[fnkcow]

^ The webpage info is correct.

lol for the video ad blunder
 
No way a BA's bass can sound this good over its dynamic counterpart for the same design

 

[SergeSE]

As the list of devices supporting aptX become longer, SoundExpert (SE) - a non-profit research project - is going to add aptX (bluetooth) codec to its testing system. This will help to evaluate perceptual quality of the codec in comparison with SBC which is in SE ratings for a long time already.
 
Unfortunately the only reliable way of making aptx test recordings is using of hardware receivers with digital output. Also some aptX-enabled source of signal is necessary (phone, tablet, laptop …). While SE is looking for such devices I would like to ask Head-Fi forumers to help with these recordings too. Details are in the article “Audio quality of bluetooth aptX” – http://soundexpert.org/news/-/blogs/audio-quality-of-bluetooth-aptx
 
Thanks in advance.

 

[dynacampjim]

SergeSE:

Unfortunately the only reliable way of making aptx test recordings is using of hardware receivers with digital output. 

I just picked up on this thread after reading about Crystal Acoustics BluDac  which is a Bluetooth receiver that seems to get good reviews and it has optical out, so presumably would be ideal to make recordings as requested above. It seems good value too - priced at £60 on Amazon in the UK.
Of course, an aptx bluetooth enabled phone or tablet would also be required and I'm having some difficulty finding out if my Moto G is so enabled. According to some spec lists online, the Moto X has aptx but it is missing on the spec for the Moto G. On the other hand, the aptx.com website lists the Moto G as having aptx !  I think I may drop Motorola a line on this but I'd be interested if anyone has any knowledge on this matter.

 

[JRG1990]

I own the crystal acoustics bludac, it works fine with my galaxy s3 and has really good range.

 

[SergeSE]

Of course, an aptx bluetooth enabled phone or tablet would also be required and I'm having some difficulty finding out if my Moto G is so enabled. According to some spec lists online, the Moto X has aptx but it is missing on the spec for the Moto G. On the other hand, the aptx.com website lists the Moto G as having aptx !  I think I may drop Motorola a line on this but I'd be interested if anyone has any knowledge on this matter.

Looks like the only place where Moto G has aptX is aptx.com. I didn't find confirmation elsewhere. Some people say it has no aptX support:
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/toybox-motorola-moto-g-ck-151642
http://www.android-hilfe.de/motorola-moto-g-forum/516395-aptx.html

 

[SergeSE]

Of course, an aptx bluetooth enabled phone or tablet would also be required and I'm having some difficulty finding out if my Moto G is so enabled. According to some spec lists online, the Moto X has aptx but it is missing on the spec for the Moto G. On the other hand, the aptx.com website lists the Moto G as having aptx !  I think I may drop Motorola a line on this but I'd be interested if anyone has any knowledge on this matter.

Looks like aptX web site is the only place where Moto G has aptX support. I did not find confirmation elsewhere. On the contrary some people confirmed that their Moto G's do not have aptX.

 

[SergeSE]

  I own the crystal acoustics bludac, it works fine with my galaxy s3 and has really good range.

Do you have possibility to record Blu-DAC's output via optical link?

 

[dynacampjim]

SergeSE:

 Looks like aptX web site is the only place where Moto G has aptX support. I did not find confirmation elsewhere. On the contrary some people confirmed that their Moto G's do not have aptX.

Thanks for your reply, Serge - that summarises what I found which I think means that the Moto G does not have aptx - unfortunately.

 

[james444]

Got the new LG BTS1 in and in short, it's the best aptX enabled BT headset with 3.5mm HPO I've heard so far. Beats my trusty old Samsung HS3000 in driving power, bass linearity and overall clarity.
Possible downside: manual and voice prompts are Korean only.
 
Sound quality ranking of all aptX headsets with 3.5mm HPO I've heard (not considering stock earpieces):
 
         HTC BH S600 - not recommended                         Samsung HS3000 - recommended                           LG BTS1 - highly recommended

 

[KBGolfRunner]

I can't find a headphone and transmitter that user aptx lossless.  Help me find one!  There is 2:1 compression on "aptX Lossless" by the way.  I'm sure it sounds lossless compared to other other Bluetooth setups, but it's definitely not lossless.  

