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

OS X and high-res audio?

This is good news! In times of high-res video downloads and streaming these compressed audio formats are ridiculous. Bandwidth should not be an issue any more. There are some high-resolution audio download sites but you need good luck to find there what you are looking for. And iTunes doesn't support the files from there anyway.

I'm wondering if iTunes and OS X are going to "learn" high-res audio as well. This is not just an iOS issue! As far as I know OS X is not able to switch between different sampling frequencies but will always resample all audio files to the standard frequency, like e.g. 48 kHz, depending on the actual audio device.

dannytip said:
Please apple don't take headphone advice from 'fashion' headphones like beats.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, agreed.
 
SchneiderMan said:
Hold on a minute, a new Lightning cable that will transfer HD audio playback? That doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Maybe they'll reengineer the current cable/connector to add an optical channel alongside the copper?

Seems like a lot of work for marginally improved sound. And isn't Apple trying to get away from wires anyway?
 
kengud said:
And make the lighting connector usb 3.0 while you're at it.
Click to expand...

I’m sure they will when the device storage is faster than USB 2.0 - at the current R/W speeds, USB 3.0 isn’t really needed.

goobot said:
Lightning wire ≠lightning port. Also it would still be the same design and be backwards compatible anyway.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is one of the really slick advantages of Lightening.

Maury said:
"The premium in-ear headphones have not been updated since 2008"

Sure they have, around 2011. You even show it in your images.
Click to expand...

Hahaha, for some reason this made me think of a Simpsons episode:


Flanders: Hey, whatever happened to the Plow from your old snow plow business?

Homer: I never had a snow plow business!

Flanders: Sure you did, Mr. Plow. You're wearing the jacket right now!
 
I would hope that if Apple are getting serious about audio again, they would put some effort into fixing the problems with the Music app in iOS7.

And if we're going to be getting larger files from iTunes, how about that 128GB iPhone?
 
dannys1 said:
It won't, Apple already have Apple Lossless for this. Convert with XLD.
Click to expand...

No.

It started getting embarrassing about no FLAC support years ago, but now FLAC is increasingly used in mainstream usage. At some point the executives that have been holding the gate on this will have to re-evaluate.
 
Loge said:
I would hope that if Apple are getting serious about audio again, they would put some effort into fixing the problems with the Music app in iOS7.

And if we're going to be getting larger files from iTunes, how about that 128GB iPhone?
Click to expand...

This...they DESTROYED the music app with iOS7. First thing to fix is the way albums are viewed.
 
Cuban Missles said:
Love the idea of upgrading the music to higher fidelity but hate the idea of trying to upgrade my 10k song library.
Click to expand...

Well, no need to worry about that. It'll only be Mastered for iTunes albums that they release in higher quality. They don't have the lossless versions of "iTunes Plus" tracks and it'd be a step backward to release CD- or better-than-CD-quality albums that had been mastered during all the loudness rubbish.
 
The idea of mobile devices with the inevitable poor quality headphones for 24-bit audio playback is a joke. You don't need a lightning cable for HD playback. The worlds best systems are still analog stereo when they hit the speakers.

The quality is in the DAC, the amplifier and speakers / headphones. When people want to listen to audiophile level audio they are not popping in a pair of in-ear headphones.

I also can't imagine the battery hit on something like this.
 
Azzin said:
Are you referring to these: http://store.apple.com/uk/product/M...123cddcfe27fb4e3ef2dbe69b6d3c042ee1abcc20d224 ?

The reason I'm asking, is that with all this Beats malarkey, I'm now considering getting myself some new earphones!
Click to expand...

If money is no option, then consider Ultimate Ears: http://pro.ultimateears.com/en-us/home/18-Pro

Shure SE 846: http://www.shure.com/americas/produ.../se-earphones/se846-sound-isolating-earphones

The Apple headphones are almost as terrible as Beats.

----------
johnmacward said:
The idea of mobile devices with the inevitable poor quality headphones for 24-bit audio playback is a joke. You don't need a lightning cable for HD playback. The worlds best systems are still analog stereo when they hit the speakers.

The quality is in the DAC, the amplifier and speakers / headphones. When people want to listen to audiophile level audio they are not popping in a pair of in-ear headphones.

I also can't imagine the battery hit on something like this.
Click to expand...

Finally someone that has an idea about audio. The DAC's in the iPhone or in any other device are a full on compromise and the sound quality is only okay at best. If you want good sound quality, you need an external DAC, and a good set of in-ear headphones.
 
inplainview said:
You are not talking about the Apple in-ear headphones are you? If so, then you never have had to the chance to hear some really good Etymotics, Ultimate Ears, or my favourites: Shure SE 846. http://www.shure.com/americas/produ.../se-earphones/se846-sound-isolating-earphones
Click to expand...

Heh. No need to have to go to the top of Shure's line to beat Apple's buds. Even the SE215s can beat those clowns. I'm a big fan of Shure though and VERY happy Apple didn't by them out. :D I've never had the privilege to listen to the SE846s -- way above my pay - but I did graduate to the SE535s a couple years ago. Painful to spend that much money but they'll also likely be the last buds I ever need.
 
Last edited:
johnmacward said:
The idea of mobile devices with the inevitable poor quality headphones for 24-bit audio playback is a joke. You don't need a lightning cable for HD playback. The worlds best systems are still analog stereo when they hit the speakers.

