Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Preparing HD Audio Playback for iOS 8 Alongside New In-Ear Headphones and Lightning Cable

Seems Apple is finding a new way to revitalize their portable offerings and home set ups - hmmm

new ear pieces - check
new iPhone - check
new iPod - check
new ATVx - check
might as well throw in -
"enhanced audio" iMac and Mac Mini - check

candidly, Apple should just provide CD quality lossless option from iTunes but then again, they wouldn't have anything to motivate everyone going out and buying more hardware from Apple.

I find that I have almost all my music as Apple lossless and a hand full of 256 AAC. I use the HD Dirac App which gets superior mileage out of the Apple provided ear sets (buds or pods). I was surprised just how much better Apple's ear pieces could sound though I prefer my Sennheiser and B&W headsets.
 
phrehdd said:
... Apple should just provide CD quality lossless option from iTunes...
Click to expand...

CD is 16-bit depth with a 44.1kHz sampling frequency. What these articles are referring to is a 24-bit depth with either a 96kHz or 192kHz sampling frequency, depending on the master recording. A CD is by no means the gold standard in audio fidelity.
 
dabotsonline said:
CD is 16-bit depth with a 44.1kHz sampling frequency. What these articles are referring to is a 24-bit depth with either a 96kHz or 192kHz sampling frequency, depending on the master recording. A CD is by no means the gold standard in audio fidelity.
Click to expand...

I do appreciate what you are saying here. However, as someone who does have 192/24 and 96/24 purchased audio files, there is a lot more that goes into a "gold standard" than just the numbers. There are some excellent 44.1/16 product via CD that certainly put some commercially released 96/24 music files to shame.

Let's just say we agree in theory but in experience, I'd just be happy if Apple provided true CD quality purchases. Also most commercial recordings of the last couple of decades started out as 192/24 and as such they were brought down to 96/24 or 44.1/16 or even 48/24. The question then is more about how they were mastered and what devices do we have to play them back to note differences.

My collection - CDs and HDTracks HD audio files (and just a handful of iTunes 256 AAC and of course some super old vinyl).
 
dabotsonline said:
CD is 16-bit depth with a 44.1kHz sampling frequency. What these articles are referring to is a 24-bit depth with either a 96kHz or 192kHz sampling frequency, depending on the master recording. A CD is by no means the gold standard in audio fidelity.
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to compare lossless CD-quality to lossy HD tracks at the same bitrate. Personally I think that HD would win out in quality because the lossy AAC codec is so efficient.

----------
phrehdd said:
Seems Apple is finding a new way to revitalize their portable offerings and home set ups - hmmm

new ear pieces - check
new iPhone - check
new iPod - check
new ATVx - check
might as well throw in -
"enhanced audio" iMac and Mac Mini - check
Click to expand...

I think all Intel Macs have had audio hardware capable of 24 bit 96kHz since the beginning. You just have to launch the Audio MIDI Setup utility to unleash HD audio from your Mac.
 
microphone pass thru!!

With In-Ear Headphones, when you speak to Siri, or on a call, the ability to hear your own voice clearly is severely hampered. Your voice sounds all muffled due to the isolation factor with IEM's. This is an Area Of Opportunity. What is needed is for the microphone to activate and allow you to hear your own voice. I'm wondering if this should be handled within the headphones? Or within iOS? Either way, this is a glaring shortcoming of the majority of IEM's. Gotta fix this. It is sooooo annoying.
 
dabotsonline said:
CD is 16-bit depth with a 44.1kHz sampling frequency. What these articles are referring to is a 24-bit depth with either a 96kHz or 192kHz sampling frequency, depending on the master recording. A CD is by no means the gold standard in audio fidelity.
Click to expand...

Actually, 16/44.1 is the gold standard, because it covers the full hearing range of the human ear.

Hi-res audio is nothing but a marketing scam:

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
 
RolyPolyBird said:
That is as stupid as saying "Just use AAC instead of mp3".
Click to expand...
Why?

----------
JAT said:
Point is that people sell audio in FLAC, they don't in ALAC. It's annoying.
Click to expand...
Whenever I encounter FLAC it's literally a two second automatic conversion process directly into ALAC in iTunes (using FLACtunes). Hardly any different than dropping a file onto iTunes itself.

Not seeing the annoyance factor here.
 
