[329161]

Of the three, AAC is vastly superior. I’ve read that 352kbps aptX is roughly equivalent to 200kbps AAC, while iPhones transmit AAC at 264kbps.

Does this actually translate to an audible difference under blind listening tests?

 

[Cloudtastrophe]

As i mentioned before, the differences are so negligible when it comes to actually listening to the sounds taht come out of your headphones that between aptx and aac it really doesnt matter. But if it does to you, it will cost you 100 dollars. So either way, if you hear a difference betweent he two, youre lucky. If you dont, you are also lucky.

And I had also mentioned that the existing Wireless circuitry/dac and amp in the CF2W cant possibly support the sonic quality benefits of using higher end wireless protocols. Wirelessly the CF2W does much worse than it's wired mode which leads me to believe that internal amp (mini Vamp) cant drive the headphones well enough to even utilize the extra resolution from the hi res wireless signal, which is why i mentioned that between aptx and aptxhd on all my bluetooth devices everything sounds exactly the same. Maybe my ears are worse than yours, but if i can detect a significant performance bump from wired mode over wireless mode, thats up to you to decide. it literally became a different headphone (figurativey).

just because the headphones can receive a higher quality signal does not mean it is capable of playing it back at that level, or even that you can hear a difference. It is like watching a 1080P TV from 20 feet away, which is being fed a 4k signal. It cant display 4k, and neither will you notice the difference if it did.

I finally got it working through Console, and Codex does show as codec 2 (AAC) indeed! Still, I'm inviting everybody to test out the particular part of the song I mentioned above on different headphones and then comparing them to CF2W on wireless mode. Thing is, that particular section doesn't distort using wired mode. So it was natural to suspect that it was the SBC codec, but unfortunately the AAC codec doesn't help either. Must be something with the amplifier.

Great news. The distortion is likely due to something with the amp or wireless tuning, assuming it’s different. (Perhaps there is more bass in wireless mode.)

I've read a couple of articles indicating blind tests and sound measurements between sbc and aptx indicate no audible difference. Has anyone seen any blind test results involving AAC, aptx hd and Ldac? It's not really enough to apply logic and theory, and what we think we hear about bitrate specs etc without solid evidence.

 

[329161]

I think sound quality has more to do with the physical headphone specifications rather than which codec is used, provided at least high bit lossy files are used. Prime example The Beats Studio uses the AAC codec but still sounds like ass.

 

[spongeycraze]

I think sound quality has more to do with the physical headphone specifications rather than which codec is used, provided at least high bit lossy files are used. Prime example The Beats Studio uses the AAC codec but still sounds like ass.

I agree with you, but imagine how much more ass the beats would sound if they used SBC.

 

[winslord]

As i mentioned before, the differences are so negligible when it comes to actually listening to the sounds taht come out of your headphones that between aptx and aac it really doesnt matter. But if it does to you, it will cost you 100 dollars. So either way, if you hear a difference betweent he two, youre lucky. If you dont, you are also lucky.

And I had also mentioned that the existing Wireless circuitry/dac and amp in the CF2W cant possibly support the sonic quality benefits of using higher end wireless protocols. Wirelessly the CF2W does much worse than it's wired mode which leads me to believe that internal amp (mini Vamp) cant drive the headphones well enough to even utilize the extra resolution from the hi res wireless signal, which is why i mentioned that between aptx and aptxhd on all my bluetooth devices everything sounds exactly the same. Maybe my ears are worse than yours, but if i can detect a significant performance bump from wired mode over wireless mode, thats up to you to decide. it literally became a different headphone (figurativey).

just because the headphones can receive a higher quality signal does not mean it is capable of playing it back at that level, or even that you can hear a difference. It is like watching a 1080P TV from 20 feet away, which is being fed a 4k signal. It cant display 4k, and neither will you notice the difference if it did.

Perhaps. But I don’t fully agree. Since I do hear a (very!) slight difference, I must say that codec does help. And in the 4K-1080 analogy, actually that’s not entirely true. Some people have noted that watching a 4K content on an 1080P TV actually shows somewhat increased sharpness and better color (less color banding).

 

[winslord]

Does this actually translate to an audible difference under blind listening tests?

Absolutely. My H9 sounds somehow better and cleaner when paired with my iPhone (AAC) compared to when it’s paired to my PC (Aptx Low Latency). After a while the difference goes away, but on the initial listening you definitely know you’re listening to a different sound profile.

