Only found out today but here is a shocker. What format you choose, say 24 bit 48khz, it is downsampled to AAC 256kbs Before it hits the AirPlay waves. I am so disappointed! Not even 24bit/48khz, let alone 96 or 192kHz
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.
iOS 17 AirPlay Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Proof are my ears. High Bitrates provide you a much deeper room of the sound. If you know, how compression of data works, you know what to hear for. Blind tests are for dummies. Educate your ears, that's not a tough one... If you have a file with classic music - orchestra - you must search with your ears of a instrument. With high bitrates and then with low bitrates. If you have good ears you must hear the difference ;-). Because of the missing compression, the room of the sound is much wider and the instrument much more clear to hear with his details. But - you need a good headset and a good amplifier. Or a expensive HiFi-Setup. Try it, is is no magic ;-)
I tried those kind of files in 24 or 32bit with VLC or even telegram-messenger on IPhone. It plays, but no sound, just some background noise came out. 256kbs are a joke. I am sure, that the iphone could play those files. But apple is against it...
Blind tests are for dummies?!? 😂
Why do you think medical companies make blind tests? Confirmation bias is a thing and no one (my self included) can avoid it.
Great post, I never used ICloud, decided to test it out with Books, worked for a few days and then kaput, there are other examples like the Books debacle, basic things that should be relatively easy to make happen, other things that you can't do, that seem simple and would actually serve a practical purpose, this principle seems to cut across all different companies and technologies, as if the programmers are divorced from the practical aspects of the device they write code for, but why, why, I assume everyone that works in that Apple Spaceship Campus uses their products, how do they not see the practical use cases for some of the missing features, how do they not fix the obvious flaws and bugs in the features that actually matter, maybe it is arrogance, I don't know.
I bought an Eero router, a simple Sangean internet radio could not connect to it, after three hours, I gave up, later on I discovered through Google it could be that I am using a special character in my password, too late, returning it, if it can't connect you to a device with a special character in the password, what other bugs lie in this device. One day I believe we will get more products that combine simplicity with practicality and seem to disappear, perform the tasks flawlessly and melt into the distance, companies that master that concept will displace the Apples and Microsofts of the world.
But once again, Apple Books, are you kidding me Apple, why can't you remember the page between devices, pure garbage.
Blind tests aren't blind tests anymore, when involved test persons are prepared. If not, they're ears are "dummies".
Look, every tech has his down sides. Venyl cracks, Audio cassettes with their mechanical issues, compressed files take parts off - i would say that just audio tape, digital tapes or above some bit rates we can't hear differences. If you know what to hear for - you can. But just for a person which has experience.
But arguments @ that subject are like the talks about golden hifi cables. Some say, they are a must-have, some say it is just a waste of money (me).
When will we get iPhone airplay to iPad? I’ve wanted to do this for a long time
A double blind ABX test with 50+ people is infinite better than your (or my) confirmation biased opinions
If people cannot hear the difference when they don’t know what they’re listening to, then the difference is not significant. It’s that simple
Imagine hearing a Steinway d274. Over 99% cannot hear the difference between a cfx and a d274. But many musicians go to Steinway and play them, to find the right one...A double blind ABX test with 50+ people is infinite better than your (or my) confirmation biased opinions
If people cannot hear the difference when they don’t know what they’re listening to, then the difference is not significant. It’s that simple
Peoples don't hear the art work of music. They just hear songs... So - you are right; blind tests with ordinary peoples will have only one result.
Me too ! I think this is mainly because Apple doesn’t publicly announce all the features. There are always features that are either hidden or discovered later by the beta testers.
Can’t wait for the public release, it’s only about one month away ! Though I’m mainly hoping for stability improvements besides all those nice features.
I think you are conflating a few different things here though. I would agree that most tech has some level of downside. But CD audio doesn’t really have any downsides from the fidelity side of things.
First, and most importantly to this discussion: 16-bit/44.1KHz is not a compressed version of 24-bit/192KHz. There is no compression in this process. Think of it Like 2 different sizes of garage doors. One is a normal single car door and the other is a big industrial door. You drive a regular sized sedan (analogous to our ears). You CAN drive through both doors without changing the car. But you can’t drive a semi through the smaller door, but you don’t own a semi so there is no point in having the bigger door. The semi needs to exist to help transport all the sedans, but the normal driver does not need a semi or large garage door. All of the features of the car remain the same regardless Of which door you drive through. Lossy compression is more like when you put cheap tires on your car so it doesn’t ride as nice now.
On to the other bits. I think people confuse personal preference with technical superiority all the time. It’s correct to say CD quality (ie 16-bit/44.1KHz) is technically superior to Vinyl. That point can not be argued and to argue against it would make you wrong. That is a scientific and provable fact. But it is OK to say you prefer the sound of Vinyl and because you prefer it, it provides you with a superior experience. That is an opinion which anyone is welcome to hold and defend as it is their preference.
