It is usb so yes, it will probably add a millisecond of latency.
So that's the "high end" quality the push to replace the audio jack with usb was all about. 97 dB dynamic range is quite laughable. But hey, at least it will add to the cost, so the goal is achieved, more milk from the cattle.
It's an obvious typo in the article: that is the dynamic range for the 16 bit DAC, for which the theoretical maximum is 16 * 6 dB = 96 dB. So they even pulled out an extra dB out of nothing.
Excellent! I'm glad to see that old analog audio jack get kicked to the curb in favor of something vastly more complex and costly that offers no tangible benefits. Bring on USB connectors for headphones and, why not mandate USB connectors on other things like my dresser? I could have a USB FOB that protected the secrets of my sock drawer!
no benefits? digital > analog. lets keep audio digital until the last possible moment, and this helps in that endeavor... benefits are audio quality via less noise/distortion.
the largest benefit though are amps that can be custom designed for the headphones/speakers instead of general purpose amps.
There is a reason the entire studio monitor industry has gone from passive to self-amplified/powered.
You should get informed before posting such glorific displays of ignorance. The analog signal for headphones is already amplified and at that signal level even running through meters of unshileded cable is 100% OK. There is no added distortion or noise, nor any noticeable or even measurable loss of signal in range of the audible spectrum.
99% of the high end professional studio reference monitors and headphones use analog signal connectors. Even self-powered monitors, which have a much lower line level inputs use analog connectors, they just use balanced cables - that is 3 wires per channel rather than 2.
If anything, the specs of this chip reveal fairly mediocre audio performance - a meager 97/104 dB I/O dynamic range. High end audio already pushes 120. And if you don't think that's much of a difference, familiarize yourself with the fact the scale of dB is not a linear but a logarithmic one. That means every 6 dB represent an increase of 100% or 2x. So a rather modest for pro audio 116 bB dynamic range already offers THREE TIMES the dynamic range of this so called "high quality digital" solution.
Also, the article doesn't mention THD of the converters and the amp, so I assume it is even more mediocre than the dynamic range.
Digital audio is good as an option to have, but any attempts to replace the audio jack stem only from corporate greed and the desire to make more money on the clueless "omgz digital rulez" simpletons. I honestly feel pity for the poor souls, reduced to a state to fool them into buying all the empty hype. This is 100% in the interest of the industry, at the expense of the consumer. More costly products, more prone to breakage, more things to fail, very hard or even impossible to repair, plus making a lot of already good products obsolete, requiring either the purchase of new ones or bulky adapters.
Yes, most (not all) professional monitors use analog inputs, but they are self-amplified with custom-tuned and designed amplification solution paired with the speakers. This is a huge advantage. D/A occurring closer to the amp would only improve things... and it's certainly going in that direction.
It's interesting me the personal attack I got just for saying obviously true things... that digital transmission is better than analog and should be used until the last possible moment for optimal audio quality.
I did not mention this specific chip/solution as I have not read the specs, but in general I fully support the move to usb-c headphone jacks to move the D/A and amps closer to the actual speakers.
When you say the amplified signal running through meters of unshielded cable is 100% ok... uhhh what does ok mean?
OK is certainly not lossless or perfect. usb-c audio represents a potential upgrade to the audio experience.
Would you also suggest video D/A occur on the video-card and then the signal sent through analog D-sub cables to the LCD?
" usb-c audio represents a potential upgrade to the audio experience. "
Huge generalisation with no facts to ground it's veracity. Shortening the signal path by a couple feet and moving from a shitty DAC/amp inside a phone to a shitty DAC/amp in an even more compromised device guarantees absolutely nothing.
You should not see FACTS as personal attacks. You are clueless and that's a fact. If facts offend you, that only further goes to show where you stand. Be a man and take it as constructive criticism and make a note of it instead of whining about it.
So you first whine about taking the fact of your ignorance as a personal attack, and now it is US who are "just afraid of change". Yeah, it must be that...
So besides ignorant, you are also a hypocrite, that is "accusing others of things which you actually do".
