[HN Gopher] CT scans of AirPods evolution
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       CT scans of AirPods evolution
        
       Author : vitruvius
       Score  : 283 points
       Date   : 2021-12-06 21:02 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (scanofthemonth.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (scanofthemonth.com)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | snazz wrote:
       | Super cool scans and captions! I wonder if there were any
       | substantial internal changes between the first and second
       | generation AirPods (besides changing the chip). The article
       | unfortunately does not include a scan of the 2nd generation.
        
       | baybal2 wrote:
       | My former coworker worked on airpods. Most of RnD for them was
       | made in Apple's Shenzhen RnD centre which existence Apple for
       | long time tried to hide.
        
         | fnord77 wrote:
         | the first airpods were released in Dec 2016, roughly the same
         | time apple opened the Shenzhen r&d center, so I don't see how
         | r&d for this product was done there.
        
       | veb wrote:
       | This was SUPER interesting to see! I actually (for once) signed
       | up for their next newsletter/scan. It asked me what they should
       | scan next and I suggested cochlear implant processors. It'd be
       | pretty cool to see!
       | 
       | The tech on those processors are pretty insane - and remember,
       | Apple did partner up with Cochlear for the Nucleus 7 I believe
       | for wireless streaming from the processor to an iPhone.
        
       | t-writescode wrote:
       | I wonder if this explains / clarifies some of the difficulty in
       | getting repair tech for the earbuds. They seem to change in major
       | ways each time.
        
         | walrus01 wrote:
         | even if you could get repair parts they're assembled with
         | strong glue (search youtube for airpod teardown), making it
         | pretty much impossible to disassemble without destroying it.
        
       | ProfessorLayton wrote:
       | Not an audio expert, but I really wonder why they need a
       | microphone for their adaptive EQ. I understand home
       | speakers/theatre systems need to compensate for a room's shape
       | and contents, but do human ear canals vary that much to need a
       | mic?
       | 
       | I think it's pretty neat how sophisticated this adaptive EQ
       | system is, but tbh, I haven't noticed much difference between
       | this mic system and the "dumb" adaptive EQ that companies like
       | bose/ikea etc do (Basically turn up base at low volumes, down at
       | high volume to not clip).
       | 
       | Very cool stuff!
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | _do human ear canals vary that much to need a mic?_
         | 
         | Based on the number of online complaints that AirPods slip out
         | of people's ears, and the equal number of people saying they're
         | rock solid, even while working out, I think the answer is
         | "yes."
        
           | ericbarrett wrote:
           | I've tried all three gens of AirPods and none will stay in my
           | right ear. Same is true of the old wired earbuds. Everybody's
           | a little bit different--sometimes on the same human!
        
         | twobitshifter wrote:
         | I worked on a product that used an in ear microphone to adjust
         | the model used in noise cancellation on the fly. In a control
         | theory sense, the system varies a lot so your poles can move
         | around and need a different controller, even on the same head
         | depending on fit. The product produced white noise to tune the
         | model which greatly improved the noise cancellation accuracy.
         | 
         | It's also not just the ear canals but the rest of your skull
         | that effects how you hear. There are apps that use machine
         | learning to fit a model/eq to the shape of your head from a
         | photo. I would think that actually measuring in the ear would
         | give a more accurate representation of this.
        
         | MrBuddyCasino wrote:
         | > do human ear canals vary that much to need a mic?
         | 
         | Surprisingly, they do! It doesn't need a lot of change to have
         | a different ear canal resonance, changing the frequency curve
         | somewhere between 5000-7000Hz. Oluv is currently tuning Earfun
         | IEMs to different earl canal lengths which you can then try
         | out, and he has written some articles [0] on exactly this
         | topic, but unfortunately its paywalled:
         | https://www.patreon.com/oluvsgadgets/
         | 
         | [0] https://www.patreon.com/posts/trust-your-ear-58601998
        
         | aidenn0 wrote:
         | Low frequencies are heavily affected by both how well the canal
         | is sealed, and the volume of air that is in the (partially)
         | sealed area. The adaptive EQ does seem slightly over-
         | engineered; given that people tend to be forgiving of a fairly
         | large amount of bass emphasis, you can just tune for the worst-
         | case. However people don't generally buy Apple products to get
         | something _under_ engineered...
        
