# Audio Technica AT-PHA55BT: BT headphone amplifier (LDAC)



## myusernameislove

Introduction (with some additional information about this product /specs, review/ and about other ldac products).

It is BT4.2 LDAC/AAC/Aptx receiver based on *ES9118 SABRE HiFi SoC *with an impedance switch, that is currently available in Japan only, but some units are available online.

Learn about LDAC's compression algorithm here. It is an intelligently operated variable bitrate lossy BT codec that is supposed to transfer CD quality audio (16bit 44.1kHz) without a data loss under optimal signal strength conditions when run in Quality priority mode. It is computationally demanding, as it analyzes audio in advance during playback to apply optimal compression settings variably for optimal wireless data transfer, and in combination with DSEE HX software upscaler Sony claims, that it can successfully restore some of the data, that were cut out from HiRes audio sources (upto 24bit 96kHz).


----------



## Researcher (Jan 19, 2018)

for 140 USD on amazon.co.JP  link. This seems to be ultimate solution to portable DAC-AMPs.  I wish it had BT 5 and 2.5mm balanced output. It is really tempting though.


----------



## waynes world

Researcher said:


> for 140 USD on amazon.co.JP  link. This seems to be ultimate solution to portable DAC-AMPs.  I wish it had BT 5 and 2.5mm balanced output. It is really tempting though.



The Radsone Earstudio seems to be worthy competition. Looking forward to comparisons.

Note: I'm pairing with my Samsung S7, so I am mainly interested in APTX at this point (and maybe APTXHD at some point).


----------



## Researcher

waynes world said:


> The Radsone Earstudio seems to be worthy competition. Looking forward to comparisons.
> 
> Note: I'm pairing with my Samsung S7, so I am mainly interested in APTX at this point (and maybe APTXHD at some point).



AFAIK The Radsone Earstudio is not available, and no one knows definitely when it will be accessible.


----------



## waynes world

Researcher said:


> AFAIK The Radsone Earstudio is not available, and no one knows definitely when it will be accessible.



No need to cloud the truth with.facts lol.

You are correct. Some people have it, but I'm not sure when it will be ready for the masses.


----------



## myusernameislove (Jan 21, 2018)

Not sure if Bluetooth standard Ver.4.2 mentioned in specs means EDR (Enhanced data rate). It may be needed for Quality priority mode.

I should have it next weekend, so I will confirm on that. I will compare it with direct output from my Xperia phone and with Chord Mojo as well. I may also compare it briefly with cheap Aptx HD receiver (Inateck BR1006) and with Aptx receiver Samsung Level Link. I expect PHA55BT to outperform all of these except Mojo of course.


----------



## p50kombi (Jan 21, 2018)

Mine is in transit from Japan to the UK, on a plane as we speak.
I'll give you guys my honest review when it gets here.
I spoke to radsone but it looks like the ear studio won't be available in the UK due to no CE certification.
I might ask a friend of mine to order one on Amazon when it comes available in the US depending on how the audio technika perfoms.


----------



## myusernameislove

There are 2 potential weak spots that I registered in japanese user reviews. 1st one mentioned connection interuptions in Quality priority mode. 2nd one wrote something about sound skipping issue that is apparent in low listening volumes and with low volumes at the end of songs. Otherwise japanese guys seem to be happy with the sound quality.


----------



## Researcher

p50kombi said:


> Mine is in transit from Japan to the UK, on a plane as we speak.
> I'll give you guys my honest review when it gets here.
> I spoke to radsone but it looks like the ear studio won't be available in the UK due to no CE certification.
> I might ask a friend of mine to order one on Amazon when it comes available in the US depending on how the audio technika perfoms.



I look forward to your review. I am wondering how much you have paid for it


----------



## imparanoic

has anyone purchase this item? is it good? the sound quality and if the connection is flawless? i would like to use it with my NW-ZX100 dap and Sony Xperia XZs phone, 3.5mm is great for my XBA-40, XBA-30 and full size AKG K551, it's amazing that sony ignore this ldac bluetooth reciever, their current equivalent SBH56 only support bluetooth 4.2, no ldac or bluetooth 5.0 or aptx hd, but there again it's quite cheap at  US$100


----------



## p50kombi

Still stuck at customs.. Sigh


----------



## waynes world (Jan 25, 2018)

imparanoic said:


> it's amazing that sony ignore this ldac bluetooth reciever, their current equivalent SBH56 only support bluetooth 4.2, no ldac or bluetooth 5.0 or aptx hd, but there again it's quite cheap at  US$100



Fwiw, I think the Radsone Earstudio supports all of that for $80. It hasn't quite been released yet, but initial reviews are quite favorable.

