[novatax]

Lots of comparison to ES100. I don't have and never listened to it. Interesting product though. I don't know anything about technical terms, just simply like or dislike the sound, but I hope this helps.
Fiio Q1 Mk2 has been out there for some time, so I assume some of you have listened to it.
From what I've listened for 3 days, I found it hard to differentiate the sound between BTR3 and Q1 Mk2 (no bass/gain boost) when being used as USB DAC via 3.5mm output and listening to Spotify. Maybe because both uses AK's DAC. I could not go for more when Q1 Mk2's vol pointed to 2 or 3, and I could reach that same loudness with BTR3.
As for those bluetooth codecs, same thing. I've tried guys. On paper, yes they are different. But I found nothing compared to AptX's BTR1. So, for me, portablitity speaking, I prefer BTR3 over Q1 Mk2 and BTR1's limited features as I found three of them kind of equal.
Please note that I was only using PC and 1+3T, Tin Audio T2, Adv Sound M4 & Model 3, Mee Audio M6 Pro 2nd Gen, Yersen FEN-2000, Radius NEF-HP31. Nothing fancy stuffs..

 

[hotdog108]

Lots of comparison to ES100. I don't have and never listened to it. Interesting product though. I don't know anything about technical terms, just simply like or dislike the sound, but I hope this helps.
Fiio Q1 Mk2 has been out there for some time, so I assume some of you have listened to it.
From what I've listened for 3 days, I found it hard to differentiate the sound between BTR3 and Q1 Mk2 (no bass/gain boost) when being used as USB DAC via 3.5mm output and listening to Spotify. Maybe because both uses AK's DAC. I could not go for more when Q1 Mk2's vol pointed to 2 or 3, and I could reach that same loudness with BTR3.
As for those bluetooth codecs, same thing. I've tried guys. On paper, yes they are different. But I found nothing compared to AptX's BTR1. So, for me, portablitity speaking, I prefer BTR3 over Q1 Mk2 and BTR1's limited features as I found three of them kind of equal.
Please note that I was only using PC and 1+3T, Tin Audio T2, Adv Sound M4 & Model 3, Mee Audio M6 Pro 2nd Gen, Yersen FEN-2000, Radius NEF-HP31. Nothing fancy stuffs..

Very interesting, thank you for the insignts

 

[mvadu]

Es100 doesn't have this mode as well yet. Well, my LDAC Sony also don't have volume sync.

Yes, as per the white paper on Radsone

However, in order to manage fine analog volume adjustment, EarStudio does NOT
support the volume synchronization even with the iOS device. We'd like to provide the full
degree of freedom for analog volume control with finest step sizes: 0.5dB step with
EarStudio mobile application and 2dB step with EarStudio HW buttons. Thus, please
make sure to set and keep the mobile phone volume at the maximum level, so that the
encoder in the iOS/Android would perform at best before the A2DP transmission.

I am assuming same limitation or guidance works for BTR3. @FiiO do you have any such white papers or block diagrams on how your solution works?

Also Radsone seems to be very good with firmware supports, they have published 6 firmware updates since Jan. They even added features like "Microphone loopback during a voice calls(self-hearing)". Any commitments of adding new features after release via firmware upgrades?

 

[Brooko]

Fair point. It would be nice to see some measurements, so we could know how it behaves for certain with different IEMs. Personally I don't mind underdamping with my Beyer A20 (100Ω output impedance). Even FiiO's F9 Pros with their 28Ω sound good on it. It's a fuller, more relaxed sound. Maybe not for audiophiles, but way more fun than straight out of a smartphone. But then comparing a hifi desktop amp to a smartphone is almost as stupid as comparing it to the BTR3.

As for spending an extra $30 for a better source, I don't think the BTR3 was meant to be taken seriously. It's just a small BT DAC for sports / commuting.

Mine should be here next week. I'll see what I can do about supplying measurements on my rig. I haven't commented so far because the BTR3 hasn't arrived yet - but I've seen a lot of talk about what the device can drive and can't drive - but I'm wondering about real world results.

SubMash - you've been quite vocal so far. Have you got the BTR3 and the ES100 (I see you have SE846)? Have you performed any blind volume matched tests between both devices?

Also their specs are here : https://www.fiio.com/btr3_parameters

In most of the measurements they have - they were performed under load (its common practise for FiiO to do this with all their devices). Usually they use a 32 ohm real world load.

