[Researcher]

The BT 5 is in this case just marketing blabla. The BT Chip (which is also used by other devices like earstudio) is certified for BT 5 (but the certification was easy as this kind of device needs to implement nothing new for BT 5 - so qualcomm just had to spend a few bucks for recertification)

If you read the Bluetooth specifications (or at least on wiki whats new on BT 5) you notice following;
BT 5 brings big improvements for BT Low Energy. This is good for Stuff like Fitbit and so on.

But for A2DP - that what is used by BT audio Receivers - the communication is done by Bluetooth BR/EDR classic.
And this wasn't changed since BT 4.x on receiver side or on the protocol
So for audio BT 5 is no improvement like higher Datarate.

Yes, the sender is allowed to send with a higher output power in classic mode. But this "feature" does not need a higher Protocol number on Receiver side. Also Receivers with BT 4.x (or even older) profit if the sender is transmitting with more power.

So:
BT 5 in smartphone (or other sender) = good.
BT 5 on receiver side = just marketing
(for classic stuff. For LE Stuff it's great)


BTW: it's BT 5 not BT 5.0.
Bluetooth dropped it's Point numbers starting with BT 5

BT 5 (i am almost sure 5.1 will be released. You will use 5.0 then. Whether or not i am right, this is not the topic we are discussing about) To be honest, you wrote many WAFFLES here. BT 5 is currently a must-have feature due to several reasons;

Bluetooth 5 provides the high speed in terms of the speed between packets. In reality, the speed is in terms of link speed. Historically, BLE was capped at a 1-Mb/s data rate; that’s doubled to 2 Mb/s with Bluetooth 5. This means low latency, while watching a movie. Moreover a Bluetooth 5 radio at 2 Mb/s will see a big advantage in application throughput when placed the same distance apart. This means you can hear clearly what you are on at longer range. Many people here complain about temporary loss of connection and clarity, while their phone are placed into back-pocket. This will kill such an unacceptable situation.

I got Iphone X with BT 5. Of course, i would like to invest in not crappy tech but future.

anyway, my question is still there, is there anyone here who can say the Gets`s connecting range (ft) with/without any obstacle?

 

[meinname123]

5.1 i don't think so. Maybe they will call it 5+ or 5 Advanced or 5 High-speed or whatever.
But this doesn't really matter.

For the other things you wrote.
Believe and think what you want.
But the future will show you that no BT 5 A2DP Audio Receiver will have any advantage over a BT 4.2 A2DP Device. (cause A2DP is no part of the BLE Stack)
//edit:

Yes, both can profit from a BT 5 Device on sender side (like your iPhoneX) cause of the higher allowed Output Power. But as said, BOTH

//edit: BTW: the next cool thing in BT which has to do with Audio is the Tempow Audio Profile (TAP)

 

[Researcher]

5.1 i don't think so. Maybe they will call it 5+ or 5 Advanced or 5 High-speed or whatever.
But this doesn't really matter.

For the other things you wrote.
Believe and think what you want.
But the future will show you that no BT 5 A2DP Audio Receiver will have any advantage over a BT 4.2 A2DP Device. (cause A2DP is no part of the BLE Stack)
//edit:

Yes, both can profit from a BT 5 Device on sender side (like your iPhoneX) cause of the higher allowed Output Power. But as said, BOTH

//edit: BTW: the next cool thing in BT which has to do with Audio is the Tempow Audio Profile (TAP)

Yeah, provided that you have any two devices with BT 5, you can only get benefit from BT 5. Afais, BT 5 will be standard for all phones released in 2018. On the other hand, nearly all 2017 flagships have BT 5. I am gonna be waiting for V2 of the Get for overall improvement in build quality or `maybe` sounding. Who knows whether or not we will see any interesting news from CES 2018...

BTW, i am thinking to pair it with W40.

 

[Karendar]

The BT 5 is in this case just marketing blabla. The BT Chip (which is also used by other devices like earstudio) is certified for BT 5 (but the certification was easy as this kind of device needs to implement nothing new for BT 5 - so qualcomm just had to spend a few bucks for recertification)

If you read the Bluetooth specifications (or at least on wiki whats new on BT 5) you notice following;
BT 5 brings big improvements for BT Low Energy. This is good for Stuff like Fitbit and so on.

But for A2DP - that what is used by BT audio Receivers - the communication is done by Bluetooth BR/EDR classic.
And this wasn't changed since BT 4.x on receiver side or on the protocol
So for audio BT 5 is no improvement like higher Datarate.

Yes, the sender is allowed to send with a higher output power in classic mode. But this "feature" does not need a higher Protocol number on Receiver side. Also Receivers with BT 4.x (or even older) profit if the sender is transmitting with more power.

