[StefanJK]

 
Hopefully patented. Unless it's considered prior art.

The patent office can't tell &^%$ about prior art.  You can patent obvious stuff.  I've done it (even for a type of linear filter!).  Just transfer into a different subfield and you're done.   I'm sure they could patent this...not sure if its worth it though, that's a much tougher call.  Only really worth it if you know others will sue you down the line for infringing some other silly patent for equally obvious stuff (which is why my firm went the patent route for  some of my stuff).    

 

[valiant66]

  So is Schiit going to do home theater??
 
Over my dead body.
 
When hell freezes over.
 
When shrimps learn to whistle.
 
I know, but just in case I was vague, NO.

 
Ummm... so, probably not, eh? 

 
 
Looks like Mike went to Cornell:
 
http://thewhistlingshrimp.weebly.com
https://www.facebook.com/WhistlingShrimp

 
Edit: Or perhaps he takes his inspiration from the Commies:

In the midst of the Cold War, Nikita Khrushchev stated firmly, "We wish to live in peace and tranquility. But if anyone believes that our smiles involve abandonment of the teachings of Marx, Engels and Lenin, he deceives himself poorly. Those who wait for that must wait until a shrimp learns to whistle."

 
 
Edit^2:
 

 
So... is Mike being Satirical when he says "No"?
 
Damn, I'm having fun with this.
 
On teaching your shrimp to whistle:
 

Finally, sit down with your chosen shrimp and talk to it. Tell it, whether it can presently whistle or not, that it will whistle-like it or not. Don't be too pushy, but get your shrimp's attention. Make it understand that it will soon be whistling a happy tune. For you to talk turkey to your shrimp means that you must absolutely believe that it can learn to whistle. Some shrimp may not be able to whistle right now, but they can smell a chicken a mile away. 

Believe in your ability as a whistling instructor for shrimp

.

 
Or perhaps he's using fractal mathematics to generate his supersauce burrito:
 
http://fractaljourney.blogspot.ca/2007/04/whistling-shrimp.html
 
OK, I'm done now. I'm not even going to mention the Whistling Shrimp episode of Espionage…
 
Cheers!

 

[Mach-X]

Mr. Baldr. As an objectivist listener, I would like to ask why did you choose to tackle home theater from the angle that makes the least amount of difference? As amazing as your decoder may have been from a technical standpoint, how much audible difference would be had vs a cheap avr connected to the sub $500 Kenwood 5.1 setups the average consumer bought when surround sound took off? Why not transducers? You might have seen better gains...

 

[arnaud]

   
Hi Arnaud,
 
There's a lot to be said for DSP, but if one were to look at wireless headphones, it seems that since there are so few companies who actually have the expertise that covers the design and manufacture of transducers, DAC's and amplifiers that attempts have not yielded satisfying results. I understand that most wireless audio devices have to deal with protocols that may not have been conceived for the purposes of delivering high fidelity audio, but even in examples where audio-sepecific protocols are used (Senn RS220, aptX) results are less than pleasing and certainly do not come close to the performance of similarly priced wired headphones. The reason I compare lightning headphones to wireless ones is because they appear to differ only in the medium through which they obtain the digital data stream. This also brings us to a point that if one only aims only for mid/lo fi, then why not just go with bluetooth or even airplay? Any technology one cares to mention can be applied to these as well as lightning headphones (including DSP and ANC). Introducing a wired digital connection may yield some stability advantages, but one remains stuck with all other limitations of size, weight and integration of all the above.
 
The scope offered by integrating the conversion from a digital stream to diaphragm movement is quite an interesting one. I can see great potential in this approach at least in theory, more so than I do in acoustic wools and some vents. But in practice, results seem to be mostly agglomerations of individually designed modules presided over by some sort of corrective DSP in an effort to make everything okay. What they end up making is something that sound really odd.
 
So I guess my point is that potential for integration exists, but if it can be done, there'd be no reason to bother with the lighting (or any other) cable.
 
C

 
I think we're on the next topic already but I wanted to reply to your comment:
 
1. By using lightning connector, apple can create its own protocol, they don't need no stinking consensus from a bunch of competitors.
2. I don't see how these standard protocols for delivering audio could be applicable to these digitally connected smart head/earphones. It's obvious the health sensors will get in there as soon as commercially viable, the standards would likely become obsolete by the time a revision is agreed upon.
3. As for the capacity of headphone manufacturers to embrace this kind of technology (DSP based active control / eq / you name it), I agree this is going to severely limit the number of players who can touch this.
4. But as far as apple is concerned, knowing where they recruit some of their audio engineers, I can tell you they have in-house expertise that goes well beyond ported transducer design...
 
