New Sony Walkman Is $1,200

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Sony is showing off its new Walkman at CES 2015. At $1,200, I think it is safe to say that the Walkman isn't going to set any sales records. :eek:

To be sure, the ZX2 isn't an all-in-one device. It's running years-old Android — 4.2 Jelly Bean, to be exact, which first debuted in November 2012. And while you can download and play apps from Google Play, this isn't meant to match wits with today's smartphones.
Click to expand...
 
collegeboy69us said:
That same question was asked in many meetings at sony -- the reply is always the same:

"Because fuck you, that's why"
Click to expand...

Seriously though -- even if this was $50... I have no use for it. My phone can store something like 70 or 80GB worth of music (I only have 60) and I never listen to music when I'm on the go.

Will be so happy if I live to the see the day sony dies and gets broken up and sold off.
 
Sony took a wrong direction with this one.

The entire walkman brand was not built for "audiophiles" it was build as a cost effective solution for portable music (most people here probably havn't seen a tape cassett lol)

Sony amazes me with their poor decision making, "Oh we are posting losses, lets release a product that is geared tword the 0.02% but just charge more for it!!!"
 
They had to spend the time collecting all the old cell phone hardware, then remove the SIM slot and radio and put it in a new case.
 
I would have considered it if it was $120, but $1200? sounds a little steep for an MP3 player.

For the record, I have no smart phone, nor any intention of getting one.
 
In this thread, clueless people. If you think this sounds the same as your phone, then LOL. Maybe read the specs and look who it is geared towards instead of the troll opening post. Hint, you don't play MP3s with this player.
 
You know, if this were 2005, and it was $50-80, this would be great.
But, considering it is 2015, and this is *snort* $1200, this is just hilarious.

Really, almost all MP3 players are completely obsolete, primarily because nearly every mobile device on the planet has this functionality built-in.
Even standard cell phones can do this easily.

Even with video playback, any smartphone can do this.
This is the equivalent to an iPod touch compared to the iPhone, except that it costs a ton more.

facepalm-meme-face-i11.jpg
 
Sony deserves everything coming to them...they'll be out of business in no time.
 
xIronCrossx said:
In this thread, clueless people. If you think this sounds the same as your phone, then LOL. Maybe read the specs and look who it is geared towards instead of the troll opening post. Hint, you don't play MP3s with this player.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if it plays FLAC or any other high-quality audio/video file, $1200 is ludicrous and is even more, laughable at best.
Sony can put any spin on this that they like, but at the end of the day, the only market for this is people with more money than brains.
 
So the $1200 dollars if for the licenses for all the types of music it can play? The hardware is average at best, some would say sub par, it's using 4.2 android and it's replacing a $300 music player. The only thing that might be able to justify that is the 128 gb memory, but even the Apple products with 128 gb are under a thousand dollars.

This is another misstep by Sony. If they drop to 600-700 range it might sell, but at $1200 there is no way.
 
If you assumed the demographic of today's smartphone crowd, right now would be about the best time to exploit nostalgia of the name. But the 80's electronics buyer even for portable gadgets were a deal older than today's demographic. In the 80's parents hadn't quite relearned how to throw money at their kids to get them out of their hair. So it was bought mostly by 20 & 30 somethings and not teens.

They missed the nostalgia window by about 8-10 years.

Kind of like if you had a Stretch Armstrong in the attic, the collectable value goes up at first, then once all the people with money to burn who remember it from childhood start to die, retire, or plan for retirement, the collectable value plummets. It doesn't go up forever.
 
Red Falcon said:
It doesn't matter if it plays FLAC or any other high-quality audio/video file, $1200 is ludicrous and is even more, laughable at best.
Sony can put any spin on this that they like, but at the end of the day, the only market for this is people with more money than brains.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should look into the components in it before spouting the BS. Did you know external DACs for PCs can cost thousands? Comparing this to a smartphones audio quality is just hilariously stupid.
 
xIronCrossx said:
Maybe you should look into the components in it before spouting the BS. Did you know external DACs for PCs can cost thousands? Comparing this to a smartphones audio quality is just hilariously stupid.
Click to expand...

Sony is selling this for $1200, and I'm the one spouting bullshit?
lol, if one is going to spend this kind of money, they will go with vinyl and be done with it.

The only thing I see that is hilariously stupid is the fact that you are actually backing Sony on this clusterfuck of a product.
I bet you told everyone how stupid they were for thinking the Titanic was a crappy ship, especially when it was sinking... :rolleyes:
 
Sony really is clueless... why didn't they create a high end Android smartphone with the ability to play back high quality digital audio? Once again they show us that they're completely out of touch with the current market.
 
doho7744 said:
So the $1200 dollars if for the licenses for all the types of music it can play? The hardware is average at best, some would say sub par, it's using 4.2 android and it's replacing a $300 music player. The only thing that might be able to justify that is the 128 gb memory, but even the Apple products with 128 gb are under a thousand dollars.

