[HN Gopher] Homebrew Bluetooth Headphones
___________________________________________________________________
Homebrew Bluetooth Headphones
Author : cunidev
Score : 187 points
Date : 2022-08-07 09:35 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (homebrewheadphones.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (homebrewheadphones.com)
| bullen wrote:
| I stocked up on Urbanears Plattan 2 during the last sale, they
| are both bluetooth and cable headphones but you need to buy the
| cable yourself, I bought kramer cables.
|
| For $25 a pair they are easily the best headphones I have ever
| had, my last pair was a Plattan 1 that lasted 8 years!!! (cable
| broke once)
| public_defender wrote:
| Oh wow, the price has gone down a lot. These are great
| headphones, but they're a relatively small on-ear profile. They
| would have me as a customer forever if they had an over-ear
| model. The best thing about them in my opinion is that they are
| very easy to take apart and clean.
| aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
| I used to have a Plattan myself in 2010, but had to sell it
| because the pads felt painful when wearing them longer than 30
| minutes... A lot of people posted reviews with the same issue.
|
| Quite a shame, because I really like the design.
| thatcat wrote:
| Found a wired version
| https://www.instructables.com/DIY-3D-Printed-Headphones/
| dijonman2 wrote:
| I really want long range bluetooth, from one side of my house to
| the other. I like to walk around while on calls and range sucks.
|
| I looked into bodypack solutions but it's receive or transmit,
| can't find transceivers.
| infofarmer wrote:
| If you're looking into bodypack, why not just carry the phone
| around? Spotty Wi-Fi / 4G coverage?
| dijonman2 wrote:
| This is for calls where dial in is not permitted.
| mikestew wrote:
| And to support what sibling said, I open the Teams app on
| my phone, not dial in, join the meeting and go walk the dog
| around the neighborhood. Unless you simply don't have a
| smartphone (or an app for your meeting software), I can't
| see how one would more simply solve your problem.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| Are you not allowed to use Teams / Zoom / whatever on the
| phone? I used to do this before I had wireless headphones.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| If it's just for calls, look at DECT headphones. I have a Jabra
| model, don't know if they still make them.
|
| Coverage is great, I can walk around my parents' house, and
| even out in the garden, without loss of signal. They live in a
| hundred-year-old stone house.
|
| Sound quality is great for calls. Music is ok-ish. They don't
| have any kind of ANC.
|
| Another drawback is the big-ass base that for some reason
| requires a dedicated power cord.
| rkagerer wrote:
| For phone calls, Plantronics CS55 has worked great for me for
| over a decade. (Range not be as long as you need though)
| dijonman2 wrote:
| Thanks for that, I am looking at POTS audio interfaces and
| POTS simulators. Looks like with DACT I can do what I want
| cheaper than using multiple body packs.
| nyanpasu64 wrote:
| How practical is homebrew open codec support, like building
| Bluetooth headphones or receivers with software/hardware Opus
| decoding support (as opposed to conflict-of-interest proprietary
| codecs that the Bluetooth standards authors add to the standards,
| then profit from license fees)?
| rollcat wrote:
| Is Opus optimized for latency, battery usage, and widely
| supported in common hardware? I don't mind paying a royalty fee
| if it affords me a better experience when actually using the
| product.
| themerone wrote:
| Opus is low latency and higher quality than the other music
| formats. It was designed to be suitable as a low delay voip
| codec.
|
| I've never seen comparisons to the proprietary Bluetooth
| codecs, but those are always implemented in hardware so it is
| impossible to do.
|
| I don't know about battery usage, but Opus is simple enough
| to be implemented on micro controllers, so it should't be too
| bad.
| nyanpasu64 wrote:
| Opus is one of the lowest-latency frequency-domain codecs out
| there (not including ADPCM-style codecs), as well as being
| the best-sounding voice and music codec at a given bitrate,
| beating MP3 and AAC (excluding ultra-low-bitrate voice, and
| recent neural codecs). In listening tests, LC3 is only better
| than Opus when Opus is deliberately misconfigured to compress
| audio badly.