As far as THD+N goes - the real question is at what point it is actually audible? If both are inaudible to us during music playback - then the debate is meaningless. Here's some good reading (admittedly its speakers) but follows the same debate - https://www.axiomaudio.com/blog/distortion. Another is https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/ap...preting-thd-measurements-think-db-not-percent.

And regarding damping - the BTR3 has close to zero ohm impedance - so the discussion regarding the SE846 and damping doesn't correlate. A source would have to have 1 ohm or more of OI to make a significantly audible frequency difference to the SE846 (usual 1:8 damping factor). As far as current and voltage goes - FiiO has not published those specs so anything quoted is speculation. I'm going to see if they have them (have already emailed their support staff). What we do know is that:
Into a 16 ohm output - the BTR3 will put 33 mW
Into a 32 ohm output - the BTR3 will put 25 mW

This suggests that the BTR3 is more voltage restricted than current restricted, so backs up FiiO's guidance of 16-100 ohm devices. I would suggest SubMash is probably right that the 9 ohm SE846 might be a difficult load for most low current amps - but note that FiiO already states it is not in their recommended guide. So writing it off because it does not support the SE846 is something that will only apply to very low impedance IEMs.

I have a pair of 8 ohm DN2000J - so it will be interesting to see how they go when the BTR3 arrives.

 

[georgelai57]

https://www.facebook.com/FiiOAUDIO/videos/528237094299281/

A video on how to use the BTR3

 

[georgelai57]

And a comparison between this, the BTR1 and the uBTR

https://www.fiio.com/btr3_comparison

 

[caprimulgus]

If you don't need serious source, why not to get something 3x cheaper than btr3? ES100 sounds very serious disregarding price. Btr3 for non demanding headphones could be quite comparable.

FWIW, my personal rationale for getting the BTR3 is that I want AptX-LL for gaming/TV use, while also future-proofing a bit, with the AptX-HD and LDAC support (neither of which I have a need for right now). Not many others can support AptX-LL AND higher quality codecs.

I guess the alternative is that I buy a cheaper AptX-LL receiver just for gaming/tv use, and then just grab a higher quality receiver later down the track for music listening (eg. ES100). But I would prefer to just have the one unit that can do everything, and BTR3 looks like the best option currently for using AptX-LL as well as supporting other codecs.

Just a pity that my XBA3 (which are my beater IEMs) are outside the 16-100ohm range provided by Fiio, and especially in the lower frequencies (I am a basshead). Hopefully they don’t sound TOO bad, but I guess I can just use other IEMs (I will mainly use the BTR3 with M-100, but the option to go IEM for more portability would be handy).

FWIW, I will mostly be using it with Genki AptX-LL Bluetooth transmitter for Nintendo Switch, as a portable gaming rig. Later down the track, I was planning to grab an Avantree Oasis Plus (or Mee Audio Connect) for TV watching over dual-link AptX-LL, or music listening over AptX-HD.

 

[SubMash]

Mine should be here next week. I'll see what I can do about supplying measurements on my rig. I haven't commented so far because the BTR3 hasn't arrived yet - but I've seen a lot of talk about what the device can drive and can't drive - but I'm wondering about real world results.

SubMash - you've been quite vocal so far. Have you got the BTR3 and the ES100 (I see you have SE846)? Have you performed any blind volume matched tests between both devices?

Also their specs are here : https://www.fiio.com/btr3_parameters

In most of the measurements they have - they were performed under load (its common practise for FiiO to do this with all their devices). Usually they use a 32 ohm real world load.

As far as THD+N goes - the real question is at what point it is actually audible? If both are inaudible to us during music playback - then the debate is meaningless. Here's some good reading (admittedly its speakers) but follows the same debate - https://www.axiomaudio.com/blog/distortion. Another is https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/ap...preting-thd-measurements-think-db-not-percent.