We are not afraid of change, we are just not stupid enough to be cheering about a chance FOR THE WORSE. Because unlike you we know what we are talking about, and you are a clueless hype repeating device. You few "attempts" to point out actual advantages are far below adequate or even passable, and after that failed your best effort was a practically empty "usb-c audio represents a potential upgrade to the audio experience". Oh an that "everything will be possible" magic gem LOL.
I've been working professionally with audio for almost 20 years now, I've enjoyed the technically best audio experience possible for most of that time, and I can tell you for a fact that the path to improved audio experience IS NOT replacing the audio jack with usb-c. While it could have some benefits, most notably adding non-audio quality related features, what it will mostly result in will be a slight bump in the profits of corporations. It will not give you pro grade audio, it will give you the same lousy consumer products, but slightly more expensive and with more things to break and ruin the stuff you paid for.
well actually with a digital output of audio there are no limits to how good the audio can be. I don't know why you are so passionately negative about it. As someone with a formal education in electrical engineering and mathematics, I don't agree with your negative tone about it.
I don't know why this seems to becoming personal, life is too short.
my vote is digital output vs analog output from any device. and then there will be options of all sorts of quality/costs for the D/A Amp and speakers... and there are net benefits to putting the D/A and amp at the last possible spot closest to the speakers. The less the analog signal has to travel, the better.
Change is great when there's a benefit to the adoption of that change to the person using the device that makes any compromises or trade-offs worth accepting. At this point, I'm finding it difficult to identify any benefit that offsets the detriment of cost and complexity. However, I think the wider forces in the overall market will dictate whether or not products like this find success just as Microsoft discovered with Windows 8 and LCD manufacturers figured out with 3D TVs.
A personal attack would have been calling you stupid, not ignorant. Stupid implies you are too dumb to learn. Ignorant implies you can learn, but CHOOSE not to. There is a big difference.
"Full Definition of ignorance. : the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness." From merriam webster. Not a comment on who's right or wrong because I'm ignorant of many things audio. I just don't care to learn, and I can read a review or ask an audiophile etc to buy the right stuff. I CHOOSE to spend time on other things. Same thing can be said about me and cars. I hire a mechanic to get dirty for me...LOL. I only need to be informed enough to not get snowed on the repair cost (still ask dad for that info...ROFL - gearheads R US). My klipsch v2.400's speakers sound fine BTW ;) and blow away my z560's in music but the z560's rock for games (picked for those jobs). Headphones sound great too. I know enough to understand hz, thd, db etc but not enough time to care about inner workings of internals etc. I just need to know what works not why. I know enough about handbrake to make a very good rip, but not enough to bother with the advanced panel settings.
The point? EVERYBODY is ignorant about MANY things. Period. There is just not enough time in our lives to be omniscient... :) What do you expect someone to say to describe another persons lack of knowledge? The correct word is ignorant.
I agree, there is no way your average sub-$100 digital USB headphones are going to have a DA converter, preamp and opamp superior to even the wolfson dac's found in iPods a decade ago.
Ditching the 3.5mm jack is incredibly stupid. I used to think it was a good idea because of the added waterproof benefits of not having the gaping hole in the device, but Samsung and others have proven you can make an equipped device IP56 and even IP65 in the case of some Kyocera models. Apple is getting ridiculous here and unfortunately others are going to copy them.
Moving the DAC 2 feet further along a headset cable will do absolutely nothing to improve sound quality.
The floor for noise/distortion in a headset will always be caused by the physical limitations of putting drivers in a container which fits in/around a human ear.
There is certainly merit in having amplifiers connect via USB. And maybe fancy headset functionality beyond the volume/pause controls in current headsets.
You're mixing apples and oranges, and having a DAC with a shitty opamp all housed in an already hard to design headphone shell will accomplish exactly nothing of what you're describing.
There ARE some benefits, but for the most part they have nothing to do with this...
I'm not commenting on this specific DA - amp design, but in general, putting the D/A and amps closer to the speakers is better... and when the designer of the amp knows EXACTLY what speakers are attached. that is a huge advantage and they could achieve a better outcome than someone who has to use a general purpose amp to power a variety of speakers.
