[bowei006]

I'm tempted to order the BTR3 when it hits the UK since it's about 60% of the price of the ES100. Given my K10s should fall into the Fiio spec I find it hard to believe that the double dacs in the ES100 will have any real impact on the sound. If this was likely to be the only BT DAC I purchase over the next year then I'd go with the ES100 for more versatility (the increased power working with more headphones). However, I feel like this is really just the beginning and I expect within a year I'll be selling whatever I buy to replace it with something has a higher end Burr Brown or Sabre DAC included.

Feels like this is where the market is going. More and more of us are listening to Apple Music & Spotify. BT is pretty much lossless in transmitting AAC from Apple Music to one of these things, so it's making more sense to me to have an iPhone and a BT device rather than a CCK + USB dac or a dedicated player. Even if I do miss the sound of my old and sold Mojo. A BTR5 with an ESS9018M or similar makes sense.

Good points you make but the bolded part is incorrect. AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is not remotely close to lossless. I'm going off lossless here by the technicial definition. AAC transmits at a best available lossy 250kbps.

 

[zerolight]

Good points you make but the bolded part is incorrect. AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is not remotely close to lossless. I'm going off lossless here by the technicial definition. AAC transmits at a best available lossy 250kbps.

It transmits Apple Music untouched, bit for bit. I'm saying it's pretty much (more or less) lossless transmitting Apple Music, see what you bolded. Of course a flac file transmitted over AAC would lose something in the process, but an already AAC file in Apple Music, no it loses nothing Vs wired.

 

[SubMash]

It transmits Apple Music untouched, bit for bit. I'm saying it's pretty much (more or less) lossless transmitting Apple Music, see what you bolded. Of course a flac file transmitted over AAC would lose something in the process, but an already AAC file in Apple Music, no it loses nothing Vs wired.

It is not true. Doesn't matter which file you play - it is decoded first and then encoded back again. There are no physical way in the phone system to send original encoded stream over Bluetooth.

With that being said - AAC is much more sophisticated codec, so it has much higher quality than any other BT codec with same or double bitrate. It's just power hungry codec and drains battery faster.

 

[zerolight]

For what it's worth, my old ears struggle to here a difference between DSD, FLAC, Tidal HD, 320k Spotify, and AAC Apple Music.

Both Spotify and Apple Music had an edge over Google Play and Deezer last time I tested. But the rest, varied by track which service sounded best, but in a blind test I'm not be able to identify it was so subtle. It was more tone than detail. Apple Music is just more convenient for me in a house full of Mac, iOS, and watchos, though I did spend a good 6 months on each of Spotify, AM, Tidal.

 

[zerolight]

@SubMash fair enough, sure I read otherwise in one of these threads, possibly by you. May have misinterpreted. Still it's close enough to losing nothing over wireless for me I reckon with AM as source.

 

[Sonic-Debris]

I think Hiby are doing interesting things, and bypassing the limitations of androids audio and their direct transport architecture.

 

[zerolight]

I think Hiby are doing interesting things, and bypassing the limitations of androids audio and their direct transport architecture.

The R3 is a cute little dap. If I were in the market for a dap, that would be on my list.

 

[rkw]

It is not true. Doesn't matter which file you play - it is decoded first and then encoded back again. There are no physical way in the phone system to send original encoded stream over Bluetooth.

In the case of an AAC file played through AAC codec, the file can be transmitted directly in the A2DP audio payload without transcoding.

 

[jeffri]

Received my BTR3 last week.

For $79, this is no brainer. Of course, coming for a guy who collected this little thingy (my new obsession, lol).

 

[avnv007]

From where did you buy and how is the sound quality

Is it true that via usb dac it supports only 16bit

 

[jeffri]

From where did you buy and how is the sound quality

Is it true that via usb dac it supports only 16bit

AliExpress. The shipping is quick, they are using DHL Express, quite surprising considering it is free shipping, it only took 4 days from the shipment to my door.

I'm not really sure about the USB DAC, but could be. It seems to be some limitation for the chipset on these tiny thing. Bluewave Get also only does 16 bit, and I believe ES100 is also the same case. Personally, I haven't really tried the USB DAC feature other than connecting it to my Nintendo Switch (it works!). The Switch seems to only support UAC1 (many DACs don't work as the result), however both BTR3 and Bluewave Get worked with Switch. So it's likely BTR3 is also only supporting UAC1, and in that case it will be limited to just 16 bit/44.1 khz.

