[Peicille]

Anyone know if the sound quality is the best when wired? I read somewhere that the quality diminishes when you use it wired so using it with BT might be the best in terms of SQ ..

 

[Yaroslav]

The irony is that most of us assumed the C2W 'dropped' the AAC support of the original CW, when in fact the CW never had it in the first place!

It's all one big sham - $300+ for a headphone that doesn't support any of the modern codecs.

Yup, that's what I was posting this whole time and most people trolled me. Sad, I liked the brand.

It's much worse, of course, that the ORIGINAL CFW1 was a fake when it comes to AAC support. That's why the info from the site was pulled and Val is ignoring the forums despite checking in every couple of days.

 

[Yaroslav]

To play Devil's Advocate (just a bit), AAC support was never something advertised directly on the box for the CFW's. It was mentioned in a video shot by Head-Fi, on the forums here, and may have been online at some point. There's a difference between direct advertising on a product's box and making (what appears to be) a mistake during a video interview. It's not like people were paying more for AAC, not like what they're doing with aptX now. If the end results cannot be heard and there wasn't an added cost, does it really make that much of a difference. I know some people in this forum are throwing up their arms saying "no AAC, no buy, they are the Devil" but, if they have finely tuned the equipment and electronics to provide transparency when using SBC, does any of that really matter?

It also doesn't help that wireless headphone manufacturers really aren't giving people a way to determine what codec is being used with their products. Take the Sony MDR-100ABN or MDR-1000X headphones. Both support AAC, aptX, aptX HD, and LDAC over Bluetooth along with standard SBC. There isn't an indicator light or companion app to determine what codec is being used. Instead, people need a Mac and they have to hunt down specific software or they need to buy specific hardware (such as a USB Bluetooth transmitter) that will indicate what audio format is being used. It's a big pain in the butt and I wish that the different headphone companies would make it easier. B&O is another example. Their H9 (and H5 and H7) headphones support AAC and aptX LL (the H8's are listed as standard aptX) but we don't know what codec is being used. Are we just supposed to assume that, with an iPhone, everything will work properly and AAC is being implemented? If macOS's finicky Bluetooth is any indication, that would be a major assumption. Then again, if we actually can't hear a difference between anything and it's not explicitly advertised everywhere, does it really matter?

AAC support was mostly advertised on forums, but it ALSO was featured on the site. I don't agree with your idea that it's only fraud if it's in the box — as well as a lot of people in this thread, I buy from V-MODA.com directly and it was on the site for sure.

I agree that manufactures should be way more open about giving the user info on the codecs in use at every moment, but as you can see from this very thread, it's easier to save money on DAC and licenses — and people will still claim that the sound is "better". Sony and some other brands like ATH are the good folks for supporting every codec in existence, except maybe aptX HD, but most other companies are exactly like V-MODA.

 

[Yaroslav]

Anyone know if the sound quality is the best when wired? I read somewhere that the quality diminishes when you use it wired so using it with BT might be the best in terms of SQ ..

It depends on the headphone. With both V-MODA CFWs, they sound significantly better wired and even amped.

 

[Devodonaldson]

Anyone know if the sound quality is the best when wired? I read somewhere that the quality diminishes when you use it wired so using it with BT might be the best in terms of SQ ..

Not quite sure where you read this or what headphones it may have been referring to, but the best answer is, it depends. In wired mode, if your source is ill-equiped, has a horrible DAC, and subpar amp built in, then wired mode will truly suffer. At that point, the Bluetooth would be best because the source will be sending a signal that will be amplified by the headphones, and will benefit from the sound signature of the headphones built in amplification module. HOWEVER, if your source is capable, high quality DAC, amp,music files, FLAC, the headphones will definitely sound much better wired. AptX maxes out at 24-bit 48khz. Having a DAC that can play 24-bit 96khz/192khz or higher will absolutely benefit the headphones. So for me, wired far outperforms wireless

 

[winslord]

I'm also not hearing any distortion in that one pop song. I'm not familiar with the source material but I'm not hearing anything that stands out whether I listen to the file (256kbps AAC, Apple Music) over SBC or aptX. In fact, I can't really discern a difference between the two streaming formats. Like before, I kind of think the discussion is being blown up out of proportion as V-Moda has really tuned SBC mode on these so that they are audibly indistinguishable from aptX and even really close to wired mode (unlike the CFW).