So:
BT 5 in smartphone (or other sender) = good.
BT 5 on receiver side = just marketing
(for classic stuff. For LE Stuff it's great)


BTW: it's BT 5 not BT 5.0.
Bluetooth dropped it's Point numbers starting with BT 5

Funny you say that Bluetooth dropped the minor versioning numbers: https://www.bluetooth.com/~/media/files/specification/bluetooth-5-faq.ashx?la=en - I guess someone should tell the person who does their documentation to drop the decimals too.

While it's true that BT 5 bandwidth and range increases are mostly for LE devices, there are some optimizations which might give a more stable connection. And depending on how it's implemented, having a BT 5 transmitting device paired to the Get could have some improvement in communication as opposed to a BT 4.x transmitting device.

 

[meinname123]

Funny you say that Bluetooth dropped the minor versioning numbers: https://www.bluetooth.com/~/media/files/specification/bluetooth-5-faq.ashx?la=en - I guess someone should tell the person who does their documentation to drop the decimals too.

LOL - True. Good catch.

 

[infinitum4]

Hi there, I have been eyeing the GET for a week now.

A bit info on my setup, I currently use Dragonfly Red on my Samsung S8, with songs between 16 - 24bit, 44.1 - 96khz, 320kbps or above. I use FLC8S with the Reds for my wired setup, and am planning to use it with the GET too for commute. One thing that concerns me though, is the hissing issue I've been reading on this thread. Considering that FLC8S has just 11 Ohm impedance, will this be a major issue?

Also, how do these compare with the Red if anyone has both? Thanks a lot!

 

[Karendar]

Hi there, I have been eyeing the GET for a week now.

A bit info on my setup, I currently use Dragonfly Red on my Samsung S8, with songs between 16 - 24bit, 44.1 - 96khz, 320kbps or above. I use FLC8S with the Reds for my wired setup, and am planning to use it with the GET too for commute. One thing that concerns me though, is the hissing issue I've been reading on this thread. Considering that FLC8S has just 11 Ohm impedance, will this be a major issue?

Also, how do these compare with the Red if anyone has both? Thanks a lot!

Get is mostly used for high impedance gear... I have 32 ohm impedance IEM's (64 audio U8) and they suffer from the hiss, which I can make abstraction of at higher volume. Some people were not able to make abstraction of it though. Your best bet would be to listen to it first...

However, they do offer a "garanteed satisfaction" policy. So if it doesn't float your boat, they'll make good on it. They were working on an impedance adapter for sensitive gear. Waiting for them to fulfill on that front. In the meantime, I have a 20 ohm impedance adapter which does cut the hiss considerably, but affects audio clarity/soundstage... It's a cheap adapter, so it's normal.

There's always this that can compensate for the hiss:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1281352-REG/ifi_audio_iematch_micro_idsd_headphone.html

But at that price, makes Get a little too expensive unless you have a few use cases for this.

 

[zolom]

I am really worried about the noise (hiss) level with highly sensitive IEMs (mine is the Shure se846). Did anyone try the GET with those or similar IEMs?
I did place an order on the GET, but I am reluctant to add impedance stage which may affect the sound dynamics and soundstage.
If the noise level over such IEMs is significant, then it might be reasonable to hold my order for now and wait for V2 of the GET.

 

[infinitum4]

Get is mostly used for high impedance gear... I have 32 ohm impedance IEM's (64 audio U8) and they suffer from the hiss, which I can make abstraction of at higher volume. Some people were not able to make abstraction of it though. Your best bet would be to listen to it first...

However, they do offer a "garanteed satisfaction" policy. So if it doesn't float your boat, they'll make good on it. They were working on an impedance adapter for sensitive gear. Waiting for them to fulfill on that front. In the meantime, I have a 20 ohm impedance adapter which does cut the hiss considerably, but affects audio clarity/soundstage... It's a cheap adapter, so it's normal.

There's always this that can compensate for the hiss:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1281352-REG/ifi_audio_iematch_micro_idsd_headphone.html

But at that price, makes Get a little too expensive unless you have a few use cases for this.

Hi Karendar, thanks for the info. I think for my use cases I will instead search for a separate wireless IEM that supports at least aptX; still don't know if I'm going true wireless yet, will have to see CES 2018 till the end to make my decision.

 

[zolom]

I undestood from a Bluewave representative that they had prepared an impedance adapter to be used with sensitive IEMs. Hope they'll share information (and picture) of that adapter.

 

[Karendar]

I undestood from a Bluewave representative that they had prepared an impedance adapter to be used with sensitive IEMs. Hope they'll share information (and picture) of that adapter.