Edit: not ldac. But also 14 hour playback, and balanced.


----------



## p50kombi (Jan 25, 2018)

waynes world said:


> Fwiw, I think the Radsone Earstudio supports all of that for $80. It hasn't quite been released yet, but initial reviews are quite favorable.
> 
> Edit: not ldac. But also 14 hour playback, and balanced.



Well, not exactly.
Radsone do not support LDAC.
There is still a huge difference between LDAC and APTX-HD.
Make sure you don't confuse the two 

SNAP....just saw your edit 

For me LDAC is still one of the main reasons for not getting the Radsone, plus the fact that we can't get it in the UK


----------



## waynes world

p50kombi said:


> Well, not exactly.
> Radsone do not support LDAC.
> There is still a huge difference between LDAC and APTX-HD.
> Make sure you don't confuse the two



Yeah, as per the edit that you quoted, I realized that.

I don't know much about ldac, as I doubt my s7 will ever support it (or aptxhd for that matter), but I'm going to find out more about it for my own edification


----------



## p50kombi (Jan 25, 2018)

waynes world said:


> Yeah, as per the edit that you quoted, I realized that.
> 
> I don't know much about ldac, as I doubt my s7 will ever support it (or aptxhd for that matter), but I'm going to find out more about it for my own edification



Yeah, sorry, didn't see that edit till later...
I would still love to get an ear-studio as I thin kyou get plenty bang for your bucks there, plus I love the fact you can tinker with it firmware wise and app-wise.
Might still get one later on if I don't like the audio technika, although I think once I get used to playing my FLAC files over LDAC, it'll be hard to go to aptx-hd.

@myusernameislove When are you getting yours?
Mine has just been released from customs and is on it's way to the depot.
Need to pay customs charge so I'll probably won't have it in hand till mid next week....


----------



## waynes world

p50kombi said:


> Yeah, sorry, didn't see that edit till later...
> I would still love to get an ear-studio as I thin kyou get plenty bang for your bucks there, plus I love the fact you can tinker with it firmware wise and app-wise.
> Might still get one later on if I don't like the audio technika, although I think once I get used to playing my FLAC files over LDAC, it'll be hard to go to aptx-hd.
> 
> ...



I'm now up to speed on ldac:

https://www.androidauthority.com/sony-ldac-codec-790690/

Yup, looks good (although I'm not sure that my ears would be able to discern much of a difference).


----------



## p50kombi

waynes world said:


> I'm now up to speed on ldac:
> 
> https://www.androidauthority.com/sony-ldac-codec-790690/
> 
> Yup, looks good (although I'm not sure that my ears would be able to discern much of a difference).



Yeah, I don't know if it's a blessing or a curse to be an audiophile, but I can instantly hear it... 
It's the cymbals that give it away for me, not sure exactly why but I can always hear from the drummer smashing a cymbal if it's hi res or not


----------



## Researcher

p50kombi said:


> Still stuck at customs.. Sigh



Yeah quite sad to hear, it happened once, AFAIK, you should pay for 20% VAT



p50kombi said:


> Well, not exactly.
> Radsone do not support LDAC.
> There is still a huge difference between LDAC and APTX-HD.
> Make sure you don't confuse the two
> ...



The problem here is the bottleneck of BT 4.2. While  LDAC needs apparently 990kbps at least to able to stream 24bit/96khz resolution. BT 4.2 offers only around 600 kbps at min. distance. Thats why BT 5, offering easily over 1 Mbps at 10m away from device, is a must have for LDAC. 

However, i am still interested in your view about AT-PHA55BT as apple user. Please keep all of us updated of your experience.


