[Malfunkt]

  Actually, it's AAC that I haven't been able to get working.
 


So don't go converting all of your MP3 to AAC yet.

 
Edit:
 
I'm wondering iF implementation is different for iOS devices as opposed to Mac OSX. Will only AAC files on iOS get transmitted as AAC Bluetooth. I was hoping that no matter what the file it would encode or transcode the files as AAC.
 

 

[Giogio]

  Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at.
 
I mean... without making it look like a battle about suppositions or anything. It's kind of a fact that AptX really is just a software codec, and Apple has at least licensed it for Mac OSX. The only reason for them to not put it on their mobile devices would most likely be due to licensing issues, and also why they haven't officially listed it on their website yet.

 
I like the supposition battle, as far as fair
But I can also suppose that it can be easier for Apple to get a license for an OS, than for Microsoft.
Apple has only got a few models where to install the OS X.
IF Windows would support natively Aptx, there would be thousand of different pc and notebooks and tablets with Aptx, with ONE license. A very big and expensive license probably, whcih anyway microsoft do not have interest in buying because it would sell no more copies of its OS for that, and CSR have no interest in selling because it would make more money with individual licenses.
While Apple is at same time producer of the OS and of the Hardware, so, it was logic to make the OS supporting the codec instead of buying a license for each of those few products with that OS.
If you know what I mean
Another reason for them not to put it on their mobile devices is that so they make people dependent on iTunes and online streaming.
Well, they could still do that by giving iTunes Aptx support...
 
Anyway, if Class-D in that other thread says it well, there still is a relation to Aptx and hardware, in the measure that not each BT chip can support Aptx so well.
But, nobody would ever doubt of the quality of Apple's hardware
 

  Just to add a bit to this codec discussion.
 
Apple devices, such as iphones and other iOS devices default to AAC codec transmission. Yes, this is the same codec used by Apple for MPEG-4 AAC file compression.
 
I think even in Standard mode, the XB950BT would still be sent an AAC signal from an iOS device or APTX from compatible devices. That's not going to change. So this could be why it there may be no change in audio quality in 'high quality' mode. Sony even refers to it as a 'priority' mode. So High quality is more priority for high-quality sound signal.
 
http://theheadphonelist.com/wireless-fidelity-making-sense-bluetooth-headphone-technology/#codecs
http://helpguide.sony.net/mdr/xb950bt/v1/en/print.html
 
I'm sure Apple has some reason for not pushing towards APTX in its devices. In any case, AAC at 250kbps probably is very close or as good as what APTX is putting out. Perhaps they don't want to make a deal with CSR. 

 
Yes but Bill meant that he could not hear any difference also with a Samsung.
Samsung do not support AAC as far as I know.
And, for what I read in the online manual of the XB, for both AAC and Aptx you need the Priority on Quality mode.
This means, no AAC on Standard mode.
= he should have noticed a difference also with AAC.
I can understand why Apple do not want to deal with CSR.
They suck.
Really.
People who do not even answer an email.
What kind of people are they?
 

  Actually, it's AAC that I haven't been able to get working.
 


So don't go converting all of your MP3 to AAC yet.

 
About this, how does the AAC thing work?
For example I have just read the Digitalversus review of the Parrot Zik 2 which I have ordered for test and comparison purposes.
They write: "no aptX, as Parrot opted for the iTunes-, Spotify- and Deezer-compatible AAC"
Does this mean that when you use iTunes it automatically convert your MP3 to AAC before sending them to the Headphones?

 

[Bill-P]

Well, Apple was vague enough with their specifications that it's unclear what is necessary to trigger it:
https://developer.apple.com/hardwaredrivers/BluetoothDesignGuidelines.pdf
 
And I haven't found any way in the API to get back what codec is being used by bluetooth to transmit audio using the A2DP profile in iOS... so I honestly have no idea how to check.
 
And no, iTunes doesn't convert everything to AAC. It'll leave the format the way it is if the device support it. So I can get lossless in iTunes and on my iOS devices using Apple Lossless Audio Codec (ALAC) instead of FLAC (converting is super fast, too).

 

[Malfunkt]

Tonight I hooked up the XB950Bt wired to my JDS Labs C5D.

For whatever reason I hadn't even bothered in the whole time owning this headphones.

So they sound considerably better out of the C5D and using the C5 bass boost these headphones can definitely handle the bass, and we're designed to, but it is so much cleaner with less distortion than what it's internal amp is capable of. I guess no suprise there.

I think a number of people are wondering how these do with what they ar supposed to truly deliver on, and just want to say these fantastic on the sub bass.

