(Pocket-lint) – Amazon updated its Echo Show 8 and Echo Show 5 in 2021, with a couple of new features on both models.
You can read how the new Echo Show 5 and old Echo Show 5 compare in our separate feature, as well as how the Echo Show models all compare in another feature.
Here we are looking at how the second generation Echo Show 8 compares to the old Echo Show 8 though. Read on to find out the differences and help you decide which to buy.
What’s the same?
Design
Speakers
Alexa features
As with the new Echo Show 5, a lot remains the same between the new Echo Show 8 and its predecessor. The two devices have the same design and they both come in Charcoal and Glacier White colour options.
Both measure 200.4 x 135.9 x 99.1mm, they both have a power port and 3.5mm audio output at the back of the fabric-covered speaker base and they both have an 8-inch display. A camera cover switch sits on top of both devices, along with four microphones, volume buttons and a microphone on/off switch.
The two devices also all offer the same features in terms of Alexa and everything that comes with Alexa, such as weather reports, jokes, games, shopping lists and plenty more, whilst music streaming and video streaming is the same across the two models too.
What’s different between the new Echo Show 8 and old Echo Show 8?
There are a couple of differences between the new Echo Show 8 and the old Echo Show 8 though.
Front camera
The new Echo Show 8 has a 13-megapixel front camera that incorporates pan and zoom, tracking you across the room like the Echo Show 10, latest iPad Pro and Facebook Portal offer.
The old Echo Show by comparison has a 1-megapixel front camera and it doesn’t offer the pan and zoom feature.
Processor
The second generation Echo Show features a bump in processor compared to the older model. It has an 8-core processor in the MediaTek 8183, while the older model has a four-core processor in the MediaTek 8163.
Environmentally friendly
The second generation Echo Show 8 is ‘Climate Pledge Friendly’, like the Echo Show 5, featuring 30 per cent post-consumer recycled plastics, 100 per cent post-consumer recycled fabric and 100 per cent recycled die-cast aluminium.
The new Echo Show 8’s packaging is also 99 per cent wood-fibre-based.
Price
squirrel_widget_167746
The second generation Echo Show 8 is available to preorder for £119.99 in the UK. It will be delivered on 9 June.
The first generation Echo Show 8 is a little cheaper at £99.99 in the UK.
Conclusion
The Amazon Echo Show 8 (2021) is a little more expensive than its predecessor, but it comes with a big front camera upgrade, not only in terms of resolution but in terms of the features it offers too, adding pan and zoom.
It also has a more powerful processor under its hood and it’s more environmentally friendly.
Of course, you save a little cash if you buy the older model, and you get many of the same features in terms of Alexa, as well the same audio capabilities, but you’ll miss out on the camera tech and the faster processor.
When Tidal began offering hi-res audio streaming in 2017, becoming only the second streaming service to do so after Qobuz broke that ground the year before, we didn’t expect hi-res streaming to be a two-player game for quite so long.
Now though, not only have their rivals caught up but they are attempting to leapfrog the established players. And this could change the game significantly.
Higher audio quality, lower subscription prices
Apple Music has just embraced hi-res streaming with open arms – and isn’t asking people to pay a penny more for it. Its all-encompassing individual subscription plan is sticking at £10 ($10, AU$12) per month, significantly cheaper than the monthly hi-res tiers from Tidal (£20, $20, AU$24) and Qobuz (£15, $15, AU$25).
In response to Apple, Amazon has now bundled its Music HD hi-res tier, which arrived in 2019, into its standard plans rather than asking a £5 ($5) premium. That means the monthly subscription has dropped from £13 ($13) to £8 ($8) for Prime customers, and from £15 ($15) to £10 ($10) for everyone else.
Meanwhile, Deezer offers CD-quality for £15 ($15, AU$20) per month, and Spotify plans to begin offering CD-quality – no mention of hi-res so far – later this year for a fee expected to be equal to or perhaps even higher than its current £10 ($10, AU$12) per month asking price.
Maybe Apple’s bold move means that Spotify won’t ask a premium price or shun hi-res audio for its imminent Spotify HiFi tier. Realistically, Spotify’s popularity and class-leading usability mean it can probably afford not to match or undercut its rivals and still remain competitive. Even ‘only’ CD quality may be enough to keep its loyal subscribers onboard.
The wider adoption of hi-res audio streaming by big players such as Apple and Amazon has brought better sound quality into the mainstream. The fact you can have unlimited access to it for as little as £8 ($8) per month is great news for those who care for sound quality.
With Apple offering hi-res at no extra charge, and Amazon readjusting its offering accordingly, the streaming service competition has reached a crossroads, with all ways potentially pointing to tier simplicity and affordability.
Do USPs justify premium prices?
So how will the competition justify charging extra – in Tidal’s case, double? Perhaps rivals will now have to reconsider their current monthly fees, and if they don’t, hope that their unique selling points are enough.
Tidal, for example, uses MQA to power its hi-res audio streams. It’s a technology that arrived as a handy enabler for hi-res streaming back when; a method of efficiently packaging and transporting high-resolution (and therefore large) files without lossy compression.
Now that Amazon and Apple have used other methods to do this (Amazon doesn’t disclose specifics, while Apple uses its ALAC format), MQA isn’t quite as fundamental to hi-res streaming as it once seemed. However, as it is now licensed to many hi-fi brands, MQA-powered Tidal Masters tracks can be played through an increasing amount of audio hardware, via app support or Tidal Connect. If you own a compatible device that doesn’t play ball with Amazon Music HD or Apple Music, you may well be swayed to stick with Tidal.
Naturally, device support will play a part in people’s subscription decisions. While desktop and mobile apps are par for the course as far as lossless support is concerned, some services also have their own quirks. For example, Qobuz has recently become the first to bring 24-bit hi-res streaming to Sonos speakers, and its vast hi-res catalogue is also accessible via the widely supported Chromecast (which supports transmission up to 24-bit/96kHz).
Apple Music is only an attractive proposition for owners of Apple devices – and even then, its hi-res implementation isn’t without its frustrations. We wonder whether Apple Music’s hi-res streaming will be supported by AirPlay 2 (or 3!) in the future to open up the device ecosystem, or even by some new Apple-developed Bluetooth codec for inter-Apple device wireless transmission.
You can bet that Spotify HiFi will have almost universal support upon, or soon after, launch, too.
Tidal also has a burgeoning catalogue of immersive 3D tracks, thanks to its support for Dolby Atmos Music and Sony 360 Reality Audio. That said, Amazon Music HD also supports these two formats, Deezer supports the latter, and Apple will have its Dolby Atmos-powered Spatial Audio catalogue. Who knows whether Spotify has any immersive audio plans up its sleeve for its HiFi tier?
Qobuz is the audiophile’s choice for its hi-res catalogue, as well as the fact its most premium tier (Sublime) also includes discounts on hi-res downloads. But it has a comparatively limited catalogue and has long been a more niche option compared to its rivals.
Over to you, Spotify et al
Right now, Apple Music appears to offer the best-value hi-res streaming proposition for iOS users, while Amazon Music HD does that for everyone else, especially Prime members. It’s the service we’d pick right now for mobile and desktop listening.
Spotify could, of course, outdo all of them with an excellent value, hi-res HiFi tier, but even if it doesn’t, the likes of Tidal, Deezer and Qobuz are still being significantly undercut by their competition.
So will the latest moves by the streaming giants be nails in their coffins or a necessary force for change? We very much hope it’s the latter.
