[ClieOS]

Retested UP4 a couple of times, both as USB DAC and on BT (via Creative BT-D1, aptX codec)

Good news first - after some reconfiguration of the testing equipment, I rerun the USB DAC test multiple times and UP4 result shows overall improvement - there are still noticeable distortion, but significantly less so from the yesterday's test. Not really sure what causes the difference in result for UP4, as BTR5 under the same test only shows marginal difference. See ND file in zip for detail

Somewhat of a bad news - as expected, BT test's result is worst than USB DAC test due to the fact the aptX is used, as opposed to hard wire (*applicable to both UP4 and BTR5), but the significant bit is that multiple test run on UP4 all came out with slightly different result, implicating inconsistency on performance (on contrast, BTR5's BT test is fairly consistent). Noticeably FR curve seems to be mismatched every time, among other things. See aptX files in zip for detail.

Updated RMAA zip file is on 2nd post.

So this isn't exactly all positive across the board, but I'll revise my advice for UP4 from 'not recommended' to 'caution when buying'.

 

[Q Mass]

A question to owners of any of the newer BT dac/amps which handle LDAC or any other of the recent 'hi-rez' codecs:

Which wired DAP (that you have heard) most closely matches your BT device in terms of quality (not so much character, just overall SQ)?

I ask on behalf of all those (me too) who haven't heard a modern BT device, and are wondering what general level of SQ modern Bluetooth can achieve compared to wired.

I realise that results will vary wildly due to differing headphone performance, but knowing which tier of performance a device like a UP4 or BTR5 enjoys would help many of us out a lot.

Thanks Folks!

 

[vnmslsrbms]

A question to owners of any of the newer BT dac/amps which handle LDAC or any other of the recent 'hi-rez' codecs:

Which wired DAP (that you have heard) most closely matches your BT device in terms of quality (not so much character, just overall SQ)?

I ask on behalf of all those (me too) who haven't heard a modern BT device, and are wondering what general level of SQ modern Bluetooth can achieve compared to wired.

I realise that results will vary wildly due to differing headphone performance, but knowing which tier of performance a device like a UP4 or BTR5 enjoys would help many of us out a lot.

Thanks Folks!

SQ compared to anything wired, you are going to hear a little degradation. APTXHD or LDAC is pretty decent though. I think in an outside environment, you are going to be satisfied, since the reduction of cord tangle (not to mention the outside noise, your own footsteps, etc) kind of makes the difference moot IMO. There's no reason for me to use bluetooth at home, except for sometimes playing music from my iPad, and that's just for convenience sake in my bedroom. Or in the shower. BT has come a long ways I think. However finding devices that support the codecs that you want with all the functionality (form factor) that you want isn't always straightforward. It's certainly moving in the right direction though, and is something that is probably one of the most rapidly changing audio spaces.

It's also not often straightforward what your device is using, and how to set it or force it. So, your mileage may vary, but generally it's very decent experience, although to me, when hooking up the say BTR5 compared to Shure BMCE2, to the completely wireless options, you are making sacrifices in SQ, power, and customisability within the Bluetooth realm (more convenient, less of everything). One day in the future the completely wireless buds will sound just as good as a wired connection, but that's still a ways away (cost/battery problems mostly limiting the power output decision).

 

[Q Mass]

SQ compared to anything wired, you are going to hear a little degradation. APTXHD or LDAC is pretty decent though. I think in an outside environment, you are going to be satisfied, since the reduction of cord tangle (not to mention the outside noise, your own footsteps, etc) kind of makes the difference moot IMO. There's no reason for me to use bluetooth at home, except for sometimes playing music from my iPad, and that's just for convenience sake in my bedroom. Or in the shower. BT has come a long ways I think. However finding devices that support the codecs that you want with all the functionality (form factor) that you want isn't always straightforward. It's certainly moving in the right direction though, and is something that is probably one of the most rapidly changing audio spaces.

It's also not often straightforward what your device is using, and how to set it or force it. So, your mileage may vary, but generally it's very decent experience, although to me, when hooking up the say BTR5 compared to Shure BMCE2, to the completely wireless options, you are making sacrifices in SQ, power, and customisability within the Bluetooth realm (more convenient, less of everything). One day in the future the completely wireless buds will sound just as good as a wired connection, but that's still a ways away (cost/battery problems mostly limiting the power output decision).

Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.

You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).

If so that's kinda disappointing, as I was hoping to use my phone (Sony, LDAC) as a transport/host for Spotify offline (and maybe Tidal offline) via BTR5 or similar, without it being a step down from entry level, (or even perhaps some mid-range) DAP's.

To be clear, my question is only in reference to sound quality, not other attributes.

 

[peter123]

Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.

You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).

If so that's kinda disappointing, as I was hoping to use my phone (Sony, LDAC) as a transport/host for Spotify offline (and maybe Tidal offline) via BTR5 or similar, without it being a step down from entry level, (or even perhaps some mid-range) DAP's.

To be clear, my question is only in reference to sound quality, not other attributes.

