Don’t Duck Around This Player

Quack Quack! Ok I won’t kid around this time, but I think Mac Funamizu has matured pretty much in his design sensibilities. The CD player is called Quackie, but the concept looks decent enough for the tweens who endorse stuff like the Mickey Mouse MP3 players. Quackie is thus: There’s a round body that rolls and a black speaker. The speaker is attached to the body at the axis and it rolls around the body. Simple functions of play/stop/next/back and volume up/down are included.

To pump up the volume, you roll the body so that the “beak” opens up; shutting the beak powers-off the system. Click the black speaker once to skip to the next song and click it thrice to go back.

Wow Mickey n Donald…a winner team!

Designer: Mac Funamizu

Quackie CD Player by Mac Funamizu

quackie2

quackie3

quackie4

quackie5

quackie6

46 Comments

  • SkyWay says:

    I’m beginning to see myself as a Funamizu hater…

    Okay, one good thing, neat idea.

    But then about the maturing : Mac here has apparently never experienced a lock-in CD player, which this would have to be, spitting the disc out when the lock fails. The CD may look flimsy, but it carves furniture quite decently, if you get what I mean and this has no exterior protection, so as a bonus of fear you get sliced childfingers.

    The volume slider is also its stand, so I assume it has a ballbearing running at least half the way for it to slide comfortably on the surface of whatever you put this on.

    Can’t bend my head around how the button thing works, is it a touchsensitive thing and if so, why did he try to complicate the navigation process by putting everything in one button, instead of, I don’t know, three? If it’s a clicky button thingy then oh my…

    Sorry, he still has quite a few flaws in his mind, at least for me. Fans of his “designs” may disagree 😛

    • Confucius says:

      Not to mention, hitting the black play “disk” off centre, would result in the whole thing falling over, breaking that new disk you just bought.

      I think hes going to regret posting.

    • Nick says:

      Ough mature?! Ever considered professional help to acquire a perspective that fits in this reality?

    • TBC says:

      "…so I assume it has a ballbearing…"

      "…how the button thing works…"

      I think you're missing the point, here. This isn't intended to be an actual product, and if you talked to the designer you would be told the same. It's an exploration of interactions between the end user and a product, of form vs. function, and the place of the product in our lives and our homes. To demand fully functioning schematics for an exploratory idea of how things might be, someday, shaped is pretty silly.

      • Butter + Vodka says:

        But as an exploration of form vs. function, I think he failed. Or at least didn't quite succeed. It's all form, and very poor function, if it's impossible or frustrating to interact with.

    • TBC says:

      “…so I assume it has a ballbearing…”

      “…how the button thing works…”

      I think you're missing the point, here. This isn't intended to be an actual product, and if you talked to the designer you would be told the same. It's an exploration of interactions between the end user and a product, of form vs. function, and the place of the product in our lives and our homes. To demand fully functioning schematics for an exploratory idea of how things might be, someday, shaped is pretty silly.

      • Butter + Vodka says:

        But as an exploration of form vs. function, I think he failed. Or at least didn't quite succeed. It's all form, and very poor function, if it's impossible or frustrating to interact with.

    • Cody Morgan says:

      i know what you mean… i think the buttons need to be on top what if you wanted to change the song when the volume is really low? wouldnt the cd be in the way of the buttons?

    • Cody Morgan says:

      i know what you mean… i think the buttons need to be on top what if you wanted to change the song when the volume is really low? wouldnt the cd be in the way of the buttons?

  • Ana says:

    Do we still need CD players?

  • Bos'un's M says:

    Wow, this would have been really cool back in 1993.

  • Margot says:

    not quite as practical or as portable as an iPod….

    • ZapTap says:

      No CD Player ever will be. But CDs offer immeasurably higher quality music. So it's a trade-off with many people supporting each idea. *shrugs*

      • Yeh, but it we're going down that argument, then we should all switch back to vinyl which was even better because its recorded in analogue rather than digitally. Interesting design but 10 years too late.

        • guest says:

          ive listened to vinyl, the sound quality was in noway beter than digital, it was shit. and as far as cds being better quality, thats crap too. cds had limited space on which to put music, the digital stuff Ive downloaded sounds a hell of a lot better

          • ActuallyHasEars says:

            Wow, I cannot believe someone actually said something as ridiculous as this. You are either deaf or whatever LP you "listened" to was previous used as a chopping board. You will never be able to compare digital to analog and have digital come out on top. Ask any musician or audiophile. Analog music contains frequencies that get cut off in digital formats. Frequencies that may not always be audible to your ear, but that register in the subconscious. Also, there are harmonics that you may not get in digital music because, once again, it gets cut off at the high or low pass filters. Go find someone with a good deck and a nice collection of LP's and really listen.

    • ZapTap says:

      No CD Player ever will be. But CDs offer immeasurably higher quality music. So it's a trade-off with many people supporting each idea. *shrugs*

      • Yeh, but it we're going down that argument, then we should all switch back to vinyl which was even better because its recorded in analogue rather than digitally. Interesting design but 10 years too late.

