Huh? The 7506s are amazing dynamic range headphones. You won't find better quality for the price. A lot of recording studios still use them and have done since the '90s.
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.
Woz Laments No Headphone Jack on iPhone 7, Sees USB-C as Future of Audio
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Huh? The 7506s are amazing dynamic range headphones. You won't find better quality for the price. A lot of recording studios still use them and have done since the '90s.
keysofanxiety is right. The Sony 7506 is an industry favorite for audio recording and video production.
Yeah, cause Apples half-a-billion user base is really a make or break for aptX.
Did you even check the list? More or less every other quality wireless product in the world, EXCEPT Apple, have support for aptX.https://www.aptx.com/products?field...duct_category_tid=All&field_aptx_type_tid=All
Apart from the fact that aptX already is solidly implemented. If you think Apple can come up with a better, proprietary bluetooth protocoll, AND be able to licence it to all the vendors already licencing aptX, you are really drinking the Apple cool-aid. And no, aptX will not be the ones losing big time, we who try to use high quality bluetooth equipment with an Apple product are the ones who will lose big time.
Fair enough. For me, having to juggling pairing for different devices, not being able to simultaneously charge and play music through a decent pair of wired headphones, having to keep a pair of wireless headphones charged, having to worry about different cables for different devices or keep track of adapters...this is all a worse user experience than what is currently available with the jack. And not even having the choice anymore makes it that much more frustrating.
But yes, to each their own. And again, I look forward to seeing whatever magic thing Apple whips out next month that manages to solve all of this.
Tons of words and still failing to crasp the concept. With the Apple or Moto modell you have to use another adapter (something that can get lost easily), to do the same ****ing thing you did before! And no, companies won't suddenly start licensing a new Apple technology because they are already invested into aptX, NFC and the new bluetooth standards.
Also newsflash: If people don't have good enough headphones to notice a difference between wired and wireless, the headphones for sure won't notice the difference between a 3,5' jack and one with an extra adapter in fact they might have a worse experience. But keep drinking the koolaid and then cry about having to use a bunch of adapter, if you want to listen to music and charge your phone. Apple is making the same stupid decision as Moto with their Z line here.
Innovation for the sake of innovation is a bad thing, as was removing the optial disk drive.
Lightning is not a standard if only one company uses it. This whole headphone jack thing is purely a money grab since most iPhone users are far from tech savy and will likely believe the Beats hype and will get wireless Beats. Those are the likely statistics Apple is looking at and using to determine the removal of the 3.5 mm jack not how many actually use it.
Yeah, cause Apples half-a-billion user base is really a make or break for aptX.
https://www.aptx.com/products?field...duct_category_tid=All&field_aptx_type_tid=All
Apart from the fact that aptX already is solidly implemented. If you think Apple can come up with a better, proprietary bluetooth protocoll, AND be able to licence it to all the vendors already licencing aptX, you are really drinking the Apple cool-aid. And no, aptX will not be the ones losing big time, we who try to use high quality bluetooth equipment with an Apple product are the ones who will lose big time.
For starters, Apple doesn't need anybody else to license its software. They have over a billion customers actively using their products, so why would they?
As for aptX, if Apple comes up with something better, why wouldn't other manufacturers want to use it instead? They're already paying to license aptX, so it makes no difference to them. Apple pretty much dominated the market with QuickTime because it was better than the option Windows Media Player and REAL were offering. Apple also managed to help drive Flash out of existence as well despite the market dominance at the time Apple took it on with the iPhone.
That said, in the videotape wars, VHS managed to dominate BETA, despite the latter being a superior product. So really, Apple doesn't even need to introduce a better product. Just better marketing. Of course if they do both, then they stand a good chance of succeeding outside of Apple products.
You say "fair enough" but continue to misrepresent the future situation.
1) If Apple improves the pairing situation, then simply turning the headphones on may negotiate pairing quickly and automatically. Much faster than wrapping the cable up neatly and unwrapping again to use.
2) There's no evidence that wired headphones can't be used at the same time as charging the iPhone, in fact logic argues against that assumption. A simple passthrough plug on the charging cable is all that's minimally required, not to mention many other solutions.
3) You don't actually even have to keep most wireless headphones charged, as you can optionally plug them in when they run out of power. Since you're already resigned to carrying around a wire anyway, it's even more convenient to carry one neatly wrapped up, which doesn't impair your freedom of movement, that you don't need most of the time, if ever.
4) If you buy a hybrid cable for your headphones for the devices you commonly use, you won't need to keep track of anything, as it will include plugs for both 3.5mm and Lightning and/or USB-C. People with existing headphones equipped with a detachable cable will be able to buy a new cable and keep using tier old headphone easily. I wouldn't be surprised to see kits to upgrade old fixed headphone cables with a hybrid digital/analogue interface.
I will of course concede that the transition to any new technology is initially a worse experience for the user, until they adopt to the new paradigm, and I understand why someone would rather keep using what they're used to. However, at this point I don't see any way for a future of different standards from coming to pass. Even if Apple didn't offer Lightning, USB-C will definitely become a digital audio standard. So that's just something to get used to, and perhaps like the loss of the idealic America of the 1950s for some, something to be lamented. Devices are only going to get smaller and lighter as technology improves. It's already gotten too small to serve the iPod nano effectively while keeping the headphone jack, so Apple has resorted to a non-standard 3.5mm jack for both charging, syncing and listening -- hardly an optimal solution. If Apple continues to make the nano after they drop the 3.5mm jack, it will greatly benefit from having a smaller, more functional port, allowing the shuffle to become even smaller.
