How Sony's HD Audio Player Falls Short

Mr_Silver writes "Sony's new MP3 based HD player (the snappily titled NW-HD3) is reviewed over at head-fi.org. Unfortunately it can't remember where you last were located when browsing, you can't list all the songs by an artist, 1.5 hours to transfer 2100 songs (instead of the iPod's 15 minutes) and a wall of noise in the output. Final conclusion? 'If there was a way I could return this thing, I'd do it in a second.' So close, yet so far." Update: 12/14 00:35 GMT by T : Not quite so fast: As forums.minidisc.org Administrator Christopher MacManus writes, it turns out that (as the threads below this review reveal), "The reviewer discovers that the unit he had is defective as someone else employs one and there is no hiss issue. Furthermore, the software woes he experienced are related to him employing JAPANESE software on an English operating system. Sonicstage 2.3, which he needs to use the unit, is now available in English."

Comments

what were these guys thinking?

[Poleris]

honestly - how do people turn out such a faulty product? it seems the hardware would be the hard part - why is the software so shoddy?

Re:what were these guys thinking?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the people in charge are more worried about DRM than user interface, and because they design software by committee.

-- A Sony Employee

Re:what were these guys thinking?

[gad_zuki!]

I think the MP3 player industry is just crazy. Seriously, its just run by loons. My original Archos 6 gig was a very simple device. I would *gasp* make folders and put songs in them. Every other device I've owned had some special client software with some fancy synch crap.

It blows my mind that mp3 player developers think the user is so stupid that a simple copy and paste is beyond them, thus they must help them will these badly done client apps.

The worst is the Neuros. If an mp3 doesnt have an ID3 tag, it wont even show it in the damn "mp3 browser" part of the client software. Its exactly like the file doesnt exist. You have to find that file and manually edit the ID3. There's not even a n "unknown songs" category so I can do this in the client by looking at the filename. Not to mention, the only way to add songs is to use the client. If you copy a file over via USB, the device can't see it until the client updates its little database.

I hear people complain about their client software all the time. Crashes, too slow, etc. Do they even still make devices that act like hard drives?

Re:what were these guys thinking?

[Geekenstein]

Let me just say that this is the experience of one person, using a Japanese version of the product, and exactly one sample. The audio problems could be a sign of a defective unit, not a design flaw. Anyone who would make a buying decision based on one person whom they don't know should think again. The interface nitpicks could of course be cured with a simple software update.

In fact, further down that thread, someone says their own unit doesn't have the hiss. This is the only showstopper I really see here. Does anyone else have experience with this player?

Re:what were these guys thinking?

[Grishnakh]

I'd really like to get a portable MP3 player for use at work, on airplanes, etc. But I just haven't seen anything that even meets my bare minimum requirements:

1) Must play Oggs
2) Must work with Linux
3) Must be durable and reliable
4) Must have at least 20GB

Ideally, I'd like to have a player that has the following features:

5) Can upgrade hard drive to larger capacity, using a standard (laptop probably) hard drive, not an overpriced special-order one from the manufacturer
6) Can connect to home network by ethernet
7) Can connect to stereo with SPDIF and RCA jacks
8) Doesn't require funky, annoying software to transfer new files (though optional software for extra functionality is ok, as long as it runs on Linux). As an addendum to this, can be used as generic HDD storage device when connected via USB.

Most players fail miserably on requirement #1. The Rio Karma seems to come the closest to meeting most of my requirements, and actually inspired several of them with its innovative dock which has ethernet and RCA jacks. However, a simple google search will show that it has an absolutely terrible reputation for reliability; I've never seen an item with so many people complaining about it breaking. Apparently, it has a problem with the hard drive dying, and its ultra-short warranty period doesn't help here. So for all its nifty features, it fails to meet basic requirement #3.

Maybe I should design my own MP3 player and market it, much like the guys at SlimDevices did with their very successful SliMP3. However, since there are already established players in the market, it's unlikely I'd be able to compete effectively against them, especially when so few people actually care about getting products that are durable and reliable these days, and would rather buy something with a fancy brand name.

I predict this Sony MP3 player will be very successful, even though it doesn't work worth a damn. There's millions of consumers out there who would happily shell out big bucks for a piece of moldy bread if it just had a Sony emblem on it.

Re:what were these guys thinking?

[Dude_here]

Its not that they think we are stupid, its just we have better things to do with my time. Many geeks just do not realize people do not want to mess with technology; it just needs to work. This is why Apple enjoys its current market position. I all ways thought it funny people on this site criticized Apple for not putting enough features in the iPod, but rave about Unix and its many forms for doing the same thing: K.I.S.S. Try http://www.musicbrainz.org/ for tagging, it is about 80% right the first time and hit or miss after. Use the program and you will know what I mean.