And regarding damping - the BTR3 has close to zero ohm impedance - so the discussion regarding the SE846 and damping doesn't correlate. A source would have to have 1 ohm or more of OI to make a significantly audible frequency difference to the SE846 (usual 1:8 damping factor). As far as current and voltage goes - FiiO has not published those specs so anything quoted is speculation. I'm going to see if they have them (have already emailed their support staff). What we do know is that:
Into a 16 ohm output - the BTR3 will put 33 mW
Into a 32 ohm output - the BTR3 will put 25 mW

This suggests that the BTR3 is more voltage restricted than current restricted, so backs up FiiO's guidance of 16-100 ohm devices. I would suggest SubMash is probably right that the 9 ohm SE846 might be a difficult load for most low current amps - but note that FiiO already states it is not in their recommended guide. So writing it off because it does not support the SE846 is something that will only apply to very low impedance IEMs.

I have a pair of 8 ohm DN2000J - so it will be interesting to see how they go when the BTR3 arrives.

As I've stated before - I don't have btr3. So I'm only talking about physical difference of products specs. I do have es100. I don't see a point of single person blind test. It's also doesn't make sense for me to buy btr3, because all my headphones would work worse - 846 too low impedance, 650 - too high.

Most important measurements Fiio doesn't provide with any load - SNR and THD+N. FR also measured without load, btw. Power output at load provided from amp specs. And amp makes those 25mW with 60dB THD+N. 60dB you can hear if music is not too busy. But those 25mW are with ideal load. On 846 60db thd+n would happen way way sooner. On 650 you can't get any reasonable volume. Take a look how many tests Radsone published on website including comparisons to other similar products.

Btr3 doesn't have close to zero OI. Es100 paid a lot of attention to decrease OI, but ultimately it's amplifier impedance. Single 4375/76 amp is 1 Ohm OI. Dual makes it 0.5Ohm. ES100 is close to amp specs. BTR3 can't be below 1.0, but in reality could be worse.

I'm not writing off btr3. Apparently Fiio was looking at success of es100 designing product and price+looks offsets absence of second amp. So it has its place - high sensitivity 32Ohm headphones would work inaudibly same as es100 based on specs. But there are always a lot of work required to make sure ground noise, interference, crosstalk a are not coming out from PCB design. I have no idea if Fiio done it right in btr3.

Also, for instance, es100 changes volume with amp. A lot of products change volume with DAC to simplify design. How btr3 does it? I don't know. But if by DAC - you will have higher noise floor with low impedance headphones.

My point of being vocal here is to make sure people don't get distracted by marketing BS of 4376 noise floor without load.

P.S. I doubt that btr3 OI is 0.3Ohm. somebody who has it should verify it. Google how to measure it with a computer and splitter of audio signal.

 

[SubMash]

FWIW, my personal rationale for getting the BTR3 is that I want AptX-LL for gaming/TV use, while also future-proofing a bit, with the AptX-HD and LDAC support (neither of which I have a need for right now). Not many others can support AptX-LL AND higher quality codecs.

I guess the alternative is that I buy a cheaper AptX-LL receiver just for gaming/tv use, and then just grab a higher quality receiver later down the track for music listening (eg. ES100). But I would prefer to just have the one unit that can do everything, and BTR3 looks like the best option currently for using AptX-LL as well as supporting other codecs.

Just a pity that my XBA3 (which are my beater IEMs) are outside the 16-100ohm range provided by Fiio, and especially in the lower frequencies (I am a basshead). Hopefully they don’t sound TOO bad, but I guess I can just use other IEMs (I will mainly use the BTR3 with M-100, but the option to go IEM for more portability would be handy).

FWIW, I will mostly be using it with Genki AptX-LL Bluetooth transmitter for Nintendo Switch, as a portable gaming rig. Later down the track, I was planning to grab an Avantree Oasis Plus (or Mee Audio Connect) for TV watching over dual-link AptX-LL, or music listening over AptX-HD.

Aptx-ll is useful addition for gaming if you have transmitter, but it's still significant lag. I'm using wired connection for games and do video delay correction in the HTPC player for movies over BT.

 

[caprimulgus]

Aptx-ll is useful addition for gaming if you have transmitter, but it's still significant lag. I'm using wired connection for games and do video delay correction in the HTPC player for movies over BT.

Yeah, it’s more for convenience, and to avoid fear of cable getting snagged on public transport (pulling either the headphones off head or Switch out of hands!). For this kind of use (non-competitive portable use, and for games that do not require pinpoint sound accuracy), I think AptX-LL would be an acceptable amount of lag.

For any games that required exact timing with sound, I would probably avoid Bluetooth altogether.

