Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What?!! There's a DAC in there? These people must know nothing about audio. /s
[doublepost=1474384687][/doublepost]

You only prove the courage statement every time you talk smack about it - you do realize this, right?
omg, you said to stop... so people must do so.

said nobody, ever
 
So how about quality of sound? In heated exchanges in thread after thread prior to the rollout, arguments flew hot & heavy that shifting the DAC & AMP outside of the phone meant better quality DACs & AMPs and thus better quality sound. In fact, this was one of the most common rationalizations in support of jettisoning the headphone jack. The adapter retails (RETAILS) for $9. So is THIS a better quality DAC & AMP than what has always been argued as "a good one" inside the iPhone?

A manufacturer of quality audio devices can now embed a better DAC in their device than was previously inside the phone. They couldn't do that before. THAT's the argument. It is unrelated to the throw-in adapter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocko99
Yes. As mentioned upthread, Chipworks found three amps in the iPhone teardown. Two speakers would use two amps, but why the third? ..,

This proves that hypothesis is wrong, but we're still wondering why that extra amp?

These are not amplifiers. These are digital-to-analog converters. Differing digital streams may be enough to warrant another DAC. Two speakers, but one of those has two uses. ( telephone earpiece , 2nd of stereo speaker). May want different performance and transformations in those two modes. One DAC is optimized for one (encoded voice) and the other is optimized for the other.
A more general purpose DAC could span both, but maybe can get smaller, lower power DAC that is just good at narrow range of conversion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gav2k
The bigger question is how does this DAC compare the internal DAC on the previous iPhones?
 
Serious questions here.
1) we know that the phone already ha a DAC and amplifier because it has speakers, why can't this be used for the headphones?
2) look at how small the DAC is in the Lightning connector! This is what they had to remove in order to free up a bunch of space? Couldn't they have just used a smaller DAC like this inside the phone?

I am just confused by everything involved in this. It's like when our mothers told us to eat vegetables. But instead of explaining that they are good for us and keep us healthy we got, "because I said so." In this case though, it's like we were told some random things that have nothing to do with the topic. We took out the jack because we needed space for the speakers (which didn't make it) a larger battery which doesn't encroach on the space, for waterproofing (again not true) and it just took up too much room. Oh but here is the tiniest thing you've seen in a while that does all of that stuff. We certainly couldn't keep it in that empty space. We need that for...

1) one of the benefits of going to a digital connection is that the headphone manufacture can choose a better DAC to power the headphones.
2) It wasn't the chip that they removed for more room, it was the port its-self, this allowed them to move down the Taptic engine and increase battery size.
 
1) one of the benefits of going to a digital connection is that the headphone manufacture can choose a better DAC to power the headphones.
2) It wasn't the chip that they removed for more room, it was the port its-self, this allowed them to move down the Taptic engine and increase battery size.

They still need a chip for the speakers.
 
A manufacturer of quality audio devices can now embed a better DAC in their device than was previously inside the phone. They couldn't do that before. THAT's the argument.
Uhm, what? Of course you could. There have been external DACs and headphones with Lightning connectors long before the iPhone 7. Dropping the 3.5mm jack didn't add anything, it just removed functionality.
 
... So is THIS a better quality DAC & AMP than what has always been argued as "a good one" inside the iPhone?

Since it is hardwired directly to one pair of earphone speakers, it only has to be "good enough" for that specific pair. If it was better what would it buy you? It is likely a "good enough" to be close to result of old analog ear pods and also enable the $9 price point.

There is no sense in a $20 DAC chip to drive a $20 worth of earphones. ( not that the old internal was $20, but the range of output devices drive the utility of a DAC. )
 
iTunes purchased music isn't DRM protected so how would that work? :confused:

Aren't some songs protected while others aren't? For example songs that are $1.29 are DRM-free whereas $.99 songs are protected?

Not sure on that at all, I just thought that was the case from years ago.

I only listen to it through iTunes or the phone, so I don't mind the DRM if it's there.
 
I remember the hubbub around removing the floppy drive in the first iMac. There was an uproar, but people learned to deal with it. We eventually got flash drives and then wireless communication like AirDrop and the cloud. I think this will be a similar process, but would be better if it was a USB-C port instead of a lightning port. More standardized port, and more headphone options.

They dealt with it because there was the superior CD to replace it. What is superior to the 3.5mm jack???????????
 
They still need a chip for the speakers.
I'm not sure I understand your comment? I was saying the reason for removing the audio port wasn't to make more room by also removing the DAC. The room is created by removing a large empty hole used for a port.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kingpushup
Yes, and Yes - you can pay upwards of £1,000 for a top-end DAC! The question really is whether this DAC is at least as good as the one that's built in to the iPhone and I'd guess it will be but time will tell

Distinguishing between modern day converters is extremely difficult; in other words, they all sound very much alike. Further more, for even the few individuals who can reliably hear a difference (when tested blindfolded), it's not always obvious which one is "better". Another wrinkle is that speakers/earphones/monitors (and most other links in the chain) contribute far more variability to the sound produced than do DAC converters.

Some things that matter a lot: quality of sound to be recorded; distance from and orientation to microphone; what kind of mic is used; acoustics of recording environment; pre- and postproduction audio processing; what speakers are used;...

Some things that matter much less: what brand or model microphone is used; what brand or model of preamplifier is used; whether analog tape was used as a recording medium; digital compression to reduce file size;...

Things that matter very little or not at all: what cables are used; what DAW was used; what ADC is used; what DAC is used;...
 
  • Like
Reactions: discuit and 480951
Anybody knows if the "quality" of the DAC can impact the quality of sound? If yes... how good are the ones provided by Apple? Are there better ones?

this is the golden question.

Apple puts pretty good dac's in their ipods, iphone, ipads. better than you'd expect perhaps - and those who appropriate good music quality really appreciate their effort there.

However, now, the existing DAC ( it's still in phone from speakers) isn't used - and each thing connected to the lightening port will need a dac. Are they putting any quality into that little adapter thing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Macinva
They dealt with it because there was the superior CD to replace it. What is superior to the 3.5mm jack???????????

Valid point. However, by moving the DAC to the headphones, people can choose which one they prefer. If they want an el cheapo, $10 model, fine. If they want the uber-good, $1000 model, fine. This way, they're not stuck with whatever one Apple chooses to stick in it.
 
Valid point. However, by moving the DAC to the headphones, people can choose which one they prefer. If they want an el cheapo, $10 model, fine. If they want the uber-good, $1000 model, fine. This way, they're not stuck with whatever one Apple chooses to stick in it.
If it had a headphone jack and digital output through Lightning, people would not be stuck either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bladerunner2000
Apple controversially removed the 3.5mm headphone jack on iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus, forcing customers to use a growing selection of Lightning-equipped headphones like Apple's own EarPods, wireless Bluetooth headphones, or traditional headphones connected via the Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter.

Article Link: Teardown Confirms Digital-to-Analog Converter in Lightning EarPods and 3.5mm Adapter

That should have read 'a growing selection of battery limited, low sound quality, expensive, and easily lost wireless bluetooth headphones, or to have a massive ugly dongle hanging off their phone to charge and listen to audio at the same time'
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.