Lightning Headphones: Are They Better or Just an Inconvenience?

[Abazigal]

Here's a random thought - what if Apple finds a new way of transmitting audio that is better than Bluetooth?

I noticed that my Apple TV pairs via Bluetooth but does the data transfer over wifi. I can't comment on the viability of it, but I am wondering about the possibility of headphones that do the same thing.

The pieces are somewhat there. We have the ability to pair Bluetooth peripherals by inserting the Lightning connector into the device. AirPlay mirroring lets me stream full HD video, so high fidelity music shouldn't be an issue. Apple can presumably find a way to make this all work at a software and hardware level.

I guess one observation of this thread is that the discussion is limited by what we know (or at least, what we think we know) about Apple or technology in general.

 

[dk001]

After going through everything posted here, I would like to add a bit. BT vs. Wired.
btw - thanks for the A2DP mention - (Rigby). Nice catch we missed.

I have a set of decent general purpose headphones (in ear) I use with my iOS and Android devices.
- For my workout I have a set of BlueAnt Pump Mini that support A2DP and BT 4.1. They sound pretty good (better than most I have tried). They are not cheap at $100 a set. Still one of the better I have found in the under $200 range.
- For my normal everyday listening I use Puro IEM 500. These are wired. Paid the same as the BlueAnt.

The difference in sound. Not only listening, as both have a built in mic, also what the recipient hears is night / day. The Puro are far and away much much better.

I have found this disparity between BT and Wired across the board irrespective of brand or model. Even at the higher end B&O brand (which Apple also sells). Doesn't matter if it is my iPhone, Nexus, iPad, Retina Macbook, Lenovo, etc..., the result is consistent; wired is better.

What path will Apple take? I don't know. I just hope it isn't this and keeps the stock plug port for the future. BT sound quality at typical user level, cost and battery life have to significantly improve to move from a wired to a BT listening world.

 

[Rigby]

Well, I think it's time I jump of this thread. However, it has been unusually enlightening. (+1 Rigby)

Here are the conclusions I've personally drawn:

- Bluetooth has a newer standard that is becoming more widely available (A2DP).
- A2DP allows both AptX and AAC passthrough, and those codecs at that bandwidth will sound very transparent (read: great)
- iPhone 6S will transmit AAC via A2DP right meow.
- Several higher-end cans have successful implementations of A2DP, a few have crappy ones.
- Some newer earbud products are starting to include AptX, though none seem to be established IEM brands thus far
- Vast majority of consumers know how BT 4.0 sounds; most ok with it, but those that aren't don't know much about A2DP

There are still some misconceptions:

- A2DP it not a new standard. It has been around for a long time (since Bluetooth 2.0). In the early years it was primarily used in car audio systems. A more recent development is support for alternative codecs such as AptX and AAC in A2DP. But those can be (and are) used with BT 4.0 as well.

- I have never heard of a "crappy A2DP implementation" even in the cheapest headphones. There are a handful of chips that are used by almost all manufacturers. They differ in features and codec support, that is all.

- There are absolutely IEMs from established brands that support AptX and/or AAC.
[doublepost=1463100120][/doublepost]

Here's a random thought - what if Apple finds a new way of transmitting audio that is better than Bluetooth?

I noticed that my Apple TV pairs via Bluetooth but does the data transfer over wifi. I can't comment on the viability of it, but I am wondering about the possibility of headphones that do the same thing.

There is a reason for BT's limitations: power efficiency. Using Wifi would suck a mobile device battery empty very quickly. BT is extremely power efficient for what it does.

 

[drumcat]

There are still some misconceptions:

- A2DP it not a new standard. It has been around for a long time (since Bluetooth 2.0). In the early years it was primarily used in car audio systems. A more recent development is support for alternative codecs such as AptX and AAC in A2DP. But those can be (and are) used with BT 4.0 as well.

- I have never heard of a "crappy A2DP implementation" even in the cheapest headphones. There are a handful of chips that are used by almost all manufacturers. They differ in features and codec support, that is all.

- There are absolutely IEMs from established brands that support AptX and/or AAC.
[doublepost=1463100120][/doublepost]There is a reason for BT's limitations: power efficiency. Using Wifi would suck a mobile device battery empty very quickly. BT is extremely power efficient for what it does.