        • guest says:

          ive listened to vinyl, the sound quality was in noway beter than digital, it was shit. and as far as cds being better quality, thats crap too. cds had limited space on which to put music, the digital stuff Ive downloaded sounds a hell of a lot better

          • ActuallyHasEars says:

            Wow, I cannot believe someone actually said something as ridiculous as this. You are either deaf or whatever LP you “listened” to was previous used as a chopping board. You will never be able to compare digital to analog and have digital come out on top. Ask any musician or audiophile. Analog music contains frequencies that get cut off in digital formats. Frequencies that may not always be audible to your ear, but that register in the subconscious. Also, there are harmonics that you may not get in digital music because, once again, it gets cut off at the high or low pass filters. Go find someone with a good deck and a nice collection of LP's and really listen.

  • SewerShark says:

    Seems dangerous to me…I mean, touch a high rotation disk. And without mention that a poorly construct disk could shatter without any particular reason.

  • nutbastard says:

    modern cd’s don’t shatter easily. in the early days the plastic was more brittle, but it’s been pretty flexible for a decade or longer.
    as for high rotation, cds spin at 500rpms. that’s 6.25 fps at the edge. which isn’t enough to do any real damage. also they’re essentially torqueless, and would likely stop very quickly upon contact with the edge.

    • tmkiwipeel says:

      actually dragging a fingertip across a thin edge of plastic at 6.25fps seems pretty dangerous to me…but it is pretty torqueless though

    • tmkiwipeel says:

      actually dragging a fingertip across a thin edge of plastic at 6.25fps seems pretty dangerous to me…but it is pretty torqueless though

    • Jon says:

      I haven't read through all the comments so I don't know if you are the first person to state it but if you are good job.
      for and example of the torqueless thing this person is talking about take a cd player that has an open top and let it run then place your finger on the cd and see if it stops or continues spinning, my bet is on it stops.

    • Jon says:

      I haven't read through all the comments so I don't know if you are the first person to state it but if you are good job.
      for and example of the torqueless thing this person is talking about take a cd player that has an open top and let it run then place your finger on the cd and see if it stops or continues spinning, my bet is on it stops.

    • Practical says:

      Actually the speed on the edge is 11.44 fps – which can still give quite a nasty burn to a child / toddler!

    • Practical says:

      Actually the speed on the edge is 11.44 fps – which can still give quite a nasty burn to a child / toddler!

  • Bos'un's Mate says:

    Wow, this would have been really cool back in 1993.

  • juan m priego says:

    Well when designing means everything, it does balances well, and looks very modern and minimalistic and the last part makes it “art” but when it comes to practical for everyday use is another story, joggers no need to apply, board skaters same deal. at home where no children are present will be a piece of conversation .

  • Jon says:

    what happens if we knock it over, there goes the cd. if you turn it to far it bends and snaps the cd or the cd falls out, you would also have to worry about your cd being scratched

  • Jon says:

    what happens if we knock it over, there goes the cd. if you turn it to far it bends and snaps the cd or the cd falls out, you would also have to worry about your cd being scratched

  • Dennis says:

    Interesting design, but having the CD open to the air seems very impractical. Plus does anyone actually listen to a CD anymore? Most people simply rip the CD onto the computer.

  • Dennis says:

    Interesting design, but having the CD open to the air seems very impractical. Plus does anyone actually listen to a CD anymore? Most people simply rip the CD onto the computer.

  • ActuallyHasEars says:

    Wow, I cannot believe someone actually said something as ridiculous as this. You are either deaf or whatever LP you “listened” to was previous used as a chopping board. You will never be able to compare digital to analog and have digital come out on top. Ask any musician or audiophile. Analog music contains frequencies that get cut off in digital formats. Frequencies that may not always be audible to your ear, but that register in the subconscious. Also, there are harmonics that you may not get in digital music because, once again, it gets cut off at the high or low pass filters. Go find someone with a good deck and a nice collection of LP’s and really listen.

  • ActuallyHasEars says:

    Wow, I cannot believe someone actually said something as ridiculous as this. You are either deaf or whatever LP you “listened” to was previous used as a chopping board. You will never be able to compare digital to analog and have digital come out on top. Ask any musician or audiophile. Analog music contains frequencies that get cut off in digital formats. Frequencies that may not always be audible to your ear, but that register in the subconscious. Also, there are harmonics that you may not get in digital music because, once again, it gets cut off at the high or low pass filters. Go find someone with a good deck and a nice collection of LP’s and really listen.

  • ActuallyHasEars says:

    Man, this blog failed. I hit the reply right under guest saying that digital was better than vinyl. Geez.

  • ActuallyHasEars says:

    Man, this blog failed. I hit the reply right under guest saying that digital was better than vinyl. Geez.

Comments are closed.