I had the same conversation with Pierre. He told me he had to deal with initial shipping of the Get from their campaign and then they would look into this.

@Pierre111 is this correct? Any news for us on the impedance adapter?

Thanks!

 

[PowderLegend]

I've had both my GET and Earstudio for a couple weeks now. I've used them both with CIEMs and with KZ ZS-6, both SE and balanced (Earstudio only). Until these showed up, my portable use was either through a 1G Fiio X5 or if I needed nav, iPhone->AT-PHA50BT.

The AT is my control device, and the X5 is my portable reference.

Other people have posted lengthy reviews of all of these, but having them side by side points out their most glaring flaws in the face of their competition.

First, the build quality on the GET is great- it's built like a tank. Really similar to the original X5... just a chunk of metal. I'm less impressed with the lack of a hold function, so any brush of the volume wheel is immediate pain. Then there's the hiss- it's not a minimal "10% of people" or golden ears thing, it's like 15+% of the sound at normal listening levels is straight hiss. The beeps through the headphones also drive me nuts- there's no way to control that volume and they're painfully loud. I can't really speak to the sound quality of the DAC or amp other than the hiss is terrible. It's really not useable for me. The AT does better, and let's face it, the AT was convenient and well-featured, but SQ is total crap. It's like trying to play a record with sandpaper- all fuzz and digital artifacts, but at least it has a low noise floor.

The Earstudio is kind of hilariously the polar opposite. It feels cheap and plasticy like the AT, not chunky and surprisingly solid like the GET, but the SQ is out of this world. It sounds so much better than the AT it's hard to describe. Everything is clean, clear, and controlled like the X5 where the AT was grainy and noisy. The Earstudio in balanced mode lit up my CIEMs like nothing I've tried before. It's better balanced with the customs than my schiitstack is SE, and my schiitstack is a Bifrost Uber and Asgard 2!

If only the Earstudio could be packaged into the GET (with a hold switch!), we'd have the perfect product.

 

[Pierre111]

I had the same conversation with Pierre. He told me he had to deal with initial shipping of the Get from their campaign and then they would look into this.

@Pierre111 is this correct? Any news for us on the impedance adapter?

Thanks!

Hi we received the samples for our impedance adapter, the performance is very good according to some people noticing a hiss. I urged our supplier to make an extra effort to produce them promptly and we will supply it free of charge to our customer for whom the background noise is problematic.

 

[Karendar]

Hi we received the samples for our impedance adapter, the performance is very good according to some people noticing a hiss. I urged our supplier to make an extra effort to produce them promptly and we will supply it free of charge to our customer for whom the background noise is problematic.

Great news! Glad to see this will be a free option... If you need someone else to give impressions, feel free, I'm just a stone's throw away.

How much is the impedance rating for the cable?

 

[Karendar]

I've had both my GET and Earstudio for a couple weeks now. I've used them both with CIEMs and with KZ ZS-6, both SE and balanced (Earstudio only). Until these showed up, my portable use was either through a 1G Fiio X5 or if I needed nav, iPhone->AT-PHA50BT.

The AT is my control device, and the X5 is my portable reference.

Other people have posted lengthy reviews of all of these, but having them side by side points out their most glaring flaws in the face of their competition.

First, the build quality on the GET is great- it's built like a tank. Really similar to the original X5... just a chunk of metal. I'm less impressed with the lack of a hold function, so any brush of the volume wheel is immediate pain. Then there's the hiss- it's not a minimal "10% of people" or golden ears thing, it's like 15+% of the sound at normal listening levels is straight hiss. The beeps through the headphones also drive me nuts- there's no way to control that volume and they're painfully loud. I can't really speak to the sound quality of the DAC or amp other than the hiss is terrible. It's really not useable for me. The AT does better, and let's face it, the AT was convenient and well-featured, but SQ is total crap. It's like trying to play a record with sandpaper- all fuzz and digital artifacts, but at least it has a low noise floor.

The Earstudio is kind of hilariously the polar opposite. It feels cheap and plasticy like the AT, not chunky and surprisingly solid like the GET, but the SQ is out of this world. It sounds so much better than the AT it's hard to describe. Everything is clean, clear, and controlled like the X5 where the AT was grainy and noisy. The Earstudio in balanced mode lit up my CIEMs like nothing I've tried before. It's better balanced with the customs than my schiitstack is SE, and my schiitstack is a Bifrost Uber and Asgard 2!

If only the Earstudio could be packaged into the GET (with a hold switch!), we'd have the perfect product.

You make me wanna try the Earstudio now... But I can't justify the extra cash. Have too many failed crowdfundings tying up money :/