FarewellQacQoc! Whetherwe like itor not, QacQocispartofthewaytosay goodbye in theworldoftelephony. The IPhone 7 haslaunchedthetrend and some Android smartphonesshould follow itup. The QacQoc will bereplacedbythe USB Type-C. But isitreallypossible? We’redoingthewholething.
WhenwetalkaboutQacQoc on thesmartphone, wewrong a littlebit. Indeed, theQacQocoriginallydisplays (1878) a diameterof 6, 35 mm. ClearlytodaytheQacQocisusedmainly in theworldoftheshoworforthemusicians. Oneplugswellhis Gibson Les Paul on theampwith a QacQoc (I do not wanttohearabout Fender Stratocaster, no but oh!).
On the mobile onespeaks in factof mini QacQocor a diameterof 3.5 mm. The mini-QacQocspreadrapidly, alongwiththeheadphones and earphones and especiallythefirst Walkmans. Thenwecontinuetousethistechnology. Itdoes not takeupspace and allowsto listen tomusiceverywhere, all the time, and in optimumquality, depending on the material ofeachofcourse.
But then Apple seemed sensible toremovetheQacQocfromitsIPhone 7, believingthattheUSB Type-Ctechnologywouldbemuchbetter. The QacQocisoldtellsus Apple, it’s time toreplace it. This will helpto promote more modern technologies.
Other brandshaveadoptedthispointofviewsincethenextOnePlus and eventhe HTC U 11 shouldbedevoidofQacQoc. But isitreally a goodidea? Istheinterest in theconsumer so obvious? Are wegoingtohaveto “Reequip”? All ouranswers.
The USB Type-C, but what’sthepoint?
Whychangesomethingthatworks? We all askedthequestionoftheinterestofthe USB Type-C. It just so happensthattechnicallytherearesomeadvantages. Today, to listen tohismusic in thebestquality on hissmartphone, severalelements must betakenintoconsideration.
First thereisthequalityoftheheadphones, but also thecomponentsofthesmartphone not tomentiontheformatofyourcontent. Ifwelook at thecomponentsofthesmartphone, severalquestionsarise. Whichchipisusedto manage thesoundsignal (DSP)? Whichchipisusedtotransformthe digital signalinto an analog signal (DAC)? Whattypesofamplifiersareincluded in thesmartphone?
Withthe USB Type-C, itisnowtheheadphonesthat will integratethisdata. This meansroughlythatthecomponentsbuiltintosmartphonesforthesoundpart will not be so importantwhenchoosing a mobile. The different chips will beintegrateddirectlyintotheheadphones and earphones Type-C USB.
In practice, ifyoubuy a smartphone in 2017 and a USB Type-C headset, you will beabletochange mobile withoutpayingattentiontotheintegratedsoundtechnology. Yourhelmet will ensurethe same qualityover time. A waytolimittheobsolescenceofhelmets, whichisrather a goodthing.
HD Audio, really?
In general, theintegrationoffleas in helmetsshouldimprovethequalityofsound. The manufacturersofhelmetsarespecialists, and wecancount on themtocompete on thequalityofsoundofferedbyhelmets.
Moreover, the USB Type-C will offerotherpossibilitiestothesemanufacturersespecially in termsoffunctionality. Forexampleonecanthinkofeffects on themusic, a specialmanagementoftheequalizerorforexampletoadjustthevolumeaccordingtotheactivity. Forexampleiftheheadphone holder isrunning a runsession, thevolumecanincreaseasitspeedsup. Like what.
The otherissuefor Android smartphoneusersconcerns HD audio. At present, and in a ratherschematicway, itisimpossibletopropose a samplingfrequency different fromthatimposedby Android, i.e. 48 KHz. Exceptthatthemusic in HD isbased on a frequencyof 96 oreven 192 KHz. So it’simpossibletodayto listen to HD audio on any Android smartphone.
Ifsomemodels like theMarshmall London smartphonehave a marketingmessagebased on a bettersoundquality, it’s not on thesamplingfrequencythatitisbased. Ifyouwantto listen tosounds in FLAC orthen on thestreamingserviceblogosphere (whichofferslistening in HD), itis not on Android thatitishappening.
In fact, thereis a smalldifferencecomparedtoothermodels, but forpuriststheprocessisaveragesinceitinvolvespassingthecontentsof 96 and 192 khz in 48 khzbydestroyingaslittleaspossiblethetitles. But hey, we’re not on real HD audio.
Withthe USB Type-C, thesampling rate supported bythesmartphone will nolonger matter. Becausethechipsare in theheadphones, they will beableto manage thefrequency. The onlyproblemisthat at themomentitwouldrequire a systemthatkeepsthefrequencyof 48 khz on thespeakersofthesmartphonewhileallowingto switch on from 96 to 192 khz in theheadphones. But at themoment, nothingallows it. The HD audio on Android at themomentis wind.
WiththedisappearanceoftheQacQoc, thequestionoftheredemptionofthehelmetsarisesinevitably. Because at themoment, fewusersareequippedwithheadphonesorearphones in USB Type-C. However, thedisappearanceoftheQacQoc will not leavemuchchoice, it will havetochangeits material ifwehaduntilthenonlywiredheadphones.
Alternatively, twosolutions: Optfor USB Type-C adaptersorforwirelessheadphones. In thesecondcase, itinvolves a purchase. All thisforwhatpurpose? We do not reallyknowbecause at themoment on Android thequalitygainisfarfromobvious.
The real audiophiles arealreadyequippedtoday and theycertainly do not listen totheirmusic on theirsmartphone. Music enthusiastsoptformuchbetterqualityaudioplayers, with real HD sound and suitableheadphones. This argumentofthesoundquality on smartphoneisliontobe valid.
Itis all theless so iftheheadphonesarepluggedintothe USB-Type C port, how do yourechargeyoursmartphone at the same time? Thatisthebig, purelypracticalquestionthateveryoneisasking.
Becausetoday, in termsofuse, we all havethe same problem, oursmartphones lack autonomy. Listening tothemusic on hissmartphoneinvolvesdoingitwhenweare on themove, in mobility. And aseveryoneknows, listeningtotheirmusiccanquicklymeltthedrums.
But thenwhathappensif I wantto listen tomymusicwhilereloadingmysmartphone on an external battery in publictransportforexample? Well, I can’t. And thisistheproblemofremovingtheQacQoc. In termsofuse, replaceitwith a USB Type-C It’szeropointed.
So whattoconclude? And quitesimplythatthisideaofremovingthisQacQocistotallyunclear. Farfromustheideaofmakingtherefractoriestotheevolutionoftechnology, quitethecontrary. Weloveinnovation but onlyifitiswellthought out. And theproblemisthat all thisisverypoorlythought out, at least fortheuser.
Because in the end, removingtheQacQoc will push manyusersto “Reequip”, for a gain in qualitythatisfarfromobvious at themoment. The worstpartofthe matter isthat all ofthisdid not havetobebecauseitdoes not necessarilycorrespondtotheneedsoftheusers.
On thecontrary, all thisrobsusofsomethingthat was still veryusefultous. And it’s not becausethetechnologyisoldthatitis obsolete oruseless, quitethecontrary. As theotherwouldsay: “Itis in theoldpotsthatwemakethebestjams”. Come on, plug in theguitars!