[SparkOnShore]

Cool down, it's an inside joke between us. And i still am an iPhone 6 user.

As i said before: if Apple provides me with a cheap, ergonomic and great sounding path to plug my iems i won't flee.

So far there is a cheap and ergonomic dongle but now it comes the tricky part: getting something as tiny as that dongle to provide a clean, powerful and linear signal (aka low Zout).

if the dongle fails to impress then i am leaving. If i am put in the position of having to choose between iPhone 7 and my SE846 & W30 then i am sticking with my headphones as i love good sounding music more than an iPhone.


If the tonality it's not right, then nothing else really matters.

Dear Elfary, I always respect your point of view and your opinions regarding audio but I would like to ask you something; If Apple resolves the Bluetooth hiccups with their new W1 and offer a higher audio quality wireless transmission, wouldn't you prefer to use a completely wireless sound system in your ears? Aren't you tired messing with cables in 2016?? Isn't it the time to start opening a new audio path in tech? I know you have paid 1000 eur for the SE846. But later on Shure may produce a new iem, using the W2 or 3 which will have no wires to get tangled, no fish hooks effects caused to all Shure cables because of the over ear memory wire, and still getting a high quality audio. This may or may not happen. But why to be negative from the beginning? I don't understand how people can say "no, you will not get quality audio out of this", without even hearing a note coming out of this new product! It's possible that Apple has opened a new road for future high quality wireless audio, which was not showing to happen with classic/problematic Bluetooth. I don't understand how they can just close their eyes and say no, I want my loving cables...I just suggest to open our minds and look further front!!

 

[RugbyPlayer]

Dear Elfary, I always respect your point of view and your opinions regarding audio but I would like to ask you something; If Apple resolves the Bluetooth hiccups with their new W1 and offer a higher audio quality wireless transmission, wouldn't you prefer to use a completely wireless sound system in your ears? Aren't you tired messing with cables in 2016?? Isn't it the time to start opening a new audio path in tech? I know you have paid 1000 eur for the SE846. But later on Shure may produce a new iem, using the W2 or 3 which will have no wires to get tangled, no fish hooks effects caused to all Shure cables because of the over ear memory wire, and still getting a high quality audio. This may or may not happen. But why to be negative from the beginning? I don't understand how people can say "no, you will not get quality audio out of this", without even hearing a note coming out of this new product! It's possible that Apple has opened a new road for future high quality wireless audio, which was not showing to happen with classic/problematic Bluetooth. I don't understand how they can just close their eyes and say no, I want my loving cables...I just suggest to open our minds and look further front!!

dude, how many times do we have to tell you that ITS STILL USING BLUETOOTH. So long as bluetooth is the median for wireless audio transmission, it is NEVER going to be at the level of quality as a 3.5mm headphone jack. Wires exist for a reason, they are they best and always will be the most consistent method and transferring data between devices 

 

[franzdom]

  dude, how many times do we have to tell you that ITS STILL USING BLUETOOTH. So long as bluetooth is the median for wireless audio transmission, it is NEVER going to be at the level of quality as a 3.5mm headphone jack. Wires exist for a reason, they are they best and always will be the most consistent method and transferring data between devices 

 
Don't you use your cell phone sometimes or do you always prefer a landline?

 

[SparkOnShore]

dude, how many times do we have to tell you that ITS STILL USING BLUETOOTH. So long as bluetooth is the median for wireless audio transmission, it is NEVER going to be at the level of quality as a 3.5mm headphone jack. Wires exist for a reason, they are they best and always will be the most consistent method and transferring data between devices 

No you are wrong. There is audio quality without wires. And even if it was not 100% equal, I would still prefer the awesome ease of use of wireless. Since I also cannot tell any difference between Flac and AAC I will be perfect with a better Bluetooth. That's my opinion...

 

[colonelkernel8]

  dude, how many times do we have to tell you that ITS STILL USING BLUETOOTH. So long as bluetooth is the median for wireless audio transmission, it is NEVER going to be at the level of quality as a 3.5mm headphone jack. Wires exist for a reason, they are they best and always will be the most consistent method and transferring data between devices 

Complete nonsense. Bluetooth isn't some static audio transmission standard. There are new versions of it being released all the time. Are you telling me that if they at some point get to where they are sending bit-perfect audio to a receiving pair of headphones, that it still won't be as good as a 3.5mm jack? Look at the Bluetooth 5 spec for instance. It might not exist for this iteration of phone/headphone, but it's not completely out of our sight. You need to get off your high horse of "NEVER NEVER NEVER IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE" and start thinking out of the box a little bit.
 
Edit: and of course wires are the best method of transferring data...but that's not what we're talking about though is it?

 

[RugbyPlayer]

  Complete nonsense. Bluetooth isn't some static audio transmission standard. There are new versions of it being released all the time. Are you telling me that if they at some point get to where they are sending bit-perfect audio to a receiving pair of headphones, that it still won't be as good as a 3.5mm jack? Look at the Bluetooth 5 spec for instance. It might not exist for this iteration of phone/headphone, but it's not completely out of our sight. You need to get off your high horse of "NEVER NEVER NEVER IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE" and start thinking out of the box a little bit.
 