         | snthd wrote:
         | Might be more important for noise cancellation.
        
         | whiddershins wrote:
         | Ears do vary quite a bit. If you try in ears molded to your
         | ears they can be mind blowing.
         | 
         | In some cases a microphone will also help adapt to background
         | noise.
        
         | shard wrote:
         | > do human ear canals vary that much to need a mic?
         | 
         | Not an expert in human ear canals, but over the years I've
         | learned that if I am looking into a field that I am not
         | familiar with, it's always more complicated than I
         | expected/imagined.
         | 
         | > "dumb" adaptive EQ that companies like bose/ikea etc do
         | (Basically turn up base at low volumes, down at high volume to
         | not clip)
         | 
         | Sounds like a compander for the lower frequencies. That's
         | technically "adaptive" to the input audio, but not adaptive to
         | the acoustics of the output environment. I expect that to for
         | the second type of adaption, you'd need to measure it, which
         | would necessitate some sort of input, such s a mic.
        
         | skavi wrote:
         | Bose definitely also uses a mic for their adaptive EQ. I
         | wouldn't be surprised if Ikea did as well. IIRC they use Sonos
         | tech.
        
         | lpasselin wrote:
         | Maybe slight variations of position in the ear can be
         | compensated?
        
       | roody15 wrote:
       | But somehow they cannot figure out how to make a replaceable
       | battery. hmm
        
         | spicybright wrote:
         | This is the weirdest product to complain about this for. For
         | something so small, replaceable battery hardware would double
         | the size of the thing from the battery connectors alone.
        
         | guidedlight wrote:
         | PodSwap seem to have worked it out.
         | 
         | https://www.thepodswap.com/
        
           | ncann wrote:
           | I'm curious how they did it. Is there a video out there on
           | how that's possible?
        
           | spicybright wrote:
           | How? This seems only for people with good batteries that want
           | to upgrade. There's no new pods with good batteries being
           | added if it's just swapping.
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | They can, it's just that the trade-off isn't worth appeasing a
         | few HN readers.
         | 
         | >The reason earbud companies use non-replaceable rechargeable
         | batteries is simple: It makes the earbuds smaller. Earbud
         | buyers generally prefer more compact devices, but that means
         | the earbuds have less room inside for all the necessary
         | components. Designers need to cram a Bluetooth chip and
         | processor, an antenna, a battery, drivers, controls, and
         | microphones into something that's often the size of a thimble.
         | Replaceable battery compartments require more earbud real
         | estate, and in a competitive field where tiny is currently
         | king, companies don't want to risk their earbuds being flops by
         | making them bigger.
         | 
         | https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/your-wireless-earbud...
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | The reason is simpler than that. Battery will inevitably wear
           | out, and it is a very deliberate planned obsolescence move.
        
             | filoleg wrote:
             | I don't know about that. I still have my original AirPods,
             | and they had no noticeable battery loss, and it's been over
             | 3 years by now. They might have lost some battery if I
             | tried to measure it empirically, but I have no way of
             | knowing without measuring it explicitly, as I cannot really
             | catch a battery loss of less than 5-10% with normal use
             | over the course of 3+ years. But I use them all the time
             | interchangeably with Airpods Pro, and both deliver on
             | battery so far. Airpods Pro have already hit the 2-year
             | mark for me as well, no issues either.
             | 
             | I had to replace one of the OG airpods because I lost it
             | (around 2 years ago), but replacing a single airpod was
             | only like $50.
        
               | newaccount74 wrote:
               | I got the original Airpods and after less than two years
               | the battery lasted like 15 minutes in one of the pods.
               | They are a disposable product.
        
