Intel wants USB-C to replace the headphone jack

[Curufinwe_wins]

41 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Most would probably be 2-port solutions, and in the worst case, a USB-C splitter won't be expensive.

I share @djdwosk97's opinion. It isn't about the cost of a splitter, it's about dealing with a splitter in the first place. It obviously begins to ruin the point of having a thin/light/portable device when you have to carry around adapters for it (something I have learned first hand with my XPS13, even if those are only for rare use of wired ethernet.) 

 

But yea, if this is what it takes to get a two usb port solution, I am actually all for it (I've been wanting that for literally years.)

[RexinOridle]

""""PLEASE DON"T MIND MY LANGUAGE"""

 

Don't get that mother****ing speakers use analog at the end of the day. Leave the F***ing dac in the device. Don't have to ditch the whole F***ing thing for type c. Earphone users will be f***ed.

[SuperCookie78]

I don't get the "it's digital" arguement. Sound by nature is analog so at some point it has to be converted from digital to analog so why not do it in the phone.

[dalekphalm]

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Except that's not true at all. No high end home theater/stereo system uses analog audio for a reason. On a mobile device it's generally not as big a deal due to the quality of the headphones generally being used and the fact that interference isn't as big of a concern (although it still needs to be accommodated for). 

 

Not to mention a USB-C replacement would be able to handle future functionality. Plus I really want the Bluetooth standard to be pushed forward as it still not where it should be.

Source? As far as I'm aware, by their very nature, speakers are Analog. The Receiver/Mixer/Amp, etc, might all be Digital, but in that box, or right before, it, there's still going to be a DAC, which outputs to the speakers themselves - unless the speakers also incorporate a DAC individually.

2 hours ago, Technic77 said:

Except the fact that professional recording studios use analog TRS 1/4" and XLR for most of their connections. You won't find a studio without analog audio somewhere in the chain. There's a reason for that.

Indeed. Recording Studios, especially ones that deal with state of the art technology, can afford to put whatever standard they deem best into the system, and yet, they still choose TRS 1/4" and XLR for at least some of the components.

2 hours ago, SirRoderick said:

So is the DAC in the headphones in this plan? Because that would mean a whole new factor to consider with buying headphones. 

That seems terrible. A pair of otherwise awesome sounding Headphones might be crippled because of a shitty (or simply subpar) integrated DAC. Headphones are already difficult enough to review and shop for.

5 minutes ago, SuperCookie78 said:

I don't get the "it's digital" arguement. Sound by nature is analog so at some point it has to be converted from digital to analog so why not do it in the phone.

I agree.

 

Now if USB-C can output an analog signal, and then a simple USB-C to 3.5mm adapter? Maybe - that might work for a few phones that specialize in "thinness". But as a general standard? I don't see the benefit of getting rid of 3.5mm as a whole.

 

Those of us in the "Prosumer" segment, with $50-100 IEMs/Earbuds, and $200-300 Headphones are going to hate it if USB-C becomes the audio jack standard.

[suicidalfranco]

ahahah. nope. wait, let find a gif for that

 

now, let me shop for TRRS and TRS connectors while i still can cause idiotJoe will eat this BS no questions asked

[WelshDdraig]

1 hour ago, zMeul said:

that' BS

to implement an external DAC you will need to power it, where fom? the the phone's battery of course - and you're back where you started

 

there's nothing wrong with the headphone jack

if they want to implement an alternative (not replacement) via the USB type C, that's OK

Not my words: Taken straight from the article:

Quote

With the digital connection available via USB-C, headphone designers can integrate the digital-to-analog converter and amplifier right into their headphones, ensuring consistent quality across devices. 

 

[BHS4K]

I hope this isn't to make device more and more thinner, I don't want to end up having a phone that is "Thinner than paper"

[Stefan1024]

It will offload some cost from the phone to the headset. So i can see why they like to get rid of it.

Also music is an analoge signal, there is no option to go fully digital like VGA to DP. PWM isn't really a digital (data) signal.

Also the USB type C port is already a nigthmare to implement on the HW and SW side due to all the optional modes. As the user can't tell by looking at the plug what mods are implemented / supported, the assumtion "when the connector fits, it works" is no longer valid.

This will be a pain in the neck down the road.

[420istoday]

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Except that's not true at all. No high end home theater/stereo system uses analog audio for a reason. On a mobile device it's generally not as big a deal due to the quality of the headphones generally being used and the fact that interference isn't as big of a concern (although it still needs to be accommodated for). 