MORE:
Our pick of the best music streaming services
The lowdown on Spotify HiFi: quality, price, release date, and latest news
10 of the best hi-res albums on Tidal Masters
Apple Music lossless: which devices will (and won’t) play lossless, Spatial Audio
Spotify is entering the virtual concert business, just as in-person concerts are becoming more of a possibility. The company announced today that people can now buy tickets to five different concert streams, which will air throughout May and June. Initial artists include The Black Keys, Jack Antonoff of Bleachers, and Leon Bridges. The streams all are prerecorded but can only be viewed at a given time through the web browser. The shows aren’t available on demand, and they aren’t accessible through the Spotify app.
Tickets cost $15, and viewers must have a Spotify account to watch the show. (Viewers can set up a free Spotify account during the ticket-buying process if they don’t already have one.) You can check out the FAQ page for more details, but notably, tickets are tied to individual users’ accounts, so they’re non-transferable, and if you end up missing the show, you can’t get a refund. (Spotify says each artist’s recording will air at four different times to account for the world’s various timezones, so buyers have to select their preferred time.)
Spotify previously participated in the concert ecosystem by allowing artists to list shows through its app and link out to ones from specific partners, like Eventbrite. In 2017, the company said it generated more than $40 million in ticket sales through its Fans First program, which gives fans extra perks, like early access to tickets. It also hosted its own in-person events tied to its playlist branding, including Rap Caviar and Viva Latino.
During the pandemic, the company started listing virtual concerts, too. Fifteen dollars for these prerecorded concerts feels a bit steep, especially because it isn’t much different than live sets you can likely find from late-night shows or other specials for free on YouTube or Instagram Live, but it seems like Spotify is trying to find a new revenue stream and way to keep fans engaged during a time when most have been disconnected from the idea of live music. It’s unclear if the company intends to keep up the virtual concert series. For now, these five shows are all the commitment we’ve seen.
The What Hi-Fi? Awards are back once again and we are looking forward to announcing a wealth of winning products – and hosting an in-person event to celebrate!
2021 will be the 39th annual What Hi-Fi? Awards and is set to feature 31 categories and, based on previous years, more than 100 brilliant hi-fi and home cinema products for your delectation.
This year our Best Buy winners will be announced online on Monday 4th October, with the Product of the Year winners for each category revealed at the live event on the evening of Wednesday 3rd November. The special edition of the magazine will go on sale the following day.
We will once again be recognising the very best tech the AV industry has to offer, from DACs to music streamers, projectors to TVs. There will also be a new addition to the What Hi-Fi? Hall of Fame, plus an Innovation of the Year and a high-end Temptation winner.
Our Outstanding Contribution award will recognise an exceptional member of the consumer electronics world, while the Readers’ Award winner will once again be decided by the What Hi-Fi? audience.
Manufacturers can submit new products for consideration right up until the 13th August an you can find out more about the entry process on the dedicated website. Members of the industry can also book tickets for the Awards event.
We will be sharing more details nearer the time but for now we look forward to our test rooms being a hive of activity in the coming months, as we endeavour to sort the best from the rest to help you make that all-important buying decision. Roll on October.
Hot on the heels of Apple announcing Apple Music lossless and Spatial Audio earlier this week, we have a new clue that suggests the previously announced Spotify HiFi lossless tier could be with us soon.
One Reddit user, TheMonarc, has apparently been able to find the Spotify HiFi menu in a song in its iOS app, indicating that Spotify’s long-awaited higher quality offering may launch imminently. So far, the only official word from the green streaming giant is that it’ll arrive sometime this year.
According to the Reddit user, a glitch in the Spotify app for iOS meant that they were able to access the HiFi menu. As first reported by 9to5Mac, the user explains: “I successfully opened the ‘HiFi’ menu by quickly tapping the glitched icon upon app launch.” The tipster shared some screenshots, which feature a small HiFi button in the bottom right of the screen to deploy Spotify HiFi.
Spotify announced in February that it had designs on a CD-quality subscription tier, initially saying the HiFi service would launch later this year as an add-on for Spotify Premium subscribers. However, considering the popular streaming platform has since raised its prices, while arch-rival Apple Music has just announced it’s making lossless – CD quality and 24-bit hi-res – and Spatial Audio listening free to subscribers from June, it’s unclear what Spotify’s current stance on pricing is.
Again, the HiFi icon on Spotify apparently appeared in the lower right corner of the app. Clicking on it led to the advice: “Use wired devices or speakers that are capable of playing lossless audio, 16-bit/44.1kHz quality or higher, to successfully listen to music in HiFi.”
If Spotify HiFi is indeed about to launch, the premium music streaming war will be ready. Amazon just made its HD subscription tier free to all Amazon Music users and Apple Music is not going to charge more for lossless. Tidal, our current favourite service and 2020 Award winner, still charges £20 ($20) per month for its HiFi membership, while Qobuz also asks a significant premium over Amazon and Apple. So, the ball’s in your court, Spotify…
MORE:
Understand why Spotify HiFi is missing something – but will it matter?
And Apple Music’s new service isn’t perfect either… Apple Music lossless: which devices will (and won’t) play lossless and Spatial Audio
Not sure which deserves your subscription fee? See best music streaming services 2021: free streams to hi-res audio
Music streaming service Deezer has revamped its Apple Watch app to let you listen to music without an internet connection, the company has announced. Previously Deezer’s Apple Watch app has only been able to control music playback on a paired iPhone, but now paid subscribers can download songs for offline listening when they’re away from their phones.
Offline listening has previously been available with Apple Music as well as Pandora, but similar functionality is yet to appear in Spotify’s Apple Watch app. Spotify recently added the ability to stream music from Apple Watch without needing a paired iPhone, but the feature still requires a cellular or Wi-Fi connection. Meanwhile, Google just teased that Spotify users will soon be able to download tracks to Wear OS smartwatches, which makes it even more strange that it doesn’t offer a similar feature on Apple’s wearables.
Subscribers can download both Deezer playlists as well as their own personalized playlists for offline listening. Naturally, you’ll need enough storage on your Apple Watch to hold the files for offline listening. The streaming service doesn’t explicitly say which models of Apple Watch support the new feature, noting only that it requires the “latest Apple watch software.” Presumably this is referring to watchOS 7, which is available on Apple Watch devices going back to 2017’s Series 3.
The new Apple Watch feature follows Deezer’s upgraded integration with Apple’s HomePod smart speakers released earlier this month. The new functionality lets users control playback with Siri voice controls, and even make Deezer their default music service. Spotify is yet to offer the same option. Then again, with a fraction of Spotify’s market share, Deezer has to work a lot harder to try and catch up.
Spotify’s product lead for cars and wearables teased an exciting new feature coming to Wear devices during Google’s Developer Keynote on Tuesday: the ability for the streaming services’ 356 million users to download music directly to their watch, and listen to it at times when they don’t want to carry their phone (via XDA Developers). The feature isn’t included in the redesign that was just released, but Spotify says that it’s currently in the works.
The announcement came alongside Google’s reveal that it would be merging Wear OS with Samsung’s Tizen. During Tuesday’s I/O keynote, Google promised that the updated OS would bring faster performance and longer battery life, which are currently still issues for Wear OS watches.
The YouTube Music app is also getting an update, which will similarly add the ability to download music directly to Wear devices, allowing users to listen without a phone nearby.
Google’s smartwatch OS has lagged behind Apple’s in many ways, including offline music listening. The Apple Watch has been able to play songs downloaded through Apple Music when away from a phone for years, and it got to the point where Google decided to release its YouTube Music app for the Apple Watch before its own Wear OS. When Gizmodo put out an article last November on how listen to music phone-free on smartwatches, its Wear OS recommendation was more or less an app that acted as an MP3 player, requiring the transfer of local files that you already own.
