[Traveller]

It's all good and well that the AK3xx can "identify" a call from a AptX HD device, but this alone in no way guarantees that the AK3xx will actually operate in AptX HD mode... . As you (and many others on the Internet) pointed out, the CSR8675 is a requirement for AptX-HD support...

Are you suggesting the AK380 displays AptX HD and then actually goes ahead and just uses AptX? ... I agree that it seems very unlikely the CSR8675 can be in the AK380 unless they had early access to the chips which DOES happen in the industry... .

I'm only suggesting that the timeline is against us but I do trust A&K (as well as iRiver - manufacture of my first serious DAP - the iHP-120*). Enough that I recently parted with a lot of € for their AK320

 

...There is a whole separate question about whether the AK DAPS are "really" outputting APT-X HD, considering that the Qualcomm chip that supports this came out over 6 months after the release of the AK380 and of course a whole lot longer with the AK240. The screen shows APT-X HD on the DAP when connecting with the XB10 but conspiracy theorists believe that is all it does by identifying the stream header, and then just transmits with APT-X (no HD) anyway    
I did try and put the conspiracy to bed by contacting Qualcomm directly to ask if there were other ways of implementing APT-X HD without the newest BT radio chip (e.g. in an FPGA), and whether they planned to certify the AK DAPs........no response, unfortunately.

 

...As for the question of the 320's ability to use the AptX-HD codec, I have no way of verifying it. I would need an AptX-only headphone dongle so that I could plug in the same headphone / IEM into both BT-dongles. This would provide the means to properly compare 16-bit AptX against 24-bit AptX HD.

While I still am without the ability to A/B, I was pleased to see Qualcomm add the AK3xx/AK70 to their AptX HD list!!!

 

 

[jonstatt]

   
 
While I still am without the ability to A/B, I was pleased to see Qualcomm add the AK3xx/AK70 to their AptX HD list!!!

 

 
So they have! Good you noticed that I guess that puts the conspiracy theory to bed as I highly doubt that Qualcomm would simply add the models to their list without checking first!

 

[adonissk]

Is there such a thing as a bluetooth transport only?  I would really love to be able to untether the mojo from the phone. I.e. running a usb cable from the XB10 to the mojo and let the mojo do the decoding!

 

[faw88]

  Is there such a thing as a bluetooth transport only?  I would really love to be able to untether the mojo from the phone. I.e. running a usb cable from the XB10 to the mojo and let the mojo do the decoding!

I was also looking for such a thing. ended up getting the Shanling M1. It does pretty much all you want plus more. a lot of mojo owners are getting M1's as it fits really well. 

 

[k4syx]

Is there such a thing as a bluetooth transport only?  I would really love to be able to untether the mojo from the phone. I.e. running a usb cable from the XB10 to the mojo and let the mojo do the decoding!

Bluetooth doesn't have enough bandwidth to do somethinglike that - that's why we need to use codecs that are able to compress data on the fly.
Unfortunately unless you're using AptX lossless capable devices that compression will be lossy.

I saw adverts of mojo add-on that makes it wireless. It's called mojo poly and I (as a proud mojo owner myself) was thinking about buying it - until I saw the price. It's almost same as for mojo alone (!)

So I'll stay a happy mobile XB10 user and happy desktop Mojo user.

 

[adonissk]

Bluetooth doesn't have enough bandwidth to do somethinglike that - that's why we need to use codecs that are able to compress data on the fly.
Unfortunately unless you're using AptX lossless capable devices that compression will be lossy.

I saw adverts of mojo add-on that makes it wireless. It's called mojo poly and I (as a proud mojo owner myself) was thinking about buying it - until I saw the price. It's almost same as for mojo alone (!)

So I'll stay a happy mobile XB10 user and happy desktop Mojo user.

I wasn't looking to transport uncompressed. For instance let's say I have an iphone and my bluetooth receiver supports aac. I can transfer the AAC untouched over bluetooth and the decode it using my own dac. Not the bluetooth receiver's dac. The poly is nice but it's so expensive and it only works with the mojo...

 

[adonissk]

 
I was also looking for such a thing. ended up getting the Shanling M1. It does pretty much all you want plus more. a lot of mojo owners are getting M1's as it fits really well. 

 
Thanks, I saw the Shanling before. I suppose I was hoping for something much smaller, without a screen and all those other features. Oh well, one can't have everything. Does Shanling support AAC?

 

[faw88]

   
Thanks, I saw the Shanling before. I suppose I was hoping for something much smaller, without a screen and all those other features. Oh well, one can't have everything. Does Shanling support AAC?

Yes it does, and also DSD. The way I look at it, I can have all my HQ DSD FLAC music in the M1 on the memory card, and I can stream Spotify/tidal over bluetooth via aptx with minimum loss, It doesn't have aptx HD but I'm ok with aptx as well. Even aptx HD can't stream loss FLAC or DSD. so I don't see the utility, as aptx is fine for 320kbps Spotify streaming without any degradation. 
I think the best option for you is the Poly, but the price/functionality ratio was just too steep for me hence I settled for an M1. Although I was really hoping the XB10 had line out or USB-out, but I'm afraid it doesn't. maybe AK can give these features in the next iteration, It'd be perfect. 
That Being said, The XB-10 is a very very good device on its own to use with IEM's etc. just not a good transport. 