It takes....

[dj245]

...A special kind of sadistic bastard to make a portable music player that doesn't play MP3 files (as most previous Sony products did). Sadistic bastards generally don't make stellar products when their main concerns are pushing file formats.

How do things like this make it past q&a?

[chroot_james]

I often wonder how companies don't notice things like what's listed for how it falls short... I guess companies just rush it out the door instead of spending at least a week having random people use it an list complaints... shame.

control

[ezekiel683]

this is a prime example of how a product fails because of it trying to control the consumer.

I just can't believe how this got past the door isn't market research meant to prevent really stupid products like this

sony can make awesome electronic gear its just the donuts in head office and other depts shoot them selves in the foot

Re:control

[ScrewMaster]

this is a prime example of how a product fails because of it trying to control the consumer.

I might add that your comment also applies to music industry in general. The RIAA can point fingers in various directions as to why they aren't making the growth numbers to which they've become accustomed. But it's the same story ... they tried to tell their customer base what they can't do. You can't have decent playlists on radio stations anymore, you can't buy singles anymore, you can't copy discs ... you get the picture. That's not the way to make sales, you make sales by empowering your customers and giving them what they need or want, and you do it for the right price. That's just good business. Sony is making the same mistake here: you, the customer, will do what we tell you, play the files we tell you, and because we're Sony you will obey. Phooey on them. If they keep that up all they'll have left is their media business and Playstations. Maybe that's all they want.

Apple's Edge

[saddino]

The post mortems of this and other so-called "iPod Killers" are beginning to expose the difficulty of creating:
1) a sleek, feature rich MP3 player;
2) sleek, intuitive software to run on the player; and
3) sleek, intuitive software to interface with it.

(and optionally a sleek music store to interface with it)

For those who belittle Apple's achievement or dismiss their market success as "clever marketing," the failure of Sony and others to basically get their engineering shit in order should be more than telling: apparently, creating a great MP3 player really is hard.

Re:Apple's Edge

[Propagandhi]

Couldn't help but notice your use of "sleek" in each of your little points. Sleekness is all the iPod has going for it, IMHO.

1) Poor battery life
2) Poor format support (Vorbis? FLAC?)
3) Poor playback (no EQ, no Gapless playback)
4) Poor feature set (No FM, no voice recorder, nothing that sets it apart features-whys)
5) Still more expensive than most other players

It's a fine player for your average music listener, but it's hardly the geeky plaything a DAP can (and IM(Geeky)O should :) ) be.

Re:Apple's Edge

[the pickle]

1) Eight hours (first-gen) to 12 hours (current) is hardly "poor." If it gets people through their day -- which it does -- it's good enough. Sure, only having to charge it every other day would be nicer, but MOST people simply don't need 12 hours of battery life.

2) Again, how many people -- Slashdotters excluded -- do you know who give a rat's asshole about Ogg or FLAC? Thought so.

3) No EQ? WTF? It has EQ. Did you not see the "EQ" part of the settings? Gapless playback I'll give you, though.

4) FM, eh, who cares? I haven't found a halfway decent FM station other than NPR in probably five years. Commercial radio in the US is atrocious. Voice recorder: here's a hint. Go to www.belkin.com and quit yer bitchin.

5) More expensive because the UI kicks the ass of everything else out there. And not all that much more, really -- we're talking $50-100 more for the most part, and on the low end, if you shop around, as little as $20-30. You get something for that, too. Besides the UI, you get a case (granted, not a great case, but most don't even include that).

Complain about its lack of "geek appeal" all you want, but several million of your fellow geeks -- along with several million others who aren't -- think your complaints are baseless. Like it or not, it's the millions of non-geeky people who form the majority of the market, and a player that provides features only one or two percent of the already-small "geek" market will use is never going to be an iPod killer.

Which is exactly what the grandparent was talking about in the first place.

p

Re:Sigh...

[Elwood P Dowd]

But then again, how often does one swap out that many songs on and off a DAP?

Every time I go to a friend's house.

An iPod Convert

[Omega1045]

When the first iPod came out, I was not a fan.

"Oh, here is another over priced piece of Apple crap", I thought. And that time, I might have been right. I am not an Apple fan by nature.

I bought a 20 GB player from another company, and liked it well enough.

Earlier this year, I had the chance to get $100 off one of the new 4th gneration iPods. I decided on the 20 Gb to replace the brick that was my MP3 player.

