So basically this means making bluetooth connections with low latency that work reliably, and DSP that is device specific. Great. That's what should be happening anyway and the resources required for this silly program creation should have simply been put into developing and implementing the technology silently without end user awareness other than devices work and sound good.
But it will have branding (e.g. Intel Inside) that lets you know it has been implemented (licensed). Buy a phone and an earpiece that both have the branding and they guarantee they provide the benefits.
But the clicking issue was worst on my previous phone: Nexus 5X. I thought the newer phone didn't have the issue, but then noticed it a little, so I wonder if it's some kind of Android thing?
Anyway, by that point, I was using bluetooth headphones with phone nearly all the time, so I didn't invest any time or effort to investigate or remedy the issue.
I can only have a great thing to say about S10e in this regard. Superb Audio Out on headphones is one of the reasons why I am reluctant to change for newer mobile. I am especially impressed how well it powers HD650 which usually needs headphone amp for good results. If possible, I can't recommend enough.
How about plugging in a lovely USB Rode microphone and having it as the one and ONLY input source for anything that records? Or, even, have it as an option. or both, to record two mics at the same time??
>Bluetooth audio latency, which would reach down to 89ms in the company’s example.
And that’s good? Damn, how bad is bad Bluetooth latency? SBC looks like 200ms+ 😅
One day, the world will vocally hate Bluetooth audio as much as we hate USB type-C. A myriad of codecs (aptX, SBC, AAC, etc.), nobody knows what’s compatible with what on which firmware version on which device, and the default is still a terrible old legacy format that at least works everywhere. We’re about 6 versions deep into Bluetooth and hardly a handful of people in the world can tell you the differences between Bluetooth 4.1 vs Bluetooth 5.2 vs Bluetooth 5.1 va Bluetooth 4.2 vs Bluetooth 4.
75ms is usually the upper-end of what RTINGS considers acceptable for audio-video sync. It doesn’t look like an RF limitation; niche (great, more “standards”) Bluetooth codecs have brought it down to 30ms.
Sony took the approach of making free & easy for phones and other sources to support their headphones, but you still owe them a licensing fee if you want to build a headphone or wireless speaker that supports LDAC.
Nothing that a 3.5mm can do, which is older than 150 years.
This garbage cannot even make the bitrate higher than LDAC at 900Kbps which consumes battery fast. The AptXHD maxes at 500ish, for basic 320 we have AptX, and more royalty certification bullcrap for Qualcomm. More use and throw garbage products, every year you can buy them at $100-250, Apple pumped new $550 trash which doesn't even have AptX class audio quality. But hey it's Apple and H1 chip and etc bs. While a 3.5mm jack can process FLAC and DTS formats more than 1600Kbps to 5000Kbps data rate with zero performance impact or battery, or any Interference. Even in Mobiles, from low quality garbage to high end audio in LG phones.
A headphone jack from LG phones have Impulse response filters, sound turning options, not even just playback but even Hi Fi recording in 24Bit FLAC at 192KHz and filters to proof from low bass frequencies, wind noise filters plus an SD card too. But who cares ? Mass market, lowest possible denominator is what that matters.
Absolute junk is what that matters, which is why Beats audio and Bose generate so much money almost literally half of the Audio market in Mainstream consumer market. Esp in Wireless Apple pocketed 1/2 Dollar in 2016, now it might be 80% of a Dollar spent.
I use LDAC at 900 kbps all day, every day, and still get > 1 day of charge out of my year-old Sony WH-1000XM3 headphones.
As for headphone jack being equivalent, I like that I don't have to carry my phone with me, literally everywhere. It means I can go back to wearing shirts without pockets.
It's milion pluses for the hedaphone jack after I sow audio measurement for those. But thers something in between for me like tiny DAP that I can control from the phone over BT which have WiFi and BT and of course hedaphones plugged in. Guess what means no T-shirt without pockets for me.
Another thing about wired headphones I don't miss is the cord getting snagged on door knobs, drawer handles, corners of counter tops, and pretty much everything else conceivable! Also, cord noise from it bumping and rubbing against my clothes. The only time I still use corded headphones is when I'm sitting at my desk (where I have a hi fi rig hooked up to my PC via toslink and play FLAC files).
