Apple lossless goes up to 24bits at 192KHz, which is over 4mbps. I believe bluetooth 5.x only supports 2mbps, although I'm not sure.
According to wikipedia, Apple did file a patent in 2019 for high bandwidth low latency audio streaming over bluetooth (up to 8mbps)[0]. Looks like they've been working on this for a while.
I assume that "up to 8mbps" probably means that in reality you can't use much more than 1 mbps because in a crowded space with lots of wifi devices and lots of other people using bluetooth headphones there will be lots of interference and data rates will be forced to go down.
Bluetooth and Wifi already don't properly coexist - one device can transmit a bluetooth packet and another a wifi packet at the same time, and the likelihood is both packets will get clobbered and lost. Proper coexistence would involve a device saying "I want to reserve Frequency bands X, Y and Z for the next 1 millisecond", and then no other devices using those frequency bands for that time. That exists for wifi clients, but it doesn't interoperate with Bluetooth, thread or zigbee.
I support getting the sampling rate and quality up. To what level? Idk.
Have you ever been in a room with a DJ playing low quality music on a decent sound system? It's awful, grating. Now at least your everyday aspiring DJ has access to higher bitrate tunes and doesn't need to blast low quality junk out of the PA system.
While I can understand that bluetooth limits the data transmission rate, now it becomes even more puzzling that the AirPods Max don't support data transmission via lightning cable. With that they could fully support lossless and high res audio in full quality. How can Apple release such expensive, some people even used the word "overpriced" headphones without that features, especially with the new tiers of Apple Music coming?
I think the real question is why AirPods Max have received tons of praise for their unmatched audio quality when they were released, and now suddenly are talked down to second tier because they don’t support lossless?
I mean, surely all those audiophile testers were aware that they are listening to compressed music? Or is this a recent realisation?
To add on top of that, they own the full stack, they can (as they already did in the past) use their 100% proprietary way to achieve this. They don't obey to common standards.
Apparently lossless streaming cannot be supported on the newest bluetooth spec, and will probably require some kind of wired headphones for the near future.
Apple took our headphone jacks, then gave us lossless audio. How generous. My 6s is starting to show its wear, unfortunately.
I don't expect it, but I truly hope the next iPhone has a headphone jack. People want airpods whether or not their phones have headphone jacks, it was insecure to take it away in the first place. Have some faith in your products.
On the plus side, I often get to pick the music in my friends' cars.
Having wireless headphones:
Cons:
- Battery to charge
- Battery that is reduced after a few years
- Pairing with devices issues
- Lower quality of the sound due to the Bluetooth recompression
Pros: Cable doesn't get snagged when person sitting next to you gets up on the subway, ripping them out of my ears. I can connect them to my phone, tablet, tv easily and move around the house without the device.
There's perfectly valid reason to have wireless headphones.
I, uh, just own both types? Actually 90% of the time the reason I use wireless buds is because I want to wear just one bud without stuff dangling, like when I'm cooking or walking my dog and I want to be aware of my surroundings.
You can't seriously list battery wear and charging and leave out the biggest annoyances with wired earphones: the cable gets tangled, and on earphones the cable is the weakest link, it's the first thing that breaks the majority of the time.
When I'm cycling or running I cannot handle having a cable going around. Bluetooth does the job anyway.
If you care about quality of audio, then your requirements differs.
Apples loves to make something new/cool and then make it obsolete a year later. Honestly, frustrating as an Apple customer. Just when I jump to your new product you make it useless by changing something. Tech should be designed to last years, not months.
How is not supporting "24-bit/192kHz" making a headphone obsolete? I would be surprised if you can even hear a difference on any AirPods compared to "24-bit/48kHz".
Which Apple devices are most notable as part of the story of next-year deprecation? And won't compressed streaming still be the norm for almost everyone in the world for a very long time?
In this case, though, it's more like protecting the user from streaming higher bitrate than anyone can hear a difference in on that hardware anyway - which will help their battery life. We're talking about things like ear pods here, not a hi-fi stereo system.
