While I know that everyone’s blog is just as accessible as another, these blog/media machines — like Gizmodo’s Gawker Media and Engadget’s Weblogs Inc. — just know how to attract the eyeballs. They’re undeniably centers of gravity when it comes to attracting the gadget lusty peanut gallery. I just wish they spelled “AvneraAudio” correctly.

That being said, it always makes me happy when I see one of the products we helped enable get a small stage on one of these geeky mega-venues. And what a product Audioengine crafted. This thing rocks.

All my shouting and banner waving about the “Swiss Army Knife of wireless audio gadgets” from the Alive Matters bleacher seats only gets the word out so far… but that’s not going to stop me.

Lots more to come. Stay tuned…

In my trolling for product chatter related to Avnera, I found myself at one of my favorite corporate-sponsored blogs, Skype Gear, Skype’s own blog on hardware, which merely mentioned the FREETALK wireless stereo headset.  But alas, no review yet… we’re looking forward to it when it hits.

What peeked my interest was their mention of the 3 Skypephone.  I think we’re heading where I hope we’re heading.  More bandwidth for IP-only traffic on my handset, please.

Over at Audio DesignLine, BDTI’s test results of Avnera’s AudioMagic system are discussed.  Overall, it’s a pretty good discussion of our technology.

One point to which I can offer some clarification is in their discussion of the over-the-air bit quality.

Avnera claims “>90 dB SNR digital-in-to-analog-out.”  In an uncompressed digital audio signal, each bit contributes about 6 dB to signal-to-noise ratio, so the Avnera figure of “>90 dB SNR” implies “>15 bits”.   Standard CD quality is 16 bits at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz.   Thus, the Avnera may not quite reach CD quality. 

AudioMagic is in fact transmitting 16-bits of audio data over-the-air, and thus is actually better than CD-quality - over-the-air - at 16-bits of 48 KHz sampling rate to be exact… for reference CD-quality is 16-bit, 44.1 KHz.

However, the reason they question our CD-quality assertion is that we don’t acheive the full 96 dB SNR that would come with 16-bit audio… the Avnera chipset is quoted from digital-in to analog-out, Avnera achieves a ~91 dB signal-to-noise ratio, end-to-end.

Anyways, long story short, Avnera measurements include the analog audio output, which is in fact what limits the SNR to 91 dB.  To compare our complete end-products to a CD-system, you would also need to factor in the DAC/headphone amplifier of the CD-based system… it may very well be the same fact that you get less than 96 dB SNR out of a Discman or similar.  There is often a quality down-grade during the conversion of the bits stored on the compact disk itself into analog audio.  Product makers often use optimization strategies to buy battery-life in portable applications by giving up some fidelity/SNR… many products, like iPod Shuffles, nanos, etc, do this.  As does Avnera in the headset chip.  It is the headphone amplifier stage, not the over-the-air payload that should have been suspected, as that would have been accurate.   Otherwise, good technical discussion of AudioMagic for Avnera.

Still, in most consumer settings such as a home-theater-in-a-box in a normal living room, the difference between 15 and 16 bits of precision will probably be imperceptible.

At the end of the day, the conclusion was fair… for this grade of consumer equipment, >90 dB is plenty good enough.  Trust me, it still knocks your socks off.

InsideDSP published the complete report.

Jim Courtney at Skype Journal put the FREETALK through the paces, and offered his first impressions… and I quote:

Today is my day of liberation!… Beethoven’s 9th has finished now; the pianissimo phrases were soft, the chorale fortes did not distort; you could clearly hear every word of the chorus in the fourth movement. On finishing the first draft of this post I received a Skype call, answered the front doorbell and let the dog back in at the back door, all while continuing the conversation. At US$79 or £50, this is probably the one most useful new technology hardware item for everyone on your gift list with either a Windows or Mac PC.

Read the full article here.

