2020 HP Envy x360 13 Convertible 2-in-1 Review: Ryzen 5 Beats a Core i7

[vertigo]

3.5mm devices aren't "recognized" like USB devices are, i.e. the software has nothing to do with it. Since the earbuds have a mic, the plug has four sections, and each section on the plug has to line up with the appropriate section in the socket/port. My guess would be that it's either not going in far enough (possibly because of embedded lint in the port or the casing on the plug being too bulky for that particular port) or it's going in too far. So try plugging it in the backing it out very slightly a little at a time to see if it works at any point, and if it doesn't then try checking for lint (no idea how you would go about this in such a tiny hole). You could also try another 3.5mm "headset" (headphones with mic) to see if it works, which would point to the Earpods molding being too bulky for the Envy.

Would this mean that the molding is too bulky for the Envy? And by that, does that mean that it isn't plugging deep enough on the port?

Yes, that's what I meant, that if it's too bulky it can prevent it from plugging in deep enough, similar to how many charging cables won't work on phones in cases, because the case is getting in the way, and the cable molding hits it and can't go far enough. So it's possible that the design of the 3.5mm port on the Envy is designed in such a way that it prevents the Earpods' plug from going in all the way, though it seems pretty unlikely. HP is apparently capable of some pretty stupid design decisions, but that would be really bad. It's more likely there's lint in the port, which is keeping the plug from going in all the way (this is a somewhat common issue with USB ports on phones, since they're usually kept in pockets), but that also would be rather unlikely since a) a laptop isn't kept in a pocket, and b) it's supposedly new. But anything's possible.

Other than that, I don't know what could be causing the problem. Unless there's something very uniquely special about Earpods, it's not like a USB device where it may need certain drivers to work. 3.5mm is a "dumb" port and doesn't transfer conventional data, only audio, so as far as the computer is concerned one device is the same as the next. Do you have an extension or y-adapter you could plug into the computer and plug the Earpods (and others, for testing purposes) into?

[vertigo]

Just looked at some images of the Earpods and the plug molding is definitely not bulky, so I doubt that's an issue. It could be that it extends ever so slightly farther (toward the tip), preventing it from going in far enough. You could compare it to another plug to see if there's a difference, but it might be so small you can't tell by eyeing it. After you check the port for lint, I'd suggest trying plugging it in then somewhat forcefully (being careful not to break anything, obviously; pinch the plug between your fingers and push that way, don't push straight on it from the end by the wire) pushing it in more to see if that makes a difference. Then trying gently angling/wiggling/spinning it to see if any particular orientation causes it to make better contact. If the "springs" in the port are too relaxed and/or the plug on the Earpods is slightly smaller than others (shouldn't be, since it's a standardized 3.5mm, but again, anything's possible, and I'm just throwing out ideas), then it might not be making good enough contact to work properly. This is where an extension or adapter would be nice, because it could help rule that out.

[Francisca]

Just looked at some images of the Earpods and the plug molding is definitely not bulky, so I doubt that's an issue. It could be that it extends ever so slightly farther (toward the tip), preventing it from going in far enough. You could compare it to another plug to see if there's a difference, but it might be so small you can't tell by eyeing it. After you check the port for lint, I'd suggest trying plugging it in then somewhat forcefully (being careful not to break anything, obviously; pinch the plug between your fingers and push that way, don't push straight on it from the end by the wire) pushing it in more to see if that makes a difference. Then trying gently angling/wiggling/spinning it to see if any particular orientation causes it to make better contact. If the "springs" in the port are too relaxed and/or the plug on the Earpods is slightly smaller than others (shouldn't be, since it's a standardized 3.5mm, but again, anything's possible, and I'm just throwing out ideas), then it might not be making good enough contact to work properly. This is where an extension or adapter would be nice, because it could help rule that out.

