Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Discontinues Chromecast Audio (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the end-of-the-line dept.

Google has discontinued the Chromecast Audio dongle that allowed you to stream music via Wi-Fi to any dumb speaker with a 3.5mm headphone jack. If you're saddened by the news and would like to pick one up before they're completely gone, Google is now selling its remaining inventory for $15 instead of $35. TechCrunch reports: "Our product portfolio continues to evolve, and now we have a variety of products for users to enjoy audio," Google told us in a statement. "We have therefore stopped manufacturing our Chromecast Audio products. We will continue to offer assistance for Chromecast Audio devices, so users can continue to enjoy their music, podcasts and more."

Google is clearly more interested in getting people to buy its Google Home products and Assistant- or Cast-enabled speakers from its partners. It's also worth noting that all Google Home devices can connect to Bluetooth enabled speakers, though plenty of people surely have a nice speaker setup at home that doesn't have built-in Bluetooth support. "Bluetooth adapters suck," Google told us at the time, though at this point, it seems a Bluetooth adapter may just be the way to go.

34 of 88 comments (clear)

  1. Already out of stock by jakedata · · Score: 1

    Bummer, I could use another one. Nothing like listening to OK-ish digital music through four 7591a tubes. Friendly tube distortion mixed with digital artifacts. Sort of like crossing proton pack streams, might be "bad", or it might banish Zuul.

    1. Re:Already out of stock by jakedata · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't normally reply to AC but here you go...

      1. Bluetooth audio is TERRIBLE
      2. BT range is ~10M at best, Chromecast uses WiFI/Ethernet
      3. CC supports synchronous multiple endpoint streaming
      4. CC supports guest streaming without pairing
      5. CC lets you control playback from multiple devices

    2. Re:Already out of stock by msauve · · Score: 1

      "Bluetooth audio is TERRIBLE"

      You've obviously never listened to AM/FM radio or 8-track/cassette tape. AAC or AptX really aren't bad, unless you're one of those who spends $2500 on a power cord. Or perhaps you're simply exaggerating.

      "CC supports synchronous multiple endpoint streaming"

      Do tell. Since you're someone who considers Bluetooth audio to be "TERRIBLE," what sort of phase jitter is present with multiple Ethernet endpoints?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Already out of stock by jakedata · · Score: 2

      Oh, obviously.

      AM/FM was degraded by the digital subchannels stealing bandwidth. 8-Track was a joke from day one and I still have a case of them along with a player and the splicing die because that's just how I roll.

      As for phase issues, it's tough to tell when they are in different rooms, but you can adjust the delay in 1 ms increments if there's a problem.

      Mostly I play old records unless I want background music around the house all day long. I still crank up the Victrola now and then for that genuine 1:1 uncompressed analog experience.

    4. Re:Already out of stock by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 1

      The coolest part about Chromecast Audio is that you can play lossless music and use optical-out into a nice DAC/amp for maximum quality.

      I've got one, I'll probably order another from some store that has them in stock. Super bummed that this useful little gadget is gone.

    5. Re:Already out of stock by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      I was able to buy some just now.

    6. Re:Already out of stock by ChitaChijiokeCharles · · Score: 1

      how do u say terrible? Privacy Policy

    7. Re:Already out of stock by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Don't normally reply to AC but here you go...

      1. Bluetooth audio is TERRIBLE

      I’m sure you can find an app that adds random hisses and pops to your Bluetooth audio, so it sounds like the formats you grew up with.

  2. Truth by eclectro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know that a product has left Google beta and works perfectly, when Google decides to kill it outright

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:Truth by dmt0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real problem with this thing is that it doesn't have an always-on microphone that listens to you all the time. And it eats into the market of the devices that do.

    2. Re:Truth by msauve · · Score: 1

      "The real problem with this thing is that it doesn't have an always-on microphone that listens to you all the time."

      Nothing a sewing needle and super glue can't fix, if you don't know how to solder.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Truth by zugmeister · · Score: 2

      You may be surprised to learn these devices are always listening to you.
      If they didn't do this they couldn't listen for the activation word.

    4. Re:Truth by willy_me · · Score: 1

      The product is missing features compared to the more integrated solutions. The best solutions will generate their analog signal at full scale and then inform the amplifier how much the signal should be amplified. This provides maximum signal quality. This Google product generates an analog output but has no way of informing to the amplifier what the amplification should be. To adjust volume you have to decrease the amplitude of the signal which induces signal loss.

