[bangraman]

Perhaps. I meant to say that I have no issues with the SQ of the HD5 for casual listening but beyond that, there are better and not just from the manufacturers I like.

 

[widds2v]

I wouldnt buy one just based on the fact it seems like over half of HD5 owners have had/have problems with their player ranging from harddrive crashes to broken buttons.

 

[epzcaw]

I bought a Sony NW HD3 in december., It died in April due to an admitted manufacturing fault. It died again in July - thsi time a hard disk failre. Three weesk on, it had not come back from Sony, and no doubt when it does, it will have lost all the tracks I put on. So no more Sony for me.

 

[Emmanuel]

Hehe, I love this forum...

Mate, I have the HD5 and I love it. As mentioned elsewhere, I have tried a lot of different MP3 players (HD and flash) and after much consideration, and almost a year of searching, I concluded that the HD3 is the best for what I was looking for. When the HD5 came out, I immediately had a go at it and I finally aquired it (mainly because of it's removable battery and standard USB port).

The unit sounds fantastic with ATRAC encoded tracks (I have to say that I utterly hate the sound of MP3), it's very small & light, very well built with it's metallic casing and has an excellent built in Line-out.

This unit is as robust as the next person's iPod (both use the same hard drives, after all) or whatever and, believe me, there is no hard drive out there that will not get damaged if dropped. Be it IDE, SCSI, SATA, 5GB or 500GB, with G-Sensor or not.

Personally, I hadn't had any hard-drive crashes, buttons cracking, screen scratches, freezing and whatever else is claimed. Does it have bad points? Oh yes, loads. Just like every other portable player out there, bar none.

And just a clarification about sound quality... No portable player can ever sound as good as a full blown, even modestly priced, separates hi-fi as the philosophy and aims of a portable player couldn't be any more different... One has to adjust one's expectations. At this moment there is no other hard drive based player that does the no-frills portable thing better than the HD5.

You pay your money you make your choices.


P.S. This is not the first time I come across a situation like this. I have a Motorola cellular phone which everyone on the internet claims constant freezes, buttons not working, rubbish screen, rubbish interface, etc. Well, I had it for a year and I've had no issues whatsoever. Makes you think, does it not?

 

[HeadKase]

Emmanual, I'm with you. The HD5 sounds better for some reason than any portable CD player I've owned - I can't explain it, it just does. Do I expect my portable rig to compare with my $30K + home audio system? Nope, but I find the HD5 sound addicting anyway oddly enough.

Saying that this or that portable system doesn't cut it for "critical listing" - OK I'll agree with that, but I'm highly suspicious of ANY MP3 player that you're trying to tell me does cut it for serious listening. And if you're including external tube amps, stand alone DAC's and $1000 headphones in the equation, than you're missing the point of this technology by a mile.

I bought the HD5 because of it's reported excellent sound quality (which I'll agree with) and its' superior battery life and simplicity of operation (all of which are true) plus cool form factor. For me this is everything a PAD should be - but those are just MY priorities.

 

[bangraman]

I have an opportunity to compare the HD5 versus it's competition every day. However I still have to blow the dust off it in the very rare occasions that I do pick it up. It's not just the sound (which is a major issue by the way to me. The iPod can surprisingly rival a mid-fi separate. The HD5 can't quite manage it). It is the lack of flexibility in listening and loading too.

 

[DRSpeed85]

Both the HD5 and iPod lack EQ. Isnt that a very big lack of flexibility?

 

[HeadKase]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRSpeed85 Both the HD5 and iPod lack EQ. Isnt that a very big lack of flexibility?

Actually the HD5 does have EQ.

 

[HeadKase]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman I have an opportunity to compare the HD5 versus it's competition every day. However I still have to blow the dust off it in the very rare occasions that I do pick it up. It's not just the sound (which is a major issue by the way to me. The iPod can surprisingly rival a mid-fi separate. The HD5 can't quite manage it). It is the lack of flexibility in listening and loading too.

It must be very dustry at your place if you have to blow the dust off every day. Seriously though, you compare an IPod to mid-fi seperates? Even setting aside the fact that one set of midfi seperates will sound completely different than another, this kind of comparison makes no sense at all.

You seem to be reaching for dramatic analogies to prove whatever your point is, but how a system with speakers, seperates, sources etc can be like an MP3 player is incomprehensible. I know you've set yourself up as the sound quality guru here, but your observations make no sense and should be taken with a baseball sized grain of salt IMO.

 

[Oga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman It's funny that when we want to agree with CNET we do, yet when they praise a product like the Bose or give the MDR-V700DJ a good rating, we all feel the need to trash them. My take on CNET is that they're consumer reporters, producing reviews for consumers. That makes their reviews far more consistent in my view.

