FiiO’s Upgraded Bluetooth Amplifier BTR1K: Qualcomm QCC 3005 BT chip, BT 5.0 and aptX /aptX LL/AAC supported, RGB light, NFC pairing, Type C and USB DAC
May 2, 2018 at 7:35 AM Post #496 of 803
Hi Brooko

Thanks for your review and comments.

No, I didn't volume match or test against SBC etc as I have no facility to do so.

I sold my Btr1 before I read your review, as I needed to fund another purchase and I was a bit pissed about it not supporting AAC. The information I read on the web stated that SBC was of a lower quality than AAC and I had nothing else to go on.

However, I was pleased enough with the sound of the btr1 and would possibly consider buying V2, but will wait on more details / reviews of that btr3.
 
May 3, 2018 at 8:59 AM Post #499 of 803
My BTR1 arrived yesterday and i’ve had a few hours time with it so I thought i’d post some impressions.

So, I already own a Fiio Q1 dac/amp. I like it a lot, but it’s the version that isn’t specifically IOS ready. When connected to my iPhone7 via the lightning adapter it’s only an amp - the DAC is bypassed. That isn’t a huge issue as it sounds fine. However, I also use the Q1 with my laptop via the USB connection which does use the Fiio DAC. Not only is it a marked and very notable improvement over the crappy headphone jack on my laptop, but I feel it also provides better sound than when I run iPhone7-Q1-headphone. In other words, I feel the Fiio DAC provides better sound than the Apple DAC in the lightning adaptor. That leads me to the BTR1...

Here’s what I was looking for with this little guy:

1. Convenience - I don’t like the lightning adapter. It’s a pain. It feels flimsy (my teenage son destroys them in about a month). It also means I can’t charge the phone and listen to music at the same time. Finally, the iPhone7 is big enough that I don’t find it easy to tuck it in a pocket and carry it around all the time while phones are plugged in. It’s tiresome being physically tethered to it.

2. Extra power - not much, but just a bit of a boost to drive things a little harder. With quieter recordings I find I have to sometimes turn the volume up to 70% or more to get suitable volume (that’s without using the Q1 of course). I’m using VE Monk plus buds btw. I just don’t have opportunity to listen to music often enough when i’m out to warrant big money on buds and I actually really like the monk sound.

3. Possibly, a slight SQ improvement from what I suspect might be a better DAC in the BTR1 than what Apple has in the lightning adaptor.

Having spent some time with it, I can definitely say the BTR1 takes care of numbers 1 & 2. It's a super convenient device - connects smoothly and seems to stay connected. Small enough to carry around almost unnoticed whether clipped to a pocket or just hanging from the included lanyard. It's really quite liberating to be able to sit the phone down and charge it while walking around my apartment listening to tunes. Perfect.

It also provides a nice power boost. I don't need to go above about 50% with the Monks and the extra juice gets the buds vibrating with more authority. It also drives my K240s to a suitable level although not with the same authority. As a relative newb to the whole headphone amplification thing I've found that amp power isn't always just a volume thing. There's a certain quality to the sound of a properly driven speaker...I don't know what the word is...maybe "bloom?" Something like that. With the right amount of amp power headphones seem to really open up in a musical way that isn't just about volume. The slightly higher output power of the BTR1 gets that out of the Monks but not so much the K240s. But it's certainly listenable even with the bigger phones. I haven't tried my 400i's yet but I suspect it wouldn't be enough to get them humming much. But that's OK as I really hadn't intended on using the full size phones anyway with the BTR1.

As far as number 3 of my desires, I'm not so sure. I "think" the DAC provides a better SQ than Apple's, but I could just be imagining it. However, I can definitely say it doesn't impact the sound quality negatively. It certainly sounds very good. There might be a slight boost in the bass area but not much. Mids sound rich and detailed which I love as I play guitar and my tastes lean towards lots of guitar both acoustic and electric, horns, piano...vocals sound real nice. Highs are fine - the Monks aren't a real bright earbud generally but what's supposed to be there is there. I've tried a few Bluetooth headphones over the past couple years and haven't been impressed with how they sound, so to be able to plug whatever buds or IEMs I want into the BTR1 and get good sound quality is a great thing...I don't hear any hiss at all with the Monks at least. I imagine that's an issue reserved for gear having higher sensitivity.

Overall, I really like the BTR1! I think its pretty close to exactly what I was looking for.

Oh, BTW...I'm in Canada and ordered it from Amazon and was pleased to see when it arrived that it is the V2 model that supports AAC. It wasn't a huge concern for me as I figured it would sound fine either way, but I'm happy it's the most recent model anyway.

:beyersmile:
 
Last edited:
May 3, 2018 at 6:27 PM Post #500 of 803
My BTR1 arrived yesterday and i’ve had a few hours time with it so I thought i’d post some impressions.