Since the shutdown of Google Play Music, Wear OS users haven’t had many options for offline music. But now, Google’s Wear watches could potentially even leapfrog the Apple Watch when it comes to offline Spotify playback — to get your Spotify on an Apple Watch without carrying around your phone, you currently need an active internet connection to stream it to one of Apple’s pricier cellular Apple Watch models, a feature added late last year. Some other watches have had offline Spotify playback in the past, though, like Garmin’s flagship Forerunner sports watches and some Samsung Galaxy wearables.
You can check out the Spotify and YouTube Music app reveals for yourself in Google’s Wear-specific session from I/O. The YouTube Music announcement starts at 2:38, and the Spotify demo starts at 12:50 in the video below.
In yet another sign of the growing alliance between Google and Samsung, today both companies announced that they are essentially combining Wear OS — Google’s operating system — and the Tizen-based software platform that has been foundational to Samsung’s wearables for many years. The resulting platform is currently being referred to simply as “Wear,” though that might not be the final name.
Benefits of the joint effort include significant improvements to battery life, 30 percent faster loading times for apps, and smoother animations. It also simplifies life for developers and will create one central smartwatch OS for the Android platform. Google is also promising a greater selection of apps and watch faces than ever before.
“All device makers will be able to add a customized user experience on top of the platform, and developers will be able to use the Android tools they already know and love to build for one platform and ecosystem,” Google’s Bjorn Kilburn wrote in a blog post.
Wired has more details on what’s to come, including the tidbit that Samsung will stick with its popular rotating bezel on future devices — but it’s finished making Tizen-only smartwatches. There will also be a version of Google Maps that works standalone (meaning without your phone nearby) and a YouTube Music app that supports offline downloads.
Samsung confirmed that its next Galaxy Watch will run on this unified platform. And future Fitbit devices will also run the software. Aside from merging the technologies of both platforms, the new Wear OS will include improvements that make it easier to multitask between wrist apps. And some of Fitbit’s “most popular” fitness tracking features will also be included.
There are new features, but it’s the biggest design update in years
Google is announcing the latest beta for Android 12 today at Google I/O. It has an entirely new design based on a system called “Material You,” featuring big, bubbly buttons, shifting colors, and smoother animations. It is “the biggest design change in Android’s history,” according to Sameer Samat, VP of product management, Android and Google Play.
That might be a bit of hyperbole, especially considering how many design iterations Android has seen over the past decade, but it’s justified. Android 12 exudes confidence in its design, unafraid to make everything much larger and a little more playful. Every big design change can be polarizing, and I expect Android users who prefer information density in their UI may find it a little off-putting. But in just a few days, it has already grown on me.
There are a few other functional features being tossed in beyond what’s already been announced for the developer betas, but they’re fairly minor. The new design is what matters. It looks new, but Android by and large works the same — though, of course, Google can’t help itself and again shuffled around a few system-level features.
I’ve spent a couple of hours demoing all of the new features and the subsequent few days previewing some of the new designs in the beta that’s being released today. Here’s what to expect in Android 12 when it is officially released later this year.
Material You design and better widgets
Android 12 is one implementation of a new design system Google is debuting called Material You. Cue the jokes about UX versus UI versus… You, I suppose. Unlike the first version of Material Design, this new system is meant to mainly be a set of principles for creating interfaces — one that goes well beyond the original paper metaphor. Google says it will be applied across all of its products, from the web to apps to hardware to Android. Though as before, it’s likely going to take a long time for that to happen.
In any case, the point is that the new elements in Android 12 are Google’s specific implementations of those principles on Pixel phones. Which is to say: other phones might implement those principles differently or maybe even not at all. I can tell you what Google’s version of Android 12 is going to look and act like, but only Samsung can tell you what Samsung’s version will do (and, of course, when it will arrive).
The feature Google will be crowing the most about is that when you change your wallpaper, you’ll have the option to automatically change your system colors as well. Android 12 will pull out both dominant and complementary colors from your wallpaper automatically and apply those colors to buttons and sliders and the like. It’s neat, but I’m not personally a fan of changing button colors that much.
The lock screen is also set for some changes: the clock is huge and centered if you have no notifications and slightly smaller but still more prominent if you do. It also picks up an accent color based on the theming system. I especially love the giant clock on the always-on display.
Android’s widget system has developed a well-deserved bad reputation. Many apps don’t bother with them, and many more haven’t updated their widget’s look since they first made one in days of yore. The result is a huge swath of ugly, broken, and inconsistent widgets for the home screen.
Google is hoping to fix all of that with its new widget system. As with everything else in Android 12, the widgets Google has designed for its own apps are big and bubbly, with a playful design that’s not in keeping with how most people might think of Android. One clever feature is that when you move a widget around on your wallpaper, it subtly changes its background color to be closer to the part of the image it’s set upon.
I don’t have especially high hopes that Android developers will rush to adopt this new widget system, so I hope Google has a plan to encourage the most-used apps to get on it. Apple came very late to the home screen widget game on the iPhone, but it’s already surpassed most of the crufty widget abandonware you’ll find from most Android apps.
Bigger buttons and more animation
As you’ve no doubt gathered already from the photos, the most noticeable change in Android 12 is that all of the design elements are big, bubbly, and much more liberal in their use of animation. It certainly makes the entire system more legible and perhaps more accessible, but it also means you’re just going to get fewer buttons and menu items visible on a single screen.
That tradeoff is worth it, I think. Simple things like brightness and volume sliders are just easier to adjust now, for example. As for the animations, so far, I like them. But they definitely involve more visual flourish than before. When you unlock or plug in your phone, waves of shadow and light play across the screen. Apps expand out clearly from their icon’s position, and drawers and other elements slide in and out with fade effects.
More animations mean more resources and potentially more jitter, but Samat says the Android team has optimized how Android displays core elements. The windows and package manager use 22 percent less CPU time, the system server uses 15 percent less of the big (read: more powerful and battery-intensive) core on the processor, and interrupts have been reduced, too.
Android has another reputation: solving for jitter and jank by just throwing ever-more-powerful hardware at the problem: faster chips, higher refresh rate screens, and the like. Hopefully none of that will be necessary to keep these animations smooth on lower-end devices. On my Pixel 5, they’ve been quite good.
One last bit: there’s a new “overscroll” animation — the thing the screen does when you scroll to the end of a page. Now, everything on the screen will sort of stretch a bit when you can’t scroll any further. Maybe an Apple patent expired.
Shuffling system spaces around
It wouldn’t be a new version of Android without Google mucking about with notifications, Google Assistant, or what happens when you press the power button. With Android 12, we’ve hit the trifecta. Luckily, the changes Google has made mostly represent walking back some of the changes it made in Android 11.
The combined Quick Settings / notifications shade remains mostly the same — though the huge buttons mean you’re going to see fewer of them in either collapsed or expanded views. The main difference in notifications is mostly aesthetic. Like everything else, they’re big and bubbly. There’s a big, easy-to-hit down arrow for expanding them, and groups of notifications are put together into one bigger bubble. There’s even a nice little visual flourish when you begin to swipe a notification away: it forms its own roundrect, indicating that it has become a discrete object.
The thing that will please a lot of Android users is that after just a year, Google has bailed on its idea of creating a whole new power button menu with Google Wallet and smart home controls. Instead, both of those things are just buttons inside the quick settings shade, similar to Samsung’s solution.
