[MayaTlab]

Must resist. MUST RESIST.
I feel like I'm going to make a very stupid decision in the coming hours and even worse that it will be for a colour that will look like skid marks on a beige Volvo seat in a few weeks of use.
If I don't send them back as it's probably going to be the case for some random operational problem .

 

[plakat]

I think that my defective pair of K371-BT (defective as in : one pad was completely crumbled out of the box, and they even forgot to stick the acoustic felt in front of the driver on the right ear cup !) still sounded better than nearly all of the "high-end" ANC BT over-ears headphones I've tried this year so it isn't much competition IMO. And they even added the luxury of having a decent BT implementation that I couldn't make fail simply by playing single tones through them at higher frequencies (something I was able to do with several of the pairs I tried this year like the M3, Bose 700, A50, etc... all of which coincidentally use the same or a similar chip from Qualcomm, so...).

At €630 I would have really liked to see Apple implementing their capacitance sensors patents to enable a rough imaging of the user's ear to at least make them left / right agnostic and more interesting to me start to provide for "baby" auto HRTF customisation but alas that might have to wait for the next version (2022 ?). Interestingly the ear cup design remains 100% compatible with Apple's latest patents on the matter :



I really hope that we'll see that happening in the next version as headphones that automatically adapt to the listener's ear are the only way forward to see a big generational leap in headphones design.

Interesting... I've bought the K371 sometimes late last year just on their nice looks, was positively surprised by their good sound and eagerly awaited the BT version... preordered with delays etc. Yet it was a major disappointment to me, sounded bland and uninteresting vs. the wired model. Of course it might be a case of missing quality assurance, given your experience with even missing parts (I think I remember you posted photos in the K371 thread).

But long story short, I think there are some good sounding wireless headphones available, but still better sounding wired models exist in larger numbers. Apple would obviously not produce a wired passive headphone, but concentrate on what they can do to make a better headphone (i.e. computational audio). So they are going that route and I hope their target were not gaming headsets but those better wireless headphones (for whatever specific models one might include in that club, to me its primarily the Aonic 50).

Knowing both AirPods Pro (the base model AirPods I'd never ever use for music, albeit they are just perfect for calls) and the HomePod, I fully expect the Max to be up there with the best wireless models available. And yes, being kind of first gen there may well be some quirks, but the HomePod does really well in about the same situation: I still think those moaning about Siri performance are barking up the wrong tree, the HomePod can simply be used as a speaker for music, and does that very well. So lets see...

Regarding adapting to the listeners ears: what exactly are you expecting in that regard? I think they will actually do what is possible using external measurements, but for adapting the sound to hearing ability that won't work without listener feedback I guess. You have something like MIY by Beyerdynamic in mind, but without the hearing test?

 

[larzy]

They remind of me the Parrot wireless headphones - remember those?

 

[Trager]

Interesting. I feel like this may be a shot across the bow in the better-traditional-headphone-acoustics-vs-aggressive-software war. I'm intrigued by the idea that it's got basically a computer onboard and will adjust its EQ based on seal and fit. Also the use of a gyroscope and accelerometer to basically provide software-based soundstage.
Either way, I ain't buying one, but I'm intrigued by the concept.

I had pretty much the same thought but the opposite conclusion. I already put in an order but expect it’s about 80% likely that they go back to Apple within a week. I’m definitely curious about how they sound and what the tech is like but that price and weight means they’ll have to be amazing to stay in use here.

 

[trellus]

They remind of me the Parrot wireless headphones - remember those?

Yup! I still have a pair of these, one in black, and an older version of the Parrot Zik in white.

 

[Whitigir]

Designed by Apple and tuned by your revered Dr.Dre

 

[MayaTlab]

Regarding adapting to the listeners ears: what exactly are you expecting in that regard? I think they will actually do what is possible using external measurements, but for adapting the sound to hearing ability that won't work without listener feedback I guess. You have something like MIY by Beyerdynamic in mind, but without the hearing test?

It's just that headphones will remain inherently limited as long as they don't tailor very precisely the frequency response curve they output so that they can reach at a particular listener's eardrum a very specific FR target tailored to that one user's own head-related transfer function. This beyond the usual individual variations that have been well documented in Harman's research (and probably others).

If you put person A and B in the exact same room listening to the exact same pair of speakers in the same position and measure at their eardrum the frequency response they hear, it will be different because their varying anatomy influence the FR curve they receive at their eardrum. Headphones putting the drivers much closer in a very different acoustic space mess with that and produce yet again different FR curves, but differently different if you see what I mean . So they'll always sound off to some degree (besides problems related to lack of crossover). This is also the reason why surround sound simulation with headphones is never truly convincing for most users with only general HRTF profiles (by convincing I mean being able to pass tests where the listener is tasked with pointing their finger in a 3D space at the origin of the sound and accurately locating it within x degrees).

Currently the best we can do without directly measuring a user's HRTF is gather anatomical data on a user and compare that anatomical data thanks to various algorithms (such as neural networks) to a known database of anatomical data vs. measured HRTFs to come up with an individualised HRTF profile for that user. But that requires gathering anatomical data on a user's head / torso / ear in the first place. Apple is uniquely placed here thanks the technology they developed with Face ID which can work very well for mapping an ear in 3D. Problem being that optical sensors need some distance from the object to work well in that case which would result in very large an unwieldy earcups, and I bet that such sensors are quite expensive. I don't know if the sort of long range (ie not just "touch", they work a few mm (cm ?) away from the surface) capacitance sensors Apple mentioned in their patents was able of that to a good enough degree, but apparently it was good enough to form a low res image of a user's ear to detect left from right ear and orientation of the headphones.

This is all why passive headphones from boutique companies, as good as may be sometimes, kind of bore me to death. That being said as you said coincidence is that most headphones I've really enjoyed lately are all passive and all in the $100-$300 range .