The meager shortening of signal path accomplishes absolutely nothing in that real world... Matching amps and drivers could have more potential but that's not gonna happen when OEM buy commoditized chips like these, and headphone makers driving out of their lane into custom ICs seems even less likely.
Increased use of DSP is the most likely scenario, and we really didn't need Type C for that...
One of the biggest fears of using the Type-C port for earbuds is the stresses exerted on the plug and the phone connector when you put the phone into your pocket.
One of the nice things a 3.5mm jack with a right angle plug could do is rotate and have a lower profile to minimize the mechanical stresses.
With the Type-C earbuds, imagine sticking your phone in your pocket with Type-C plug pointing towards the bottom of your pocket. The wire would be pinched almost 180 degrees at the base of the plug. This creates a point of failure for the earbuds.
On top of that, because the Type-C plug has a higher profile than right angle 3.5mm plug, it will be easier to put higher bending forces that could shorten the life of the earbuds and the connector on your phone.
At least if the 3.5mm jack broke, you still had the rest of your phone. With this, imagine breaking your USB connector so you can’t charge it.
I will give one counterpoint. when you put your phone in your pocket, you normally put it in upside-down with the connector pointing towards the opening negating most of these stresses.
In the end, make sure you have a clear understanding on how you are going to use your phone and earbuds and weigh the advantages and the disadvantages.
TL;DR version: It will be easier to break your Type-C earbuds and the connector on your phone if you put your phone in your pocket connector down with the earbuds plugged in.
Your point is still valid but most phones with a type C connector also have QI charging so your phone will still work. To my mind wireless headphones make much more sense than Type-C.
I think you are overestimating how correlated those features are, I can name several phones off the top of my head with a USB type C connector and no Qi charging: Nexus 5X, Nexus 6P, OnePlus 2, OnePlus 3, HTC 10. (So actually almost all popular phones with said connector)
I find it quite hard to even name a device with QI charging and USB type C, only ones I can come up with are: Lumia 950 and 950XL, and also probably the new 2016 Samsung Galaxy Note (6/7?). The Lumia's are not that popular, the new Note will probably be quite popular, but right now it's safe to say that most USB type C phones don't have wireless charging.
100% easily preventable. To do otherwise would be stupid.
Even better, putting your phone in your pocket upside-down means when you pull it out and turn your hand up to a natural position, the phone is magically the right way up.
It's almost like this whole problem is... not a problem.
Impressive feature set at such a small size. This type of service could enable headphone correction dsp by manufacturers. Could also get balanced output from the amp, since the standard unbalanced connect is bypassed.
You know what's even smaller and more efficient? The similar/better DAC/amp inside your phone that's not going anywhere as it's still needed for speakers...
The potential for interesting DSP is there, but there's already headphones doing that and it'll probably take years for fruitful results in that regard.
Love how a simple and useful change, getting rid of a bulky, aging analog port on space constrained phones elicits wails of doomsday, apparently from the crowd who most likely cried into their beers when the floppy was banished.
"bulky"? 3.5mm jacks let alone 2.5mm jacks are comparable size to USB ports "useful"? to whom? Right now it looks only useful to accessory vendors. "floppy was banished"? Specious comparison. Until human ears are replaced by cybernetics, headphones must NECESSARILY retain analog drivers.
The USB performs yet another function and the headphone port disappears. You can't compete against 0, genius.
A dumb analog port versus a digital interface. Not everyone is limited by your lack of imagination. Any idiot who wasn't blindly partisan can see that is an upgrade.
Again, your closed mind has blinded you. Many people don't use the headphone port at all. There are the speakers and bluetooth.
You are your ilk are all the same: "this isn't my preference, so it's a disaster!"
Audio is analog. All you do by moving the DAC out of the phone and three feet up the cable is make the headphones more expensive and generate a more easily damaged cable and port. Not to mention you force everyone to purchase new headphones.