CNET doesn't make its money from consumers. Its makes its money from ads from retailers and manufacturers, of which Sony is one of a few giants.

You figure out where any inherent biases may lie. Its not all that complicated a situation to decipher.

A good illustration is the extremely lenient view they hold on DRM and propreitary software. These are not exactly consumer friendly, are they? Nope. The contrast in CNET's views on Sonicstage vs what consumers say on user forums in real life has always been very large.

Besides, CNET is not that brilliant. Even when they are acting in good faith, their assessment is not comprehensive. Thinsg like after-sales service, customer support and reliability do not weigh in: CNET are mostly focused on news of new products. What happens to your $300 3 months later, they dont really care.

And in light of all the above, I'd maintain that you are throwing your money away buying these small consumer electronices from Sony, not matter what you read on CNET.

 

[vranswer]

Uh, well, I may blow him some **** from time to time, but I find Bangra's remarks and observations to be well-considered and poignant. Don't know if he's a 'guru' but his viewpoints are generally well-respected and informative.

Personally, I like Sony stuff, but I agree that iPod is more accurate. It maintains a place in my 'audiophile' drawer.

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oga CNET doesn't make its money from consumers. Its makes its money from ads from retailers and manufacturers, of which Sony is one of a few giants. You figure out where any inherent biases may lie. Its not all that complicated a situation to decipher. A good illustration is the extremely lenient view they hold on DRM and propreitary software. These are not exactly consumer friendly, are they? Nope. The contrast in CNET's views on Sonicstage vs what consumers say on user forums in real life has always been very large. Besides, CNET is not that brilliant. Even when they are acting in good faith, their assessment is not comprehensive. Thinsg like after-sales service, customer support and reliability do not weigh in: CNET are mostly focused on news of new products. What happens to your $300 3 months later, they dont really care. And in light of all the above, I'd maintain that you are throwing your money away buying these small consumer electronices from Sony, not matter what you read on CNET.

Oga, I would not like you to get the feeling that I am defending CNET. On the contrary, I share much of your concerns, and more. What I am pointing to however are the inconsistencies of the people who would make use of such an inherently flawed (yet in my opinion, pretty consistent as outlined) source of information when CNET's opinions agree with what they want to believe. Yet they are equally able to cast aside opinions of said publication when it does not suit their needs.


I think that in a 'relatively uneducated ear' consumer sense, CNET's opinions are generally on the mark. i.e. if you agree with CNET on the interpretation of sound quality of the HD5, you will probably agree with their take on the MDR-V700DJ. I do like their usual reliance on reviewer's ears instead of a bunch of measurements, but I do sometimes wonder if those ears couldn't be a little more experienced. You would have thought they would be, bearing in mind the mountain of gear that must pass through each staff member's hands. But then, I am reminded of what I said... consumer reviews for consumers. Perhaps they do have the balance right after all. Check gpalmer's custom title

Regarding DRM, CNET stopped mentioning Sony DRM when it became pretty 'transparent' in use. As it is, there are still hoops to jump through but it is probably not a conspiracy in that for daily use with a single person out of a single PC, it does not impact the usability. It should still have been mentioned though.

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadKase It must be very dustry at your place if you have to blow the dust off every day. Seriously though, you compare an IPod to mid-fi seperates? Even setting aside the fact that one set of midfi seperates will sound completely different than another, this kind of comparison makes no sense at all. You seem to be reaching for dramatic analogies to prove whatever your point is, but how a system with speakers, seperates, sources etc can be like an MP3 player is incomprehensible. I know you've set yourself up as the sound quality guru here, but your observations make no sense and should be taken with a baseball sized grain of salt IMO.

You may want to review your comments, as they consistently make even less sense than mine apparently does to you. An MP3 player with a line out is a source just like a separate CD player. It can be run behind a preamp. In my case, they have been run behind a preamp.

 

[Emmanuel]

Bangraman, for reasons that would cause a drift on the thread (and hence will not expand on), please allow me to disagree with your comment.

I will refrain to just saying that the way a stereo system (in general terms) sounds is as subjective as they come but I find the comparison of MP3 to a hi-fi format (cd, vinyl or even DAT and mini disc) very difficult to swallow. Unless you have compared a lossless format and not MP3...

I, personally, prefer ATRAC to any other compression method because it sounds better to my ears. This, in addition to other aspects of the player, leads me to the aforementioned conclusion; there is no better portable player than the HD5 at this moment in time. The rest of my comments were a criticism to the perceived faults of the player, faults I have not encountered.

 

[wally]

I have heard that the sound quality of ATRAC is worse (haven't heard the player myself though), which allows for more tracks to be held on the 20Gb than, say, the iPod 20Gb. But if the sound of ATRAC is confirmed, then I guess it's win - win on both accounts...