Edit: and of course wires are the best method of transferring data...but that's not what we're talking about though is it?

only if they completely remove the audio codec which means revamping the entire spec, that kind of change has literally never happened on an existing interface, keep grasping for straws though
 
Bluetoothes entire focus from its incarceration has been low power, which does not go hand in hand with uncompressed audio codecs

 

[csglinux]

  Complete nonsense. Bluetooth isn't some static audio transmission standard. There are new versions of it being released all the time. Are you telling me that if they at some point get to where they are sending bit-perfect audio to a receiving pair of headphones, that it still won't be as good as a 3.5mm jack? Look at the Bluetooth 5 spec for instance. It might not exist for this iteration of phone/headphone, but it's not completely out of our sight. You need to get off your high horse of "NEVER NEVER NEVER IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE" and start thinking out of the box a little bit.

 
He is simply stating what is available now. All current incarnations of BT are lossy - and that's an additional loss of audio quality above and beyond that resulting from your file-compression format. I don't doubt that lossless codecs are coming, but they aren't here yet, which makes forcing Apple users right now to use BT ridiculously premature.

 

[csglinux]

I understand all companies need to make money. Clearly Apple do a superb job of marketing - many people genuinely seem to have been convinced that the 3.5 mm socket was dumped for their benefit, not Apple's. The problem is, use of all these BT/Lightning Beats headphones and W1 AirPods did not require the removal of the 3.5 mm jack. Apple simply removed the users' choice. It's a deeply cynical ploy which leaves me questioning whether I would buy any Apple product ever again. I still have many Apple products at home, but frankly Apple is no longer the kind of company I want to give my money to.

 

[colonelkernel8]

   
He is simply stating what is available now. All current incarnations of BT are lossy - and that's an additional loss of audio quality above and beyond that resulting from your file-compression format. I don't doubt that lossless codecs are coming, but they aren't here yet, which makes forcing Apple users right now to use BT ridiculously premature.

Could've fooled me. Based on his other sweeping negative generalizations, I'd conclude that nothing interesting is possible, ever.

 

[colonelkernel8]

  only if they completely remove the audio codec which means revamping the entire spec, that kind of change has literally never happened on an existing interface, keep grasping for straws though
 
Bluetoothes entire focus from its incarceration has been low power, which does not go hand in hand with uncompressed audio codecs

False. It falls under the spec.
 
4.2.2 Optional codecs
The device may also support Optional codecs to maximize its usability. When both SRC and SNK support the same Optional codec, this codec may be used instead of Mandatory codec.

 

[RugbyPlayer]

  False. It falls under the spec.
 
4.2.2 Optional codecs
The device may also support Optional codecs to maximize its usability. When both SRC and SNK support the same Optional codec, this codec may be used instead of Mandatory codec.

no it doesnt, its stating they may use a seperate alternate codec out of the existing list of allowed codects, which does not include lossless

 

[ThinWalls]

Aside from the probable (but apparently arguable) attenuation of sound quality, personally I _really_ don't need another set of batteries to charge.  Plus, and I know its been said and joked about ad nauseum already, but I would definitely lose a wireless earbud very quickly (its bad enough constantly losing my prescription eye-glasses!  But at least they don't need to be recharged!)

 

[colonelkernel8]

  no it doesnt, its stating they may use a seperate alternate codec out of the existing list of allowed codects, which does not include lossless

"Each A2DP service, of possibly many, is designed to uni-directionally transfer an audio stream in up to 2 channel stereo, either to or from the Bluetooth host.^[2] This profile relies on AVDTP and GAVDP. It includes mandatory support for the low-complexity SBC codec (not to be confused with Bluetooth's voice-signal codecs such as CVSDM), and supports optionally MPEG-1 Part 3/MPEG-2 Part 3 (MP2 and MP3), MPEG-2 Part 7/MPEG-4 Part 3 (AAC and HE-AAC), and ATRAC, and is extensible to support manufacturer-defined codecs, such as aptX.^{"
 
Not that any current Bluetooth aptX implementation is lossless or that the iPhone uses aptX (it doesn't), but the fact that it can support manufacturer-defined codecs does not preclude a lossless codec from being used in the future.}

 

[csglinux]

Not that any current Bluetooth aptX implementation is lossless or that the iPhone uses aptX (it doesn't)

Guys, I think we can all agree that teleportation MIGHT exist one day, and obviously when it does, Apple's implementation of it will be magical and far superior to anybody else's, but the key point is it doesn't exist yet.

And don't get too excited about the iTeleporter, because Apple's version will not be compatible with anybody else's, as Apple will want to keep you in their walled garden while paying no license fees to anybody else.

 

[colonelkernel8]

Guys, I think we can all agree that teleportation MIGHT exist one day, and obviously when it does, Apple's implementation of it will be magical and far superior to anybody else's, but the key point is it doesn't exist yet.

And don't get too excited about the iTeleporter, because Apple's version will not be compatible with anybody else's, as Apple will want to keep you in their walled garden while paying no license fees to anybody else.

Fair enough.