They aren’t changing anything, your AirPods will still be using the same AAC codec it did when you first bought them.
Taking a step back from watching their every move or keynote is one way to keep being happy with your device, and you’ll probably find it does last years.
My Sony XM3 supports LDAC which is near-lossless and it was released a couple of years ago. No matter what you think, I can't justify a so called $600 "premium" wireless headphone not even attempt to support something close to lossless no matter how you put it. I really hope there's something Apple can do about this via software, otherwise, as an audiophile this is just full of compromises - all the way from requiring a case just to charge it, to the easy to slip from fingers design, to the smaller driver size (40mm) and now to not supporting lossless formats.
LDAC isn't lossless. The 'Hi-Resolution' ALAC files would all be lossy over it, and honestly anything else above 44.1khz that doesn't have a near flawless bluetooth connection.
This is a really baffling decision from Apple - normally they're very good about having tightly integrated ecosystems where everything just 'works' with everything else. That's kinda the entire value proposition in my eyes.
> normally they're very good about having tightly integrated ecosystems where everything just 'works' with everything else
As a long time Apple user (since the 90's), I feel like this hasn't been true in a while. The number one exhibit is the dongle-hell they've been putting their customers through for the last 5 years. I have a watch, phone, headphones, a computer, and a tablet by Apple. All were made in the last two years. I have to carry a handful of different cables and power adapters if I want to charge them all. It's a huge pain in the ass and is FAR from the definition of "just works".
I wonder whether someone who resents the lack of lossless audio in wireless, noise-cancelling headphones shouldn‘t rather consider buying an analogue, wired pair instead?
Weel I don't think any bluetooth headphone would work with that.
I don't know how it works with headpones, but Douby Atmos you need at least 7 good speakers to make it work well in a movie:
* Front left
* Front right
* center
* surround pair.
* back pair.
Also you need a Subwoofer and if you gonna implement a perfect set, you still need 4 ceiling speakers to have the full effect.
This cost of entry is the reason I still didn't put it in my house.
You only have two ears. If you can isolate them, as in headphones, you don't need more than two speakers.
The reason Dolby Atmos requires so many speakers is that each speaker is heard by both ears, like in real life, as a result you need a setup closer to real life. In addition, in theaters, people seat all over the place, so you need even more speakers to widen the "sweet spot".
Strangely enough, Apple's most advanced ear pods/headphones and the like change the audio you hear as you move your head. Kind of gimmicky, but they do technically have a way to render spatial audio even though they only have two speakers.
Serious question: You only have 2 ears so theoretically headphones should be able to produce the same experience as 7 speakers in a room. I imagine that is a hard problem, but is my understanding correct? Anyone know how hard this is?
> you need at least 7 good speakers to make it work well in a movie
You don't - they use head-related transfer function filters (the Fourier transform of head-related impulse response) to make it work from a single pair of speakers.
There doesn't seem to be enough bandwidth, not even with BT 5.0's 2 Mbps LE 2M which just barely ekes out 1400 kbps after accounting for protocol overhead, just below CD audio's 1411 kbps data rate for 2-channel 16 bit 44.1 kHz LPCM.
Unless ALAC can consistently keep the data rate below 1400 kbps, I don't see how it's possible to have lossless audio over today's BT standards. And keep in mind that CD-quality is the lowest tier of Apple's new offering.
Apple filed a patent a few years ago for something called "high data rate" (HDR) that's capable of 8 Mbps. Maybe something will come of that eventually.
It feels like Apple released the lossless Apple Music update prematurely. I'd expect them to do the lossless update at the same time as introducing a refresh of their high end gear that is able to take advantage of the upgrade.
If my speculation is correct, did they do it early to get the jump on another platform? That also does not seem like an Apple style move.
It's been long reported that Apple has been undergoing a strategic shift to put more focus on their services business, and this seems like some more evidence of that. It's certainly a very "non-Apple" thing to do based on how they've operated for the past 2 decades. The release of lossless audio and the upcoming release of Apple Music on Android are two major features that add zero value or lock-in pressure for Apple hardware but add real value for subscribers of Apple Music.
