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.
Rumor: Apple to Announce Third-Generation AirPods and HiFi Apple Music Tier in 'Coming Weeks'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For source, you want highest possible quality, preferably raw, so in case there’s a better format in the future, you can go back to the source master instead of transcoding a lossy version.
That has nothing to do whether you can differentiate between “standard” res audio vs high res or not. That part is purely subjective.
I wouldn't be so sure. The lightning jack won't be around forever. I wouldn't be surprised if future iPhone models dispensed with connector ports entirely and went completely wireless. Much like Apple's stubborn commitment to inferior mp3 quality, Apple's refusal to embrace more advanced Bluetooth codecs like AptX HD and LDAC, or offer their own version, is frustrating. Perhaps someone will develop an ultra low power wifi chip that can go into headphones. All I know is that we can do a lot better than the status quo.
Let's hope the case has U1 support... because if the AirPods are in their case, you can't use Find My... to locate them.
The weakest links for these things are the charging contacts in the case. They're fare too susceptible to corrosion than the contacts on the AirPods. Due to their delicate nature and position, they've very difficult to clean too.
From what I've read, Spotify HiFi is going to be just "CD Quality" (16bit/44.1kHz), not "Hi Res" (24bit wtih 48, 96 or 192kHz sample rates). If the new tier of Apple HiFi is merely "CD Quality" it should be an improvement over basic Apple Music, and will enable Apple to compete with Spotify HiFi and Tidal HiFi, but it won't be to the Hi Res level of Qobuz or Tidal Masters. Granted, a lot of low and mid-fi audio equipment can't reveal the benefit of Hi Res.
If you're an audiophile, you're already listening to Qobuz or Tidal Masters if you're streaming, and you already have equipment that can discern the benefit of Hi Res.
If you're an audiophile, you're already listening to Qobuz or Tidal Masters if you're streaming, and you already have equipment that can discern the benefit of Hi Res.
I also have the Sennheiser HD 800S, connected to a Schiit Magnius amplifier connected to a Hegel HD12 DAC. Balanced cables between them all.
I love the headphones, and I decided to get the amp as the Hegel HD12 isn't quite powerful enough to drive the Sennheiser HD 800S, in my opinion. The only way to get fully balanced cables end-to-end is by connecting the Hegel HD12 to a balanced amplifier.
I have listened to 256kbps AAC, 1411kbps ALAC, Tidal MQA 24bit/96kHz and some music from Blu-Rays at 24bit/192kHz I would be hard-pressed to separate them in a blind test.
Going from running unbalanced using my Hegel HD12 to fully balanced by tossing the Schiit Magnius into the mix made for a much bigger change than going from 256kbps ALAC to 24bit/192kHz tracks.
And this is pretty much being backed up by almost every unbiased blind test out there. Even on extremely high-end and expensive equipment, next to no one can separate the source material when you go past 16bit/44kHz 200 kbps VBR if decent codecs and encoding have been done from decent masters.
And the funny thing about hearing is that it's degrading with age. By the time you reach a point in life where you have the money to spend on great equipment, your hearing will most likely have degraded to a point where you are far less likely to be capable of picking up the slight difference in audio quality. If you take this expensive equipment and put them on the ears of a 14-year-old, the person will have a hearing making them far more likely to tell the difference, but they would most likely not care to begin with.
We are all going to be different, of course. So your mileage will vary. But unless someone is capable of entering an unknown environment with high-end equipment they have no personal experience with and listen to a complete blind-test and prove to me they are actually able to hear and tell the difference, I'm going to have a tough time believing them.
Whatever differences you are telling yourself that you are hearing are most likely down to the differences between the masters that have been used for whatever encode you are listening to and the placebo. And it's nothing wrong with that. Placebo is a powerful thing, and if it gives you joy and you feel you get something out of it, there is nothing wrong with it.
With all that said. I see nothing wrong with Apple offering a "Hi-Fi" option. The closer the encoding is to its master, the less likely we will have any kind of theoretical degradation of the audio. And it's not like streaming in 256 kbps or 1411 kbps or whatever is much of an issue in 2021. So providing the option doesn't really hurt anyone, so it doesn't really matter if it's pointless or not. Why do we have to throttle the bitrate when we have the capacity in our networks for using higher bitrates.
At medium volumes agreed. Lossless really shines at loud volumes on high quality equipment. Lossy washes out at high volumes.