|
| Looking around for battery usage,
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21982964 claims LC3 is
| no simpler to decode in specialized low-powered hardware than
| Opus, while https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php?topic=118692.msg
| 979046#msg9... claims LC3 is "basically Opus with a few
| marginal gadgets thrown in". In that case, I think the only
| reason Opus couldn't be as widely supported as LC3 is that
| there isn't money to be extracted from the system.
| rollcat wrote:
| Thanks for the explanation. So it's a different situation
| from e.g. hardware H264 decoders, where the extra silicon
| makes a dramatic difference.
|
| Then the main concern remains interoperability. I'd still
| pay a bit more to make sure my friend's random device has a
| better chance of working at all. Bluetooth is already a
| tire fire so I wouldn't like to add another layer of
| interop issues.
| nyanpasu64 wrote:
| Hardware Opus decoders are completely unnecessary for
| desktops, and probably so for laptops or even phones I
| think. It's possible it substantially improves battery
| life in small-battery headphones and such, or it's
| physically impossible for headphone Bluetooth chips to
| support CPU decoding. But I doubt Opus is any harder to
| implement in hardware (or DSP firmware) than LC3 (which I
| don't know if it's easy to implement, but I assume
| they're trying to get hardware to support it).
| DarthNebo wrote:
| I just wanted to be able to use 18650 cells in my headphones &
| never worry about battery life.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| At a quick glance the hardware for this is compatible with
| Lithium Ion chemistry so go for it. Just need to make some
| minor mods to put a battery holder on.
|
| More specifically, just about any headphone with a LiPo (flat
| square) battery could be modified to accept an 18650. The
| charging voltages are the same, so you would just have to snip
| the old battery out and wire in an 18650.
| xchaotic wrote:
| These are overkill and way too heavy for headphones
| melkael wrote:
| The instructions recommend to print with ABS. Any reason for not
| going for PETG or PLA ?
| eurasiantiger wrote:
| Higher glass transition temp so can be left in the car, and
| less prone to break when dropped?
| Saris wrote:
| PLA and PETG start to soften at lower temps, 60C and 80C
| respectively. But ABS is up at 105C, so it won't have any
| chance of deforming in a hot car or something.
|
| I still think 80C on PETG should be high enough, and it's a
| much nicer material to print.
| intsunny wrote:
| The whole bluetooth headhones situation is a little ironic.
|
| Us Linux types remember how long it took until the MP3 patents
| expired for us to stop having to add non-free repos everywhere
| and being treated as the ugly cousin because we couldn't support
| such a universal codec out of the box.
|
| Fast forward today, and we're back at square one because everyone
| and their mother wants some new codec to make bluetooth audio
| quality suck not so bad. (Bluetooth couldn't do better than SBC
| out of the box? really?)
|
| The only difference between yesterday and today is that, we Linux
| folks are much better at quickly enabling support for proprietary
| codecs out of the box.
| tehwebguy wrote:
| This rules! I have one of this bluetooth chip but mine didn't
| come with the breakout pre-soldered & I'm struggling to solder
| them myself, thinking I should try paste + heat gun.
|
| I believe you can also can change the name that the BT module
| broadcasts if you have an FTDI to USB cable (or something with
| UART pins like an Arduino). (You can also just change the
| "display name" on your iOS device bluetooth settings but it is
| just the name your device shows. I'm guessing this is doable on
| Android and everything else too.)
| userbinator wrote:
| I believe the CSR chipsets have some programming tools available
| as well, so you can change things like the voice prompts to your
| liking (many of the cheap modules seem to come with the infamous
| "the Bluetooth device is ready to pair" meme sound) and adjust
| the device name.
| pxx wrote:
| > They sound awesome - on par with pairs that cost around $200
|
| I don't know. The problem is that $20 pairs often sound on par
| with ones that cost around $200. But the ones that cost around
| $200 have much better ANC than the $20 ones. You can definitely
| tell on an airplane. And these don't have noise cancelling at
| all.