Maybe their services teams are finally starting to be given leeway to operate as real businesses and do things to grow their revenue rather than just operate as growth channels for Apple hardware as they always have in the past.
I’m just going to say it… it was a stupid feature to “announce” the way they did.
It should have been a bullet point mentioned in passing at WWDC… assuming they had anything at all about the Apple Music APIs to mention. This isn’t something enough people care enough about to generate hype or growth, releasing it out on its own just allowed them to draw attention in isolation which has cast it in a less than ideal light due to its shortcomings.
If they new (and they obviously did) that it was supported in such a statistically limited (percentage wise) subset when compared to their overall customer base’s listening habits… then making any fuss at all was kind of stupid. They now have the unforced error of having high value customers buying their most expensive products asking uncomfortable questions like “why did you sell me $1000 headphones that don’t support your best stuff?”
Tidal, Amazon Music HD, and Spotify hifi are all services aimed at selling higher fidelity Music at higher prices. Apple gives this away and they should just make it a bullet point?
I figured as much. Oh well, for serious listening I'll just get that lightning to headphone jack cable and plug it into my Schiit stack (Modi / Magni Heresy AMP/Dac)
[+] [-] float4|4 years ago|reply
According to wikipedia, Apple did file a patent in 2019 for high bandwidth low latency audio streaming over bluetooth (up to 8mbps)[0]. Looks like they've been working on this for a while.
[0] https://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2019/0104424.html
[+] [-] londons_explore|4 years ago|reply
Bluetooth and Wifi already don't properly coexist - one device can transmit a bluetooth packet and another a wifi packet at the same time, and the likelihood is both packets will get clobbered and lost. Proper coexistence would involve a device saying "I want to reserve Frequency bands X, Y and Z for the next 1 millisecond", and then no other devices using those frequency bands for that time. That exists for wifi clients, but it doesn't interoperate with Bluetooth, thread or zigbee.
[+] [-] qmmmur|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] datahead|4 years ago|reply
Have you ever been in a room with a DJ playing low quality music on a decent sound system? It's awful, grating. Now at least your everyday aspiring DJ has access to higher bitrate tunes and doesn't need to blast low quality junk out of the PA system.
[+] [-] _ph_|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] herodoturtle|4 years ago|reply
For me the holy grail is USB-C powered earbuds with active noise cancelling.
That way I don't have to worry about battery running out either.
I often work for 10+ hours and 4 hours of battery on AirPods pro frustrates me when I have to regularly charge them during the day.
Then with USB-C could also get superior audio quality than Bluetooth.
I'm considering getting the Bose QC20 as a compromise. But still... they're also somewhat battery dependent.
[+] [-] periheli0n|4 years ago|reply
I mean, surely all those audiophile testers were aware that they are listening to compressed music? Or is this a recent realisation?
[+] [-] darkwater|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] amelius|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] threatofrain|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] switz|4 years ago|reply
I don't expect it, but I truly hope the next iPhone has a headphone jack. People want airpods whether or not their phones have headphone jacks, it was insecure to take it away in the first place. Have some faith in your products.
On the plus side, I often get to pick the music in my friends' cars.
[+] [-] andix|4 years ago|reply
There are probably some special cases where you may hear the difference, but it wouldn't be significant.
If you want to listen to music in highest possible quality, AirPods are for sure the wrong device. Probably also the AirPods Max.
You would use some very high end wired sound system or headphones, to get a very small difference for a lot of money :)
[+] [-] edhelas|4 years ago|reply
Pros: - No cable
I'll keep my cable headphones :)
[+] [-] tashoecraft|4 years ago|reply
There's perfectly valid reason to have wireless headphones.
[+] [-] greenshackle2|4 years ago|reply
You can't seriously list battery wear and charging and leave out the biggest annoyances with wired earphones: the cable gets tangled, and on earphones the cable is the weakest link, it's the first thing that breaks the majority of the time.
