SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
PC World has an article on why USB-C has not been a viable alternative for the 3.5mm audio jack. Problems with USB-C include variable handling of digital to audio conversion, incompatible SOCs inside the cable, and non-standard analog-passthrough. In short, the cables which contain computers themselves are not standardized in behavior and the author's conclusion is that mobile devices must have 3.5mm jacks until the USB-C cable technology gets sorted out enough that they become usable.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Bring Back the Headphone Jack: Why USB-C Audio Still Doesn't Work
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 65 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Q: Do you know what the death rate around here is?
A: One per person.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Wednesday September 12 2018, @10:33AM (9 children)
USB-C is a bad choice (except M2M), at best it comes out as just a change of ports.
But since I'm having a cold and slow day..
The replacement I'd want to see is a short-range (a couple of millimeters) inductive (active host, passive guest) device that simply pushes the analouge signal.
The advantages I would see with this would be that it would allow you to have a dustproof and waterproof unit, the "jack" would simply be a "apply reader here" (be it a slotted device, slight indentation, a suction cup, a magnetic connector, welcro, duct tape...) and it would be a simple analouge device that basically converts magnetic induction to electricity.
For orientation I'd say that the best thing would be to make the "guest" connector, and split it into six cells, of which one is a very weak magnet (at specified strength), and the rest of the cells are numbered in a simple [linear or clockwise] fashion (e.g: magnet, left, right, mic, control, reserved)
This would allow for both a round connector (divide it into twelve sections, adjust what does what depending on the magnet), a straight connector, and a rectangle, whiel allowing you to introduce different power by having different sizes (diameters, width [data is length]).
I'd implement "control" by reading the resistance/power drop over the coil for "control" (it will vary if the control open/closes to a drain/sink, and I'd probably also have this set at four levels (open+3)).
The drawback I would see is cost (cents), requirement of the manufacturer to keep their EM in check, and that you'd lose the 3.5mm jack.
Soo. what "shoot from the hip"-ideas do you people have?
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday September 12 2018, @02:11PM (6 children)
The problem I see with magnetic induction is cross-talk - how do you prevent the stereo-left transmitted signal from bleeding in to the stereo-right received signal, when both transceiver pairs are operating in extreme close proximity? Maybe you could pull it off with an inch or two of separation - but then you're talking about a credit-card sized "plug" on your headphones, which I doubt would go over well.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Wednesday September 12 2018, @05:48PM (5 children)
I'm basically picturing that the sender-blocks being half the size of receiver-blocks as well (hence 12:6), as long as the receiver block is larger than the distance sender-receiver it should also be reduced somewhat by only sending from whatever sender-block covers dead center of receiver blocks. Also a bit of shielding between the blocks (ie, between sender-blocks, as well as between receiver blocks) could probably reduce it a bit. To reduce even further add more sender blocks and try to cause more directionality. The goal being to aim for as short range as possbile (basically putting enough current through 3-4mm at most)
This is really not my field (as stated - I'm having a cold and shooting from the hip), and have no idea how to do the math for range (it is about 1v@20mA per channel iirc for normal earbuds. So let's say about 2v@40mA as a design target).
Pointing out crosstalk made me realise my order was weird, a better order would be magnet, left, reserved, mic, control, right. (to alternate the paths with more expected signal).
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday September 12 2018, @07:35PM (4 children)
Certainly you can do various things to reduce cross-talk, but if you're delivering enough power to drive a headphone speaker, you're going to be delivering a notable amount of power to any other receiver in close proximity as well, including the other channels.
A much easier (and cheaper) route would be to just use a magnetic connector to deliver direct physical contact, and make sure your contact pads are well bonded to the insulating substrate so that water can't get in. After all, you don't really care if the contacts get wet, you just need to make sure the water doesn't penetrate your device.
Or, if you *really* want to go contactless, use a single induction pad to deliver power, modulated to deliver a digital signal as well, and then decode the signal into multi-channel audio fed through a DAC to get your analog speaker-driving signal.
Basically, once you go analog crosstalk becomes an issue - and it's made far worse through wireless broadcasting. You can still achieve any desired level of isolation, but the cost of doing so increases rapidly.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 13 2018, @02:19AM (3 children)
I got a degree in electrical engineering.
You don't know what you are talking about.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Immerman on Thursday September 13 2018, @02:57AM (2 children)
So do I. Care to elaborate?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 13 2018, @05:46PM (1 child)
This forum is not the place for a very technical back and forth.
I will just say that I suspect you do not work in the audio industry as a design engineer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 13 2018, @05:52PM
Hey Immerman,
I got your response mixed up with the guy you were responding to because your posts were long and you paraphrased the guy you were responding to a lot in your reply.
I apologize.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday September 12 2018, @02:25PM
I like that idea with one change -- don't make it connect with a "slight" indentation; make it a LARGE indentation. Large enough to fit a 3.5mm jack. Large enough to conceal or at least hang on to the adapter that most people are going to be using anyway. Then just include that adapter with the phone itself as a removable module.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 12 2018, @05:11PM
Until we get that inductive port as an industry standard, I think USB-C is pretty good.
Both ends of the cable are identical. So just grab and end and plug it into charger or device.
And you can plug cable into device in either orientation.
That's a nice improvement.
If we sing a slaying song tonight, what tools will be used for the slaying?