This is another misstep by Sony. If they drop to 600-700 range it might sell, but at $1200 there is no way.
Click to expand...

The cost comes from the specialized hardware, which will obviously include DAC.

When you think about it, even on the PC, one of the components in a sound card that contributes to it's high cost is it's DAC. But even so, a PC soundcard DAC is not comparable to some of the more expensive external DAC hardware out there. And these high end DAC cost more than $1k

Obviously, this is not aimed at anyone, it's geared towards users who are willing to spend on expensive audio hardware, such as DAC.
 
Hornet said:
The cost comes from the specialized hardware, which will obviously include DAC.

When you think about it, even on the PC, one of the components in a sound card that contributes to it's high cost is it's DAC. But even so, a PC soundcard DAC is not comparable to some of the more expensive external DAC hardware out there. And these high end DAC cost more than $1k

Obviously, this is not aimed at anyone, it's geared towards users who are willing to spend on expensive audio hardware, such as DAC.
Click to expand...

So you are telling us, the Hardware inside this Sony is equivalent to the high end DAC that cost more than 1K? I doubt that.
 
xIronCrossx said:
In this thread, clueless people. If you think this sounds the same as your phone, then LOL. Maybe read the specs and look who it is geared towards instead of the troll opening post. Hint, you don't play MP3s with this player.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. One of the better interfaces would be the RME Fireface series. (Between $1000-$2000.) There are more expensive ones, but these are considered to be more than adequate to produce and reproduce high quality digital audio. The thing is though, they're multi-channel. That means they have many times the converter count as a simple audio player. There are high quality DACs that don't cost an exorbitant amount of money that would be well-suited to a "higher-end" portable device.

I realize Sony isn't marketing this to people that are happy listening on their phones. However, I do think they're overestimating the existing market for something like this.

I still need to read the specs on it, but if it was to say, also record high-bit-depth/rate audio as well, (kind of like a high-end field recorder) it may be a bit more useful for that price. Still, I see a very limited market even then.
 
It's true a good DA converter can cost near 1000 bucks, but for 2 channels on a heaphone it really it overkill IMO. Also, stuff like this screams BS:

The DSEE HX processor, on the other hand, tries to recreate high-frequency information even from compressed files, upscaling the audio as needed to produce higher than CD quality sound.
Click to expand...
 
Wolfson DAC's are commonly found in mobile devices such as smart phones and tablets, and there are numerous apps which can play lossless high bitrate formats.

My guess is that someone at Sony saw the waves of people lining up to buy rediculously overpriced Beats products, and realized that there are enough suckers born every minute that they could sell their device for $1200.
 
wankelguy13b said:
So you are telling us, the Hardware inside this Sony is equivalent to the high end DAC that cost more than 1K? I doubt that.
Click to expand...

At least that's what they claim, but of course that's up to the reviewers to find out.

The point is, this wasn't meant to be any ordinary music player, hence it should not be compared against a smartphone for example. Stuff like what Android version it runs isn't important because that wasn't the point.

Whether or not it can justify it's price will depend on its audio performance in the same way a dedicated DAC hardware would be evaluated. Certainly not something we can look at it spec, compare to any portable music player, and say it's way overprice.
 
Hornet said:
The cost comes from the specialized hardware, which will obviously include DAC.

When you think about it, even on the PC, one of the components in a sound card that contributes to it's high cost is it's DAC. But even so, a PC soundcard DAC is not comparable to some of the more expensive external DAC hardware out there. And these high end DAC cost more than $1k

Obviously, this is not aimed at anyone, it's geared towards users who are willing to spend on expensive audio hardware, such as DAC.
Click to expand...

That's a lot of money to pay for three meaningless letters. :p But since you're totally into random non-benefit that makes things sound exactly the same as a motherboard soundcard or a phone, I have this awesome beachfront house in Oklahoma to sell you.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
That's a lot of money to pay for three meaningless letters. :p But since you're totally into random non-benefit that makes things sound exactly the same as a motherboard soundcard or a phone, I have this awesome beachfront house in Oklahoma to sell you.
Click to expand...

Can never tell if you're serious... :D

However, there are very audibly different results when using high quality digital to analog converters with a high quality audio file/format. That said, there is a point of diminishing returns for the amount of money spent, and many people cross that boundary for no good reason.

Most motherboard chipsets are definitely not completely sufficient, and a computer is one of the most electrically noisy places to put one.

That said, you were probably not serious.
 
I wonder how many Sony will actually sell? Is there even a market for a $1,200 portable music player?

I used to like Sony products, but the problem with Sony has always been the same....proprietary tech, everything comes as an option (cables, remotes, power cord ;), etc.), and their products are expensive compared to their competitors.

Here's me predicting Sony will not exist in 2020 if they keep this kind of shit coming.
 
xIronCrossx said:
Maybe you should look into the components in it before spouting the BS. Did you know external DACs for PCs can cost thousands? Comparing this to a smartphones audio quality is just hilariously stupid.
Click to expand...

