iPhone 7 rumors heating up - No 3.5 headphone port?

Not one, not two, but three major Apple devices are currently the subject of some very compelling and frankly surprising rumors. We'll go from smallest to largest, physically.

--

iPhone 6c

• The name is under debate, iPhone 6sc vs iPhone 7 (strange options here, maybe a new name all together like iPhone 6s Mini will be necessary and in line with Apple's branding)
• 4" screen, a sweet spot for many individuals
• To feature an A9 SoC as seen in the current iPhone 6s lineup
• No 3d Touch (would be a shame if true)
• To feature same resolution as iPhone 5/5s/5c
• March announcement, April release date

iPhone 7

• To feature A10 SoC
• 4.7" screen
• 2gb RAM
• No 3.5 headphone jack (!!)
• To ship with headphones that have a Lightning connector instead of 3.5mm, OR
• To ship with headphones w/3.5 plug AND 3.5 to Lightning adaptor, OR
• To ship with both Lightning headphones and 3.5 to lightning adaptor
• Headphones may be Beats branded
• To be as thin or thinner than current iPod Touch
• September announcement, October release date

iPhone 7+

• To feature enhanced A10 SoC clocked noticeably higher than on 4.7" iPhone 7
• 3gb RAM
• To offer 256gb storage option
• 3100 battery (up from the current ~2600)
• No 3.5 headphone jack (!!)
• To ship with headphones that have a Lightning connector instead of 3.5mm, OR
• To ship with headphones w/3.5 plug AND 3.5 to Lightning adaptor, OR
• To ship with both Lightning headphones and 3.5 to lightning adaptor
• Headphones may be Beats branded
• To be as thin or thinner than current iPod Touch
• September announcement, October release date

--

My direct thoughts:

• Good riddance to the 3.5mm headphone jack. Between bluetooth headphones and the ability to transport higher-quality audio via Lightning, let's push the envelope. The validity of this is bolstered by a couple things, most notably a higher battery capacity for iPhone 7+ (and presumably iPhone 7) and rumors of Apple's intent to deliver high-rez audio streaming in 2016.
• Bigger batteries, bring that on, too. Nobody can say nay to better battery life, particularly if it means no compromise on the size and weight of the device.
• The rumored iPhone 7+ enhancements are compelling to say the least. An extra gig of RAM, higher clocks, a significantly bigger battery, and a higher storage space option all make it seem like Apple may be prepping for something more.

What do you think? I imagine this device will continue to solidify Apple's dominance in the mobile space, particularly from a technological standpoint. If rumors of the 7+ are even remotely true, you can be certain I'll be a 5.5" phone owner if not this year, than certainly when the 7s+ drops in 2017.

Analog>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Digital, I need my cord as blue tooth devices drain battery more!

"Transport higher quality audio" what's the point if you're streaming online from Spotify or Apple Music?

This song sounds better analog than streaming or any digital format! Apple is going to lose even more Sound enthusiast more than before

@MonsieurX: To make sure that was explained, I included a link about Apple delivering higher quality streaming via Apple Music. Check it above for your answer.

And somewhere in the article

The physical, analog headphone jack is limited to delivering roughly CD-quality sound.

At the very beginning of the linked article -

Apple Music is planning to launch new its Hi-Res music streaming—with higher audio quality than can be delivered through standard earphone jacks—over the next year, according to a report by Japanese site Macotakara.

The lightning connector on an iPhone is more able to deliver high-quality sound than the standard 3.5 headphone jack.

Apple's iPhone is poised to be able to deliver the highest quality audio on the market. Unless there's something else out there I'm not yet aware of.

EDIT: If Apple does actually kill the headphone jack, it'll be their greatest technological assassination to date. They've usually been at the forefront of the death of old tech (the original iMac is a great example, featuring ONLY USB ports and NO FLOPPY DRIVE). I say bring it on.

No? Why are you still using Apple Insider as a source? Talk about lost in translation.

Lightning is a digital output.

3.5 mm is an analog output.

When a manufacturer uses Lightning, they have to build an amplifier and a DAC into their headphones. Audeze, for example, built a DAC, audio processor and an amplifier into the wire of their lightning connector. Using Lightning just moves those components outside of the phone and passes the costs onto the headphone's manufacturer, and most likely the consumer.

In the case of the iPhone, which doesn't exactly have the best of those components, a manufacturer might be able to offer higher performance by using better components to convert to analog, process and amplify. Power for these components would still have to come from the iPhone or an external battery.