[+] [-] lopis|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unethical_ban|4 years ago|reply
For me, being able to walk around my house while doing a conference on my computer, or go to the fridge/oven while I'm on Discord, is a big sell.
Sure I have some higher quality wired equipment, but wireless is incredibly convenient.
The only time that Bluetooth gives me issue is with my 2014 vehicle.
[+] [-] yohannparis|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] annoyingnoob|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] EveYoung|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] threatofrain|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] berberous|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lnanek2|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ullevaal|4 years ago|reply
Taking a step back from watching their every move or keynote is one way to keep being happy with your device, and you’ll probably find it does last years.
[+] [-] hyperbovine|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neya|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Veen|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pram|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cfcf14|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wmeredith|4 years ago|reply
As a long time Apple user (since the 90's), I feel like this hasn't been true in a while. The number one exhibit is the dongle-hell they've been putting their customers through for the last 5 years. I have a watch, phone, headphones, a computer, and a tablet by Apple. All were made in the last two years. I have to carry a handful of different cables and power adapters if I want to charge them all. It's a huge pain in the ass and is FAR from the definition of "just works".
[+] [-] slivanes|4 years ago|reply
They've made a billion dollar market for dongles, imo unnecessarily.
[+] [-] periheli0n|4 years ago|reply
There is signal loss in noise-cancelling, too!
[+] [-] major505|4 years ago|reply
Also you need a Subwoofer and if you gonna implement a perfect set, you still need 4 ceiling speakers to have the full effect.
This cost of entry is the reason I still didn't put it in my house.
[+] [-] GuB-42|4 years ago|reply
The reason Dolby Atmos requires so many speakers is that each speaker is heard by both ears, like in real life, as a result you need a setup closer to real life. In addition, in theaters, people seat all over the place, so you need even more speakers to widen the "sweet spot".
[+] [-] zlsa|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lnanek2|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] patrickthebold|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chrisseaton|4 years ago|reply
You don't - they use head-related transfer function filters (the Fourier transform of head-related impulse response) to make it work from a single pair of speakers.
[+] [-] js2|4 years ago|reply
https://www.novelbits.io/bluetooth-5-speed-maximum-throughpu...
Unless ALAC can consistently keep the data rate below 1400 kbps, I don't see how it's possible to have lossless audio over today's BT standards. And keep in mind that CD-quality is the lowest tier of Apple's new offering.
Apple filed a patent a few years ago for something called "high data rate" (HDR) that's capable of 8 Mbps. Maybe something will come of that eventually.
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2019/0104424.html
[+] [-] DIVx0|4 years ago|reply
If my speculation is correct, did they do it early to get the jump on another platform? That also does not seem like an Apple style move.
[+] [-] cactus2093|4 years ago|reply
Maybe their services teams are finally starting to be given leeway to operate as real businesses and do things to grow their revenue rather than just operate as growth channels for Apple hardware as they always have in the past.
[+] [-] tomkarlo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xd1936|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] techdragon|4 years ago|reply
It should have been a bullet point mentioned in passing at WWDC… assuming they had anything at all about the Apple Music APIs to mention. This isn’t something enough people care enough about to generate hype or growth, releasing it out on its own just allowed them to draw attention in isolation which has cast it in a less than ideal light due to its shortcomings.
If they new (and they obviously did) that it was supported in such a statistically limited (percentage wise) subset when compared to their overall customer base’s listening habits… then making any fuss at all was kind of stupid. They now have the unforced error of having high value customers buying their most expensive products asking uncomfortable questions like “why did you sell me $1000 headphones that don’t support your best stuff?”
[+] [-] twobitshifter|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raverbashing|4 years ago|reply
So please tell me again how the wired headphone plugs were "deprecated" and "outdated" and that wireless audio was the future.
[+] [-] whywhywhywhy|4 years ago|reply
Seems absurd to launch a service where your $550 headphones launched just a few weeks ago don't even support the difference.
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] samgranieri|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] StartupTree|4 years ago|reply
I have an old iPhone SE (2016). It has a headphone jack. Does this mean my old iPhone can play lossless music but the latest iPhones can't?