[FiiO]

I did understand that as far as sound there is no advantage to bluetooth 5.0; I did read that battery consumption was improved with 5.0.

My question was concerning this advantage of btr1k with bluetooth 5.0 being used on a device running bluetooth 4.2; do both devices need to be running bluetooth 5.0 to take advantage of this battery consumption improvement?

Dear friend,

But the engineer also told me that Bluetooth 5.0 does not have improvement in battery consumption consumption.

Best regards

 

[sidecross]

Dear friend,

But the engineer also told me that Bluetooth 5.0 does not have improvement in battery consumption consumption.

Best regards

‘With this new version of Bluetooth, the special interest group (SIG) that controls the spec has opted to simply call it “Bluetooth 5” with no decimal point, no “v,” and no “LE.” Yes, it still included the low energy protocol (and it has been greatly improved), but it’s all wrapped up into one simple brand: Bluetooth 5. The Bluetooth SIG wanted to make the branding simpler and easier for the public to understand.

In order to take advantage of Bluetooth 5, you’ll need new Bluetooth 5 gear. If you have an iPhone 8/Plus, or iPhone X, you’ve already got the phone part taken care of. Apple was one of the first to ship a Bluetooth 5 compatible phone (along with Samsung in the Galaxy S8). ‘



https://www.macworld.com/article/3262664/bluetooth-5-faq-everything-you-need-to-know.html



‘Its specification includes the low power consumption, inexpensive hardware and, small size implementations.’


https://www.amarinfotech.com/differences-comparisons-bluetooth-5-vs-4-2.html

 

[gorman]

Am I the only one that would like the power button functionality to be swapped with the side button currently used for play/pause?

Anyone? I fail to understand how having a button you use once per "session" so bigger than the one you use much more often makes any kind of sense.

 

[sidecross]

I am not fond of the controls either, I find them worse on the btr3.

The problem may be the difficulty to engineer controls on such a small size device.

 

[fiiobtr1]

Hi everybody.
Has anyone else had the problem with the BTR1 V2.0 that it won't connect the handsfree profile on the phone but just the audio profile?
I've had this problem for like 20 reboots of the BTR1 and with different phones...

 

[sidecross]

Hi everybody.
Has anyone else had the problem with the BTR1 V2.0 that it won't connect the handsfree profile on the phone but just the audio profile?
I've had this problem for like 20 reboots of the BTR1 and with different phones...

You might want to reset the device; you press down both plus and minus volume at the same time for a few seconds then retry to pair as if for the first time.

 

[thebrieze]

This or the BTR3? Assuming I do not need the additional codecs (Aptx HD, etc.) will there be any difference is sound quality? Are the Amp and DAC sections similar?

 

[sidecross]

This or the BTR3? Assuming I do not need the additional codecs (Aptx HD, etc.) will there be any difference is sound quality? Are the Amp and DAC sections similar?

https://www.fiio.com/btr1k_comparison

 

[Bombyx]

I did understand that as far as sound there is no advantage to bluetooth 5.0; I did read that battery consumption was improved with 5.0.

For Hi-Fi audio purposes, BT5 is not more power efficient than BT4.2, @FiiO is right about that. Do not trust web articles about BT5, most of them are inaccurate.

 

[sidecross]

For Hi-Fi audio purposes, BT5 is not more power efficient than BT4.2, @FiiO is right about that. Do not trust web articles about BT5, most of them are inaccurate.

Thank you, I will look at the links you provided.

From my understanding all devices in bluetooth chain must be 5.0 compatible for lower battery consumption.

 

[sidecross]

For Hi-Fi audio purposes, BT5 is not more power efficient than BT4.2, @FiiO is right about that. Do not trust web articles about BT5, most of them are inaccurate.

I did read the link you provided but I would like to see other data that does not seem to insinuate a conspiracy to falsify the bluetooth upgrade.

Also bluetooth 5 is a chip-set and not just a firmware update, btr3 is bluetooth 4.2 while btr1k is bluetooth 5 chip-set.

So far your data is the only I have seen with this allegation of misinformation. Is this a redux Rashomon?

 

[Bombyx]

I would like to see other data that does not seem to insinuate a conspiracy to falsify the bluetooth upgrade.

Huh? When there is misinformation about BT5, it is (of course) not intentional. Just journalists and bloggers extrapolating from partial information (e.g. press releases) and copying each other. The accurate and complete data is freely available on the Bluetooth SIG website (there and there). From those documents, it is clear that BT5 brings many improvements, but all of them are for the Bluetooth LE (Low Energy) mode, currently not used by Hi-Fi audio streams. The only improvement that applies to the Bluetooth Classic mode (used by Hi-Fi audio streams) is the SAM (Slot Availability Mask) which improves the coexistence with LTE devices.

A quote from a good article by Gary Sims:

• Bluetooth 5 extends and enhances the Bluetooth Low Energy aspects of Bluetooth, it does not alter Bluetooth Classic.
• BLE is not used for streaming audio to wireless speakers. This means that any notions of increased range or speed for audio streaming over Bluetooth BDR/EDR are wrong.
• Bluetooth 5 offers greater speed and distance for Bluetooth Low Energy connections but these are mutually exclusive, you either have greater speed or greater range, not both.

Also bluetooth 5 is a chip-set and not just a firmware update, btr3 is bluetooth 4.2 while btr1k is bluetooth 5 chip-set.

Radsone ES100 (same chipset as BTR3) became compliant with BT5 via firmware update, several months after its release. This is because Qualcomm made several versions of the base firmware (upon which manufacturers can build their own). As for BTR1K, its chipset is more recent, compliant with BT5 from the start.

 

[sidecross]

Huh? When there is misinformation about BT5, it is (of course) not intentional. Just journalists and bloggers extrapolating from partial information (e.g. press releases) and copying each other. The accurate and complete data is freely available on the Bluetooth SIG website (there and there). From those documents, it is clear that BT5 brings many improvements, but all of them are for the Bluetooth LE (Low Energy) mode, currently not used by Hi-Fi audio streams. The only improvement that applies to the Bluetooth Classic mode (used by Hi-Fi audio streams) is the SAM (Slot Availability Mask) which improves the coexistence with LTE devices.

A quote from a good article by Gary Sims:

• Bluetooth 5 extends and enhances the Bluetooth Low Energy aspects of Bluetooth, it does not alter Bluetooth Classic.
• BLE is not used for streaming audio to wireless speakers. This means that any notions of increased range or speed for audio streaming over Bluetooth BDR/EDR are wrong.
• Bluetooth 5 offers greater speed and distance for Bluetooth Low Energy connections but these are mutually exclusive, you either have greater speed or greater range, not both.

Radsone ES100 (same chipset as BTR3) became compliant with BT5 via firmware update, several months after its release. This is because Qualcomm made several versions of the base firmware (upon which manufacturers can build their own). As for BTR1K, its chipset is more recent, compliant with BT5 from the start.

You are implying that with this amount of disinformation available there is no way to know fact from conjecture. Is this web site and others like it a source of information pollution?

I am glad that you have brought up this discrepancy and I do appreciate it as well as the links provided. Thank you.

 

[akupaka]

Anyone? I fail to understand how having a button you use once per "session" so bigger than the one you use much more often makes any kind of sense.

I second that! I would change those buttons behavior as soon as this is available!

 

[sidecross]

I feel for the larger button to verify which one it is; I do not find this a great problem to be solved.

The btr1k does not have this problem; the btr3 does.