Maybe I don't fully understand your point.

This isn't about computer hardware, this is about sound and Analog will always beat Digital in every way!

The source and its claim are nonsense. Every signal starts as digital and has to be converted to analog.

Source (Lightning output) --> Digital to Analog Converter --> Amplifier (3.5 mm output) --> Headphones

These are two points on the same path! The digital output gives someone else (not Apple) the choice of DAC/amp, that will decide the performance. At this point the iPhone can be considered a transport for digital music.

Based on your earlier comments, you've displayed a lack of understanding of the topic and placed your faith in a click-bait author.

So another source breaks it down a little more:

The so-called Hi-Res Audio format will enable audio streaming in up to 96kHz/24bit resolution, reads the report. By comparison, audio quality on regular music CDs is 44kHz 16-bit. Apple Music features adaptive streaming technology which automatically adjusts audio quality based on each particular user’s Internet connection, and whether they’re streaming over Wi-Fi or cellular.

This is all false? There could be literally no improvement in audio quality (or the ability to offer higher quality audio) by utilizing the Lightning port instead of a 3.5 mm headphone jack?

The first thing I said to you is that I may not fully understand... I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. I'm kind of sad you decided to go so nasty with your reply... Seems a little over the top.

Increased audio quality of the stream is not related to the use of a Lightning port. It's best to view the entire process from start to end (as outlined in my previous post). This level of quality is also nothing new. For example, the internal audio hub (DAC and amp combination) of the LG G2 could output 192 kHz / 24-bit. That's just one example, many phones can do this.

My disappointment comes from the fact that you continue to source a website and a particular author that has a tendency for manipulating, and in some cases, fabricating the truth to best fit his narrative. You really need to stop buying into their 'fluff', find another source for your Apple news, or at least take their articles with a grain of salt. I would also add, the Macotakara webpage sourced by Apple Insider does not mention anything with regards to the 3.5 mm output, that was something added by the Apple Insider author. I'd much rather see posts with more bite and less bark.

Keeping with the topic, the use of Lightning as the output is the same as using USB (or other digital outputs). If the DAC and amp are pushed to other manufacturers (as they are used externally), there is definitely room for an improvement in audio performance, of course this will likely come at a cost as the consumer has to pay for that additional hardware. It should also be noted that USB and Lightning ports are not nearly as sturdy as a 3.5 mm port. In the case of the OPPO R5 (a phone too thin for a 3.5 mm jack), OPPO provided a micro USB to 3.5 mm adapter that contained a DAC/amp inside of the wire:

Okay, so hold on.

True or False - The Lightning port on the iPhone could be used to pass higher quality audio to headphones than a 3.5 mm headphone jack.

False, they're both part of the same flow. The signal has to be converted from analog to digital somewhere down the line. The lightning port is used prior to the DAC and amplifier, where as the 3.5 mm is used once the signal has been converted to analog.

I guess I'm just a little skeptical. Has this article from Ars also missed the point?

According to the report, there will be two different kinds of Lightning headphones. "Standard" headphones will simply use a digital-to-analog converter, while "Advanced" headphones will add a digital signal processor and "digital audio processing features like active noise cancellation." Use of the Lightning port for headphones will apparently be enabled in an update to iOS 7.1.

If Apple is planning on dropping the 3.5mm jack, they must be prepared to explain their reasoning and offer significant advantages.

More rumors about headphones and the iPhone 7. It may not even come with wired headphones. That's compelling. I think they'll be something sold separately, but we'll find eventually.

That Ars quote is talking about something different. An external DSP (digital signal processor) is just additional hardware for manipulating the digital signal before it's passed to the DAC. An audio solution inside of a smartphone already contains a DSP.

Here's one way to look at it, everything inside of the brackets is inside of the iPhone (only key components mentioned):

[DSP --> DAC --> Amplifier --> 3.5 mm --]--> headphones

[DSP --> Lightning --]--> DAC --> Amplifier --> headphones

By removing the 3.5 mm plug, all Apple is doing is taking the DAC and amplifier out of their phone. The hardware is still needed to listen to sound on your headphones.

Did that clear things up?

Yes, that's helpful, thank you. I have no problem admitting that the inner-workings of these sorts of things aren't something I'd ever claim to fully understand. I do want to quote you for one more item:

If the DAC and amp are pushed to other manufacturers (as they are used externally), there is definitely room for an improvement in audio performance, of course this will likely come at a cost as the consumer has to pay for that additional hardware

This quote makes it sound as though the Lightning port paired with a DAC and amp from another manufacturer, used externally, would allow for improved audio performance. True or false? And can those items be fitted into headphones?