Of course that's the point of this, in causing people to buy more hardware they already own. Of course moving the DAC into the headphones is likely to generate a much poorer noise floor and frequency response due to the size constraints. And you still get to pay for the DAC in the phone because it can't go away.
Audio is analog, and analog audio cables are dead simple and cheap. All you do by making this move is complicate something that already works for little to no benefit. It's called fixing things that aren't broken and it's dumb. As others have already pointed out the only people that think this is a good idea think that digital is always better than analog, which couldn't be further from the truth.
It's not a question of people belly aching over change... The 3.5mm jack isn't a paragon of build quality either... But it's a decent standard.
The DAC/amp inside a phone isn't going anywhere as that's still required for speakers, and using an interface those wasn't purposely made for audio and basically shifting and doubling up on the components required for audio reproduction doesn't guarantee anything...
Other than a big division in the market between Lighting and Type C, really looking forward to that. It's tantamount to saying Thunderbolt should replace PCI-E instead of being an extension or an option.
Not to mention you're also doubling up on batteries (those new Type C headphones gonna need em, they won't be port powered at the high end), and the potential for more DRM...
The potential benefits all look like fringe stuff, like new sensors and wearable tech or always on audio assistants being even better...
Why why why why why, a thousand times, why?????? I will never understand this idiotic push to make things "digital" without any friggin knowledge of how to design audio systems, meanwhile deprecating something that's worked perfectly well for decades, and doesn't have a superior replacement.
I don't think attaching a USB hub to a phone makes a lot of sense from a portability perspective. Granted, a person is unlikely to be moving around when they're charging their phone, but carrying around a USB hub and associated cables in addition to the phone itself and the headphones isn't as practical. Phones would need to include multiple USB ports to solve that problem in a more practical manner which doesn't really offer a more compelling solution to having a USB port and an existing headphone jack.
I doubt consumer on his end will be very happy when he has to get new headphones along with the new phone, despite all of the marketing bullshit sure to be levelled at him about muh biger battery(compared to what?) and muh slimness(that 0,1 mil matters oh so much!).
Like all the discussion here focused on the technical difficulties of ever improving audio quality this way and how this is more to fatten the wallet of different OEMs vs the ignorant....."But Digital" commentary.
But one thing not being addressed so far with these deleted headphone jacks is an ability to charge while you have headphones on!! I am sure eventually adapters will exist to do this....but pretty sure most early adapters that are going to ship with devices without a headphone jack are much "dumber" adapters with now Y off for charging.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
55 Comments
Back to Article
Noremacam - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
I wonder if using USB-C introduces any ms delays...ddriver - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
It is usb so yes, it will probably add a millisecond of latency.So that's the "high end" quality the push to replace the audio jack with usb was all about. 97 dB dynamic range is quite laughable. But hey, at least it will add to the cost, so the goal is achieved, more milk from the cattle.
dr_traktor - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
It's an obvious typo in the article: that is the dynamic range for the 16 bit DAC, for which the theoretical maximum is 16 * 6 dB = 96 dB. So they even pulled out an extra dB out of nothing.extide - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Well, it is actually a 24-bit DAC, so 97dB is not outrageous at all.BrokenCrayons - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
Excellent! I'm glad to see that old analog audio jack get kicked to the curb in favor of something vastly more complex and costly that offers no tangible benefits. Bring on USB connectors for headphones and, why not mandate USB connectors on other things like my dresser? I could have a USB FOB that protected the secrets of my sock drawer!8steve8 - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
no benefits? digital > analog. lets keep audio digital until the last possible moment, and this helps in that endeavor... benefits are audio quality via less noise/distortion.the largest benefit though are amps that can be custom designed for the headphones/speakers instead of general purpose amps.
There is a reason the entire studio monitor industry has gone from passive to self-amplified/powered.
ddriver - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
You should get informed before posting such glorific displays of ignorance. The analog signal for headphones is already amplified and at that signal level even running through meters of unshileded cable is 100% OK. There is no added distortion or noise, nor any noticeable or even measurable loss of signal in range of the audible spectrum.99% of the high end professional studio reference monitors and headphones use analog signal connectors. Even self-powered monitors, which have a much lower line level inputs use analog connectors, they just use balanced cables - that is 3 wires per channel rather than 2.
