Wireless iPod Headphones (Bluetooth)?

[tuartboy]

How would the sound quality be using BT wireless? I assume this would be similar to AirTunes?

I realize it's different, but one concern I always had when I had my FM transmitter for my iPod in my car, was the noticeable lack of quality in the music. I now have a direct input into my car stereo, which is awesome, but I am wondering if a wireless solution for the iPod's headphones would experience similar quality issues. I'm guessing no, but some further information on this would be appreciated.

They would likely use the BT A2DP protocol which, to my understanding, provides quite decent sound quality. It really will depend on the quality of the phones.

 

[Ups85]

I don't think this is about wireless headphones. Although Apple might offer them as an add-on, I don't think most people want to have to change the battery in their headphones.

This is about integrating your iPod into your home and car stereo system. Steve made a big deal about all of the car companies including iPod integration into their car. If the iPod supported a standard like bluetooth, it would be much easier for car companies to integrate it into their stereos. Plus, the driver wouldn't even need to take the iPod out of his pocket.

Home stereo systems could also start integrating bluetooth, giving you the ability to wirelessly play music from your iPod.

You could even connect iPods directly. Imagine being on the subway, and listening to music from the iPod on the other side of the car.

Bluetooth will greatly expand the iPod's integration into your home music life.

 

[~Shard~]

BT works by pairing with another device and setting up a 2 way connection just between the 2 paired devices. In theory it works, but someone can sniff it without hardly any effort. It would prevent overlapping connections in normal listening.

<snip>

Cool, thanks for the info! I thought it would be something along those lines, but wasn't sure.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Not knowing much about BT and broadcast/transmission frequencies, protocols, and the like, how would Apple isolate the data to the headphones, so that when a person walks past another BT headphone iPod user, their music doesn't accidentally kick in? Would there be any interference/crosstalk issues like this?

Sounds neat though - less wires is always a good thing! Couple these with a new video iPod and you can have my credit card number Apple! Well, I guess you already do, but....

This would not be an issue with bluetooth. It has built in security features to ensure that this does not occur. That is why you always need to pair bluetooth devices when you first set them up, including mice & keyboards. When wireless keyboards first came out that was an issue, the guy in the cublicle next to you could be typing, and you would see it on your screen. That was before the bluetooth days though.

 

[aegisdesign]

That may not be the best technology for people with ADD.

Plus, for people with thousands of songs, the odds would increase that a random thought could trigger a song to be played, as the user might inadvertently think of something which ends up to actually be the title of a song!

As long as you think in Russian you'll be ok.

 

[MattG]

I'd be interested in Bluetooth enabled iPods for other reasons...like the ability to control iTunes (running on my Bluetooth-enabled Mini) using my iPod.

 

[dollystereo]

I think that bluetooth headsets in mobile phones look horrible, I dont think this will become available soon, and will just be a forgotten rumor.
Who cares the little cable of the headphones, I will prefer to have a better headphone with my ipod, like the ones that isolates your listening (pretty expensive ones)

 

[SiliconAddict]

It’s going to HAVE to be Bluetooth 2.0. Version 1.2 Simply can't handle the bandwidth of a decent bitrate music track. I use HP's BT headphones with my iPaq 4700...See here The quality is simply OK. Even with a 256kb/s MP3 bitrate the sound is NOT as good as standard earbuds. If you look at the BT 1.2 standard the bandwidth is simply not there for stereo sound. Version 2.0 looks much more promising though. I can't remember off the top of my head the max bandwidth but I remember thinking that it should handle audio without a problem.

 

[loco_macg6]

BT Headphones

yeah...and here they are....

 

[~Shard~]

This would not be an issue with bluetooth. It has built in security features to ensure that this does not occur. That is why you always need to pair bluetooth devices when you first set them up, including mice & keyboards. When wireless keyboards first came out that was an issue, the guy in the cublicle next to you could be typing, and you would see it on your screen. That was before the bluetooth days though.

Cool, thanks for the insight. As I stated in my above post, I was pretty sure this was the case, but wasn't aware of the specifics.

Although, Apple may decide to somehow bypass this functionality to offer a new version of the iPod Shuffle - not only do you not know what you'll be listening to next, it may not even be coming from your own iPod!

 

[crawdad62]

As others have stated this could be anything and not necessarily headphones. However I'd love headphones. If I used my iPod while sitting on a bus or waiting in an airport it really wouldn't appeal to me but I use my iPod while I'm skateboarding or working in the yard etc. and those damned wires are always in my way.

I've tried putting them behind me and then everytime I turn or bend over they pull the buds from my ears. I would think it was a godsend.

I don't see how they could do it with a bud type but I'd certainly still be interested in a set of headphones which could be a real possibility. Some of those "sports" headphones are quite light and stay put very well.

BT to play through your car's stereo is overkill IMHO but a more likely scenario.

 

[~Shard~]

BT to play through your car's stereo is overkill IMHO but a more likely scenario.

I agree - I much prefer to have my direct connection wired in, and wouldn't want any type of wireless solution - I simply would have doubts on the quality.

 

[ClimbingTheLog]

Good point. Technically, N&S Enterprises (Nagromme & Shard) could "approach Apple" tomorrow with a great product idea, but that doesn't mean Apple will snap it right up. (The fools....)

