How do you think of AirPod for new iPhone7?

Discussion in 'iPhone Accessories' started by woodywoodz, Sep 8, 2016.

  1. woodywoodz Suspended


    Apr 12, 2014
    Apple launched the new wireless headphone AirPod for iPhone 7. However, many people compalins that it is easy to lose them, especially lose one,but not both·····
    So how do you think of AirPod?
  2. willismac macrumors regular

    Jun 7, 2014
    I think if your on the tube they are going to get lost esp at rush hour. My EarPods fall out all the time so can't imagine what these will be like.

    They need to fit better imo.
  3. AmazingTechGeek macrumors 6502


    Mar 6, 2015
    They are just too expensive. Yes, there are many different technologies built into it. Most people, however, may be better off buying higher quality headphones...
  4. Ries macrumors 68020

    Apr 21, 2007
    Im still in the nogo camp on these wireless things. They need a string going arround the back of the neck, that connects them together, to catch them falling out and being able to unplug them when talking to people. Can't get more anti social douche bag, than speaking to people with our headset on (turned on or not).

  5. username: macrumors 6502a

    Dec 16, 2013
    I think you're right! My EarPods always fall out too.

    But now I think about it, it's usually because of the connected cable and the cable pulling on something. I think if the EarPods were just in my ear by themselves maybe nothing would really pull them out and they would be fine? I can kind of imagine with nothing connected they would sit there fairly easily.

    However it would be quite scary to have such expensive earphones like that and would be so easy to lose them if they fell out.
    --- Post Merged, Sep 8, 2016 ---
    Ha love that movie

    "maybe I can get a run in"
  6. macrumors 68000

    Feb 22, 2014
    Probably sound as bad as the wired versions with too much top end and not enough bass due to no seal. Also will easily fall out, get lost and look rather stupid to be honest.
  7. Michaelgtrusa macrumors 604

    Oct 13, 2008
  8. Closingracer macrumors 68040

    Jul 13, 2010

    Meh. I wont go assuming until I listen to them myself or some guy reviews them because who knows maybe Apple put some decent drivers in them you could hope.
  9. kasakka macrumors 68020

    Oct 25, 2008
    Rubbish. They are not in-ear so their sound quality is probably not that great. Keeping them in your ears is going to be a huge issue. I can probably pick up a set on the street in a few months because people will lose them. Just adding some sort of string to tie them behind your neck would've helped tremendously.

    Apple has once again gone for impressive tech without thinking if it will be usable.
  10. techiebug macrumors 6502a

    Oct 20, 2013
    Actually I think they're affordable compared to Apple price standard. The key here is how they work so well with the iPhone by eliminating all the pairing and unpairing crap
  11. Newtons Apple macrumors Core

    Newtons Apple

    Mar 12, 2014
    Jacksonville, Florida
    These thing usually do not fit my ears well so I always go for on the ear or over the ear headphones. Do not care what I look like to others, just want good quality.
  12. Ghost31 macrumors 68020


    Jun 9, 2015
    I think if you care how you look to an obsessive point, you've lost focus in your life. Did you think the original EarPods looked tacky?

    Yes? Ok then. Fair point

    No? Then these are no different. They literally just took the wire away. No change in design. So there's not a whole lot to complain about unless you're complaining for the sake of complaining.

    I have a pair of jaybirds I like a lot with the wire connecting...but the wire is annoying. Always have to readjust it when I'm in the gym and I'm really interested in getting one of those truly wireless headphones. Bragi has a new headphone coming in November I might check out...but as it is now, I don't think the air pods are tacky or the design is extra crappy. I think if we are going to complain about anything, it should be that they are charging $160 for terrible sound quality when you can get much better for way way less
  13. freepomme Suspended

    Oct 30, 2015
    Boston, MA
  14. Phil A. Moderator

    Phil A.

    Staff Member

    Apr 2, 2006
    Shropshire, UK
    I can't decide if they look cool or stupid, but either way I can't see them being any use for running as they look like they'll just fall out and as that's my main use of in-ear 'phones, I'll give them a miss until I see more details and reviews
  15. macrumors 68000

    Feb 22, 2014
    I wish Apple would just license aptX or Sony LDAC so we can just buy decent headphones....
  16. RamGuy macrumors 6502a


    Jun 7, 2011
    The wired EarPods gets a lot of hate for no apparent reason. The audio performance of the price, and especially the performance of it's microphone is pretty much next to none at the price.

    They don't really fit my ears, it get unpleasant really fast and I'm somewhat of a audio snob so I prefer to use my Shure SE846 instead, which are crazy expensive, creates a perfect seal in my ears and sounds amazing. Otherwise I use my wireless B&O BeoPlay H7 for wireless audio on the go as that's easier and more efficient.

    But these new AirPods are really expensive. They might not be that expensive considering they are completely wireless without the need of a cable connecting them together etc.. These kind of headphones normally cost a lot.

    The big question is; Do they feature the same drivers as the wired EarPods?

    While the wired EarPods are quite good considering the price, these AirPods cost a lot more so they should also feature audio drivers and audio quality reflecting the fact that they are no longer considered being cheap headphones.

    I find it really stupid how people hate on the wired EarPods. To me it seems like some people makes it into some kind of awkward sport out of hating on the EarPods without reason. They are rather impressive for the price.

