Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Sony Walkmans work on OS X?

O

otispunkmeyer

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 5, 2007
302
0
Middlesbrough UK
the latest sony players have ditched the utterly crummy sonic stage software in favour of simply dragging and dropping files.

now, this interests me because im a big fan of sony walkman products and would much rather have one over an iPod any day. so my question is this... will it work on OS X? will it just plug in a come up as a storage drive much like a USB stick would?

ModNote: I think this is the correct forum... --mkrishnan
 
I would certainly think so. It's just a mass storage device at the end of the day.

Keep in mind though that things like calendar, contacts etc. (if Sony's have these features) as well as your iTunes playlists and podcasts won't sync.
 
joefinan said:
I would certainly think so. It's just a mass storage device at the end of the day.

Keep in mind though that things like calendar, contacts etc. (if Sony's have these features) as well as your iTunes playlists and podcasts won't sync.
Click to expand...

yeah, im not really fussed about extra features such as those... i just want it to play music. i dont have alot of music either so i can just shove my whole collection onto a 8gb one and have plenty of room to spare.

only trouble is, ill have to burn a disc of my purchased tunes and re-rip them in DRM free MP3 form.
 
That's true - finding the music and getting it onto the Walkman will be a time-consuming process, too (assuming that all your music is organised by iTunes, cos it scatters it around in a huge number of different folders).

Which model are you looking at?
 
joefinan said:
That's true - finding the music and getting it onto the Walkman will be a time-consuming process, too (assuming that all your music is organised by iTunes, cos it scatters it around in a huge number of different folders).
Click to expand...

Not really. It sorts it in to Artist/Album. About the only thing it might "scatter" is any album you've neglected to mark as a "compilation" or give an "Album Artist," which given iTunes' ability to mass-tag is really easy to fix.

The only time your music will be "scattered" is if you've not tagged your files well. And there's not excuse for a badly tagged library but laziness.
 
Here's my opinion: When it's in your pocket playing music, you'll never know whether it's a Sony or Apple, but an iPod will offer you a massive level of convenience (considering you have a Mac and organise your music with iTunes).

It will sync seamlessly and automatically with iTunes, it'll make all your contacts and calendar available, any software updates will download automatically etc.

I'd say stick with an iPod.
 
I use a iRiver H320 which was drag and drop

I just had to make sure all the files were in the correct order because this is how they appeared on the mp3 players screen.

Any new albums/music I had to add manually which is okay, although now I find irritating so do wish for an ipod which would be more automatic, although the iriver at the time was a great music player
 
looking at the Sony NWZ-A816 or whatever ( ithink thats the 4gb model, but the only diff between them is memory)

not sure how it would sort things, but then again i generally only listen using shuffle anyway
 
joefinan said:
Here's my opinion: When it's in your pocket playing music, you'll never know whether it's a Sony or Apple, but an iPod will offer you a massive level of convenience (considering you have a Mac and organise your music with iTunes).

It will sync seamlessly and automatically with iTunes, it'll make all your contacts and calendar available, any software updates will download automatically etc.

I'd say stick with an iPod.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree. You already have an existing investment in iTunes purchased tracks which will work seamlessly on an iPod without conversion (and resultant quality loss). I'd say it makes much more sense to pick up a 4GB nano which will just plug in and sync with no headaches.
 
I'd agree with killmoms in terms of the no-brainerness of iTunes + iPod.

But if the previous Sony is anything to go by, while the 82x will likely have comparable or slightly sound quality (in a measurable sense), it will have much better control over the sound (the Sony EQ is always excellent, whereas the iPod EQ is always turd) and also work much better with your regular low-impedance, high-quality earphones... and the player also already comes bundled with better earphones than the vast majority of people will invest in separately as an upgrade for their iPod, or a Bluetooth headphone depending on which one you buy. Soundwise I think it's safe to say that out of the box, the Sony will whip the iPod into submission - even the Bluetooth version. In that way, you will likely be able to very readily tell the difference between the iPod and the Sony.

However, I appreciate iTunes' integration and unless you're running Windows (and more specifically, j.River Media Center or MediaMonkey Gold) you're not going to approach that ability with a non-iPod. That integration changed the way I enjoy music, and regardless of how little music you have, the way its presented to you through iTunes (and also of course, discovery of Podcasts, etc) is a powerful feature.