True, but it has to be looked at in context. For example, if quality components are used, there will be an improvement in audio quality when compared to the current internal DAC and amplifier found in an iPhone. If low end components are used, it will be worse.

These components can be integrated into the cable or headphone chassis.

Going back to the earlier example of Audeze, the Cypher cable for the Audeze EL-8 ($799) includes a DSP/DAC/AMP in the cable:

Stand alone devices containing these components can come in all sorts of forms:

@NVIDIATI: Alright, so when I posed the question:

True or False - The Lightning port on the iPhone could be used to pass higher quality audio to headphones than a 3.5 mm headphone jack.

The answer really was True. You just decided to determine a context without making that clear.

What I'm trying to decide now is whether you were being intentionally disingenuous, or if our misunderstanding is purely rooted in our point of view on technology.

My perspective is focused on the end-user experience, not the technicality of a particular question. To say a Lightning port can't be used to pass higher quality audio, and to say a Lightning port can be used to pass higher quality audio, are both technically true. We're just choosing whether or not to acknowledge the existence of the third party equipment you've provided information for here and if the components are of high quality.

I'm also wondering what Apple has planned for the future in regards to all of this because they own Beats. Apple purchased the most popular brand in headphones, so they're going to do something with them. We'll see.

UPDATE ON NEW IPHONE RUMORS

New details from the supply line outline the smaller, iPhone 6e

• 4" Screen
• A8 processor (which, frankly, makes a lot more sense)
• 1gb RAM (like the iPhone 5, 5s, 5c, 6/+)
• Apple Pay (which means TouchID)
• Slightly thinner and lighter
• Rose Gold and other colors
• 16/64gb storage options
• Feb/March announcement/launch time frame

That all makes a lot more sense to me. This is the iPhone for folks who want to save a few bucks but still enjoy the conveniences of an iPhone (Apple Pay, Apple's ecosystem, plenty of speed, Touch ID, etc). This is essentially what we all wanted the 5c to be.

No, the answer there is NOT true. The quality has nothing do to with the 3.5 mm jack, that's what you don't seem to understand. It only has to do with the hardware. The 3.5 mm jack and Lightning are just connectors (one digital, one analog) in their respective parts of the same flow.

When you start quoting an article with false statements such as these:

"The physical, analog headphone jack is limited to delivering roughly CD-quality sound."

"with higher audio quality than can be delivered through standard earphone jacks"

I'm going to quickly call you out.

If you haven't noticed, most of these external devices have a 3.5 mm output for your headphones.

[DSP --> Lightning --]--> [DAC --> Amplifier --> 3.5 mm] --> headphones

Again, the signal has to be converted to analog somewhere down the line.

I see, and you're right, I did not fully understand that end of it. So the 3.5 mm jack has no bearing on the quality of the sound and that jack itself isn't limiting anything? Just for final clarification.

Exactly.

Well that's fairly simple. Misunderstanding it was.

I am fairly confident saying that utilizing Lightning would allow for some other interesting advantages, like allowing the phone to power the headphone (noise cancelling, etc).

And moving past port-gate, I can also say that if Apple does release an iPhone 6e as is described above, I think it'll be a hit with folks who still yearn for that 4" size.

The disadvantages to Lightning and USB come in the form of usability. Neither port is as robust or as stable as the 3.5mm port. As well, if the headphone cable twists, the 3.5 mm port will allow for free rotation to relieve stress on the cable. This is not the case for USB or Lightning. The use of this port also keeps someone from charging the device while headphones are plugged in.

It prevents them from charging without the presence of an adapter, yes. I do understand how this might inconvenience a lot of people. Truth be told, I haven't used the headphone jack on my iPhone in a long, long time. Bluetooth speakers and headphones are my standard these days. I won't miss it.

That potential $500 starting price (as mentioned in your link) seems a little high given the specifications., I think Apple would be able to price it closer to $300. The described device is essentially the current iPod Touch with a fingerprint scanner, NFC and a wireless modem. The current iPod Touch is only $199 for the 16 GB model, and it's been on the market for a number of months now.

@NVIDIATI: I understand your point of view on the price, and I almost addressed it to be ahead of the game in the thread. I had a paragraph written out that I deleted before submitting the post.

