Lightning Headphones: Are They Better or Just an Inconvenience?

gaximus said:
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?
Click to expand...
Obviously not, since you can get the same "better" sound quality by turning the volume up further.

BTW, it would have been more interesting to hear how the volume of these headphones compares to, say, the Apple earbuds when using the 3.5mm jack. If the headphones have lower sensitivity, they take more power to drive, which means that the main difference of the Lightning cable vs. the 3.5mm jack is probably that the amp in the cable has a higher power output (and draws more power from the phone's battery accordingly).
 
big-ted said:
While Lightning-connected headphones can only be used with iOS devices - that's more than just an inconvenience, it makes them useless for using on anything else but an iPhone
Click to expand...

Or an iPad. Or iPad touch.

Not trying to be argumentative, but (for some reason) you took a pretty self explanatory sentence (which already listed it as a negative [2 negatives actually]) and restated it while incorrectly limiting it to even more than the (limited) iOS statement and said it's just for iPhones.

It's pretty clear from the original statement it wasn't going to work on non-iOS devices.

Gary
 
big-ted said:
Can you find me a pair of bluetooth earbuds that sound better or just as good as corded ?
Click to expand...
I am totally with you on this.
Having been using Bluetooth stereo headsets since 2006 with the Sony Ericsson HBH-DS970 along with different brands and designs, I have yet to find one that beats a pair of good old wired ones.
 
falainber said:
As far as DACs are concerned, I think the important point that need to be made here is that even relatively cheap DAC chip in iPhone will provide pretty decent quality. Most headphones below $100 (and maybe higher) won't even be able to match this quality. So all the talk about external DACs and amplifiers is relevant only for really expensive head phones which represent very small fraction of the headphone market. So, I see a lot of sense to keep 3.5mm jack for cheap head phones that represent the bulk of the headphone market.
Click to expand...

This 1000x. Everyone please stop for a sec and read this.
 
Rigby said:
Obviously not, since you can get the same "better" sound quality by turning the volume up further.

BTW, it would have been more interesting to hear how the volume of these headphones compares to, say, the Apple earbuds when using the 3.5mm jack. If the headphones have lower sensitivity, they take more power to drive, which means that the main difference of the Lightning cable vs. the 3.5mm jack is probably that the amp in the cable has a higher power output (and draws more power from the phone's battery accordingly).
Click to expand...

It is fair to say that this "test" wasn't legitimate. It is how MR pays bills. That's unfortunate because it lowers credibility.
 
drumcat said:
The reality is that unless they have rewritten the BT Spec so that it can pass 256kbps AAC stereo, it will be officially worse without a dongle.
Click to expand...
Bluetooth A2DP 1.2 actually supports AAC as a non-mandatory codec, and Apple has implemented this in the iPhone. The problem is that few Bluetooth headphones support it (AptX is currently more widely supported, but not by Apple).
 
JamesPDX said:
Audio engineers weep for the future: The ongoing, dumbing-down of audio quality for sheer convenience; to overturn a working multi-generational standard; just so someone can make something thinner and charge the consumer for endless pointless, greed-driven updates.
Click to expand...

Considering what people have been listening for the last 100 years, not sure were you're seeing "dumbing down", convenience has ALWAYS trumped anything except for maybe 1% of buyers. Those people can probably offer whatever's needed to get the best sound of whatever system they're connected too...
 
gaximus said:
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?
Click to expand...
That actually just means those headphones were probably too high impedance or too high power for the internal amp. The Lightning cable apparently had an amp that drove the headphones properly. If he would have used a small external amp with the 3.5mm cable it should have been similar sound level. Most headphones do not have that issue.
 
Keirasplace said:
Considering what people have been listening for the last 100 years, not sure were you're seeing "dumbing down", convenience has ALWAYS trumped anything except for maybe 1% of buyers. Those people can probably offer whatever's needed to get the best sound of whatever system they're connected too...
Click to expand...

Right, I love how people are outraged at the "dumbing down" of audio and this is going to be a slap in the face to "true audiophiles" etc etc. Meanwhile, we are talking about listening to music on your phone!!!
If sound quality is a major issue for you, are you really planning your listening experiences around listening to music on your phone??? I would think the purpose for this would be for longer battery life as you are making room for a bigger or better battery. I will take a battery that lasts 50%, 40% even 30 or 20% longer in replace of headphone jack. Headphones will come with a adapter (not Apples but any new lightning ones) or you will get 2 cords as most quality headsets the cord isnt attached. So you got lightning cord and 3.5 cord. Done. Not sure why people are so mad.
 
All these people complaining about not being able to use these while charging... I'm sure Apple will have a splitter. Then charge you $30 for it.
 
mwd25 said:
Right, I love how people are outraged at the "dumbing down" of audio and this is going to be a slap in the face to "true audiophiles" etc etc. Meanwhile, we are talking about listening to music on your phone!!!
If sound quality is a major issue for you, are you really planning your listening experiences around listening to music on your phone??? I would think the purpose for this would be for longer battery life as you are making room for a bigger or better battery. I will take a battery that lasts 50%, 40% even 30 or 20% longer in replace of headphone jack. Headphones will come with a adapter (not Apples but any new lightning ones) or you will get 2 cords as most quality headsets the cord isnt attached. So you got lightning cord and 3.5 cord. Done. Not sure why people are so mad.
Click to expand...
I use reference monitors to listen to music on my iPhone, so yeah, quality is major, especially since the iPhone supports 192khz playback. That's Hi-Fi quality, or close to it with the iPhones "higher end (still crap)" DAC. Makes a night and day difference in detail.