| willcipriano wrote:
| Bluetooth audio isn't fantastic in my experience. I prefer
| wired if I'm looking for sound quality.
|
| Still you'll enjoy something you made yourself more than the
| $200 version you just bought.
| codethief wrote:
| > Bluetooth audio isn't fantastic in my experience.
|
| I had been thinking the same but then I still gave it a shot
| and bought some new headphones with Bluetooth (and aptX
| support), in my case the Sennheiser Momentum True Wireless 2
| (in-ear), and the Sennheiser Momentum 3 (over-ear). Turns out
| they can easily compete with (or are even better than) the
| cable-bound ~$250 in-ears I used to have.
| bosie wrote:
| Does the momentum 3 sound better when you use the cable for
| it?
| blangk wrote:
| I would say the difference is not easily noticeable but I
| haven't done exhaustive testing as I've only really used
| the cable when FPS gaming on them
| codethief wrote:
| I haven't noticed a difference to be honest.
| erdewit wrote:
| When playing FLAC music over aptX HD, the next step for
| improvement is to avoid any resampling. The music is
| generally at 44.1 kHz and the default for Android is 48
| kHz. It requires root to change the audio config file to
| 44100, and it's also necessary to change the bluetooth
| settings (in the developer options).
|
| Something similar goes for Linux.
|
| The resampling shouldn't matter much in theory, but in
| practice it's pretty noticeable. It seems to be optimized
| for CPU usage instead of audio quality.
| userbinator wrote:
| _It seems to be optimized for CPU usage instead of audio
| quality._
|
| Presumably on an Android phone, it makes sense to lower
| CPU usage (and thus prolong battery life) rather than go
| for the best audio quality.
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| You can get OEM bluetooth in-ear buds straight from China
| quite easily these days. They are cheap and punch well
| above their weight. My wired ear buds are subjectively
| better sounding to me. My wired ear buds connected to a BT
| receiver also sound better. But the OEMs cost on the order
| of 50AUD/35USD...
| [deleted]
| marcinzm wrote:
| >Still you'll enjoy something you made yourself more than the
| $200 version you just bought.
|
| That's not the case for me. I enjoy the process of making
| something but in terms of day to day usage I enjoy the better
| version more.
| iasay wrote:
| Similar. I enjoy the effort someone else has put in to work
| all the bugs out.
| jefftk wrote:
| If you don't care about latency, like listening to music or
| watching a movie, Bluetooth audio can be as good as wired.
| The maximum bandwidth for Bluetooth audio is 576kbps (aptX
| HD) which is way above the point at which you can tell the
| difference.
|
| On the other hand, if latency is important, like on a call,
| then you can get kind of reasonable latency if you almost
| give up on quality (34ms from aptX Low Latency) But you're
| much better off sticking with wired (low single digit
| milliseconds) since latency matters so much for good
| conversation.
| ajolly wrote:
| It's frustrating to me that even high-end apple and both
| noise canceling headsets don't have low latency support
| netr0ute wrote:
| > The maximum bandwidth for Bluetooth audio is 576kbps
| (aptX HD)
|
| 100% pure unadulterated USDA-certified Prime grass-fed
| gluten-free all natural organic free-range BS, as the LDAC
| codec for BT comes in 330, 660, and 990kbps flavors and has
| even lower THD than aptX HD and an even wider frequency
| response (essentially to 20KHz). The catch is, only a few
| really recent and expensive chips have support for it, so
| almost nobody has heard (of) it, literally.
| MayeulC wrote:
| SBC sounds really good too if you negociate a higher
| bitrate than the "high quality" profile. Sometimes called
| SBC- XQ, and most receivers support it.
| AshamedCaptain wrote:
| SBC is practically transparent at these bitrates anyway,
| or at least on the level of other 320kbps codecs. The
| differences are so inaudible that even listening tests
| have a hard time telling the different codecs apart.
| http://soundexpert.org/encoders-320-kbps
| https://habr.com/en/post/456182/
|
| These talks about replacement, higher-bitrate codecs
| always have always been very dubious.