----------



## waynes world

p50kombi said:


> Yeah, I don't know if it's a blessing or a curse to be an audiophile, but I can instantly hear it...
> It's the cymbals that give it away for me, not sure exactly why but I can always hear from the drummer smashing a cymbal if it's hi res or not



Fortunately for me, I only have silver plated bronze ears, and I only listen to cymbal-less genres


----------



## p50kombi

Researcher said:


> The problem here is the bottleneck of BT 4.2. While  LDAC needs apparently 990kbps at least to able to stream 24bit/96khz resolution. BT 4.2 offers only around 600 kbps at min. distance. Thats why BT 5, offering easily over 1 Mbps at 10m away from device, is a must have for LDAC.
> 
> However, i am still interested in your view about AT-PHA55BT as apple user. Please keep all of us updated of your experience.




Not quite 
LDAC has a trick up it's sleeve which makes it compatible with BT4+
Using BT5 uses less energy, but BT4.2 will support EDR on my device, so there is no bottleneck.
See https://www.androidauthority.com/sony-ldac-codec-790690/ for reference


----------



## imparanoic

p50kombi said:


> Well, not exactly.
> Radsone do not support LDAC.
> There is still a huge difference between LDAC and APTX-HD.
> Make sure you don't confuse the two
> ...



i believe to most people, even most audiophiles, aptx hd  or bluetooth is good enough, ldac is better though, good compromise between wireless and quality, but ldac is best by far and after walking in HMV hong kong causeway bay branch today, i noted that there were around 4-5 non sony branded ldac headphones ( none 6 months ago), but audio technia has not released at-pha55bt in hong kong


----------



## myusernameislove

Mine arrived 4 days ago, but I will get my hands on it for the first time today. Ill write some sort of review till Sunday I guess.


----------



## myusernameislove

It sounds better than Xperia XZ1. There seems to be no apparent detail loss from Tidal flacs in Quality priority mode and it (on B impedance setting) seems to have wider and more coherent soundstage than XZ1 and its sound is a liitle more pleasant. Impedance setting A sounds worse with Finder X1 - narrower and in a face. B impedance setting is maybe 50 percent louder than XZ1, but it still can not drive He-400i sufficiently. So far so good.

The unit is tiny - very thin.


----------



## p50kombi

Getting mine wednesday


----------



## myusernameislove (Jan 28, 2018)

I would call the sound of A setting narrow yet musical.
I would call the sound of B impedance setting as wider, much more bassier, with a stronger 3D feel to it. If there was less bass, B setting would be perfect.
XZ1 has better soundstage and it slices the sounds into separated sounds of instruments (which may get a bit annoying as it makes you to concentrate on them instead on enjoying the song as a whole).

I will write a review next week. I may test it with Ifi IeMatch and focus on signal consistency during outside and office use.


edit (few hours later)
Ok I will seriously need to compare this to Mojo. Maybe i only forgot what quality means. This receiver does not create slices for each instrument to be picked out by our ears. Its presentation is very consistent. It presents the song as one piece.

edit (one day later)
I removed the false part, where I said that it sounds worse then my phone.


----------



## p50kombi (Jan 27, 2018)

myusernameislove said:


> Ok, I would like to correct my previous statement from yesterday. It does not sound better than Xperia XZ1. XZ1 has better separation of instruments and wider soundstage ( horizontally). Bass is also a little bit tighter on XZ1, but XZ1 has some kind of plastic aftertaste in its sound. The sound of AT-PHa55BT on A setting is narrower, and it does not become as messy as Samsung Level Link or even Inateck BR1006 when many notes are played together, i.e. it does not suffer with so much of compression. SQ wise, XZ1 outperforms AT PHA55BT that outperforms Inateck BR1006 that outperforms Samsung Level Link.
> 
> I would call the sound of A setting narrow yet musical.
> I would call the sound of B impedance setting as wider, much more bassier, with a stronger 3D feel to it. If there was less bass, B setting would be perfect.
> ...


Isn't it a case that b setting is for balanced earphones and a for non balanced?
I have klipsch x12i which are balanced so expecting them to sound better on b


----------



## myusernameislove

p50kombi said:


> Isn't it a case that b setting is for balanced earphones and a for non balanced?
> I have klipsch x12i which are balanced so expecting them to sound better on b


A is for dynamic, B is for balanced armature.


