I am surprised it got updated without redesign because AirPod Max was perhaps one of the worst Apple product in recent history. Big, Bulky, Heavy and not comfortable.
Surprisingly people say consumer will blindly follow Apple but instead you see far more Sony XM series headphone around.
> Studio-quality audio recording may not be available in all regions, and availability may vary due to local laws and regulations.
Wonder what this is about. Higher power radio transmission? I know most BT mic used to happen with AMR-WB on HFP1.6... newer BT LE ones use mSBC which is better... What codec/transport-protocol do Airpods use?
Two questions not answered by their press release:
1. Will it have sleep detection like all other H2 based Airpods?
2. Did they make any changes to the goofy sleep case, where the only turn off the Airpods max is their weird case?
These are the two things that I'm looking for in an upgrade to my current Max's.
It doesn’t look like it. The AirPods Max “bra” case used to feel like it was the bane of my existence when I would always return to my dead AirPods outside the case, after I hurriedly took the headphones off.
But now, thanks to makerworld and 3D printers, I have a stand with integrated neodymium magnets for home that puts them to sleep on my desk and nightstand.
I’m equally surprised I had to print something Apple doesn’t sell and Apple hasn’t improved the design for what feels like a decade (other than USB-C and lossless and now old H2)
The original Airpods Max (and presumably these) had a 'case' that only covered the earmuffs and not the band. Some people called it a 'diaper' due to its appearance. By default, at least the earlier firmware revisions (don't know if this got changed), the headphones would stay on unless they were put into their case and it would kill the battery.
> "For the highest-quality audio across music, movies, and games, the new AirPods Max support 24-bit, 48 kHz lossless audio when connected with the included USB-C cable."
I feel like this should have been 24-bit at 192 kHz.
I'm wondering why they couldn't do that, especially since Apple Music supports it and they're talking about a wired connection.
Although they write:
> "with the included USB-C cable".
Does that mean a third-party cable could handle more, or is there some other limitation?
The wording seems a bit odd, no?
>I feel like this should have been 24-bit at 192 kHz.
As if anybody is going to notice the difference? Even the 24-bit vs 16-bit difference is gratious (it makes sense during recording and mixing, when listening it's just a check-mark item).
It costs extra money to properly support it, so why would they? For a listening device it shouldn't matter one bit. As an output (i.e. their headphone outputs), I could see some marginal benefit for recording... but not as an input to your ears.
Pretty disappointing update. AirPods Pro can do wireless lossless audio streaming with the Vision Pro. Really expected them to add that to these for streaming music from your phone. That would have justified the price for me.
Surprisingly people say consumer will blindly follow Apple but instead you see far more Sony XM series headphone around.
reply