Holding down the power button now just brings up Google Assistant. Samat says it was a necessary change because Google Assistant is going to begin to offer more contextually aware features based on whatever screen you’re looking at. I say the diagonal swipe-in from the corner to launch Assistant was terrible, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it seriously reduced how much people used it.
I also have to point out that it’s a case of Google adopting gestures already popular on other phones: the iPhone’s button power brings up Siri, and a Galaxy’s button brings up Bixby.
New privacy features for camera, mic, and location
Google is doing a few things with privacy in Android 12, mostly focused on three key sensors it sees as trigger points for people: location, camera, and microphone.
The camera and mic will now flip on a little green dot in the upper-right of the screen, indicating that they’re on. There are also now two optional toggles in Quick Settings for turning them off entirely at a system level.
When an app tries to use one of them, Android will pop up a box asking if you want to turn it back on. If you choose not to, the app thinks it has access to the camera or mic, but all Android gives it is a black nothingness and silence. It’s a mood.
For location, Google is adding another option for what kind of access you can grant an app. Alongside the options to limit access to one time or just when the app is open, there are settings for granting either “approximate” or “precise” locations. Approximate will let the app know your location with less precision, so it theoretically can’t guess your exact address. Google suggests it could be useful for things like weather apps. (Note that any permissions you’ve already granted will be grandfathered in, so you’ll need to dig into settings to switch them to approximate.)
Google is also creating a new “Privacy Dashboard” specifically focused on location, mic, and camera. It presents a pie chart of how many times each has been accessed in the last 24 hours along with a timeline of each time it was used. You can tap in and get to the settings for any app from there.
The Android Private Compute Core
Another new privacy feature is the unfortunately named “Android Private Compute Core.” Unfortunately, because when most people think of a “core,” they assume there’s an actual physical chip involved. Instead, think of the APCC as a sandboxed part of Android 12 for doing AI stuff.
Essentially, a bunch of Android machine learning functions are going to be run inside the APCC. It is walled-off from the rest of the OS, and the functions inside it are specifically not allowed any kind of network access. It literally cannot send or receive data from the cloud, Google says. The only way to communicate with the functions inside it is via specific APIs, which Google emphasizes are “open source” as some kind of talisman of security.
Talisman or no, it’s a good idea. The operations that run inside the APCC include Android’s feature for ambiently identifying playing music. That needs to have the microphone listening on a very regular basis, so it’s the sort of thing you’d want to keep local. The APCC also hands the “smart chips” for auto-reply buttons based on your own language usage.
An easier way to think of it is if there’s an AI function you might think is creepy, Google is running it inside the APCC so its powers are limited. And it’s also a sure sign that Google intends to introduce more AI features into Android in the future.
No news on app tracking — yet
Location, camera, mic, and machine learning are all privacy vectors to lock down, but they’re not the kind of privacy that’s on everybody’s mind right now. The more urgent concern in the last few months is app tracking for ad purposes. Apple has just locked all of that down with its App Tracking Transparency feature. Google itself is still planning on blocking third-party cookies in Chrome and replacing them with anonymizing technology.
What about Android? There have been rumors that Google is considering some kind of system similar to Apple’s, but there won’t be any announcements about it at Google I/O. However, Samat confirmed to me that his team is working on something:
There’s obviously a lot changing in the ecosystem. One thing about Google is it is a platform company. It’s also a company that is deep in the advertising space. So we’re thinking very deeply about how we should evolve the advertising system. You see what we’re doing on Chrome. From our standpoint on Android, we don’t have anything to announce at the moment, but we are taking a position that privacy and advertising don’t need to be directly opposed to each other. That, we don’t believe, is healthy for the overall ecosystem as a company. So we’re thinking about that working with our developer partners and we’ll be sharing more later this year.
A few other features
Google has already announced a bunch of features in earlier developer betas, most of which are under-the-hood kind of features. There are “improved accessibility features for people with impaired vision, scrolling screenshots, conversation widgets that bring your favorite people to the home screen” and the already-announced improved support for third-party app stores. On top of those, there are a few neat little additions to mention today.
First, Android 12 will (finally) have a built-in remote that will work with Android TV systems like the Chromecast with Google TV or Sony TVs. Google is also promising to work with partners to get car unlocking working via NFC and (if a phone supports it) UWB. It will be available on “select Pixel and Samsung Galaxy phones” later this year, and BMW is on board to support it in future vehicles.
For people with Chromebooks, Google is continuing the trend of making them work better with Android phones. Later this year, Chrome OS devices will be able to immediately access new photos in an Android phone’s photo library over Wi-Fi Direct instead of waiting for them to sync up to the Google Photos cloud. Google still doesn’t have anything as good as AirDrop for quickly sending files across multiple kinds of devices, but it’s a good step.
Android already has fast pairing for quickly setting up Bluetooth devices, but it’s not built into the Bluetooth spec. Instead, Google has to work with individual manufacturers to enable it. A new one is coming on board today: Beats, which is owned by Apple. (Huh!) Ford and BMW cars will also support one-tap pairing.
Android Updates
As always, no story about a new version of Android would be complete without pointing out that the only phones guaranteed to get it in a timely manner are Google’s own Pixel phones. However, Google has made some strides in the past few years. Samat says that there has been a year-over-year improvement in the “speed of updates” to the tune of 30 percent.
A few years ago, Google changed the architecture of Android with something called Project Treble. It made the system a little more modular, which, in turn, made it easier for Android manufacturers to apply their custom versions of Android without mucking about in the core of it. That should mean faster updates.
Some companies have improved slightly, including the most important one, Samsung. However, it’s still slow going, especially for older devices. As JR Raphael has pointed out, most companies are not getting updates out in what should be a perfectly reasonable timeframe.
Beyond Treble, there may be some behind-the-scenes pressure happening. More and more companies are committing to providing updates for longer. Google also is working directly with Qualcomm to speed up updates. Since Qualcomm is, for all intents and purposes, the monopoly chip provider for Android phones in the US, that should make a big difference, too.
That’s all heartening, but it’s important to set expectations appropriately. Android will never match iOS in terms of providing timely near-universal updates as soon as a new version of the OS is available. There will always be a gap between the Android release and its availability for non-Pixel phones. That’s just the way the Android ecosystem works.
That’s Android 12. It may not be the biggest feature drop in years, but it is easily the biggest visual overhaul in some time. And Android needed it. Over time and over multiple iterations, lots of corners of the OS were getting a little crufty as new ideas piled on top of each other. Android 12 doesn’t completely wipe the slate clean and start over, but it’s a significant and ambitious attempt to make the whole system feel more coherent and consistent.
The beta that’s available this week won’t get there — the version I’m using lacks the theming features, widgets, and plenty more. Those features should get layered in as we approach the official release later this year. Assuming that Google can get this fresh paint into all of the corners, it will make Google’s version of Android a much more enjoyable thing to use.
Apple Music is being upgraded in a big, big way. From June, the music streaming service will support CD-quality and hi-res lossless audio as well as Dolby Atmos-powered Spatial Audio, offering subscribers much higher quality, immersive playback.
Both lossless and Spatial Audio will be available to Apple Music users at no extra cost. Apple describes these two additions as Apple Music’s “biggest advancement ever in sound quality” – which we’d have to agree with. “Excellent news. Well done, Apple!”, we thought upon hearing the news.
But here comes the (rather large) downside.
Apple’s own headphones don’t support lossless audio. None of them. That means even if you’ve spent £549 ($549, AU$899) on a pair of AirPods Max, you can’t listen to Apple Music in the highest quality. Miffed? We don’t blame you.