| netr0ute wrote:
| The trick is, though, even though SBC is only marginally
| worse than lossless, because it's the lowest common
| denominator codec, you tend to see it with worse DACs
| that also have to do with the end audio quality. When you
| use codecs like LDAC, you tend to also see them with high
| quality components that would make it seem like it's LDAC
| that's doing the work, but it's in reality just a bonus.
| jefftk wrote:
| I'm glad there's an even higher bandwidth option I didn't
| know about! But at this point no one is hearing the
| difference, and this isn't a reason to go with wired over
| Bluetooth, as long as you can get hardware that supports
| a good enough codec.
| harha wrote:
| Small side note on Bluetooth:
|
| I regularly use four devices (phone, tablet, laptop, desktop) and
| I have two pairs of headphones (in ear and over ear).
|
| Since it's 2022 and we have so much amazing technology all around
| us, these are the two things I'm missing: I'd like to be able to
| use any combination of these without pairing again and I'd also
| really like to stay connected while I'm listening to something or
| having a conversation.
|
| Is this really too much to ask for? Now the funny thing is that
| it doesn't matter if I spend $20 or $200. I've heard AirPods may
| be better as long as you stay in the apple ecosystem, but that's
| one constraint too much.
| [deleted]
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| It would be more interesting if we started threads about TFA
| instead of rehashing the same generic complaints about X just
| because X appears in the title.
| harha wrote:
| Ok let me rephrase that: can anyone explain why this common
| scenario doesn't work and if there's any way to solve this?
| Would a homebrew device running my own software help?
| scarface74 wrote:
| I can't imagine dealing with the shit show of BT outside of
| the Apple ecosystem in 2022.
|
| You're not going to like the obvious answer - get into the
| Apple ecosystem and buy Apple headphones.
|
| They seamlessly switch between my iPhone, iPad and Mac. If
| I am watching something on my iPad and my iPhone rings,
| they automatically switch. If I start watching a video on
| my iPad and then start playing a video on my iPhone, they
| automatically switch.
|
| Not to mention if I'm using my AirPods with my AppleTV at
| night and my wife starts talking to me, I just take one
| side out and the TV pauses.
|
| Of course they work in just the opposite manner. If I put
| them in, audio switches to them.
|
| I'm not sure if auto switching from my watch. But since I
| can take phone calls on it anyway. It doesn't matter as
| much.
|
| Also if I pair to any device connected to my Apple ID, all
| of my other devices automatically show them as an option -
| iPad, iPhone, AppleTV, Watch, Mac.
| mbreese wrote:
| To echo the sibling comment -- Apple has largely solved
| this problem, within the Apple ecosystem. If you want to
| avoid Apple, then you're up to the will of N vendors want
| to try to solve the problem their own way, so...
|
| For Apple, the key feature is iCloud. Your headphone
| bluetooth information is stored in iCloud, so any
| headphones that have been paired with one device, are
| paired with all other devices. This is the secret sauce
| that make the system work. But even here, there can be
| issues. My Airpods connect to all of our Apple TVs, but my
| wife's don't. My iCloud account is the primary one, but I
| haven't figured out how to get my wife's headphones to
| transfer over as easily. So, even here -- when things work,
| they work great. When they don't -- you're stuck.
|
| As far as using custom firmware, I'm not sure how much that
| would help you. The CSR8645 module from the article has its
| own firmware already installed and running. It looks like
| customizing would require some kind of license from
| Qualcomm. But, even then -- the secret sauce for migrating
| headphones from device to device isn't in the headphones.
| It's in the devices. So, that's where you'd need to add
| some custom code.
| happyopossum wrote:
| > My Airpods connect to all of our Apple TVs, but my
| wife's don't
|
| The key is to add your wife as an additional user on the
| AppleTV. The ability has been there since at least tvOS
| 13.x
|
| https://support.apple.com/guide/tv/multiple-users-
| atvb59ec8e...