 

Not to mention a USB-C replacement would be able to handle future functionality. Plus I really want the Bluetooth standard to be pushed forward as it still not where it should be.

Well, the only thing I can say is that they better put two USB-C ports on the device, because I like to charge my phone while I'm using the headphone jack, like in my car or when I'm just laying in bed. I do not want wireless headphones for the simple reason is that it's another thing I have to charge, and I forget to do things a lot. I have trouble remembering to grab my headphones, much less charge them. Now if we can push battery technology the point where I'd only have to charge them once a year, then maybe.

[patrickjp93]

58 minutes ago, Stefan1024 said:

It will offload some cost from the phone to the headset. So i can see why they like to get rid of it.

Also music is an analoge signal, there is no option to go fully digital like VGA to DP. PWM isn't really a digital (data) signal.

Also the USB type C port is already a nigthmare to implement on the HW and SW side due to all the optional modes. As the user can't tell by looking at the plug what mods are implemented / supported, the assumtion "when the connector fits, it works" is no longer valid.

This will be a pain in the neck down the road.

Solution: make them all TB3-compliant and call it a day.

 

54 minutes ago, 420istoday said:

Well, the only thing I can say is that they better put two USB-C ports on the device, because I like to charge my phone while I'm using the headphone jack, like in my car or when I'm just laying in bed. I do not want wireless headphones for the simple reason is that it's another thing I have to charge, and I forget to do things a lot. I have trouble remembering to grab my headphones, much less charge them. Now if we can push battery technology the point where I'd only have to charge them once a year, then maybe.

You people seem to think batteries can magically get 5x better. That's not even theoretically possible with any material. You can only optimize 2 of the the following three in a given form factor.

 

fast charging

high capacity

high endurance (many recharges while losing minimal capacity per power cycle).

[Stefan1024]

3 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Solution: make them all TB3-compliant and call it a day.

... And call it an empty battery and use a quite expencive transeceiver in every single product.

[patrickjp93]

2 minutes ago, Stefan1024 said:

... And call it an empty battery and use a quite expencive transeceiver in every single product.

Thunderbolt in and of itself is not expensive. It's only expensive because it's rare.

[porina]

Possible impacts from going digital:

1. major music companies can mandate DRM (like HDCP) to try and close the "analog hole" they've been crying over, and make every pay for it never mind it'll be broken from day 0 and ineffective. There might be enough resistance from legacy devices they might only limit this to future HD audio standards (beyond CD quality).
2. more features on the headphone/headset, especially that need power e.g. active noise cancelling, more inline controls, display - but obviously this would consume power too
3. possibility of higher quality external DAC

[420istoday]

3 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

You people seem to think batteries can magically get 5x better. That's not even theoretically possible with any material. You can only optimize 2 of the the following three in a given form factor.

 

fast charging

high capacity

high endurance (many recharges while losing minimal capacity per power cycle).

No argument, it just supports that wireless headphones are a dumb idea especially earbuds.

[Stefan1024]

5 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Thunderbolt in and of itself is not expensive. It's only expensive because it's rare.

True, high volume production should drive the cost down.

But as beeing a very high speed interface, it consumes a lot of power, and even the post modern SoCs in phone can't make use of the high bandwith. Even the 10 GBit/s of USB 3.1 are the upper limit. At least until they get powerful enougth to replace a desktop when you add a big screen and some input. And no the windows continium is not enougth as it lacks SW support because they miss X86 instructions.

[79wjd]

36 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Source? As far as I'm aware, by their very nature, speakers are Analog. The Receiver/Mixer/Amp, etc, might all be Digital, but in that box, or right before, it, there's still going to be a DAC, which outputs to the speakers themselves - unless the speakers also incorporate a DAC individually.

Indeed. Recording Studios, especially ones that deal with state of the art technology, can afford to put whatever standard they deem best into the system, and yet, they still choose TRS 1/4" and XLR for at least some of the components.

That seems terrible. A pair of otherwise awesome sounding Headphones might be crippled because of a shitty (or simply subpar) integrated DAC. Headphones are already difficult enough to review and shop for.

I agree.

I should have been more clear. Analog of course needs to exist at some point, but I meant that the signal is kept digital until you get to the point where you can get high end professional grade hardware. i.e. the conversion usually happens within the processor before an analog signal is sent out to the amps/speakers. The reason being that it's practical to sell high end processors that don't have as much interference, but having different tiers of Playstation 4's (bluray players, etc...) is ridiculous. 

