# aptX Adaptive Blutetooth 5.0 transmitters?



## Dogway

I'm searching Bluetooth transmitters for the PC to send aptX adaptive LPCM audio to my DAC (thinking Qudelix-5K here). For some reason description on transmitters is always vague or ambiguous.


----------



## Monstieur

Doesn't exist.


----------



## Dogway

Thanks!


----------



## visanj

Please don't use aptx adaptive. Aptx HD is way better codec than Adaptive. for starters, aptx adaptvie limits quality to 470 kbps ps and the quality varies depending on the signal strength and most of the times it falls to lowest quality of 270 kbps which is lower than normal aptx. LDAC is facing same problem now. LDAC supports upto 990 kbps but since its adaptive, most of the time it defaults to 330 kbps which is worse.

After using all the codecs, I can safely say that Aptx HD is way better codec than LDAC


----------



## Toth21

visanj said:


> Please don't use aptx adaptive. Aptx HD is way better codec than Adaptive. for starters, aptx adaptvie limits quality to 470 kbps ps and the quality varies depending on the signal strength and most of the times it falls to lowest quality of 270 kbps which is lower than normal aptx. LDAC is facing same problem now. LDAC supports upto 990 kbps but since its adaptive, most of the time it defaults to 330 kbps which is worse.
> 
> After using all the codecs, I can safely say that Aptx HD is way better codec than LDAC



Do you have a link to a report on this? What was this tested on? This sounds weird, what would be the point if by default it usually only hits worse than Aptx quality?


----------



## vmiguel

I use Creative BT-W2, wich has SBC, normal aptx and aptx low latency.


----------



## Monstieur (May 13, 2020)

visanj said:


> Please don't use aptx adaptive. Aptx HD is way better codec than Adaptive. for starters, aptx adaptvie limits quality to 470 kbps ps and the quality varies depending on the signal strength and most of the times it falls to lowest quality of 270 kbps which is lower than normal aptx. LDAC is facing same problem now. LDAC supports upto 990 kbps but since its adaptive, most of the time it defaults to 330 kbps which is worse.
> 
> After using all the codecs, I can safely say that Aptx HD is way better codec than LDAC


Your device is defective. There's not much difference between aptX flavours - HD has 2 more bits in the low frequencies resulting in a marginal but audible difference in sound quality. All of them are measurably worse than "real" psychoacoustic codecs like AAC.


----------



## Dogway

You mean AAC sounds better than aptx HD?
I'll post here my notes in case someone finds it useful:


```
Bluetooth sends LDAC HQ (990kbps at 24 bit/96 kHz) LDAC LQ (330 Kbps @ 24 Khz) (connection often fails though)
    Bluetooth sends SBC* encoded audio (328 kbps 48Khz) (but worse quality response than simple aptX -crushed treble-)
    aptX sends aptX LL  (352 kbps 16-bit/48Khz) (32ms)
    aptX HD sends aptX HD  (576 kbps 24-bit/48Khz) (1-32ms)
    aptX Adaptive sends aptX VBR  (279-420 kbps 24-bit/48Khz) (80ms)
    AAC (256 Kbps 16-bit/48Khz) (on paper worse than SBC, on real better)
    * through A2DP interface (can send MP3 without transcoding but in reality all devices reencode to SBC)
```


----------



## Monstieur (May 14, 2020)

Dogway said:


> You mean AAC sounds better than aptx HD?
> I'll post here my notes in case someone finds it useful:
> 
> 
> ...


Those numbers are mostly irrelevant. The algorithm used by the encoder and device-specific implementation have the highest impact on fidelity. The bitdepth such as 16-bit and 24-bit is only applicable to PCM signals and the concept is not applicable to psychoacoustic codecs like AAC and MP3. aptX uses adaptive PCM compression, so while bitdepth is still applicable, it's reduced at the output and the number is just a marketing gimmick.

SBC encodes with audible distortion and can be written off immediately. Someone conducted an analysis of SBC and found that most devices have a low quality implementation. In rare devices with a high quality implementation, it was not audibly distorted.

aptX (all flavours) are simple bit-discardation adaptive PCM encoders. They are low fidelity by design and are meant for low power hardware implementation. aptX HD is transparent to the ear but measurably inferior to psychoacoustic codecs.

