Apple Explains Why Only USB-C AirPods Pro Support Lossless Audio With Vision Pro

[jarman92]

That doesn't at all explain why Apple is artificially and arbitrarily limiting lossless audio on the USB-C AirPods Pro to only the Vision Pro. Many Apple devices support the 5GHz band and have for many, many years - since at least the early-to-mid 2000's.

I think this part is pretty obvious—5GHz works best over very short range, and I'd imagine that streaming lossless requires an incredibly close connection, i.e. the distance between your ears and your eyes. Unless you want to hold your MacBook next to your face while listening to music, allowing lossless streaming from other devices would be a terrible experience.

Ouch. I love Apple products, and own several, but that’s a tough pill to swallow. Apple knew they were releasing the Vision Pro when they announced the AirPods Pro 2.

(I don’t own any of the products under discussion, just an observer.)

Did they know? The Vision Pro has been rumored for years, and was constantly being delayed. From what I remember, Apple wasn't even sure they were going to announce it at this year's WWDC until shortly before the event.

it's called planned obselences. They need to make sure you have a reason to buy the new earbuds and push the upcoming mulit month mortgage payment headset. It's nice to see wirelss lossless in the headphones.

You tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists really outdo yourselves sometimes 😂

 

[DowsingForPurple]

I think this part is pretty obvious—5GHz works best over very short range, and I'd imagine that streaming lossless requires an incredibly close connection, i.e. the distance between your ears and your eyes. Unless you want to hold your MacBook next to your face while listening to music, allowing lossless streaming from other devices would be a terrible experience.



Did they know? The Vision Pro has been rumored for years, and was constantly being delayed. From what I remember, Apple wasn't even sure they were going to announce it at this year's WWDC until shortly before the event.



You tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists really outdo yourselves sometimes 😂

Guessing at things doesn't make them facts. If planned obsolescence is a conspiracy theory (it's not - it's a real thing), then you're the other end of the spectrum. Not much nuance here, just bowing to a trillion dollar company that doesn't care about anything but your wallet.

 

[jigzaw]

Why isn’t the iPhone 15 Pro with WiFi 6E support even incapable of lossless with the USB-C AirPod Pros? Surely, its 5Ghz support is robust enough.

So they can announce it as a "new feature" for the iPhone 16 Pro.

 

[- rob -]

It is an interesting question. A lot of good explanations in this thread.

So why are they still called 2nd gen if they have a better chip?

They have all the major features of the prior AP2, just a minor bump to support improved (but to many, not discernible) feature in AVP.

Mac mini got a bump like this on networking throughput, right? I can’t remember the change. Apple still called it the same gen of mini though.

The chip is only part of the equation, there also has to be antenna support. I’m guessing we’ll see teardowns showing if they’re different.

I am also curious on this.

No one cares why the Lighting AirPod Pros aren’t able to do lossless, the real question is why can’t the NEW iPhone do Lossless with the new USB-C AirPod Pros?

This is a fair point. In a prior reply @jarman92 mentions short range.

But cost is also a consideration. Pricing was kept the same, despite massive inflation in the US. I could see Apple shaving off any change that erodes margins, including support for this.

I would not be surprised if it was in the 16 though, and would expect a revision to the AirPods Max to have 5ghz.

This would actually make APM and AP2 have the same feature set in the versions that have USB-C. A minor but useful parallel in the product lineup.

 

[WWPD]

Just once I want Apple to say "we did it because we want you to buy new stuff."

"Here at Apple, we are always looking for new and exciting ways for you to buy new stuff" - Tim Cook

 

[cygy2k]

So you mean when everybody had pickforks out and I said it was possible the H2 chip was a revision with tweaks to make it possible, I was right despite being called a bunch of names. Hmm, odd that nobody on here every goes back and says they jumped the gun with their happiness to think Apple makes every decision to screw them over.

 

[Denzo]

Given history in hard pressed to believe this anything more than a limitation imposed by Apple. 2.4ghz can support a lot more than lossless audio. Like cmon Apple.

 

[cygy2k]

This is nonsense to me.

Every electronic manufacturer makes slight revisions of products during their lifecycle - from 3D printers (Prusa, Bambu, etc) to motherboard models, to CPUs. You were never promised when you bought your APP2 that it would support every feature ever released in the future. It's nonsense that you think your expectations are in check.

