Sony Introduces 1000.00USD Audiophile Walkman

  On 1/6/2015 at 9:25 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 9:15 PM, doublename said:

Off topic, but do Sony's phones generally sound better than the average Android handset? This is the only area where I'm not totally satisfied with the Nexus 5.

Sony supposedly bypasses the Android audio stack, so I would imagine so (from what I've read; no personal experience)

 

 

I just went from a Nexus 5 to a Xperia Z3c and it sounds much better to me.

  On 1/6/2015 at 11:35 PM, modey said:

I like to be skeptical about this stuff. How can a DAC be better or worse?

Probably the same reason as to why these guys thought comparing hard drives for audio reproduction was a good idea - http://www.enjoythemusic.com/hificritic/vol5_no3/listening_to_storage.htm

ugh, so much bullshit in that article, I wouldn't even know where to begin

Edited January 6, 2015 by modey

flol

  On 1/6/2015 at 6:44 PM, chim said:

Hard drive space is pretty low for that price considering the lossless media format, my old iPod classic has 120 gigs for chrissakes.

  On 1/6/2015 at 11:39 PM, datastream said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 9:25 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 9:15 PM, doublename said:

Off topic, but do Sony's phones generally sound better than the average Android handset? This is the only area where I'm not totally satisfied with the Nexus 5.

Sony supposedly bypasses the Android audio stack, so I would imagine so (from what I've read; no personal experience)

I just went from a Nexus 5 to a Xperia Z3c and it sounds much better to me.

Damn, I can feel the consumer lust building.

Does it support RealMedia files? Not interested otherwise.

I'm actually seriously considering releasing my next album as RealAudio files as retaliation to audiophile bullshit

Bit late to the party, but the bit about the technology that could upscale lower quality files... I hope people don't fall for this crap. It's an expensive box of snakeoil.

I have several boxes of expensive snake oil in my freezer that I break out at parties to turn it up a couple notches.

So this is what a thread from the 90s looks like.... A+ nostalgia

Edited January 7, 2015 by Brisbot

But will it play cassettes? If not fuck off.

  On 1/6/2015 at 8:09 PM, paranerd said:

I mix almost all music at 24bit/44.1khz and broadcast/theatre mixes at 24bit/48khz. I've never had anyone, in 10 years, ask me if I mixed at any specific bit rate/sample rate or complained about audio quality.

 

This audiophile stuff is, IMO, BS. I'm even hearing the opposite these days - that cassettes are the best for audio quality for warmth and all that pseudo-acoustic stuff.

yep, all BS.

you cannot even hear up to 16 bit. all that 24 bit is BS.

but as always, nobody known the real truth.

 

but watch it, now some will come and post shitty interenet articles which show that theres a difference. in a blind test, nobody can tell 16 bit from 24 bit.

and for a portable solution, a ipod connected to a ifi micro idsd would absolutely destroy the sony walkman

  On 1/6/2015 at 8:37 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 7:51 PM, xox said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 7:32 PM, Joyrex said:

 

Now, if there were headphones that streamed from your home audio setup... that would make more sense.

 

how it would make more sense? how would higher resolution than the official cd quality (44.1k/16bit) for a playback make more sense?

 

Well, if you MUST have higher than CD quality... some people swear they can hear the difference!

 

just like people pretend that spending 1k for cables is worth it.

for anyone interested to the 24 bit non sense. heres a article from neil young and steve jobs

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

  On 1/7/2015 at 10:17 PM, murphythecat8 said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 8:09 PM, paranerd said:

 

I mix almost all music at 24bit/44.1khz and broadcast/theatre mixes at 24bit/48khz. I've never had anyone, in 10 years, ask me if I mixed at any specific bit rate/sample rate or complained about audio quality.

 

This audiophile stuff is, IMO, BS. I'm even hearing the opposite these days - that cassettes are the best for audio quality for warmth and all that pseudo-acoustic stuff.

yep, all BS.

you cannot even hear up to 16 bit. all that 24 bit is BS.

but as always, nobody known the real truth.

 

but watch it, now some will come and post shitty interenet articles which show that theres a difference. in a blind test, nobody can tell 16 bit from 24 bit.

and for a portable solution, a ipod connected to a ifi micro idsd would absolutely destroy the sony walkman

Yeah. I remember around the time of Oversteps, I asked if anyone even knew of a way to measure/graph the difference between the 16 and 24 bit WAVs (not even taking into account possible audible differences), but nobody replied. I tried a phase inverted mix (by converting the 16bit files to 24bit) but just ended up with very very quiet white noise.. which may be something but may also be dithering/interpolation from upscaling?

  On 1/7/2015 at 10:31 PM, murphythecat8 said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 8:37 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 7:51 PM, xox said:

 

  On 1/6/2015 at 7:32 PM, Joyrex said:

 

Now, if there were headphones that streamed from your home audio setup... that would make more sense.

 

how it would make more sense? how would higher resolution than the official cd quality (44.1k/16bit) for a playback make more sense?

 

Well, if you MUST have higher than CD quality... some people swear they can hear the difference!

 

just like people pretend that spending 1k for cables is worth it.

for anyone interested to the 24 bit non sense. heres a article from neil young and steve jobs

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

 

That was an amazing, and informative article. Thanks for posting!

^^ Yes, thanks so much for posting that. I've never seen a single write-up so articulately explain all of that before.

you mean my audioquest diamond cables aren't worth $13,500?

 

 

I've been had!

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-Diamond-52-49-Braided-Cable/dp/B00IL3TZSQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1420685261&sr=1-1&keywords=diamond+cables

  Quote

Diamond HDMI incorporates AudioQuest's highest-performance, lowest-distortion Perfect-Surface Silver conductors. Silver is known for its high conductivity and its "colorless" sonic presentation. Perfect-Surface Technology applied to extreme-purity silver provides unprecedented clarity and dynamic contrast. Solid conductors prevent strand interaction, a major source of cable distortion. Extremely high-purity Perfect-Surface Silver minimizes distortion caused by the grain boundaries that exist within any metal conductor, nearly eliminating harshness and greatly increasing clarity compared to OFHC, OCC, 8N and other coppers.

seems legit

Perhaps the diamond coating stuff compensates for the muffled sound you'd experience from sticking your head up your arse

Edited January 8, 2015 by Bechuga

lol

but wait.. HDMI is digital.. how could.. augh this is like electronic homoeopathy or something

no way guyth i can hear the diff my cabals r diamond ur cabils dont even not bling they are cubed zirconium

 

cheep 10$ cabel people you guy r dumb

http://www.head-fi.org/t/293165/my-cat-tore-up-my-virtual-dynamics-power-3

Besides, instead of 24 bit stereo, why not work on getting some form of surround sound portable player? I reckon you could do it if you placed two speakers up your nose and the fifth one in your mouth.