[Wiz33]

Well my A17 supports AptX and LDAC and all Sony DAP's released after the invention of LDAC did as well up until the A30, and WM1-A/Z. The reason to support AptX is the huge number of AptX products both headphones and wireless speakers that are already sold. I have two AptX capable wireless speakers and between my friends and family another 10 or so. For me to share my music with them I want a DAP with AptX.

Sony announced awhile ago (last year) that they were going to start offering LDAC bluetooth chips to other manufacturers. But up until the google announcement they haven't had much success. AptX HD will probably catch on before LDAC as people are already familiar with AptX. Whereas only people who bought Sony products would be familiar with LDAC. Also LDAC is a battery hog, when I use it on my A17 with my Sony receiver the battery life drops like a rock. The range is also limited compared to AptX in my experience as I find it harder to position my A17 for good reception with LDAC. Now maybe Sony has improved the battery efficiency and range on later versions of the chip, I can't say.

I am also willing to bet that those Android devices will also offer AptX as well as LDAC. Google isn't going to abandon all the AptX headphones and speakers on the market. So the question becomes how much more will an android smartphone cost with the LDAC chip included if it also offers AptX?

Problem is that AptX HD is basically useless. If all you are playing is 16 bit m4a/FLAC, there's no difference as you're not exceeding the BT 4.0 bandwidth. But if you're play 24/96 or DSD then the AptX HD 's extra bandwidth is not enough and you need LDAC.

 

[fish1050]

Problem is that AptX HD is basically useless. If all you are playing is 16 bit m4a/FLAC, there's no difference as you're not exceeding the BT 4.0 bandwidth. But if you're play 24/96 or DSD then the AptX HD 's extra bandwidth is not enough and you need LDAC.

Let's look at your statement with actual numbers. AptX has a transmission rate of around 320 kbps (mp3). If I remember correctly AptX HD is someting like 560 kbps. LDAC is either 600 kbps (standard) or 906 kbps (sound quality). which I can confirm from my own experience. Most of my tracks are 16 bit flac files ripped from CD. They tend to be somewhere between 700 to just under 900 kbps depending on the track. So if you use AptX HD you will get better results than with AptX assuming at least 16 flac files or higher. If you want the best results the highest quality results then the LDAC (sound quality). Personally I can't hear a difference between LDAC standard and LDAC sound quality when streaming to my Sony STRDN860 receiver and listening through my B&W P5S2 headphones. If I go LDAC I stick with standard as it seems to provide better range and slightly less battery drain.

Now lets talk AptX vs LDAC: Streaming from my A17 to my home system via AptX I can hear minor differences on some but not all tracks vs LDAC standard. Streaming to wireless speakers LDAC to me is overkill and AptX is perfectly fine. I personally have not tried bluetooth headphones and probably never will. I will stick to wired for the best sound quality.

So if I can't hear a difference between 600 kbps LDAC and 906 kbps LDAC then I doubt I would hear a difference between AptX HD vs LDAC standard or sound quality settings. No AptX HD won't give you 100% lossless but it will give you better results than AptX. Personally I find DSD files on a portable device overkill as the file sizes are huge. If I want to listen to DSD I listen on my home system with my 9 TB media server. For me portable audio is more about convenience than ultimate sound quality.

You are talking numbers I am talking actual user experience with AptX, and LDAC. No I can't speak to the quality of AptX HD but I have to believe it would be impossible to tell the difference between AptX HD and LDAC especially on portable audio devices. I know of 5 manufacturers offering AptX HD compatible devices although not many actual products. Right now Sony is alone in offering LDAC compatible devices. I hope we are not looking at another format war like we saw with HD DVD and Bluray.

 

[Wiz33]

Let's look at your statement with actual numbers. AptX has a transmission rate of around 320 kbps (mp3). If I remember correctly AptX HD is someting like 560 kbps. LDAC is either 600 kbps (standard) or 906 kbps (sound quality). which I can confirm from my own experience. Most of my tracks are 16 bit flac files ripped from CD. They tend to be somewhere between 700 to just under 900 kbps depending on the track. So if you use AptX HD you will get better results than with AptX assuming at least 16 flac files or higher. If you want the best results the highest quality results then the LDAC (sound quality). Personally I can't hear a difference between LDAC standard and LDAC sound quality when streaming to my Sony STRDN860 receiver and listening through my B&W P5S2 headphones. If I go LDAC I stick with standard as it seems to provide better range and slightly less battery drain.

Now lets talk AptX vs LDAC: Streaming from my A17 to my home system via AptX I can hear minor differences on some but not all tracks vs LDAC standard. Streaming to wireless speakers LDAC to me is overkill and AptX is perfectly fine. I personally have not tried bluetooth headphones and probably never will. I will stick to wired for the best sound quality.

So if I can't hear a difference between 600 kbps LDAC and 906 kbps LDAC then I doubt I would hear a difference between AptX HD vs LDAC standard or sound quality settings. No AptX HD won't give you 100% lossless but it will give you better results than AptX. Personally I find DSD files on a portable device overkill as the file sizes are huge. If I want to listen to DSD I listen on my home system with my 9 TB media server. For me portable audio is more about convenience than ultimate sound quality.

You are talking numbers I am talking actual user experience with AptX, and LDAC. No I can't speak to the quality of AptX HD but I have to believe it would be impossible to tell the difference between AptX HD and LDAC especially on portable audio devices. I know of 5 manufacturers offering AptX HD compatible devices although not many actual products. Right now Sony is alone in offering LDAC compatible devices. I hope we are not looking at another format war like we saw with HD DVD and Bluray.

