[DeJaVu]

It will be lossles when original stream permits. In reality it will be compressing. Or Qualcomm has broke all math together. So it is the next marketing lie.

Flac also uses compression but it is lossless. The important thing is that at decompression stage the stream is bit perfect, which is what aptx lossless codec promises at CD Quality (44KHz/16bit).

 

[anli]

Flac also uses compression but it is lossless. The important thing is that at decompression stage the stream is bit perfect, which is what aptx lossless codec promises at CD Quality (44KHz/16bit).

Flac uses archiving rather than compression. In other words flac could be restored into original wav (pcm) file bit-perfectly.

 

[emlin]

Flac uses archiving rather than compression. In other words flac could be restored into original wav (pcm) file bit-perfectly.

FLAC uses lossless compression. I don't know what you mean by archiving.

 

[anli]

FLAC uses lossless compression. I don't know what you mean by archiving.

I guess it's just matter of terms. Among my friends we use "compressing" in two meaning:

- compressed dynamic range
- lossy encoding

I have used "archiving" to emphasize the fact an initial content can be exactly restored as it was before, the same way as, say, we have zip or rar archives. Of course, flac is not just an archive as far as it is oriented to decoding on the fly (streaming). And, for sure, we can also name it as lossless compressing.

At any case, having limited stream BT bandwidth about 1 Mbit/s it is impossible to transfer information we can transfer via 1,4 Mbit/s. But at some period of time some track fragments could be... Ok losslessly compressed to fit BT bandwidth. For example some old recordings with small team (say, jazz trio or song with a guitar) can achieve 0.7 size factor of final flac files in comparison with wav ones. So, definitely, there are many fragments fitting BT bandwidth. But if we use flac to encode modern symphonic orchestra recording with tutti... Well, I gues even with my ugly English I have clarified my thoughts. Thanks!

 

[DeJaVu]

Of course, flac is not just an archive

I was just about to try WinRar as a player, good that this has been cleared .

At any case, having limited stream BT bandwidth about 1 Mbit/s it is impossible to transfer information we can transfer via 1,4 Mbit/s.

So bt audio works as follows. Your player decodes the flac file and sends the stream to system mixer for mixing with other system sounds(like notifications, alerts etc), after that the stream gets encoded with the used codec and sent to your BT receiver/earphones/headphones, where it gets decoded one last time for you to enjoy.

So if qualcom managed to achieve better compression method than FLAC(which has few levels of compression to choose from when encoding a CD) that would also be bit perfect in the decoding stage(which by the claims looks like they did) then they can manage to fit all that audio data in 1Mbit/s(ive seen mentions of it being up to 1.2Mbit/s). Qualcom itself claims "rates beyond 1Mbit/s"

 

[anli]

I was just about to try WinRar as a player, good that this has been cleared .


So bt audio works as follows. Your player decodes the flac file and sends the stream to system mixer for mixing with other system sounds(like notifications, alerts etc), after that the stream gets encoded with the used codec and sent to your BT receiver/earphones/headphones, where it gets decoded one last time for you to enjoy.

So if qualcom managed to achieve better compression method than FLAC(which has few levels of compression to choose from when encoding a CD) that would also be bit perfect in the decoding stage(which by the claims looks like they did) then they can manage to fit all that audio data in 1Mbit/s(ive seen mentions of it being up to 1.2Mbit/s). Qualcom itself claims "rates beyond 1Mbit/s"

Not all fragments can be encoded with size reducing sufficiently to use BT transport, be it flac encoder or BT encoder. "Beyond 1 Mbit/s" is too vague, it is selling rather than technical phrase.

 

[DeJaVu]

Not all fragments can be encoded with size reducing sufficiently to use BT transport, be it flac encoder or BT encoder. "Beyond 1 Mbit/s" is too vague, it is selling rather than technical phrase.

BTW there was a codec that worked at 1.2Mbit/s, Hiby UAT. They switched it to 900Kbit/s a year or two back for better connection stability, though probably there are some older Hiby devices that still have it at that rate, unless they changed it everywhere with firmware updates.
Either way thats irrelevant , focus on the "bit perfect" claim, thats what makes it lossless. And a company like qualcom wouldnt throw that around willy nilly as there is no space for free interpretations there.