The stuff I listen to on my wireless headphones is either news or (compressed) streaming music. And I'm usually doing chores or meal prep, so I don't even care if it's not bit-perfect. The bigger quality issue is just the lower noise floor from noise cancelling, which also saves my hearing by letting me listen at lower levels.
Oh yeah, sure. Lol enjoying inferior trash audio is unfortunately not my cup of tea when the phone costs $1000+, I also have a HiFi DAC AMP with Stereo Monitors plus a pair of Senn cans but sadly I cannot take them everywhere when I'm moving so I have an LG phone with Hi Fi DAC and all my FLAC and DSD and DTS movies everything on the go with an IEM with Hybrid Drivers.
Well I can also use the BT headset whenever I want. More power and more choice and no compromise. But to each their own, many pay for streaming inferior compressed music which is garbage tier for me.
And I also have a LG phone with a Hi-fi Quad DAC. But I paid < $400 for it. You can save a lot of money, if you wait for deals near the end of a phone's product cycle.
He is referring to modern flagships this day's with out either hedaphone jack or deacent DAC. At least I understand it like that. There are flask alike Amp's and even USB dongles which can drive 300 Ohm can's but seriously leave hard to drive desktop gear where it belongs (at home).
I don't understand your point on bitrates over 900 kbps. That's a huge bitrate, enough for lossless audio compression. Raw uncompressed CD quality is 1,411 kbps, so FLAC lossless should be between 700 and 900 kbps for most content. Where is the decompression happening? Before the headphones or by the headphones?
Yup for 44100 Hz 16 bit signal however LDAC on 990 KB is 96KHz 24 bit. Arguably in top implementation with good DAC LDAC tops around 100 dB SINAD (which is more than 96 on 44100/16 signal) but however there are some obvious changes to original signal as it's losy low complexity codec as all of them are. You won't ever need more than 44100 Hz 24 bit (eventually for the compatibility reasons 48000) signal to transport as that corresponding to 150 dB SINAD and best DAC's of today only reach 120~123 dB (best mesured desktop one's). If you like to upsampling for what ever reason any DAC including 1$ one's today can do that to much higher sampling rate (can be useful to drive noise to ultra sonic range or when EQ-ing). As always path is encoder - decoder (to PCM) - DAC - analog reciver (hedaphone driver). Today there really is no reason to insist on lo complexity codec nor to put money into the pockets of people who sell you a snake oil. Opus should be a next step in BT audio.
Interesting. I read reports that people don't notice 24-bit over 16, and as you said a sampling rate beyond 44,100 Hz doesn't seem to have any benefit. Do you think 24-bit is beneficial?
Something I've wondered about is why we don't have some sort of metadata augmentation for music tracks that could significantly improve the sound quality of lossily compressed files. The core insight is that almost all of this music is known in advance because it's out there as released music. We're compressing and decompressing it as though we don't know what it is – the encoder is essentially naive to what it is, as is the decoder. But we *do* know what it is. We know it's Lady Gaga's "Born This Way" or whatever. Since we know what it is, it seems like we should be able to analyze it thoroughly, including how MP3, AAC, and Vorbis encoders are treating it. Then distribute some sort of small augmentation file to help the listener's decoder optimize the output.
> I read reports that people don't notice 24-bit over 16
The argument I see for > 16-bit is things like digital volume control and Eq. If your 16-bit data is perfectly recorded and mastered, and played back in a good DAC at the right volume level, then I accept that ordinary listeners probably couldn't discern any more resolution.
> Something I've wondered about is why we don't have some sort of metadata augmentation for music tracks that could significantly improve the sound quality of lossily compressed files.
Sort of like how MP3 supports volume-normalization, maybe the dynamics of the music could be analyzed to select a more favorable set of compression parameters. That's how I'd do it. If we're talking about bluetooth, it needs to be error-tolerant, however. So, you can't have some piece of metadata that's required to decode the rest of the song and only gets transmitted at the beginning. You could look at the pre-emphasis flag as a simplistic example of that.
Well 99% of available material are in 16 bit (true) form. 44100 Hz 16 bit full dynamic range is 96 dB while dynamic range contained in recorded music is usually far less (with some novel examples in complex philharmonic classical peaces and eventually some Dolby not music recordings). Arguably there's benefit in very rare situations (recordings) end even that with great hedaphones with corresponding LPS and for shot analytical listening on such high volume levels. How ever there are benefits of even using 32 bit floating precision in some losy formats such as Opus but that's related how they actually work. I clearly stated how there are some benefits of using higher sampling rates (pushing introduced noise to where you cannot hear it, it's legit method of lovering it in the area where you can). Would be nice for those interested in the topic to read how Opus actually works.
