6 ms·

The last thing I want with my audio is some bullshit "computational experience" fucking with things and telling me what I want to hear. Mainstream taste in aud

by tomc1985 6y ago

The last thing I want with my audio is some bullshit "computational experience" fucking with things and telling me what I want to hear. Mainstream taste in audio is crap. Designing headphones for a target audience that thinks Spotify HQ mode is sufficient is not going to produce a very good product, audio-quality-wise.

Bjartr 6y ago
He's talking about the computation involved in turning any digital sound into the analog one needed for a speaker. If there's no cable between the digital-to-analog conversion chip and the analog speaker, there's no chance for cable characteristics to have an impact on the sound. I think you're taking about audio pre-processing stuff that Spotify or others do to qualitatively ""enhance"" audio for their lowest common denominator listeners, which is completely independent from what's being discussed.
- tomc1985 6y ago
  The wording implies there is at least some level of extra DSP going on (talk of "dynamic EQ" or whatever notwithstanding). Calling a digital-to-analog converter a "computational experience" seems beyond the pale, even for Apple PR hacks
  - chungus_khan 6y ago
    Pretty mainstream level of snake oil in the audiophile world though. Whom amongst us has not been told that this fancy power cable will be the second coming of Christ?
    - tomc1985 6y ago
      Was Monster's marketing ever that aggressive?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
So I guess you travel with an orchestra? Because there aren't any "natural" / "neutral" / whatever speakers / headphones / cochlear implants. They all get a signal and a task: make this sound the way the listener wants. "Just make it sound as it did when it was (live) recorded"? That's not going to happen even assuming some "perfect" speakers (not headphones), unless you can also supply the room, audience, humidity, and appropriate level of inebriation. Apple has done a lot of of work on adjusting AirPods to your head and ear, IIRC. That's all software, and exactly the sort of thing they've been good at, even in the last few years. It's basically iPhone camera vs. Canon & Nikon, the sequel. How many times did people on HN insist phone cameras will never be as good as SLRs, because the latter have the five pound of glass it takes to create good photos? Turns out software and sensors are a pretty good substitute. While some features of good lenses are still not quite there (bokeh), they've eviscerated them in other, arguably more important disciplines (low light).
- tomc1985 6y ago
  Phone cameras still aren't as good as SLRs, and never will be due to sensor size and optics. Apple could have made these as good as $500 Sennheiser/Grado/Sony cans. But they didn't. Rants about "traveling with an orchestra" don't even make sense when one listens to music produced exclusively in-the-box. And even if I am listening to recorded material what is wrong with nuance and detail... after all that is what the mixing and mastering engineers heard when they made it. Do you think they choose their microphones and recording hardware willy-nilly? Software is a terrible substitute for hardware! Hardware is easier to understand, latency-free, and produces a more harmonically interesting result
  - rblatz 6y ago
    Yeah man, you live in a different world from 95% of consumers. For typical users the iPhone camera will destroy what they could do with an SLR. You remind me of a buddy of mine that has hearing loss from the marines. He is a giant headphone nut, and owns numerous $500+ pairs of headphones. All sorts of head phone amplifiers and dacs. But his hearing loss prevents any of that from really even mattering.
drcoopster 6y ago
> Mainstream taste in audio is crap. Designing headphones for a target audience that thinks Spotify HQ mode is sufficient is not going to produce a very good product, audio-quality-wise. Mainsteam taste is what sells products. Obviously you're not part of the target market and should probably just move on.
- tomc1985 6y ago
  Apple could use their position of product leadership to introduce mainstream consumers to a higher standard of fidelity if they wanted to, particularly at this price. But I guess that would cut into their Beats business and would make Apple Music look worse than it already is, and surely the profits aren't as nice as using plastic(!) drivers You can get Sennheiser HD280's, where the audio quality is likely worlds apart from these, and earcup padding that attenuates outside noise by something like 30db passively, for $60. Or you could be a doof and buy these Apple cans
- theincredulousk 6y ago
  Spotify HQ mode is not a bad digital source. Do you mean that's all (these) people think is required to get high quality playback?
  - tomc1985 6y ago
    It's not bad but neither is it good. The compression still butchers a lot of sound. It's easy to tell when compared against the original CDs or FLAC backups for certain kinds of music
    - spekcular 6y ago
      Spotify high quality is 320 kps, if I remember correctly. This should be indistinguishable from lossless unless something is weird with the track. I've done A/B testing with decent headphones (http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html) and not been able to tell the difference. Maybe you can, but I'd bet that most people can't, and in any case the result is far from butchery.
erik_landerholm 6y ago
I bet you are fun at parties.
- tomc1985 6y ago
  And I'd bet you my parties have far better sound than you've ever heard