And also i think youre confused about bitrate, 1.4Mbit/s is for PCM 44/16(uncompressed).
Check some of the FLAC files you have in a player that would display bitrate info, like foobar2000, and let us know what it says... Or you can also right click the file on pc>properties>details>bitrate.
I did explain how BT works, so you should be able to come to the right conclusion if you comprehend whats written.

 

[Lobaba]

@FiiO I have couried back UTWS5 to China for warranty claim but your customer support has not provided custom clearance documents since 30th June! DHL tracking number is 1505729842, I have contacted Fiio by taobao and wechat and they told me on 5th July they will handle it but nothing has happened! There will be additional charges by DHL for storage if this is not settled by tomorrow. Please push your colleagues to settle this ASAP!

 

[Lobaba]

@FiiO Mr Wang02036772949 just needs to confirm item and receive it! THIS IS VERY URGENT. IF NOT SETTLED TODAY IT WILL BE RETURNED BACK FROM CHINA TO SINGAPORE AND WILL BE VERY COSTLY. I HOPE THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN OTHERWISE FIIO HAVE TO FOOT THE RETURN LOGISTICS COST.

 

[FiiO]

@FiiO Mr Wang02036772949 just needs to confirm item and receive it! THIS IS VERY URGENT. IF NOT SETTLED TODAY IT WILL BE RETURNED BACK FROM CHINA TO SINGAPORE AND WILL BE VERY COSTLY. I HOPE THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN OTHERWISE FIIO HAVE TO FOOT THE RETURN LOGISTICS COST.

Dear Lobaba,

Sorry about that. I checked with my colleague that since the receiver's phone number of your package was not a mobile phone number so he failed to make the custom clearance work. He will contact DHL again this afternoon for the custom clearance.

Best regards

 

[Lobaba]

@FiiO Complete information is still not received by DHL, please expedite

 

[Lobaba]

@FiiO

Email from DHL

1.shpt clearance is still holding for cnee to provide required ppwk of Chinese description report.
2.cnee was ctced via 708995034@QQ.COM 18825175312 MR WANG since from 29th JUNE to 11th JULY.
3. cnee didnt provide the relevant ppwk to clear it.
4.Once the ppwk provided, it takes about 3-5 working days for customs to approve release if the ppwk no problem.

Please push receiver to provide paperwork asap . The clearance deadline is 30 days since Arrival, if over deadline, shpt may be destroyed or confiscated by local customs

Thank you

 

[anli]

@FiiO

Email from DHL

1.shpt clearance is still holding for cnee to provide required ppwk of Chinese description report.
2.cnee was ctced via 708995034@QQ.COM 18825175312 MR WANG since from 29th JUNE to 11th JULY.
3. cnee didnt provide the relevant ppwk to clear it.
4.Once the ppwk provided, it takes about 3-5 working days for customs to approve release if the ppwk no problem.

Please push receiver to provide paperwork asap . The clearance deadline is 30 days since Arrival, if over deadline, shpt may be destroyed or confiscated by local customs

Thank you

Is it possible to use direct emailing? Your conversation kills life time of many people.

 

[pervysage]

About 2.5 months into ownership of the UTWS5's and still a very happy camper. Run them pretty much 5 days a week, 6-8 hours a day and they haven't missed a beat.

Battery has been holding up great besides one instance a long time ago where I guess one of the hooks didn't activate the charging and started giving me a low battery warning pretty early on into a listening session. Never happened again after that although nowadays I always pay attention to the front lights when setting the earhooks back into the case. There is still the off chance one of the sides doesn't light up at first but a simple lifting of the lid and putting it back down and then usually both lights come right back on to indicate both sides are charging.

Other than that, no complaints, these things have been a godsend at work

 

[Lightspeed12]

About 2.5 months into ownership of the UTWS5's and still a very happy camper. Run them pretty much 5 days a week, 6-8 hours a day and they haven't missed a beat.

Battery has been holding up great besides one instance a long time ago where I guess one of the hooks didn't activate the charging and started giving me a low battery warning pretty early on into a listening session. Never happened again after that although nowadays I always pay attention to the front lights when setting the earhooks back into the case. There is still the off chance one of the sides doesn't light up at first but a simple lifting of the lid and putting it back down and then usually both lights come right back on to indicate both sides are charging.

Other than that, no complaints, these things have been a godsend at work

I had that charging problem with my sony m9 with spinfit cp240 ear tips, the lid was closed but the tips must have been slightly tilting the hooks in the case.
I solved it by using a silocine wrist band around the case while charging.