As far as battery goes, that's marginal. I'd go as far to say that most of these lightning headphones would draw more power since you'd have easier access to active crossovers. Plus, when there's more battery, they cram in more processor intensive OS features, so I'm sure the boost in battery life will be muddened by the "new features," Tim Cook says we "won't believe we lived without," in the not so distant future.

What I would like to see is an option for headphone amplification. My monitors are 60ohms, so an amping option (adjustment for power output) would be *awesome*.
 
Last edited:
boast said:
I guess this proves the DAC inside the iPhones is not good!
Click to expand...

Not as good as powered digital doesn't mean not good. I say powered, since I'd think they are drawing power from the phone to power the DAC in the headphones, many (most) 3.5mm headphones don't have separate power and they're just drawing from whatever comes out of the audio jack (probably some ancient standard that's been around since the 1970's).

Gary
 
Of course, what this video ignored is that even if the new iPhone does use the Lightning port for audio output the iPhone will still NEED a DAC because otherwise you won't be able to use the phone for its primary purpose -- making phone calls. Without a DAC there would be no way to hear the person you are talking to -- you need a DAC for both the earphone and the iPhone's built-in speakers. Of course, maybe Apple is expecting you to plug your ear into the Lightning port?

If true, this has got to be one of the most ridiculous decision that Apple has made in a very long time (maybe right up there with the circular, hockey puck mouse) . IMO, it will only lose market share for Apple, which is something they really can't afford.

Best move would be to keep the headphone port and switch over to USB-C. That would make an awesome upgrade and Apple is going to have to eventually switch to USB-C anyway. Then, since everyone else in the industry will move to USB-C getting a USB-C type headphone set will be easy and commonplace (if you want to go digital and skip the analog headphone port).
 
Last edited:
JonneyGee said:
Given the outrage that surrounded the 30-pin to Lightning transition in 2012, I highly doubt Apple will want to change the standard again for a long time. USB-C doesn't have any real benefits other than being a universal standard, and for people who are locked into Apple's ecosystem, that's irrelevant. For most people, it would be a net negative, having to replace cables and adapters.
Click to expand...

I think that if Apple didn't use proprietary connectors, then people wouldn't be outraged when they change. They are making this problem themselves. You nailed it though, lightening is about control and tightening it in any way possible (ecosystem).

Honestly I'm just fed up with this stuff.
[doublepost=1462849645][/doublepost]
paulopadopa said:
And use USB micro? No thanks!
Click to expand...

I suppose that's your personal preference, and that's fine. I have many devices which use USB mini and micro connectors, it's honestly not that big of a deal to me.
[doublepost=1462850028][/doublepost]
cmichaelb said:
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.
Click to expand...

I suppose the question is that it can do a quick charge NOW while it's new, but does the quick charge feature still actually work after a year or two?

No? Just throw away in the trash can under your desk and buy a new one. Who cares if it's wasteful.
 
organisum said:
Jogging with an iPhone and aftermarket headphones, getting songs cued forward because of headphone jack circuit shorts. Not cool.

Bring the lightning.
Click to expand...
Under that use case, go buy yourself some lightning cans, or better, Active BT workout earbuds, and leave the 3.5 alone.
 
This is the classic example of "Is taking a feature away make the product more attractive"??

if your answer is "Yes" in any capacity, Put DOWN the coolaid asap!

I personally use bluetooth 90% of the time. However there's absolutely no way I'm bringing dongles when I'm out with friends who wants to share listening to a song. Also I have no bluetooth in my car (rely exclusively on AUX).

if iPhone 7 has no headphone. I'm going android. one of many I'm sure
 
Is $45 the bottom of the barrel? Holy smokes! 3.5mm headphones can be gotten for a couple of dollars. This is pure insanity this $45 price for crappy headphones
 
Rigby said:
Bluetooth A2DP 1.2 actually supports AAC as a non-mandatory codec, and Apple has implemented this in the iPhone. The problem is that few Bluetooth headphones support it (AptX is currently more widely supported, but not by Apple).
Click to expand...

Yes, that's a good thing. It'll handle HE-AAC, which at 96kbps stereo would be a win for the 99%. Love that idea, but... the spec doesn't allow for that ubiquitous remote control on the cabling of every iEarbud out there. Hell, that spec even allows for ATRAC... someone had a serious woody for Sony to allow that.

Anyhow, if that was supported widely, say by Beats branded buds, it might catch on.
 
gaximus said:
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?
Click to expand...

What it is saying is that the headphone amplifier in the lightning port has a higher wattage, and thus can drive the headphones with less distortion, albeit at a considerable cost in terms of battery drain (which is why the iPhone has a low-power headphone amp to begin with).

That's a big problem. The iPhone's circuitry is designed to work well under a very tight power budget. Sure, you can provide more power to drive headphones with lower distortion, but the second you do, you're drawing more power than the built-in amplifier.
 
mkldev said:
What it is saying is that the headphone amplifier in the lightning port has a higher wattage, and thus can drive the headphones with less distortion, albeit at a considerable cost in terms of battery drain (which is why the iPhone has a low-power headphone amp to begin with).

That's a big problem. The iPhone's circuitry is designed to work well under a very tight power budget. Sure, you can provide more power to drive headphones with lower distortion, but the second you do, you're drawing more power than the built-in amplifier.
Click to expand...

And then you get people bitching about battery drain, etc. etc...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top