If anything, the specs of this chip reveal fairly mediocre audio performance - a meager 97/104 dB I/O dynamic range. High end audio already pushes 120. And if you don't think that's much of a difference, familiarize yourself with the fact the scale of dB is not a linear but a logarithmic one. That means every 6 dB represent an increase of 100% or 2x. So a rather modest for pro audio 116 bB dynamic range already offers THREE TIMES the dynamic range of this so called "high quality digital" solution.
ddriver - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
Also, the article doesn't mention THD of the converters and the amp, so I assume it is even more mediocre than the dynamic range.Digital audio is good as an option to have, but any attempts to replace the audio jack stem only from corporate greed and the desire to make more money on the clueless "omgz digital rulez" simpletons. I honestly feel pity for the poor souls, reduced to a state to fool them into buying all the empty hype. This is 100% in the interest of the industry, at the expense of the consumer. More costly products, more prone to breakage, more things to fail, very hard or even impossible to repair, plus making a lot of already good products obsolete, requiring either the purchase of new ones or bulky adapters.
8steve8 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Yes, most (not all) professional monitors use analog inputs, but they are self-amplified with custom-tuned and designed amplification solution paired with the speakers. This is a huge advantage. D/A occurring closer to the amp would only improve things... and it's certainly going in that direction.It's interesting me the personal attack I got just for saying obviously true things... that digital transmission is better than analog and should be used until the last possible moment for optimal audio quality.
I did not mention this specific chip/solution as I have not read the specs, but in general I fully support the move to usb-c headphone jacks to move the D/A and amps closer to the actual speakers.
When you say the amplified signal running through meters of unshielded cable is 100% ok... uhhh what does ok mean?
OK is certainly not lossless or perfect. usb-c audio represents a potential upgrade to the audio experience.
Would you also suggest video D/A occur on the video-card and then the signal sent through analog D-sub cables to the LCD?
Impulses - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
" usb-c audio represents a potential upgrade to the audio experience. "Huge generalisation with no facts to ground it's veracity. Shortening the signal path by a couple feet and moving from a shitty DAC/amp inside a phone to a shitty DAC/amp in an even more compromised device guarantees absolutely nothing.
pashhtk27 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
"moving from a shitty DAC/amp inside a phone to a shitty DAC/amp in an even more compromised device"Nailed it.
Spunjji - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
What says the device HAS to be shitty, though? Buy better headphones, get better amp - even on a $200 phone.I'm not 100% behind this shift but you're looking at it through a huuuge chunk of bias.
ddriver - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
You should not see FACTS as personal attacks. You are clueless and that's a fact. If facts offend you, that only further goes to show where you stand. Be a man and take it as constructive criticism and make a note of it instead of whining about it.8steve8 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
When the word ignorance is used, I take that as a personal attack.sure you could put a worse D/A and then a worse amp after the connector... and the audio may be worse... but why would you guys assume that?
anything will be possible, could be a great D/A after the usb-c port and then a great, perfectly paired amp for the speakers/headphones hard-wired.
It's almost you guys are just afraid of change.
ddriver - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
So you first whine about taking the fact of your ignorance as a personal attack, and now it is US who are "just afraid of change". Yeah, it must be that...So besides ignorant, you are also a hypocrite, that is "accusing others of things which you actually do".
We are not afraid of change, we are just not stupid enough to be cheering about a chance FOR THE WORSE. Because unlike you we know what we are talking about, and you are a clueless hype repeating device. You few "attempts" to point out actual advantages are far below adequate or even passable, and after that failed your best effort was a practically empty "usb-c audio represents a potential upgrade to the audio experience". Oh an that "everything will be possible" magic gem LOL.
I've been working professionally with audio for almost 20 years now, I've enjoyed the technically best audio experience possible for most of that time, and I can tell you for a fact that the path to improved audio experience IS NOT replacing the audio jack with usb-c. While it could have some benefits, most notably adding non-audio quality related features, what it will mostly result in will be a slight bump in the profits of corporations. It will not give you pro grade audio, it will give you the same lousy consumer products, but slightly more expensive and with more things to break and ruin the stuff you paid for.