So, I already own a Fiio Q1 dac/amp. I like it a lot, but it’s the version that isn’t specifically IOS ready. When connected to my iPhone7 via the lightning adapter it’s only an amp - the DAC is bypassed. That isn’t a huge issue as it sounds fine. However, I also use the Q1 with my laptop via the USB connection which does use the Fiio DAC. Not only is it a marked and very notable improvement over the ****ty headphone jack on my laptop, but I feel it also provides better sound than when I run iPhone7-Q1-headphone. In other words, I feel the Fiio DAC provides better sound than the Apple DAC in the lightning adaptor. That leads me to the BTR1...

Here’s what I was looking for with this little guy:

1. Convenience - I don’t like the lightning adapter. It’s a pain. It feels flimsy (my teenage son destroys them in about a month). It also means I can’t charge the phone and listen to music at the same time. Finally, the iPhone7 is big enough that I don’t find it easy to tuck it in a pocket and carry it around all the time while phones are plugged in. It’s tiresome being physically tethered to it.

2. Extra power - not much, but just a bit of a boost to drive things a little harder. With quieter recordings I find I have to sometimes turn the volume up to 70% or more to get suitable volume (that’s without using the Q1 of course). I’m using VE Monk plus buds btw. I just don’t have opportunity to listen to music often enough when i’m out to warrant big money on buds and I actually really like the monk sound.

3. Possibly, a slight SQ improvement from what I suspect might be a better DAC in the BTR1 than what Apple has in the lightning adaptor.

Having spent some time with it, I can definitely say the BTR1 takes care of numbers 1 & 2. It's a super convenient device - connects smoothly and seems to stay connected. Small enough to carry around almost unnoticed whether clipped to a pocket or just hanging from the included lanyard. It's really quite liberating to be able to sit the phone down and charge it while walking around my apartment listening to tunes. Perfect.

It also provides a nice power boost. I don't need to go above about 50% with the Monks and the extra juice gets the buds vibrating with more authority. It also drives my K240s to a suitable level although not with the same authority. As a relative newb to the whole headphone amplification thing I've found that amp power isn't always just a volume thing. There's a certain quality to the sound of a properly driven speaker...I don't know what the word is...maybe "bloom?" Something like that. With the right amount of amp power headphones seem to really open up in a musical way that isn't just about volume. The slightly higher output power of the BTR1 gets that out of the Monks but not so much the K240s. But it's certainly listenable even with the bigger phones. I haven't tried my 400i's yet but I suspect it wouldn't be enough to get them humming much. But that's OK as I really hadn't intended on using the full size phones anyway with the BTR1.

As far as number 3 of my desires, I'm not so sure. I "think" the DAC provides a better SQ than Apple's, but I could just be imagining it. However, I can definitely say it doesn't impact the sound quality negatively. It certainly sounds very good. There might be a slight boost in the bass area but not much. Mids sound rich and detailed which I love as I play guitar and my tastes lean towards lots of guitar both acoustic and electric, horns, piano...vocals sound real nice. Highs are fine - the Monks aren't a real bright earbud generally but what's supposed to be there is there. I've tried a few Bluetooth headphones over the past couple years and haven't been impressed with how they sound, so to be able to plug whatever buds or IEMs I want into the BTR1 and get good sound quality is a great thing...I don't hear any hiss at all with the Monks at least. I imagine that's an issue reserved for gear having higher sensitivity.

Overall, I really like the BTR1! I think its pretty close to exactly what I was looking for.

Oh, BTW...I'm in Canada and ordered it from Amazon and was pleased to see when it arrived that it is the V2 model that supports AAC. It wasn't a huge concern for me as I figured it would sound fine either way, but I'm happy it's the most recent model anyway.

:beyersmile:

Great impressions!

Btw, I'd like your user name if I didn't currently have an ear ache lol
 
May 5, 2018 at 7:34 PM Post #502 of 803
Oh, no problem. These are exactly what we can do. Among them, there is a big relationship between battery life and size. It is the hardest decision.

Will the BTR-3 and BTR-5 have Bluetooth 5? I like my FiiO Q5 but the range could be greatly improved by upgrading from Bluetooth 4.x to Bluetooth 5
 
Last edited:
May 8, 2018 at 6:54 AM Post #505 of 803
Will the BTR-3 and BTR-5 have Bluetooth 5? I like my FiiO Q5 but the range could be greatly improved by upgrading from Bluetooth 4.x to Bluetooth 5
Dear friend,

Not sure currently. We may consider about that according to the maturity of Bluetooth 5. :slight_smile:

Best regards
 
FiiO Stay updated on FiiO at their sponsor profile on Head-Fi.
 
https://www.facebook.com/FiiOAUDIO https://twitter.com/FiiO_official https://www.instagram.com/fiioofficial/ https://www.fiio.com support@fiio.com
May 8, 2018 at 1:04 PM Post #506 of 803
Bluetooth 5 only improves range for Low Energy mode, which isn't used for music.

I'll admit I am not an expert in Bluetooth so I'm just going off what I read, but based off this article on whathifi it seems like Bluetooth 5 would increase range for music.

Dear friend,
Not sure currently. We may consider about that according to the maturity of Bluetooth 5. :slight_smile:
Best regards

@FiiO If the article above is true, and Bluetooth 5 increases range it would help a lot. I've noticed that in an office environment with lots of interference, my Q5 can cut out at a range as little as 3 feet...
 