That’s not the whole story, though, and not the only Apple device not able to take advantage of the new Apple Music features. Let’s take a look at which devices can benefit from hi-res audio, which don’t, and why…
What is Apple Music Lossless?
Essentially, it’s Apple embracing hi-res audio. Apple’s lossless streams use ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec) to offer more detail and information in a recording.
Apple offers three tiers of higher resolution audio: CD quality (16-bit/44.1kHz), Apple Music Lossless (24-bit/48kHz), and Hi-Res Lossless (up to 24-bit/192kHz). You can choose your quality through the Settings > Music > Audio Quality section of Apple Music.
As of next month, all of Apple Music’s 75-million-strong music catalogue will be available in CD quality or Apple Music Lossless. At launch, 20 million will be accessible in the highest quality Hi-Res Lossless format, with the whole catalogue following “by the end of 2021”.
Apple Music isn’t the first service to offer lossless streaming, of course. Tidal, Qobuz and Amazon Music HD all offer CD-quality and hi-res listening, while Deezer offers the former. The Spotify HiFi lossless tier is due to offer CD-quality streams later in the year too.
What is Spatial Audio?
Another new addition to Apple Music is Spatial Audio, which is an Apple technology designed to provide “multidimensional sound and clarity”; to deliver surround sound and 3D audio via your headphones.
Spatial Audio was initially launched as part of iOS 14 and iPadOS 14, and the newer Spatial Audio with Dolby Atmos feature for Apple Music is coming as part of the iOS 14.6 and iPadOS 14.6 updates that are due in June 2021.
Spatial Audio is a slightly different beast to this new Dolby Atmos-powered Spatial Audio for Apple Music in that it also utilises the sensors in Apple’s own headphones to enable head-tracking. Because the implementation for Apple Music of spatial audio is sound-only, there’s no head-tracking involved.
“Thousands” of Apple Music tracks will be available in Spatial Audio with Dolby Atmos at launch, with more being added regularly.
Which Apple devices work with Apple Music lossless?
The big news is that no model of AirPods will support lossless audio. In the case of the AirPods and AirPods Pro, that’s not exactly surprising, seeing as they’re both completely wireless and Apple only supports the AAC (rather than ALAC) codec over Bluetooth – that’s a step up from MP3, but nowhere near the quality of lossless.
The AirPods Max can be wired to an iPhone, so one might hope that that could be a way to get lossless audio. But actually they only work with analogue audio sources in wired listening mode. Which again means no lossless listening.
Its HomePod range of smart speakers also won’t support lossless – that’s the now discontinued HomePod and still-very-much-current HomePod Mini.
Apple’s iPhones (since the iPhone 7) natively support lossless – but only Apple Music Lossless, and not the highest quality Hi-Res Lossless (which delivers up to 24-bit/192kHz). If you want to listen to Apple Music tracks above 24-bit/48kHz on your iPhone, you’ll need to connect an external DAC and use a wired pair of headphones. Check out our guide for how to listen to hi-res audio on an iPhone.
The same is true of the Apple TV and iPad families, which are listed as supporting Apple Lossless, with no mention of Hi-Res Lossless.
Which Apple devices support Spatial Audio?
Apple devices are much better represented when it comes to Spatial Audio through Apple Music. Some – like the AirPods Pro and Max – already support it, after all. And it will come to the standard AirPods 2 in due course.
In fact, it will be available on all AirPods and Beats headphones with an H1 or W1 chip. (That’s the AirPods, AirPods Pro, AirPods Max, BeatsX, Beats Solo3 Wireless, Beats Studio3, Powerbeats3 Wireless, Beats Flex, Powerbeats Pro, and Beats Solo Pro.) But you don’t have to line Apple’s pockets to hear the Dolby Atmos tracks: it will also work on any headphones connected to an iPhone or iPad. You just have to enable it manually.
To do so, head to Settings on your iPhone or iPad and then to Music – once the update has landed next month, a new Dolby Atmos option will be available. This will be set to Automatic by default, which means Dolby Atmos tracks will play correctly when you’re listening via any W1- or H1-enabled pair of Apple or Beats headphones, but not when you’re using third-party headphones. However, if you switch this option to Always On, even non-Apple headphones will play back Dolby Atmos tracks in all their sonic glory.
However, this only applies to Dolby Atmos Spatial Audio tracks on Apple Music, and not Spatial Audio content from other apps like TV. (Remember, Spatial Audio in the TV app is a slightly different beast in that it also utilises the sensors in Apple’s own headphones to enable head-tracking.)
The HomePod and HomePod Mini also support Spatial Audio, so you can fill your room with virtual 3D sound from a single device. As do the iPhone 11 onwards and iPad Pro (but not iPad, iPad Mini or iPad Air).
Playing from an Apple TV 4K into a Dolby Atmos soundbar or system will work too.
MORE:
Check out the best wireless headphones around
3D sound from a soundbar: Best Dolby Atmos soundbars
Try 30 Apple Music tips, tricks and features
Need new music? 10 Apple Music playlists to listen to right now
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
This is an iMac unlike any other iMac we’ve seen before, and it all comes down to the M1 chip.
Sure, there are some other differences between this 24-inch iMac and the 21.5-inch model from 2019 that it’s replacing. There are better microphones and better speakers. There are fewer ports, and some of them have moved around. The screen is bigger and better. The keyboard now has TouchID. But the M1 is the star of the show.
It’s not just the performance increase. It’s not just the fact that you can run iOS and iPadOS apps natively on the system. It’s not just the new advanced image signal processor, which helps create better low-light images than I’ve ever seen from an integrated webcam. It’s also the groundbreaking efficiency with which this processor runs, which has enabled Apple to create a slim, sleek, and quite unique iMac chassis.
Whether you actually get every upgrade here depends on the configuration you choose. The entry-level iMac is $1,299 for 256GB of SSD storage, two Thunderbolt / USB 4 ports, 8GB of unified memory, and a seven-core GPU — but that’s only available in four colors and doesn’t come with TouchID. The model I tested bumps the storage up to 512GB and the memory up to 16GB. It has two USB-3 ports in addition to the two Thunderbolt, an eight-core GPU, Touch ID, and a gigabit Ethernet port (which is in the power brick). I also received both the Magic Mouse and the Magic Trackpad with my model. You’d need to pay a total of $2,028 to get everything Apple sent me (and which I’ll be sending back, for the record).
In short, this device costs money. And it’s true that you’d get similar performance and save a few hundred bucks, if you just plugged a Mac Mini into an external display. But this iMac has almost everything that most people need in one package: processing power, sure, but also a camera, speakers, microphones, a keyboard, a mouse, a trackpad, and a display. And they’re all good. This is a computer you can plonk on your desk and never think about again. And for some of the iMac’s target audience, that’s probably worth the extra money. You’re paying for simplicity.
The M1 processor uses what’s called a “hybrid” configuration. The easiest way to conceive of this is that most competing Intel and AMD chips have a number of equally “okay” cores, where Apple’s M1 has four very fast cores and four lower-powered high-efficiency cores. This allows M1 devices to deliver arguably the best performance-per-watt in the world. It also means that they’re nearly unbeatable in single-core workloads.
That advantage bore out in our benchmark testing. This iMac model achieved a higher score on the Geekbench 5 single-core benchmark than any Mac we’ve ever seen before — even the iMac Pro. That means if you’re looking for a device for simpler everyday tasks that don’t scale to every available CPU core (and that largely seems to be the demographic that Apple is trying to sell this machine to), there has literally never been a better iMac for you to buy.