Time will tell but I am so convinced this isn't lightyears ahead wishful thinking.
 
cheers,
arnaud

 

[atubbs]

Mr. Baldr. As an objectivist listener, I would like to ask why did you choose to tackle home theater from the angle that makes the least amount of difference? As amazing as your decoder may have been from a technical standpoint, how much audible difference would be had vs a cheap avr connected to the sub $500 Kenwood 5.1 setups the average consumer bought when surround sound took off? Why not transducers? You might have seen better gains...

 
I'm obviously not Mike, but a few things: First, transducers are an entirely different discipline than digital/analog electronics. Second, I suspect these units were being designed as high-end products for high-end components (speakers, amplifiers, etc.). Finally, there's the old garbage in, garbage out problem: It doesn't matter how good the speakers are if the software or means of getting it to the speakers aren't good, and it's turtles all the way down. 

 

[AlterSack]

After all this discussion over the last pages about "Amps in HeadPhones"  - this is what just came up in the ads here at Head -Fi.  This somehow feels as if somebody knew what is being discussed here and loading the fitting ads to that.  Probably a Google algorhyithm ...   Still with a cable though - but claiming "audiophile Status" with amp inside.
 
http://mofiheadphones.com/

 

[Ableza]

I have no issue with powered headphones just like I have no problem with Bluetooth ear pieces or Beats.  If that's what people want to use then fine, let them have at it.  I will never own or use such things, but that's just me.  If Apple decides to remove the 1/8" headphone/mic jack from some future iPhone 42, that won't affect me either since I use a Beyer A200 amp via lightning with my iPhone 5S now. 

 

[tonykaz]

My Dear Professor Baldr ,
 
Ditto's , my experience exactly , lost tons of dinero , my wife dragged me away from the business , attorneys wrote letters for us and managed to stop our bleeding , cauterized our wounds , kaput , NEVER again , even over my dead body , never I say , never !!!!   
  I'm sorry to hear of your suffering from ….  
  I share your pain ! 
 The good news , is , I make ample money by simply avoiding the Train Wreck of Licensing .  JS speaks "niche" , I speak niche too , it's the only way to stay away from Big Troubles , thats plural .  
 
Tony in Michigan 
 
ps .   Some customer of yours ( Lyr 2 ) discovered putting wine bottle corks under the device improves !!  , see , I could make some of those things , in colors , etc… .  There's money on the table for stuff like this , silly as it is , crapy dog food but the dogs gobble it up .  Ok , I know , I'd have to put on a tight skirt and wear bright red lipstick but ….

 

[AManAnd88Keys]

After all this discussion over the last pages about "Amps in HeadPhones"  - this is what just came up in the ads here at Head -Fi.  This somehow feels as if somebody knew what is being discussed here and loading the fitting ads to that.  Probably a Google algorhyithm ...   Still with a cable though - but claiming "audiophile Status" with amp inside.

http://mofiheadphones.com/

There's stuff running in the background that monitors your behavior when you are online. So yes, "someone" is keeping track and uses algorhythms to display the right ads that fit your preferences. Welcome to the digital world, please be our customer! We already know what you want anyway...

 

[Jason Stoddard]

Someone mentioned THX in comments.
 
Some comments on THX, preceded by a disclaimer: this data is 24 years old, and I have no idea if THX still operates this way. So, this may not be accurate any more. 
 
But, based on a meeting Sumo had with a THX rep in 1990 at CES, THX at the time operated very differently than Dolby.
 
Dolby (and DTS, etc) are licensing bodies. They will approve your device if it meets their specs. Now, it may take you a very long time to meet their specs, and your submission may not be prioritized, but it is a binary relationship. Pass = license. Eventually.
 
THX seemed like a licensing body...at least until we started talking to them. We asked what technical specs an amp had to pass to become THX certified, because we were interested in the idea for the Sumo amps. The answer we got was relatively vague...just that THX would test them as part of the process. And, of course, a significant certification fee had to be paid. That's expected—you're betting the licensing/certification fee is the lead into revenue that will mote than cover it, of course.
 
But that's when it got interesting. The THX rep opined that, "Well, maybe we have enough 200W per channel stereo amps that are certified, how is yours different?" 
 
"Wait, you mean we can pass the tests and not be THX certified?" I asked.
 