| terramex wrote:
| I have converted my old Beyer Dynamic DT 770 to Bluetooth [1] and
| used them daily for past 6 months and I recommend this BT module
| over what is listed on that website:
| https://www.gotronik.pl/odbiornik-bluetooth-50-audio-aptxll-...
|
| It has 5V stepdown converter and Li-Po charger as well as
| amplifier integrated on board. Cheap USB-C Li-Po chargers lack
| neccessary 5.1kOhm pull-downs and therefore work only with
| USB-A->USB-C cables. Soldering them onto charger PCB is
| borderline impossible, while adding them to most USB-C sockets is
| fairly easy (usually there are free pads to solder 5.1k SMD
| resistor). You then connect 5V and GND from USB-C socket to BT
| module and it handles charging the battery that is connected to
| separate pads.
|
| I don't really understand why article recommends board without
| amplifier, I tried using CSR8675 board without one and it was
| waaay too quiet.
|
| With 500mAh battery salvaged from old BT speaker I get over 20h
| of loud playback, which is fine for me.
|
| [1]
| https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/r32ru2/yet_anot...
| thatcat wrote:
| Thinking of doing a similar mod to my shp9500. Have you tried
| pairing this with an android phone yet? I'm also curious how it
| sounds on aptx instead of aac.
| leobg wrote:
| I like that the Bluetooth part on the board is blue.
| userbinator wrote:
| _I don 't understand why article recommends board without
| amplifier, I tried using CSR8675 board without one and it was
| waaay too quiet._
|
| It depends on the drivers; if they're low impedance, the result
| may be deafeningly loud. Yours seem to be available in 32, 80,
| and 250 ohms, the ones in the article are 32.
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| These look nice! I have also been making my own headphones. I
| recently posted a twitter thread with build instructions if
| anyone wants to make them. [1]
|
| Notable difference is that mine are simpler to build, though less
| integrated. I use an off the shelf bluetooth to 3.5mm adapter
| rather than one of those integrated boards (I did recently buy an
| integrated board to test out). The off the shelf bluetooth
| adapter just plugs in to the short 3.5mm cable I build in to the
| headphones, which has the advantage that you can make them wired
| headphones with a simple extension, which sometimes has its use.
| Anyway take a look!
|
| [1] https://twitter.com/TLAlexander/status/1550903550930067456
| lostgame wrote:
| I very much appreciate that your design incorporates the
| ability to use them wired as well.
|
| While I'm out/in transit, of course there's nothing
| particularly terrible about Bluetooth.
|
| When I'm at home, however - I produce music a _lot_ more than I
| consume it.
|
| I also mainly consume music at home on my record players
| anyway, which obviously I don't use Bluetooth for.
|
| As any audio producer will tell you; the latency introduced be
| even the newest Bluetooth standards makes producing music in a
| DAW a frustrating experience at best.
|
| I love the 'best of both worlds' headphones with optional
| latency-free wired support. I can take them on the go and use
| Bluetooth on the bus, I can connect a wire at home; and produce
| in bliss.
|
| I would _absolutely_ love to create my own headphones from the
| ground up sometime, choosing my drivers and cushioning
| carefully, and ideally modelling /3D printing my custom design,
| based on taking measurements of the shape of my head and size
| of my ears. (I prefer over the head headphones as even the most
| comfortable buds tend to hurt my ears after a short while.)
|
| Sounds like a fun summer project sometime. :)
| skeyo wrote:
| The homebrewer in me was like "what do headphones have to do with
| brewing"
| zdw wrote:
| Or with installing open source software on a Mac.
| quercusa wrote:
| Or Hebrew...
| rob_c wrote:
| Very cool, would be curious to know battery life Vs audio quality
| but very impressive non the less
| happyopossum wrote:
| Battery life is listed at 5 hours, which to be frank, is
| horrible.
|
| 25-40 hours is pretty common with big over-ear headphones these
| days, even ones with ANC...
| rob_c wrote:
| > 25-40 hours is pretty common with big over-ear headphones
| these days...
|
| well yes... But frankly given low power btle with audio chips
| exist it's related more to chip/software than say the battery
| type...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-07 23:01 UTC)