Point 2, http://gizmodo.com/sennheisers-new-wireless-headphones-only-work-well-with-1702879729
[doublepost=1463101045][/doublepost]

Here's a random thought - what if Apple finds a new way of transmitting audio that is better than Bluetooth?

I noticed that my Apple TV pairs via Bluetooth but does the data transfer over wifi. I can't comment on the viability of it, but I am wondering about the possibility of headphones that do the same thing.

The pieces are somewhat there. We have the ability to pair Bluetooth peripherals by inserting the Lightning connector into the device. AirPlay mirroring lets me stream full HD video, so high fidelity music shouldn't be an issue. Apple can presumably find a way to make this all work at a software and hardware level.

I guess one observation of this thread is that the discussion is limited by what we know (or at least, what we think we know) about Apple or technology in general.

Wi-fi direct was tried in 2010... didn't take.

 

[alex0002]

It depends - didn't WiFi overtake Ethernet speeds? Because WiFi was more convenient so developed more, where as Ethernet was left behind. I can see a similar thing happening with audio.

Servers and high end workstations are using 10Gbe Ethernet and some ethernet switches are using 40Gbe or 100Gbe. To the best of my knowledge, WiFi isn't there yet.

To get back to the original questions - I'm using headphones with 3.5mm jack on Android tablet and phone, Macbook Pro, Linux Desktop and sometimes Windows laptops and iOS devices. Unless I can use Lightning headphones on most or all of these, it's just an inconvenience.

 

[Mac 128]

To get back to the original questions - I'm using headphones with 3.5mm jack on Android tablet and phone, Macbook Pro, Linux Desktop and sometimes Windows laptops and iOS devices. Unless I can use Lightning headphones on most or all of these, it's just an inconvenience.

Why would you use Lightning headphones at all? You're absolutely atypical, and one of the last customers Apple is considering in this move. You don't even use an iPhone. This is only going to affect initially customers who buy the latest flagship iPhone. Since you only "sometimes" use iOS devices, you'd be much better off with an adapter to Lightning, assuming any of those iOS devices you "sometimes" use will even be the jackless iPhone flagship.

You're more likely going to be faced with an Android flagship phone with USB-C only which is going to create the exact same conundrum for you without Lightning ever entering into it, at least in the near future. If this all comes to pass, adapters will be your future, not Lightning headphones. But the solution for customers with needs like yours will be a digital set of headphones, since you've already indicated a willing ness to buy a new digital set of headphones, with a combo D/A port that allows you to use a cable with a multi-plug connector supporting Lightning, USB-C, and 3.5mm. The plug will be a little more bulky than a single plug, but hardly inconvenient. And that's assuming you don't want to use a higher quality wireless solution which Apple will most likely introduce with the removal of the Jack and would be compatible via BT with all of the devices you mention.

 

[dogslobber]

It's the age of bluetooth headsets now, cut the cords!

If Apple remove the headphone jack from iphones then I will never buy an Apple Car.

 

[thekeyring]

Servers and high end workstations are using 10Gbe Ethernet and some ethernet switches are using 40Gbe or 100Gbe. To the best of my knowledge, WiFi isn't there yet.

To get back to the original questions - I'm using headphones with 3.5mm jack on Android tablet and phone, Macbook Pro, Linux Desktop and sometimes Windows laptops and iOS devices. Unless I can use Lightning headphones on most or all of these, it's just an inconvenience.

Great point. I use my iPhone headphones with my Mac when I'm at work. I can quickly unplug from iPhone and plug into my Mac - it would need to be this fast and simple to sync headphones between devices.

 

[dk001]

Why would you use Lightning headphones at all? You're absolutely atypical, and one of the last customers Apple is considering in this move. You don't even use an iPhone. This is only going to affect initially customers who buy the latest flagship iPhone. Since you only "sometimes" use iOS devices, you'd be much better off with an adapter to Lightning, assuming any of those iOS devices you "sometimes" use will even be the jackless iPhone flagship.

...

Why atypical? I'm curious.
In all my years in the tech/enterprise/educational/personal world, the All Apple user is likely the least common even among iPhone users. That makes the typical user (who on average own 3 devices they can use headphones on) ... typical and the All Apple atypical.
As for the USB C headset... I think that is a ways away from mainstream use / adoption. It has barely started from a connector option in smartphones.