Fwiw my experience is quite different. To my ears the Radsone ES100 does outperform the Shanling M1 ($99) in performance over Bluetooth through its balanced output (single ended I'd put it on a similar level). I do also use it with Bluetooth both at home and in the office and I'm perfectly happy with it although I have a quite large amount of wired options that I could choose in those places.

I haven't bought any other DAPs since I got the ES100 since I'm perfectly happy with it.

 

[vnmslsrbms]

Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.

You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).

If so that's kinda disappointing, as I was hoping to use my phone (Sony, LDAC) as a transport/host for Spotify offline (and maybe Tidal offline) via BTR5 or similar, without it being a step down from entry level, (or even perhaps some mid-range) DAP's.

To be clear, my question is only in reference to sound quality, not other attributes.

Honestly there is such a wide range of DAPs it's hard to say. I was thinking more similar range. Like say if you took the best DAP vs the best Bluetooth option, the best DAP would beat it for sure. Taking the cheapest of anything would result in crap as well. If you chose the cheap DAP vs the cheap BT (which I have tried) it would just be a competition for futility. Honestly I don't think you would be disappointed too much in the ES100. The new BTR5 would be fun to try out as well. Try them and compare to your DAP. Again, using BT isn't to beat the DAP, since it offers convenience benefits. If you're looking for best SQ possible then obviously wired. If you want to spend not too much money then ES100 would work great with your smart phone or DAP.

 

[Q Mass]

Fwiw my experience is quite different. To my ears the Radsone ES100 does outperform the Shanling M1 ($99) in performance over Bluetooth through its balanced output (single ended I'd put it on a similar level). I do also use it with Bluetooth both at home and in the office and I'm perfectly happy with it although I have a quite large amount of wired options that I could choose in those places.

I haven't bought any other DAPs since I got the ES100 since I'm perfectly happy with it.

Thanks, this at least gives me a very rough idea of where you think the best BT devices lie in sound quality (unavoidably, value plays a part here too, but comparison to the M1 does at least give someone who hasn't heard the newest BT a ballpark idea of where the tech is currently at).
I have read that the M1 is no slouch for it's price, so that would elevate the contemporary BT experience above my own limited (and unsatisfactory) BT experience with old kit.

BT may yet prove to be disappointing SQ wise, but if it can compete with the M1 it might be worth a try .

Honestly there is such a wide range of DAPs it's hard to say. I was thinking more similar range. Like say if you took the best DAP vs the best Bluetooth option, the best DAP would beat it for sure. Taking the cheapest of anything would result in crap as well. If you chose the cheap DAP vs the cheap BT (which I have tried) it would just be a competition for futility. Honestly I don't think you would be disappointed too much in the ES100. The new BTR5 would be fun to try out as well. Try them and compare to your DAP. Again, using BT isn't to beat the DAP, since it offers convenience benefits. If you're looking for best SQ possible then obviously wired. If you want to spend not too much money then ES100 would work great with your smart phone or DAP.

OK, thanks again.
Do you have any cheapish DAP's which compares in SQ to your es100?
I'm not expecting even the best BT solutions to compare to the best wired, I'm just trying to get a rough idea where the best BT lies in the spectrum before I make the decision to invest (maybe gamble would be a better word here!).

 

[monsieurfromag3]

Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.

You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).

If so that's kinda disappointing, as I was hoping to use my phone (Sony, LDAC) as a transport/host for Spotify offline (and maybe Tidal offline) via BTR5 or similar, without it being a step down from entry level, (or even perhaps some mid-range) DAP's.

To be clear, my question is only in reference to sound quality, not other attributes.

I’m going to do just that in a few months’ time, letting my precious V30 go and get one of those new jack-less phones (or might as well be jack-less given how lackluster they sound when they maintain the legacy jack).
The V30 is easily at the level of current $300 Pioneer or Fiio DAPs.
I also have an ES100, the format is invaluable in the summer. I tend to reach for my V30, for better dynamics and resolution. But that’s also down to the ES100’s softer tuning.

The newest generation of BT receivers (Qudelix 5K, Fiio BTR5, Shanling up4...) boast similar specs to the newest generation of entry-level DAPs, or the previous generation of mid-level DAPs. AptX HD or LDAC transmission means you are not losing out on anything meaningful if you stream up to CD quality, as you can see from the curves here. I was going to get a DAP and use it as BT receiver but I don’t think I’ll bother, as SQ now reaches neck-and-neck.

I’ll ping the excellent @holsen here as he had interesting things to write on the subject on the Shanling up thread.

 

[Hanesu]

I have compared my iFi xDSD in bluetooth mode to several mid priced DAPS - and I honestly though it`s not such a big difference in SQ. It`s amost the same as the difference between DAPs themselves. They all have a slightly different sound - but it is very difficult to say which is better or worse because it`s all so subjective.
So I would be very interested, too, if somebody could compare BTR5 to a DAP.

 

[Q Mass]

I’m going to do just that in a few months’ time, letting my precious V30 go and get one of those new jack-less phones (or might as well be jack-less given how lackluster they sound when they maintain the legacy jack).
The V30 is easily at the level of current $300 Pioneer or Fiio DAPs.
I also have an ES100, the format is invaluable in the summer. I tend to reach for my V30, for better dynamics and resolution. But that’s also down to the ES100’s softer tuning.