You can see the rest of our benchmarks below:
Apple iMac 24 (2021) benchmarks
Benchmark
Score
Benchmark
Score
PugetBench for Premiere Pro
372
Cinebench R23 Multi
7782
Cinebench R23 Single
1505
Geekbench Multi
7668
Geekbench Single
1739
Geekbench OpenCL
19114
These results help illuminate where this iMac fits into Apple’s all-in-one lineup, and where its limitations are. The 24-incher is a significant improvement over the 21.5-inch iMac in both single-core and multi-core workloads. And it’s very comparable in graphics tasks — which is quite impressive, given that the 21.5-inch iMac has a discrete GPU and this one relies on what’s integrated with the M1.
On the other end, these results (with the exception of single-core performance) are not close to what we’d expect from the 27-inch Intel iMac with discrete graphics. In this comparison, multi-core results are more important. They indicate that the 27-inch iMac is going to do much better on the types of tasks that owners (or prospective buyers) are likely to be doing: intense multitasking, computations, design, video work, and other more complex loads that may leverage the GPU.
There are other limitations that may put some workloads out of reach. As is the case with the MacBook Pro and Mac Mini, you can’t configure the iMac with more than 16GB of memory and 2TB of storage; we wouldn’t recommend those specs to anyone who regularly edits 4K or 8K video, for example. The memory and storage are soldered, so you can’t upgrade them after purchase. Only one external display is supported (up to 6K resolution at 60Hz). Ports are also bizarrely limited; the base model has just two Thunderbolt / USB-4 ports and a headphone jack, while more expensive models have an additional two USB-3 ports and Gigabit Ethernet. These all may be reasons Apple is pushing this iMac as a “home and family” PC, even though its processor is clearly capable of all kinds of professional work.
Another way to interpret these numbers is that I was getting effectively the same performance out of this machine as we got from the M1 MacBook Pro and the Mac Mini. That’s completely unsurprising, since these devices all use the same processor. But it’s a good proxy for gauging whether the iMac can handle your work: if you expect you could get a task done with the M1 MacBook Pro, you should be able to do it on this.
More anecdotally, I was able to use my test unit for all kinds of daily tasks, from emailing to YouTube to amateur photo and video work. I was able to hop between over 25 Chrome tabs with Cinebench looping in the background, with no stutter or slowdown whatsoever. If you’re buying the iMac for this kind of thing, I can’t imagine you’ll see too many spinning wheels.
During this testing process, I also got a sense of just how well cooled this chassis is. On thinner laptops that I test often (including the fanless MacBook Air), you’ll see performance decrease if you run heavy tasks over and over again. None of that on this iMac: I looped Cinebench R23 as well as a Premiere Pro 4K video export several times over and never saw scores go down. It took a lot to get the fans going — they were checked out during my daily office multitasking. When they did spin up, mostly while I was working in Premiere, I could barely hear them. They were quieter than the background hum of my refrigerator. That’s quite a quality-of-life improvement over prior Intel iMacs.
The M1’s advantage, after all, has never been raw power; it’s the combination of power and efficiency. We saw much better battery life in the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro than we did in their Intel predecessors. Battery life obviously isn’t a concern with the iMac, but efficiency certainly is. Chips are limited by two things: the power available and how well their systems can keep them cool. They vent almost all the energy they use as heat, and because the M1 has such incredibly high performance per watt, Apple doesn’t need a heavy-duty cooling system to keep it from frying itself. Because it doesn’t need that heavy-duty cooling system, Apple has finally been able to redesign the iMac from the ground up.
This iMac is sleek. Even though it has a 24-inch screen, it’s close in size to its 21.5-inch predecessor. Apple reduced the screen’s borders by close to 50 percent in order to squeeze the bigger screen into the compact chassis. This device is also 11.5 millimeters thick, or just under half an inch — which is quite thin as all-in-ones go. Next to the 27-inch iMac, it looks like a tablet on a stand.
Size isn’t everything; this iMac also comes in seven colors. There’s blue, green, pink, orange, purple, yellow, and the boring silver we know and love. I’m not quite convinced that the jazzier models will fit in outside of especially stylish homes and offices. But I will say: I’ve never seen so many of my friends, or so many people on TikTok, as excited about a tech product as they seem to be about the colored iMacs. The hues are a nice change, aren’t obnoxious, and are clearly a hit with certain crowds.
Some traditional iMac touches remain, of course. The bezels are still substantial compared to those of some modern monitors. You can’t raise or lower the display height — the built-in stand only allows tilt adjustments. (You can also buy it with a built-in VESA mount adapter.) And there’s still that pesky chin, though it’s no longer emblazoned with the Apple logo.
Pretty much every other notable part of the iMac has been upgraded in some way. There’s a 4.5K (4480 x 2520) Retina display, a step up from the predecessor’s 4096 x 2304 Retina display (though both have effectively the same pixel density). It has Apple’s True Tone technology, which automatically adjusts colors and intensity based on your surroundings.
But the screen is also another reminder that this iMac doesn’t have “Pro” in its name. Twenty-four inches is on the small side as screens go; most of the best external monitors are 27 inches or larger these days. Professionals on The Verge’s video team also noticed some vignetting on the sides of the screen, which caused issues with off-angle viewing — we had a similar issue with Apple’s Pro Display XDR. Of course, neither of these limitations were a problem for my untrained eye; I thought the display looked great, with sharp details and plenty of room for my Chrome tabs and apps.
Elsewhere, Apple has upgraded the camera, microphones, and speakers. The company claims that they’re the best camera, mic system, and speaker system that have ever appeared in a Mac. I’d believe it. The six-speaker sound system is easily on par with a good external speaker. I played some music in my kitchen, and it was audible all over the house. Percussion and bass were strong, and I felt very immersed in the songs. It also supports spatial audio when playing video with Dolby Atmos.
I don’t have too much to say about the three-mic array except that nobody on my Zoom calls had any trouble hearing me. But the webcam was a very pleasant surprise. The iMac has a 1080p FaceTime HD camera, which has a higher resolution than the 720p shooter that lives in the 21.5-inch iMac (as well as the MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and many other AIOs). The M1 also lends a hand here: its built-in image signal processor and neural engines help optimize your picture in low-light settings.
I wouldn’t say I looked amazing on my Zoom calls — parts of my background were sometimes washed out, and the image looked processed in some dimmer areas. But I was visible and clear, which is better than you get from most webcams these days. And the difference between this webcam and the grainy mess the MacBook Pro has is night and day.
When I review a computer, my task is usually to figure out for whom that computer is made.
But all kinds of people use iMacs, from college students to accountants to podcast producers to retired grandparents. And this model has arguably the most widespread consumer appeal of any iMac that Apple has made in recent years. So it’s much easier to figure out for whom this iMac isn’t made.
It’s not for people who can’t handle dongles and docks; I kept a USB-C to USB-A dongle next to me on my desk while I was testing the iMac, and I used it very frequently. It’s not for people who already own a 27-inch iMac, because it would be a downgrade in display size and quality, port selection, upgradability, and raw power. And it’s not for people with serious performance needs.
It’s not for people who are looking for the very best value for their money. Most folks won’t need the specs and accessories that I tested here, but even $1,299, the base price, is certainly more than plenty of people want to spend on a computer. The base Mac Mini is $600 cheaper than the base iMac; plug that into a monitor and some speakers (you can find plenty of good ones for well under $600), and you’ll get the same M1 performance at a massive discount.
