RTX Voice for headsets?

[Sirgeorge]

Just curious if anyone else immediately thought of active noise canceling headphones when they saw the effectiveness of RTX Voice. Any news on if/when someone's going to license the tech for their headsets?

[The Flying Sloth]

31 minutes ago, Sirgeorge said:

Just curious if anyone else immediately thought of active noise canceling headphones when they saw the effectiveness of RTX Voice. Any news on if/when someone's going to license the tech for their headsets?

It degrades audio far too much and is less effective than phase cancellation, there is no reason anyone would license an inferior technology that requires much more processing power for a consumer device.

 

[Sirgeorge]

10 hours ago, The Flying Sloth said:

It degrades audio far too much and is less effective than phase cancellation, there is no reason anyone would license an inferior technology that requires much more processing power for a consumer device.

 

Great, comparisons have already been made! Can you point me to the source so i can see the numbers to figure out the magnitude of the gap in performance?

[The Flying Sloth]

5 hours ago, Sirgeorge said:

Great, comparisons have already been made! Can you point me to the source so i can see the numbers to figure out the magnitude of the gap in performance?

Any test of RTX voice shows decrease in microphone quality yes? This is why direct comparison is not necessary. Noise cancelling headphones do not need this destruction of quality as they simply use external microphones for phase inversion cancellation of the audio source. They also don't require the processing power of RTX voice and they are far less complicated than RTX voice really leaving no reason for a headset company to utilise the technology.

 

If that's difficult to understand think of it like this "man, I just watched a video Tesla coils powering lights, why haven't companies trialed mounting Tesla coils near light bulbs to power them instead of cables????" Or "I just watched a video on lyrebirds and how they can mimic anything, why hasn't anyone tried reaching one an entire playlist and carrying it around instead of an iPod???" They're ridiculous because they're obviously inferior to the systems we currently have in place even if they are technically possible.

[Sirgeorge]

4 hours ago, The Flying Sloth said:

Any test of RTX voice shows decrease in microphone quality yes? This is why direct comparison is not necessary. Noise cancelling headphones do not need this destruction of quality as they simply use external microphones for phase inversion cancellation of the audio source. They also don't require the processing power of RTX voice and they are far less complicated than RTX voice really leaving no reason for a headset company to utilise the technology.

 

If that's difficult to understand think of it like this "man, I just watched a video Tesla coils powering lights, why haven't companies trialed mounting Tesla coils near light bulbs to power them instead of cables????" Or "I just watched a video on lyrebirds and how they can mimic anything, why hasn't anyone tried reaching one an entire playlist and carrying it around instead of an iPod???" They're ridiculous because they're obviously inferior to the systems we currently have in place even if they are technically possible.

My main concern is with that 'obvious' word. In my normal work, I like to see data (normal with a citation) to demonstrate a point in a technical domain (especially in an area such as audio tech and, thankfully, test rigs for such things are all but standardized and it would be an interesting thing to see some industry data in a working prototype, even if just for shits and giggles, but even if it weren't about the technical aspects, anyone with an understanding of basic economics would know that even if the tech was definitely inferior, it's still a differentiation which, in a mature market with lots of competitors and price competition, makes for a great way to get some slice of the pie, sorta like an extra fancy way of setting up one's packaging. Besides, I'm the kind of person that likes records. The sheer novel nature of this would be interesting to see.

[The Flying Sloth]

25 minutes ago, Sirgeorge said:

In my normal work, I like to see data (normal with a citation) to demonstrate a point in a technical domain

As do I, the difference here is that you don't need technical data to know when a vastly inferior technology won't stand up to the technically perfect isolation of phase inversion technology. You can't sell headphones that will destroy any audio you send to them, it's the equivalent of running RTX voice on the microphone a vocalist used in the stuio, recording that and releasing it.

While your differentiation point is somewhat interesting, it's also entirely incorrect.
In a mature market with lots of competitors and price competition the only way to get a slice of pie is either to have either a better (different) product or a cheaper one and this technology would be both vastly more expensive and produce far worse quality audio with worse isolation, like, there's no reason to implement RTX voice in a headset when it will require the same microphones as normal phase inversion isolation to hear the audio and noise together (so on the inside of the earcup instead of the outside) and then guess which bits to exclude through phase inversion, the latency would make it implausible to conduct the complex processing and phase inversion at the same time as playing back the audio, the processing would have to happen before playing the audio but to process the audio would require hearing the audio to guess at what the noise is and remove it. It's just not a plausible implementation, it wouldn't work.

Compare that with microphones on the outside of an earcup being processed and phase inverted then being sent directly into the earcup.... One works the other doesn't.

[Sirgeorge]

Better is not the same as different. I specifically said different for a reason. Using a non-tech example, a box that one hamburger is sold in vs another is not superior, it's just different and it tends to happen the more mature a market gets because eventually you end up being able to only differentiate and not necessarily with a more superior product but with a different one. This is a world filled with SD card arrays in PCIe slots and easy bake ovens in 5.25 inch bays. Absolute definite performance is not the only metric to measure and even if the tech is absolutely bogus (which I'm still looking for a citation on for anyone wanting to pop in with an offer)

 

Linus made an entire series about "shit manufacturers say" where half of the time the tech is laughably found to be vapor ware, which still doesn't stop people from spending millions on building out half of these things and months/years spent making them. "powered by RTX" would absolutely be a draw to a headset, regardless of the validity of the claim to a technical point and it would be fun seeing it be the case regardless. Let it not be forgotten that Redbull tastes like garbage and five hour energy is arguably nearly no better then coffee (https://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2013/06/14/10836595/EnergyDrinkPoster_APS_05262013.pdf forgive me for being able to find only a research poster, studies in this area are shockingly spare to what I'm used to and the other one I found was behind a paywall to a site I have no access to).

 

So I look forward to seeing what actually happens in the next half decade or so. Good day.

[The Flying Sloth]

For starters I wouldn't call the tech bogus, it's just designed to reduce noise on inputs and isn't really applicable to output noise compared to the technically perfect technologies already in use.

 

I completely agree that "Powered by RTX Voice" would be a brilliant marketing strategy for ANC headphones but that wasn't your initial question, you asked

On 5/22/2020 at 1:56 PM, Sirgeorge said:

Just curious if anyone else immediately thought of active noise canceling headphones when they saw the effectiveness of RTX Voice

Which is what was answered,

 

Of course different products aren't always better but energy drinks forged an entirely new product section completely separate from coffee, perhaps one isn't better than the other but they're not comparable. A piss-poor ANC headset with RTX Voice in the end is still a piss-poor ANC headset.

 

Perhaps building that functionality into the input on headphones would be an interesting trial (if NVIDIA stops artificially limiting the cards that can process it), especially in aircraft communications but as processing on an output? Yeah, nah, not a thing that's going anywhere.

[Sirgeorge]

I didn't ask for a topper. You've made your opinion known, repeatedly. I get it. I tried to nicely nudge things to hear from other people so I'll be more blunt, just because you don't curse or flail around doesn't mean that you aren't being just as rude as those that do. My main curiosity in starting this thread has been resolved on another forum which had a more interesting assortment of discourse and actually provided some backing (in related, if not exactly on point) in the form of citations that more clearly explore things (in part, proving part of your point better then you ever did). I'm no longer following this thread. Leave your topper comment and be done with it.