Pixel Buds review: OK Google, go back to the earbud drawing board
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
1. Bluetooth headphones usually have shit audio quality, and too little battery life for someone who listens as much as I do.
2. I have yet to use a phone in the last 8+ years that I didn't destroy the 3.5mm jack on over the course of <1 year of running. The same thing is clearly applying to the USB-C adapter on my Pixel 2. It frequently needs to be removed and plugged back in mid-run.
It feels like I don't have any options here. Anyone have any good tips? Particularly for a Pixel 2? Is there maybe a better aftermarket adapter?
I will personally throw this in the "it depends" category. I've had a pair of IEMs which reproduced bass as well as my 3' tall speakers (with dedicated bass, mid, and treble cones).
Sure, my ass wasn't being shaken with the IEMs, but the low level details were there.
It's only around 20-25db of isolation, so unless you really have your music cranked, you can still typically hear vehicles (and can definitely hear horns).
I know a few people who love IEMs for exercising (including running), since they pretty much never fall out unintentionally. You can't even really pull them out by the cord.
If you've got recommendations I'm all ears!
But instead of giving us devices that speak directly to those needs, the market requires us to spend even more on add-on products (rubberized cases, wireless earbuds, etc.) to try and take absurdly over-spec'ed smartphones wrapped in glass and entirely designed around a touch-based UI and make them slighly less inappropriate for what we want to do.
Sigh.
$50, buttons, etc.
I would say if you really need FLAC support, go for one and put Rockbox on there. Otherwise, I'd be interested to know how good the new Sansa Clip models are.
They're a nice MP3 player. The Clip Jam is very cheap. It feels a bit cheap. They dropped the colour screen and the case feels a bit plasticy. There's some weirdness if you use a microSD card (playlists go weird, for example).
I have a slightly broken iPod but the phone+sdcard was cheaper than getting it repaired.
And the audio output is a standard 3.5mm jack.
Interesting. I have a similar issue, but rather than destroying the headphone jack on the phone (iPhone 5s and SE), I've been destroying the 3.5mm connector on the headphone. Since the headphones I used ranged from $80 to $150, I got real sick of broken headphones. My solution was purchase these https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00ZK43S4Q/ in bulk. I get about 3-4 months out of each adapter, when it flakes out, I toss it and install the next one. So far, so good, I've gotten a 15 months out of my latest set of headphones so far.
My "good enough" solution was to buy a sansa clip, install rockbox, and just use that. It's only possible because I don't care about having a huge variety of music to listen to while running, so I can just outright purchase the tracks/albums I want, load them up, and enjoy running with music and basically no extra weight.
I doubt the price of entry is really worth it, but yeah, I hated running with my phone last year and this seems better.
I lost my iPod Shuffle through a boardwalk last month, decided I didn't feel like crawling through a puddle full of discarded needles in 5°C to get it back, and almost regretted the decision when I discovered they are selling used on Amazon for about $170.
The Sansa line at one point had (or still has) the same audio chip as the iPod (Classic), is cheaper, and is super well reviewed. I think people interested in dedicated players have moved onto that.
As for your theory, the iPod Touch doesn’t work with the Apple Watch. No GPS/Cellular/etc makes it mostly useless as a parent device for the non-LTE watches and the LTE watch has better connectivity. https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/177304/can-you-use...
This looks promising on the face of it but is missing a key killer-feature IMO. The reason I still use an iPod for my MP3s is for a specific feature in iTunes that I've not yet found elsewhere, I forget the name they use but I call them dynamic playlists.
Most of my playlists generate themselves based on DateAdded, LastPlayed, LastSkipped, Rating, Tags and other attributes. When I add a song I give it some tags and sync my iPod, and then it will over time and after a few syncs, end up in other playlists based on how often I play it and what rating I give it. It's a feature that I very much enjoy, and feels like a significant step up from manually managing playlists. I wish I had the same for my Movie library.
I've seriously been considering building my own gizmo with a Raspberry pi, an LCD screen and some scripts but that's rather unappealing aesthetically.
Has anyone got an equivalent to dynamic libraries + mp3 players working without iTunes? The crux seems to be that the mp3 player needs to keep a log of what's played and when and needs to support ratings, even if the player itself doesn't update the playlists until it's synced. I'm not even huge on sound quality or big on Apple products, it's just the features I like I can't find elsewhere.
Or perhaps because no one was buying the iPods?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KXYXXK2/
Plugging the headphones straight in will transfer huge amounts of vibration directly to the solder joints on the jack insider the phone while running. Maybe consider an adaptor that brings a right-angled plug out to a socket for your headphones, much like [0]?
[0]: https://www.jaycar.com.au/adaptor-3-5mm-stereo-socket-3-5mm-...
Westone makes a decent Bluetooth cable with MMCX connectors so you can plug it directly into buds themselves, without a separate 3.5mm cable.
* I absolutely love that I can still hear my surroundings. I've been able to bike with them in, but still feel like I can hear my surroundings. I'm not sure if I'd feel safe enough to listen to music my whole commute, but for podcasts, it just feels like I hear everything around and someone is talking next to me. Previously I'd use a speaker mounted to my bike, which I still didn't like to use too much, because I didn't want to annoy people too much.
* They are so comfortable. The first ear buds I can actually wear. I just can't stand the in-ear buds of any sort.
* For what they are and the places I'd use them, they sound rather good. I admittedly just ordered the wireless sennheiser hd-1 (which is on sale right now), so the pixel buds are not really for my high-quality listening needs either way.
* I think they look cool (I have the blue ones) and the strap is a plus for me. I also don't understand all the complaints about the case, the strap, or putting it in the case. It's super easy...
Basically, if you want in-ear buds, then avoid these. But, if you want comfortable buds that are not in-ear that you could safely wear while biking...these are pretty great.
There arn't too many choices for buds that are not in-ear and have good sound quality that I'm aware of. But, it's also not what as many people want.
One problem they have is that low, intense frequencies (most modern pop and electronic music) can actually cause them to bounce on your skull, which is quite uncomfortable.
From what I started reading on the bone-conductive headphones, it'd be no different than having a speaker mounted on your bike in terms of being able to hear around you.
I try to bike with the assumption that nobody sees me and I have to be ready for anything. Same with a motorcycle. Always assume to not be seen and always be aware of your surroundings.
I now bike as if every driver has a mild incentive to hit me if they can so I don't trust turn signals, I run through red lights if it's clear for me, go down one way streets the wrong way to avoid traffic, flip off drivers who tailgate me when they can pass, etc. I'm "that cyclist" but it's what you have to do to survive. Zero accidents or even close calls so far this year.
If/when they wanted to make the transition, they should have made (the next revision of) Bluetooth good enough that users want to use it.
Instead, after being present for years and years on phones, they finally decided to force adoption by dropping the headphone jack.
Why? Well, there are the "thin" and "no room" arguments (oh, and, "waterproofing" -- really more splash-resisting), but those don't seem convincing of themselves.
There's the chance to sell expensive headphones at substantial markup.
And, there's however much behind-the-scenes pressure to transition the delivery channel to entirely digital, where DRM can ensure that content is not copied and, as part of a larger push, that all revenues for listening become recurring revenues in perpetuity. (The thing Microsoft's been trying to accomplish with Windows and Office licensing, for years now.)
With wired things this never worked for me since you could not just tuck them in pocket. They had to be stored somewhere.