AAC is measurably the highest fidelity codec and is transparent at 256 kb/s. The only AAC sources are Android, iOS, and macOS. The iOS and macOS AAC encoders are the highest quality ones and are transparent. The Android AAC encoders are low quality and may not be transparent.

MP3 is almost as good as AAC and is still audibly transparent. However there are no Bluetooth sources that use it so it's irrelevant.

LDAC is a marketing gimmick and has no reason to exist next to AAC. It's a psychoacoustic codec but is still inferior to AAC. The higher bitrates are irrelevant when AAC is transparent at 256 kb/s. It could be useful on PC as there is no AAC encoder on Windows (only SBC and aptX, both of which are audibly distorted), but there is no LDAC on PC either.


----------



## Dogway

While inferior a psycho acoustic or visual encoder (audio or video) mostly is so to counteract the lack of bitrate. Now an encoder that doesn't have a psychoacoustic algorithm of any kind like apTX is quite of a shock, but given that LDAC has one I doubt that it is inferior to AAC given the difference of bitrate. But I can't tell without an AB. In windows I encode with qaac.


----------



## Monstieur (May 14, 2020)

Dogway said:


> While inferior a psycho acoustic or visual encoder (audio or video) mostly is so to counteract the lack of bitrate. Now an encoder that doesn't have a psychoacoustic algorithm of any kind like apTX is quite of a shock, but given that LDAC has one I doubt that it is inferior to AAC given the difference of bitrate. But I can't tell without an AB. In windows I encode with qaac.


With the additional constraint of real-time low power encoding, software psychoacoustic encoders are typically run in low quality mode for Bluetooth transmission. iOS devices for example have hardware AAC encoders that encode in in normal / high quality mode. In high quality mode, software encoders will outperform hardware encoders, but at the cost of high CPU usage and reduced battery life.

LDAC is not used as a storage format, but only for real-time transmission. Thus for Bluetooth it's a comparison between a low quality real-time software LDAC encoder and a normal / high quality hardware AAC encoder.


----------



## meyerovb

Monstieur said:


> Those numbers are mostly irrelevant. The algorithm used by the encoder and device-specific implementation have the highest impact on fidelity. The bitdepth such as 16-bit and 24-bit is only applicable to PCM signals and the concept is not applicable to psychoacoustic codecs like AAC and MP3. aptX uses adaptive PCM compression, so while bitdepth is still applicable, it's reduced at the output and the number is just a marketing gimmick.
> 
> SBC encodes with audible distortion and can be written off immediately. Someone conducted an analysis of SBC and found that most devices have a low quality implementation. In rare devices with a high quality implementation, it was not audibly distorted.
> 
> ...



I love how this bloated self righteous monologue doesn’t have a single mention of latency. The only reason I’m tapping my foot for a aptx adaptive transmitter is to watch tv with true wireless earbuds. Currently living with aptx LL but want to upgrade for the better sound quality adaptive will provide with the minimal latency.


----------



## Monstieur

meyerovb said:


> I love how this bloated self righteous monologue doesn’t have a single mention of latency. The only reason I’m tapping my foot for a aptx adaptive transmitter is to watch tv with true wireless earbuds. Currently living with aptx LL but want to upgrade for the better sound quality adaptive will provide with the minimal latency.



Most sources with combined Wi-Fi + Bluetooth antennas will probably never support low latency due to interference. That's the reason there is no mobile phone with aptX Low Latency.

With a dedicated transmitter, it's yet to be seen if aptX Adaptive in low latency mode will have the same audible distortion as aptX Low latency. For non-interactive content, it's probably better to use a higher quality code with lip sync. Sources like Apple TV will auto-compensate for AAC latency.


----------



## turbobb

@meyerovb - well, I wouldn't go as far as what you said  but to be fair @Monstieur has provided a fair bit of useful details (thx!), just that his assumptions on SQ priority is different than our use case. I too am very interested in aptX adaptive but not for SQ since I'm at a stage where convenience of TWS trumps pure SQ (and if I really wanted to indulge that, I do always have wired units to go back to).

I just got the SoundPEATS TrueAir 2 as it has aptX Adaptive; I do a bit of video editing and wanted alternatives to aptX LL since TWS featuring that have been quite rare. The TA2 are actually quite decent (priority here was long term comfort vs. SQ) but alas, I'm unable to test the codec as of now since there are no Tx that feature aptX Adaptive (yet). Will be keeping an eye on this thread in case anyone posts any they've found.


