of new models. In a way the lifestyle ends. And most are creatures of habit and don't want to shift brands.

And in many ways we can't blame Sony for the copywrite paranoia as it was an industry pandemic in 2005. It's just that they simply crossed the line. Where Apple took the paranoia and came up with the iTunes Store to remedy everything and achive another grand win on their parts. So on Apple's regard we see them again provide a music purchasing platform and going one step farther to integrate everything into one lifestyle.

I remember the rootkit affair as well. It ended with Sony tarnishing their reputation with the public and making a public apology, but the battle goes back much further. RIO was sued in 1998 to try to prevent the pmp300 from hitting the market. When the lawsuit came out in favor of RIO the market began to be flooded with players. The original iPod cane out, I think in 2001 or 2002, when victory and defeat were still fresh in minds of both parties. If Sony had went after the mp3 player market in a big way it would have been seen by some inside the company and inside the media industry as supplying weapons to the enemy...and if I recall correctly Sony's first hard-drive and flash-based media players didn't even play mp3 format, just drm'd ATRAC. They probably couldn't get mp3 playback approved all the way up the chain of command.