 

[Mac 128]

Why atypical? I'm curious.
In all my years in the tech/enterprise/educational/personal world, the All Apple user is likely the least common even among iPhone users. That makes the typical user (who on average own 3 devices they can use headphones on) ... typical and the All Apple atypical.
As for the USB C headset... I think that is a ways away from mainstream use / adoption. It has barely started from a connector option in smartphones.

Apple is a consumer product company. Most consumers aren't constantly plugging their headphones into multiple devices throughout the day. I mean, you don't even have an iPhone, so I'm not sure why we're even debating this. But, you're a tech professional that seems to use every computing platform known to man -- that's not who Apple is designing products for. Even if an iPhone user uses Windows/Linux at work, or a PC laptop, that's really only a few changes to accommodate throughout the day. At worst, they have a native Lightning headphone for their iPhone, which they are likely to plug into most often, an adapter for their work computer, and an adapter for their laptop for the occasion where they do plug in their headphones (when I see people listening to music while working on a laptop, their headphones are usually plugged into their phones sitting next to the laptop anyway). Best is buying a set of headphones with a custom cable that accommodates their specific needs, or a higher quality wireless set that works with everything without wires.

You say USB-C isn't implemented, but you completely discount why Apple would logically be dropping the 3.5mm jack, and ignoring that Intel is currently pushing USB-C as an audio standard, suggesting that mobile devices, and particularly top of the line phones, are looking for ways to gain more space inside their devices to make improvements and add features, without increasing size and weight. That's why Apple would do it, and everybody else will follow soon after Apple does. So sooner or later, you're looking at adapters for mobile audio.

 

[oplix]

At this point everyone should just get Bluetooth headphones

 

[dk001]

Apple is a consumer product company. Most consumers aren't constantly plugging their headphones into multiple devices throughout the day. I mean, you don't even have an iPhone, so I'm not sure why we're even debating this. But, you're a tech professional that seems to use every computing platform known to man -- that's not who Apple is designing products for. Even if an iPhone user uses Windows/Linux at work, or a PC laptop, that's really only a few changes to accommodate throughout the day. At worst, they have a native Lightning headphone for their iPhone, which they are likely to plug into most often, an adapter for their work computer, and an adapter for their laptop for the occasion where they do plug in their headphones (when I see people listening to music while working on a laptop, their headphones are usually plugged into their phones sitting next to the laptop anyway). Best is buying a set of headphones with a custom cable that accommodates their specific needs, or a higher quality wireless set that works with everything without wires.

You say USB-C isn't implemented, but you completely discount why Apple would logically be dropping the 3.5mm jack, and ignoring that Intel is currently pushing USB-C as an audio standard, suggesting that mobile devices, and particularly top of the line phones, are looking for ways to gain more space inside their devices to make improvements and add features, without increasing size and weight. That's why Apple would do it, and everybody else will follow soon after Apple does. So sooner or later, you're looking at adapters for mobile audio.

Please please read (not skim) before you reply.
1. most headphone users have 3 or more devices they use a headset on. Usage rates likely vary.
2. been using an iPhone since the 2. Currently using a 6S+ (see my signature for current hardware)
3. USB C for power / data has been implemented. It is, however, not mainstream in the smartphone world. Yet.
4. Intel's push has just started. Intel is looking at this from a business model development standard. There are a few OEM's making USB C headsets. Intel wants to drive that direction.
5. adapters suck. (pardon my Old English) They have never really been mainstream.

There are a number of reason for dropping the current headset jack. There is though no standard dependable quality replacement.

 

[Mac 128]

Please please read (not skim) before you reply.
1. most headphone users have 3 or more devices they use a headset on. Usage rates likely vary.
2. been using an iPhone since the 2. Currently using a 6S+ (see my signature for current hardware)
3. USB C for power / data has been implemented. It is, however, not mainstream in the smartphone world. Yet.
4. Intel's push has just started. Intel is looking at this from a business model development standard. There are a few OEM's making USB C headsets. Intel wants to drive that direction.
5. adapters suck. (pardon my Old English) They have never really been mainstream.

There are a number of reason for dropping the current headset jack. There is though no standard dependable quality replacement.

I did read. Not sure what you think I missed.