10 minutes ago, 420istoday said:

Well, the only thing I can say is that they better put two USB-C ports on the device, because I like to charge my phone while I'm using the headphone jack, like in my car or when I'm just laying in bed. I do not want wireless headphones for the simple reason is that it's another thing I have to charge, and I forget to do things a lot. I have trouble remembering to grab my headphones, much less charge them. Now if we can push battery technology the point where I'd only have to charge them once a year, then maybe.

Yeah, I would hope two ports become standard, although, I get the feeling that won't be the case on all devices unfortunately.

 

I don't really have that issue, I get about half a week out of my bluetooth IEMs (and there are better alternatives that I could probably get a week out of), and when it's time to charge them my phone warns me (Android/iOS shows battery level of attached devices). Unfortunately, that's physically not possible (not until there is a MAJOR change in battery technology anyway).

[patrickjp93]

7 minutes ago, Stefan1024 said:

True, high volume production should drive the cost down.

But as beeing a very high speed interface, it consumes a lot of power, and even the post modern SoCs in phone can't make use of the high bandwith. Even the 10 GBit/s of USB 3.1 are the upper limit. At least until they get powerful enougth to replace a desktop when you add a big screen and some input. And no the windows continium is not enougth as it lacks SW support because they miss X86 instructions.

It's only high-speed in certain modes. It's certainly not guzzling 40Gbps worth of electricity when only using the 10Gbps speed of standard USB 3.1.

[SuperCookie78]

50 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

 

I agree.

 

Now if USB-C can output an analog signal, and then a simple USB-C to 3.5mm adapter? Maybe - that might work for a few phones that specialize in "thinness". But as a general standard? I don't see the benefit of getting rid of 3.5mm as a whole.

 

 

If that happened then the traces for analog would etheir need to be shielded from interference or have every other trace have nothing going through them( power or data) which makes a splitter useless. And if they were shielded the connector would be a lot bigger defeating the purpose of getting rid of the 3.5mm jack because of size

[dalekphalm]

18 minutes ago, SuperCookie78 said:

If that happened then the traces for analog would etheir need to be shielded from interference or have every other trace have nothing going through them( power or data) which makes a splitter useless. And if they were shielded the connector would be a lot bigger defeating the purpose of getting rid of the 3.5mm jack because of size

Honestly, that just gives me more reason to oppose USB-C becoming the Audio standard.

[SuperCookie78]

22 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Honestly, that just gives me more reason to oppose USB-C becoming the Audio standard.

That's what i'm saying. I can't beleive that this didn't go through the minds of someone at least inteligent enough to see all of the issues together and little benifits. I just wish they would listen to linus and make the phone a little think and add batter and then you don't have to worry about the 3.5mm jack. and isn't there a small audio jack then the 3.5mm. Can't they just use that?

[bobhays]

5 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Except that's not true at all. No high end home theater/stereo system uses analog audio for a reason. On a mobile device it's generally not as big a deal due to the quality of the headphones generally being used and the fact that interference isn't as big of a concern (although it still needs to be accommodated for). 

 

Not to mention a USB-C replacement would be able to handle future functionality. Plus I really want the Bluetooth standard to be pushed forward as it still not where it should be.

What do you mean? The receiver acts a a giant DAC, sending analog signals to the speakers. Normally the DAC is built into the computer or inside the phone, the only reason it isn't on a theater is because you have so much space and the receiver's whole purpose is to act as a switch and splitter (part of that includes being a DAC).

 

What do you want from bluetooth that isn't already there? I'm genuinely curious what it's lacking since I don't use it often.

 

USB-C can handle future functionality, but why remove the 3.5mm jack while we're at it. Yea it takes up space, but that space is completely worth it for the functionality it provides. Otherwise we'd use the space for another usb-c jack to charge and play music at the same time OR we'd need to have adapters and splitters which is probably even worse.

[SSL]

Not this again. I don't want to have to buy a mobile headphone with a built-in DAC and amp. Or worse, an external DAC and amp to run mobile headphones.

[tsk]

Death to the 3.5mm jack. I hope apple axes it in the iPhone 7 to speed up this process. 

[Deli]

Round wheel has been around for way too long. It's time for a change. We need square wheels. Anyone who wants to use round wheels can just buy an adapter. So, what's the problem?

[TetraSky]

I'd rather for Intel to put their priorities into making a smaller Ethernet connector, while still using the same old cables so you can make patch cables with them with new tools, instead of going after the audio jack.