They don't get it. Don't bother.

Granted, I too think this is a hilariously poor product for Sonys bottom line... The specs, on paper, would produce sound quality not even touchable by your average mp3 or phone.

This is geared towards people who already spend thousands on audio, and hate portable MP3 players for their abysmal quality and poor drive characteristics.
 
J3RK said:
Can never tell if you're serious... :D

However, there are very audibly different results when using high quality digital to analog converters with a high quality audio file/format. That said, there is a point of diminishing returns for the amount of money spent, and many people cross that boundary for no good reason.

Most motherboard chipsets are definitely not completely sufficient, and a computer is one of the most electrically noisy places to put one.

That said, you were probably not serious.
Click to expand...

I'm always a thousand-million-gorgonzola-gajillion percent more serious than everyone else at all times because its obvious that the people who get the most enjoyment out of life are the ones who take everything and anything with as much seriousness as humanly possible!

Oh, do you wanna buy my Oklahoma beachfront mansion? it's a time share thing-y, but it's so awesome at sharing time that you actually get younger while you're there which is almost as amazing as having a DAC...or a QUACK. :D QUACKs are obviously better because they have more letters and they have such good sound quality that the literally make wax-filled human ears into candles without even making you have to buy a wick.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I'm always a thousand-million-gorgonzola-gajillion percent more serious than everyone else at all times because its obvious that the people who get the most enjoyment out of life are the ones who take everything and anything with as much seriousness as humanly possible!

Oh, do you wanna buy my Oklahoma beachfront mansion? it's a time share thing-y, but it's so awesome at sharing time that you actually get younger while you're there which is almost as amazing as having a DAC...or a QUACK. :D QUACKs are obviously better because they have more letters and they have such good sound quality that the literally make wax-filled human ears into candles without even making you have to buy a wick.
Click to expand...

You definitely cleared up any doubts I had. :p
 
The biggest issue I see is that Sony as a company continues the trend of making bad decsions. Why put all this R&D money towards making a product that isn't going to be popular? Customers are not going to line up to buy a $1200 music player. If Sony wants to know why they're losing so much money year over year all they have to do is talk to the management team that green lit this new "walkman".
 
Arcygenical said:
They don't get it. Don't bother.

Granted, I too think this is a hilariously poor product for Sonys bottom line... The specs, on paper, would produce sound quality not even touchable by your average mp3 or phone.

This is geared towards people who already spend thousands on audio, and hate portable MP3 players for their abysmal quality and poor drive characteristics.
Click to expand...

Some of us get it, and are still a little perplexed by this particular device's usefulness, market position, hardware choices, etc.

Let's put it this way.

It's a portable device. In MOST (not all) situations where portability is important, listening conditions are not optimal. Road noise, wind noise, jet-turbine noise, train track noise, random city noise polution, a noisy person next to you, gym weights jiggling/clanging...

Sure there are noise cancelling technologies, but those also can impact audio quality negatively. They don't react perfectly, instantaneously, and while some work fairly well, are still not perfect enough to warrant something like this.

If one is sitting in a quiet room, with nice speakers or monitors, or with some nice headphones (AKG, Grado, in the mid-price-balanced-price/quality ranges) then sure, there might be some benefit. But then, why do you need a portable? I'm definitely not against quality products, and better solutions for things. I'm not even against the ultra-high-end for those that get pleasure from such things even if some of it borders on snake-oil. If someone wants to buy it, then there is a reason for it to exist. However, I question the exact purpose for this one device. (unless, as I said, you can also use it as a decent quality recorder or something like that)
 
xIronCrossx said:
In this thread, clueless people. If you think this sounds the same as your phone, then LOL. Maybe read the specs and look who it is geared towards instead of the troll opening post. Hint, you don't play MP3s with this player.
Click to expand...

Arcygenical said:
They don't get it. Don't bother.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is an enthusiast product. Even considering that, it is overpriced, because Sony.
 
MavericK96 said:
Yes, this is an enthusiast product. Even considering that, it is overpriced, because Sony.
Click to expand...

That's also a consideration. Sony is known for occasional innovation, but also for overpriced consumer products. They are not known for truly high-end hardware. They will not be adopted by those circles, and they just priced themselves out of their classic target audience.
 
I would like to have one of these, honestly I'd consider it at half the price but $1200 is way too much. Sony still hasn't realized that it isn't the brand it once was, you'd like they would have figured that out sometime in the last 15 years.
 
I have a nice 4 channel firewire audio interface for testing and recording the synthesizers I design. It's not the highest-end, but it's good. More than adequate for any portable application I could think of. It cost $500. It's in a nice little milled aluminum case too. Now, add a fast micro-controller, some flash memory, some software and codecs, and you're still probably coming in around $700-800 retail. It is possible that the Sony converters are better, but I'm still debating about how beneficial that is in a portable environment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top