Glad to see this kind of initiative. Maybe one day, combined with some novel battery technology, we'll see good wireless earphones. Until then, I'll keep telling people to buy Moondrop's Starfield.
"...but it appears to be to be focused on a certification program..."
Fix your typos AnandTech. It's incredibly unprofessional for you guys to have typos like this in every article you publish. Hire someone. Use normal word processing software instead of Markdown. Whatever you need to do.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
41 Comments
Back to Article
Hulk - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
So basically this means making bluetooth connections with low latency that work reliably, and DSP that is device specific. Great. That's what should be happening anyway and the resources required for this silly program creation should have simply been put into developing and implementing the technology silently without end user awareness other than devices work and sound good.DougMcC - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
But it will have branding (e.g. Intel Inside) that lets you know it has been implemented (licensed). Buy a phone and an earpiece that both have the branding and they guarantee they provide the benefits.cosmotic - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
As long as a UI is involved (which their slides indicate), theres little chance this works as reliably and consistently has promisedSantoval - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
I don't think these slides are from a UI, they appear to just be marketing slides.shabby - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
Oh please make the headphone jack as a requirement 😂Arsenica - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
Hell no, Qualcomm(R) aptX(tm) won´t get license fees by incentivizing the usage of wired headphones.mode_13h - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
I bought my last phone for its headphone jack, among other reasons. But, stupid clicking makes it almost unusable.Sharma_Ji - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
How about not purchasing 100$ phones from now on ?iphonebestgamephone - Sunday, March 7, 2021 - link
Its an lg phone with a hifi dac, costs 400$. How about not being prejudiced from now on?mode_13h - Sunday, March 7, 2021 - link
Thanks, I think.Yeah, it has a Snapdragon 845, so near flagship-level. I think it originally listed for > $700.
mode_13h - Sunday, March 7, 2021 - link
But the clicking issue was worst on my previous phone: Nexus 5X. I thought the newer phone didn't have the issue, but then noticed it a little, so I wonder if it's some kind of Android thing?Anyway, by that point, I was using bluetooth headphones with phone nearly all the time, so I didn't invest any time or effort to investigate or remedy the issue.
Hideo - Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - link
I can only have a great thing to say about S10e in this regard. Superb Audio Out on headphones is one of the reasons why I am reluctant to change for newer mobile. I am especially impressed how well it powers HD650 which usually needs headphone amp for good results. If possible, I can't recommend enough.damianrobertjones - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
How about plugging in a lovely USB Rode microphone and having it as the one and ONLY input source for anything that records? Or, even, have it as an option. or both, to record two mics at the same time??ikjadoon - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
>Bluetooth audio latency, which would reach down to 89ms in the company’s example.And that’s good? Damn, how bad is bad Bluetooth latency? SBC looks like 200ms+ 😅
One day, the world will vocally hate Bluetooth audio as much as we hate USB type-C. A myriad of codecs (aptX, SBC, AAC, etc.), nobody knows what’s compatible with what on which firmware version on which device, and the default is still a terrible old legacy format that at least works everywhere. We’re about 6 versions deep into Bluetooth and hardly a handful of people in the world can tell you the differences between Bluetooth 4.1 vs Bluetooth 5.2 vs Bluetooth 5.1 va Bluetooth 4.2 vs Bluetooth 4.
75ms is usually the upper-end of what RTINGS considers acceptable for audio-video sync. It doesn’t look like an RF limitation; niche (great, more “standards”) Bluetooth codecs have brought it down to 30ms.
https://www.rtings.com/soundbar/tests/connectivity...