----------



## Ggg99 (Feb 12, 2021)

Well here goes my first post here.  Thanks mods for giving me the go-ahead.

Hey turbobb, I'm also searching for a Tx that features aptX Adaptive and so far also not seeing one in my search.

Additionally, I'm on the hunt for a decent pair of  TWS  that support aptX Adaptive but also support an ambient pass-thru mode.  Want them for TV viewing and also for biking safely so being able to toggle between isolation and hearing surroundings when biking is important for me. I thought this was another unicorn I was searching for but interestingly I see you  mentioned that  SoundPEATS TrueAir 2  has aptX Adaptive.  If true, then these would be the unicorn I am searching for since by design they physically do not provide isolation and allow me to cycle, enjoy music and hear surrounding traffic.

I also own the SoundPEATS TrueAir 2.  They are excellent for biking but not for TV with the Taotronics Tx unit I own which only supports aptX and aptX ll. https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B07NQ52J76/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

*But I am questioning if the TrueAir2 do indeed have aptX Adaptive enabled...*

Described as:  SoundPEATS TrueAir2 Wireless Earbuds Bluetooth V5.2 Headphones *with Qualcomm QCC3040*

Qualcomm's site indicates QC3040 supports aptX but no mention of Adapive* ... *https://www.qualcomm.com/products/qcc3040
*"Qualcomm® aptX™ audio playback support: Qualcomm® aptX™ "*

Qualcomm's site does say that QCC304x,enables Qualcomm® aptX™ Adaptive - so possibly it is not used by SoundPEATS TrueAir2 but can be enabled
"Qualcomm TrueWireless Mirroring, featured on the *QCC304x *and QCC305x, *enables Qualcomm® aptX™ Adaptive *audio for the first time in earbuds"

Also in reviews posted on this site it is noted that aptX Adaptive appears to be lacking on the TrueAir2....

https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/so...lcomm-qcc3040.24797/reviews#item-review-24864
"The box is almost identical to the Sonic, which I reviewed here. It advertises the 25 hour battery and QCC3040 chipset. *No mention of aptx-adaptive."*

https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/soundpeats-sonic-tws.24787/reviews#item-review-24832
"The Sonic feature aptx-adaptive, and the BT5.2 Qualcomm QCC3040 chip is also present in the TA2. *We only get aptX on the TA2, but the chip I would imagine could allow for software enhancements in the future."*


----------



## alsorkin

Ggg99 said:


> Well here goes my first post here.  Thanks mods for giving me the go-ahead.
> 
> Hey turbobb, I'm also searching for a Tx that features aptX Adaptive and so far also not seeing one in my search.
> 
> ...


"a decent pair of  TWS  that support aptX Adaptive but also support an ambient pass-thru mode" 
 How about Noble Audio - FALCON PRO True Wireless IEMs.
https://www.nobleaudio.com/wireless/p/falcon-pro


----------



## johnston21 (Feb 14, 2021)

Fii0 announced:
_“K9 Pro Supports Bluetooth input and also encoding in aptX adaptive format; if your headset also supports aptX adaptive Bluetooth input and also encoding in aptX adaptive format”_

This may be the 1’st, but you’ll need to be willing for the amp aspect and wait till release (April?)

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/fiio-k9-pro-hi-fi-deskdop-dac-bluetooth-amplifier，xlr-rca-4-4-optical-coaxial-interface.952664/post-16156822


----------



## Devodonaldson

alsorkin said:


> "a decent pair of  TWS  that support aptX Adaptive but also support an ambient pass-thru mode"
> How about Noble Audio - FALCON PRO True Wireless IEMs.
> https://www.nobleaudio.com/wireless/p/falcon-pro


Listening to my falcon pro as I read this at work


----------



## alsorkin (Feb 14, 2021)

Devodonaldson said:


> Listening to my falcon pro as I read this at work


Good......how do you find it's comfort with supplied tips and sound quality? Mine arriving in couple of days.


----------



## Devodonaldson

alsorkin said:


> Good......how do you find it's comfort with supplied tips and sound quality? Mine arriving in couple of days.


