I spoke to Apple to find out the secret behind the AirPods Pro 2’s audio success

[What Hi-Fi?]

Apple's acoustic team gives us an insight into the design and development of the new AirPods Pro 2 wireless earbuds.

I spoke to Apple to find out the secret behind the AirPods Pro 2’s audio success : Read more

 

[HappySounds]

One key takeaway from that interview:

"We don't think that the codec currently is the limitation of audio quality on Bluetooth products."

Is it not at least conceivable that lossless audio will not deliver an appreciably better sound quality for in-ear headphones? I am absolutely convinced that Apple have the technical chops to pull this off if they want to, and also I am sure they will have this working in the lab.

How convinced are you that this goal you persist with demanding is actually worth achieving? I suspect you want it simply because it is technically better than what we have already, but maybe what we already have is plenty good enough for the purpose.

Why not perform some blind testing to see if it makes an appreciable difference to people's enjoyment of music if they are listening to lossless audio? Pursuit of the ultimate is often to pursue an unachievable goal, and surprisingly often does not deliver the result that is expected.

What's more, I wonder whether there is such a thing as the ultimate in sound reproduction - there is always going to be more that can be done because any recorded sound is only ever at best a facsimile of the original performance. It is unlikely that listening to a recording can ever actually reproduce the original accurately.

In my view the question should really be "What's good enough" coupled with "Is it enjoyable to listen to". You may find that what we have already meets those two criteria more than adequately.

 

[Sliced Bread]

One key takeaway from that interview:

"We don't think that the codec currently is the limitation of audio quality on Bluetooth products."

Is it not at least conceivable that lossless audio will not deliver an appreciably better sound quality for in-ear headphones? I am absolutely convinced that Apple have the technical chops to pull this off if they want to, and also I am sure they will have this working in the lab.

How convinced are you that this goal you persist with demanding is actually worth achieving? I suspect you want it simply because it is technically better than what we have already, but maybe what we already have is plenty good enough for the purpose.

Why not perform some blind testing to see if it makes an appreciable difference to people's enjoyment of music if they are listening to lossless audio? Pursuit of the ultimate is often to pursue an unachievable goal, and surprisingly often does not deliver the result that is expected.

What's more, I wonder whether there is such a thing as the ultimate in sound reproduction - there is always going to be more that can be done because any recorded sound is only ever at best a facsimile of the original performance. It is unlikely that listening to a recording can ever actually reproduce the original accurately.

In my view the question should really be "What's good enough" coupled with "Is it enjoyable to listen to". You may find that what we have already meets those two criteria more than adequately.

Apple have said in the past that they have researched this and found people (or at least most people) cannot tell the difference.
They do provide high res audio from Apple Music at no extra cost but the hardware does not really work with it. Their (paraphrased) message is; it’s there if you really want it, but we don’t think it’s worth it.

I’m not saying I agree, that’s just what I’ve read from them in the past.

 

[HappySounds]

Apple have said in the past that they have researched this and found people (or at least most people) cannot tell the difference.
They do provide high res audio from Apple Music at no extra cost but the hardware does not really work with it. Their (paraphrased) message is; it’s there if you really want it, but we don’t think it’s worth it.

I’m not saying I agree, that’s just what I’ve read from them in the past.

Yes, maybe another way of putting it is "You may think you want it, but do you actually need it?"

 

[Sliced Bread]

Yes, maybe another way of putting it is "You may think you want it, but do you actually need it?"

Yes exactly.

 

[cubeover]

Without Steve, Apple always few years behind the rest in adopting innovative features that are in use by others.
That was the case with OLED screens, quick charging, common connectors, true color capture, display calibration, now audio codecs. Like proverbial Fox in Aesop's tale, they insist to tell us and themselves "I really do not need the grapes, and they're sour anyway"...
There simply is an aversion at Apple to be seen Copying others when you cannot Steal (as was famously said), or in computer terms, Move, so the others do not have it, or at least have been forgotten to have had it.
I've noticed a few tricks were "taken from the dead" so this probably counts as a Move since nobody has webOS phones anymore (carousel menu). I wish Apple were fine with Copying non-patented things too so Appleoids wouldn't have to wait ~5 years. But yeah, some other things they're innovating, like removing ports and strengthening "ecosystem" (that's why expensive AirPods Max still cannot take pure bits by wire like Focal Bathys do).