Review: Sony Walkman S540 Series Video MP3 Player
9:44 am, November 19th, 2009, Giles Turnbull
Press releases, you will hardly be surprised to hear, are rarely very interesting. But one arrived in my inbox a couple of weeks ago that made me double-take.
“Sony’s S Series Walkman,” it chattered, “is a serious challenger to the iPod Nano.” Gosh, really? Perhaps the Cult had better have a look at one, then, despite it hitting the shops a couple of months ago.
Sony claims the Walkman is better than a Nano because: it has a bigger screen (2.4 inches compared to the Nano’s puny 2.2 inches), better speakers, radio recording, better batter life, and unlimited TV shows.
The bigger screen is, yes, bigger. But so minutely fractionally so that boasting about it is almost embarrassing. For the rest of us. It’s bright enough, and saturated enough, but ultimately it’s as much of a muchness as makes no odds.
Also: the “video” they’re talking about is video you watch, not video you record. The Sony isn’t a camera, like the Nano is.
Anyway, says Sony. Who wants to record their own videos? We have other features.
The speakers, now, yes, those speakers. It’s true that the Walkman has stereo speakers. In fact, most of it seems to be speaker. Every part of the front facia that isn’t screen or button is speaker; a couple more speakers are included on the back too. This thing is festooned with speakers.
But the end result isn’t great sound. Having lots of tiny, tinny speakers on a device like this doesn’t change the fact that the sound is tiny and tinny. The upshot is something that sounds just as tinny as its rivals, only a bit louder. Tinny sound that goes up to 11.
That’s not supposed to be a criticism of Sony, either. I’m sure the result would be the same if Apple covered an iPod with speakers on all sides. The difference is that Apple knows the result wouldn’t be worth the effort.
The next two features are easy to deal with, because they’re both quite nice: yes, you can record radio and it’s jolly handy. And yes, the battery lasts ages and that’s just great.
The device is well sized, nice and small. It’s very light, but feels solid. You get the sense that it’ll survive a fair amount of knocking about in your pocket or bag. It’s also a decent price for your 8GB or 16GB worth of space. If you want to listen to stuff as you walk around, it’s a fine piece of kit.
Company: Sony
Model: S Series Walkman
List Price: $129 (16GB)
Buy Now: The Sony S Series Walkman is available from Amazon for $116 with free shipping.
You know what, I’ll give this one to Sony: they’re right. It is a challenger to the Nano. But if I were to make the choice, I’d still pick the Nano, and here’s why: the features Sony is trumpeting don’t seem that compelling to me, and don’t compensate for the lack of a video camera. I’m one of those people who’d rather have the camera, and can live without all those speakers.
Posted by Giles Turnbull in Hardware, Reviews, Top stories | Comment on this article
If you enjoyed this article:
Subscribe via RSS or email, or follow us on Facebook and Twitter
Good article, but some training in photography seems in order, don’t you think Mr.T? Focused in your writing but not …….
chano, on November 19th, 2009 at 11:12 am
I am the *last* person to claim to have any skill at product photography, as I commented on Twitter about 10 minutes after taking these shots.
That said, the sixth picture (the *really* blurry one) was *meant* to be that way.
Related fact: I need to get a tripod.
Giles Turnbull, on November 19th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
unlimited tv shows? what the hell does that mean?
firesign3000, on November 19th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
‘If you want to listen to stuff as you walk around, it’s a fine piece of kit.’ isn’t that the purpose of a portable music player?
Also it is well known that the walkman’s sound quality is a lot better than the nano’s.
killer feature: UMS
nabil2199, on November 19th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Agree with nabil2199 on the sound quality. I stopped using my nano and gave it to my brother after i heard the Sony. It’s in a league of its own in terms of sound.
Unfortunately the software is terrible. It doesn’t play well at all with OS X and in general it’s a lot less user friendly than the ipod.
So it depends on your priorities I guess.
lameplanet, on December 8th, 2009 at 9:21 pm