Quite so. In fact talking to the press about it is a great way to lose your Apple contract.

So reading between the lines, they approached and were rebuffed. Maybe Apple is doing this inhouse, after the Synaptics situation.

 

[ClimbingTheLog]

I agree - I much prefer to have my direct connection wired in, and wouldn't want any type of wireless solution - I simply would have doubts on the quality.

Bluetooth is digital. If the packets make it, they make it flawlessly.

If they don't make it, there are interference issues.

 

[~Shard~]

Bluetooth is digital. If the packets make it, they make it flawlessly.

If they don't make it, there are interference issues.

Fair enough then, I have learned yet another thing about BT. Gotta love MacRumors.

 

[albeik]

... Apple also filed a patent in 2003 describing "a wireless media player system that includes a hand held media player capable of transmitting information over a wireless connection and one or more media devices capable of receiving information over the wireless connection".

Do you happen to have the link to the 2003 patent mentioned above?
Thanks in advance.

 

[eji]

Bluetooth is just another step toward the überdevice that I want to see from Apple.

First it was music. Then there was note and contact syncing. Then there were games. Then there was photo storage and browsing.

Then videos were slated. And now bluetooth.

Add a mini-keyboard, WiFi, bigger screen, a scaled-down version of OS X, and keep the flash memory, and you've got what I'm looking for. Something to replace my Zaurus and sync seamlessly with my Mac.

 

[crawdad62]

That is fair enough and the adage "If it's digital then you either get it or you don't." can't really be argued (well maybe a little, my satellite dish has varying degrees of "getting it" as well as my OTA antenna receiving HDTV).

I was getting to the fact that first you'd have to have a radio/stereo system in your auto that could receive BT, and BT enabled iPod. This while convenient can be handled quite nicely through my Belkin cassette interface.

LOL I know the irony. My post above is crying about the wires and now I'm defending them.

 

[dornoforpyros]

let me update my iPod with BT and I'll care, wireless headphones? *yawn*

 

[FoxyKaye]

If this goes into the next iPod, I may be swayed away from buying a Nano for Christmas.

I love my existing iPod, which has gotten even better with a high-capacity replacement battery.

A Bluetooth iPod would be amazing, but I think the next time I'd actually purchase one would be when Apple hits 8GB or 16GB Bluetooth iPod Nano. This, I think, may be a while coming if ever.

Offtopic: C'mon Bluetooth Mighty Mouse - that's something I could use tomorrow.

 

[strydr]

The biggest problem I see with a BT iPod would be battery life. On my cell phone (moto. V600), when I enable BT (for connectivity to my PowerBook), my battery dis-charges in 12 hours. In contrast, with BT turned off, I get 2-4 days worth of charge. A BT enabled iPod would need a bigger battery, and wouldn't hold a charge for too long. I would think this would also translate to any type of headphones too. No earbuds, unless they can get power consumption WAY down. Don't get me wrong, I totally am into a BT iPod, give me capabilities to use it as a remote for iTunes, and I'll be the first to buy one. I wonder which protocol uses more power, BT or WiFi?? If they could integrate WiFi, I'd be even happier (than with BT)

 

[Trekkie]

Battery life would suck, or you'd have a big brick of a thing connected to your 'wireless' headphone by a wire. Or, the headset itself would have a brick in it making it heavy and uncomfortable.

Not until I can carry around a portable nuke reactor to power all my stuff

 

[aegisdesign]

let me update my iPod with BT and I'll care, wireless headphones? *yawn*

It'll be way too slow to update your iPod via Bluetooth.

v1.2 gets me speeds of about 20KBps a second between a Mac and an SE p910i phone. That's just enough for streaming audio at 128Kbps, perhaps a little more with a good clear signal between source and headphones.

v2.0 is supposedly 3 times quicker so quite capable of audio streaming at decent quality.

If you remember that USB2 is 480Mbps and wireless networking is 54Mbps you can see why it's just plain stupid using Bluetooth for anything other than as a control interface or low bandwidth streaming of audio.

Apple's Airtunes btw sends Apple lossless coded audio to the Airport Express box. It uses a lot of bandwidth it need not use if the source was 128Kbps AAC originally but I guess they didn't want to stick in an AAC/WMA/MP3 etc decoder in there.

IMHO, Apple would be better off including a wifi chip in the iPod with Bluetooth just for control features and phone muting.

 

[AmericanIdiot12]

ive always wanted to grow my hair over my ears and put in wireless headphones so it doesnt look like i have them in

 

[aegisdesign]

Offtopic: C'mon Bluetooth Mighty Mouse - that's something I could use tomorrow.

I've both a BT Apple mouse and the Mighty Mouse.

MightyMouse is more accurate, doesn't suffer a stutter when you first move it waiting for bluetooth to negotiate and it's a lot lighter in the hand to move. I don't think I'll go back to a cordless mouse until they can sort out the speed issues with wireless mice. They're ok for normal desktop users but trying to draw in Photoshop with something as flaky as a wireless mouse is a frustrating experience.

Plus, replacing rechargeable batteries every couple of weeks was getting very tiresome. To get them inside a mighty mouse and have all the features they'd possibly have to reduce the battery size.