[BigZ12]

https://www.jaybirdsport.com/nb-no/run-xt-true-wireless-headphones.html#985-000894
SBC, BT4.1... no thank you. I really hoped these would support BT5.0 and AAC.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

BT5 is nice but far from a dealbreaker. AFAIK the VModa Crossfades still use friggin' BT3 and it's aces both in connection and sound quality thanks to the codecs. If it's 4.1 then I don't think there's anything beyond maybe battery life or an occasional interference blip that anyone would notice.

 

[korefuji]

BT5 is nice but far from a dealbreaker. AFAIK the VModa Crossfades still use friggin' BT3 and it's aces both in connection and sound quality thanks to the codecs. If it's 4.1 then I don't think there's anything beyond maybe battery life or an occasional interference blip that anyone would notice.

This. So. Much. The significance of having BT 5.0 is so over played, it makes me nauseous.

 

[turbobb]

@rhsauer - thx, I have acces to an XS I can test with.

@BigZ12 - strange, the CSR I chatted with mentioned it was 4.2. I can live with their SBC implementation as I find it quite good but yeah, 4.2 now while a bevy of 5's are being released led me to cancel my pre-order.

 

[turbobb]

@korefuji - same could be said about the codecs but in the end, everybody has specific needs. Maybe 5 isn't important to you given no range or connection or battery life issues but those can be requirements for others. Great we have so many choices no? ;o)

 

[SomeGuyDude]

@korefuji - same could be said about the codecs but in the end, everybody has specific needs. Maybe 5 isn't important to you given no range or connection or battery life issues but those can be requirements for others. Great we have so many choices no? ;o)

What I'm saying is I keep seeing people go "NOPE SORRY I WON'T BUY IT BECAUSE OF ____" but oftentimes that criterion is totally inconsequential and they're basically avoiding a product that would suit all of their needs.

With BT5.0, unless you're planning on leaving your phone inside while you go to the 7/11 or your head is about 10 feet wide and made of solid lead you shouldn't run into any connection problems, and battery life is going to be more affected by other factors. If the end result is 4hr of battery, What does it matter if it has BT5 or not?

I really hate this forum sometimes because it seems like everyone eventually starts buying them for reasons other than the experience of using the damn things.

 

[korefuji]

@korefuji - same could be said about the codecs but in the end, everybody has specific needs. Maybe 5 isn't important to you given no range or connection or battery life issues but those can be requirements for others. Great we have so many choices no? ;o)

some what, as SomeGuyDude says, if you were to ignore all the bt 4.2 and below the mw07, which for me is the best twe out there for sound, would not even get a look. Bt 5 is in its infancy, in terms of adoption, not every new earbud has it, 4.2 is cheaper as an option, and I havent' seen any categorical evidence that says the battery is significantly improved with the use of bt 5. YMMV, but I think there's a touch of tech snobbery going on.

 

[rhsauer]

Just FYI, I was wondering if there is any way to confirm that my iPhone was connecting to various earphones using the AAC codec, and found (on this board) the following method to check the Bluetooth codecs and connection quality on an iPhone:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/how...n-ios-device-and-bluetooth-headphones.835289/

Playing around with this, I found that the Sabbat E12’s and the Mifo o5’s (both of use, I believe, Realtek SOCs), apparently connect via AAC VBR at a maximum connection speed of 221 kbps:

“A2DP configured at 44.1 KHz. Codec: AAC-LC, VBR max: 221 kbps. 1 frames * (12+644) bytes = 656 per RTP (max=656) every 23.22 ms”

On the other hand, the MTW’s, the Mavin’s and the MPOW T5’s (all of which, I think, use Qualcomm chips), apparently connect via AAC VBR at a maximum connection speed of 256 kbps:

“A2DP configured at 44.1 KHz. Codec: AAC-LC, VBR max: 256 kbps. 1 frames * (12+744) bytes = 756 per RTP (max=879) every 23.22 ms”

(Note the numbers I’ve put in boldface.) Further, in all cases, a separate log entry indicated a connection rate that the actual connection speed bounced around (consistent with AAC VBR, I suppose) and more often than not was lower than 200. For example:

“A2DP LinkQualityReport: ReTx = 24.6% ( 14 / 57), TxPwr = 7 dBm, RSSI = -57, {50,75,90}th Noise = { -94, -93, -92} for 20 ch, 2EDR pkts = 26, rate = 192 kbps”

Before doing this, my assumption would have been that all iPhones connected via CBR AAC at 256 kbps — but apparently that assumption is wrong. I’m reluctant to correlate these numbers too directly with perceived audio quality, but I thought others might find these results interesting — and, perhaps, add to my understanding of what they mean.