Sol said:
Of course new Apple in-ear headphones are rumoured to be coming, just days after I bought replacement ear-pods :) If only I knew...

I used to have in-ear headphones from Etymotic and despite all their sonic advantages, I came to the conclusion that paying a lot for everyday headphones is not worth it. The earpods sound great considering their price and like all headphones, they eventually have to be replaced because some part of them gets damaged or they get lost. By all means, spend big on home or office headphones but paying a lot for portable/everyday headphones is a waste of money and the benefits are very small, considering all the environmental noise in most urban environments, public transport, etc.
Click to expand...

THIS! I've easily spent over $1500 on ear/headphones alone between 2007 (first job) to now, and when it comes to every day use and audio fidelity it's really, really hard to go past the EarPods. They're durable, have great audio reproduction and are super cheap.

The only thing lacking for me, is now that I'm listening to more electronic music, and have perhaps larger than average canal openings, I can miss some decent low end while walking around...but it's not like the EarPod can't produce it, I just need to manually hold it in a particular position to direct the audio correctly and generate a little more isolation.

9/10 would and have bought again.
 
Really interesting to read that there are people with ears that don't simply reject the earPods. I don't know how good their sound quality is because they simply do not stay in my ears, and their mad shape makes them hard to use with foam covers as well lol.

The Apple in-ear ones are the best headphones I've ever had, they have great sound and cut out a hell of a lot of outside noise, and they've lasted almost 4 years so far, way beyond any others I've used. Okay the wires are showing in places, and being held together with tape, but that's only cosmetic :).
 
I actually quite like the current apple earphones. These earphones with rubber buds always fall out of my ears. I hope apple doesn't change thr earphones.
 
mrussell said:
What I am wondering is if they do acquire Beats, will Beats headphones also adopt the same lightning connectivity feature. Could this be one of Apples reasonings for the acquisition of beats; to have "high quality" headphones?
Click to expand...

Why would the headphones need a lightning connector? They are headphones which would plug into the headphone jack.

----------
phrehdd said:
I do appreciate what you are saying here. However, as someone who does have 192/24 and 96/24 purchased audio files, there is a lot more that goes into a "gold standard" than just the numbers. There are some excellent 44.1/16 product via CD that certainly put some commercially released 96/24 music files to shame.

Let's just say we agree in theory but in experience, I'd just be happy if Apple provided true CD quality purchases. Also most commercial recordings of the last couple of decades started out as 192/24 and as such they were brought down to 96/24 or 44.1/16 or even 48/24. The question then is more about how they were mastered and what devices do we have to play them back to note differences.

My collection - CDs and HDTracks HD audio files (and just a handful of iTunes 256 AAC and of course some super old vinyl).
Click to expand...

My understanding is that Apple's been working on essentially AAC versions of 24/96 and 24/192 with their Mastered For iTunes app that the mastering studios would be using. I think it's still lossy not lossless compression that HD Tracks uses. How much different remains to be seen.

The reasons why a recording sounds good or bad is the mastering process, where they got the original source from and how they did the conversion and mastering process with or without audio compression (audio compression is different than file compression). Audio compression can limit the dynamic range of the recording so the "audiophile" crowd typically doesn't want audio compression.

What I'm hoping for are 24/96 and 24/192 tracks that sound as close to the FLAC/AIFF files that HD Tracks has only with smaller file sizes using AAC compression, cheaper since they are lossy instead of lossless and cost less money so that more people can afford it. I think it would be safe to say that Apple might be going for the mass market 24 Bit crowd rather than the "I don't care what it costs, I want the best sound possible" crowd. At that's what I THNK they might be doing, so time will tell what they ultimately do.

If Apple does start releasing 24 Bit files, then it would make sense that Apple would start the refresh process of implementing 24 Bit DACs in their products starting this year and that they would completely transition their entire product line over within about 3 years so that all Apple users can play 24/192 files without buying a premium external DAC and those that want even better sound know they'll have to buy an external DAC for higher quality playback.

----------
MartiNZ said:
Really interesting to read that there are people with ears that don't simply reject the earPods. I don't know how good their sound quality is because they simply do not stay in my ears, and their mad shape makes them hard to use with foam covers as well lol.