----------



## myusernameislove

Few photos -
https://www.head-fi.org/gallery/album/my-gear.1154684/


----------



## myusernameislove

myusernameislove said:


> edit (few hours later)
> Ok I will seriously need to compare this to Mojo. Maybe i only forgot what quality means. This receiver does not create slices for each instrument to be picked out by our ears. Its presentation is very consistent. It presents the song as one piece.



A little explanation: It means that to hear the differences and to interpret them correctly are 2 different things. This new receiver does not sound analytical (it does not create slices), but maybe it is a good thing, if it only tends to present the song in more musical way, i.e. if it presents it as one piece while keeping the detail and good sound characteristics. I will need to compare it with more higher end dac+amps so that I do not fall in a trap of saying, that sounding analytical is the only good way of how it should be done. The non-analytical character of sound is a fact, maybe it comes from a sound characteristics of a DAC or AMP and maybe it comes from LDAC codec. More comparisons (LDAC vs APTX on the same unit) must be done. So the real question is: how well is the sound presented aside of the fact, that it does not sound analytical?


----------



## myusernameislove

Alright, I made it clear, that what I describe as analytical sound of Xperia XZ1 phone is actually sound, that is f*ked up in some kind of analytical way. This receiver does not sufer with this problem in presentation of instruments, and that is a good thing. 

I finally compared it with Chord Mojo, and to my ears, on B setting with iFi IEMatch (later on that), it sounds quite similar to it. It misses some of its fullness in lower frequencies, but it keeps the fine articulation and the right amount of bass and treble spark. Mojo sound is a more relaxed and better pronounced, but the difference is acceptable. 

*It definitely is a keeper.*

The A setting lacks some of the bass, that may be achieved with B setting with IEMatch (on High Sensitivity)
B setting without IEMatch is too bassy and the treble is not perfect.
B setting with IEMatch gives me the right amount of bass and treble and also the right amount of Volume while Volume is maxed out on phone and therefore it does not miss any bits that would be cut out with lower Volume settings, therefore this combination is perfect for my earphones (Echobox Finder X1).


----------



## Researcher

myusernameislove said:


> Alright, I made it clear, that what I describe as analytical sound of Xperia XZ1 phone is actually sound, that is f*ked up in some kind of analytical way. This receiver does not sufer with this problem in presentation of instruments, and that is a good thing.
> 
> I finally compared it with Chord Mojo, and to my ears, on B setting with iFi IEMatch (later on that), it sounds quite similar to it. It misses some of its fullness in lower frequencies, but it keeps the fine articulation and the right amount of bass and treble spark. Mojo sound is a more relaxed and better pronounced, but the difference is acceptable.
> 
> ...



have you ever tried it with a Iphone? i am curious about its performance when it comes to AAC codec.


----------



## myusernameislove

Researcher said:


> have you ever tried it with a Iphone? i am curious about its performance when it comes to AAC codec.



I listen only with phone. Yes, I can clearly hear the difference between LDAC, Aptx, AAC, SBC.
They sound different to LDAC even regardless compression. 
- Aptx has more loud higher tones, differently sounding bass (worse, i.e. less mellow). Compression is apparent with Aptx. LDAC sounds more rounded - matured.
- AAC sounds more similar to LDAC, but you can recognize the compression in direct comparison with LDAC. Compression makes the aftersounds sound shorter, threfore motes sound less defined, everything sounds a little distorted.. especially drums. It is more apparent even with SBC. 
The compression makes all codecs except LDAC sound somehow sharp. It is less apparent with AAC (but it still is), more apparent with Aptx.
LDAC sounds fine, natural, well aged, rounded.


----------



## myusernameislove

I do not have AptxHD in the unit for comparison, but based on these findings, I would hesitate to use Aptx at all. The sharpness is unacceptable. AAC is better choice, but LDAC is miles ahead.


----------



## waynes world

myusernameislove said:


> I do not have AptxHD in the unit for comparison, but based on these findings, I would hesitate to use Aptx at all. The sharpness is unacceptable. AAC is better choice, but LDAC is miles ahead.