I have never looked back.

My iPod is easily the best gadget (or maybe even technology item, period) that I have ever purchased. I love it. My life is now filled with music and audio books.

What I really don't get is how a company like Sony can fall on its face over, and over, and over. Seriously, can't Sony, f@cking Sony, figure out how to make a cool gadget to compete with iPod? Seriously, nothing I have tickered with at WorstBuy (tm) or CircuitCrapy (tm) from Sony even comes close to the ease of use and pure coolness that I have with my iPod.

As a software developer, I really don't get how a company that is often on or ahead of the curve like Sony and continue to f@ck it up!

Apple is in strange territory. Many times the first to market is also to far ahead of the market that they fail. This is not the case with the iPod, and Sony needs a huge shift in engineering and attitude if they want to even attempt to catch up.

Re:An iPod Convert

[SewersOfRivendell]

Sony's problem is twofold:

(1) They want to control the file format. Not-invented-here syndrome. Like Adobe, they're very technologically arrogant. At one time, this was a motivational tool for Sony managers to use with their engineers; now, it's outmoded B.S outside of the PlayStation and televisions.

(2) They own a large amount of content (Sony Records/Sony Pictures), so they want to institute DRM -- remember that Sony was originally a champion of fair use with the Betamax, successfully going to the Supreme Court to get VCR's declared legal.

They bought Columbia Pictures because they wanted to have control over both of these facets, and now these facets are both controlling Sony. Terribly ironic.

it's the naming convention, stupid

[jeffehobbs]

Ah, the NW-HD3; so easy to remember. I can hear it now:

"Mom and Dad, I really really want a Sony NW-HD3 this holiday season!"

Never mind sending Mom and Dad to the mall with that kind of information just invites holiday disappointment. The real problem is that Sony makes ten trillion different pieces of consumer electronics, all of which are named just as idiotically. KD-36XS955, HDR-FX1, DSC-F828 -- these are all real products I pulled off the Sony website. Do you have any clue what they are?

Contrast this with the branding Apple pulled off after Jobs returned: they went from having a confusing line of Performa 5200s, Performa 6300s, PowerMac 7200s, Powermac 8500s, PowerBook 1800s (etc. etc. the list goes on) to having three easily explainable product lines: iMacs, PowerMacs and PowerBooks and now iBooks and iPods. Easy. "Mom and Dad, I want an iPod". Done.

Granted this creates another set of problems (for tech support and repair shops especially) but overall the effect dramatically reduces consumer confusion dramatically. Why can't Sony and other electronics manufacturers learn from this lesson?

~jeff

Re:Sony originality draught

[Indy Media Watch]

You don't always need to be an innovator. You just need to do something well.

Sony make excellent consumer and professional video gear. Their audio gear has always been low-end from the Walkman until today. As far as I can see, they were never aiming at the high-quality market, rather neato gadgets and shiny things.

On the other hand, how 'inventive' can you really be with an mp3 player? Especially when the first criticisms of a new music format or user-interface will be "but it doesn't play mp3" or "it isn't like my iPod" (when that is the whole point).

Re:Sony originality draught

[iminplaya]

I believe they crippled the regular "consumer" version by not including a digital input. They did the same to DAT. This to appease the publishing business. If they really championed it, we would've had a very durable, reliable replacement for the floppy ten years ago. Memory sticks don't compare. They just don't hold up. CD's are a pain.

I dont know

[Kanasta]

Sony's hardware has fallen short of claims so much that when I see this I just think 'here they go again'

It's always the software portion. First it was the customized software drivers on their PCs which did less than the generic drivers. Then there was the net MD crap they forgot to tell you they had to convert all the files to atrac on your HD first and that up to 64X speed meant everyone got around 1.3X speed. Then their memorystick format didn't support sizes over 256mb - hence the 'pro' version. Funny NO OTHER flash format needed any upgrades from the first 8MB card to the 4GB cards.

Who cares about hiss, can you browse by artist?

[SuperKendall]

It was pretty obivious a "wall of noise" would have to be a hardware defect, Sony would not send out a product like that - and lots of people seem to be picking up on this so you can renew your faith in ther internet.

However - is it accurate you cannot browse by artist? That to me would be enough to disregard it. I use all of the browsing modes on the iPod and wouldn't be happy to loose any of them - to produce a new product without this feature seems insane to me.

Re:Why Can't Sony Compete?

