Probably because most of us have no idea what those acronyms stand for.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Now Selling USB-C to 3.5mm Audio Cable
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm still not clear why anyone who would buy AirPodMaxes are concerned about the cost of a cable.
Not sure why you think that. DACs/ADCs are one of the main differentiators among devices like this. Apple has a good track record with its small DACs. It therefore seems more likely than not that Apple has used quality components here.
You are of course free to try and find a 3rd-party DAC/ADC (yes, bidirectional) cable and buy that. But if you don't realise what this cable does, you probably won't need it.
This is a dual-use cable. It allows you to connect your USB-C headphones (like the AirPods Max) to analog audio sources such as your Walkman, iPod, stereo system, airplane, piano, etc.
It also lets you connect your USB-C audio sources, like your Mac or iPhone, to analog devices like home or car stereo, active speakers, etc.
Sadly, I don't think it does. While it can send audio either way, it doesn't look like it can do it simultaneously. The reason being the 3.5mm plug – it's TRS, not TRRS. It lacks the simultaneous audio-in and audio-out contacts.
I stand corrected on thinking any cable could do that.
BUT:
- It's a $40 accessory to do something that many way cheaper competitors have with integrated hardware and don't even need. It's only needed because Apple's overpriced fashion headphones don't have integrated ADC
- It's still cheap to engineer and manufacture, it existed in lightning version and... it's another chip inside the connector? Plus something to recognize what direction is active? Apple sells the DAC adapter for like $8 and it's Apple.
- Apple only gives you bidirectional as an option. Just ADC for Airpods options for an acceptable price would be ok. The only reason why they don't do it is because it'd confuse consumers (and experts: there are examples on the internet of Apple's employees explaining how the normal USB-C adapted should be biderectional while it isn't and I believed them).
- It's likely not that high-quality to justify the price, you can find complaints about the lightning version on the internet.
- Both DAC and ADC ending up on the cable are the consequence of Apple wanting to move the chips on the cable and make them disposable. Kinda-almost-not-really makes sense with iPhones and their tiny boards, makes no sense on the big headphones.
Apple wants $40 to solve a problem that they've created basically. Not great for a very premium device.
The only reason I could come up with is it would allow you to use the 3 "sound profiles" you have access to when using the USB-C input.
I’m pretty sure that’s what I paid for the Lightning version. I’m not sure why USB-C would be any cheaper.
Today the cable arrived very quickly from Apple.
And I've been testing it.
1. From any 3.5mm source to AirPods Max USB-C working flawlessly. (duh) Even tried with my old GameBoy Color and that worked as expected. Also no noticable latency while playing Super Mario Land and other games tested.
2. From USB-C on my iPhone to 3.5mm into third party headphones / speakers / you name it. Working perfectly as well.
3. From USB-C on my Windows PC to 3.5mm also working. Windows sees it as an "USB-C to 3.5mm Audio Cable" (see screenshot)
No audio input though so you can't use it to connect an external audio source to your pc for recording.
All in all, the cable works as advertised and I'm very happy.
USB-C - USB-C audio to AirPods Max is not working yet. But I'm guessing it needs a firmware update to make that work.
Also the USB-C to 3.5mm cable does not work from the USB-C port of the Nintendo Switch. But the Switch doesn't support the latest USB Audio standard.
Do the AirPods Max still need battery or charged power to use with the 3.5mm cord or can they be used as passive analog cans? Its the only reason I haven’t gotten a pair...
They can't be used as passive headphones (they're always processing the audio), and they also can't charge while in use.
wait. so I have to charge the headphones, then connect the cord? Just to listen via the 3.5mm cord?!
Essentially, yes. They're battery-powered headphones, and they weren't designed to work at all without a charge. Think of it like this: they're "high-tech" wireless headphones that offer top-notch ANC, spatial audio, head tracking, auto-switching between multiple wireless devices, and constantly upgraded/tweaked audio processing, that can also be used wired in a pinch (when bluetooth isn't an option), and which can now also be used to mix lossless spatial audio. The one thing they're not are passive headphones meant to be used wired.
But you can have a better sounding pair of wired headphones for much, much less, if that's something you really value (as I do).
Discontinuing the Lightning version is INCREDIBLY consumer hostile
I can't believe Apple has turned into this
I can't believe Apple has turned into this
You can't. They're battery powered. Without that power, they don't work, just like regular Airpods.
For just $13 I got a nice third-party Lightning to USB / 3.5mm audio splitter cable for using my 2nd-gen iPhone SE in my car (a 2007 Toyota Camry LE with such an auxiliary audio jack, along with a USB charger/holder in the power socket). I suspect in a year or two when I finally need to replace said iPhone with a new model, I can get a similar third-party splitter cable with USB-C instead of Lightning for a very similar price.
Just got mine today via UPS. Works as expected, iPhone running on 18.3.2 so the APM did not need the 18.4 FW update to enable the audio capability to 3.5mm via this cable.
Only device i have left with a 3.5 is headphones. I wouldn’t connect my phone to my receiver with a 3.5mm anyway.