Comfort is very good, as the tips are very thin. However, I found the treble to have too much sibilance. The wide bore tips let all the audio through, and the treble can be too harsh. I use final audio type e tips. These have a small bore. Mids and lows shine through well, and treble brightness is reduced to lovable levels. I suggest purchasing some final e tips. I use a small in my left ear and a medium in my right. Gives a good seal, and not too tight qirh the longer nozzle. I prefer spiral dots on my other iems, but these have a greater treble. I actually appreciate the increased treble because with AAC and APTX it is the upper frequencies that lose info do the lower bit depth/compression. This tuning makes up for a lot of that. Wirh Final E tips, I find no need to use the app to eq, and using the eq, lowers the overall signal a bit.


----------



## alsorkin

Devodonaldson said:


> Comfort is very good, as the tips are very thin. However, I found the treble to have too much sibilance. The wide bore tips let all the audio through, and the treble can be too harsh. I use final audio type e tips. These have a small bore. Mids and lows shine through well, and treble brightness is reduced to lovable levels. I suggest purchasing some final e tips. I use a small in my left ear and a medium in my right. Gives a good seal, and not too tight qirh the longer nozzle. I prefer spiral dots on my other iems, but these have a greater treble. I actually appreciate the increased treble because with AAC and APTX it is the upper frequencies that lose info do the lower bit depth/compression. This tuning makes up for a lot of that. Wirh Final E tips, I find no need to use the app to eq, and using the eq, lowers the overall signal a bit.


So happens I do have Final Type E Tips that came with my Empire Ears Hero IEM. I appreciate your feedback!


----------



## turbobb (Feb 15, 2021)

@Ggg99 - welcome to the forum! Re: the TrueAir2 I was reasonably certain that I saw somewhere that it supported Adaptive ahead of purchasing it and I suppose it's because of two things:
1) it features the QCC3040 chip - though the main page you linked doesn't cite Adaptive support, the matrix on the second page of the Featured Documents (on right side of that page) shows that it does
2) on aptx.com it shows the TrueAir2 as a model supporting Adaptive: http://www.aptx.com/products/soundpeats-true-air-2

However, I searched the Q&A section on the Amazon product page and SoundPeats replied that it in fact doesn't have Adaptive:
Q: What's the latency on these earbuds? Anybody have a practical average? I know qualcomm has it listed as one of their aptx adaptives as 40-80.
A: Dear Customer,

The TrueAir2 is with aptX, not aptX-LL or aptX adaptive. Thanks.
Please feel free to contact us through Amazon message or here for any additional information needed.
By SoundPEATS Audio Customer Care on November 19, 2020

Bummer, the hunt is on again (like I need an excuse to look for another TWS...  - the TRN T300 looks interesting and has the QCC3046 but I just need to confirm that it in fact supports Adaptive).

At least for now, I can use the TrueAir2 to test LC3 codec (supposedly only 5ms latency!) with the Intel BT 5.2 adapter I just got - if that holds true I may not need to go down the rabbit hole of Adaptive. But if not then it looks like the Fiio K9 Pro that @johnston21 linked seems promising (albeit a bit more than I care to spend on) - I asked for clarification on that thread since Fiio mentioned BT "input" which I interpret to mean that it's a Rx not Tx.


----------



## FiiO Willson

johnston21 said:


> Fii0 announced:
> _“K9 Pro Supports Bluetooth input and also encoding in aptX adaptive format; if your headset also supports aptX adaptive Bluetooth input and also encoding in aptX adaptive format”_
> 
> This may be the 1’st, but you’ll need to be willing for the amp aspect and wait till release (April?)
> ...


Sorry, Only Support Bluetooth input in aptx adaptive format.


----------



## FiiO Willson

Ggg99 said:


> Well here goes my first post here.  Thanks mods for giving me the go-ahead.
> 
> Hey turbobb, I'm also searching for a Tx that features aptX Adaptive and so far also not seeing one in my search.
> 
> ...





Dogway said:


> I'm searching Bluetooth transmitters for the PC to send aptX adaptive LPCM audio to my DAC (thinking Qudelix-5K here). For some reason description on transmitters is always vague or ambiguous.



Hello,

As a product manager of a Bluetooth-related HiFi company, I would be happy to talk to you about this requirement.