However, I maintain, wireless is the future. The Watch has already demonstrated that. If pairing is improved, and quality is improved, then I'll trade charging once a day for having to manage wires all day, even if you prefer the latter. That way the whole adapter issue for use with other devices is essentially moot for me. If I do need to interface with older equipment that only has a 3.5mm jack, then there's that optional cable I can carry around for those emergencies, which you're already carrying around anyway as part of your current kit. From my perspective it's win-win. If dropping the headphone jack helps promote that future faster, then I'm all for it.
Let's put it this way. If you are using custom IEMs or >$1,000 earphones, you will not bother to use your mobile phone as your daily driver for music anyway.
Well the + $ 1.000 category more often than not is fully wired, needs an extra amplifier to get the most out of it and from my experience (I've sold 3 of them) are something classic music lovers would buy but then they also have some very highend speakers and some other stuff to go along with it. Buying $ 1.000 + headphones for your phone (even if it's the HTC 10 with an extra DAC), is overkill. People buying stuff like this for sure won't like dongles heck some of them paid 100 $ bucks for a cable that does the exact same thing as the normal one, it just has some fancy marketing words in it.
Yeah he only helped building one of the biggest and most succesful companies in the world. He is basically the Paul Allen of Apple, so the guy knows his stuff and he doesn't have to like everything Apple does.
One gets the impression that if Woz had been in charge, the Mac would have had a command prompt, and he would have spent his days tinkering with the Apple II until Apple went out of business, since Bill Gates also toured PARC on his own.
And I continue to agree that wireless is the future. And again, if they manage to solve all this I'll be very happy.
We're all just speculating at this point, me from a place of cautious skepticism, and you on the other side. We don't know anything yet. All we know is that major changes are coming. Maybe they will be easy, maybe they won't. The question is how painful it will be in the short term.
Can we at least agree on that much?
Last edited:
Well, even though i'm a big fan of wired headphones today, i still agree that the wireless headphones are the future ONLY if one thing with Bluetooth can be fixed. Right now, i use those headphones which are both wireless and wired: http://www.beoplay.com/products/beoplayh7
Now, the sound quality via Bluetooth are pretty good on those headphones. But that's thanks to the aptX codec that my phone also supports. So the sound quality via the wireless connection is not an issue for me. Yes, i only use 320 Kbps MP3s anyways which wont have any differences in sound quality from wired to wireless. It from when you starts to use anything better than MP3s or AAC the wired sound will sound better.
The issue i have with wireless headphones is not the sound quality for listening to MP3s, but the actual sound volume the wireless connection have compared to the wired connection.
On my BeoPlay H7 headphones, i can use it both wired and wireless. When i use it wireless, the sound volume isn't that great from the internal DAC on the headphones if you are in noisy environments. When i use my headphone with a wire, then i can get a much much more powerfull volume (yes i'm rooted and can boost the sound volume quite alot that way) out from my Galaxy S6 edge+.
Because there is no way to controll the output volume from the DAC in the headphones when you are using them wireless, then the volume power will always suffer over the volume power i can get from my phone by using a wire to my headphones.
And as long as the situation is like this, i wont stop using wires on my headphones until the volume power via Bluetooth is getting much better.
Now, the sound quality via Bluetooth are pretty good on those headphones. But that's thanks to the aptX codec that my phone also supports. So the sound quality via the wireless connection is not an issue for me. Yes, i only use 320 Kbps MP3s anyways which wont have any differences in sound quality from wired to wireless. It from when you starts to use anything better than MP3s or AAC the wired sound will sound better.
The issue i have with wireless headphones is not the sound quality for listening to MP3s, but the actual sound volume the wireless connection have compared to the wired connection.
On my BeoPlay H7 headphones, i can use it both wired and wireless. When i use it wireless, the sound volume isn't that great from the internal DAC on the headphones if you are in noisy environments. When i use my headphone with a wire, then i can get a much much more powerfull volume (yes i'm rooted and can boost the sound volume quite alot that way) out from my Galaxy S6 edge+.
Because there is no way to controll the output volume from the DAC in the headphones when you are using them wireless, then the volume power will always suffer over the volume power i can get from my phone by using a wire to my headphones.
And as long as the situation is like this, i wont stop using wires on my headphones until the volume power via Bluetooth is getting much better.
We're to listen to a guy who "joked" about how Apple should make an Android phone and said Apple should license its IP to Samsung? Really?
Woz started Apple, he made the very first machines, Woz organised a music festival well before Apple ever started running festivals. Woz knows best. Listen to Woz, jokes and all.
Jobs built the company and brought Woz along.
Woz played virtually no product or company development role after the failed Apple III.
Talkiness aside, you can do that now. The question here is the removal of the headphone port, not the fact some people prefer not to use it.
[doublepost=1472662364][/doublepost]
Yeah, cause Apples half-a-billion user base is really a make or break for aptX.
https://www.aptx.com/products?field...duct_category_tid=All&field_aptx_type_tid=All
Apart from the fact that aptX already is solidly implemented. If you think Apple can come up with a better, proprietary bluetooth protocoll, AND be able to licence it to all the vendors already licencing aptX, you are really drinking the Apple cool-aid. And no, aptX will not be the ones losing big time, we who try to use high quality bluetooth equipment with an Apple product are the ones who will lose big time.
Quite right. No matter what Apple does, aptX is an established standard and iPhone users miss out on better Bluetooth sound by not having it.
There's good reason to avoid wireless devices on your person as they have a higher correlation to cancer.