               | filoleg wrote:
               | Are you claiming that this is a common experience? You
               | sure you didn't dunk yours into water or something?
               | 
               | Because out of all people I know irl who had airpods for
               | 2+ years, no one has reported any noticeable battery
               | loss, let alone something as extreme as "only lasts 15
               | mins". I would be livid if mine lasted anywhere even
               | close to that, but so far I am solidly in the advertised
               | battery life range, even after 3 years of use.
               | 
               | Also, just fyi, it seems like your unit might have been
               | defective, in which case Apple offers free
               | replacement[0]. If you have AppleCare+ and your battery
               | lasts less than 80% of advertised range, it is also free
               | replacement (even if it wasn't a defective unit). And
               | just the regular replacement regardless of warranty or
               | anything like that is $49.
               | 
               | 0.
               | https://support.apple.com/airpods/repair/service#battery
        
               | gnicholas wrote:
               | Interesting! After 2 years, I'm down to 1 hour of battery
               | life in my second generation AirPods. Fortunately I use
               | one at a time, so I just swap back and forth between them
               | when one dies.
               | 
               | My bigger issue is that my AirPods no longer give a
               | warning when they're getting low on battery. The first
               | time the sound chimes marks 3 seconds until it's about to
               | die. I'm left scrambling to get my other one out as my
               | phone reverts to handset audio (in my pocket).
        
           | tinus_hn wrote:
           | Also, good enough is good enough. If the battery lasts about
           | 2 years people want the next model anyway.
        
             | newaccount74 wrote:
             | I'm not sure I would have bought AirPods if I knew ahead of
             | time that the battery would die in less than two years and
             | replacing them costs as much as getting new Airpods.
        
               | tinus_hn wrote:
               | You weren't aware the batteries were not replaceable?
        
           | snthd wrote:
           | Another reason for the trend (in phones too) is better water
           | resistance.
        
           | moooo99 wrote:
           | I think it is fairly impressive that Apple managed turn
           | 200EUR earbuds into disposable tech where users accept that
           | they have to switch every two years or so. Before the arrival
           | of the first generation AirPods, most people wearing AirPods
           | today would probably have never even considered spending
           | 200EUR on a pair of earbuds/headphones, let alone do that
           | regularly.
           | 
           | But I have to admit, my AirPods Pro are incredibly convenient
        
             | bspammer wrote:
             | They're easily on the list of things I would replace
             | immediately if I lost them, without even a second thought.
             | The price is nothing for the amount of use I get out of
             | them.
        
       | rootusrootus wrote:
       | I'm curious how the newest airpods compare to the pros when it
       | comes to bass. I had first gen airpods, then I bought a set of
       | pros, but the bass was so weak I thought they had to be broken.
       | Turns out it's just an artifact of how they were designed. Some
       | people are okay, but a _lot_ of people feel the same way I do. I
       | ended up returning them and now I 'd like to know if the g3
       | airpods are comparable to the pros, or comparable to the g1/g2
       | airpods.
        
         | hvgk wrote:
         | I've tried all of them so far. The standard gen 2 AirPods are
         | the best by far. The new 3rd gen ones won't stay in my ears.
         | Pros are uncomfortable and lack bass. 2nd gen are perfect.
         | 
         | I listen to everything from classical to metal to hard dance.
        
         | trevyn wrote:
         | If you like bass, the new Beats Fit Pros are fantastic. They're
         | basically AirPod Pros with a different physical design and
         | bass-heavy EQ. I find they keep a seal much better than the
         | AirPod Pros as well.
        
         | alexfringes wrote:
         | I've used all gens and recently tried G3 for the first time. I
         | instantly noticed that the bass was significantly better than
         | the Pros. It's been a while since I've listened to G1/G2 but
         | from memory I would easily place G3 above all of them in terms
         | of bass. It wasn't enough to persuade me to get some because I
         | love the noise cancellation on the Pros and would rather wait
         | for their update. But I was tempted, in part due to the bass.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | skavi wrote:
         | You need a seal to get significant bass from earbuds. the non
         | pro airpods do not make a seal (by design).
        
           | Talanes wrote:
           | If they experienced better bass on the G1/G2 Airbuds, it's
           | not a seal issue.
        
             | skavi wrote:
             | The G1/G2 emphasize the high-bass to make up for the
             | complete lack of sub-bass. Maybe that's the tuning they are
             | looking for?
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | I primarily listen to rock. Airpods are great for that. I
               | don't listen to much music that has significant sub bass.
        
         | e40 wrote:
         | I bought the gen3 and returned them for gen2. Two reasons, but
         | the main one was comfort. I forget the gen2's are in my ears.
         | The gen3's were painful.
         | 
         | Second reason: gen3's require Monterey for macOS integration. A
         | painful week-long exchange with Apple support brought this out.
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | Interestingly, some people had the opposite complaint about
         | HomePods -- that they had too much bass. Apple now has an
         | option in the Home app to reduce bass on HomePods.
         | 
         | Not everyone had the complaint, and I think I know the reason
         | for that: The configuration of the room. At my last place, my
         | HomePods were way too bassy for my ears. At my new place,
         | they're fine. Same gear. Different room geometry.
        
