5 ms·

They look cool and I would love to be able to buy one but the sustainability tax seems too high to be a successful product to me.

ealhad 3y ago
It's not a "sustainability tax", it's "acknowledging people are not slaves nor are resources infinite"
- willcipriano 3y ago
  "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent” It may not make sense to repair for many consumers. In a few years we might have better codecs or similar and you'll want to upgrade your crusty headphones anyway.
  - rstat1 3y ago
    >>In a few years we might have better codecs This sounds like something could be done with a firmware update.
    - ealhad 3y ago
      Or the speakers themselves, eventually
    - lozenge 3y ago
      Nope, for latency and battery reasons this would be done by a specific chip, e.g. https://www.icstation.com/audio-module-bluetooth-compatible-receiver-universal-audio-module-p-12506.html https://www.icstation.com/audio-module-bluetooth-compatible-... / https://www.tinyosshop.com/ts8670 https://www.tinyosshop.com/ts8670 The same's true on the smartphone transmitter side.
      - rstat1 3y ago
        That 2nd link you shared, has 3 links under "Documentation" to firmware downloads.
  - roughly 3y ago
    > "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent” I notice every time the cost of a properly sustainable product comes up, the conversation always turns to what a short-sighted bastard everyone else is, and I can only assume the people who make that argument are already making moral choices themselves, which is honestly just heartwarming to see.
Kuinox 3y ago
WH-1000XM5 => $400 Bose QC45 => $279 Fairbuds XL => 249€ ($272 if I convert right now) It's cheaper than two of the most popular headphones, how is there a "too high sustainability tax" ?!?
- manmal 3y ago
  I can really recommend the WH-1000XM5 btw. They are quite light and work surprisingly well even with iDevices. I tried to call my dad while I mowed the lawn (electric mower, but pretty loud one) and he understood me well. Audio pass through sounds like the real thing, I’d just like to be able to turn it louder.
  - Kuinox 3y ago
    That's a change then because the WH-1000XM3 microphone is really crap.
    - mh- 3y ago
      rtings.com describe the recording quality as pretty bad still on the XM5[0], but with markedly better mic noise suppression than the XM3[1]. (These are the most objective measurements I'm aware of.) [0]: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm5-wireless#test_377 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm5-wi... [1]: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm3-wireless#test_377 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm3-wi...
    - manmal 3y ago
      The XM5 have 8 microphones, that’s one of the major improvements over previous versions.
      - nickserv 3y ago
        NC headphones typically have multiple microphones, the more there are, the better the NC can be. This is because the first part of NC is detecting ambient noise, the second being generating soundwaves to cancel out what's picked up by the mics. With more mics it's possible to get more accurate NC, especially for directional sounds. However more mics won't necessarily mean better call quality, they may not even be used at all for voice. For example my Jabra NC pair has really good microphone quality for calls, this is done by having a dedicated boom microphone, in this case nothing to do with the multiple NC microphones.
usrusr 3y ago
Wireless headphones are essentially streetwear. Making their product too cheap would be an unforgivable mistake in that market.
- nickserv 3y ago
  I use mine for remote work, they are so expensive I actually avoid wearing them outside as much as possible.
npteljes 3y ago
I agree, and this is why I believe that issues like this can only be fixed with regulation. Markets not only can't solve them, they actually reward exploitation. It's way more efficient from a product standpoint, and the only thing that's needed to quell the public response is just to remove the abuse far enough from them, so that no real feedback loop can form.

ealhad 3y ago

It's not a "sustainability tax", it's "acknowledging people are not slaves nor are resources infinite"

willcipriano 3y ago
"Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent” It may not make sense to repair for many consumers. In a few years we might have better codecs or similar and you'll want to upgrade your crusty headphones anyway.
- rstat1 3y ago
  >>In a few years we might have better codecs This sounds like something could be done with a firmware update.
  - ealhad 3y ago
    Or the speakers themselves, eventually
  - lozenge 3y ago
    Nope, for latency and battery reasons this would be done by a specific chip, e.g. https://www.icstation.com/audio-module-bluetooth-compatible-receiver-universal-audio-module-p-12506.html https://www.icstation.com/audio-module-bluetooth-compatible-... / https://www.tinyosshop.com/ts8670 https://www.tinyosshop.com/ts8670 The same's true on the smartphone transmitter side.
    - rstat1 3y ago
      That 2nd link you shared, has 3 links under "Documentation" to firmware downloads.
- roughly 3y ago
  > "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent” I notice every time the cost of a properly sustainable product comes up, the conversation always turns to what a short-sighted bastard everyone else is, and I can only assume the people who make that argument are already making moral choices themselves, which is honestly just heartwarming to see.

Kuinox 3y ago

WH-1000XM5 => $400 Bose QC45 => $279 Fairbuds XL => 249€ ($272 if I convert right now) It's cheaper than two of the most popular headphones, how is there a "too high sustainability tax" ?!?

manmal 3y ago
I can really recommend the WH-1000XM5 btw. They are quite light and work surprisingly well even with iDevices. I tried to call my dad while I mowed the lawn (electric mower, but pretty loud one) and he understood me well. Audio pass through sounds like the real thing, I’d just like to be able to turn it louder.
- Kuinox 3y ago
  That's a change then because the WH-1000XM3 microphone is really crap.
  - mh- 3y ago
    rtings.com describe the recording quality as pretty bad still on the XM5[0], but with markedly better mic noise suppression than the XM3[1]. (These are the most objective measurements I'm aware of.) [0]: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm5-wireless#test_377 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm5-wi... [1]: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm3-wireless#test_377 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sony/wh-1000xm3-wi...
  - manmal 3y ago
    The XM5 have 8 microphones, that’s one of the major improvements over previous versions.
    - nickserv 3y ago
      NC headphones typically have multiple microphones, the more there are, the better the NC can be. This is because the first part of NC is detecting ambient noise, the second being generating soundwaves to cancel out what's picked up by the mics. With more mics it's possible to get more accurate NC, especially for directional sounds. However more mics won't necessarily mean better call quality, they may not even be used at all for voice. For example my Jabra NC pair has really good microphone quality for calls, this is done by having a dedicated boom microphone, in this case nothing to do with the multiple NC microphones.

usrusr 3y ago

Wireless headphones are essentially streetwear. Making their product too cheap would be an unforgivable mistake in that market.

nickserv 3y ago
I use mine for remote work, they are so expensive I actually avoid wearing them outside as much as possible.

npteljes 3y ago

I agree, and this is why I believe that issues like this can only be fixed with regulation. Markets not only can't solve them, they actually reward exploitation. It's way more efficient from a product standpoint, and the only thing that's needed to quell the public response is just to remove the abuse far enough from them, so that no real feedback loop can form.