The Apple in-ear ones are the best headphones I've ever had, they have great sound and cut out a hell of a lot of outside noise, and they've lasted almost 4 years so far, way beyond any others I've used. Okay the wires are showing in places, and being held together with tape, but that's only cosmetic :).
Click to expand...
There are earbuds that have several drivers inside that are EXTREMELY good, but they are vastly more expensive.

These higher quality headphones can be custom fitted for superior isolation and best frequency response for the best sound.

Here's a good article that covers custom ear buds.

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/totl-madness-24-top-line-custom-ear-monitors-reviewed-companies

Innerfidelity is the best source for information on earbuds and headphones.
 
wizard said:
I just had this idea flash in my head, why doesn't Apple make a pro iPod. Here I mean an iPod that can plug right into studio equipment via the use of the most common studio connectors (probably XLR). Sure it wouldn't fulfill mainstream needs but a device that played "HD Audio" and supported good D/A conversion would be very interesting.

By the way, yes I know XLR connectors are big and fat. I'm confident that Apple could find a solution though that works for a larger iPod device, maybe something to replace the Classic.
Click to expand...

A 3.5 mm plug will do just fine, XLR has no benefits in an application like this.

Still, why bother, since any studio will already have ADACs that are way better than any iPod will ever have, so a simple digital out will still produce a better sound quality.
 
SkippyThorson said:
If you can cut your iPhone's storage in half out of the box, you have bigger problems. :p
Click to expand...

As soon as I got my iphone 5 and turned it on, it only had 12 GB free of the supposed 16GB it came with. Then by the time it got done loading all the recommended Apple Apps, I was down to close to 8-9GB free within the first hours of even turning it on. That didnt include any music or video files.

I just wish when they said a 16GB model, it had 16GB free. Not the 8-9GB that it really does. Especially when they are still using 16GB as a base model while everybody else has gone to 32GB and the fact that they charge a ridiculous amount of money to go to the 32GB model.

----------
Reason077 said:
I was talking about the in-ear headphones, not the 'EarPods' that come with the recent iPhones. I find those to be really good! Among the best fitting and most comfortable earbuds I've used.
Click to expand...

Really? I dont know ANYBODY that likes them. Here at work most of us get iphones and NOBODY keeps the ear buds. There's an entire box of them back in the break room where people put them up for grabs....not a single taker yet.

They sound ok, but they are ridiculously big and completely uncomfortable. I have a pair of $9.99 JL Audio ear buds from amazon that sound better and are 100 times more comfortable with their little rubber ear pieces that are changeable.
 
derek4484 said:
As soon as I got my iphone 5 and turned it on, it only had 12 GB free of the supposed 16GB it came with. Then by the time it got done loading all the recommended Apple Apps, I was down to close to 8-9GB free within the first hours of even turning it on. That didnt include any music or video files.

I just wish when they said a 16GB model, it had 16GB free. Not the 8-9GB that it really does. Especially when they are still using 16GB as a base model while everybody else has gone to 32GB and the fact that they charge a ridiculous amount of money to go to the 32GB model.
Click to expand...

It's not 8-9 free, it's the 12 you mentioned. We've all known this from the time the iPhone was new. We knew this about flash drives when they gained traction. Hard drives are even the same way sometimes.

The advertised size is rounding from what you actually have, and especially with mobile phones, the OS is a large percentage of that space you have available after the drop from the rounded number.

I literally meant if you opened the box, activated the 16GB iPhone, and had 8GB free, you have problems. I plan for what size iPhone I may need by looking at the amount of junk I want to load it up with, and then adding a couple gigs for extra, and then I can gauge what I may have left empty to play with.

I believe this shouldn't be a problem these days, but then again I also side with you in saying that 16GB today is just too little. It should be reserved to the 5C and 4S (at this point in time) - the flagship 5S should come with 32GB minimum.
 
While I'm all for higher quality files even simply for the principle of it, it would be odd if Apple played up high resolution audio support on the iPhone/iPod, given that just about every place you're using your iPhone, you are either multitasking or there is enough background noise that any change in fidelity, even if there was one, wouldn't be able to be heard.
 
Azzin said:
And how useful with those cables be, with an iPhone 6 that features (amongst other things) HD Audio over a newly designed Lightning cable?
Click to expand...

You can do just the same that you do today with these cables? Did you expect your cables to be "upgraded" when you bought them? Of course not. I don't really see the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back