      Users who want optimum signal quality can still get it by setting audio output to 100% and then using the amplifier / speaker settings to adjust volume. Great - but most people want to use their digital devices to control the audio. Play, pause, forward, next, and volume all controlled from the same device.

      The current Chromecast probably operates just like AirPlay. Lossless audio transmission and full control from the transmitting audio device. I can see why Google would kill the Chromecast Audio given the advantages of more integrated solutions. The market now is filled with such solutions - unlike when the Chromecast Audio was release.

    5. Re:Truth by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Not really a point in chrome cast audio devices except for legacy hardware. The people that want to cast to legacy hardware aren't buying them anymore, they already have the ones they need and they're legacy hardware is most likely going to die before their chrome cast audio.

      Obviously I can't speak for everyone, but in my case this legacy hardware is decades old and it will continue to be used for decades, because it sounds fucking incredible and was built before the current trend of everything immediately falling apart after you buy it. It will almost certainly outlast the Chromecast. But..

      the far more likely scenarios is simply that no one wants these things anymore.

      ..I think you're right about that too. I expect the Chromecast to last 5-10 years so it would be a long time before I bought another one, and I know not many people are doing this stuff.

      It's unfortunate, though. The nice thing about the Chromecast is that it's so damn small and cheap (even if you cloned it using a Pi or something, it wouldn't be as small and cheap and elegant). It really was a great low-impact way to deliver music to an old stereo. Very high quality, different league than bluetooth. Chromecasts can decode FLAC so it really is CD quality all the way to the amp, if you're already storing your music that way.

      And just in case not everyone really understands what you could do with a Chromecast: the protocol was apparently documented and open enough that we got the pychromecast library out it. So you could talk to these things and control them. Have mpd output to stream, have homeassistant watch for play events and tell the Chromecast to connect to the stream, and you're got top notch audio over wifi to high-end oldschool stereos. All without putting a "computer" in that room. I really can't overstate how well it works, for so little investment. AFAIK nobody else sells anything like that.

      Alternatives?

      One is to not use legacy equipment and just get a new amplified speaker with Chromecast built in. That's what we use on the back patio, with a boombox we carry back'n'forth. That's ok for that situation. But now I'm wondering if Chromecast-enabled boomboxes are still going to be available (why the fuck did I trust Google to not kill their product!? I know better than that, but for some reason I really thought they wouldn't abandon Chromecast), so if anything happens to that speaker, I worry I might be back to square one with the outdoor solution.

      The other alternative is to use a "real computer." Reading the files over NFS and just run a cable from the computer's output to the amp, and it will obviously be every bit as good. So of course you can do that ... in situations where you can do that, but that's going to be more than $30. That's probably what most Chromecasts will get replaced with. And of course once you add a real computer to that room, that adds to the things you can do in there.

      All that said, it's also a proprietary device that I allowed onto my LAN!!! And it really does phone home, and I think the stream provided metadata, so it's probably telling Google what music I listen to, plus that I stream from my own server. So the spy angle is right too, which won't apply to having just another Ubuntu box hidden somewhere.

      [Heh, just realized I keep calling them Chromecasts instead of Chromecast Audio. I sometimes forget there is (was?) a video version too.]

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    6. Re:Truth by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 1

      I don't think he's kidding, I just think he didn't include "the problem FOR GOOGLE WITH OFFERING IT".

  3. Never seen one by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    I've never seen a speaker with a 3.5mm headphone jack.

    1. Re:Never seen one by sobachatina · · Score: 1

      The audio chromecasts also had optical output and adapters for RCA.
      I love mine. I wish I would have known about this in time to buy some spares.

    2. Re:Never seen one by msauve · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's the Chromecast which has the 3.5 mm headphone jack, which is also usable for line level audio. Use whichever commonly available cable you need to hook up to powered speakers - a 3.5 mm jack is common there, too.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Never seen one by zugmeister · · Score: 1

      JBL Flip 3 / Charge 3 and just about every $20 BT speaker on Amazon have 3.5 mm in jacks. Those tiny ones that accordion up "for bigger bass" mostly run off that jack as well. Don't all computer speakers use that plug by default as well?