Fwiw, I use APTX all of the time (S7 Edge to bluetooth headphones or Fiio BTR1), and I don't find anything about it unacceptable (sounds great to me). Granted, I've never listened to LDAC, but even if it is considerably better, that wouldn't make APTX "unacceptable" to me ("not preferred" would be more apt).


----------



## myusernameislove (Feb 3, 2018)

It may be caused by implementation of these codecs into this specific unit. My intention was not to start a flamewar, but to point out, that there is some kind of mellowness to sound of Ldac and sharpness to sound of Aptx. And that I did not hear this kind of difference in the other codecs.


----------



## p50kombi

Just a very quick update, I have to agree on myusernameislove's review, the device sounds great.
I haven't been able to put it through it's paces yet fully due to some family circumstances but I'll try to write a review in the coming weeks.
It does look and sounds the part though I can say.
It's not big, but the attention to detail and materials used make this look like a high end device, plus it drives my klipsch x12i's in ear beatifully on B (balanced armature setting).
Shame I can't get my hands on a radsone to do a face-off comparison.


----------



## Researcher (Feb 3, 2018)

it is currently crazy expensive at amazon/us .  can you guys share any info about how to buy the receiver?


----------



## myusernameislove (Feb 3, 2018)

Researcher said:


> it is currently crazy expensive at amazon/us .  can you guys share any info about how to buy the receiver?


Ebay. It came from japan to eu for total cost $190.69 and I paid no additional custom fees (maybe it was my lucky day). There is a $172 offer there as well.


----------



## myusernameislove (Feb 3, 2018)

*Ok and now the shortcomings :* the signal does not reach far (with any of the codecs). Switching between ldac's Connection priority mode and Quality priority mode seem to have a little or no effect at all. 3-4 meters, and it may start to drop the signal. It behaves standardly as other class 2 BT4.1 devices I tried, maybe a tiny bit worse. Walking outside with it (on a street or in a bus or underground) and listening to it in an office while sitting and having it in a pocket while phone is on a table close to computer is perfectly fine. It does not pick interferences from other devices near to it (as Mojo does) as far as I noticed. Some ugly signal drops may occur occasionally at home when there is a heavy data load on a WiFi networks around you. Maybe in this situation may Connection priority mode come in handy. My understading is such, that if it supported BT5, it would behave much better in all these situations that I described. It behaves fine while moving around near your smartphone in a room, just pause the music (short press PLAY/PAUSE button) for a moment before you walk outside of your room. If you switch your receiver OFF and ON again, it plays a short pleasant sound to let you know it automatically reconnected, but after you short press the PLAY/PAUSE it may struggle to continue playing the song again. I discovered, that if you long press PREV or FORWARD button first (this is supposed to set prev/next song) and short press PLAY/PAUSE afterwards, music starts playing again. Short pressing PREV and FORWARD buttons changes the volume.

The clip does not hold the unit tightly and securely, it tends to fall off. Apply a bit of Bondic (plastic welder) paste to fix it in place. Do not blend it (you silly americans), it would blend. If it falls in your beer, just softly lick out the remaining beer and use it as an underlay for your table from that time on. Do not try to eat it. Do not use it under water. It does not protect you against bullets.


----------



## waynes world

myusernameislove said:


> It may be caused by implementation of these codecs into this specific unit. My intention was not to start a flamewar, but to point out, that there is some kind of mellowness to sound of Ldac and sharpness to sound of Aptx. And that I did not hear this kind of difference in the other codecs.



Thanks for that clarification!


----------



## waynes world

p50kombi said:


> Shame I can't get my hands on a radsone to do a face-off comparison.



That is a shame! I'm forward to those comparisons.


----------



## orderingrabbits

Can you use this guy as a wired DAC/amp via what looks to be Micro USB?


----------



## p50kombi

orderingrabbits said:


> Can you use this guy as a wired DAC/amp via what looks to be Micro USB?



Not that I'm aware off, it looks like the USB is mailny and only for charging, 98% sure about that.

The manual is in Japanese, so even with google translate it is sometimes hard to gifure everything out.


----------



## myusernameislove

p50kombi said:


> USB is mailny and only for charging


That's right.


----------



## myusernameislove (Feb 4, 2018)

Ok, first review is up.


