[geoxile]

So I got a response to my question on the Rtings review (they updated the review as well) in regards to their strange latency measurement for AptX HD.
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/discussions/WeMvdn7XnP8Kr0oe/latency-question

They seem to confirm the value was correct, and muse that due to the backwards compatibility with Aptx HD, that this result is adaptive kicking in.

Can anyone else confirm this? I know one guy from this thread made a post about how he recorded from a mic and played back the same tone and got no difference.

I've been thinking... how the hell is this new codec supposed to work automatically with different types of content, to determine what bitrate and latency to target. For phones with integrated ecosystems (new android phones for instance), I've been thinking that they could indeed set a flag somewhere for the type of content, but say on a PC, that would be unlikely in regards to Qualcomm's walled garden.

That leaves only some sort of analysis of the sound signature to "guess" what to target, though God only knows how they would do this reliably.
Any other thoughts on the matter? I know a lot of people on here are discussing sound quality and build quality, but actually one of my reasons for buying was compatability with aptx codecs and latency. It's annoying at the moment that this adaptive stuff is a complete black box.

I've read that aptx HD actually has configurable latency when the manufacturer implements support for it, so that may be what we're seeing.

 

[Toth21]

Ah ok that could be. That means the transmitter has to support a configurable Aptx-HD signal. Any idea which dongles might support that? I'm literally just looking for this for my PC.

 

[geoxile]

Ah ok that could be. That means the transmitter has to support a configurable Aptx-HD signal. Any idea which dongles might support that? I'm literally just looking for this for my PC.

I believe it's fixed for the user, but configurable based on how the manufacturer implements it.
edit: To clarify, I mean it's only configurable for the manufacturer when they're making their transmitter. At least that's how I understood it.

Another scalable parameter within aptX HD is coding latency. It can be dynamically traded against other parameters such as levels of compression and computational complexity. The latency of the aptX HD codec can be scaled to as low as 1 ms for 48 kHz sampled audio, depending on the settings of other configurable parameters. aptX HD performs particularly well against other lossless codecs when the coding latency is constrained to be small, such as 5 ms or less, making it particularly appropriate for delay-sensitive interactive audio applications. aptX HD has an end-to-end latency of around 150ms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AptX

Interestingly qualcomm's aptx HD product page claims you should expect about 150ms of latecy, which the above wikipedia excerpt repeats. But we can clearly see that's not the case per rtings' rating of 60~ms. If you want that lower latency I think you'd just have to buy and try out some different transmitters, or wait for the rtings guys to answer your question about what they used in their testing.

 

[Toth21]

Hmm ok, but I think here "coding latency" is just the time for the analog signal to get compressed and converted to digital:
https://metersmusic.com/pages/aptx-hd-principles-and-explanation

This would be different than the end to end time which of APTX-HD is ~150ms.

This whole thing is strange... especially since this is set to replace aptx-LL. I would expect there to be some sort of definitive info out there, otherwise how does anyone work with their stuff even.

 

[Jester0fTortuga]

Hmm ok, but I think here "coding latency" is just the time for the analog signal to get compressed and converted to digital:
https://metersmusic.com/pages/aptx-hd-principles-and-explanation

This would be different than the end to end time which of APTX-HD is ~150ms.

This whole thing is strange... especially since this is set to replace aptx-LL. I would expect there to be some sort of definitive info out there, otherwise how does anyone work with their stuff even.

I think there’s some confusion here. As stated in the manual, the PX7 supports three different AptX codecs: Adaptive, HD and “classic.”

Adaptive is not relevant yet as very few transmitters support it (just a few android phones so far). So until that happens, you have no low latency option with the PX7. Adaptive is not being used if you don’t have one of the phones that support adaptive. So you’re using either HD or Classic.

 

[geoxile]

I think there’s some confusion here. As stated in the manual, the PX7 supports three different AptX codecs: Adaptive, HD and “classic.”

Adaptive is not relevant yet as very few transmitters support it (just a few android phones so far). So until that happens, you have no low latency option with the PX7. Adaptive is not being used if you don’t have one of the phones that support adaptive. So you’re using either HD or Classic.

Aptx adaptive is backwards compatible with aptx and aptx HD. It may be the case that adaptive is the only thing available on the px7 and its merely compatible with aptx and aptx hd transmitters

 

[Toth21]

Aptx adaptive is backwards compatible with aptx and aptx HD. It may be the case that adaptive is the only thing available on the px7 and its merely compatible with aptx and aptx hd transmitters

Yes this is what I thought to begin with, but then since there is no official info excepting a vaguely worded phrase, and everyone saying this is wrong I assumed that was BS.

However there is no other way to explain Rting's test result, and I don't think they would have bothered answering me in that thread unless they were backing up their measurement.

Bizaare.

 

[hoth]

I have been using the PX7's for a few days now and was able to test Sennheiser Momentum 3's and Sony XM3's against them. I have generally really enjoyed the PX7's but have noticed a few niggles such as 1) the limiter issue that some people have mentioned; 2) some distortion in the high frequencies at times that was unpleasant; and 3) I'm not the biggest fan of the bass tuning (it's jarring to me at times) and the lack of an EQ in the app to me is a real omission. I do though like the PX7's for their very good sound (especially the wide sound stage), their robust codec support, excellent ANC and their comfort.

I was able to test the wireless capabilities of the headphones using Amazon Music ultra hd files that I have downloaded on my iphone as well as music streamed from an iBasso DX160. For me, the most important thing is the sound quality. I can live without superb noise cancellation as long as the ANC is decent.