 

[k4syx]

I wasn't looking to transport uncompressed. For instance let's say I have an iphone and my bluetooth receiver supports aac. I can transfer the AAC untouched over bluetooth and the decode it using my own dac. Not the bluetooth receiver's dac. The poly is nice but it's so expensive and it only works with the mojo...

Still, too narrow bandwidth. Unless you'd like to transfer file in advance, than play it and maybe transfer another one while the first one is still playing.
That would be an interesting idea, though I'm still not sure if it is possible to push typical size (~5mins) FLAC file less than 5 minutes.
Interesting idea though.

 

[adonissk]

Still, too narrow bandwidth. Unless you'd like to transfer file in advance, than play it and maybe transfer another one while the first one is still playing.
That would be an interesting idea, though I'm still not sure if it is possible to push typical size (~5mins) FLAC file less than 5 minutes.
Interesting idea though.

 
Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I am not talking about lossless here, I am merely looking to transfer a compressed AAC stream. But the original one, that comes from apple music. If the receiver supports AAC over bluetooth, it should just receive that apple music stream without any processing from the phone (which I assume the XB10 does).
 
Now, instead of decoding this stream on the XB10 DAC, I want to get it over USB from the SB10 and decode it on the Mojo. 

 

[faw88]

   
Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I am not talking about lossless here, I am merely looking to transfer a compressed AAC stream. But the original one, that comes from apple music. If the receiver supports AAC over bluetooth, it should just receive that apple music stream without any processing from the phone (which I assume the XB10 does).
 
Now, instead of decoding this stream on the XB10 DAC, I want to get it over USB from the SB10 and decode it on the Mojo. 

Shanling m1 supports AAC format. it supports bluetooth receiving function. since all of mojo's inputs are digital, the only way to give mojo a signal is via unprocessed digital input. so when you connect the m1 to mojo via USB-C to micro-USB cable, It merely acts like a bluetooth receiver and transfers the digital unprocessed signal to mojo. the hidisz ap60 does the same
I don't know if the XB-10 has a USB out function? 

 

[adonissk]

 
Shanling m1 supports AAC format. it supports bluetooth receiving function. since all of mojo's inputs are digital, the only way to give mojo a signal is via unprocessed digital input. so when you connect the m1 to mojo via USB-C to micro-USB cable, It merely acts like a bluetooth receiver and transfers the digital unprocessed signal to mojo. the hidisz ap60 does the same
I don't know if the XB-10 has a USB out function? 

No it doesn't unfortunately. If it did it would solve my problem!
I guess I will give the Shanling a try then. 

 

[gr8soundz]

 
Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I am not talking about lossless here, I am merely looking to transfer a compressed AAC stream. But the original one, that comes from apple music. If the receiver supports AAC over bluetooth, it should just receive that apple music stream without any processing from the phone (which I assume the XB10 does).
 
Now, instead of decoding this stream on the XB10 DAC, I want to get it over USB from the SB10 and decode it on the Mojo. 

 
Unfortunately, the XB10 only charges over usb. No usb audio or dac support (one of 1st questions I asked about it). Imo, it's best features are aptx-hd and the balanced output.
 
The best bluetooth codec might be Sony's LDAC which has 2-3x higher data rate (990k) than even apt-x/hd. However, the only non-Sony device that supports it so far is the Mytek Clef.
 
The Poly, despite the price, does sound like the best/simplest option for what you're describing. Not sure it'll support AAC; Chord's last bluetooth device (the Hugo) only specified a2dp and aptx.
 

 

[adonissk]

   
Unfortunately, the XB10 only charges over usb. No usb audio or dac support (one of 1st questions I asked about it). Imo, it's best features are aptx-hd and the balanced output.
 
The best bluetooth codec might be Sony's LDAC which has 2-3x higher data rate (990k) than even apt-x/hd. However, the only non-Sony device that supports it so far is the Mytek Clef.
 
The Poly, despite the price, does sound like the best/simplest option for what you're describing. Not sure it'll support AAC; Chord's last bluetooth device (the Hugo) only specified a2dp and aptx.
 

I suppose with the Poly I won't need AAC, I'll be streaming Tidal lossless over wifi. But then again AAC would be nice as a lower power alternative for the phone. I'm pretty sure constant wifi streaming will kill the iPhone pretty fast. 

 

[The Walrus]

Correct me if I'm wrong: I connect my WIRED headphones to this thing. ...and I need my source, like my A&K DAP or whatever, to be within my reach, because I will control what I'm listening to obviously.
So why the hell do I need my headphone AMP/DAC to be wireless, bluetooth or otherwise?