SkypeJournal’s recent series on Skype’s forward moving strategies included a discussion on the relevance of hardware. Well this Christmas, a piece of hardware near and dear to my heart will be ready to ship. I’ve written about the FREETALK in another post, so no need to repeat.

The nicest thing about this device… it is a very simple and elegant hardware solution that imporves the way *current* Skype users experience voice chat.

The reason I believe in the FREETALK headset so much, is that it is geared for the hear-and-now. It does not distract Skype-users from the now — it does not promise a usage model that is not mature, and similarly it does not try to attach legacy behaviors to a modern experience, which Skype is rightfully so.

Many other types of Skype hardware — which you will see sold on Skype.com — come in the form of gear that is trying to bring Skype to Skype-non-users by appealing to lagcy usage models. The most popular tactic is to make the hardware look like a old-fashioned desk-telephone, and allow the user to use simple number-dialing to place calles on the skype network. To me, this is a hard sell. If this usage model is so important, then the user won’t value the new features… and then you gotta sell on lower cost, and even that’s a pretty complicated message to convey. To realize the added value of Skype, you gotta teach people about then new features. People who are willing and able to grok this, are already more attached to their PCs, anyways.

The other way Skype is trying to branch out via hardware is by hopping onto other broadband enabled platforms… wi-fi phones or 3G mobiles. Today, that too is cumbersome at best. Perhaps Android has ways of addressing this, but today, Skype on a 3G handset only competes against the entrenched telephony service. If a user runs Skype on their mobile phone, first of all, it’s a rare breed who can connect all the dots, and even then it’s a niche long-distance, world traveller scenario that can realize any real benefit.

I’m rambling a bit… the key is, the FREETALK leaves all these wish-ware devices for the early-early adopters. The FREETALK is hear to help last year’s early adopters of Skype, break away from their desktop, and roam free about the house while using their favorite VoIP service that has become part of their connected repertoire.

They’ll also find it a damn good PC accessory.

Finally. Our first wireless stereo headset! It is available just in time for the holidays. If you use Skype more than 5 times a week, this headset will be your new best friend, I can guarantee it. I’ve been carrying my proto with me for the better part of this year, and it’s held up relatively well in my bag, taking many beatings. It sounds great, and works flawlessly. The range on FREETALK’s version is just over 35 feet. It will best the two other cordless options shown on this page. They are both based on Bluetooth… stop yawning, you’ll want to hear this.

People often ask how we compare to Bluetooth… often phrased as, “why wouldn’t I just use Bluetooth?” The few (powerful) reasons are:

1. FREETALK requires no driver installations. Freetalk is plug & play. Plug it in, wait for Mac OS or Windows to recognize it, and about 20 seconds later you are off to the races.
2. FREETALK achieves better than 30 feet of range. Our system’s wireless audio coding gives you a few more meters than BT can at the same transmit power. Just try it. You’ll get 35-40 feet in most conditions, and up to 60 feet in very clean RF interference & obstacle environments.
3. FREETALK gives you high fidelity stereo audio & wideband voice!!! The Freetalk headset natively supports 48 kHz uncompressed stereo audio to the headset, and 16 kHz wideband voice from the headset’s mic…. wait for it… at the same time. Boom. (Gamers rejoice - use it for World of Warcraft, Ventrillo, you name it) You have to hear it to believe it. With BT, you’re required to use a different profile (A2DP), which does not support simultanous usage of the microphone, AND it compresses the hell out of the audio using a very crude compression scheme called SBC (sub-band coding). About as clean as 96 kbps mp3 in best cases.
4. FREETALK costs less. Don’t even get me started.

Anyways, let’s hear about what you think. Check it out, and report back here. I’m pretty sure you’ll be asking straight-away, “why hasn’t this existed before?”

At Brian’s Brain, Dipert was one of the first bloggers to write about the Rocketfish RF-WHTIB. He had some issues with an early production example, but has since come back to it after realizing the grass ain’t so green on the 5.8 GHz side of the fence. So far so good.