It just so happens that we have a BTA30 that supports both transmit and receive, but unfortunately it does not support aptX adaptive, only aptX & aptX low latency &aptX HD& LDAC & SBC & AAC

I would say that there is no better solution that supports all Bluetooth formats. I understand that there are already companies that can support Bluetooth transmitting using the QCC51xx, but they are still in the sample stage and there are no mature products yet.
To make matters more difficult, it is not possible to implement LDAC transmit on the QCC51xx, and this is far more attractive than aptX adaptive

Thus creating a phenomenon where
1, the average consumer does not care much about having aptX adaptive transmitting devices, they even prefer SBC/AAC, in which case the average manufacturer's product using the QCC51xx chip is more concerned with improving connectivity and compatibility
2, HiFi factories like ours would not start using QCC51xx solutions if they had not finished supporting LDAC, compared to the CSR8675, which is better suited to most target users

For FiiO users, if the BTA30 is upgraded, it must also support LDAC, so we also have to solve the LDAC TX problem, of course, if we can get it done on the QCC51xx chip is the best, if not, we can only use CSR8675, which is very realistic

So I don't think you can find such a device with the ability to transmit aptX adaptvie for the time being.
*Of course, if you have found such a technology that enables LDAC transmission on QCC series chips, you can contact me and we would like to work with them.*


----------



## Ggg99

FiiO Willson said:


> Hello,
> 
> As a product manager of a Bluetooth-related HiFi company, I would be happy to talk to you about this requirement.
> 
> ...



Somewhat confusing post generally. Specifically, did you come to this conclusion....


FiiO Willson said:


> the average consumer does not care much about having aptX adaptive transmitting devices


----------



## johnston21

I have the Falcon Pros on the way and anticipate them to be compatible with my BTA30 only up to aptx HD, not LL. I have my 847s connected with Shure’s BT2 for TV but would be nice if a TWS had similar non-lag performance.


----------



## alsorkin

johnston21 said:


> I have the Falcon Pros on the way and anticipate them to be compatible with my BTA30 only up to aptx HD, not LL. I have my 847s connected with Shure’s BT2 for TV but would be nice if a TWS had similar non-lag performance.


The Noble Falcon Pro has APTX Adaptive which will operate with your trasmitter to be lag free.


----------



## turbobb

alsorkin said:


> The Noble Falcon Pro has APTX Adaptive which will operate with your trasmitter to be lag free.


However, sadly the BTA30 doesn't support Adaptive; as of today there are no standalone (i.e. excluding smartphones) Adaptive Tx that I'm aware of.


----------



## alsorkin

turbobb said:


> However, sadly the BTA30 doesn't support Adaptive; as of today there are no standalone (i.e. excluding smartphones) Adaptive Tx that I'm aware of.


I don't believe you understand that the Noble Adaptive receiver will enable the lag free LL equivalent performance that it receives from the transmitter.


----------



## turbobb

@alsorkin - I was under the impression that since aptX Adaptive is a codec (as with all the other aptX flavors) both the TX and Rx need to support it, else it'd just default to regular aptX; are you saying that Adaptive would work as long as just the Rx has it? I assume you have the Falcon now - have you been able to validate its latency vs. regular aptX?

This would be very interesting as then there'd be no need to hunt for an Adaptive Tx.

Thx!


----------



## alsorkin

turbobb said:


> @alsorkin - I was under the impression that since aptX Adaptive is a codec (as with all the other aptX flavors) both the TX and Rx need to support it, else it'd just default to regular aptX; are you saying that Adaptive would work as long as just the Rx has it? I assume you have the Falcon now - have you been able to validate its latency vs. regular aptX?
> 
> This would be very interesting as then there'd be no need to hunt for an Adaptive Tx.
> 
> Thx!


Yes I have the Falcon  and it works fine with my transmitter set to Aptx HD


turbobb said:


> @alsorkin - I was under the impression that since aptX Adaptive is a codec (as with all the other aptX flavors) both the TX and Rx need to support it, else it'd just default to regular aptX; are you saying that Adaptive would work as long as just the Rx has it? I assume you have the Falcon now - have you been able to validate its latency vs. regular aptX?
> 
> This would be very interesting as then there'd be no need to hunt for an Adaptive Tx.
> 
> Thx!