1. They have maybe 3 devices based on your anecdotal evidence. You mentioned you use a minimum of 6, and in addition multiples of Windows Laptops and iOS devices. Also, you were specifically stating computer devices, not audio devices. I still haven't made that point clear from you. Regardless, I was addressing your particular atypical need to plug your headphones into multiple computing devices daily.
2. You stated clearly in your first post that you are using an Android phone. You never mentioned iPhone. Who reads signatures?
3. Yet. Give it a year after Apple removes the 3.5mm jack.
4. Intel is actively pushing USB-C as an audio standard. Nobody has to make a USB-C headset. They have to make a digital headset that can output a compatible signal whatever connector is attached to the headphone. These already exist and is likely the future.
5. No argument that adapters suck. But they still exist. In fact professional audio studios and consumers alike still need 3.5mm to 1/4 adapters in many cases -- but like you, that's a typical of the average consumer. There was a time when they only made headphones with one jack or the other. Now the adapters are integrated into headphones intended for such dual purposes. But you still need such an adapter with most native 3.5mm headphones sold today. There are cases however where adapters are just fine -- a desktop work computer, a hifi stereo mounted in a rack, a laptop that's rarely used for listening to headphones, a car AUX jack, etc.

There are a number of speculative reasons, however none but the NEED to remove it to create more internal space makes any sense. If Apple drops the 3.5mm jack, but nobody else in the world needs to in order to remain competitive with Apple vis-a-vis features, and size, then Apple will most assuredly lose marketshare. And currently you personally may not think there is a "standard" dependable quality replacement, but you have no idea what Apple plans on introducing. And ultimately it doesn't matter, the wired "standard" is going away, like it or not. Wireless is the undisputed future for the average consumer -- and that's the main customer that Apple cares about.

 

[friedmud]

Because I want to pair my phone to some random car, and download my phone book to it, NOT

You can always wipe the address book before giving the car back. That's exactly what I did a couple of weeks ago.

 

[enriquemmd]

[doublepost=1463166063][/doublepost]

Can you find me a pair of bluetooth earbuds that sound better or just as good as corded ?

I know that so far bluetooth headphones audio quality does not compare to corded headphones. But I do own a pair of V-moda's Crossfade Wireless bluetooth headphones. To my ears the quality of this set of cans is very good, If you can give them a try, the quality over bluetooth is very similar, maybe even the same, as when I use them with the chord.

Pardon my english, it's my second language.
Here I leave a link of this headphones so you can check them out.

http://www.amazon.com/V-MODA-Crossf...id=1463165793&sr=8-1&keywords=v-moda+wireless

 

[AsherN]

You can always wipe the address book before giving the car back. That's exactly what I did a couple of weeks ago.

Umm, no. Wipe does not truly, fully, erase the info. I don't trust my contacts info to some random car and hope my info can't be retrieved.

 

[friedmud]

Umm, no. Wipe does not truly, fully, erase the info. I don't trust my contacts info to some random car and hope my info can't be retrieved.

I assume you have a source that shows this?

 

[AsherN]

Decades in IT security. Unless I know for sure that the delete feature performs a DoD wipe, I assume it does not. The info in my address book is too valuable to chance on an unknown.

 

[redfirebird08]

I am in the same boat. I would also add driving in older cars without bluetooth, charging while connected to the AUX port. I would guess that Apple would produce an adapter that would provide an additional port for charging, but I would guess that it would be expensive and inconvenient.

Hell, my car is newer (2015 model) but the Bluetooth is a pain in the ass. Have to wait for it to warm up any time the car is started. AUX cable is much easier and ready to go as soon as the car starts. Plug in iPhone and boom, ready to go.

 

[Mac 128]

You can always wipe the address book before giving the car back. That's exactly what I did a couple of weeks ago.

Why would anyone download their address book to a rental car (or any car for that matter)? There's actually no need to with the iPhone. Whenever this option comes up I say no thanks and I've never had a problem, fully utilizing the cars phone system to make and receive calls using my iPhone as the interface. The only thing I've ever erased on a rental car is my pairing profile.

Hell, my car is newer (2015 model) but the Bluetooth is a pain in the ass. Have to wait for it to warm up any time the car is started. AUX cable is much easier and ready to go as soon as the car starts. Plug in iPhone and boom, ready to go.

"Warm up"!? I've driven dozens of different late model rental cars and have never seen a BT system that has to "warm up". I turn on the car, BT connects and instant playback of whatever I was listening to in the car when I got out. Some auto makers have poor software interfaces that cause my phone to reset to the first song in my music library as a default, but that's not the fault of BT.