 

[plakat]

It's just that headphones will remain inherently limited as long as they don't tailor very precisely the frequency response curve they output so that they can reach at a particular listener's eardrum a very specific FR target tailored to that one user's own head-related transfer function. This beyond the usual individual variations that have been well documented in Harman's research (and probably others).

If you put person A and B in the exact same room listening to the exact same pair of speakers in the same position and measure at their eardrum the frequency response they hear, it will be different because their varying anatomy influence the FR curve they receive at their eardrum. Headphones putting the drivers much closer in a very different acoustic space mess with that and produce yet again different FR curves, but differently different if you see what I mean . So they'll always sound off to some degree (besides problems related to lack of crossover). This is also the reason why surround sound simulation with headphones is never truly convincing for most users with only general HRTF profiles (by convincing I mean being able to pass tests where the listener is tasked with pointing their finger in a 3D space at the origin of the sound and accurately locating it within x degrees).

Currently the best we can do without directly measuring a user's HRTF is gather anatomical data on a user and compare that anatomical data thanks to various algorithms (such as neural networks) to a known database of anatomical data vs. measured HRTFs to come up with an individualised HRTF profile for that user. But that requires gathering anatomical data on a user's head / torso / ear in the first place. Apple is uniquely placed here thanks the technology they developed with Face ID which can work very well for mapping an ear in 3D. Problem being that optical sensors need some distance from the object to work well in that case which would result in very large an unwieldy earcups, and I bet that such sensors are quite expensive. I don't know if the sort of long range (ie not just "touch", they work a few mm (cm ?) away from the surface) capacitance sensors Apple mentioned in their patents was able of that to a good enough degree, but apparently it was good enough to form a low res image of a user's ear to detect left from right ear and orientation of the headphones.

This is all why passive headphones from boutique companies, as good as may be sometimes, kind of bore me to death. That being said as you said coincidence is that most headphones I've really enjoyed lately are all passive and all in the $100-$300 range .

I see. Yes, interesting though, especially the idea about 3D scans of the ear derived from FaceID tech...

Still I think its only part of the whole picture, since the individual perception does also come from the brains interpretation of the nervous signals generated by our inner ear. Yet an interesting step for sure... and yes, that sounds very Apple-like to me as well.

I can very well relate to your last sentence. I've put a stop to buying ever new toys about two years ago, keeping my interest in the midrange ca 100-400€. I, too, have found many interesting models in that range, which gives me hope that the overall quality is rising (ignoring the inflated prices at the top end). I've just recently acquired a D9200, first thing I considered worthy (and it is to me), now I'll stop buying expensive models once again.

Regarding computational audio: yes, that's an interesting field. Given the HomePod goes down to about 35Hz (I listen to electronica/EDM, so that's important to me) that's quite a feat and for sure only possible due to extensive involvement of electronics and correction. Looking forward to what they accomplished in the Max in that regard.

 

[Monstieur]

This is all why passive headphones from boutique companies, as good as may be sometimes, kind of bore me to death. That being said as you said coincidence is that most headphones I've really enjoyed lately are all passive and all in the $100-$300 range .

As long as the drivers are low-distortion and flat down to 20 Hz, like most Audeze headphones, I'm fine with EQing to taste. There is only one headphone I've heard that sounds good without DSP - the Shure SE846.

The issue with AirPods is you can't EQ apart from the iOS presets. I can't stand Apple's and Bose's bright treble, and the "Treble Reducer" preset in iOS is too warm. There is no way to get my preferred target.

I bought them anyway, because of the whole UX, and AirPods are the only way to get Dolby Atmos rendered on headphones apart from Windows 10 / Xbox.

 

[SilverEars]

When they say high fidelity, does that mean we'll now have a lossless audio solution with these?

You know they will be limited to AAC. $549 is rediculous for ANC wireless headphone, and the design took inspiration from a watch? lol They want you to match the watch and headphone look as well? Haha You get this eco of apple square lookin with corner rounded aluminum shelled devices all around you.

 

[Blinxat]

ill wait until I see the measurements and the reviews, maybe apple was able to make a great driver, but for now I am a skeptic.

 

[davidmolliere]

Well it was bound to happen audiophiles are skeptic when it comes down to mainstream consumer products... my own experience with AirPod Pro tell me Apple might do something pretty great actually so hold off on dismissing it altogether. AirPods Pro are much better than my Sony WF-1000XM3.

So AirPods Max might be better than Sony WH-1000XM4... I'll know more when I get those

 

[MayaTlab]

One thing that can make measurement of Apple's latest products a little tricky :
https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory199...tory1990_eq_thread_questions_requests/ge0odjp
Although I'd be surprised to learn that it's to the point of making them totally irrelevant either.

 

[SilverEars]

I didn't know there was April Fools in December. Can't say I'm a fan of the design. And the bra... lol

The colors!! Only black I can do. Or I'll look weird.

Kidding aside, it's being release on the 15th? I guess they made it just in time for Christmas gift like the AirPods Pro? Fairly expensive headphone gift however. I would spend the money on PS5 if I can grab one (which is the issue).

 

[Aeneas]

As someone who was reluctant to switch to iPhone a few years ago because of aptX... If you're using any AirPods you're probably going to be using an iPhone and Apple Music or Spotify, so aptX really doesn't matter. It becomes your standard. We continue to dream of lossless Apple Music and Spotify.

It is difficult to convey the ease of getting connected to AirPods from multiple Apple devices. Once you've experienced it, going to your menu/Bluetooth and connecting manually feels painful enough to warrant a small Apple premium.

The case seems like the weakest area. Will they go into ultra-low battery mode without it? Otherwise you'll need that case within a tougher case if you really need protection.