But they can do this today, while the majority of people continue to use the integrated "dinky DAC" (which is actually quite good in case of the iPhone).
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.
Lightning Headphones: Are They Better or Just an Inconvenience?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Yes, I wouldn't see Beats headphones in the same category as yours.
And the DAC + Amp is most of that magic in quality of sound. Build a better DAC + Amp inside the phone and let that go head to head against quality DACs + Amps outside the phone. All our ears can hear is the analog audio result. In other words, no surprise they sound better than hooking them to the 3.5mm port. But that's not actually the port's problem
I have the 6s Plus now and probably my last iPhone. Tired of being in a walled world. I work in one every day.
I assume you are referring to the theoretical speeds of 802.11 ac when you make this statement. However, in the real world, you are never going to get any wifi ac or otherwise to outperform full duplex Gigabit ethernet. Not quite left behind at this point.
I thought so to but it's not. two minute charge gets you 9 hours of use, charge it when you use the restroom, charge it overnight, etc. I have one on my work computer and it's not been an issue at all.
F%^K thinness.
You get to the point where it makes holding the device more awkward.
I bought the SE hours after it was available, why, because I did not want a big phone that did not fit in my pockets, I wanted one that felt good in my hand, I could use one handed and it had a headphone socket on it because I swap my headphone between my phone and my laptop.
I don't want bluetooth, its either wasting batteries or its yet another charger I need to take.
I use my headphones when there is other ambient noise, like on a bus, its there to supply a more pleasant sound, but that noise still comes though and better quality sound will not be an improvement. I am also not going to shell out hundreds for good quality noise cancelling headphones.... batteries/chargers...again. And I dont want to walk around airports looking like one of Dr Who's Cybermen.
I have left my headphones at home and bough a pair of $5 ones that were good enough to see me through the day.
Less than a foot? LOL it isn't that bad. It's bad but not nearly that bad. Same small room... Also I'd never call wifi power levels massive! Higher order encoding actually decreases total power consumption as your data is transmitted faster reducing total transmit time.
The user can choose today. GoPro didn't stop Apple from improving their camera module with higher frame rates, higher resolutions, and stabilization. Heck, anyone can SEE that there's currently not enough room for the camera module.
DSLRS and mirrorless still cameras are all getting wifi transfer built in now... Just like Bluetooth for audio, they sync photos right to the phone. I say it is about time Apple completely remove the camera from the iPhone and let the user choose how good a camera they want.
Bluetooth headsets for phone calls too... Why limit ourselves to the onboard microphones for voice quality? Better mics are out there, we can choose for ourselves. /s
But in all seriousness... I keep saying this, but it must be repeated. The current iPhone's sound quality is rated amongst the most neutral for any phone. You don't have to lose the 3.5mm to give choices. We already have that ability today.
In my mind, switching to Lightning would be done for one reason... To convince the public that Lightning is the only way to transfer high resolution audio. There are high res DACs just as small as what is in the phone today, but I think that Apple knows that 99.9% of the public can't actually hear the difference. Moving it to a different cable and branding the audio something in the way they branded high-DPI as "Retina" will make for a wonderful placebo effect that will look like true innovation to ordinary people.
What if Apple brings out a wireless charging plate along with this new phone? Is the lightning port still behind the times if it can charge the old fashioned way (when needed), but is going to be used primarily for listening to music? I don't know if that's what Apple plans to do, but bringing up the iPhone to new standards (wireless charging) doesn't erase the fact that users still need a way to listen to music (besides bluetooth). And as customers from iPhone 5 up have lightning devices for charging, it seems logical to keep the lightening port.
Looked at it that way, Apple might be making it easier and cheaper for customers to transition to wireless charging. All those buying a new iPhone only have to buy new headphones and can keep their old lightning dock until they're ready to upgrade.
Last edited:
Maybe... but nothing else.
"In our tests, all of the Lightning-connected headphones, from the $45 pair to the $800 pair, sounded better than comparable headphones connected to an iPhone using the 3.5mm jack, so while many of us may be disappointed with the inconvenience of no headphone jack, at least there's the silver lining of better quality audio when using Lightning-connected headphones."
This first off is a paid advertisement. Philips gave them headphones.
Second, was the test against the same model? There's absolutely no testing details here. Where they A/B tested against the same model, blindly?
This reads like some sham consumer thing, like when Listerine said it was as effective as floss.
A REAL TEST would have been to take 3.5mm headphones... the same ones... and run them through a 3.5mm jack, and a lightning/DAC converter. Otherwise, this is all DonkeyPoo.
[doublepost=1462828275][/doublepost]
The phone via the cable. It's no longer passive; it draws.
With the usb forum coming out with usb-c audio, is there any chance Apple would ditch lightening and go C? They were integral in its creation and first to adopt it, which would make the headphones usable in their laptops as well as the multitude of other devices that will presumably use the tech. I believe I've heard one other smartphone already has C. Also, data rates on C are so much faster and no limitations on charging capabilities, meaning they could up that side of things if they can find a way to charge phones faster.
Seems like a no brainier to me.
Seems like a no brainier to me.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Sub in Battery for DAC above.
Sub in Camera for DAC above.
Again, slippery, slippery slope. If we can rationalize jettisoning something as ubiquitous as this, why not eject the battery next. After all users can then choose how much of a battery they want by choosing from a variety of battery cases. And why not eject the camera? Then users can choose what quality of camera they want by making it an accessory. And on and on... until we're buying an empty box for $1000 and then building iPhone 14 to personal preferences via accessory purchases (all sold separately of course).
I agree, but ... I can see Apple debuting and marketing its Beats headphones as a solution to its own problem. By using the Lightning connector, Apple can minimize competition (other companies will focus on USB-C which will have greater ROI potential due to USB-C's ubiquity) and maximize its profit.
Surely if they are going to make us buy new headphones, now is the moment to jump to USB-C? Otherwise, we will have to do it yet again ...
He said you had to turn up the lighting port to only half way to match the volume, which he did during the test. He said the quality was noticeably better. Also saying that the lightning port is louder and will be perceived as "better", then wouldn't that still be a reason to say that lightning is better?
someone didn't follow the thread along before replyingSomeone didn't watch the video before commenting
No I did not, I'm not going to read every response before commenting. I do wish there was a way to see if someone responded to a particular post.someone didn't follow the thread along before replying
You'd be surprised - you pretty much have to hold your device next to the AP in order to achieve the highest coding rate + modulation. You can pretty easily try this yourself if you have the equipment.
Which ignores that the major power consumer: energy per bit transferred, goes up significantly.
Last edited:
Speakers work using electromagnetic waves to power the drivers (probably not enough to do damage)