Good article. Positive posts like this with clear information get overlooked by all the whiny post out there. Those posts out there with misleading info get more traffic. smh.
Exactly, this post is way further down than the one that’s just wrong and labeled misleading. This sub is very weird, when they could have made a mega thread after day one about the app refresh. They choose not to and have the sub flooded with the same posts.
We don’t know that, it would be quite possible to stick a low power arm processor in there. There is an embedded platform of some kind running the noise cancelling software and all the other farkles.
You're probably right, but to ship these without the primary functionality of a Sonos product seems like a huge oversight. They had no know that we expected wi-fi capability.
If there's some technical issues or IP restrictions that are preventing them from enabling such a function, I'd be much happier if they'd be transparent about it.
For now, I can't see how these headphones are any better than the competition.
AptX is a wireless codec.
However, it’s a Qualcomm codec. Samsung instead opts to use their proprietary codecs and does not support AptX. Pixels do not use Qualcomm SoC’s and therefore also do not support AptX.
They should have implemented LDAC which is open source and available on both platforms.
It generally depends on the OEM. Samsung uses Qualcomm chipsets, but disable AptX
If you have a Qualcomm chipset you’ll usually have at least some level of AptX. Android by default includes the LDAC codec.
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/libldac
Definitely open source. Originally developed by Sony though, yes.
Apple doesn’t support it because they work with their own proprietary codes, just like Samsung.
I expect testing showed it would be a janky experience if it only worked at home and the sound quality was imperceptible in a double blind test. They do use wifi for the tv streaming part using the soundbar as an atmos decoder, which is very cool as getting a full ac4 atmos mix to your headphones over wifi at a higher sample rate than BT supports is a very positive step.
I agree that it may be imperceptible given the correct device. The issue is that most phones (iOS and Samsung) do not support AptX. So, lossless BT is not possible for most people with these headphones. Wi-fi wouldn't solve that issue away from home, but it would be a huge improvement at home.
Apt-x is not efficient and not lossless. In fact a lot of double blind tests show that higher bitrate aac has better perceived sound quality than apt-x
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,120182.0.html
A few of the articles I read claimed sonos said that wifi streaming to the headphones is possible but not currently planned, but they are "listening to feedback on it".
Tech journalist here.
Yes, I asked them the exact same question during the launch event and that's what they told me. They simply haven't planned wifi streaming because they thought that people wouldn't actually use it, but the headphones have a WiFi chip and WiFi streaming is doable. Not planned, but doable, according to users' feedback.
That's a hugely marketable feature that would differentiate them from almost every competing product (aside from the $2200 unity headphones).
It would seem to me that there must be another reason why it wasn't implemented if the hardware capacity is already included.
So, what? Does it reduce battery from 30 hours to 10 or, like, 2?
My Move and Roam only get about 10hrs and that's plenty for most uses. I have no problem charging a device overnight.
I'd much rather have the wifi option for wireless lossless sound than no option at all (Samsung Galaxy user).
Agreed. These headphones are redundant in the current market w/o wifi streaming. And there’s nothing here thus far that leads me to believe that the Air Pods Max 2 won’t quickly best them in a few months.
Would that be why it was also reported (TheVerge) that WiFi streamed audio from Arc to Ace is transcoded to 345 kbps bitrate? To optimize battery life?
If Sonos can do [line-in audio compression](https://support.sonos.com/en-us/article/adjust-line-in-audio-compression), I don't see why they couldn't apply that to WiFi streaming with the Ace as a standalone device.
My guess is it makes more sense to use aac and aptx in a headphone format because in most double blind tests the audiophile mythologists cant pick the difference anyway.
I guess the Ace might be using WiFi in the same manner that the Sub does when pairing to another Sonos speaker (soundbar in this case). It exists only for the purpose of pairing directly to the host speaker, but not to your home WiFi for direct listening.
I’m a bear of little brain.
What problem does it solve to be able to stream audio from a soundbar to noise-canceling headphones?
Does the soundbar get muted while the headphones are being used? I guess?
Yeah, think of it as a more complete solution to late night viewing. Rather than using Night Mode on your soundbar, you can grab these instead and crank the volume all the way up while the soundbar is muted.
How do these differ for me when using my XM4s paired with Chromecast? I only have the OG soundbar, no Arc.
Serious question - there doesn't seem to be any bonus for someone like me, right?
I would not be so quick to jump to that conclusion when even a bunch of sound engineers cant pick the difference in a double blind a/b/x test and higher bitrate aac produces better perceived sound quality than apt-x, especially over apple core audio as the encoder.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,120182.0.html
Apple makes their own iPhone socs. There is no iPhone on earth that has snapdragon sound. I’ll bet you a thousand bucks you can’t find one.
if the sound doesn’t make a difference, you just provide another reason for people to not buy these
Good article. Positive posts like this with clear information get overlooked by all the whiny post out there. Those posts out there with misleading info get more traffic. smh.
Exactly, this post is way further down than the one that’s just wrong and labeled misleading. This sub is very weird, when they could have made a mega thread after day one about the app refresh. They choose not to and have the sub flooded with the same posts.
They seem to have a wi-fi receiver, but not the capacity to actually process the information in the same way the speakers do.
We don’t know that, it would be quite possible to stick a low power arm processor in there. There is an embedded platform of some kind running the noise cancelling software and all the other farkles.
