Removal of the headphone jack : the future or a marketing scheme?

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by aertus, Oct 22, 2017.
First
 
Back
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
Next
 
Last
  1. RockStar2005
    Ok good. Then yeah, it would be nice if you or someone did a comparison with it off then vs. the AT one.
     
  2. RockStar2005
    Yes, that is a very good point. I don't recall him mentioning the codec he used, but you're right, there would be a noticeable difference b/t AptX & AptX HD. Well I'd still like to read a review where someone compares AptX HD to LDAC (with NC off) before I would agree.

    I'm sure it can be done. They're making devices and chips smaller and smaller (and better) every year anyway. Think about how big cell phones used to be like 20-30 years ago vs. now. lol

    Another question I have for you Whit is, since you tried the DSR9BT, what was your opinion of its amp?? Would you say it got loud, or perhaps LOUD?! lol For me, if its on-board amp was weak, that would be a deal breaker.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2017
  3. RockStar2005
    Well it's only innovative IMO if it's BETTER than wired. lol Or at least equal. But yes, LDAC + D-Notes would ROCK!

    I know Apple created ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec) as their response to FLAC, but AAC? Are you sure they created that too? I'd read somewhere that was a myth, but not sure.

    Well at $550 I dunno if I'd called the DSR9BT affordable, but it certainly is more affordable than say, the AKG K812 (or the newer closed-back version: K872) or Sennheiser HD 800. lol

    Wow. Beats being the BEST sounding HPs? Now that would TRULY be a miracle. lol They have gotten better though vs. the older Beats models from what I've heard and read.
     
  4. RockStar2005
    Was this for me? If it was, no I haven't tried it yet. I would ONLY go BT if it was PROVEN to at least be EQUAL to a wired setup. If not, I have no interest. From what I'd read and mentioned earlier, when connecting the DSR9BT to a PC (using the cable it comes with), the sound marginally improved. That means yeah maybe it's the best BT but it's not YET equal or better than a wired setup.
     
  5. RockStar2005
  6. aertus
    actually i have no doubtts its the best wireless headphones out there i believe you. the D notes systems seems to very innovative and there is potential. But there is two drawbacks: One its too expensive. and 2 I don't think it's better than having say a very high end sennheiser pair of headphones combined with a really good tube amp.

    so yeah if you want wireless its probably the best out there.

    if sony sells their LDAC tech we might see Dnote plus LDAC. or maybe Sony might come up with something to compete with it.
     
  7. rkw
  8. rkw
    RockStar2005 likes this.
  9. aertus
    RockStar2005 likes this.
  10. RockStar2005
    Damn..........now THIS is a deal! lol Act quick if you want the original 1000X.
     
  11. Slaphead
    I don’t know what price they were when you posted that, but it’s now at $348 which is what I paid for them 6 months ago.

    Currently here they’re going for $299 (swiss franc is at parity with the dollar) here and that’s a bricks and mortar store.
     
  12. reginalb
    They were $228, I was tempted.
     
    RockStar2005 likes this.
  13. RockStar2005
    Correct. $228.
     
  14. Slaphead
    Then indeed that was a very good price, “was” being the operative word :wink:
     
    RockStar2005 likes this.
  15. reginalb
    So, this is kind of interesting, there seems to be some sort of oversampling that happens with LDAC?

    I am using GPM to stream a 320kbps MP3, so I definitely don't need the 990kbps provided by LDAC, but take a look at this:

    [​IMG]

    32 bit/96 KHz is listed there.

    Either way, AptX HD using AAC is going to give you pretty good audio already (since AptX HD can max out at over 500kbps) - the problem with AptX is that you don't really know exactly what you're getting with it, as it can be implemented with a few different codecs from what I understand.

    I've done a lot of digging in to LDAC lately. Early Sony marketing material had described LDAC as a lossless codec for 24/96 audio. Lossless compression of 24/96 at 990kbps would be a pretty major achievement, since FLAC is ~4,600kbps for 24/96 audio. But I found someone who had pressed them on this, eventually speaking to an actual engineer who indicated that it is NOT lossless. Either way, it should be completely transparent at 990kbps unless it's a terrible codec - that is more than enough for 16/44.1 lossless.

    These are just some random musings about LDAC I've had since the discussion about it in here :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017
    jfvny and RockStar2005 like this.
First
 
Back
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
Next
 
Last

Share This Page