"Well, we're looking for something more than just another amp, we already have plenty of manufacturers that make products with similar specs to yours."
 
"So this isn't just a certification, it's selection and protection?" I asked.
 
The THX guy smiled. "Right."
 
So, THX, at least at the time, wasn't a binary relationship. It was, "Well, if you're special enough, we'll let you into the club...providing you pass some unspecified tests, pay your fees...and you don't conflict too much with our other licensees."
 
No, thanks. I'll stick to producing product that stands on its own merits, without having to be selected as part of a club.

 

[htr2d2]

  Someone mentioned THX in comments.
 
Some comments on THX, preceded by a disclaimer: this data is 24 years old, and I have no idea if THX still operates this way. So, this may not be accurate any more. 
...

I didn't know that about THX. Interesting, and I applaud your view point.

 

[smitty1110]

Wow, that's just awful. Note to self, avoid THX certified crap, definitely not a model I want to support...

 

[AlterSack]

I am aware about those programs that monitor which sites I am going to etc. 
In this case though I have never ever searched for amped headphones ore similar products. Therefore I found it very astounding that the ad popped up while I was reading the posts about amped headphones. 
I still doubt that there is stuff running in the background that can track what I am reading. Or am I wrong here and the total supervision is reality ? 

 

[Jason Stoddard]

  So, I produced the Angstrom 200 HED (Home Entertainment Director) all digital surround sound decoder/stereo D/A converter. It had such an easy to use UI that you could set up the unit intuitively, all digital pro-logic decoding, and was by far and away the best sounding unit on the market. It won design awards, was amazingly well reviewed, and was ready for sale. 

 
Some comments on this:
 
1. The first review of the Angstrom 200 actually had a final line that read, "Run, don't walk, and get yourself an Angstrom 200." Or something very similar--relying on memory here.
 
2. I was involved in Angstrom only peripherally—Centric did their advertising, and I did the industrial design and UI work. This was one of the last home theater products without an on-screen display, so the UI was actually a fairly old-skool affair of buttons and LEDs...but, as Mike said, it was very, very easy to use.*
 
3. The Angstrom 200 also has the distinction of being the first upgradable surround processor/AV preamp--an ethos that Mike brought along from Theta. Some other manufacturers followed suit, but Angstrom was the first. The problem was that with rapidly changing video and audio formats, upgradability became much more difficult. Ask current manufacturers how they feel about the 170 Dolby/DTS standards and the ongoing HDMI changes and you'll get a lot of groans. This was worse--we went from analog audio, to RF-modulated digital, to digital, to HDMI, during the "Angstrom years."
 
*One of my ongoing pet peeves (read: thermonuclear anger) about A/V is the complete insanity of their remote and onscreen UIs. It is simply inexcusable to give someone a remote control with 120 buttons on it (or a screen with 4 levels of menus) and expect anything other than frustration and angst. It is NOT hard to get this crap right.
 
I probably shared the experience of changing two screened legends on a Sumo product and reducing customer inquiries by an order of magnitude (specially, changing the "Monitor" and "Input" knobs to "Record From" and "Listen To"), but I also did the Angstrom remote control. Which, of course, was delivered to us as a prototype containing the typical grid of same-size buttons, about 40 of them, if I remember correctly. Sensible crap like different sized buttons were out of the question). So what did I do? I looked at what functions an owner would most rely on--volume, input select, mode select--and prioritized them over everything else. I looked at where my thumb would fall when holding it. I considered that most home theaters would be dark, and we couldn't do backlit buttons, so I color-blocked the important buttons. Then I had them rip every other button off the faceplate, so that things were logically ordered. Simple. This really isn't difficult.
 
And this is what it looked like:
 

 
Art? No. Functional? Yes. Easy to use? Look at a Sony remote from that time. 
 
Note: the Apple remote is a frigging wonder of manufacturing. Take a look at one sometime, and consider how it has to be made. 

 

[aamefford]

SNIP  
Tony in Michigan 
 
ps .   Some customer of yours ( Lyr 2 ) discovered putting wine bottle corks under the device improves !!  , see , I could make some of those things , in colors , etc… .  There's money on the table for stuff like this , silly as it is , crapy dog food but the dogs gobble it up .  Ok , I know , I'd have to put on a tight skirt and wear bright red lipstick but ….

Tony - Pictures or it didn't happen!  I spent some years as a wine buyer.  Similar tactics were used in that industry.  As far as I know, no retired audio CEO's cross dressing though....  Thank you for the chuckle!