And that, right there, is the biggest reason that this iMac, despite its power, is primarily targeting the family market. Because it’s asking you to pay more in order to do less. You’re paying $600 not to have to research and budget out monitors, speakers, webcams, docks, keyboards, and mice. You’re paying not to have to arrange thousands of things on your desk. You’re paying for a device where everything, out of the box, works well. You’re paying to eliminate fuss.
Tech enthusiasts (especially those who want to pop their machines open and make their own upgrades) may see that as a waste of money. And for them, it probably is. But they’re not the target audience for this Mac — even if its specs might suit their needs.
Could Apple have done more with this iMac? Of course. I was hoping to see a 30-inch, 6K iMac with a powerhouse 12-core workstation chip this month as much as the next person. But I have faith that we’ll get one in the future — and in the meantime, I’m glad Apple released this. It’s not earth-shattering in its design; it doesn’t redefine its category. But it’s fun. It improves upon the 21.5-inch iMac to offer a simple, attractive, and very functional device for users across all kinds of categories. It’s not the iMac to beat — but it is the iMac for most people to buy.
Amazon is launching new lens options today for its Echo Frames smart audio glasses: two types of polarized sunglass lenses for use outside, and blue light-filtering lenses for staring at bright screens. The blue light and blue mirror sunglass options will ship on May 18th, and the “Classic” dark sunglass lenses will arrive later on June 9th. All three varieties will be available in the black version of the Echo Frames for $269.99.
Echo Frames are far simpler in comparison to other smart glasses, like Google Glass. Essentially, they’re a glasses frame with Amazon’s Alexa assistant built-in, along with some microphones and downward firing speakers. In our review of the Frames, we found Alexa’s abilities to be pretty limited (especially on the iPhone) because the assistant defaults to Amazon’s services. Frames are much more compelling as a straightforward audio device, which is where these new lens options seem to come in.
Take the sunglasses variety. Echo Frames might not make sense as a smart assistant you interact with all day, but for a bike ride or hike, it could be very helpful to have your sunglasses pull double duty as headphones for music or podcasts.
You could use the same kind of logic for the blue light-filtering lenses. Say you’re going heads down on a long project and you know you’re going to look at screens for an extended period of time. Having a way to listen to music or take calls while still keeping your ears free could be handy. (Keep in mind blue light might not be as damaging or eye-straining as some headlines suggest.)
The limit on either of these use cases is the battery life of the Echo Frames. When we originally reviewed the Frames we weren’t able to make it through a full day, despite Amazon’s more open-ended battery life claim of 14 hours of “mixed use.” For an afternoon outdoors, it seems like the sunglasses should last, but using blue light glasses inside, listening to music all day, you might have to keep a closer eye on the Frames’ battery.
(Pocket-lint) – Amazon updated its Echo Show 5 and Echo Show 8 in 2021 with a couple of new features.
There aren’t huge differences between the new Echo Show 5 and the older Echo Show 5, but if you’re wondering which to buy, you’ve come to the right place. If you’re looking at whether to buy the Echo Show 5, Show 8 or Show 10, then head to our separate feature. We also have a full Echo devices comparison feature.
Keep reading here if you want to know how the new Echo Show 5 (2021) differs from the old Echo Show 5 (2019) though.
What’s the same?
Design and controls
Features
Speaker hardware
To be honest, almost everything remains the same between the new Echo Show 5 and the old Echo Show 5. Both devices measure 148 x 86 x 73mm and weigh 410g. They also both have a 5.5-inch touchscreen and they both come with the same design and controls.
There’s a camera cover switch at the top of both devices, along with a microhone on/off button and volume buttons. On the rear of the fabric-covered speaker base, there’s a power port, while the top of the display has a front-facing camera within the bezel of the top right corner. Both have the same speaker setup too.
All the features are the same across the second generation Echo Show 5 and first generation Echo Show 5 too, including built in Alexa and everything that comes with Alexa, like smart home control, news and weather reports, games and Alexa calling. Both also have the ability to stream music from various services, or stream your favourite TV shows from the likes of Prime Video and Netflix.
What is Alexa and what can Amazon Echo do?
What’s different between the 2nd gen Echo Show 5 and first gen?
Despite looking identical and offering the same features, there are a couple of differences between the first generation Echo Show 5 and the second generation. Here’s what is different.
Front camera
Though the front camera positioning is the same across the new Echo Show 5 and the old Echo Show 5, the new model has a 2-megapixel camera, while the older model has a 1-megapixel sensor with 720p video recording.
Energy efficiency
The new Echo Show 5 is ‘Climate Pledge Friendly’. It is made from 30 per cent post-consumer recycled plastics, 100 per cent post-consumer recycled fabric and 100 per cent recycled die-cast aluminium. Additionally, 99 per cent of its packaging is made of wood-fibre-based materials.
Colours
The new Echo Show 5 is available in Charcoal, Glacier White and Deep Sea Blue colours, while the old Echo Show 5 only comes in Charcoal and Glacier White.
Price
squirrel_widget_148875
The new Echo Show 5 is available to pre-order for £74.99 in the UK. It will be available from 9 June 2021.
The old Echo Show 5 cost the same at launch, but it is now available for £64.99 in the UK.
Conclusion
The second generation Echo Show 5 is identical in design to the first generation model, but it offers a more sustainable build, new colour and a higher resolution front camera.
The new model is more expensive than its predecessor though, and it offers the same processor and features so the older model is still just as capable.
If you want to do your bit for the environment, really like the blue colour option or you want a high resolution front camera for video calls, the 2021 Echo Show is the one you want. If none of those are super important to you, you might find the old Echo Show 5 at a great price and you don’t miss out on much.
Good news: Apple Music is adding lossless audio. And not only is it significantly upping the audio quality, offering high-resolution audio right up to 24-bit/192kHz, but it is also doing so at no extra cost to subscribers. Over to you, Tidal, Qobuz et al.
However, it’s not all plain sailing for those of us wanting to benefit from the very best possible sound quality using Apple products. Neither the iPhone 12, AirPods Max, AirPods Pro or either of the HomePods will play Apple Music’s ‘Hi-Res Lossless’ offering (which Apple defines as above 24-bit/48kHz, up to 24-bit/192kHz).
Apple makes that (relatively) clear itself, saying, “Due to the large file sizes and bandwidth needed for Lossless and Hi-Res Lossless Audio, subscribers will need to opt in to the experience. Hi-Res Lossless also requires external equipment, such as a USB digital-to-analog converter (DAC).”
While Apple plays its cards close to its chest over certain specs, the iPhone’s output maxes out at 24-bit/48kHz, which is fine for Apple Music ‘Lossless’ but not good enough for ‘Hi-Res Lossless’.
The AirPods Max, AirPods and HomePods, meanwhile, use the AAC Bluetooth codec, which doesn’t support the Apple Lossless Audio Codec (ALAC) that Apple Music uses for its lossless audio streams (since confirmed by Apple to T3).
AirPods Max owners might reasonably hope that their headphones could be wired to an iPhone to unlock Apple Music lossless, but this doesn’t appear to be the case either. Apple told The Verge: “When you play a 24-bit/48 kHz Apple Music lossless track from an iPhone into the AirPods Max using both the cable and Lightning dongle, the audio is converted to analog and then re-digitized to 48kHz. That re-digitization step is the reason that Apple can’t say you’re hearing pure lossless audio; it’s not an identical match to the source.”
So, what’s the solution? If you connect a compatible external DAC to your iPhone and use a wired pair of headphones, you should be able to listen to Apple Music lossless audio. Check out our guide for how to listen to hi-res audio on an iPhone. You will also be able to listen on a Mac this way.
