Even in 100% perfect conditions, LDAC still has to throw away 421 kbps of data. That ain’t lossless.
All I’m saying is - sure, you can crap on iPhones for not supporting the best Bluetooth CODEC standards… but it’s ultimately a minor-league argument when connecting a damn wire is superior performance on either platform anyway.
Not all records need to use 1411kbps (it's a max bitrate not min or average).. 909Kpbs is still far nearer to 1411 than SBC/AAC.
Then, with most android devices you can switch instantly between AAC and LDAC so you can find quite easily and quickly, by yourself, the real differences with your own ears when music is really busy (probably when it should need a 1411kbps transmission).
I almost never find any particular improvement with different cableswith my IEMs (from cheap to very expansive) => but it is very often quite instant between SBC vs AAC vs LDAC
Aptx adaptive vs LDAC is far more tricky story to catch real improvements for me with my ears (Need a Bluetooth Codec Switcher to make real time codec comparisons with android).
Then, with most android devices you can switch instantly between AAC and LDAC so you can find quite easily and quickly, by yourself, the real differences with your own ears when music is really busy (probably when it should need a 1411kbps transmission).
I almost never find any particular improvement with different cableswith my IEMs (from cheap to very expansive) => but it is very often quite instant between SBC vs AAC vs LDAC
I never said that the higher-bitrate LDAC isn’t superior to AAC or any other given Bluetooth CODEC. I was not suggesting they are all the same. If that’s what you took from my post, you were missing the point.
I was pointing out that even a cheap, non-defective wired solution will have better SQ than any Bluetooth solution. It’s got nothing to do with cheap wires versus expensive wires, and it has nothing to do with LDAC 990 vs. any other Bluetooth CODEC.
It has to do with wired vs. wireless.
Wireless is, no doubt, more convenient. Hands down. However that always comes with a compromise.
I don’t think that is necessarily correct… With wired you get more transmission bit rate than with Bluetooth, so clearly the fidelity of the data is greater with wired.
But SQ also has to do with the capabilities of the transducers, and how they are tuned. Now if you said that the ***same*** earphones or IEMs would sound better via wired than Bluetooth you very likely have a point.
So just because one set of headphones or IEMs are wired, it does not mean they would sound better than a completely different Bluetooth set, a point that often gets glossed over.
Even in 100% perfect conditions, LDAC still has to throw away 421 kbps of data. That ain’t lossless.
All I’m saying is - sure, you can crap on iPhones for not supporting the best Bluetooth CODEC standards… but it’s ultimately a minor-league argument when connecting a damn wire is superior performance on either platform anyway.
FLAC compression ratio is 50-70%, so for most Redbook material it will be under 990kpbs, with the few exceptions of course.
Wired is better, but in practice even with bit-perfect UAPP the difference in quality with 990kbps LDAC is negligible at best if noticeable at all.
With OS native oversampling USB audio driver, it's actually better with LDAC.
But SQ also has to do with the capabilities of the transducers, and how they are tuned. Now if you said that the ***same*** earphones or IEMs would sound better via wired than Bluetooth you very likely have a point.
I didn’t think I needed to state the obvious (but perhaps it was not obvious to everyone), but of course I was referring to “all other things being equal”. Comparing completely different headphones/IEMs, one on Bluetooth, the other wired, is an apples vs. oranges comparison.
FLAC compression ratio is 50-70%, so for most Redbook material it will be under 990kpbs, with the few exceptions of course.
Wired is better, but in practice even with bit-perfect UAPP the difference in quality with 990kbps LDAC is negligible at best if noticeable at all.
With OS native oversampling USB audio driver, it's actually better with LDAC.
That depends entirely on whether the FLAC decompression is occurring on the source, or inside the Bluetooth IEMs/headphones. I would not be surprised if the FLAC decompression was occurring in the source, and then the uncompressed material is then jammed through the Bluetooth CODEC for (re-)compression and transmission.
I am not saying that I know this for sure (and I am happy to be proven wrong, if it is the truth), but it is my understanding (without digging around more for white papers on it).
That depends entirely on whether the FLAC decompression is occurring on the source, or inside the Bluetooth IEMs/headphones. I would not be surprised if the FLAC decompression was occurring in the source, and then the uncompressed material is then jammed through the Bluetooth CODEC for (re-)compression and transmission.
I am not saying that I know this for sure (and I am happy to be proven wrong, if it is the truth), but it is my understanding (without digging around more for white papers on it).
If you read the article linked above it uses lossless Huffman coding compression combined with high freq re-quantization on high-res material, so that definitely means that FLAC decoding happens at the source, recompressed using LDAC algorithm, and uncompressed at the receiver. Which also means that even WAV file will be transmitted compressed.
Question for the group will I hear an Improvent with this device and a balanced 4.4mm cable over the fiio utws5. I have alot of high quality sources in my library. Thanks for any replies
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