My Falcon has no issues receiving APTX HD from my transmitter attached to a Sony TV with headphone cable. The transmitter also can be switched to APTX LL but no need to do it.


----------



## turbobb (Mar 6, 2021)

So not that I doubt you re: the latency part but I don't think it's Adaptive that's at play here since one of the scalable parameters for aptX HD is the latency too:

From Wiki: "Another scalable parameter within aptX HD is coding latency. It can be dynamically traded against other parameters such as levels of compression and computational complexity. The latency of the aptX HD codec can be scaled to as low as 1 ms for 48 kHz sampled audio, depending on the settings of other configurable parameters. aptX HD performs particularly well against other lossless codecs when the coding latency is constrained to be small, such as 5 ms or less, making it particularly appropriate for delay-sensitive interactive audio applications. aptX HD has an end-to-end latency of around 150ms."

The way I understand how codecs work is that both Tx and Rx must support the same codec with only SBC being mandatory for BT. Not speaking of Adaptive, but for other codecs like AAC, HD or LL, this has born out by being able to see what codec is in use (or even available) based upon the devices I used.

Would you happen to have a regular aptX (non-HD) Tx to test with? Again this would be great news if Adaptive doesn't need both Tx and Rx supporting it for it to work.

Thx!


----------



## alsorkin

turbobb said:


> So not that I doubt you re: the latency part but I don't think it's Adaptive that's at play here since one of the scalable parameters for aptX HD is the latency too:
> 
> From Wiki: "Another scalable parameter within aptX HD is coding latency. It can be dynamically traded against other parameters such as levels of compression and computational complexity. The latency of the aptX HD codec can be scaled to as low as 1 ms for 48 kHz sampled audio, depending on the settings of other configurable parameters. aptX HD performs particularly well against other lossless codecs when the coding latency is constrained to be small, such as 5 ms or less, making it particularly appropriate for delay-sensitive interactive audio applications. aptX HD has an end-to-end latency of around 150ms."
> 
> ...


Don't have another transmitter to test. As I said, if the transmitter in HD mode was a latency issue I would just use the switch on it to LL. The transmitter I'm using is the 1Mii Model B03Pro+.


----------



## turbobb

Thx, however your use case doesn't necessarily unravel how Adaptive really works; be it that it's invoking HD (and adjusting latency as a parameter) or LL as the codec (if available) or whether it actually requires that both the Tx <> Rx utilize Adaptive codec. I feel that if all it required was the Rx having Adaptive then there'd be no need to tout products (e.g. smartphones) on their site as having Adaptive since it's not required. You can see the option to invoke Quality vs. Latency on the Mi 9 in this vid here.

I do however appreciate your feedback - I plan on getting the Soundpeats Sonic to test with and have standard aptX and HD as well as BT 5.2 Tx to test them with. Will report back later. Cheers


----------



## turbobb

@alsorkin - I sent an inquiry to Noble and Jim confirmed that in order to take advantage of aptX Adaptive, both the Tx and Rx need to support the codec, this seems to confirm everything else I've read re: codecs. As for your use case - you can check which codec your Tx has selected for the connection. I doubt you'll be able to invoke LL with the Falcon since it doesn't support that codec nor HD either - it's likely defaulting to aptX Classic. However, if you don't notice any latency then that's all that matters. 

I got the SoundPeats Sonic but without an Adaptive Tx, I can't test the codec; it does have its own way to invoke low latency by tapping the left button 3x which forces it to 60ms (confirmed this with the Bluetooth Tweaker app) which is slightly better than Adaptive's 80ms but I'm sure at the cost of quality (though I'd be hard pressed to hear that with my old ears).

I've sent an inquiry to Avantree to see if they might be cooking up any Adaptive Tx soon.


----------



## johnston21 (Mar 9, 2021)

Adaptive Is backwards compatible with aptX & aptX HD, not Aptx LL.
https://www.aptx.com/aptx-adaptive
See Tech Specs near bottom of page.


----------



## turbobb (Mar 10, 2021)

johnston21 said:


> Adaptive Is backwards compatible with aptX & aptX HD, not Aptx LL.
> https://www.aptx.com/aptx-adaptive
> See Tech Specs near bottom of page.