----------



## imparanoic

seems like this is the best audiophile wireless solution ever (until another model in the distance future with both 3.5mm unbalanced and 4.4mm balanced and maybe an oled display, probably won't ever be released)


----------



## waynes world

imparanoic said:


> seems like this is the best audiophile wireless solution ever (until another model in the distance future with both 3.5mm unbalanced and 4.4mm balanced and maybe an oled display, probably won't ever be released)



It would be nice to read some comparisons with the Radsone ES100 (which is great).


----------



## imparanoic

I was at Hong Kong personal Audio exhibition last night, the audio technica at-pha55bt has been confirmed to be released in Hong Kong from summer 2018, I have ask Audio technica people there. Price will be similar to Japan retail price


----------



## Ynot1 (Mar 22, 2018)

I hope LDAC does better than memory stick and beta. 

Edit: CSR is LDAC capable so chances are good LDAC will be more widely accepted.


----------



## myusernameislove

Comparison of LDAC BT receiver from Audio Technica and Mojo on Acoustune HS1551 CU added to my review of AT-PHA55BT: here


----------



## imparanoic

myusernameislove said:


> Comparison of LDAC BT receiver from Audio Technica and Mojo on Acoustune HS1551 CU added to my review of AT-PHA55BT: here



great article


----------



## myusernameislove (Jun 1, 2018)

imparanoic said:


> great article


Yeah, I don't write it directly, but Mojo just trashes Audio Technica on Acoustune iems, that are dark and bassy sounding, and little muffled by design, because it cleans the sound up and it grasps the balls of these iems and swings with them and throws their sound onto you. 
I am still waiting for a specific cable replacement, which should even further help Mojo clean the sound and make it sound even more natural (Toxic cables Black widow - puro copper that is said to clean up sound without taking away the characteristics of copper i.e. without taking away the warmness that these iems has and need to sound well. Silver would take it away, and it would not sound natural.)


----------



## FrostClaus (Jun 3, 2018)

myusernameislove said:


> Comparison of LDAC BT receiver from Audio Technica and Mojo on Acoustune HS1551 CU added to my review of AT-PHA55BT: here


Nice comparison


----------



## imparanoic

myusernameislove said:


> Yeah, I don't write it directly, but Mojo just trashes Audio Technica on Acoustune iems, that are dark and bassy sounding, and little muffled by design, because it cleans the sound up and it grasps the balls of these iems and swings with them and throws their sound onto you.
> I am still waiting for a specific cable replacement, which should even further help Mojo clean the sound and make it sound even more natural (Toxic cables Black widow - puro copper that is said to clean up sound without taking away the characteristics of copper i.e. without taking away the warmness that these iems has and need to sound well. Silver would take it away, and it would not sound natural.)




The mojo is a pretty high end ( however, it's affordable) dac and the AT-PHA55BT is a wireless ldac receiver, can't really be compared, nevertheless, based on the reviews, it literally trashes 99% bluetooth solutions due to high bitrate and adds significantly improve to regular phones built in dac


----------



## srREXed

Does anyone have one of these for sale? The pha55bt? Thanks.


----------



## imparanoic

srREXed said:


> Does anyone have one of these for sale? The pha55bt? Thanks.



write to yodobashi.com who are japanese electronics retailer, one of the largest ones, they delivery throughout the world, so far audio technica at-pha55bt no confirmation yet of Hong Kong release, even though one of the representatives confirmed release in summer a few months ago

info@yodobashi.com


----------



## srREXed

Ok thanks for the info. Appreciate that.


----------



## jeffri

Just picked this up... lovely sound


----------



## Sonic Defender

I'm going to be a party pooper here and suggest that there is unlikely to be any audible advantage to LDAC. This post will make some people say this belongs in the sound science forum, which I admit it does, but hopefully I won't trigger anybody too much. So first off, in terms of bitrate, Apt X is capable of 352. Why is that important? Well, beyond a bitrate of 320 it is arguably not possible to tell the difference. About 4 years ago at a head-fi meet I organized here in Ottawa I conducted a multiple subject, multiple trial blind listening test. I took one very dynamic and well recorded song, One Trick Pony by Holy Cole and made a 320mp3 from the lossless master that I ripped from the commercial CD I own. Each user used the same equipment. Before the trials began each user was able to set the volume level they wanted. Once they indicated that they had the volume level correct for their preference, no further volume adjustment was allowed.