[imroy]

I think you might be onto something there. I wonder how much pressure there is from Sony Music, and the rest of the RIAA behemoth, on the rest of Sony to cripple anything dealing with digital music/audio. Making a portable digital music player these days that doesn't play MP3, WMA, or AAC and forcing their own crappy proprietary DRM'ed codec on people is just plain dumb.

The RIAA is really a bunch of dinosaurs and I derive great satisfaction from watching non-music-industry companies (and the Open Source community) show them the kinds of truly great things that can be done with technology.
</rant>

IAAPDESE

[claussenvenable]

This blows my mind continually. I hate the Apple marketing, I hate the stupid white headphones, and I hate the iTunes music store.

However, as an EE, I think the iPod is a god-damn miracle. It's incredibly well-designed, tightly engineered, and not really much more expensive than any of its competitors these days. It is, simply put, a triumph of user-centered design, at least in regards to the interface.

Is it the only interface out there? No.
Is it the only great interface that's possible? No!
Is it the only great interface out there? Yes.

The only thing that's even come close, in my book, was the Archos running Rockbox -- generally speaking, when manufacturers fuck up the UI, they do it in the firmware or with those CRAP joystick input devices. Since basically no one has clued in to the fact that open firmware for an otherwise impossible-to-copy device poses no threat to sales, firmware on otherwise well-designed devices (iRiver, etc) languishes in shittiness. When someone develops a good open firmware standard for portable audio devices, we'll really be getting somewhere.

It's not even that Apple has the best hardware engineers or the best platform -- the iPod uses the PortalPlayer architecture, and so have a number of other companies' entries. They've just all sucked.

IAAPDESE(I Am A Product Design Embedded Systems Engineer), and I work for a company that does MP3 players, among other things. We worked on one of the most recent entrants in 5GB HDD space.

I watched this product be crippled by the client's overwhelming urges to satisfy their industrial design (read: aesthetics) people, who knew precisely dick about what makes a really good interface. Unsurprisingly, it has bombed in the market despite good media coverage, and has been discontinued indefinitely.

Apple, on the other hand, generally pays attention to that stuff. It's not that they're the only ones who can. It's that they're the only ones who do -- everyone else is clawing at the market with money-losing bullshit products instead of regrouping, taking a year off, and designing a *really* well-though-out device.

Personally, I use an iRiver iHP140 -- I need record capability -- but I lust after the new one with the non-joystick controls...

Yeah, when compared to iPod

[superhoe]

Well, the guy might know his stuff but I hate it when every other MP3 review is done by somebody who starts by saying 'I love iPod very much and this..' Then, after this they always remember to do at least the following comparisons in the main article:

iPod's design "is so sleek" vs. the poor device on review "doesn't come even close to iPod design"

iPod's interface "is so sleek" vs. the poor device on review "which has some interface problems when compared to iPod"

.. and just go on with the list. Oh gee, so now we know that you love iPod and seem to be therefore totally uneligible to write reviews for other MP3 players.

I have an IRiver myself and I like it's metallic design. Still, I read every now and then reviews like 'the design is nothing like iPod's' - and always from people who should bring in a neutral point of view. Give me a break on this!

You don't have to try to simply find a better device than iPod, but nice alternatives for people who want and need different things from their player.

Re:It's a real shame

[AllUsernamesAreGone]

It nowadys seems to be run by a bunch of paranoid, MBA'd marketing droids with neither a knack for innovation, nor a clue what the customer wants.
Oh, they know what the customer (what the Suits call the "consumer" or "cash cow") wants. They just decide that, because the lawyers are jumping up and down and screaming blue murder and the media sorts are having aneurysms over letting the unwashed masses actually use the stuff they by in the way they want, the customer can't have it.

Sony's engineers are still some of the best and they still kno whow to innovate. It's just that the Suits take a hatchet to the features of most of their products so you end up with a compromise between the engineers trying to give the customer all the features and the Suits trying to turn the product into a single-use, single function piece of plastic that the customer can only rent.

Re:How could this biased article be posted?

[Mr_Silver]

His device was defective. There is no background hiss with this device, but unfortunately, most people will not see my comment and believe the aforementioned review. It's truly idiotic how the internet can be at times..

Ignoring the fact that Sony get what they deserve for shipping a duff device, it is worth pointing out that a lot of the issues he noted would be still around on a "non-defective" device.

Admitidally the wall of sound issue looks to be a device one, however he was using good quality earphones and I didn't see the followups in time.

Finally, I ignored the software issues he had with the Japanese version in my synopsis but it is fairly clear than the DRM wrapping time, the lack of browse by artist and the inability to remember the last browsing postion are "features" on all other shippings of the device.