I don't know how I feel about a low-price iPhone. Apple isn't in the business of market share and they clearly understand the value of profit margins. I would rather see then preserve those margins and continue delivering the quality of device we've seen so far than focus on growing the lower end of the spectrum. Not because I want to preserve status or something nonsensical like that, but because I want Apple to stay as focused as possible in their bread and butter zone.

I'm also not too bothered by the A8, even if the ideal scenario is three similarly spec'd phones at 4, 4.7, and 5.5 inches. We'll see how it turns out.

Even at $300, I'm sure the margin would be quite high. It really depends on who Apple wants to compete with, and which part of the market they hope to capture.

Looking at the low end market, build quality seems to be a new focus. Take for example Xiaomi's Redmi 3 (~$105):

Despite its low price, it comes with an all metal unibody, a mid-range Snapdragon 616 SoC with 4G LTE, 2 GB RAM, a 13 MP camera and a gigantic 4,100 mAh battery. These are specifications only seen in upper mid-range devices a year ago.

I agree about using the A8. Many smartphone SoC's have comfortably passed the performance threshold for the majority of users. Even on newer flagships, you'd be hard pressed to find many apps or games that can utilize all of their performance.

@musicalmac:

Well I finally decided on, and received the Oneplus X. In my decision process I came across the opportunity R series. A few of them did not have an headphone jack, and it was a deal breaker for me. I don't understand the consumer in the entire mobile arena, here. For the price of these high end phones the features should stress audio playback far more. For $700 Apple should include a decent DAC--the audio output on most of the big devices seems to be getting worse over time.

It is nice to see a company like zte stress the added audio capabilities of the axon pro, in their advertising.

My $250 OneplusX has better audio output than the $800 iPhone 6s+. That is sad and speaks volumes of the consumer.

@Heirren: What do you mean "...speaks volumes of the consumer."?

@musicalmac:

It means that people base their decisions more upon the camera, screen resolution, stylish build, and gimmicks like a finger print scanner. Audio has taken a back seat, unfortunately.

Well I can say plainly that TouchID is no gimmick, it's one of my favorite things on my iPhone 6. Passwords are annoying, a half second of my finger on the home button is not.

I'd be more concerned about the aging 801 inside the OnePlus X than I would the audio quality.

@musicalmac:

I was going to put an asterix next to the touch I'd. It does have its uses.

Processors are another issue. The market moves so fast that software is sloppily written as there is no need to support devices that long. You can diss a mid range phone all you want, but it will still do the essentials. And how is bringing up the processor in conjunction with the audio even relevent? Heck I'd prefer a good audio player with decent phone funtion over the current situation of the play/ITunes store....both are atrocious for the most part.

Lastly, Oneplus X cost a 1/3 of the price of high end phones. I could buy 3 phones on 1.5 yearstine and it'd be a more fair comparison.

...you were the one who brought up other features in conjunction with the audio, like the camera, screen resolution, etc, I just offered another perspective on the same line of thought...

We all have our priorities, and that's okay. I'm not quite as cynical as you, I don't think.

Given that my current headphones relies on the 3.5mm port, I really do hope Apple includes it. Or an adapter. I'm not switching headphones anytime soon, one of them going strong for 7 years now.

@NVIDIATI: I have to ask you one thing. Not sure if I understand this right. The 3.5mm audio jack, is it bandwidth limited(or should I say that the standard specify it) so it can't transfer a signal requiring more than a 44kHz 16-bit signal does?

Since using the lightning ports can do away with the 3.5 audio jack, would it not be possible for a company to make their own solution for translating said digital signal into an analog one? And thus create an analog signal that can handle more than a 44kHz 16bit signal...?

You may have answered it already, at least parts of it I think in your conversation with musicalmat, I haven't read all of it yet.

@musicalmac:

In relation to the thread, though. No audio jack? It's because nobody really cares. Like I said, at the price points these phones hit, actual value should hit the consumer end in some way.

If Apple ships headphones that are either wireless or use the lightning port, I won't care too much. I don't think the removal of a headphone jack means removing value for the consumer.

@musicalmac:

Lightning port would be a positive sign. Easier for an external amp/dac, likely.

Short answer, no.

Long answer, read through the thread and let me know if you have any additional questions.

Fingerprint scanner a gimmick? Just like how touch screens for phones were a gimmick too, Heirren?

I guess it's a gimmick because Google can't figure out how to effectively force all the manufacturers to include a fingerprint scanner as a standard. The tones of jealousy in you is real.

- iPhone 7 needs Bluetooth headphones

+ what is Bluetooth headphones !!?