    But as soon as you are willing to pay a little more for your headphones you start to find a lot of options providing better audio fidelity and quality. And with the steep price of the AirPods, they need new audio drivers providing a audio quality that is more in range of it's high price.

    And my biggest concern with these. Even though I will properly never own them. How light are they? With a "no seal" design and no cable providing gravity for the earbuds to stay in the ear. How likely are they to simply fall out of ones hears? The stem need to have some weight to them in order for the not fly right out of your ears while moving.
    --- Post Merged, Sep 8, 2016 ---

    We know nothing about the codec and specification of this new Apple W1 chip. So its really hard to say what magic source Apple might be using here.

    When it comes to APTx, Apple is already using and utilising AAC over bluetooth on most devices already. And there is barley any meaningful difference between APTx and AAC over bluetooth as is. And Apple gets the added benefit of Apple Music, Tidal and most audio playback on Apple devices is encoded using AAC so it doesn't need to be converted before its sent over bluetooth when using AAC instead of APTx.
  17. macrumors 68000

    Feb 22, 2014
    AAC is only beneficial if you are playing AAC music, if you play AIFF loseless it still has to compress the music first losing quality.
  18. RamGuy macrumors 6502a


    Jun 7, 2011
    And like I said, most of the playback from iOS devices is AAC. Apple Music uses it, Tidal uses is, most app uses is as it's the default to use when developing apps for the platform etc..

    Comparing to to APTX you will have to convert no matter what. No app, no music player, nothing uses the SBC codec that APTX utilises so with APTX you are in a situation where everything needs to be converted. And in terms of bitrate and fidelity, APTX doesn't really offer any advantages to bluetooth AAC which Apple uses.
  19. macrumors 68000

    Feb 22, 2014
    That's what I am saying, AAC when playing back AIFF or anything else but AAC doesn't actually give better quality.

    So playing back loseless aptX or LDAC would be beneficial over AAC.
  20. The Game 161 macrumors P6

    The Game 161

    Dec 15, 2010
    Will likely get some but that's a lot of money
  21. RamGuy macrumors 6502a


    Jun 7, 2011
    APTX is not lossless. There is something called APTX Losseless, but its a entirely different solution and there is currently no phone or headphones that supports it. And even though the name suggest that it's lossless, it really isn't. It uses something that CSR has dubbed "hybrid lossless" and it's said to be "near lossless coding" so it's not lossless.

    There is a reason why this has not been adopted by anyone in the market. It's because the compression is causing a huge drain of resources affecting battery in a very negative way, as well as it causing audio delay making it next to useless when combined with video playback.

    APTX Enchanced which is the APTX you will find on some headphones, mobile phones and Mac's is only sporting a slight bandwidth advantage compared to Bluetooth AAC. An advantage that most find to be more in theory than in practice due to AAC being more efficient when it comes to preserve quality and the fact that you will have lots of situations where conversion will not be needed.
  22. oneMadRssn macrumors 601


    Sep 8, 2011
    New England
    I do not like them for a few reasons:

    - No volume control
    - For $100+, I expect significantly superior sound quality in some way
    - They look goofy to me, with the tails

    Personally, I love Bose's active noise cancellation technology. I would gladly pay double what these cost if they were Bose and had ANC (similar to the QC20)

    I'm not against paying top dollar for good stuff, but from the initial reviewer impressions so far, it seems these are the same old earpods sound quality but with time limitations and with less controls.
  23. 0007776 Suspended


    Jul 11, 2006
    They are way too expensive and I'd be worried about losing them. If the price were to come down to where you could cheaply replace a lost pair (or even better sell them individually to replace a single lost one) then I could be tempted.

    The other question I have about them is it looks like they work with Macs so I'm assuming they are using regular bluetooth under the fancy Apple marketing, but do they work with non-apple computers?
  24. macrumors 68000

    Feb 22, 2014
    I know aptX codec is not lossless. I'm saying if you play AIFF on your iPhone it will be converted to AAC then sent to your headphones. If you play AIFF on your iPhone and it had aptX it would convert to aptX and send that to your headphones instead.

    I'm fully aware that aptX is a lossy codec, no matter what codec you use for your lossless audio it will still be compressed to send over Bluetooth, it's how that codec deals with it the compression that matters. If you take Sony LDAC as an example the sound quality is far superior to an iPhone playing AIFF via AAC and that is all to do with the codec.

    iPhone - AIFF > Compresses to AAC and sends over Bluetooth
    Sony - AIFF > Compresses to LDAC and send over Bluetooth
    Samsung - AIFF > Compresses to aptX and send over Bluetooth

    The only way AAC is comparable to aptX is if you play AAC on your iPhone (which most people do) and then it doesn't have to be compressed to be sent over Bluetooth. If it is a straight comparison between AIFF > aptX/LDAC and AIFF > AAC, the former win every time.
  25. noekozz, Sep 8, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2016

    noekozz macrumors 6502a


    Jun 29, 2010
    In my eyes, that's $159 down the drain the minute you step outside and lose them.

    As far as audio quality, highly doubt they'll sound better than the wired Apple earphones we currently have, since the built in DAC on a unit of such small size would probably sound like crap anyway.

    At the very least they should come out with an adapter to secure them to your ears, I'm pretty sure the 3rd party market will be all over that one.

Share This Page