Are Bluetooth ear buds technically difficult to make, or are we just paying a premium for Bluetooth?

[Green_man]

Hi, I recently discovered Chi-fi IEMs, and they raise an interesting question about the value proposition for Bluetooth ear buds. I've got a pair of KZ ZS10 Pros, that cost about $48, and sound noticeably better out-of-the-box, with no app, no hearing test, and no EQ magic than my Jabra Elite active 75Ts, which have the benefit of an app, hearing test-based optimization, and an EQ that I spent a fair bit of time fiddling with. With all that, the sound quality is close, but the ZS10 Pros clearly win.

 

This implies, that half the price of the jabras at their current going rate is essentially the convenience of Bluetooth, and that goes up to two thirds of the price, when they were the flagship item.

 

It seems odd to me that for Bluetooth, your essentially paying double the price of a comparable wired item. are are Bluetooth ear buds just technically that much more difficult to make?

[ShearMe]

Yes, the more you pack into a product, the harder it is to make

[PlaybyEar]

I come from the world of medical acoustics (Audiology) and not from a consumer side, but yes, Bluetooth does cost more. 

The tech / licensing / code compliance side of things all certainly add costs. However, in order to cut the cord it turns out that you actually have to cut the cord, which also removes power. Now the devices have to be independently powered which includes batteries, chargers, and of course more regulatory compliance. 

More points of failure also tend to bring with it more failure, which adds to a companies back end in the form of warranty and support issues. 

I am sure there are some additional complications that I am not covering, but this should roughly answer the question. 

[Areco777]

well i guess in wired earplugs there is no battery nor it has to process much so i think the bill of parts will be higher in itself 

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

On 2/1/2022 at 7:10 PM, Green_man said:

Hi, I recently discovered Chi-fi IEMs, and they raise an interesting question about the value proposition for Bluetooth ear buds. I've got a pair of KZ ZS10 Pros, that cost about $48, and sound noticeably better out-of-the-box, with no app, no hearing test, and no EQ magic than my Jabra Elite active 75Ts, which have the benefit of an app, hearing test-based optimization, and an EQ that I spent a fair bit of time fiddling with. With all that, the sound quality is close, but the ZS10 Pros clearly win.

 

This implies, that half the price of the jabras at their current going rate is essentially the convenience of Bluetooth, and that goes up to two thirds of the price, when they were the flagship item.

 

It seems odd to me that for Bluetooth, your essentially paying double the price of a comparable wired item. are are Bluetooth ear buds just technically that much more difficult to make?

If you factor in engineering inside each tiny ear bud with batteries, Bluetooth circuitry, dacs and amps... while all you get for cabled headphones is a just a wire soldered on, I guess you can say it's rather amazing what you get for your money. This is also in addition to the charging case which not nearly as complex, still costs money to design and build. 

 

To put into context, the KZ AZ09 Bluetooth adapters costs nearly as much as the IEMs it's made for. I got my ZSN Pro Xs for 30 bucks and the adapter was around 50 bucks (went for the less problematic Pro version, the standard can be had for around 30 bucks as well). 

[Psittac]

An example that I'm learning about is the AKG-361-bt vs the AKG-361.  As @BlueChinchillaEatingDoritosaid, it's kind of amazing how much you get for $36.  No longer do you need to worry about a proper dac and amp plus you get the added bonus of no wires.  I've been researching what it takes for entry level hifi on a budget and I can't find a dac/amp for under $100 that beats onboard audio.  So you've eliminated the chance of a shoddy source and you have the added benefit of being able to tune the source specifically to your device.  The con's being that you haven't built up any equipment that can go into something else but $36 vs $110 makes the value proposition of this trade off check all the boxes especially if you're someone looking for a one and done solution.  Not everyone is in this for shiz and giggles and just wants something that works and works well, plus there are a lot of people that enjoy the benefit of wireless.

 

I have always been the kind of person that would be in some way's a pureist, why on god's green earth would you spend more for an inferior product?  Just get the cheaper wired version with more options available to you such as changing sources.  But the 361bt has taught me that it's nice to not fuss with everything else, it just works not to mention it can be freeing to not have a cable.

[rice guru]

Yep it's generally harder but in your case it doesn't help that the 75t it worse sounding than it's predecessor.

[Green_man]

Thanks to all for the perspective. Sometimes it's so hard to tell what cost more, because companies actually put more effort into it, and what does cost more, because companies are trying to get you to pay a premium for a feature.

On 2/1/2022 at 11:04 PM, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

I got my ZSN Pro Xs for 30 bucks and the adapter was around 50 bucks (went for the less problematic Pro version,

I actually looked at that, I wish it would fit my HZsound Heart Mirrors, post EQ and hearing test, the sound signature on my 75Ts is close enough to the ZS 10 Pros, that adding Bluetooth to the ZS10 Pros doesn't make sense for me.