I had a rental car once with an AUX Jack that always reset to the radio when turned off. So I always had to fumble with the controls to switch it back to AUX. PITA. There was also the annoying problem with the AUX where I got out of the car listening to a soft song and had the volume turned up, but when I get back in, the last song I was listening to was loud and blasted me out of the car. Digital interfaces control the volume level to prevent that from happening.

 

[friedmud]

Why would anyone download their address book to a rental car (or any car for that matter)? There's actually no need to with the iPhone. Whenever this option comes up I say no thanks and I've never had a problem, fully utilizing the cars phone system to make and receive calls using my iPhone as the interface. The only thing I've ever erased on a rental car is my pairing profile.

In this case I did it on purpose. I was going to have the car for over a week and had a lot of driving to do. It came in handy to have my phone book synced.

 

[Mac 128]

In this case I did it on purpose. I was going to have the car for over a week and had a lot of driving to do. It came in handy to have my phone book synced.

I guess, but I've never had a need to do that. With the iPhone I just say, "hey Siri, call Bob Smith at home". Either way, if someone is concerned about privacy, then they don't have to download it, at the sacrifice of only marginal convenience? Like I said, I've never seen the advantage to downloading my data into a car system, in part because in the early days I had more contacts than most cars could accomodate, but now I don't see any more convenience than using the iPhones built-in access.

 

[JRobinsonJr]

Many Bluetooth earbuds for $10-$20 on Amazon. I have a pair at $25 that are great for working out.



Exactly why I only use Bluetooth.



Yep: Bluetooth




1000% wrong:

https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?cid=TW189&newsId=15254

Relevant bit: "You can also continue to use short-range Bluetooth accessories, like wireless keyboards." i.e. They were actually NEVER prohibited... and definitely aren't now.



Every rental car I've had for the last 3 years or so has had Bluetooth. Just had a great Chrysler 300 rental last week that was awesome with my iPhone.

If you're really worried about it there are TONS of Bluetooth->Aux options.


Anything else?

While I appreciate the time and effort to respond, with the exception of your feedback regarding bluetooth use on planes - Thanks! - much of that is still just your situation. I find bluetooth to be less than satisfactory, plus they simply won't get loud enough FOR ME to hear over the background noise of an airport, plane or car. Why try to pigeonhole all users into a single solution that so clearly doesn't work for everyone... particularly when there is a cheap and easy alternative?

 

[SpectatorHere]

Limiting people to their proprietary connector when we had a universal standard previously is not a good move for consumers.


Penny-pinching cost savings for Apple will lose them far more in brand loyalty and good will than this will save them. I'm sure some middle management is very happy they found a way to increase profit per device and that focus groups indicated that people won't leave Apple over this, but it's damn stupid long term. Just as the Lightning connector was a needless pain in butt for consumers--nearly everyone I know had to get rid docking stations/keep two docking stations/couldn't use their phones as conveniently (or at all in some cases of car connectors)--this is another.


This is just more indication Apple has lost its way.

 

[2010mini]

While I appreciate the time and effort to respond, with the exception of your feedback regarding bluetooth use on planes - Thanks! - much of that is still just your situation. I find bluetooth to be less than satisfactory, plus they simply won't get loud enough FOR ME to hear over the background noise of an airport, plane or car. Why try to pigeonhole all users into a single solution that so clearly doesn't work for everyone... particularly when there is a cheap and easy alternative?

Get the noise cancelling Bluetooth ones instead.
[doublepost=1467294638][/doublepost]

Limiting people to their proprietary connector when we had a universal standard previously is not a good move for consumers.


Penny-pinching cost savings for Apple will lose them far more in brand loyalty and good will than this will save them. I'm sure some middle management is very happy they found a way to increase profit per device and that focus groups indicated that people won't leave Apple over this, but it's damn stupid long term. Just as the Lightning connector was a needless pain in butt for consumers--nearly everyone I know had to get rid docking stations/keep two docking stations/couldn't use their phones as conveniently (or at all in some cases of car connectors)--this is another.


This is just more indication Apple has lost its way.

Nothing about this is penny pinching. It's about moving forward. Moving the DAC to the headphones means you can have a much more advanced DAC than currently offered because of space constraints.

Its you who want to penny pinch because it means you will have to spend more money. For crying out loud, it's just headphones.