Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Audio Testing Confirms iPhone 6 Not Yet Capable of Direct HD Audio Playback
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They're saving it for next year. When they release ios9 they can make a big deal out of it, "...AND it works on all current 6/6+ iphones as well as the new ones"
Bad news for the magical audiophile unicorns that claim they can hear the difference. Pretty much irrelevant for normal humans.
This is basically like buying a 50 inch 4K TV and sitting 12 feet away and expecting it to look better than 1080P.
This is basically like buying a 50 inch 4K TV and sitting 12 feet away and expecting it to look better than 1080P.
Too funny
Anywho, from a sound engineer's perspective. I'd love this. But the general public doesn't care. They care more about higher quality picture and garbage sound as long as they can carry more music. Most of the people I know can't even hear the difference between FM quality and CD quality
This is true. I've seen the effect in digital video post processing. I personally feel that more bits of resolution at any given point of sample time, is of greater importance than a higher sampling frequency.
And I still can't believe you used Macrumors as an example of the current environment for hi-res audio appreciation/adoption. There will always be two sides, but the hi-res one will always be right
I recall that thread and I don’t remember comments from people being “against hi-res” conceptually. It broke down more like this:
Audio enthusiast praising HD audio, but questioning a standalone, expensive device vs. having the option in a multi-function device (like an iPhone)
People saying that the market for high quality music is small (it is).
Critical comments regarding the physical design of the PONO (it’s bad).
A few posters that wanted a portal, HD audio device ASAP, and the PONO would fit the bill (and they were ambivalent to the design).
Clearly mass consumed audio is so-so at best, and there’s _some_ market for higher quality audio
Most of the people I know can't even hear the difference between FM quality and CD quality
I can once I fire up my hearing contraption!
Last edited:
Remember the world was cassette based.
That being said 96K and 24Bit is just hype. It has been for years.
You are right, you can't hear it. Also 24Bit dynamic range?
Complete silence to a louder roar than standing next to a jet taking off.
Not to mention the crappy earbuds and headsets that people are going to use to listen to this stuff.....
Although this is a feature I want, I'm not overly concerned it because of the fact that it's extremely likely that the hardware is capable of HD audio playback and Apple can enable it at any time. With a number of key iOS 8 features being delayed, a niche feature like this was probably one of the first things they delayed -- especially if it gives them the opportunity to launch it alongside their own line of audio products that will claim to take advantage of it (I'm skeptical about the reality of that unless they've significantly improved the engineering team at Beats).
A quick question from someone who's mind becomes pudding in trying to understand the different variables in audio file quality (certainly I'm speaking for a friend of mine and not myself) :
Does any of this mean that if I put a couple of binaural wav tracks on my iPhone that are 44.100KHz, 1411kbps, and 16bit sample size, that I won't be getting the full audio quality? And yes, I'm (scratch that) he is using perfectly good quality headphones.
----------
Mantis shrimp wants his money back!
Does any of this mean that if I put a couple of binaural wav tracks on my iPhone that are 44.100KHz, 1411kbps, and 16bit sample size, that I won't be getting the full audio quality? And yes, I'm (scratch that) he is using perfectly good quality headphones.
----------
Mantis shrimp wants his money back!
It would be nice if someone, anyone, would objectively test the microphones and outgoing voice quality of these things. It is half of the phone after all.
Nope. And most likely they won't be able to support HD playback for a long time. This HD stuff will be a new digital format labels use to try and get people buying music again.
Almost none. 24/96 is mainly useful at the mix/master stage to give the audio engineer more headroom.
An ALAC rip of a CD will sound exactly the same to 99.44% of listeners, and a significant portion of that remaining .56% will not be able to pass a double-blind test between the two sources more than random chance would dictate.
How is the 6 a "huge" step up from 5s in anything beyond a bump in screen size?
Speed about same
RAM same
DPI same
Sound quality same
NFC no one uses it
There's the 128 gig option now though. Is that what you mean?
We have some research showing that unconscious hints can actually inform the brain about the experience. For instance, I read a japanese research about more than retina display. Even if you can't consciously see the pixel at retina resolution, your brain still records the information that it's not reality.
It's the same for sound. I listen to music all day. If I listen to compressed music, I usually have a headache by the end of the day, but not so with 24/96. Moreover, the dynamic is clearly better than CD and feels more like vinyl (without the degradation over time).
Of course, it depends on the kind of music. If you listen mostly to DrDre productions, to classical music, lyrical chant or to synthpop, there is little benefics to HD Audio. But if you listen to electronica, techno or jazz, there really is.
Like there is also some benefits to go beyond stereo - Pink Floyd is just too trippy in quadraphony.
For the general public, there is also the benefit that a better signal will accept more post-processing before sounding horrible. It's like in photography. You don't see the difference between 12 and 14 bits (and your monitor can't display it anyway), but if you post-process, there is a real difference. HD Audio might let Apple do a lot more post-processing on the sound to try to make DrDre things sound like proper headphones
This is 100% BS. The only thing you are correct about is that ABX testing isn't relevant to the 24/96 "HD" audio question, but only because we can definitively prove mathematically (ironically, using the same sampling theorem you cited) that bit depths / sampling rates above 16/44.1 are useless for playback and simply waste space.
See here for a thorough explanation of the the math: https://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
People falling for the 24/192 "HD" hoax are usually the same people lining up to buy $150 HDMI cables...
Also don't ever group techno and electronica with jazz and above classical music on a scale of sonic complexity again.
Ten million units sold over last weekend ...
----------
Bingo! You want real "high definition" go back to analog tapes. Infinite bits of realism.