Have you tried the same song in wired mode? My matte black sounds different between the two modes. 0:15-0:16 distorted badly on Bluetooth, but is very clear on wired mode. You have the rose gold?

 

[Peicille]

Not quite sure where you read this or what headphones it may have been referring to, but the best answer is, it depends. In wired mode, if your source is ill-equiped, has a horrible DAC, and subpar amp built in, then wired mode will truly suffer. At that point, the Bluetooth would be best because the source will be sending a signal that will be amplified by the headphones, and will benefit from the sound signature of the headphones built in amplification module. HOWEVER, if your source is capable, high quality DAC, amp,music files, FLAC, the headphones will definitely sound much better wired. AptX maxes out at 24-bit 48khz. Having a DAC that can play 24-bit 96khz/192khz or higher will absolutely benefit the headphones. So for me, wired far outperforms wireless

Mines playing off of Spotify (highest quality) through a FiiO E10K. I'm assuming wired is the way to go for a non-mobile set up if SQ is the goal.

 

[gLer]

To play Devil's Advocate (just a bit), AAC support was never something advertised directly on the box for the CFW's. It was mentioned in a video shot by Head-Fi, on the forums here, and may have been online at some point. There's a difference between direct advertising on a product's box and making (what appears to be) a mistake during a video interview. It's not like people were paying more for AAC, not like what they're doing with aptX now. If the end results cannot be heard and there wasn't an added cost, does it really make that much of a difference. I know some people in this forum are throwing up their arms saying "no AAC, no buy, they are the Devil" but, if they have finely tuned the equipment and electronics to provide transparency when using SBC, does any of that really matter?

It also doesn't help that wireless headphone manufacturers really aren't giving people a way to determine what codec is being used with their products. Take the Sony MDR-100ABN or MDR-1000X headphones. Both support AAC, aptX, aptX HD, and LDAC over Bluetooth along with standard SBC. There isn't an indicator light or companion app to determine what codec is being used. Instead, people need a Mac and they have to hunt down specific software or they need to buy specific hardware (such as a USB Bluetooth transmitter) that will indicate what audio format is being used. It's a big pain in the butt and I wish that the different headphone companies would make it easier. B&O is another example. Their H9 (and H5 and H7) headphones support AAC and aptX LL (the H8's are listed as standard aptX) but we don't know what codec is being used. Are we just supposed to assume that, with an iPhone, everything will work properly and AAC is being implemented? If macOS's finicky Bluetooth is any indication, that would be a major assumption. Then again, if we actually can't hear a difference between anything and it's not explicitly advertised everywhere, does it really matter?

I don't really know. The only thing I do know is that I'm happy with the CF2W headphones I have, happier than I was with the CFW, and I can't hear a difference whether I'm listening to music on my Droid Z, Mac Mini, Apple TV, or iPad Pro (SBC for the later two). Then again, I also didn't get the rose gold model specifically for aptX. I liked the color the best and it's a nice benefit that it came with aptX. It is too bad that V-Moda isn't more explicit and that they don't admit to their errors but Val, just like everyone else, is human.

I get your points, but just because we can throw our hands up in frustration because nothing works properly (and we probably couldn't tell if it was working properly anyway) doesn't mean we should. We should be holding manufacturers to much higher standards, because aren't we all trying to advance the art?

If you're just happy to have a wireless headphone that sounds good and you can't really tell the difference between music streamed from different sources, that's great, and in no way do I want my criticism of V-Moda in general and Val in particular to color your enjoyment of the music! But if you're promoting your product on the back of the qualities of the codecs many of your users (in my case iOS users) are using and wanting to take advantage of, and then fail to mention your products don't actually support those codecs but instead fudge the quality with some tweaking to the same vanilla codec used by any number of cheaper wireless headphones, that's where I have an issue.

My initial post some pages back merely expressed my surprise that more people weren't upset by this deception, and my subsequent posts were far more specific mainly because not only wasn't there any surprise, but rather a "let's sweep this under the rug" attitude. I think I've made my point, so I'll leave it at that. Suffice it to say my love affair with V-Moda that stretched over many happy years with the M-100 and CW is now over.