Well, they are actually pushed to their very limit with the C5D, and this must be because of the drivers power handling capabilities. So while this can rattle your skull, there may be better headphones out there for that.

I'd say the XB950 is truly at it best - for bassheads. I think with bass boost on, you don't want to listen to loudly for best sound quality, and I think this is perhaps the only thing keeping these from being supreme bass monsters is just power handling.

Still, that would be for crazy bassheads. As right now with my C5D it sounds pretty amazing with techno, drum n bass and dubstep. Much much better than I would have imagined a pair of generic or consumer headphones.

Anyhow, just wanted to confirm, that these handily perform out of dedicated DAC and amp, and not by a small margin.

 

[NightflyNYC]

To those of you who have the MDR-XB950BT:
 
This may sound like an odd question, but how loud are they? I listened to them at B&H this week and was really impressed how much I could crank up the volume, and with no distortion. But I'm not sure if that because Sony's display for these solidly amped them, or if they're easily driven, or even if the fact that they're chargeable gives them a pseudo-amp effect.
 
Do they sound especially robust, even when plugged into a mobile device with no amp?

 

[Malfunkt]

To those of you who have the MDR-XB950BT:

Do they sound especially robust, even when plugged into a mobile device with no amp?

They sound great from mobiles. They are really easy to drive, they have plenty of volume with Bluetooth, but I have a couple podcasts that were a bit low in the gain and ended up turning the headphones to their maximum (of which a friendly little chirp will give you some feedback - which can be a good reminder before putting something that is mastered louder on).

The same headphone has a wired configuration XB950AP which is very similar and also easily driven by mobile.

Listening out of my iPhone 6 I would say is quite comparable to the quality and volume that my dedicated amp is putting out, the only difference being the C5D awesome bass boost, which no amount of equalization on the iPhone could reproduce.

 

[Bill-P]

I measured the rough frequency response with my iPhone's microphone for fun... (please ignore anything below 100Hz because that's a limitation with the iPhone's microphone)
 

 
But what this indicates, essentially, is what I've suspected all along: the natural frequency response of the XB950BT really isn't all that bassy. It has a midrange bump, so technically, it should be more midrange, less bass, and almost non-existent treble after everything is cleaned up.
 
Will measure my modded pair soon-ish... after I've tried out a few things.

 

[Giogio]

I've received them.
Severely lacking highs. But this improves with eq.
Without eq they sound dull and not lively at all.
Without bass boost, believe me or not, they have less and worse bass than the Fidelio m2bt.
But with bassboost they cannot be reached. Although the bass of the Fidelio is much more controlled, clean, detailed, warm and lively. With more rumble too.
They have more range than the Fidelio, which would make them better for home use (due to the blind spot i have in the kitchen with the Fidelio).

But I think I'll send them back and see what comes out at CES, and if nothing better comes out, I'll buy them when they're cheaper.
And I'll mod them. Eq is not useful to me. It is not a matter of quantity. It is lack of control.

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

As many have experienced, 100-150hrs opens the sound quite a bit. Mids and highs benefit most. After some use you can let pink noise through them to accelerate the process.

I've received them.
Severely lacking highs. But this improves with eq.
Without eq they sound dull and not lively at all.
Without bass boost, believe me or not, they have less and worse bass than the Fidelio m2bt.
But with bassboost they cannot be reached. Although the bass of the Fidelio is much more controlled, clean, detailed, warm and lively. With more rumble too.
They have more range than the Fidelio, which would make them better for home use (due to the blind spot i have in the kitchen with the Fidelio).

But I think I'll send them back and see what comes out at CES, and if nothing better comes out, I'll buy them when they're cheaper.
And I'll mod them. Eq is not useful to me. It is not a matter of quantity. It is lack of control.

 

[Bill-P]

Well, the highest treble peak is 12dB down from the highest midrange peak, and roughly 8dB down from bass, so even if you boost treble like crazy on EQ, it'll only make this headphone "neutral" rather than "exciting".
 
And when it's that extreme, I don't think burn-in will help.
 
Modding will probably push more clarity in the lower range out and bring it closer to its native frequency response, but I'm starting to think I'll have to employ more... heavy-handed techniques with regards to modding in order to get the treble up to par.

Tis' a shame, because from what I'm seeing, this headphone can definitely be a good one, since bass isn't overdone, and midrange looks nice as well. It certainly will not cause any sibilance.

 

[david8613]

Yeah they do need lots of burn in, they do get better.

 

[roguepp88]

Reading some pretty good reviews here, however if I want a bluetooth headphone with similar functionality,
but with less bass and a more balanced signature for female vocals and occasionally pure instrumental pieces like piano,
what should I be looking for if I do not get these?
 
