this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
1266 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
59148 readers
2352 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
i actually find this argument flawed. Bluetooth is great but does not provide feature parity. correct me if I'm wrong but aptX was supposed to be lossless audio, but it has been shown that it has compression artifacts. I'll be happy with Bluetooth only if we can have absolutely lossless audio
If you can tell the difference between well-compressed, high bitrate audio and lossless audio played on the same equipment, then you’re in the minority. However it’s pretty easy to accidentally end up with a combo of phone / app / app settings / headphones that results in a suboptimal listening experience, either because you’re using a bad codec (like SBC on any device or AAC on many Android phones) or because your music is being compressed twice. You can avoid the latter issue by streaming uncompressed music or by using a combo that doesn’t recompress your music (like Apple Music -> iPhone -> Airpods Pro/Max).
It’s also possible that the reason Bluetooth headphones sound worse isn’t because of losing information but because the headphones just aren’t as good as your wired ones. If you get a portable Bluetooth DAC like the Qudelix 5k, you can connect it to your phone and connect your wired headphones to it.
You don’t have to be happy with Bluetooth. You can buy a USB-C DAC for like $10. Apple’s “USB C to 3.5mm Headphone Jack Adapter” is 9 USD direct from Apple and it tested extremely well. You can use it on any modern phone or on your laptop or tablet, too. (You can also use the Qudelix 5k this way.)
If that adapter isn’t good enough (maybe it doesn’t output enough power for your high impedance headphones), then most phone’s built-in DACs + headphone adapters would have the same problem. Basically only Sony and LG (RIP) phones ever had especially good onboard DACs and amps, and even with them it would often make more sense to get a dedicated portable setup.
For anyone who is happy with Bluetooth, though, they don’t have to worry about all this and they get to reap the advantages of the headphone jack’s removal. The extra space can be used for more battery, if nothing else, and it’s easier to prevent dust/water ingress when you eliminate the headphone jack.
Also, I think you’re thinking of LDAC (by Sony), not aptX (by Qualcomm). LDAC is not lossless, either, but it’s much higher bitrate than anything other than the very recently introduced aptX Lossless, which - under ideal conditions - features lossless compression.
Wired headphones don't have to incorporate their own DACs, which means any budget wired set will be better than wireless one of the same price - everything can go into the actual analog part of the equation.
The adapter is extremely inconvenient, it's a small dongle that is easy to lose and you can't even charge your phone and listen to music at the same time, which I personally do very regularly. Besides, making everything go through one port increases wear and tear and reduces reliability of the device.
3,5mm jack doesn't take any significant amount of space and the value of extra teeny tiny piece of battery is ridiculously low. This has always felt like a bullshit excuse to me.
Just my 2 cents.