  4. Re:Why would you even want it? by dmt0 · · Score: 2

    Somehow 1 time out of 3 when I use bluetooth, it fails to connect giving me various excuses. Besides, AFAIK bluetooth is not lossless. Sure, shitty Chromecast puck is not gonna give you audiophile level quality, but at least there's not transcoding loss happening.

  5. Sadly the only problem with the product was the $ by DarkKaplah · · Score: 2

    Sadly the only problem with the chromecast audio was the standard price. $35 was just too high. I got mine on a holiday sale last year for $15 with a discounted google home speaker. It let me upgrade me old yamaha 6.1 to allow easy streaming. I would have snapped up 4 more if the price was $15-$20 all the time. For $35 it was just too expensive for what it did. Honestly however if they add a 3.5 mm jack to the google home puck speaker I would get go that route.

    --
    Coffee: The lifeblood of intelligence in civilization.
  6. Google canceling a product ? Surely not ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I mean, it's not like Google has a long history of capriciously canceling products or anything of that sort

    .

    If after Google's long and dishonorable history of fucking over users you'd trust Google enough to use anything from Google, your ability to make intelligent decisions must be called into question in the most severe manner possible.

    If you disagree, you're not only stupid, you're the worst kind of stupid, which is defined by a refusal to accept important new information because it might threaten your worldview.

  7. Re:Why would you even want it? by sobachatina · · Score: 1

    A bluetooth dongle that seemlessly streams directly from the internet with no (extra) loss of quality and stays playing even when I leave with my phone?

    Just admit it. A bluetooth dongle is nothing at all like the chromecast.

    As for privacy- most people already use online music services so someone already knows what they listen to and when. You have to be especially paranoid to only play your own ripped, local, music because of privacy concerns.

  8. Replace Chromecast Audio with regular Chromecast? by jrifkin · · Score: 1

    I love my Chromecast audio. I use it with my 30 year old Sony receiver driving my 50 year old EPI speakers, serving up music from my Raspberry Pi running a minidlna server. Works great.

    Does anyone know what it would take to rig a Google "Streaming Media Player" (i.e. the Video version with the HDMI output) to drive an old-school audio receiver?

  9. Re:Replace Chromecast Audio with regular Chromecas by jakedata · · Score: 3, Informative

    Search for HDMI Audio Extractor. They are not especially expensive but it's another thing that you need to plug in.

  10. Re:Remaining Hitler Youth Continue MURDERING JEWS. by jrifkin · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing that you don't have any friends?

    https://youtu.be/Tjp5OmoDYQM?t...

  11. There's an alternative that's still in production. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

    https://www.amazon.com/YunList...

    YunListen adapter with a 3.5mm jack -- supports DLNA as well as direct music streaming from a NAS.

  12. Re:Replace Chromecast Audio with regular Chromecas by RDW · · Score: 1

    Would it be easier to run a DLNA renderer on the Pi (or another Pi), add a DAC (HAT or USB), and plug it straight into the receiver?

  13. Re: Replace Chromecast Audio with regular Chromeca by jrifkin · · Score: 1

    My question is hypothetical since my current Chromecast audio is still fine, but for the record my Raspberry pi "server" lives
      in the basement, while the receiver in upstairs in the living room.

  14. Re:More whining from dotardly boomers incoming! by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Muh Headphone Jack!

    I’m a Boomer, and I second this.I’m nostalgic about some vanished aspects of my youth, like few speech on college campuses, but tangled cords are not one of them.

  15. Re:More whining from dotardly boomers incoming! by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    EDIT: ...free speech on college campuses.

  16. Re:Enjoy your Google walled garden by Sloppy · · Score: 1

    Though you're totally right about getting spied upon, it wasn't a walled garden. Chromecast was open enough that you could really use your way, instead of their way. Your own UI, your own controller, your own music storage. It doesn't lock you into anything, other than having to have some Android device around somewhere, for the initial installation. And after that, you don't even need Android if you don't want it. So it's more like a weird Google brick column in your garden, than like being trapped inside walls like you get with the videogame-console-like situations (Sony, Apple, etc).

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  17. Re: Replace Chromecast Audio with regular Chromeca by RDW · · Score: 1

    Second RPi running the renderer for about the same price as a Chromecast?

  18. So, by BitztreamNotARealNam · · Score: 1

    How's life in the hypocrite lane?