Gibson and Walkman

[infrogmation]

Interesting short interview with S.F. writer William Gibson from Rolling Stone

One point I find interesting is his observation on the Sony Walkman:


"The very first time I picked up a Sony Walkman, I knew it was a killer thing, that the world was changing right then and there. A year later, no one could imagine what it was like when you couldn't move around surrounded by a cloud of stereophonic music of your own choosing. That was huge! That was as big as the Internet!"


I am just old enough to remember the Walkman phenomena and the technological state before it, and had a very different impression.

I had a Walkman (or one of its early clones) and enjoyed using it, but at the time regarded it as a minor improvement of existing technology with a large dose of marketing hype.

Walkman article on Wikipedia

When I was a little kid in the 1960s, there were already "Transistor" radios about the size of a pack of cigarettes that one could listen to with an earphone jack. (I take it that the technology was fairly new at the time, and I recall slang use of the term "transistorized" to mean something made improbably small.)

By the early 1970s, there were cassette tape recorders just slightly larger than a hard-cover book that one could easily carry with one hand, and listen to either with the built-in speaker or through an earphone. (I saw cheap cassette player/recorders at Radio Shack within the last year that look little changed from those of more than 30 years ago.)

The Walkman-- okay, they made it smaller, in part by elimiating the built in speaker. And instead of an ear-plug, a pair of tiny cheap-ass headphones. OK, but I rolled my eyes at the advertising that proclaimed it somehow revolutionary.

Perhaps the stereo rather than mono is what particularly impressed some people? I consider stereophonic sound reproduction nifty, but when the audio isn't particularly high-fidelity to begin with, a minor point.

Comments

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

I think this is more or less right--however, I do think there's something to the idea that stereo was key. There was stereo and there were stereo headphones long before the Walkman, but until then, most people hadn't actually listened to stereo music through headphones (those horrible old airline phones don't count); the Walkman gave them a reason to. I do remember being absolutely gobsmacked the first time I did, and it was on some Walkman-knockoff.

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

...also, I remember those bulky headphone-mounted stereo FM radios that preceded the Walkman; I think they were regarded as kind of a joke, though.

Stereophonic sound

[infrogmation.livejournal.com]

Was I unusual in having previous experince with stereo headphones? IIRC, a pair came with a new turntable/stereo my parents got towards the end of the 1960s. I recall listening to one of older brother's Beatles Lps on them at a place I think we moved out of in 1970, making it about a full decade before the Walkman.

I still had those late '60s headphones working through the 1990s, and would sometimes bring them to the radio station, especially when I was engineering a live band in the on-air studio, since the massive things provided an amazing amount of audio insulation from external sound.

Re: Stereophonic sound

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

I thought they were regarded as sort of an audiophile thing; if you were into hi-fi you'd have them but maybe not otherwise. In my parents' house in the Seventies there were various little radios (all from GE since Dad got employee discounts--he used one of the cigarette-pack-sized AM transistors to listen to the game while he was working around the house), and there was a big cabinet stereo with a turntable that Mom played "Bridge Over Troubled Water" on a lot. But the only phones I remember anyone using were the little mono earplugs. I had a trade-paperback-sized AM/FM radio with one of those, which was a prized possession.

Lightweight headphones

[notr.livejournal.com]

were a major novelty. Stereo sound was a big deal. The combination of the two made it a real environment changer regardless of the sound quality.

But I also remember it as having a lot better sound quality than other portables of the time, especially other miniatures. It cost more, too, but still a lot less than pro gear. I think of it as sort of the boom box for private people--something to show off their taste and purchasing power even though they weren't going to blast their music across the parking lot. And when they wanted to share something with friends who didn't have a cassette deck, they could plug it into their stereo and the solid-state output would give decent sound despite the impedance mismatch.

Re: Stereophonic sound

[entheos93.livejournal.com]

Of course you weren't alone. As I remember, getting stoned and listening to Pink Floyd through that type of headphones was a mandatory experience.

Re: Stereophonic sound

[jdquintette.livejournal.com]

You must have a lot of people on your flist who either weren't around in the 60s or didn't do any drugs. I mean, that was the whole point of stereo, wasn't it? Drop acid, put on the phones, and listen to Jeff Beck's "Beck-ola" pan from one side to the other.

I actually broke down and bought a cheap Walkman about 1986. I had to learn a bunch of tunes for an oldies tour with the Platters, and I figured the best way to absorb them was to listen while I was out jogging. Joggers with walkmans on had become ubiquitous.

I hated the thing. It didn't run at the proper speed, sound everything was about a half-step sharp. Tempos were too fast too; most people probably wouldn't notice, but as you know we musicians tend to be fussy about this stuff. Plus I didn't like not being able to hear the sounds of the environment I was in.

One of your more loquacious posters below goes on as if this was a good thing, but frankly I think it sucks. The whole "I'm in my own little earbud world" thing is actually the total antithesis of the communal experience that music should be, and often is in this town. I just don't find that kind of isolation-inside-my-own-head thing very attractive, at least since I gave up drugs.

Of course, I'm kind of a crank. I actually think humans should spend a whole lot less time passively listening to music on techdroid little gizmos, and a whole lot more participating in and playing it live.

Re: Stereophonic sound

[infrogmation.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I recall the Walkmans and similar portable cassette players as having problems keeping tempo and pitch as well.

Once WWOZ went on the air, I more often listened to radio when I wanted audio on my commute than cassettes. I remember in 1982 riding the St. Charles Streetcar listening to a mix tape of mine-- in the form of a 90 minute show I recorded on reel-to-reel tape that was being broadcast over WWOZ.

Yes, I think it is a problem that we have a culture with such a large number of people with little or no idea of what music actually sounds like live.

Re: Stereophonic sound

[jdquintette.livejournal.com]

Yes, I think it is a problem that we have a culture with such a large number of people with little or no idea of what music actually sounds like live.

Man, when I taught high school as a sub in Canada, sometimes I would ask the band classes how many of them had heard live music recently, besides the stuff they were playing in rehearsals. Often only one or two hands would go up. And more often than I care to remember, No hands would go up, and I would find on further questioning that none of them had ever heard live music in any form. Ever.

This was really depressing, because to them, live music sounded like the high-school concert or jazz band they were playing in, which, you know...sucked. And the kids who didn't take music had very likely never heard any live music at all. And this is the world we live in, where "listening to music" means listening to a recorded version of a past performance on 'ear buds.' I mean, talk about a 'dead' art form.

I get into arguments with people who don't make the distinction. To them it's all the same; canned, live, what's the diff? Although if you question them further you almost always find the ratio of canned to live is hugely skewed towards the recorded stuff. That's assuming that they go to live performances at all, which many, many people never do.

It's like watching a video of the grand canyon and saying "oh yeah. I've seen the grand canyon."