 

[jarman92]

Guessing at things doesn't make them facts. If planned obsolescence is a conspiracy theory (it's not - it's a real thing), then you're the other end of the spectrum. Not much nuance here, just bowing to a trillion dollar company that doesn't care about anything but your wallet.

Who said it did? I'm drawing conclusions based on available information and logical inferences. It makes absolutely zero sense that Apple would deliberately and unjustifiably withhold lossless audio from the Lightning AirPods Pro, when 1) the Vision Pro isn't available yet, 2) even when it's released, it will be severely supply-constrained (i.e. < 1 million sold next year), 3) even if/when not supply-constrained, sales will be limited by the enormous price tag, 4) almost nobody can distinguish lossy from lossless audio anyway, and 5) this clearly makes Apple look bad.

So Apple gains literally nothing—nobody with Lightning APPs is going to buy USB-C APPs for lossless audio—and loses face, and the conclusion is "planned obsolescence"? That's conspiracy theorist "logic," not reasoned analysis.

 

[boak]

Every electronic manufacturer makes slight revisions of products during their lifecycle - from 3D printers (Prusa, Bambu, etc) to motherboard models, to CPUs.

Please provide examples where the functionality/capability was not altered by these slight revisions. Genuinely curious.

 

[boak]

This is so messy. Apple should have launched APP3 with Vision Pro and kept only the case different this time.

 

[randomando]

Should have been labelled 3rd generation then

And then people will complain that barely anything changed unless you get the Vision Pro.

They just took advantage of the port update to also push the H2 chip update but they obviously didn’t want to make a big deal out of it since not a whole lot changed and the thing that did change relies on Vision Pro which doesn’t release for a while.

 

[cygy2k]

Please provide examples where the functionality/capability was not altered by these slight revisions. Generally curious.

I'm not going to spend time doing the work for you. Look at routers, motherboards, and the like for examples where revisions of the same generation model required different firmware due to changes in chipset manufacturers, board tweaks, etc and the change in performance, features, or stability.

 

[CWallace]

It still doesn’t make sense. If it’s the same chip that can run on both 2.4 and 5, then apple should be able to enable 5 on APP2wL via firmware update. If it’s a different chip, knowing apple they’d probably call it H3 already.

My guess is it is a new version of the H2 chip that now supports 5GHz.

As to why did they not call it APP3, my guess is lossless audio only with the Vision Pro is not enough to warrant calling it AirPods Pro 3.

My expectation/hope for APP3 is that it when it does launch (perhaps with iPhone 16 or M3 iPads/Macs) that it supports lossless for more devices and has new drivers with better sound reproduction and maybe a new H3 chip with support for WiFi 6E and Bluetooth 5.4 standards.

That doesn't at all explain why Apple is artificially and arbitrarily limiting lossless audio on the USB-C AirPods Pro to only the Vision Pro. Many Apple devices support the 5GHz band and have for many, many years - since at least the early-to-mid 2000's.

IMO, a reasonable presumption is there are technical issues (like antenna design) that means we won't see it until AirPods Pro 3 and perhaps the iPhone 16 and M3 iPads and Macs.

 

[bankshot]

1. If there’s an actual hardware difference to enable this new capability, then the name should reflect a newer version number to avoid consumer confusion. “With USB-C charging case” or whatever it’s officially called does not indicate any new capability beyond the cord that charges the case. Marketing team fail.

2. As for why it’s only supported with Vision Pro, perhaps the 5 GHz signal is only viable at the low power levels required by the AirPods Pro when the distance is as short as from headset to ears? Is it possible that the typical phone distance from pocket to ears would require enough extra power to support a stable 5 GHz signal that it would destroy AirPods Pro battery life? Or maybe it’s the fact that the phone can be left on the table and still support lossy audio via 2.4 GHz from across the room, but 5 GHz wouldn’t work at that distance. The Vision Pro can’t be used when away from the face, so that’s not an issue with it.

I’m not a wireless engineer, just trying to think of legitimate technical reasons why they may have done this.

Either way, Apple absolutely sucks at communication with the customer, which seems far too common for them in recent years.

 

[randomando]

Please provide examples where the functionality/capability was not altered by these slight revisions. Generally curious.

Revising materials or repositioning elements to make things easier or cheaper to assemble.

 

[kc9hzn]

This does seem to answer an earlier question that people had (the “why can’t we just buy a USB-C case like the wireless charging case” question). The answer to that seems to be different hardware, as it turns out.