Hey, thank you so much for helping! I ended up trying to use an old adapter I had (I think it's called a splitter - it basically lets you connect two earbuds into one plug... I suppose it's the Y-adapter you mentioned) and, guess what... Now the earbuds work perfectly well! I don't think the microphone is working, since the splitter adapter only has two "lines", but at least I can use them for audio.

I'll try to clean the port anyways, to remove some possible lint. Even so, it's nice to know that there's a possible fix for this.

[Francisca]

I tried cleaning the port but it still doesn't work, unless I use the adapter :( Too bad the adapter doesn't support microphone. I guess I can buy one that does and then it would work...

[Francisca]

Mind if I ask another question? Is it possible to use the USB C port as an audio port? I do have an adapter for USB C - 3.5 mm and the earbuds work well when I use them on my phone (through the USB C port). Maybe that could be another way to fix this?

[vertigo]

It should work, as that's what it's for, but depending on the adapter the mic might still not work and you may need to get a different one. Not sure if you'll be able to find a splitter cable for headsets, but there's definitely extension cables. Just keep in mind that just because the splitter worked, that doesn't mean another cable will work. But it does suggest that maybe the Earpod plug isn't going in far enough or is too small (or that the port is too "loose"). If possible, you should take your Earpods to a store and try them in some other HP laptops, especially Envys.

[Francisca]

I see... Oh well, I guess I'm just that unlucky! :(

I tried connecting the earbuds through the USB C port, but it doesn't work at all. The audio just comes through the laptop's speakers. I'm sorry I'm asking so many questions, but do you know if there's any way to make that work?

Thanks again, you're helping me a lot!

[vertigo]

You probably just need to switch audio devices. USB is a "smart" port and as such is managed via software, so you have to use Windows to switch between speakers and USB audio. Headphone jack causes it to switch on a lower level (most likely electrically/hardware) which happens automatically.

[Francisca]

Thanks for still being here to help. I'll try to look for an extension cable, since that seems to be my only option.

As for the USB C port, the headphones are just not recognized... I suppose it's because they're not USB C devices by themselves. It's kinda sad that they do work on my phone, which only has a USB C port. I used them with the adapter and they work quite well. I wonder if there's any way to use them through the USB C port on my laptop...

Thanks again, like I said you're a big help!

[vertigo]

I've never used a USB-C to 3.5mm adapter before and haven't bothered to look into them. I assumed there was a chip that would register as a device in Windows, and you would need to select that. Keep in mind it would show up as something different, not as the Earpods. It doesn't seem like it could just be a passive adapter, since USB is a data port and doesn't have (to my knowledge) pins used exclusively for audio. Maybe it needs drivers?

[Francisca]

Yeah, maybe...

I'm really grateful for your help today. I'll keep looking, but maybe I'll just end up returning the Earpods. I wanted them for online classes, but without the microphone they won't be useful at all. Again, thank you so much! :)

[TheGiu_the_eater]

Good morning i bought this pc for my wife. I noticed two negative things:
!)reading speed in my unit don't goes up to 950 mb/s and writing 850  mb/s.
2)bleeding , not too much but visible, in the high-right corner, bottom side

Someone noticed like me? Thanks for help.

[vertigo]

Good morning i bought this pc for my wife. I noticed two negative things:
!)reading speed in my unit don't goes up to 950 mb/s and writing 850  mb/s.
2)bleeding , not too much but visible, in the high-right corner, bottom side

Someone noticed like me? Thanks for help.

Both of those things can be pretty variable. Display technology is far from perfect, and the displays on several identical computers can be different in terms of their brightness, color, bleeding, etc. HDD/SSD performance is the same way, not to mention other potentially complicating factors like BIOS config, drivers, benchmark software used, etc. And you didn't say what the speeds are, just what they aren't, so there's no way to know if what you're getting is really bad or just barely under expected. Also, you may not have the same drive as the reviewed unit. Bottom line for both issues: if it doesn't bother you, and you only notice when really looking at the display or when running benchmarks, but in day-to-day use the laptop performs fine, then it doesn't matter. Most people in most situations would do fine even with a relatively slow SSD and would probably not even notice the difference between one that reads/writes at 500MB/s vs one at 2,000MB/s. IMO, IOPS are much more important, which is why I prefer NVMe over SATA for a heavily accessed drive, like for the OS, but the technology has improved so much at this point that even a budget drive is, again, almost always going to be sufficient for most people.