8steve8 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
well actually with a digital output of audio there are no limits to how good the audio can be. I don't know why you are so passionately negative about it. As someone with a formal education in electrical engineering and mathematics, I don't agree with your negative tone about it.I don't know why this seems to becoming personal, life is too short.
my vote is digital output vs analog output from any device. and then there will be options of all sorts of quality/costs for the D/A Amp and speakers... and there are net benefits to putting the D/A and amp at the last possible spot closest to the speakers. The less the analog signal has to travel, the better.
Spunjji - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
You're right, but this guy's a bigot.BrokenCrayons - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
"It's almost you guys are just afraid of change."Change is great when there's a benefit to the adoption of that change to the person using the device that makes any compromises or trade-offs worth accepting. At this point, I'm finding it difficult to identify any benefit that offsets the detriment of cost and complexity. However, I think the wider forces in the overall market will dictate whether or not products like this find success just as Microsoft discovered with Windows 8 and LCD manufacturers figured out with 3D TVs.
TheJian - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link
A personal attack would have been calling you stupid, not ignorant. Stupid implies you are too dumb to learn. Ignorant implies you can learn, but CHOOSE not to. There is a big difference."Full Definition of ignorance. : the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness."
From merriam webster. Not a comment on who's right or wrong because I'm ignorant of many things audio. I just don't care to learn, and I can read a review or ask an audiophile etc to buy the right stuff. I CHOOSE to spend time on other things. Same thing can be said about me and cars. I hire a mechanic to get dirty for me...LOL. I only need to be informed enough to not get snowed on the repair cost (still ask dad for that info...ROFL - gearheads R US). My klipsch v2.400's speakers sound fine BTW ;) and blow away my z560's in music but the z560's rock for games (picked for those jobs). Headphones sound great too. I know enough to understand hz, thd, db etc but not enough time to care about inner workings of internals etc. I just need to know what works not why. I know enough about handbrake to make a very good rip, but not enough to bother with the advanced panel settings.
The point? EVERYBODY is ignorant about MANY things. Period. There is just not enough time in our lives to be omniscient... :) What do you expect someone to say to describe another persons lack of knowledge? The correct word is ignorant.
Spunjji - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
"Be a man"Well done, you're a massive toolshed. Have a round of sexist applause.
Michael Bay - Sunday, July 3, 2016 - link
Oy vey, womyn got macroaggressed, such gevalt, it`s anudda shoah!Samus - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
I agree, there is no way your average sub-$100 digital USB headphones are going to have a DA converter, preamp and opamp superior to even the wolfson dac's found in iPods a decade ago.Ditching the 3.5mm jack is incredibly stupid. I used to think it was a good idea because of the added waterproof benefits of not having the gaping hole in the device, but Samsung and others have proven you can make an equipped device IP56 and even IP65 in the case of some Kyocera models. Apple is getting ridiculous here and unfortunately others are going to copy them.
grant3 - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
Moving the DAC 2 feet further along a headset cable will do absolutely nothing to improve sound quality.The floor for noise/distortion in a headset will always be caused by the physical limitations of putting drivers in a container which fits in/around a human ear.
There is certainly merit in having amplifiers connect via USB. And maybe fancy headset functionality beyond the volume/pause controls in current headsets.
Impulses - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
You're mixing apples and oranges, and having a DAC with a shitty opamp all housed in an already hard to design headphone shell will accomplish exactly nothing of what you're describing.There ARE some benefits, but for the most part they have nothing to do with this...
8steve8 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
I'm not commenting on this specific DA - amp design, but in general, putting the D/A and amps closer to the speakers is better... and when the designer of the amp knows EXACTLY what speakers are attached. that is a huge advantage and they could achieve a better outcome than someone who has to use a general purpose amp to power a variety of speakers.Impulses - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
The meager shortening of signal path accomplishes absolutely nothing in that real world... Matching amps and drivers could have more potential but that's not gonna happen when OEM buy commoditized chips like these, and headphone makers driving out of their lane into custom ICs seems even less likely.Increased use of DSP is the most likely scenario, and we really didn't need Type C for that...