Well, I guess it depends on how much Hi-Res music you have, I'm in the process of ripping all my LPs into 24/96 using a Sony PSHX500 and I'm not going to do every album twice so I have 24/96 for home and 16 bit m4a for portable. Given that, I might as well enjoy them on the A35. I'm in the camp that believe ripping CD to FLAC or m4a at anything higher than 44.1 does not produce any meaningful improvements so regular BT would be good enough for those.

 

[fish1050]

Well, I guess it depends on how much Hi-Res music you have, I'm in the process of ripping all my LPs into 24/96 using a Sony PSHX500 and I'm not going to do every album twice so I have 24/96 for home and 16 bit m4a for portable. Given that, I might as well enjoy them on the A35. I'm in the camp that believe ripping CD to FLAC or m4a at anything higher than 44.1 does not produce any meaningful improvements so regular BT would be good enough for those.

Well since you already ripped your LP's to a lossless format converting them to say 16 bit flac which is also lossless you shouldn't experience much loss in sound quality. So you wouldn't have to re-rip from your albums again and it should save you alot of storage space on your A35. Just food for thought.

I think we tend to get caught up in all the numbers available for this stuff. The proof is in the listening and if you can't hear a difference between formats then go with one that gives you the smallest file sizes. I had a bunch of 24 bit flac files I ripped from albums at one point. I converted them to 16 bit flac and then listen to both and could not hear any real decline in sound quality. So I just converted all 24 bit flac files to 16 bit flac and saved the space. I still have the 24 bit versions on my media server for home listening but only use 16 bit flac on my A17.

 

[Wiz33]

Well since you already ripped your LP's to a lossless format converting them to say 16 bit flac which is also lossless you shouldn't experience much loss in sound quality. So you wouldn't have to re-rip from your albums again and it should save you alot of storage space on your A35. Just food for thought.

I think we tend to get caught up in all the numbers available for this stuff. The proof is in the listening and if you can't hear a difference between formats then go with one that gives you the smallest file sizes. I had a bunch of 24 bit flac files I ripped from albums at one point. I converted them to 16 bit flac and then listen to both and could not hear any real decline in sound quality. So I just converted all 24 bit flac files to 16 bit flac and saved the space. I still have the 24 bit versions on my media server for home listening but only use 16 bit flac on my A17.

Yea, Not LP are create equal, since 24 bit mostly only offer dynamic range benefit. it's usually only noticeable on music with a wide dynamic range like on some classical or modern DTS concert rips from DVD or Blu-ray.

 

[superuser1]

Well, I guess it depends on how much Hi-Res music you have, I'm in the process of ripping all my LPs into 24/96 using a Sony PSHX500 and I'm not going to do every album twice so I have 24/96 for home and 16 bit m4a for portable. Given that, I might as well enjoy them on the A35. I'm in the camp that believe ripping CD to FLAC or m4a at anything higher than 44.1 does not produce any meaningful improvements so regular BT would be good enough for those.

Just curious.. why m4a?

 

[Wiz33]

Just curious.. why m4a?

I actually do both FLAC and m4a, Some of my earlier CD rips are m4a (just for size while I was using an iPhone for playback). Most of my newer rips since getting the A35 have been FLAC and LPs at 24/96. Just don't have time to go back and redo some of the earlier rips.

 

[superuser1]

I actually do both FLAC and m4a, Some of my earlier CD rips are m4a (just for size while I was using an iPhone for playback). Most of my newer rips since getting the A35 have been FLAC and LPs at 24/96. Just don't have time to go back and redo some of the earlier rips.

good to know. I was specifically asking about m4a as it uses the AAC codec and i wanted to know if there was an advantage qua size/ quality?

 

[Wiz33]

good to know. I was specifically asking about m4a as it uses the AAC codec and i wanted to know if there was an advantage qua size/ quality?

Seriously, If you're space limited or mostly listen on the go with fair amount of ambient noise. The difference is not really worth it. Even with isolation tips, I can't really tell the difference unless I'm in a quiet environment.

 

[superuser1]

Seriously, If you're space limited or mostly listen on the go with fair amount of ambient noise. The difference is not really worth it. Even with isolation tips, I can't really tell the difference unless I'm in a quiet environment.

This hobby is such my friend
What i am really asking is do you find it better than mp3 in an way?

 

[Wiz33]

This hobby is such my friend
What i am really asking is do you find it better than mp3 in an way?

If you can tell the difference between a mp3 and a CD then you'll be able to even on m4a much less FLAC.

 

[pinkbecca]

if anyone has the airpods, can you try to connect to the nw-a35 and tell me if you're able to adjust the volume, thanks.

 

[Bepli]

if anyone has the airpods, can you try to connect to the nw-a35 and tell me if you're able to adjust the volume, thanks.

In-Line Remotes do not work with the A35. Both Volume and Control do not work, tested with 3 different headphones.

 

[Wiz33]

if anyone has the airpods, can you try to connect to the nw-a35 and tell me if you're able to adjust the volume, thanks.

Should work over BT as it's part of the BT standard.

 

[Wiz33]

In-Line Remotes do not work with the A35. Both Volume and Control do not work, tested with 3 different headphones.

Wired remote will not work as the 3.5mm jack does not support it but BT should be fine, Mine does.