[TheGiu_the_eater]

Good morning i bought this pc for my wife. I noticed two negative things:
!)reading speed in my unit don't goes up to 950 mb/s and writing 850  mb/s.
2)bleeding , not too much but visible, in the high-right corner, bottom side

Someone noticed like me? Thanks for help.

Both of those things can be pretty variable. Display technology is far from perfect, and the displays on several identical computers can be different in terms of their brightness, color, bleeding, etc. HDD/SSD performance is the same way, not to mention other potentially complicating factors like BIOS config, drivers, benchmark software used, etc. And you didn't say what the speeds are, just what they aren't, so there's no way to know if what you're getting is really bad or just barely under expected. Also, you may not have the same drive as the reviewed unit. Bottom line for both issues: if it doesn't bother you, and you only notice when really looking at the display or when running benchmarks, but in day-to-day use the laptop performs fine, then it doesn't matter. Most people in most situations would do fine even with a relatively slow SSD and would probably not even notice the difference between one that reads/writes at 500MB/s vs one at 2,000MB/s. IMO, IOPS are much more important, which is why I prefer NVMe over SATA for a heavily accessed drive, like for the OS, but the technology has improved so much at this point that even a budget drive is, again, almost always going to be sufficient for most people.

thanks for your replay.
At the end i discovered that the ssd, when isn't connected to electric power, performs more slowsly.
I tried benchmark of ssd connecting the machine to power supply and then seem performs normally:
seq1m q8t1 1748,84 mb/s on read / 1187,58 on write.

[vertigo]

Good morning i bought this pc for my wife. I noticed two negative things:
!)reading speed in my unit don't goes up to 950 mb/s and writing 850  mb/s.
2)bleeding , not too much but visible, in the high-right corner, bottom side

Someone noticed like me? Thanks for help.

Both of those things can be pretty variable. Display technology is far from perfect, and the displays on several identical computers can be different in terms of their brightness, color, bleeding, etc. HDD/SSD performance is the same way, not to mention other potentially complicating factors like BIOS config, drivers, benchmark software used, etc. And you didn't say what the speeds are, just what they aren't, so there's no way to know if what you're getting is really bad or just barely under expected. Also, you may not have the same drive as the reviewed unit. Bottom line for both issues: if it doesn't bother you, and you only notice when really looking at the display or when running benchmarks, but in day-to-day use the laptop performs fine, then it doesn't matter. Most people in most situations would do fine even with a relatively slow SSD and would probably not even notice the difference between one that reads/writes at 500MB/s vs one at 2,000MB/s. IMO, IOPS are much more important, which is why I prefer NVMe over SATA for a heavily accessed drive, like for the OS, but the technology has improved so much at this point that even a budget drive is, again, almost always going to be sufficient for most people.

thanks for your replay.
At the end i discovered that the ssd, when isn't connected to electric power, performs more slowsly.
I tried benchmark of ssd connecting the machine to power supply and then seem performs normally:
seq1m q8t1 1748,84 mb/s on read / 1187,58 on write.

That's interesting. I've never heard of an SSD slowing down while on battery, nor does it make sense as they use very little power. My suspicion is that the CPU is downclocking and the PCIe bus is being slowed down as a result, which is therefore affecting the drive. You could look in the BIOS and Windows settings to see if there's anything you can adjust to prevent this, but unless it's really slow on battery, I wouldn't bother, since, as I mentioned before, you're unlikely to even notice in normal usage.