Surprises Qualcomm is bragging about their own codec still 1/10th of a second off. What else do we expect from a modem company?
mode_13h - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
Don't forget about Sony's LDAC and HWA's LDHC!ZolaIII - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
Those become open source at least.mode_13h - Saturday, March 6, 2021 - link
Sony took the approach of making free & easy for phones and other sources to support their headphones, but you still owe them a licensing fee if you want to build a headphone or wireless speaker that supports LDAC.mode_13h - Saturday, March 6, 2021 - link
In other words, it's free & easy to make products that interoperate with theirs, but not ones which compete with them.mode_13h - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
Also, aptX comes in several flavors (HD, LL, Adaptive, others)Silver5urfer - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
Nothing that a 3.5mm can do, which is older than 150 years.This garbage cannot even make the bitrate higher than LDAC at 900Kbps which consumes battery fast. The AptXHD maxes at 500ish, for basic 320 we have AptX, and more royalty certification bullcrap for Qualcomm. More use and throw garbage products, every year you can buy them at $100-250, Apple pumped new $550 trash which doesn't even have AptX class audio quality. But hey it's Apple and H1 chip and etc bs. While a 3.5mm jack can process FLAC and DTS formats more than 1600Kbps to 5000Kbps data rate with zero performance impact or battery, or any Interference. Even in Mobiles, from low quality garbage to high end audio in LG phones.
A headphone jack from LG phones have Impulse response filters, sound turning options, not even just playback but even Hi Fi recording in 24Bit FLAC at 192KHz and filters to proof from low bass frequencies, wind noise filters plus an SD card too. But who cares ? Mass market, lowest possible denominator is what that matters.
Absolute junk is what that matters, which is why Beats audio and Bose generate so much money almost literally half of the Audio market in Mainstream consumer market. Esp in Wireless Apple pocketed 1/2 Dollar in 2016, now it might be 80% of a Dollar spent.
mode_13h - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
I use LDAC at 900 kbps all day, every day, and still get > 1 day of charge out of my year-old Sony WH-1000XM3 headphones.As for headphone jack being equivalent, I like that I don't have to carry my phone with me, literally everywhere. It means I can go back to wearing shirts without pockets.
ZolaIII - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
It's milion pluses for the hedaphone jack after I sow audio measurement for those. But thers something in between for me like tiny DAP that I can control from the phone over BT which have WiFi and BT and of course hedaphones plugged in. Guess what means no T-shirt without pockets for me.mode_13h - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
Another thing about wired headphones I don't miss is the cord getting snagged on door knobs, drawer handles, corners of counter tops, and pretty much everything else conceivable! Also, cord noise from it bumping and rubbing against my clothes. The only time I still use corded headphones is when I'm sitting at my desk (where I have a hi fi rig hooked up to my PC via toslink and play FLAC files).The stuff I listen to on my wireless headphones is either news or (compressed) streaming music. And I'm usually doing chores or meal prep, so I don't even care if it's not bit-perfect. The bigger quality issue is just the lower noise floor from noise cancelling, which also saves my hearing by letting me listen at lower levels.
Silver5urfer - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
Oh yeah, sure. Lol enjoying inferior trash audio is unfortunately not my cup of tea when the phone costs $1000+, I also have a HiFi DAC AMP with Stereo Monitors plus a pair of Senn cans but sadly I cannot take them everywhere when I'm moving so I have an LG phone with Hi Fi DAC and all my FLAC and DSD and DTS movies everything on the go with an IEM with Hybrid Drivers.Well I can also use the BT headset whenever I want. More power and more choice and no compromise. But to each their own, many pay for streaming inferior compressed music which is garbage tier for me.
mode_13h - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
I stream music in order to find new stuff to buy.And I also have a LG phone with a Hi-fi Quad DAC. But I paid < $400 for it. You can save a lot of money, if you wait for deals near the end of a phone's product cycle.
ZolaIII - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
He is referring to modern flagships this day's with out either hedaphone jack or deacent DAC. At least I understand it like that. There are flask alike Amp's and even USB dongles which can drive 300 Ohm can's but seriously leave hard to drive desktop gear where it belongs (at home).JoeDuarte - Monday, March 8, 2021 - link
I don't understand your point on bitrates over 900 kbps. That's a huge bitrate, enough for lossless audio compression. Raw uncompressed CD quality is 1,411 kbps, so FLAC lossless should be between 700 and 900 kbps for most content. Where is the decompression happening? Before the headphones or by the headphones?ZolaIII - Monday, March 8, 2021 - link
Yup for 44100 Hz 16 bit signal however LDAC on 990 KB is 96KHz 24 bit. Arguably in top implementation with good DAC LDAC tops around 100 dB SINAD (which is more than 96 on 44100/16 signal) but however there are some obvious changes to original signal as it's losy low complexity codec as all of them are. You won't ever need more than 44100 Hz 24 bit (eventually for the compatibility reasons 48000) signal to transport as that corresponding to 150 dB SINAD and best DAC's of today only reach 120~123 dB (best mesured desktop one's). If you like to upsampling for what ever reason any DAC including 1$ one's today can do that to much higher sampling rate (can be useful to drive noise to ultra sonic range or when EQ-ing).As always path is encoder - decoder (to PCM) - DAC - analog reciver (hedaphone driver).
