• @flossdaily@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5111 months ago

    I think they would have been a lot better off if they had included a fully functional phone. Who wants to carry around TWO bricks for slightly better audio?

    I think the real missed opportunity is that they didn’t create a super hi-fi wireless headphone protocol and absolutely best-ever wireless headphones sell them together with the walkman.

    • @sidhant
      link
      English
      3611 months ago

      They did. It’s called LDAC. Many would also agree that they make the best headphones and earbuds, I swear by their WH1000s and WF1000s

      • @joshLaserbeam@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        411 months ago

        I swear by their WH1000s and WF1000s

        Its a good thing lots of people do, cause they make my Xperia purchases $250 cheaper. The freebie buds go right to eBay.

      • 999
        link
        fedilink
        211 months ago

        I made the awful decision to go with Bowers & Wilkins over the Sonys. They sound okay, but the design is absolute garbage. Next time it’s Sony.

    • himbocat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I’m the audience for this. I’ve bought previous android portable standalone players and it being a phone is actually a negative.

      There are already plenty of good smartphone dacs so there’s no need to make a super high end battery chugging, chunky phone for a niche audience, when most people are just going to use Bluetooth headsets anyway and have a good experience doing so.

      Im not just carrying these things around like a phone because the types of headphones I’ve run with these devices are not the type that I would bring with me on a bus or to the store. Portability really doesn’t matter to the target audience of these.

      I pull my standalone player out when I want to sit in front of my my garden and listen to an album all the way through. Getting a call or a notification would kill that for me.

        • st3ph3n
          link
          fedilink
          1811 months ago

          How is that the case? Lossless is lossless. Not trying to be a smartass, genuinely curious here.

          • @Zpiritual@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Maybe he’s referring to that even if the source is 44.1/16-bit flac or wave (cd) the entire chain maybe isn’t. Maybe the firmware (android in this case) uses a fixed 48kHz sample rate which to me makes it sound a lot more dull. Maybe the dac in whatever is playing the flac file is objectively or subjectively worse than the one in the cd player (this matters a lot). Maybe the firmware doesn’t allow for exclusive access to the dac to whatever software is playing the flac file. A cd players is comparably simpler to program software for since it’s only made to do one thing which is to play one format at one sample rate and bit rate. That’s it.

            Lossless sources doesn’t mean a lossfree playback chain from the software to the dac.

        • @thejml@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1511 months ago

          FLAC is literally “Lossless” compression. That’s what the L stands for. If you rip data from a CD, compress it with FLAC and then uncompressed that FLAC file you would have a bit for bit exact replica of the CD.

        • electromage
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1511 months ago

          FLAC is the same or better than CD, as long as the source format is supported. I checksummed a CD, then ripped it to FLAC, and burned it back to a new CD and the hashes matched…what more do you want?

      • @Tandybaum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 months ago

        Why is this not more of a thing? I should be able to connect 3 headphones to my iPhone. Is it a limitation of Bluetooth somehow?

        • @Taleya@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          BT is generally a 1:1 secure connection. Very inaccurate description but serves our purpose. BT was originally designed waaay before smartphones as a way of maintaining low power wireless connectivity to stuff like keyboards and mouses.

          It’s increased in ability since then, but a lot of the focus has understandably been on increasing the capacity of the ‘host’ of the party rather than the guests. More people can join the party (devices connected to your phone/pc), but they’re doing different activities at different times.

          The challenge with audio is they all have to receive the exact same data at the exact same time otherwise humans notice - which the protocol wasn’t really designed for. There’s been some inroads, but it’s a bit of a protocol limit. This is why most BT headsets are a single unit - one receiver (guest), receiving the data then disseminating to its family group. Airpods get around this by having one that actually connects to your phone, then the second one syncs to the first pod. (Someone at the party chatting with a friend elsewhere on the phone, to stretch the analogy)

          When you start mixing multiple guests of varying hardware wanting the same thing at the same time with varying latencies from the one host, it can get real messy, and we’re really good at picking up audio discrepancies

    • vacuumpizzas
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago
      • Separate batteries. Using a device for music and a standard phone drains from the same battery. You could carry a power brick, but then you’re carrying two bricks for worse audio.
      • No camera. Certain work assignments won’t allow me to bring a device with a camera into those zones. Or, if I do, the transition process is so intrusive that it’s not worth it.

      Those are the only unique characteristics. You can compensate other differences on a phone like adding an additional DAC and/or amp.