May 8, 2018 at 6:43 PM Post #507 of 803
I'll admit I am not an expert in Bluetooth so I'm just going off what I read, but based off this article on whathifi it seems like Bluetooth 5 would increase range for music.



@FiiO If the article above is true, and Bluetooth 5 increases range it would help a lot. I've noticed that in an office environment with lots of interference, my Q5 can cut out at a range as little as 3 feet...
That article is bad and wrong. Unfortunately, there are dozens of articles just like it, touting the improved speed and range Bluetooth 5 brings. Even the Bluetooth SIG is guilty of perpetuating the hyperbole around BT 5. If I was especially cynical, I would say it's because they have a strong financial incentive in promoting the technology, and if people really understood what BT5 actually does they'd be much less excited about it.

It's important to understand Bluetooth is separated into Bluetooth Classic, and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE). BT Classic is the one we're all familiar with, and that's used for streaming audio among many other things. That hasn't really changed much since Enhanced Data Rate (EDR) was added in Bluetooth 2.0.

Bluetooth Low Energy, meanwhile, is a completely separate spec from BT Classic that was introduced in Bluetooth 4.0. As the name suggests, it's a lower power variant, designed for devices with small batteries that only need to send small amounts of data in short bursts. It is not intended for higher bandwidth, continuous throughput applications, like for example streaming audio. In fact, currently there isn't even a profile to transmit audio in BLE. The Bluetooth SIG is supposedly working on a BLE audio profile, but if/when it gets added to a future Bluetooth spec, don't expect it to be as good as the codecs used in BT Classic (e.g. AptX, LDAC, etc). Apple has a proprietary BLE audio solution they've developed, but so far it seems limited to use in hearing aids, and I wouldn't expect audio quality comparable what's available with BT Classic. BLE just doesn't have the bandwidth to match BT Classic.

Bluetooth 5 adds some new modes to Bluetooth Low Energy that let it trade speed for range or vice-versa, but even with these improvements, they can't match BT Classic's bandwidth.

In short, Bluetooth 5 does nothing to improve range or anything else for audio transmission. All of the improvements to range and speed in BT5 apply to Bluetooth Low Energy only, which doesn't even include a way of transmitting audio. Even if it did, and even with the improvements in BT5, it still has less bandwidth available than Bluetooth Classic.


If you want something that could improve your existing BT range, you could try using a long range transmitter like this one.
 
May 9, 2018 at 1:42 AM Post #508 of 803
That article is bad and wrong. Unfortunately, there are dozens of articles just like it, touting the improved speed and range Bluetooth 5 brings. Even the Bluetooth SIG is guilty of perpetuating the hyperbole around BT 5. If I was especially cynical, I would say it's because they have a strong financial incentive in promoting the technology, and if people really understood what BT5 actually does they'd be much less excited about it.

It's important to understand Bluetooth is separated into Bluetooth Classic, and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE). BT Classic is the one we're all familiar with, and that's used for streaming audio among many other things. That hasn't really changed much since Enhanced Data Rate (EDR) was added in Bluetooth 2.0.

Bluetooth Low Energy, meanwhile, is a completely separate spec from BT Classic that was introduced in Bluetooth 4.0. As the name suggests, it's a lower power variant, designed for devices with small batteries that only need to send small amounts of data in short bursts. It is not intended for higher bandwidth, continuous throughput applications, like for example streaming audio. In fact, currently there isn't even a profile to transmit audio in BLE. The Bluetooth SIG is supposedly working on a BLE audio profile, but if/when it gets added to a future Bluetooth spec, don't expect it to be as good as the codecs used in BT Classic (e.g. AptX, LDAC, etc). Apple has a proprietary BLE audio solution they've developed, but so far it seems limited to use in hearing aids, and I wouldn't expect audio quality comparable what's available with BT Classic. BLE just doesn't have the bandwidth to match BT Classic.

Bluetooth 5 adds some new modes to Bluetooth Low Energy that let it trade speed for range or vice-versa, but even with these improvements, they can't match BT Classic's bandwidth.

In short, Bluetooth 5 does nothing to improve range or anything else for audio transmission. All of the improvements to range and speed in BT5 apply to Bluetooth Low Energy only, which doesn't even include a way of transmitting audio. Even if it did, and even with the improvements in BT5, it still has less bandwidth available than Bluetooth Classic.


If you want something that could improve your existing BT range, you could try using a long range transmitter like this one.

Thanks for the explanation. It's unfortunate that this is the case. I understood that Bluetooth 5 would not make audio sound better, but I was at least hoping for some range improvement...
 
May 21, 2018 at 9:40 AM Post #510 of 803
I’m considering the BTR1/3 as an alternative to wireless headphones, seeing as a lot of them, like Sennheiser, don’t support AAC. How is the latency on the BTR1 v2 for watching videos on iPhones? Noticeable?


Netflix, I don't note any delay at all really. Youtube vids, some very slight delay...but I think there's often some slight syncing issues in youtube vids.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top