I had seven subjects, 6 of them under 25 years of age (one subject was in his mid 40s), so almost all young ears, and all head-fi members. They were tasked with indicating if they could hear a difference between the two files, lossless or the lossy file made from the lossless file. Each subject had at least 5 trials where both versions were played to them. I would vary the order of which file was played first per trial pairing, but the subject had no idea what file version was being played at any time. Prior to the trials two of the subjects were completely confident they could tell the difference as they had "tested" themselves using sighted tests, in other words, they knew when they were listening to lossy versus lossless. Not in my test they didn't. Guess what? Not one of the 7 subjects did better than 50% detection, in other words, completely guessing. In order to have demonstrated any reliable detection subjects would have to be at least 90% accurate, so obviously they fell well shy of that mark. My results are not unique, these results are commonplace with blind listening tests.

That isn't proof, but it is pretty suggestive that people should consider that their belief in an audible difference between a 320 and lossless file is simply an assumption until tested. I say this as the notion that LDAC and the significantly higher bitrate will sound better shouldn't just be accepted. I had a Bluetooth Apt X HD headphone (B&W PX) and my LG G6 which does Apt X HD and I couldn't hear a difference as compared with my laptop when it streamed Apt X only to the PX. You don't have to agree with me, but I do hope that people keep an open mind and at least entertain that Apt X is already capable of excellent, and transparent quality. That said, it really doesn't matter, listen to LDAC, I'm quite sure that it will sound fantastic so no harm no foul, but hopefully people don't automatically assume LDAC is superior. My experience with Bluetooth over about the last 3 years (Sony 1000XM, B&W P7, B&O H7, B&W PX, Onkyo H500BT and Definitive Technology Symphony 1) is that Bluetooth with Apt X sounds fantastic, and recently when I compare the Apt X enabled FiiO Q5 versus the USB connection to my laptop, I can't hear a difference.

Again, I can't and don't make absolute claims, I am simply trying to keep healthy, critical thought in the area. My apology if my sound science forum like post bothers anybody, I can delete it if it does.


----------



## jeffri

I know that 320kbps is almost indistinguishable with lossless, personally I'm also not confident enough to tell between the two, especially in blind test scenario. But from my experience with aptX HD and LDAC, both codecs appear to benefit more. At least from Bluetooth receivers I owned that support either of this codecs, they are a lot more stable compared to aptX only one, less drop happening. I would argue it sounds better too when either of these codecs were in use, but someone had to set me a blind abx test to see if it is my placebo.

But as I experienced more stable connection when either these codecs is in use, the benefit seems to be more than just a simple sound quality.


----------



## dweaver

I own a V20 phone and an S9 phone and I hear quite a stark difference in sound using my WI1000X IEM. The V20 which uses APTxHD loses quite a bit of the dynamics as compared to the S9 which supports LDAC. In fact I actually prefer LDAC on the S9 over its phone jack because the built in DAC is a bit to warm compared to what I am used to while the WI1000x is essentially it's own DAC and is more neutral sounding while retaining as much detail as my ears can hear.


----------



## imparanoic

The AT-PHA55BT has finally been announced in Hong Kong

https://www.audio-technica.com.hk/index.php?op=productdetails&pid=1207&cid=30&sid=50


----------



## newtophones07

I have of these for sale, if anyone is interested.  I imported it from China.  Save the wait time.   $150 shipped, paypal.  I will be making a thread in a few minutes with pics


----------



## imparanoic

Audio Technica HK has finally confirmed official stores for AT-PHA55BT within HK, at HK$1299

"
Dear Sir,


So sorry to keep you waiting. AT-PHA55BT is available in Hong Kong.

Please contact the following authorized dealers for purchase of AT-PHA55BT.


Apex Headphone (https://www.facebook.com/apexheadphone/)

Shop 328, 3/F., Sim City

No.47-51 Shan Tung Street

Mong Kok, Kowloon.

Tel : 3527 3278


DMA (http://www.dma-audio.com/store.php?id=77)

Shop 219 - 223, 2/F., Sim City

No.47-51 Shantung Street

Mong Kok, Kowloon.