I wish I could confirm that Sony's MTP players do work. I got rid of my NWZ-A818 before I tried it on a Mac. Under Windows it always showed up as an MTP device but I know that many of these devices can show up as USB Mass Storage devices under OS X and Linux.
 
Sesshi said:
I'd agree with killmoms in terms of the no-brainerness of iTunes + iPod.

But if the previous Sony is anything to go by, while the 82x will likely have comparable or slightly sound quality (in a measurable sense), it will have much better control over the sound (the Sony EQ is always excellent, whereas the iPod EQ is always turd) and also work much better with your regular low-impedance, high-quality earphones... and the player also already comes bundled with better earphones than the vast majority of people will invest in separately as an upgrade for their iPod, or a Bluetooth headphone depending on which one you buy. Soundwise I think it's safe to say that out of the box, the Sony will whip the iPod into submission - even the Bluetooth version. In that way, you will likely be able to very readily tell the difference between the iPod and the Sony.

However, I appreciate iTunes' integration and unless you're running Windows (and more specifically, j.River Media Center or MediaMonkey Gold) you're not going to approach that ability with a non-iPod. That integration changed the way I enjoy music, and regardless of how little music you have, the way its presented to you through iTunes (and also of course, discovery of Podcasts, etc) is a powerful feature.

I wish I could confirm that Sony's MTP players do work. I got rid of my NWZ-A818 before I tried it on a Mac. Under Windows it always showed up as an MTP device but I know that many of these devices can show up as USB Mass Storage devices under OS X and Linux.
Click to expand...

It (818NWZ) does show up as mass storage under 10.5.2.
You can drop music from iTunes into the "Music" folder of your NWZ Walkman player.
 
Not to hijack, but Sony products, hands down, have FAR better sound than any iPod I've tried/owned. I have a three-year-old Sony HD-5 20GB player, and I use Parallels/Windows/SonicStage to get music on it in ATRAC3+ format. Not as a huge drama as it seems, and I've got a 13GB library ripped from my CDs (which, by the way, I recently converted to MP3 using a tool provided by Sony). I also have an Sony RH1 minidisc recorder/player. I either put music it on it via SonicStage/Windows/Parallels or directly record via optical in. Both of these units FAR exceed anything Apple can put out, IMHO. As well, I'm not using stock earbuds - am using $500 Shure e4c in-ear-monitors. Listening to a live album ripped at 256kbs ATRAC3+ on the RH1 with the Shure's, and you're almost in tears it sounds so good... :)

Anyway, Apple and iTunes are, without a doubt, hugely convenient, but check around many online portable audio forums and you'll see huge kudos going the way of Cowon, Sony and a few others, but not usually Apple (although there are some that say that, with a portable amp and some good cans, the 5th G iPod -- I think -- is reasonable, if not impressive). It's all about the audio circuitry of the unit, I think, and not the file type (I've tried all types, including lossless, with various iPod - but not the Touches).
 
You do know you can drag & drop in OS X on the RH1, don't you?

I don't think the Sony sound quality is hugely different. As I said above, the difference out of the box these days is that Sony supplies (in some cases a lot) better phones. As for the machine itself - discounting the huge gulf in EQ ability - it's just a different, warmer flavour of sound for those people who think increased bass = better quality.
 
Sesshi said:
You do know you can drag & drop in OS X on the RH1, don't you?

I don't think the Sony sound quality is hugely different. As I said above, the difference out of the box these days is that Sony supplies (in some cases a lot) better phones. As for the machine itself - discounting the huge gulf in EQ ability - it's just a different, warmer flavour of sound for those people who think increased bass = better quality.
Click to expand...

As for the machine itsef; it depends on which iPod you are looking at these days.
 
Sesshi said:
You do know you can drag & drop in OS X on the RH1, don't you?
Click to expand...

Yes, but I thought software was needed.

Sesshi said:
I don't think the Sony sound quality is hugely different. As I said above, the difference out of the box these days is that Sony supplies (in some cases a lot) better phones. As for the machine itself - discounting the huge gulf in EQ ability - it's just a different, warmer flavour of sound for those people who think increased bass = better quality.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, Sesshi, I would disagree. In my opinion, the bass on Sony's players is tighter and fuller (best on the RH1 but fantastic on the HD-5), while on almost iPod's it is simply anaemic. Hence, going from an iPod to a Sony unit would lead one naturally to conclude that Sonys are for bassheads.
 