 

[subguy812]

I'm actually quite surprised that there's not a lot more noise about this. Not necessarily for the C2W, which never advertised AAC in the spec, but for the CW which clearly did - and has now been shown to not support it at all. Instead the attitude on this forum is like: "yeah but the sound is actually still pretty good." So if I buy a TV that includes FHD in the spec but in reality is an SD screen that is only HD-ready, should I just ignore the fact that it still looks ok but doesn't give me the full resolution I thought I was paying for (and the price suggested it includes)?

Don't joke, this is a true story (a friend of mine broke this story in South Africa): https://mybroadband.co.za/news/gadgets/203340-alarm-raised-over-full-hd-tv-lie-in-south-africa.html

It's a very slippery slope because manufacturers can then claim just about anything, and it seems to be up to us consumers to prove otherwise when in fact it's up the manufacturers to show proof of those features as soon as consumers ask for it. If it were a missing falsely-advertised iPhone feature I'd wager there'd be a class action lawsuit against Apple by now, but because it's just a non-mainstream, low-volume headphone maker, the rewards aren't worth the effort. We shouldn't be passing this off as anything but a blatant deception designed to fool consumers who claim to know better but clearly don't.

I totally agree if that is the case with the CW. I am just not sure why this continues in the CF2W thread.

 

[gLer]

Anyone know if the sound quality is the best when wired? I read somewhere that the quality diminishes when you use it wired so using it with BT might be the best in terms of SQ ..

I totally agree if that is the case with the CW. I am just not sure why this continues in the CF2W thread.

You're right, this should be in the original CW thread, but this thread exposed the concerns about the 'missing' AAC feature, which lead to the closer examination of the original CW - only to find AAC was never there in the first place. Since the CW thread is dead, the conversation continued here. Happy to take this discussion elsewhere (although there's probably not much more to say, and it's not like Val or V-Moda are going to own up to anything). We can pick this up when they release the C3W with "aptX HD-equivalent SBC tuning"

 

[MICHAELSD]

Crossfade 2 Wireless and Forza Metallo Wireless are unfortunate products that are held back by codec support among other things. Val himself has sung the praises of AAC as gLer quoted earlier and gone as far as to point out that a chipset with only aptX is ~$5, while supporting important codecs like AAC and MP3 costs ~$17.

I think these products were mis-managed by V-MODA. $20 more for aptX on a $329 headphone makes zero sense especially when it's a cheap codec, and the reversal to a one-year warranty when 2-3 year warranties are still common among Sennheiser and other audiophile brands is a bit disconcerting. Some web-sites have pictures of the boxes of the white and matte black supporting aptX, and some even state that it comes with a two-year warranty. I'm sorry to say V-MODA can do better than this.

 

[Devodonaldson]

Mines playing off of Spotify (highest quality) through a FiiO E10K. I'm assuming wired is the way to go for a non-mobile set up if SQ is the goal.

Wired is absolutely the way to go for SQ, but that goes for mobile setup too. 80% of my listening is done outside of the house. Shopping, studying, running. I go wired all the time. Just sounds better. Bluetooth doesn't sound bad at all on these cans, but wired carries so much more potential.

 

[subguy812]

Wired is absolutely the way to go for SQ, but that goes for mobile setup too. 80% of my listening is done outside of the house. Shopping, studying, running. I go wired all the time. Just sounds better. Bluetooth doesn't sound bad at all on these cans, but wired carries so much more potential.

Correct sir!

 

[Yaroslav]

If anyone's wondering, here's a link to the Crossfade Wireless 1 page before the "cleanup", clearly mentions advanced codec support: http://web.archive.org/web/20161027231226/http://v-moda.com:80/crossfade-wireless

 

[daddyo1973]

Have not been back on this thread since I returned my rose gold CF2W but 40 or so pages later y'all are still having the same discussion about non supported codecs and V-MODA's advertising!

Yes its too bad there is no manufacturer response, but that only matters to us Head-Fi'ers and lets face it, we are by far the minority. I doubt any Amazon or Best Buy reviews are screaming about AAC support, but some will probably gripe about aptX and rose gold