 

[Brooko]

As I've stated before - I don't have btr3. So I'm only talking about physical difference of products specs. I do have es100. I don't see a point of single person blind test. It's also doesn't make sense for me to buy btr3, because all my headphones would work worse - 846 too low impedance, 650 - too high.

Most important measurements Fiio doesn't provide with any load - SNR and THD+N. FR also measured without load, btw. Power output at load provided from amp specs. And amp makes those 25mW with 60dB THD+N. 60dB you can hear if music is not too busy. But those 25mW are with ideal load. On 846 60db thd+n would happen way way sooner. On 650 you can't get any reasonable volume. Take a look how many tests Radsone published on website including comparisons to other similar products.

Btr3 doesn't have close to zero OI. Es100 paid a lot of attention to decrease OI, but ultimately it's amplifier impedance. Single 4375/76 amp is 1 Ohm OI. Dual makes it 0.5Ohm. ES100 is close to amp specs. BTR3 can't be below 1.0, but in reality could be worse.

I'm not writing off btr3. Apparently Fiio was looking at success of es100 designing product and price+looks offsets absence of second amp. So it has its place - high sensitivity 32Ohm headphones would work inaudibly same as es100 based on specs. But there are always a lot of work required to make sure ground noise, interference, crosstalk a are not coming out from PCB design. I have no idea if Fiio done it right in btr3.

Also, for instance, es100 changes volume with amp. A lot of products change volume with DAC to simplify design. How btr3 does it? I don't know. But if by DAC - you will have higher noise floor with low impedance headphones.

My point of being vocal here is to make sure people don't get distracted by marketing BS of 4376 noise floor without load.

P.S. I doubt that btr3 OI is 0.3Ohm. somebody who has it should verify it. Google how to measure it with a computer and splitter of audio signal.

I'll translate for others on the thread.

1. The numbers you are quoting are what you've read on the specs without actually asking FiiO or without using the product.
2. WTH do you keep going on about the HD650 and SE846 for? Both are outside the operating specifications FiiO recommends.
3. FiiO quite clearly states on their website that the output impedance is 0.3 ohms - under a 32 ohm load.
   Also the chip used is not the only thing that dictates output impedance. It also depends on the circuit being used.
4. You are making the assumption that FiiO just quotes chip specs. They don't. They have a full measurement suite at their research centre. The numbers shown are real (actually measured) numbers.

I've asked about THD+N and SNR numbers - personally I'd rather ask the manufacturer than make assumptions. I'll report back when I find out how they measured them

 

[Brooko]

P.S. I doubt that btr3 OI is 0.3Ohm. somebody who has it should verify it. Google how to measure it with a computer and splitter of audio signal.

I don't have a mutli-meter which has that sort of precision, and I don't have access to a decent analyser. I do trust FiiO with the Audio Precision suite to be able to measure these things properly.

 

[Niel_JM]

has anybody tested this with a source with the likes of samsung phones from s8 and above? considering these phones now support LDAC?

 

[SubMash]

I don't have a mutli-meter which has that sort of precision, and I don't have access to a decent analyser. I do trust FiiO with the Audio Precision suite to be able to measure these things properly.

I guess you don't have one. Because you can't measure OI with multimeter. Can't comment rest of the rant except that there is no way to use passive circuitry to decrease OI of chip. You can only make it higher. And I'm not aware of AP that can measure OI. Maybe there is one now. But if it was capable to do it - I'd rather see OI curve or at least mention frequency they used. Because load doesn't change OI, it's useless info. If it was 0.3 Ohm - they would not limit it to 16Ohm load...

 

[Brooko]

Actually you can (although normally you'd use a scope), and its not a rant.

1. Use a 1 kHz sine wave and measure peak to peak voltage with no load (can be done with an MM but scope would be preferred)
2. Add a known resistance (load) and remeasure
3. Then apply calc: RO = RL (Vopen/Vload -1)

Like I said - I have nothing which would give me the accuracy needed to measure the OI.

If you google Audio Precision and Output Impedance you'll find a series of articles on how they do it with their suites, and also note that there are software enhancements to allow you to have it as an automatic output from their hardware. I'm not sure if this is the way FiiO is doing it - but it would make sense.

And finally - you keep going back to the chip specs, but we have no idea if FiiO are using anything post the chip to further boost or change the output power. That circuitry can change impedance.