Defhammer - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
One of the biggest fears of using the Type-C port for earbuds is the stresses exerted on the plug and the phone connector when you put the phone into your pocket.One of the nice things a 3.5mm jack with a right angle plug could do is rotate and have a lower profile to minimize the mechanical stresses.
With the Type-C earbuds, imagine sticking your phone in your pocket with Type-C plug pointing towards the bottom of your pocket. The wire would be pinched almost 180 degrees at the base of the plug. This creates a point of failure for the earbuds.
On top of that, because the Type-C plug has a higher profile than right angle 3.5mm plug, it will be easier to put higher bending forces that could shorten the life of the earbuds and the connector on your phone.
At least if the 3.5mm jack broke, you still had the rest of your phone. With this, imagine breaking your USB connector so you can’t charge it.
I will give one counterpoint. when you put your phone in your pocket, you normally put it in upside-down with the connector pointing towards the opening negating most of these stresses.
In the end, make sure you have a clear understanding on how you are going to use your phone and earbuds and weigh the advantages and the disadvantages.
TL;DR version: It will be easier to break your Type-C earbuds and the connector on your phone if you put your phone in your pocket connector down with the earbuds plugged in.
Shadowmaster625 - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
But who would pass up the chance to sell something that has a higher failure rate? Then they get to sell more of em! Yay!BedfordTim - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
Your point is still valid but most phones with a type C connector also have QI charging so your phone will still work. To my mind wireless headphones make much more sense than Type-C.Impulses - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
I dunno, I love Qi but so far adoption rate for wireless charging isn't very high.Macpoedel - Monday, July 4, 2016 - link
I think you are overestimating how correlated those features are, I can name several phones off the top of my head with a USB type C connector and no Qi charging:Nexus 5X, Nexus 6P, OnePlus 2, OnePlus 3, HTC 10. (So actually almost all popular phones with said connector)
I find it quite hard to even name a device with QI charging and USB type C, only ones I can come up with are: Lumia 950 and 950XL, and also probably the new 2016 Samsung Galaxy Note (6/7?). The Lumia's are not that popular, the new Note will probably be quite popular, but right now it's safe to say that most USB type C phones don't have wireless charging.
doggface - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Could hurt the cable. Or you could put your phone in your pocket upside down. Seems easily preventable...really.Spunjji - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
100% easily preventable. To do otherwise would be stupid.Even better, putting your phone in your pocket upside-down means when you pull it out and turn your hand up to a natural position, the phone is magically the right way up.
It's almost like this whole problem is... not a problem.
CSMR - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
Impressive feature set at such a small size.This type of service could enable headphone correction dsp by manufacturers.
Could also get balanced output from the amp, since the standard unbalanced connect is bypassed.
Impulses - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
You know what's even smaller and more efficient? The similar/better DAC/amp inside your phone that's not going anywhere as it's still needed for speakers...The potential for interesting DSP is there, but there's already headphones doing that and it'll probably take years for fruitful results in that regard.
prisonerX - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Love how a simple and useful change, getting rid of a bulky, aging analog port on space constrained phones elicits wails of doomsday, apparently from the crowd who most likely cried into their beers when the floppy was banished.grant3 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
"bulky"? 3.5mm jacks let alone 2.5mm jacks are comparable size to USB ports"useful"? to whom? Right now it looks only useful to accessory vendors.
"floppy was banished"? Specious comparison. Until human ears are replaced by cybernetics, headphones must NECESSARILY retain analog drivers.
prisonerX - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
The USB performs yet another function and the headphone port disappears. You can't compete against 0, genius.A dumb analog port versus a digital interface. Not everyone is limited by your lack of imagination. Any idiot who wasn't blindly partisan can see that is an upgrade.
Again, your closed mind has blinded you. Many people don't use the headphone port at all. There are the speakers and bluetooth.