The quality is in the DAC, the amplifier and speakers / headphones. When people want to listen to audiophile level audio they are not popping in a pair of in-ear headphones.

I also can't imagine the battery hit on something like this.
Click to expand...

This is not just for audio if they want to incorporate biometrics most likely need the lightning port or Bluetooth
 
High fidelity audio in iOS 8

I wonder if such a feature will be available for iPhone 5S.

I don't think the Beats acquisition will be done in time do deliver new "apple" branded products, which means that either Apple will stick to current headphones or that Apple will heavily promote Beats headphones in their stores (online or not).

Or that they already had something in the pipeline, not taking into account their purchase of Beats.

High fidelity audio sounds good to me (ha) but the question is: how much space will these files eat up?
Will apple leverage on the acquisition of the company (can't remember the name though) that was working in the field of file compression?
Will this require a new file system?
Will this mean that new "storage tiers" will be made available (starting at 32 GB bare minimum and having a 128 GB iPhone 6 as an option?)

This is interesting because:
- Apple is negotiating a price increase of the basis iPhone 6 with carriers (could mean more storage available)
- Better music
- Better camera (pictures and movies become bigger)

All of this leads me to think the new iPhone will have more storage.
And eat bandwidth when listening to iTunes Radio in High fidelity... Carriers smell opportunity for selling more data related subscriptions (also iCloud will take more and more of a central role, with all the data exchange involved (such as Photostream)
 
Chupa Chupa said:
Heh. No need to have to go to the top of Shure's line to beat Apple's buds. Even the SE215s can beat those clowns. I'm a big fan of Shure though and VERY happy Apple didn't by them out. :D I've never had the privilege to listen to the SE846s -- way above my pay - but I did graduated to the SE535s a couple years ago. Painful to spend that much money but they'll also likely be the last buds I ever need.
Click to expand...

I went from the SE 525's to the SE 535's to the SE 846's and OMG, these are the best sounding headphones I have listened to. I demo'd them against a pair of Fit Ear (FitEar ToGO 334's) while in Japan but in the end the Shures won out. That 4th driver is sooooooo sweet. I love them. To date, even the higher end Ultimate Ears can't win me over. I have a Sony PHA-1 as a DAC, and Song's Audio Galaxy Plus replacement cable (the Shure cable was not that good) as the cable. I am in sonic bliss. :)
 
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...

I've never use the Apple earbuds cause they is no isolation and require high volume as most of the sound leaks. I've always used proper IEM's which have foam tips and they are worth spending on. Portable can be really good when you're willing to spend and usually the high end stuff blocks out environmental sound really well. I use my SE846's much much more than my HD800's at home simply because they can run off anything and I don't need to power up all my gear. After many years of playing around with headphones and IEM's the IEM's get much more use which is why I've splurged on the 846's.

----------
inplainview said:
I went from the SE 525's to the SE 535's to the SE 846's and OMG, these are the best sounding headphones I have listened to. I demo'd them against a pair of Fit Ear (FitEar ToGO 334's) while in Japan but in the end the Shures won out. That 4th driver is sooooooo sweet. I love them. To date, even the higher end Ultimate Ears can't win me over. I have a Sony PHA-1 as a DAC, and Song's Audio Galaxy Plus replacement cable (the Shure cable was not that good) as the cable. I am in sonic bliss. :)
Click to expand...

Nice I had the 530 til the rubber seal holding the cable to the shell gave. The 846 looks built to last after all the years of complaints from customers lol.
 
Apple Preparing HD Audio Playback for iOS 8 Alongside New In-Ear Headphones a...

They better be increasing the storage on IOS devices then. Those music files are large. Also, who is going to pay even more per song now? It's all moving towards subscription streaming, not pay per song increase.

Now you can repurchase all your music in HQ for $1.99 a song! Good goy!

I want to pay $4.99-9.99 for all access to the iTunes library with the ability for offline playback. I am not going to pay $10+ anymore for music now that services like Spotify, Rdio, and Google Music exist. I don't care how high quality it is. I'll just torrent it and use iTunes Match at that point.
 
Last edited:
Loge said:
And if we're going to be getting larger files from iTunes, how about that 128GB iPhone?
Click to expand...

I'd upgrade in a heartbeat, mid contract not withstanding. Always bought the highest capacity (16GB iP3G, 32GB iP4, 64GB iP5) and it's never enough to fit the whole iTunes library on + offline Spotify playlists.

A 96 or 128GB phone even if nothing else changed at all from the iP5s would be an instant sale here.

You know what to do Apple :)
 
Arran said:
Maybe they'll reengineer the current cable/connector to add an optical channel alongside the copper?

Seems like a lot of work for marginally improved sound. And isn't Apple trying to get away from wires anyway?
Click to expand...

To people who want better sound, that improvement will by no means by "marginal". And headphones need a power supply - good ones get plenty from your iDevice, but I wouldn't want headphones with batteries, and earphones with batteries would be quite ridiculous. On top of that, Bluetooth audio uses some awful compression, so your sound gets worse. On the other hand, connecting headphones through lightning would make it possible to supply power for noise-cancelling headphones as well, and that would be _huge_.
 
If Apple don't offer a 128GB storage option for iPhone 6 then that'll be the third year in a row that they've stuck with 64GB. With a handful of Android competitors including 128GB they would have had trouble justifying that anyway, but if these higher-resolution iTunes downloads with the associated larger file sizes materialise then they'll have a doubly hard time justifying their position.
 
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