 

[nc8000]

Just FYI, I was wondering if there is any way to confirm that my iPhone was connecting to various earphones using the AAC codec, and found (on this board) the following method to check the Bluetooth codecs and connection quality on an iPhone:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/how...n-ios-device-and-bluetooth-headphones.835289/

Playing around with this, I found that the Sabbat E12’s and the Mifo o5’s (both of use, I believe, Realtek SOCs), apparently connect via AAC VBR at a maximum connection speed of 221 kbps:

“A2DP configured at 44.1 KHz. Codec: AAC-LC, VBR max: 221 kbps. 1 frames * (12+644) bytes = 656 per RTP (max=656) every 23.22 ms”

On the other hand, the MTW’s, the Mavin’s and the MPOW T5’s (all of which, I think, use Qualcomm chips), apparently connect via AAC VBR at a maximum connection speed of 256 kbps:

“A2DP configured at 44.1 KHz. Codec: AAC-LC, VBR max: 256 kbps. 1 frames * (12+744) bytes = 756 per RTP (max=879) every 23.22 ms”

(Note the numbers I’ve put in boldface.) Further, in all cases, a separate log entry indicated a connection rate that the actual connection speed bounced around (consistent with AAC VBR, I suppose) and more often than not was lower than 200. For example:

“A2DP LinkQualityReport: ReTx = 24.6% ( 14 / 57), TxPwr = 7 dBm, RSSI = -57, {50,75,90}th Noise = { -94, -93, -92} for 20 ch, 2EDR pkts = 26, rate = 192 kbps”

Before doing this, my assumption would have been that all iPhones connected via CBR AAC at 256 kbps — but apparently that assumption is wrong. I’m reluctant to correlate these numbers too directly with perceived audio quality, but I thought others might find these results interesting — and, perhaps, add to my understanding of what they mean.

Unfortunately this only works for the minority with Apple computers running Mac OS

 

[Rickyearl]

Wonder if i could do this at the Apple store?

 

[albau]

Ah thanks, makes sense since the digital conversion happens inside of the wireless earphone and the quality over Bluetooth will not exceed the lossy transmission standard.

This must be why the more expensive TW buds generally sound better because of more costly DACs.

I beg to disagree. MW07 is case in point. It has the cheapest Qualcomm SoC, the one even without a dedicated DAC, programmable EQ and updateable firmware. And still among current TWS they're one of the best sounding thanks, I suspect, to 10mm custom driver and sound (pun) acoustic engineering. In the end TWS, as any headphone, are most of all about acoustic design. I strongly believe that even lossless bitsream from the cleanest of sources won't make any headphone sound good if it has dismal driver or a badly designed acoustic path. But with good analog audio innards you can have well sounding TWS even if it supports only standard implementation of SBC over BT3 and a reasonable quality source in terms of mastering and bandwidth.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

I beg to disagree. MW07 is case in point. It has the cheapest Qualcomm SoC, the one even without a dedicated DAC, programmable EQ and updateable firmware. And still among current TWS they're one of the best sounding thanks, I suspect, to 10mm custom driver and sound (pun) acoustic engineering. In the end TWS, as any headphone, are most of all about acoustic design. I strongly believe that even lossless bitsream from the cleanest of sources won't make any headphone sound good if it has dismal driver or a badly designed acoustic path. But with good analog audio innards you can have well sounding TWS even if it supports only standard implementation of SBC over BT3 and a reasonable quality source in terms of mastering and bandwidth.

I get amused by people talking about cheapo TWEs having aptX or not when at that level pretty much all that matters is the acoustic design. Codec gets important once the actual drivers and housing are done well. Then you get people upset that friggin LDAC, which is well above transparency level, isn't available, like... ugh.

Whenever I ask about stuff, I need to start clarifying that I don't want to hear any tech specs. Just performance.

 

[Inear]

1more is coming out with new TWS that they showed off in CES.

http://www.52audio.com/archives/13691.html

 

[howdy]

With my 2nd set of MW07 the battery life is definitely better. I have got over 3 hours a few times now. I will be absolutely keeping these. I'm getting a fairly good seal with Spinfits tips and hopefully better with the Symbio tips when ever they arrive.
I am still however preferring the sound of my Senns still. They are both top notch TWS though and compliment each other in there differences.

 

[MulberryMadness]

1more is coming out with new TWS that they showed off in CES.

http://www.52audio.com/archives/13691.html

seems like ~10-25% of the posts in this megathread are simply repeats of previous posts by those who refuse to read back more than a few pages.

Apple will be releasing the Airpods 2 "soon" (sometime this year, OS 12.2 beta is showing possible update), and rumored changed design/form factor for an Airpods 3? in 2020..or some day .

I'm sure multiple other posts to this thread will be mentioning 1More's rumored TWS/TWE with ANC (which they seem to be calling ENC) using the qcc5121 'premium level' audio SoC (as compared to entry level 30XX series)...which will come out in June. hmm, maybe I should post up giant sized font, prolly make no difference, as ppl just don't read this thread...just post any given news they see, like lemmings

https://hexus.net/ce/news/audio-visual/126401-1more-shows-innovative-headphones/

"New at CES 2019 are the True Wireless ENC In Ear headphones. 1More claims that these will be the first such headphones; utilising dual-drivers, plus Qualcomm's 5121 audio SoC. Runyon touted a seven hour battery life for this headset. However, thanks to the included charging case you get an additional 24 hours of portability.

There are smart functions available. For example, the headphones include realtime health monitoring. If you like or wish to use smart-assistant AI on the go the True Wireless ENC In Ear headphones are compatible with Siri, Google Assistant, or Alexa. Some technical details are that these headphones support BT 5.0, Apt-X HD, and AAC codecs.

At CES we were told that 1More would run an IndieGogo campaign to launch True Wireless ENC, with availability from around June time. Product retail price is expected to be around $149."