The experience he had with the 5.8 solution will become more and more common. People get frustrated with sub-standard 2.4 GHz getting interfered with by other 2.4 GHz systems. So they figure, “I’ll just change RF frequencies and all my problems will be solved.” Well let me offer a few points to consider before you, too, make this leap of faith:

1. The 2.4 GHz spectrum is popular because it is a technological sweet-spot. 2.4 GHz has the least amount of regulatory conflicts world-wide, and thus it sees incorporation in products/technology platforms that are destined for global/higher volumes, and thus can lead to better economies of scale - making 2.4 GHz a more economic option for end-users on the average. 5.8 GHz is the newest ISM band, and across regions there are inconsistencies that drive lots of FUD thru the industry. OEMs don’t like this, and thus adoption is and solutions are less common, and suffer from negative economies of scale. Also 2.4 GHz is typically lower power at the circuit level, and so you can get smaller form factors and longer battery lives… also generally good things in 2.4’s favor.
2. The notion of RF co-existence is a concept worth introducing and discussing. Basically when you consider a system, like WLAN, or more specifically 802.11g, you need to think about two things. One, how it causes performance degradation to other co-located systems, and how it’s own performance is degraded by other co-located systems. Like any healthy relationship, one must understand that each must be considerate… i.e. attention must be paid both ways. The initial impression that Brian had, and many others harbor, against 2.4 GHz is that anything in 2.4 GHz will degrade his precious 802.11g network. Think FHSS 2.4 GHz cordless telephones. Think Microwave ovens. Think like Mr Hasty, a quick to act wireless audio system designer… what’s important to Mr. Hasty? That his audio sound good in the presence of other 2.4 Ghz radios. If you stop there, and design, you end up with wireless audio systems that stomp(!) on WLAN and others, like Bluetooth, and FHSS telephones, and many others. This happens because Mr. Hasty likes to throw power to the transmitter and send lots of extra overhead into the spectrum to ensure his audio gets there. And sometimes it does. But like Sherman marching thru Georgia, the ends maybe don’t justify the means. Bottom-line… not all 2.4 GHz system focus on co-existance. They place a priority on survival. AvneraAudio knows the economics of 2.4 GHz, and thus wanted to build a wireless audio system that was not only designed to survive, but also to be a good neighbor. If you let Avnera’s system into your world, it will avoid WLAN, and BT will avoid us. Microwaves are easy to spot, and so we move away from that too. And Cordless phones are loud but forgiving, like a shouting person in a crowded place… So we just filter it out, and focus on our more polite conversation until the egotist pipes down and goes away. Even more Bottom-line: Smart design is needed for co-existence. So Mr Hasty should have paused and asked, how do we survive, but not at the expense of others…. would-have-been-result: consumers’ rejoice.
3. Just cause you buy something with a 5.8 GHz radio doesn’t mean you avoid co-existence issues. It only means you avoid interference from 2.4 GHz systems!!! Well, I got news for ya, it ain’t like 5.8 GHz is all cookies and cream. You got messy cordless telephones, you got 802.11a, you got a lot a stuff… Again, if you go 5.8 GHz, why go there with a communications system technology that was unproven in the 2.4 GHz domain. You are only transferring your conflicts to a different arena. Traditional wireless audio vendors think a solution to poor 2.4 GHz performance is to offer a 5.8 GHz option. Bizz!

The solution is better communication system design, through co-existence. Never have the words of Rodney King (pictured above) been such an inspiration “People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along?”

Wait a minute: did I just mock a hero Union Army general (which Pavement cemented into my psyche with “Unseen Power of the Picket Fence”, 15 years ago), and take inspiration from a convicted wife-beater? Forget Brian’s brain… what about mine? To think I was talking about good wireless audio system design. Oh, how the lure of the mass market corrupts… militarists and penologists, avert your eyes.