 

[ClieOS]

  I can't find a headphone and transmitter that user aptx lossless.  Help me find one!  There is 2:1 compression on "aptX Lossless" by the way.  I'm sure it sounds lossless compared to other other Bluetooth setups, but it's definitely not lossless.  

 
aptX lossless isn't designed for Bluetooth, so any of such headphone or receiver that is Bluetooth compatible (which is just about all of them) doesn't use aptX Lossless. It is also not full-time lossless. It will scale down to lossy if it doesn't have enough bandwidth.

 

[i1fang]

  Got the new LG BTS1 in and in short, it's the best aptX enabled BT headset with 3.5mm HPO I've heard so far. Beats my trusty old Samsung HS3000 in driving power, bass linearity and overall clarity.
Possible downside: manual and voice prompts are Korean only.
 
Sound quality ranking of all aptX headsets with 3.5mm HPO I've heard (not considering stock earpieces):
 
         HTC BH S600 - not recommended                         Samsung HS3000 - recommended                           LG BTS1 - highly recommended

if you are able to try this
- http://global.rakuten.com/en/store/bellpark-ecshop/item/lbt-mppar400bk/
- http://www.amazon.com/BlueAnt-RB-BKBL-US-Bluetooth-Streamer--Headset/dp/B009F4XM48/
 
Elcom sound neutral to me but have none above to compare.

 

[markilou]

The price of the blueant is hard to beat but as far as I understand it, it uses an additional dongle you have to plug into the phone's 3,5 jack ... not very practical whereas the Elcom model indeed looks interesting as an alternative to James' 3 models listed above.
 
I hadn't come back to this thread for a while though so 2 comments:
 
1) I have been using Sony's SBH-80 for almost 2 months now and even if they don't sound as good as my Nokia Essence (they do sound better than my HTC's BH S600 though), I just love the form factor : they're so light you just forget you're wearing them, connecting them to the phone or my tablet is as as easy touching the two devices's NFC tags. More importantly people on the other side of a call hear me perfectly even if I'm walking in a noisy street... after all -and as I already wrote in earlier in this thread- call functionality is key parameter to make your pick for a headset which will be primarily used with a phone.. just try a Skype with a normal BT headset you'll see what I mean with call clarity.
 
 
2) to shaocaholica about apt-x not being better than BT-AAC : actually AAC is an alternative to apt-x. I read in the A2DP standard definition that along with apt-x, AAC is one the two optional codecs for bluetooth on top of the default SBC codec. So in theory if you stream an iTunes' 256kbits AAC song over bluetooth from an iOS to an AAC BT receiver you're likely to get as good or better results than doing the same over an apt-x connection which as you rightly say will introduce an additional recompression.
 
This could explain why Apple never cared to introduce apt-x in iOS.
 
If that's the case though they failed to promote it. Not many vendors out there promote this AAC bluetooth compatibility and Apple barely mentions it anywhere either. So far I've only found it in the Nokia Essence heaset (BJH-610) and the NuForce S3-BT speakers. 
 
This isn't as completely trivial as it may seem because a lot of us would like to be able to use the same headphones/speakers with their Android phones and their iOS devices. I'd love that Crystal Audio BluDac to have it for ex..
 
Maybe more manufacturers have it however no-one mentions it in the specs. Should we start a new thread AAC bluetooth codec ? 

 

[turbobb]

@markilou - I have the Blueant and am just not too fond of it. The odd shape coupled with the stiff buttons contribute to very poor ergonomics and makes it difficult to use. It also has poor range and is susceptible to interference. However, for general use its decent to pair up with a non-BT can. I'd love to get my hands on the LG BTS1 but can't seem to find a US based retailer for them.

 

[Rurouni]

Picked up the sony Sbh-80 as it was finally available in my region, and this is the best implementation of a wireless bt iem I've heard so far. Have always preferred a wireless solution and after reading Rin Choi's measurements on the sbh80 I had to try it.

As mentioned by James, I have no idea if the aptx implementation is lossy or not but it sounds great! Very low noise floor and instrument details and vocal nuances are there on a fairly transparent sound signature. Dare I say that it sounds quite close to my hd598 just a smaller soundstage. (There needs to be an sbh80 appreciation thread! *gush*)

The only issue I've faced is some bass distortion but it's only noticeable at very high volumes and on certain tracks, so I'm not sure if it's the recording, limitation of the dynamic driver or the inability of the aptx codec-Bluetooth 3.0 to push all the info over to the headset.

The aptx creators need to do a marketing tie up with sony and the sbh80, as demonstrations of good aptx implementation will drive up consumer confidence in this codec.