The newest generation of BT receivers (Qudelix 5K, Fiio BTR5, Shanling up4...) boast similar specs to the newest generation of entry-level DAPs, or the previous generation of mid-level DAPs. AptX HD or LDAC transmission means you are not losing out on anything meaningful if you stream up to CD quality, as you can see from the curves here. I was going to get a DAP and use it as BT receiver but I don’t think I’ll bother, as SQ now reaches neck-and-neck.

I’ll ping the excellent @holsen here as he had interesting things to write on the subject on the Shanling up thread.

That's encouraging!
At the price point, I think that current entry level DAP, or last gen' mid level is pretty damn good for a wireless solution.
The FIIO Q5S is also interesting, but for me, too big.
If I were prepared to go to that size I'd just get/use a wired DAP (the price is also uncomfortably high, and too close to the M11 et-al, for me at least, same for the Ifi xdsd ).

it sounds as though I might not lose out on too much SQ compared to most entry level DAP's, and maybe even some of the mid level ones?

 

[Q Mass]

BTW, does it surprise anyone else that Sony don't seem to have a dog in this particular race?
I mean, LDAC is their codec after all!

Maybe they're too focused on their wireless headphones and 'true wireless' to consider a BT dac-amp?

(apologies for the BtoB)

 

[ClieOS]

BTW, does it surprise anyone else that Sony don't seem to have a dog in this particular race?
I mean, LDAC is their codec after all!

Maybe they're too focused on their wireless headphones and 'true wireless' to consider a BT dac-amp?

(apologies for the BtoB)

To somewhat answer your question, as I have some insight from a friend who used to hold a fairly high position in the company - Sony, as a huge international organization as well as having a very Japanese style management system, is very compartmentalized in its various individual business sector. That means there is a headphone department, a DAP department (probably resides within their higher-end AV department) as well as a smartphone department (which will oversee all the BT adapter R&D), and they usually don't talk to each other. A good evidence is that - despite supplying most of the CMOS camera modules to most brands of smartphone and known for having exceptional image quality, Sony's own smartphone, which uses its own CMOS sensor, are known to suck - the company smartphone department actually goes as far last year as to publicly admits the reason is that because they can't get enough resource from the camera department in order to optimize the smartphone software (where the same camera is supplied to the competitors and is much better utilized). That will tell you just how bad Sony as a company is when it comes to communication within the company. Each department has its own yearly financial report and the performance of a particular department is often not a concern for the head of another department.

 

[Q Mass]

To somewhat answer your question, as I have some insight from a friend who used to hold a fairly high position in the company - Sony, as a huge international organization as well as having a very Japanese style management system, is very compartmentalized in its various individual business sector. That means there is a headphone department, a DAP department (probably resides within their higher-end AV department) as well as a smartphone department (which will oversee all the BT adapter R&D), and they usually don't talk to each other. A good evidence is that - despite supplying most of the CMOS camera modules to most brands of smartphone and known for having exceptional image quality, Sony's own smartphone, which uses its own CMOS sensor, are known to suck - the company smartphone department actually goes as far last year as to publicly admits the reason is that because they can't get enough resource from the camera department in order to optimize the smartphone software (where the same camera is supplied to the competitors and is much better utilized). That will tell you just how bad Sony as a company is when it comes to communication within the company. Each department has its own yearly financial report and the performance of a particular department is often not a concern for the head of another department.

That's messed up.
Or maybe it isn't, maybe Sony wouldn't be Sony if they worked differently?
Either way, it's a shame they don't make a BT dac-amp, as I bet they'd make a great one.
They make pretty damn good small DAP's, they've got some cool small amp tech', and stellar battery life.
Plenty of experience with Bluetooth too!

 

[monsieurfromag3]

That's encouraging!
At the price point, I think that current entry level DAP, or last gen' mid level is pretty damn good for a wireless solution.
The FIIO Q5S is also interesting, but for me, too big.
If I were prepared to go to that size I'd just get/use a wired DAP (the price is also uncomfortably high, and too close to the M11 et-al, for me at least, same for the Ifi xdsd ).

it sounds as though I might not lose out on too much SQ compared to most entry level DAP's, and maybe even some of the mid level ones?

I’m with you on the Q5S and xDSD. I’ve never heard the Fiio but have briefly tried the xDSD, and it went as it always does whenever I audition iFi’s products - on paper they’re perfect and I’m terribly excited, but in person I find them clangy, non-musical, and fussy to use. That’s just me though and technically they’re up there, definitely worth the price. But if that format was okay I would rather get a DAP that also receives LDAC.

Regarding Sony, @ClieOS ‘s insight is enlightening; I find it crazy that their new Android DAPs are the only ones in that throng of competitors to NOT work as USB DACs, which all of these tiny dongles do!
Edit: their WM line of DAPs have been updated with the BT receiver function I believe.

 

[kangdaniel]

Hi @ClieOS , how about Fiio M5 (bluetooth receiver mode) vs ES100, BTR5? Although W5 has the best SQ, I don't like carrying its case.