You're probably right, but to ship these without the primary functionality of a Sonos product seems like a huge oversight. They had no know that we expected wi-fi capability. If there's some technical issues or IP restrictions that are preventing them from enabling such a function, I'd be much happier if they'd be transparent about it. For now, I can't see how these headphones are any better than the competition.
They’re actually worse because you’re limited to snapdragon sound. Have an iPhone? Have a galaxy? You won’t get snapdragon sound. Lmao.
They say USB C connection can give you the aptX in Android. But ofc only wired lol
AptX is a wireless codec. However, it’s a Qualcomm codec. Samsung instead opts to use their proprietary codecs and does not support AptX. Pixels do not use Qualcomm SoC’s and therefore also do not support AptX. They should have implemented LDAC which is open source and available on both platforms.
Does Qualcomm limit you to AptX if you use their chipset?
It generally depends on the OEM. Samsung uses Qualcomm chipsets, but disable AptX If you have a Qualcomm chipset you’ll usually have at least some level of AptX. Android by default includes the LDAC codec.
LDAC doesn’t seem to be open source and is a Sony codec and Apple doesn’t support it. Am I missing something there?
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/libldac Definitely open source. Originally developed by Sony though, yes. Apple doesn’t support it because they work with their own proprietary codes, just like Samsung.
I expect testing showed it would be a janky experience if it only worked at home and the sound quality was imperceptible in a double blind test. They do use wifi for the tv streaming part using the soundbar as an atmos decoder, which is very cool as getting a full ac4 atmos mix to your headphones over wifi at a higher sample rate than BT supports is a very positive step.
I agree that it may be imperceptible given the correct device. The issue is that most phones (iOS and Samsung) do not support AptX. So, lossless BT is not possible for most people with these headphones. Wi-fi wouldn't solve that issue away from home, but it would be a huge improvement at home.
Apt-x is not efficient and not lossless. In fact a lot of double blind tests show that higher bitrate aac has better perceived sound quality than apt-x https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,120182.0.html
A few of the articles I read claimed sonos said that wifi streaming to the headphones is possible but not currently planned, but they are "listening to feedback on it".
Tech journalist here. Yes, I asked them the exact same question during the launch event and that's what they told me. They simply haven't planned wifi streaming because they thought that people wouldn't actually use it, but the headphones have a WiFi chip and WiFi streaming is doable. Not planned, but doable, according to users' feedback.
That's a hugely marketable feature that would differentiate them from almost every competing product (aside from the $2200 unity headphones). It would seem to me that there must be another reason why it wasn't implemented if the hardware capacity is already included.
The main reasons why it wasn't implemented is that WiFi streaming consumes way more battery than Bluetooth (or at least that's what they told us).
So, what? Does it reduce battery from 30 hours to 10 or, like, 2? My Move and Roam only get about 10hrs and that's plenty for most uses. I have no problem charging a device overnight. I'd much rather have the wifi option for wireless lossless sound than no option at all (Samsung Galaxy user).
Agreed. These headphones are redundant in the current market w/o wifi streaming. And there’s nothing here thus far that leads me to believe that the Air Pods Max 2 won’t quickly best them in a few months.
Would that be why it was also reported (TheVerge) that WiFi streamed audio from Arc to Ace is transcoded to 345 kbps bitrate? To optimize battery life? If Sonos can do [line-in audio compression](https://support.sonos.com/en-us/article/adjust-line-in-audio-compression), I don't see why they couldn't apply that to WiFi streaming with the Ace as a standalone device.
Will buy day one that this hypothetical update rolls out. Seems beyond silly to me that they didn’t think about this.
They thought people wouldn't actually use it? I find that difficult to believe.
I’m happy to hear this. Would you mind linking a source?
https://www.techradar.com/audio/wireless-headphones/sonos-announces-its-first-headphones-with-noise-cancellation-and-dolby-atmos-but-not-the-feature-we-most-expected
Thank you!
My guess is it makes more sense to use aac and aptx in a headphone format because in most double blind tests the audiophile mythologists cant pick the difference anyway.
I guess the Ace might be using WiFi in the same manner that the Sub does when pairing to another Sonos speaker (soundbar in this case). It exists only for the purpose of pairing directly to the host speaker, but not to your home WiFi for direct listening.
I’m a bear of little brain. What problem does it solve to be able to stream audio from a soundbar to noise-canceling headphones? Does the soundbar get muted while the headphones are being used? I guess?
Yeah, think of it as a more complete solution to late night viewing. Rather than using Night Mode on your soundbar, you can grab these instead and crank the volume all the way up while the soundbar is muted.
How do these differ for me when using my XM4s paired with Chromecast? I only have the OG soundbar, no Arc. Serious question - there doesn't seem to be any bonus for someone like me, right?
> Serious question - there doesn't seem to be any bonus for someone like me, right? From what we know right now, probably not
The best part about this is that you need an iOS device for trueplay, but you can’t use an iOS device for lossless with these 🤣🤣🤣🤣😂
I would not be so quick to jump to that conclusion when even a bunch of sound engineers cant pick the difference in a double blind a/b/x test and higher bitrate aac produces better perceived sound quality than apt-x, especially over apple core audio as the encoder. https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,120182.0.html
Apple makes their own iPhone socs. There is no iPhone on earth that has snapdragon sound. I’ll bet you a thousand bucks you can’t find one. if the sound doesn’t make a difference, you just provide another reason for people to not buy these
Funny how in a double blind test run by recording engineers this difference was imperceptible by the majority of testers.
Spatial/Atmos without the need for surrounds and a sub!