       | rx_tx wrote:
       | Amazing scans, the packaging of components internally is amazing.
       | 
       | Interesting how they switched from prox-based in-ear detection to
       | capacitive skin contact sensor in the latest airpods.
        
         | qeternity wrote:
         | I find it super interesting how they have gone back and forth
         | on different approaches. I wonder how much user data they
         | collect from the wild (not even sure how one would go about
         | it).
        
           | GhettoComputers wrote:
           | Telemetry logs can be sniffed, with a good firewall and as
           | long as you're on your wifi with a wifi only device you can
           | learn a lot. I jailbreak to use this:
           | http://cydia.saurik.com/package/ca.btraas.appfirewall/
           | 
           | Amazing how much analytics I block from every app.
        
             | reaperducer wrote:
             | If you drill down far enough in the settings, most Apple
             | products are happy to show you the telemetry that's sent
             | back to Cupertino. I've seen the HomePod data while poking
             | around in the Home app.
        
       | elliottinvent wrote:
       | Wow, it's the first time I've seen this site and format but what
       | a great way to explain electronics and design.
        
         | smeyer wrote:
         | >it's the first time I've seen this site
         | 
         | I think this might only be its second month so don't be hard on
         | yourself for first seeing it now.
         | https://web.archive.org/web/*/scanofthemonth.com
        
         | Eric_WVGG wrote:
         | I'm really surprised about the (thus-far) universal acclaim of
         | the design. There's usually a lot of knee-jerk reaction against
         | fancy browser effects like parallax and scroll-jacking in this
         | crowd.
         | 
         | I think this implementation is mostly excellent, but as a web
         | craftsmen, it would have been a fun/entertaining challenge to
         | make a good non-javascript implementation underneath.
        
       | fnord77 wrote:
       | wow, this is amazing. I assume these are their first set of
       | scans? I was trying to find scans of other products and the home
       | page only has airpods
        
         | arecurrence wrote:
         | Last month they did LEGO. Interestingly, they seem to remove
         | the scan but you can still see parts of it at
         | https://web.archive.org/web/*/scanofthemonth.com
        
       | 1f60c wrote:
       | From a Google search[0], it looks like they've put two LEGO sets
       | under the scanner before, but I can't find them. It would have
       | been cool to see an archive...
       | 
       | [0]: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ascanofthemonth.com
        
         | el_isma wrote:
         | https://web.archive.org/web/*/scanofthemonth.com
         | 
         | You can read the text, and see some images, but the capture
         | wasn't perfect. Such a shame, it looks very interesting. They
         | should have an archive.
        
         | adamrmcd wrote:
         | I cannot fathom why they would they remove previous
         | scans/links. Maybe to enable a paywall archive?
         | 
         | It's super slick how they showcase the object as you scroll
         | down, but flattening it into a single URL and only making one
         | scan available per month restricts your audience appeal.
         | 
         | I only first heard of this site when they did the lego minifigs
         | last month. Did they publish any other scans prior to that?
        
           | Starmina wrote:
           | So you have actually a reason put your email in their
           | newsletter input box because you wouldn't want to 'miss'
           | anything you can't go back to.
        
       | Lammy wrote:
       | Does anyone have a canonical URL to the previous month's scan of
       | the LEGO mini-figure? I didn't see any navigation on the site
       | unless there's a magic spot I missed or am inadvertently
       | adblocking: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29253441
       | 
       | This month's entry comes off way too much like advertising for my
       | taste, with the flowery language like "magic features" instead of
       | just "features", or the seemingly-unnecessary sales statistics in
       | lieu of a technical description of the Airpods Pro: "In 2020,
       | Apple sold 110,000,000 AirPod products. Talk about mass
       | manufacturing."
       | 
       | Maybe it's just an unconscious tic when talking about Apple
       | products. Even I have a hard time not saying "Boom" when showing
       | off something cool :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx7v815bYUw
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-06 23:00 UTC)