Hacker News Reader

Comment by Sephr | Hacker News Reader

Judging by all of the comments complaining about DRM and having to buy new audio equipment, it seems like few people are actually reading the whole article. USB-C can support analog audio output via audio adapter accessory mode[1].

In the near future you'll be able to buy passive USB-C→3.5mm cables for cheaper than normal USB-C→USB-C cables. You will be able to use them like any other aux cable.

Personally, I still prefer the 3.5mm jack so that I don't need a passive adapter for using my earbuds. Requiring a passive adapter that gives you a perpendicular 3.5mm jack, no matter how small, would be ugly and obtrusive.

Fortunately, at least for over-the-ear headphones with a 3.5mm jack, this will at least be much less of a hassle. Passive USB-C→3.5mm cables can just be your new aux cable.

[1] https://i.imgur.com/y6xCS9u.png

View on HN

While it's true the USB-C spec provides for this possibility as part of the extensions to the USB Audio standard, Intel is also discussing an MPU specifically to implement HDCP for audio outputs from the USB-C connector in this announcement. You say we didn't read it, but we read it loud and clear. This is an enabler for DRM that does nothing to help consumers, many of whom have already significantly invested time and money into audio gear that works perfectly fine.

You can't DRM standard analog output (and still be compatible with normal analog headphones), which is why I mentioned the DRM concern.

Most of your current digital audio output ports already support DRM. S/PDIF, HDMI, DisplayPort, etc. all support DRM for digital audio.

You're making the big assumption these devices will always support analog audio output over USB-C. There's nothing preventing that from being disabled, and the digital output can definitely be forced to DRM only. We're already seeing this with things like the Lightning connectors on iPhones vs the old Dock connector that had analog and digital signals unimpeded, now with Lightning it requires an MFi certified device to decode the digital signal and no analog signal is provided at all.

The signal has to make its way to a speaker in analog form, eventually. In a way, analog output will always be supported.

But the conversion can be part of the headphone circuitry. I'm betting that's what Intel is thinking here.

In that case, it'd be simple enough to snip the wires to the transducers and take the analog signal from there. Even if there is wonky EQ for the specific transducers in use, it'd be simple enough to do a frequency sweep to figure out the filtering needed to undo it.

I respect and appreciate the hacker spirit that lets us understand that we can always work around things like DRM, but I'd prefer to fight it up front rather than deal with it later. There's MILLIONS of devices that currently work with 3.5mm stereo jacks around the world. Just because we can bypass the DRM in some way, it is unfair to the population at large to make this change when it incurs no real benefit just to satisfy the DRM desires of content producers.

In order to do that, you first have to buy a pair of the (likely expensive) DRM-enabled headphones, then destroy them and solder to the annoyingly hard-to-solder wires inside. Ultimately, this isn't going to stop piracy so much as it is people buying headphones that Intel haven't approved and charged a per-unit licensing fee on - it's about making sure they get their cut. It's probably a win-win for Intel and the headphone manufacturers too; Intel get to take a cut and the headphone manufacturers get to charge a premium to consumers, safe from competition from $3 earbuds from China (which are actually pretty good these days).

Until that is made illegal and you go to jail because you modified your device with the intention to circumvent content protections you agreed with when you bought the device.

IMO the 3.5 mm jack is better because it can rotate 360 degrees. The USB connector is rigidly fixed, which puts stresses on the cord and connector. I've rarely seen a 3.5 mm fail to make proper connections or wear out the port with use, whereas both are really common with USB.

Generally I agree with you, but my macbook's headphone connector won't hold the cable in anymore.

I dunno man, I typically use stuff beyond failure, and all my headsets have failed at some point due to broken wires near/inside the connector.

The key word is can, not must.

The real long term expectation on your phone should be to use bluetooth headsets anyway. No wires is better than one less port and one more adapter OR two ports and a direct analog wire.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com