With the SoundPeats Sonic, I'm unable to connect in HD via Avantree's DG60 nor LG V30 - with both it defaults back to Classic (I have a additional HD Tx somewhere but will have to dig that out later.) EDIT: No dice w/Boltune's BT-BA001 either - just goes to regular aptX.

@alsorkin - are you able to get the Falcon connected via HD w/your Mii Tx?


----------



## alsorkin

turbobb said:


> With the SoundPeats Sonic, I'm unable to connect in HD via Avantree's DG60 nor LG V30 - with both it defaults back to Classic (I have a additional HD Tx somewhere but will have to dig that out later.) EDIT: No dice w/Boltune's BT-BA001 either - just goes to regular aptX.
> 
> @alsorkin - are you able to get the Falcon connected via HD w/your Mii Tx?


Yes the Falcon does connect when the Mii Tx is set to HD on the unit's switch.


----------



## johnston21 (Mar 13, 2021)

My Falcon Pro's arrived today and I can confirm that the Fii0 BTA30 is not playing nice. When I set the unit's Tx to aptx HD as the source for the Falcon Pros, it show as the Tx is aptx Classic. Also tried setting the BTA30 to aptx LL (just to try), and it too changed to aptx Classic. I was hoping that HD would be recognized by the Flacon Pros, but it seems that an aptx Adaptive Tx is required for the Falcon Pros.

I have my SONY NW-ZX507 set to Tx aptx HD, and the Falcon Pros sound fantastic, better than my original Falcons (non Pro and only aptx Classic), but now I'm wondering if the Falcon Pro's are really receiving aptx HD.

@turbobb, Is the Bluetooth Tweaker app you referring to for Android for Windows?

More Testing: Even though the BTA30 is showing it’s Tx is aptx Classic, the Falcon Pros are not lagging as much as the non-Pros, but not like the Shure BT2 which has 0 lag when using aptx LL. So my use case may be limitations with the BTA30, and the ZX507 may actually be sending aptx HD, not sure.


----------



## turbobb (Mar 13, 2021)

@johnston21 - this app for Win10: https://www.bluetoothgoodies.com/tweaker/
As for your ZX507 - is there any option to be able to tell the codec used like w/Android using the Dev Option? Sony is generally pretty good about identifying which codec is used either in their app or via the LED on their head/earphones but I've never owned any of their phones/DAPs so not sure if that's the case with those.

As for the Soundpeats Sonic - their support replied that it doesn't feature aptX HD which is rather baffling given the use of QCC3040. Based upon this, though aptX Adaptive is stated to be backwards compatible with HD - I guess it doesn't mean the vendor has always elected to enable/support it so we can't assume that a product with Adaptive will always have backwards compatibility with HD.

Also, I don't have full confidence in aptX's webiste being fully accurate since they still show the SoundPeats TrueAir2 as featuring Adaptive (http://www.aptx.com/products/soundpeats-true-air-2) when the vendor confirmed it doesn't.

EDIT: Forgot to mention what prompted me to reach out to SoundPeats was that with my other Txs I couldn't explicitly pic a codec priority but I also have Avantree's Oasis Plus which does allow me to pick between LL/HD priority and it still just connected via aptX Classic.

@alsorkin - just wanted to confirm that with your Falcon Pro connected to your Mii and switch set to HD that the HD LED is on rather than regular aptX? As you can see, we're all very curious how Adaptive works and what it does or does not fall back to when Adaptive isn't available.


----------



## alsorkin

turbobb said:


> @johnston21 - this app for Win10: https://www.bluetoothgoodies.com/tweaker/
> As for your ZX507 - is there any option to be able to tell the codec used like w/Android using the Dev Option? Sony is generally pretty good about identifying which codec is used either in their app or via the LED on their head/earphones but I've never owned any of their phones/DAPs so not sure if that's the case with those.
> 
> As for the Soundpeats Sonic - their support replied that it doesn't feature aptX HD which is rather baffling given the use of QCC3040. Based upon this, though aptX Adaptive is stated to be backwards compatible with HD - I guess it doesn't mean the vendor has always elected to enable/support it so we can't assume that a product with Adaptive will always have backwards compatibility with HD.
> ...


When I asked Mii about the LED for Aptx showing not HD they said that when Adaptive is used on the receiver only the Aptx LED will be lit even though it is actually using the HD on their unit.


----------



## johnston21

I suspect the same with the Fii0 BTA30.