To the third point. Yes, you can say you prefer 24-bit/192KHz all day, but from a technical perspective you are now treading into placebo territory Similar to the over priced cables you mentioned. But the thing with those cables is that is another technical fact that is scientifically provable to not make a difference. On the cable end, any cable with sufficient gauge/resistance for the run and current you need will do the job equally well. I run my KEF R700 speakers on lamp cord and they sound great. 24-bit/192KHz can actually be somewhat of a detriment to quality within the hearing range of us because higher frequencies can alias in the frequencies we can hear causing distortion. You actually want to get rid of frequencies outside of our hearing range to avoid that. 16-bit/44.1KHz is specifically set to cover our hearing range both in frequency and loudness(dynamic range). Sampling at a higher rate allows us to digitally filter out higher frequencies to remove those distortions, and that is one reason why faster sampling is only helpful in production and not on the consumer end. A proper end mix has gotten rid of all that higher frequency content anyways, so why waste the storage space on empty capability?
Thank you for the answer.
The sample rate (unit Hz = hertz) indicates how many times in one second the audio level is recorded and stored. A specification of 44,100 Hz (44.1 kHz) means that 44,100 values are stored for one second of music. Bit depth, in turn, refers to the number of bits per sample – the higher that number, the fuller the tone. That is, the higher the sampling rate and the higher the bit depth, the more information is stored in an audio file. However, this also causes the file to be larger. Conversely, this usually requires a higher bit rate. So it can be said that the more information is transmitted, the better the sound quality and the larger the file.
Audio CD is in most cases 16/44, 1411kHz (wav). But you are right, 16/44 is more than enough for most of us and regular music.
Like i said; it takes the right tec and the right ears.
I do know the differences between analog and digital. Two worlds ;-)
It doesn't have anything to do with the fullness of the sound at all though. That's the point. More data doesn't matter if it isn't bringing anything to the table.
On the Sample rate:
The only thing the sample rate does is allow you to reproduce the same band-limited signal you recorded. Applying the Nyquist/Shannon theorem, sampling at 44.1KHz will allow perfect reproduction of any frequency less than half that number. IE you must have > two samples to reproduce the same frequency. So 44.1KHz sampling can reproduce any frequency less than 22.05KHz. Now because filters and such do have a fall of period a little buffer is added on top of that, so the true range of 44.1KHz sampling in CD quality Audio is 0Hz to 20KHz. If those are the only frequencies you need to reproduce, you do not need a larger sampling aside from production super sample filtering (to avoid aliasing).
On Bit depth:
The bit depth of the file only effects the noise floor of the signal. That's it. More bits = lower noise floor. 16-bit provides a low enough noise floor as it is to allow for a dynamic range where the same track can include clearly audible sounds as quiet as a mosquito in a room and as loud as a jet engine. There is literally no point in going beyond this on the consumer listening end. On the mixing end the benefit of higher bit depths is that you don't have to get the levels exactly right when recording a track because you have the wiggle room of being able to move that signal around in a larger window so if it was way to one end, you still have the ability to line it up with the rest of the tracks without having to get too close to the noise floor if you didn't record it with a high enough gain, or clipping if you recorded it with too much gain. When you have finished mixing it, you chop off the 8 LSB(least significant bits) of the sample and you have a 16-bit CD quality sample.
The tone is in the signal that was recorded and is being reproduced failthfully in either case, so tone isn't a factor here at all. It doesn't take the right tech or right ears. 16-bit/44/1KHz was chosen specifically because that is the human hearing range and it's fully covered in that definition.
I just returned from India and the Delhi Oberoi has this feature. All the rooms appear to have LG TVs and iPad Minis. The iPad Minis run in kiosk mode and have a guest streaming option that allows MacBooks and iPhones to airplay to the LG TVs. They also run room controls that allow guests to control curtains, blinds, AC, door entry and even a door cam (so you can see who is at the door before letting them in) - v modern!
I ended up putting the public beta on yesterday. Lots of nice little improvements (and a few bugs), but overall its the little things I've noticed that are great improvements.
I used to play my iTunes music and film libraries through an AppleTV via AirPlay hooked up to my SmartTV. Gave up as it was just too flaky and unreliable. One day it would work, next day it wouldn't, used to drive me crazy.
Now I use PLEX on my iPhone to stream music from my MacMini to a WiiM Pro via AirPlay and out through my Techincs amp. Also have some old Hardon Kardon speakers connected to a WiiM Mini - both WiiMs sync perfectly through AirPlay to give surround sound, it's awesome and works everythime, no fuss.
Now I use PLEX on my iPhone to stream music from my MacMini to a WiiM Pro via AirPlay and out through my Techincs amp. Also have some old Hardon Kardon speakers connected to a WiiM Mini - both WiiMs sync perfectly through AirPlay to give surround sound, it's awesome and works everythime, no fuss.
VERY informative; thank you!
I can't tell the difference myself. Not at home, not in a store with $100,000 setup. Tried all kinds of music.