The process and the accuracy of the encoding makes a huge difference. 96/24 from a poor source is always poor. 44.1/16 from a quality source and encoded correctly will sound better every time.
This is what I believe too; I'm sure there are people with gifted ears and fantastic equipment that can hear the differences, but it seems so exceedingly rare that I'm highly skeptical of people who claim they can. That doubt is doubled when I hear flowery nostalgia for vinyl/analogue and qualitative descriptions of HiFi being warm, rich, full or natural.
While those descriptions can be true, it wasn't until I ABX'd lossless against ~160kbps iTunes AAC VBR that I noticed how much of a challenge it could be to hear the differences. The only consistent give away were cymbals. Apple Music 256kbps AAC CBR should be enough for most people. The remaining audiophiles will then mostly be satisfied with access to CD lossless equivalents. It won't be until bandwidth/storage become so trivial that HiFi at 24+/96+ will become a mainstream focus. Maybe if the streaming services get into a pissing match about (essentially placebo) music quality?
The archivist in me loves that idea. But I don't think it particularly pragmatic just yet.
Last edited:
Let's see how long it will take for Hi-Fi music streaming to fail and be discontinued
My guess is it will take less than 2 years 😂 😂 . (iPod HiFi was discontinued in ~1 year, HomePod was discontinued in ~3 years). Seems like every single "Hi Fi" branding/speaker fails at Apple, every single time.
Aptx is Qualcomm, LDAC is Sony, Apple would probably come up with their own format before paying license fees to these. So forget about those.
For real, I bet you we see that tech comeback in another form tho. This isn’t the first time they canceled a high end speaker and the made a new one.
While I am excited about the possibility of an upgrade with sound and battery improvements to the non-pro line, if they retain those GD squeeze controls of the Pro's it is a solid no go from me. Those stupid squeeze controls are the only thing I actually hate about my Pro's, because 1) they aren't intuitive in the way the tap controls of the non-pro's are and 2) when I try to squeeze them while moving I invariably end up just pulling the stupid thing out of my ear completely. Yeah I can control most things from my watch, but it so much easier just tapping twice to skip a track, or once to answer/disconnect a call. I know I am not the only one who feels this way, so whenever I see the telltale indents on the leaked photos I have to wonder what exactly Apple is thinking, and why it has this thickheaded tendency to double down on designs people actively dislike (butterfly keyboards, TouchBar etc)
So it's plausible one could discern a difference if a remixer ****s things up, which is why bluetooth AAC vs AptX HD FLAC file or 3.5/USB-C comparisons may not be equivalent to directly comparing 326kbps and a FLAC file via wired direct connection.
But that's still a very minor quibble - somewhat theoretical - and overall most absolutely cannot pass a ****ing ABX test, lol, myself included.
Last edited:
This whole absurd notion that "the bar for observing a benefit to lossless audio is a function of equipment" is hilarious. If I didn't know better, I'd think this mantra were a marketing psyop. Yeah, for the ~ 2.3% of the population who'd notice a difference in some cymbals, $15 buds from Walgreens won't do, but $100 Audio Technica M40X's would.
The primary prerequisite for "enjoying HiFi audio" is one of a mental state: Convincing yourself you've ****ing golden ears, haha.
The primary prerequisite for "enjoying HiFi audio" is one of a mental state: Convincing yourself you've ****ing golden ears, haha.
96kbps mp3s, smartphone speakers, YouTube, and TikTok have proven that music is much more culture and ideas than anything else and that it doesn’t need to meet anything but the most minimal levels of technical and auditory quality as long as it feels relevant to the listener and invokes a strong emotional response.
Apple can put out $2000 AirPods Max Fidelity Pro and pair it with a $70/month lossless-only streaming service, the vast majority of people would not enjoy music anymore even if Apple handed them the gear and subscription for free.
Apple can put out $2000 AirPods Max Fidelity Pro and pair it with a $70/month lossless-only streaming service, the vast majority of people would not enjoy music anymore even if Apple handed them the gear and subscription for free.
I’m currently trialling QoBuzz, which makes for really impressive listening (even at their CD Quality level, let alone the HR stuff).
I get Spotify with my Vodafone tariff (U.K.), but I'm seriously considering a monthly sub to QuBuzz, until Spotify announce/release their lossless product.
I get Spotify with my Vodafone tariff (U.K.), but I'm seriously considering a monthly sub to QuBuzz, until Spotify announce/release their lossless product.