Why didn’t they add the 5GHz support to the previous model? Dunno. Apple doesn’t particularly like increasing the base price point (in USD) for an existing product if they can help it. The first release sets the curve for the price point to target in subsequent revisions. The Mac mini to this day is in the same roughly $600 to $700 range (give or take $100 depending on the hardware generation) that it was when it launched back in the G4 PowerPC era. So maybe they wanted to hit the $250 target while maintaining the current profit margin and wouldn’t have been able to with the 5GHz chip on launch?

 

[jigzaw]

This is so messy. Apple should have launched APP3 with Vision Pro and kept only the case different this time.

Yes and for the price of the Vision Pro, a pair of APP3 should've been included in the package.

 

[crawfish963]

The real answer: so that next year we can market the new iPhone 16 Pro, our most advanced iPhone yet, as having lossless capabilities. And we think you're gonna love it.

 

[CWallace]

1. If there’s an actual hardware difference to enable this new capability, then the name should reflect a newer version number to avoid consumer confusion. “With USB-C charging case” or whatever it’s officially called does not indicate any new capability beyond the cord that charges the case. Marketing team fail.

To be fair, the number of consumers who will be using these with an Apple Vision Pro is going to be very low so to them, there is no hardware difference. And for those who will be using them with an Apple Vision Pro, they probably almost all will know that they support lossless (either by reading about it or by it being noted in the Apple Vision Pro user manual that lossless is available with AirPods Pro 2 with USB-C charging case).

This does seem to answer an earlier question that people had (the “why can’t we just buy a USB-C case like the wireless charging case” question). The answer to that seems to be different hardware, as it turns out.

The different hardware is in the AirPods themselves, however, not the case. That being said, Apple might not be releasing the USB-C case separately (and forgoing all that revenue) because they fear too many people might assume that the lossless audio capability is in the case.

 

[Garrote]

My original question was about why no articles seem to discuss the iPhone 15 Pros with lossless but I just realized I kept overlooking that this is due to the H2 chip and not the U2 chip.

Okay, so why dont iPhones also get the H2 chip, at least the Pro versions?

Apart from margins and extra cost, does anyone have any thoughts why the Pro iPhones don’t have an H2 chip?

 

[CWallace]

Apart from margins and extra cost, does anyone have any thoughts why the Pro iPhones don’t have an H2 chip?

The H series (and W series before it) are designed to provide Bluetooth and wireless connectivity in headphone devices. iPhones (and Watches and iPads and Macs) already have Bluetooth and wireless connectivity via other chips so they do not need the H/W chip.

 

[kc9hzn]

Guessing at things doesn't make them facts. If planned obsolescence is a conspiracy theory (it's not - it's a real thing), then you're the other end of the spectrum. Not much nuance here, just bowing to a trillion dollar company that doesn't care about anything but your wallet.

While there’s a kernel of truth to the idea of “planned obsolescence”, it most certainly is a conspiracy theory the way it’s typically presented. Consider the brouhaha about battery health a few years back. Apple throttled the phones so they wouldn’t demand voltage spikes that would cause the phone to reset. Having had a phone that would reset due to battery issues and one that would just slow down, the latter was much more preferable and allowed me to extend the usable life of the phone. That’s the exact opposite of what planned obsolescence would suggest that they do. Does Apple want you to buy new generations of their products? Of course. Does Apple deliberately cripple existing hardware in order to drive new sales? Doesn’t seem to be the case, if anything, Apple bends over backwards to support older hardware.

 

[iPhone Andy]

My original question was about why no articles seem to discuss the iPhone 15 Pros with lossless but I just realized I kept overlooking that this is due to the H2 chip and not the U2 chip.

Okay, so why dont iPhones also get the H2 chip, at least the Pro versions?

Apart from margins and extra cost, does anyone have any thoughts why the Pro iPhones don’t have an H2 chip?

Cost is likely the only reason.

The flagship iPhones have been $1,000 USD for six years, despite iPhones packing new expensive hardware and inflation reducing the value of that $1,000 significantly. If iPhone prices kept pace with inflation, the Pro iPhones would start at $1,250.

 

[progx]

My prediction will be the visionpro will sell less than the airpod pros and that’s not saying much.

A niche product is a a niche product.

Seeing how the Vision Pro is almost a market onto itself, I don't really think a niche has been established for AR Workstations yet. Also, I don't think this item is going to be outselling anything except their sales forecasts and expectations, which probably isn't too high as a risk item.