 

[329161]

Absolutely. My H9 sounds somehow better and cleaner when paired with my iPhone (AAC) compared to when it’s paired to my PC (Aptx Low Latency). After a while the difference goes away, but on the initial listening you definitely know you’re listening to a different sound profile.

This is what I mean when I mention blind listening test....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test

 

[AnakChan]

This is what I mean when I mention blind listening test....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test

Per Head-Fi's Terms of Service (Posting Etiquette Section) discussions like ABX should really be in the Sound Science section. It usually causes quite a bit of controversy that could potentially end up in disastrous discussions in specific main threads like this and requires a lot of cleanup by mods/admins.

IMHO, discussions -specific- to whether the V-Moda wireless drivers have sufficient detail to discern between the different codecs however, are acceptable here in this thread.

 

[MICHAELSD]

The difference between Beats’ latest offerings and V-MODA’s latest is that Beats tunes its headphones as wireless-first while V-MODA is wired-first. Beats sounds markedly better in wireless mode and not nearly as good with a wire (they’re really not made for wired mode as they cannot benefit from lossless files and it seems like the amp/DAC really brings out the best of what the drivers are capable of). While I haven’t tried CF2W yet, I can surmise from this thread that it sounds markedly better with a wire and not nearly as good in wireless mode. V-MODA is going to have to decide in the future which mode its customers are most interested in prioritizing, although I think it is possible to make both modes equally as good in their class. Personally I still believe it’s possible for wireless to sound better than wired unamped with the same files.

 

[329161]

Per Head-Fi's Terms of Service (Posting Etiquette Section) discussions like ABX should really be in the Sound Science section. It usually causes quite a bit of controversy that could potentially end up in disastrous discussions in specific main threads like this and requires a lot of cleanup by mods/admins.

IMHO, discussions -specific- to whether the V-Moda wireless drivers have sufficient detail to discern between the different codecs however, are acceptable here in this thread.

I figured the whole disussion of the thread had turned to the introduction of the Codex model. I just wanted to question whether codecs actually make any audible difference, and hence question the worth of the new model. Early evidence points to no difference, but the fat lady jury is still out.

 

[329161]

I

The difference between Beats’ latest offerings and V-MODA’s latest is that Beats tunes its headphones as wireless-first while V-MODA is wired-first. Beats sounds markedly better in wireless mode and not nearly as good with a wire (they’re really not made for wired mode as they cannot benefit from lossless files and it seems like the amp/DAC really brings out the best of what the drivers are capable of). While I haven’t tried CF2W yet, I can surmise from this thread that it sounds markedly better with a wire and not nearly as good in wireless mode. V-MODA is going to have to decide in the future which mode its customers are most interested in prioritizing, although I think it is possible to make both modes equally as good in their class. Personally I still believe it’s possible for wireless to sound better than wired unamped with the same files.

I heard the CFW2 was tuned to sound the same in either mode.

 

[MICHAELSD]

I figured the whole disussion of the thread had turned to the introduction of the Codex model. I just wanted to question whether codecs actually make any audible difference, and hence question the worth of the new model. Early evidence points to no difference, but the fat lady jury is still out.

They definitely do carry a significant audible difference (SBC < aptX < AAC), but the jury is out on how much CF2W’s wireless mode makes it discernible due to either tuning or the internal amp/DAC. From what I’ve heard in early impressions (including @Maukey) the sound quality is still behind other wireless headphones, even if it sounds great wired.

 

[MICHAELSD]

That being said I did love the M-100 and am still watching V-MODA closely. If I can check CF2W out for myself, perhaps at a Best Buy or Microsoft Store, I’ll give it a listen.

In 2018 I’m a wireless-first person, when funnily enough I had zero interest in Bluetooth audio when I bought my M-100 a few years ago.

 

[329161]

They definitely do carry a significant audible difference (SBC < aptX < AAC), but the jury is out on how much CF2W’s wireless mode makes it discernible due to either tuning or the internal amp/DAC. From what I’ve heard in early impressions (including @Maukey) the sound quality is still behind other wireless headphones, even if it sounds great wired.

Evidence?
I happen to like the tuning of the CFW2 a lot more than any Beats model I've heard. But of course that's a personal thing.

 

[MICHAELSD]

Evidence?
I happen to like the tuning of the CFW2 a lot more than any Beats model I've heard. But of course that's a personal thing.

I can clearly hear the difference between the three codecs, and I know if you dig deep enough you can find some ABX tests.