Today there really is no reason to insist on lo complexity codec nor to put money into the pockets of people who sell you a snake oil. Opus should be a next step in BT audio.
JoeDuarte - Tuesday, March 9, 2021 - link
Interesting. I read reports that people don't notice 24-bit over 16, and as you said a sampling rate beyond 44,100 Hz doesn't seem to have any benefit. Do you think 24-bit is beneficial?Something I've wondered about is why we don't have some sort of metadata augmentation for music tracks that could significantly improve the sound quality of lossily compressed files. The core insight is that almost all of this music is known in advance because it's out there as released music. We're compressing and decompressing it as though we don't know what it is – the encoder is essentially naive to what it is, as is the decoder. But we *do* know what it is. We know it's Lady Gaga's "Born This Way" or whatever. Since we know what it is, it seems like we should be able to analyze it thoroughly, including how MP3, AAC, and Vorbis encoders are treating it. Then distribute some sort of small augmentation file to help the listener's decoder optimize the output.
mode_13h - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link
> I read reports that people don't notice 24-bit over 16The argument I see for > 16-bit is things like digital volume control and Eq. If your 16-bit data is perfectly recorded and mastered, and played back in a good DAC at the right volume level, then I accept that ordinary listeners probably couldn't discern any more resolution.
> Something I've wondered about is why we don't have some sort of metadata augmentation for music tracks that could significantly improve the sound quality of lossily compressed files.
Sort of like how MP3 supports volume-normalization, maybe the dynamics of the music could be analyzed to select a more favorable set of compression parameters. That's how I'd do it. If we're talking about bluetooth, it needs to be error-tolerant, however. So, you can't have some piece of metadata that's required to decode the rest of the song and only gets transmitted at the beginning. You could look at the pre-emphasis flag as a simplistic example of that.
ZolaIII - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link
Well 99% of available material are in 16 bit (true) form. 44100 Hz 16 bit full dynamic range is 96 dB while dynamic range contained in recorded music is usually far less (with some novel examples in complex philharmonic classical peaces and eventually some Dolby not music recordings). Arguably there's benefit in very rare situations (recordings) end even that with great hedaphones with corresponding LPS and for shot analytical listening on such high volume levels. How ever there are benefits of even using 32 bit floating precision in some losy formats such as Opus but that's related how they actually work. I clearly stated how there are some benefits of using higher sampling rates (pushing introduced noise to where you cannot hear it, it's legit method of lovering it in the area where you can). Would be nice for those interested in the topic to read how Opus actually works.Wereweeb - Thursday, March 4, 2021 - link
Glad to see this kind of initiative. Maybe one day, combined with some novel battery technology, we'll see good wireless earphones. Until then, I'll keep telling people to buy Moondrop's Starfield.ZolaIII - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link
More snake oil and doungrades incoming.JoeDuarte - Monday, March 8, 2021 - link
"...but it appears to be to be focused on a certification program..."Fix your typos AnandTech. It's incredibly unprofessional for you guys to have typos like this in every article you publish. Hire someone. Use normal word processing software instead of Markdown. Whatever you need to do.
keremutku - Sunday, March 14, 2021 - link
Sitemizi ziyaret edebilirsiniz. https://www.viltrin.com/keremutku - Sunday, March 14, 2021 - link
Sitemizi ziyaret edebilirsiniz. https://www.viltrin.com/keremutku - Sunday, March 14, 2021 - link
Sitemizi ziyaret edebilirsiniz. https://nors.com.tr/keremutku - Sunday, March 14, 2021 - link
Sitemizi ziyaret edebilirsiniz. https://nors.com.tr/keremutku - Sunday, March 14, 2021 - link
Sitemizi ziyaret edebilirsiniz. https://www.ecefermuar.com.tr/