You are your ilk are all the same: "this isn't my preference, so it's a disaster!"
rahvin - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
Audio is analog. All you do by moving the DAC out of the phone and three feet up the cable is make the headphones more expensive and generate a more easily damaged cable and port. Not to mention you force everyone to purchase new headphones.Of course that's the point of this, in causing people to buy more hardware they already own. Of course moving the DAC into the headphones is likely to generate a much poorer noise floor and frequency response due to the size constraints. And you still get to pay for the DAC in the phone because it can't go away.
Audio is analog, and analog audio cables are dead simple and cheap. All you do by making this move is complicate something that already works for little to no benefit. It's called fixing things that aren't broken and it's dumb. As others have already pointed out the only people that think this is a good idea think that digital is always better than analog, which couldn't be further from the truth.
Impulses - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
It's not a question of people belly aching over change... The 3.5mm jack isn't a paragon of build quality either... But it's a decent standard.The DAC/amp inside a phone isn't going anywhere as that's still required for speakers, and using an interface those wasn't purposely made for audio and basically shifting and doubling up on the components required for audio reproduction doesn't guarantee anything...
Other than a big division in the market between Lighting and Type C, really looking forward to that. It's tantamount to saying Thunderbolt should replace PCI-E instead of being an extension or an option.
Impulses - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Not to mention you're also doubling up on batteries (those new Type C headphones gonna need em, they won't be port powered at the high end), and the potential for more DRM...The potential benefits all look like fringe stuff, like new sensors and wearable tech or always on audio assistants being even better...
benzosaurus - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Why why why why why, a thousand times, why?????? I will never understand this idiotic push to make things "digital" without any friggin knowledge of how to design audio systems, meanwhile deprecating something that's worked perfectly well for decades, and doesn't have a superior replacement.willis936 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Mother of god an 81 pin chip to do something existing hardware does just as well.Furunomoe - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Mother of god, 81 pins chip to put in an earbud.pashhtk27 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
First they killed budget pc gaming, now they play to kill budget hi-fi audio.I don't like where the big tech companies are taking us.......
Michael Bay - Sunday, July 3, 2016 - link
Budget PC gaming? Your billions upon billions of faceberg farms are very much alive!Zingam - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
And you won't be able to listen to music or use headphones while you are charging your device!prisonerX - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Ever heard of a USB hub?"Aww, now I have to use a hub, waaaaaaaaaaaaah!"
BrokenCrayons - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link
I don't think attaching a USB hub to a phone makes a lot of sense from a portability perspective. Granted, a person is unlikely to be moving around when they're charging their phone, but carrying around a USB hub and associated cables in addition to the phone itself and the headphones isn't as practical. Phones would need to include multiple USB ports to solve that problem in a more practical manner which doesn't really offer a more compelling solution to having a USB port and an existing headphone jack.Michael Bay - Sunday, July 3, 2016 - link
>USB hub>to listen to goddamn music
You people shlould have at least a sliver of selfawareness, right?
UCHEER - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
It is not the only single chip solution for type c headphone application.Agent Smith - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
It's all about certain phone manufacturers wanting to save space inside the phone for other tech, or improved battery, or greater slimness.The consumer at the end offer day and the amount of competition out there has driven this change not the hatred of the jack-plug.
Agent Smith - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link
Edit - The consumer at the end and the amount of competition out there has driven this change not the hatred of the jack-plugMichael Bay - Sunday, July 3, 2016 - link
I doubt consumer on his end will be very happy when he has to get new headphones along with the new phone, despite all of the marketing bullshit sure to be levelled at him about muh biger battery(compared to what?) and muh slimness(that 0,1 mil matters oh so much!).jasaero - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link
Like all the discussion here focused on the technical difficulties of ever improving audio quality this way and how this is more to fatten the wallet of different OEMs vs the ignorant....."But Digital" commentary.But one thing not being addressed so far with these deleted headphone jacks is an ability to charge while you have headphones on!! I am sure eventually adapters will exist to do this....but pretty sure most early adapters that are going to ship with devices without a headphone jack are much "dumber" adapters with now Y off for charging.