 

[Amber Rain]

Yes. Fiio confirm you my question that it is 16 bit for a DAC.

 

[SubMash]

In the case of an AAC file played through AAC codec, the file can be transmitted directly in the A2DP audio payload without transcoding.

Yes, sure, you can do it if you deal with BT directly. Unfortunately, in phones BT is just one of the output device options that stands after mixer system app. And there are no ways of dealing with encoded streams directly. If you have any evidence showing opposite - let me know.

 

[jeffri]

As for the sound, I liked it. It is quite warm sounding and everything rendered pretty well, it's hard to find fault on this thing. I don't think it does anything exceptionally well though, i.e detail-wise, both XB10 and Bluewave Get is still ahead (all connected to aptX HD source). But those two have annoying faults, BTR3 have none.

However, I can say for sure, this BTR3 have lower noise floor than both AK XB10 and Bluewave Get. My IEM of choice is U12, while it's not the most sensitive IEM in the universe, it still is quite sensitive. XB10 hiss is audible, Bluewave Get is bordering annoying, BTR3 on the other hand is clean, while AT-PHA55BT is slightly better.

My favorite is still AT-PHA55BT though. It's very unique that it renders soundstage and image very 3D-like, but when doing so, still sounding pretty natural, warm and detailed. None of my other Bluetooth receiver did that (heck, not even any of my portable DAC did that), so I really love that thing.

Anyway, I don't have ES100 for head to head comparison, but I have spent a bit of time with it. It's a good contender, with features that a bit more complete. I didn't notice hiss when I tested it, so I'm pretty sure both sound clean. Hopefully I'll find some time with my friend to compare both.

Another stand out is the build quality, it is excellent. It definitely is better build than XB10 and from what I have seen, even the ES100. It's on par with the Bluewave Get and AT-PHA55BT.

With such build, complete feature and codec set (aptX LL, HD and LDAC especially), low noise floor and nice sound, I can't really find any fault with it. I'll definitely pick this over XB10 and Bluewave Get.

 

[bowei006]

As for the sound, I liked it. It is quite warm sounding and everything rendered pretty well, it's hard to find fault on this thing. I don't think it does anything exceptionally well though, i.e detail-wise, both XB10 and Bluewave Get is still ahead (all connected to aptX HD source). But those two have annoying faults, BTR3 have none.

However, I can say for sure, this BTR3 have lower noise floor than both AK XB10 and Bluewave Get. My IEM of choice is U12, while it's not the most sensitive IEM in the universe, it still is quite sensitive. XB10 hiss is audible, Bluewave Get is bordering annoying, BTR3 on the other hand is clean, while AT-PHA55BT is slightly better.

My favorite is still AT-PHA55BT though. It's very unique that it renders soundstage and image very 3D-like, but when doing so, still sounding pretty natural, warm and detailed. None of my other Bluetooth receiver did that (heck, not even any of my portable DAC did that), so I really love that thing.

Anyway, I don't have ES100 for head to head comparison, but I have spent a bit of time with it. It's a good contender, with features that a bit more complete. I didn't notice hiss when I tested it, so I'm pretty sure both sound clean. Hopefully I'll find some time with my friend to compare both.

Another stand out is the build quality, it is excellent. It definitely is better build than XB10 and from what I have seen, even the ES100. It's on par with the Bluewave Get and AT-PHA55BT.

With such build, complete feature and codec set (aptX LL, HD and LDAC especially), low noise floor and nice sound, I can't really find any fault with it. I'll definitely pick this over XB10 and Bluewave Get.

Agree on these points. I have the Bluewave GET as well

The general sound sig of the GET is cleaner and more refined but that's about its only point of superiority here. It's connection is not nearly as stable and with much more frequent drops. It's also noisy with my CIEMs unless I use a low impedance adapter.


I'd rather lose some of the refine of the GET for the signal reliability of the BTR3. The drops and stutters happen frequently enough with the GET that even if it's gen sound is better, the audible cracks and sputters pretty much degrade the audiophile listening experience.

The GET's wheel has gotten loose for me over the last two months and plastic is kinda spongy. It's also not able to keep AptX HD and often downgrades.

The normal MSRP will be $69.99 which is fantastic. USB C is a massive plus as well. Great to see FiiO moving to this standard.

Is it my most favorite sound sig? Not really. A bit too warm and heavy at times but at its multi function, price, and the fact that its a wireless device first. Can't really be too harsh compared to if it was a dedicated $70 wired amp.