The Sony's were the worst of the bunch for me. I felt the sound was veiled and muddied. I didn't find the presentation to be open at all and the dynamics were subdued. The Moementum 3's really surprised me. I was hesitant about them at first because they don't have Aptx HD. But they sounded great. Very open and dynamic. The bass was emphasized but it was still punchy and the app was able to get it for me where I like it. I also found they were not fatiguing and closer to my wired headsets.

Although I liked the PX7's and could have been happy with them, I am going to return them and go with the Sennheiser's. For me, they are the best choice at a similar price to the PX7's.

 

[soundblast75]

I got the Dali today and i have to say they are the better pair sonically, the PX7 have something unnatural about the presentation, like its a BA with not so well implemented cross over and everything sounds wide but detached.
The Dali's are incredibly musical and sweet, resolving, everything sounds right, i have no idea what reviews complaint about the bass, its the only ANC that sounds not bloated but deep and detailed.
A definite keeper for me, PX7, M3 and H9 iii are all going..

 

[dannydj]

I got the Dali today and i have to say they are the better pair sonically, the PX7 have something unnatural about the presentation, like its a BA with not so well implemented cross over and everything sounds wide but detached.
The Dali's are incredibly musical and sweet, resolving, everything sounds right, i have no idea what reviews complaint about the bass, its the only ANC that sounds not bloated but deep and detailed.
A definite keeper for me, PX7, M3 and H9 iii are all going..

How's the ANC ? And does if affect the sound signature when switched on ? Thanks

 

[soundblast75]

How's the ANC ? And does if affect the sound signature when switched on ? Thanks

It's been discussed widely here and Dali Thread, it is a consensus it's not as good as other ANC cans. PX7s isn't as good as Sony or Bose either. Basically you can't have it all, you either :

1: Get top ANC, but at the cost of the most anti audiophile ear pressure, audible sq deterioration between modes, not the best sq available(Bose/Sony)
2: Middle of the rd, good ANC (less ear pressure, almost no sound difference b/n modes, sq oriented first, then NC, that's Senns M3 (no Aptx HD), PX7( leaking sound quite a bit) and B&O H9 (no HD)
3: Dali, Best sq, so musical and right sounding it puts it outside the anc category sq wise, a new chapter. But, relying on a combination of great passive isolation along a basic, but working well ANC (haven't tried on a flight yet), less leakage.

This is my opinion, but also shared by many.
Too many factors to consider, but the one that should be prime on this forum is sound quality.

Hope this helps, ideally try for yourself, i find PX7 to rub around my ears and irritates me. sound, whilst great generally, i find inconsistent, lacking coherence a bit and following the usual bass trends whilst trying to sound audiophile, but actually sounding like it has a weird surround echo effect applied.
For your ears, all might be different

 

[Jester0fTortuga]

I noticed the same. The PX7 sounds fantastic via a quality 3,5mm source. The original PX hissed like a mofo with every analog source, because the signal went through the onboard amplifier no matter what. I suppose the PX7 either applies less gain to the 3,5mm source or lets the signal bypass the amp completely and needs to be switched on only for the ANC. Would be very curious about B&W's reply to your inquiry.

So, I'm not sure how much the customer service people really understand the product -- I've gotten a few confusing responses on things that seemingly contradict what others have been told/B&W has written on Amazon -- but I was told that the DAC and and amp are *always* active, even in a 3.5mm situation. Now, on Amazon they told someone that they'd be getting a higher quality signal to the DAC by using a Dragonfly. But, the person I talked to said they don't recommend using a DAC. The former statement seems more true, since I hear what seems to be a, how to say it, fuller sound when wired to a good DAC. And yes, the hissing problem the PXs had are not there in wired mode.

 

[musicoverppl]

To all the people complaining about treble harshness: Which headphones have you tried/used before?

I'm honestly interested in the answers here, because most "audiophile" headphones I've tried have a much "harsher" treble response.

Been comparing to P7, PX, DT 770 & 990, Momentum II, Arc-1 (others aren't relevant here).


So this comment won't be helpful to some (most?) here, as many seem to commute/fly on the reg and require NC.

But FWIW after almost a month I've decided to return my PX7 and instead was able to pick up a used but like-new pair of P7W. Me personally, I'm good with decent passive isolation, and as far as I'm concerned I'd rate all of the B&W over-ears as performing exceptional in that regard. I'd give the nod to the PX7 in terms of comfort, battery and slightly better bass response (plus NC, app/connectivity stuff & a good case – all of which I pretty much couldn't care less about). Since for me it's just about enjoying my music on the go, the P7W was a no-brainer as I prefer the overall sound signature by far. The PX7 might pack a slightly deeper but at the same time controlled growl in the bass department; but overall the P7W has better highs and MUCH better mids according to my ears. For me it's more suitable across a larger variety of genres and even most of my bass heavy music I enjoy more with them, guess mids aren't trivial. Oh, and the mic is actually usable. Plus I paid less than half the PX7 price, while they ooze more craftsmanship/value for me construction-wise.

I guess I just wanted to share this because some in this thread speak reverently of the P7W as sound-wise still their favorite wireless cans. Since it's been a few years since I owned the P7 I now appreciate these comments

 

[Jazz1]

Ambient Passthrough killing my vol. I went into the app. today, on my iPad, and when I invoke the ambient passthrough sound control the vol. gets dialed way back. The slider in ITunes gets dialed way back, and sliding it for more vol. does not good. Turning the passthrough off does not restore the sound. I have to shut off the headphones to restore listenable vol. so I can hear the music. I’m sousing 13.2.2 IOS. I guess I’ll be calling B&W tomorrow.

 

[pablohoney]

Anyone listening using Qobuz and think the sound is better than Tidal with the PX7?