I really want something good that is portable, preferably matched wireless with my nexus 5 

 

[GearMe]

Reading some pretty good reviews here, however if I want a bluetooth headphone with similar functionality,
but with less bass and a more balanced signature for female vocals and occasionally pure instrumental pieces like piano,
what should I be looking for if I do not get these?

I really want something good that is portable, preferably matched wireless with my nexus 5 

I got some Creative WP-350s about a year ago from Best Buy for $40 (matched a web price). They're aptX and a more neutral sound signature...really quite a good value with a compact form factor.

Another Head-Fier's thoughts http://www.head-fi.org/t/661074/creative-wp-350-bluetooth-headphones-were-suprisingly-good

 

[Giogio]

  Well, the highest treble peak is 12dB down from the highest midrange peak, and roughly 8dB down from bass, so even if you boost treble like crazy on EQ, it'll only make this headphone "neutral" rather than "exciting".
 
And when it's that extreme, I don't think burn-in will help.
 
Modding will probably push more clarity in the lower range out and bring it closer to its native frequency response, but I'm starting to think I'll have to employ more... heavy-handed techniques with regards to modding in order to get the treble up to par.

Tis' a shame, because from what I'm seeing, this headphone can definitely be a good one, since bass isn't overdone, and midrange looks nice as well. It certainly will not cause any sibilance.

 
I did not have problems with the highs. I mean. Yeah, without EQ they totally suck. But I boosted them with EQ (a lot) and I was satisfied enough for a second pair of headphones (eventually also for a "only" pair of headphones, if the FIdelio would not exist and if I would feel that I prefer to sacrifice the MUCH better sound quality of the Plantronics Backbeat Pro over the exciting bass of the Sony XB).

My problem is the dull bass. There is power in quantity but it is, not, lively, not clear, not precise...
I would like all that power, but with the warmth and clarity of the Fidelio M2BT.
Can your Mod do that?
BTW, I would love to ear your opinions on the Fidelio M2BT when you will ever try them.
And, I would also appreciate your comparisons on BT Headphones in my thread.

This is also true for you, Malfunkt!
And for everybody, actually
 

  Reading some pretty good reviews here, however if I want a bluetooth headphone with similar functionality,
but with less bass and a more balanced signature for female vocals and occasionally pure instrumental pieces like piano,
what should I be looking for if I do not get these?
 
I really want something good that is portable, preferably matched wireless with my nexus 5 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/746519/huge-comparison-of-all-the-best-bluetooth-headphones-fidelio-plantronics-bose-harman-kardon-parrot-logitech-sony-samsung-beats-akg-jbl-jabra-phiaton-sennheiser-house-of-marley-skullcandy-supertooth-bluedio-pendulumic
 
Plantronics Backbeat Pro for quality. Bose Soundlink On Ear for Portability (but they also sound VERY good, really very good.
Both have a less intrusive bass than the XB.
 
The Fidelio M2BT are unfortunately not available in the US.
Are you in the US or in EU?
They could be the best choice. Their bass is powerfull, but not overwhelming. They do NOT exaggerate bass, they just respond very well to bass frequencies.
So, if there is lot of bass in a track, they give lot of bass (of very good quality). If not, not.
They are also very well portable.

 

[Bill-P]

  I did not have problems with the highs. I mean. Yeah, without EQ they totally suck. But I boosted them with EQ (a lot) and I was satisfied enough for a second pair of headphones (eventually also for a "only" pair of headphones, if the FIdelio would not exist and if I would feel that I prefer to sacrifice the MUCH better sound quality of the Plantronics Backbeat Pro over the exciting bass of the Sony XB).

My problem is the dull bass. There is power in quantity but it is, not, lively, not clear, not precise...
I would like all that power, but with the warmth and clarity of the Fidelio M2BT.
Can your Mod do that?
BTW, I would love to ear your opinions on the Fidelio M2BT when you will ever try them.
And, I would also appreciate your comparisons on BT Headphones in my thread.

 
Yeah, bass quality was one of the issues I wanted to address. It was underdamped, so there was not much focus or precision at stock. Modded does have better focus, but the quantity leaves much to be desired, because... well, they simply don't have a lot of bass to begin with.
 
Now that I have obtained a MDR-Z7, and I have regained my ATH-ES10 for portable use, I'm starting to feel the limitations of the XB950BT creeping up to the powerhouses. It's still a very nice bluetooth headphone, but I think I'm just asking for too much from it.
 
It's still the best bluetooth headphone I have heard, of course. Heard the MDR-1RBT, and I wasn't hearly half as impressed. I haven't heard the Fidelio M2BT... but will try that one when I get a chance.