Bjartr 6y ago

He's talking about the computation involved in turning any digital sound into the analog one needed for a speaker. If there's no cable between the digital-to-analog conversion chip and the analog speaker, there's no chance for cable characteristics to have an impact on the sound. I think you're taking about audio pre-processing stuff that Spotify or others do to qualitatively ""enhance"" audio for their lowest common denominator listeners, which is completely independent from what's being discussed.

tomc1985 6y ago
The wording implies there is at least some level of extra DSP going on (talk of "dynamic EQ" or whatever notwithstanding). Calling a digital-to-analog converter a "computational experience" seems beyond the pale, even for Apple PR hacks
- chungus_khan 6y ago
  Pretty mainstream level of snake oil in the audiophile world though. Whom amongst us has not been told that this fancy power cable will be the second coming of Christ?
  - tomc1985 6y ago
    Was Monster's marketing ever that aggressive?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago

So I guess you travel with an orchestra? Because there aren't any "natural" / "neutral" / whatever speakers / headphones / cochlear implants. They all get a signal and a task: make this sound the way the listener wants. "Just make it sound as it did when it was (live) recorded"? That's not going to happen even assuming some "perfect" speakers (not headphones), unless you can also supply the room, audience, humidity, and appropriate level of inebriation. Apple has done a lot of of work on adjusting AirPods to your head and ear, IIRC. That's all software, and exactly the sort of thing they've been good at, even in the last few years. It's basically iPhone camera vs. Canon & Nikon, the sequel. How many times did people on HN insist phone cameras will never be as good as SLRs, because the latter have the five pound of glass it takes to create good photos? Turns out software and sensors are a pretty good substitute. While some features of good lenses are still not quite there (bokeh), they've eviscerated them in other, arguably more important disciplines (low light).

tomc1985 6y ago
Phone cameras still aren't as good as SLRs, and never will be due to sensor size and optics. Apple could have made these as good as $500 Sennheiser/Grado/Sony cans. But they didn't. Rants about "traveling with an orchestra" don't even make sense when one listens to music produced exclusively in-the-box. And even if I am listening to recorded material what is wrong with nuance and detail... after all that is what the mixing and mastering engineers heard when they made it. Do you think they choose their microphones and recording hardware willy-nilly? Software is a terrible substitute for hardware! Hardware is easier to understand, latency-free, and produces a more harmonically interesting result
- rblatz 6y ago
  Yeah man, you live in a different world from 95% of consumers. For typical users the iPhone camera will destroy what they could do with an SLR. You remind me of a buddy of mine that has hearing loss from the marines. He is a giant headphone nut, and owns numerous $500+ pairs of headphones. All sorts of head phone amplifiers and dacs. But his hearing loss prevents any of that from really even mattering.

drcoopster 6y ago

> Mainstream taste in audio is crap. Designing headphones for a target audience that thinks Spotify HQ mode is sufficient is not going to produce a very good product, audio-quality-wise. Mainsteam taste is what sells products. Obviously you're not part of the target market and should probably just move on.

tomc1985 6y ago
Apple could use their position of product leadership to introduce mainstream consumers to a higher standard of fidelity if they wanted to, particularly at this price. But I guess that would cut into their Beats business and would make Apple Music look worse than it already is, and surely the profits aren't as nice as using plastic(!) drivers You can get Sennheiser HD280's, where the audio quality is likely worlds apart from these, and earcup padding that attenuates outside noise by something like 30db passively, for $60. Or you could be a doof and buy these Apple cans
theincredulousk 6y ago
Spotify HQ mode is not a bad digital source. Do you mean that's all (these) people think is required to get high quality playback?
- tomc1985 6y ago
  It's not bad but neither is it good. The compression still butchers a lot of sound. It's easy to tell when compared against the original CDs or FLAC backups for certain kinds of music
  - spekcular 6y ago
    Spotify high quality is 320 kps, if I remember correctly. This should be indistinguishable from lossless unless something is weird with the track. I've done A/B testing with decent headphones (http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html) and not been able to tell the difference. Maybe you can, but I'd bet that most people can't, and in any case the result is far from butchery.

erik_landerholm 6y ago

I bet you are fun at parties.

tomc1985 6y ago
And I'd bet you my parties have far better sound than you've ever heard