Tel : 3971 0242


Thanks & Regards,


Audio-Technica (Greater China) Ltd."


----------



## jeffri

Anyway, my review for this on my blog: https://jeffri.me/2018/12/audio-technica-at-pha55bt-review/


----------



## imparanoic

jeffri said:


> Anyway, my review for this on my blog: https://jeffri.me/2018/12/audio-technica-at-pha55bt-review/



assuming you're using ldac mode on at-pha55bt and aptx-hd on xb-10, what the difference in sound quality and performance?


----------



## Sonic Defender

imparanoic said:


> assuming you're using ldac mode on at-pha55bt and aptx-hd on xb-10, what the difference in sound quality and performance?


Absolutely none, it is impossible for anybody alive to hear the difference. Anybody who claims to hear the difference is using sighted listening. In blind listening I would bet my life that not a soul on this planet would be able to tell over multiple trials so don't lose sleep over it. I have LDAC and Apt x capable sources and headphones and there is no difference.


----------



## imparanoic

Sonic Defender said:


> Absolutely none, it is impossible for anybody alive to hear the difference. Anybody who claims to hear the difference is using sighted listening. In blind listening I would bet my life that not a soul on this planet would be able to tell over multiple trials so don't lose sleep over it. I have LDAC and Apt x capable sources and headphones and there is no difference.



presumably, you mean no difference between aptx hd and ldac, aptx uses same bitrate as regular bluetooth 4.2


----------



## Sonic Defender

imparanoic said:


> presumably, you mean no difference between aptx hd and ldac, aptx uses same bitrate as regular bluetooth 4.2


I don't hear a difference even with good old aptx.


----------



## jeffri

imparanoic said:


> assuming you're using ldac mode on at-pha55bt and aptx-hd on xb-10, what the difference in sound quality and performance?



Codec aside, there is clear differences between pha55bt and xb10. The sound of pha55bt is warmer, more organic and with better imaging as well. Xb10 is a bit drier, but I think it is a bit detailed as well. Pha55bt is cleaner, less hiss with sensitive IEM. Xb10 hiss can be quite troublesome with sensitive IEM, but have balanced output that is more powerful. Personally, I'll choose pha55bt anyday over xb10.

Regarding codec, aptx hd is pretty much comparable to ldac, so as long as your phone supported one, you are good with either. Regular aptx still give sort of compressed sound to it, I think due to the higher noise floor.

Here is some good articles:
https://www.soundguys.com/the-ultimate-guide-to-bluetooth-aptx-and-aptx-hd-19914/
https://www.soundguys.com/ldac-ultimate-bluetooth-guide-20026/

The noise floor of aptx codec can reach as high as -74db in high frequency. This is something audible I think, especially for high dynamic range tracks.


----------



## imparanoic

jeffri said:


> Codec aside, there is clear differences between pha55bt and xb10. The sound of pha55bt is warmer, more organic and with better imaging as well. Xb10 is a bit drier, but I think it is a bit detailed as well. Pha55bt is cleaner, less hiss with sensitive IEM. Xb10 hiss can be quite troublesome with sensitive IEM, but have balanced output that is more powerful. Personally, I'll choose pha55bt anyday over xb10.
> 
> Regarding codec, aptx hd is pretty much comparable to ldac, so as long as your phone supported one, you are good with either. Regular aptx still give sort of compressed sound to it, I think due to the higher noise floor.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the info


----------



## Sonic Defender

I don't think it is this simple. I am still trying to find the information, but I remember reading an explanation from an audio engineer about the audibility of signal to noise ratios (SNR) as it related to music and what our hearing brain could distinguish and if I recall anything above -40db was acceptable. I think those linked articles while useful are very simplified and seem to echo marketing speak, but none really put forth evidence about at what point can we detect a difference in SNR. I need to understand the topic better, so I am quite willing to state that I am trying hard to grasp things, but based on what I am reading it does not seem to suggest that there is any audible (in real world listening to music situations) between the signal to noise between the two apt X iterations. I do not represent this as fact and I am completely open to any thoughts. I wish I had the time now but I don't, if I did I would find actually research that investigated in the realm of audio what SNR levels were audible and at what point SN becomes transparent to the user.


----------