Of course, the other big Apple Music update, spatial audio via Dolby Atmos, is much more widely available across Apple products. By default, Apple Music will automatically play Dolby Atmos tracks on all AirPods and Beats headphones with an H1 or W1 chip, as well as the built-in speakers in the latest versions of iPhone, iPad, and Mac. In fact, Apple Music Dolby Atmos will work with all headphones.
One thing’s for sure, Apple lossless audio sounds like a good excuse for Apple to upgrade its next generation of audio hardware. Might the AirPods 3 be lossless audio compatible? That would require Apple to come up with a hi-res-supporting Bluetooth codec. Or could we get an upgraded version of the AirPods Max? Is there a new HomePod HiFi in the works? We shall see.
Apple spatial audio: what is it? How do you get it?
Astell & Kern’s digital expertise comes good in this entertaining USB-C cable DAC
For
Notable improvement to audio
Clean, precise character
Nicely made
Against
No iOS device compatibility
No MQA support
For a relatively simple product, Astell & Kern’s first portable DAC has a rather convoluted moniker. ‘Astell & Kern AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable’ isn’t something you’d want to say out loud (or type) often but, to the company’s credit, it sums up the product perfectly: it’s a USB-C cable with two DACs inside.
Thankfully, the name doesn’t attempt to further explain its purpose, so let us fill in the gaps.
Features
Portable DACs – compact DACs that don’t rely on mains power – have arrived in force in recent years with the mission of conveniently improving the sound quality between your phone or computer and wired headphones. That’s because the digital-to-analogue converters and analogue output stages of these do-all devices are generally pretty poor.
Though wireless headphones connected to a device may be the portable audio preference of many nowadays, a wired set-up generally still offers the best performance-per-pound value, particularly if you want to play hi-res audio.
Astell & Kern AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable tech specs
Input USB-C
Output 3.5mm
Hi-res audio PCM 32-bit/384kHz, DSD256
Weight 27g
While there are a number of traditional box or USB stick portable DACs in existence, the AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable is one of an increasingly common group of DACs designed to enhance on-the-go or desktop sound quality in cable form. This Astell & Kern, like the Zorloo Ztella and THX Onyx, is essentially an extension of your headphones cable; the discreet middleman between them and your source device.
At one end is a 3.5mm output, and at the other is a USB-C connection for plugging into any device with that output, such as an Android phone, Windows 10 PC, tablet or MacOS computer. For the bulk of our testing, we use it with a Samsung Galaxy S21 and Apple MacBook Pro.
Some portable DACs, such as the multi-Award-winning Audioquest DragonFly Red, have a USB-A connection instead, but now that USB-C is becoming more prevalent it makes sense for a portable DAC like this one to adopt it. You can always buy a USB-C-to-USB-A adapter to cater for devices with such ports.
Portable DACs can often be used with Apple’s camera adapter to make them compatible with iPhones and iPads, but Astell & Kern says that isn’t the case here “due to the dual DAC incompatibility and power restrictions of iOS devices”. So iPhone users will have to look elsewhere.
The dual DACs (specifically, two Cirrus Logic CS43198 MasterHIFi chips) support native high-resolution audio playback of PCM files up to 32-bit/384kHz and DSD256. However, due to the AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable’s lack of MQA file support, Tidal HiFi subscribers won’t be able to benefit from the (MQA-encoded) hi-res Tidal Masters that are part of the tier’s offering. It’s also worth noting that the DAC has been built for sound output only, so it won’t work with headphones with an in-line remote.
A portable cable DAC is new territory for Astell & Kern – the company is most renowned for its portable music players but also makes headphones and desktop audio systems. But digital-to-analogue conversion technology is something the company is well versed in. And that shows.
For the AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable, Astell & Kern says it developed a circuit chip on a six-layer PCB just 14 x 41mm in size, featuring bespoke capacitors found in its music players, and optimised to prevent power fluctuations. The analogue amplifier (with a 2Vrms output level), meanwhile, is designed to drive even power-hungry and high-impedance headphones.
Sound
We use a range of headphones, from high-end Grados to more modest Beyerdynamic on-ears and Sennheiser Momentum earbuds – and the Astell & Kern doesn’t struggle to power any of them. However, we would be wary of your playback device’s volume output level when you first connect the DAC and plug in your headphones (especially if you’re using more than one pair) to avoid getting an unexpected earful. It’s something Astell & Kern advises in the manual, too.
Adding the AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable between these headphones and our source devices (which provide power to the DAC) makes the world of difference. As the likes of the Zorloo Ztella and Audioquest DragonFly Black have shown, even a modest outlay can make a significant improvement to your portable sound.
The Samsung Galaxy S21 is by no means the worst-sounding smartphone out there, and yet the Astell & Kern makes music come through our wired headphones much clearer, cleaner and punchier than with just a standard USB-C-to-3.5mm dongle. This little DAC doesn’t just do the basics by amplifying the sound and beefing up its tone, it also goes the extra mile to open up music and let you in on more of its detail.
Considering the increasing competition in the portable DAC market, you could say it’s a necessary mile. One of our favourite portable DACs, the Audioquest DragonFly Red, proves to be a notably more insightful and rhythmically entertaining performer – but then it is significantly pricier at £169 ($200, AU$280). For this modest amount of money, the AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable is a very attractive proposition indeed.
We play Lesley by Dave ft Ruelle and the rapper’s poignant storytelling is all the more compelling for the boost in clarity and vocal insight delivered by the DAC. The melodious synth chords, which twinkle with clarity against the contrasting backdrop, are planted with precision on either side.
It’s a similar story as we plug the Astell & Kern into our MacBook Pro and settle into Big Thief’s Shoulder, the presentation pleasantly opened up and generously populated with definition aplenty around Adrianne Lenker’s pleading vocal delivery and the warm textures of the band’s hallmark folksy guitar licks.
Build
So, it sounds good. But what’s it like to live with? After all, this is an everyday device that’s likely to sit in your pocket or on your desktop during the 9 to 5. Perhaps most crucially for a device of this nature, the AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable is compact, lightweight (27g) and well made – to the extent that we feel comfortable tossing it in a bag or shoving it down trouser pockets before long.
The twisted cable between the USB-C output and main body – made up of Technora aramid fibre at its core, wrapped by copper layers and finished with shielding treatment – makes it easy to manipulate the device into a jeans pocket when connected to a phone, and feels built to last. It also helps absorb the shock of accidental knocks, unlike USB stick designs.
While we would expect a device like this to last years, in the weeks we spend in its company we feel confident of its durability. Even when we accidentally yank the device out of our playback source with the cable a number of times, it proves hardy enough to withstand it.
While made to fit nicely into a pocket, some consideration has also clearly been taken to make the AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable look nice when it’s not hidden away – when it’s on a desktop, for example.
The metal casing at the end of the cable – comparable with one of the more compact USB sticks in our collection – has a polished finish and angled surface that resonate with the aesthetic of the company’s premium music players. Design niceties on products like these are only ever going to be the small touches, but they’re here at least.
Verdict
Before Astell & Kern announced its AK USB-C Dual DAC Cable, it wouldn’t have been a stretch to imagine the company making such a product. It has been in the portable digital audio game for years and enjoyed much success.
That know-how has been put to good use in offering USB-C device owners an affordable, practical way to soup up their smartphone or desktop sound through wired headphones. It’s such an appealing option that we can almost forgive the unwieldy name.
SCORES
Sound 5
Features 4
Build 5
MORE:
Read our guide to the best portable DACs
Read our Audioquest DragonFly Red review
Read our Audioquest DragonFly Black review
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.