I've had Sony players before but have never noticed any real quality difference. Funny thing was about 5-6 yrs ago I had a Sony Vaio PC that actually had a mini-disk recorder in it. I kid you not. (it also was on of the first PC's on the general market with a DVD recorder as well, it recorded to DVD-R) I think the price on the PC was something like $ 2500


The MD quality was pretty good I will say that, the Sonic stage software and the atrac format of the time was very odd though.
 
chatoyer said:
Yes, but I thought software was needed.



Respectfully, Sesshi, I would disagree. In my opinion, the bass on Sony's players is tighter and fuller (best on the RH1 but fantastic on the HD-5), while on almost iPod's it is simply anaemic. Hence, going from an iPod to a Sony unit would lead one naturally to conclude that Sonys are for bassheads.
Click to expand...

Software is needed, but the process is drag & drop. I was just wondering why you were inflicting Sonicstage on yourself.

Well - of such disagreements are internet discussions drawn out. It's true the iPod has a bass fall-off and the Sony's don't, but the difference with current iPods is about 1db @ 30hz with iPod earphones. That is quite noticeable, but not catastrophic. The Sony's sound is also further 'consumer tuned' beyond a flat response.

The quantifiable quality of the sound is inferior on an RH1 when compared with the iPod Touch for example at the same listening volumes with a low-impedance phone, and the iPod gets less subjectively inferior to many listeners as you raise the connected phone's impedance.

I'm not simply saying it's for bassheads, I'm saying it's for people who can't tell a difference in quality but base their opinions on how much bass the sound has, because ultimately the difference is small either way but the bass difference is more noticeable to the untrained ear.

There are other players which actually have better sound quality than the iPod - some players from Cowon as an example - but once again, given small quality increase vs the massive tradeoff in convenience on the Mac, I'd rather stick with the iPod, even with premium earphones.
 
The roll-off is much more than 1db at 30hz on the touch and nano.
It is 7-8 db with the touch having inherited the 5 - 5.5g open airy entry level Marantz mids :rolleyes:
You also get more thd when you crank up the volume past 50%.
The Classic, however, is a totally different beast and quite possibly the best sounding DAP I have ever owned. Given the fact that Wolfson was shunned for the forthcoming iPods I am pretty confident that the Classic´s sound concept will be transferred to the entire line up.
Then, the iPod will be invincible ;)
 

Attachments

  • nano3 q bassabfall.jpg
    nano3 q bassabfall.jpg
    33.6 KB · Views: 128
  • touch sq.jpg
    touch sq.jpg
    33.2 KB · Views: 142
Wow - you guys know for more about sound dynamics/properties than I.

As for SonicStage, I have to say: have never had a problem with, and I started using it way back in version 2.3 with a old netMD player/recorder (remember those? :) ). I just use it for transferring and not as an actual PC-based player. Then again, having to fire up Windows in Parallels just to rip and CD and then put it on my HD-5 is, I have to admit, getting a bit tired...

Am actually thinking about getting a Cowon iAudio 7 (16GB) if I can find one.
 
Sesshi said:
What the heck is that?!?
That is way off. Did you do it?

Do you know what that curve would actually sound like? Well, no, I guess you wouldn't - otherwise you wouldn't mention it in the first place...
Click to expand...

Professional Hifi Mag did it and it´s been that way with every ipod I remember and owned ( Nano 1g,2g 4G HDD, 5 and 5.5g ). Shuffle 1st gen and Classic are the only exception to this frequency response as they use a completely different output stage. I know exactly what this sounds like hence I own a Classic and a NWZ 818 ;) There have been enough assays out there that attest to the mediocre audio quality of former ipods. Look at this, for example:
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_14_1/ipod-bench-tested-3-2007-part-1.html

If you couple such a DAP with phones, especially IEMs, that tend to overproduce bass you get the typical muddy bass and low mids response that people complain about.

I am pretty confident that apple, having shunned Wolfson, will implement the Classic´s sound architecture in its entire lineup in September or so.
 

Attachments

  • classic vs 5.5g.jpg
    classic vs 5.5g.jpg
    40.6 KB · Views: 109
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back