----------



## miserybeforethemusic

turbobb said:


> @alsorkin - I was under the impression that since aptX Adaptive is a codec (as with all the other aptX flavors) both the TX and Rx need to support it, else it'd just default to regular aptX; are you saying that Adaptive would work as long as just the Rx has it? I assume you have the Falcon now - have you been able to validate its latency vs. regular aptX?
> 
> This would be very interesting as then there'd be no need to hunt for an Adaptive Tx.
> 
> Thx!


Hopping into the thread as you requested, @turbobb . Not sure I'm going to be able to add much value, but I'll join the conversation.

Currently running the Noble Falcon Pro in Adaptive successfully from a OnePlus 8T. I find its scaling to be a little wonky at times, but usually only on high-bitrate content. I have a feeling that whatever algorithm it's running in Adaptive mode is having trouble keeping up with the tx/rx intervals, meaning as the bitrate goes up and time gets longer, interruptions are apparent and they can vary anywhere from minor artifacting in one ear to a full channel cutout until the music is paused. To my knowledge, there is no background reverting to legacy codecs; I'm fully and consistently in aptX Adaptive during my listening time.

I wouldn't consider it a negative if you can't get ono the latest and greatest codecs. Honestly, I think AAC is going to be your moneymaker on iOS and aptX HD is as good as we have on Android unless you can get a consistently-locked-in 990 kbps on LDAC. That being said, I'm willing to join the ride to see what the group learns and intend to learn along the way!


----------



## mrfashion (Mar 27, 2021)

turbobb said:


> I was under the impression that since aptX Adaptive is a codec (as with all the other aptX flavors) both the TX and Rx need to support it, else it'd just default to regular aptX


You are correct.


----------



## alsorkin

mrfashion said:


> You are correct.


Just ordered the B&W P17 buds that can use the charging case as a bt transmitter. The B&W support person stated that the case codec used will be highest quality available from the source. So if it is using APTX HD the buds will receive it as APTX HD if within about 10ft of the charging case.


----------



## johnston21 (Apr 22, 2021)

Doesn't make sense as the case is a BT transmitter not a BT Transceiver. The source is a 3.5mm input, hence no incoming aptx codec to the case.

I do anticipate that it will be equivalent to aptx-HD, but anxious to see how it handles TV input latency...


----------



## alsorkin

johnston21 said:


> Doesn't make sense as the case is a BT transmitter not a BT Transceiver. The source is a 3.5mm input, hence no incoming aptx codec to the case.
> 
> I do anticipate that it will be equivalent to aptx-HD, but anxious to see how it handles TV input latency...


Should have it on Friday and will post impressions soon after.


----------



## CJYYZ

I'm stunned that there are no transceivers available that support Apt-X Adaptive, which has been around since 2018. Here we are in 2021, with plenty of killer TWS earbuds and Bluetooth headphones that support it, but nothing to connect them to. What's the holdup? The first company that brings one to market is going to make a killing... Why is no one jumping on this opportunity?


----------



## miserybeforethemusic

CJYYZ said:


> I'm stunned that there are no transceivers available that support Apt-X Adaptive, which has been around since 2018. Here we are in 2021, with plenty of killer TWS earbuds and Bluetooth headphones that support it, but nothing to connect them to. What's the holdup? The first company that brings one to market is going to make a killing... Why is no one jumping on this opportunity?


Adaptive isn't really its own codec; more like a protocol to determine the most efficient of the aptX codecs at any given time. That means a lot of license cost for virtually no market benefit. No bean counter is going to green-light that.

Besides, you're not missing much by not having Adaptive. LDAC has the technical advantage in throughput, even if it is technically lossy.


----------



## CJYYZ

miserybeforethemusic said:


> Adaptive isn't really its own codec; more like a protocol to determine the most efficient of the aptX codecs at any given time. That means a lot of license cost for virtually no market benefit. No bean counter is going to green-light that.
> 
> Besides, you're not missing much by not having Adaptive. LDAC has the technical advantage in throughput, even if it is technically lossy.


I see, thanks for clarifying. I'm looking for a Bluetooth transmitter to connect my tv to my Lypertek Z7 earbuds. They support SMB, AAC and Apt-X Adaptive. Can you recommend a good transmitter? I assume I should use AAC and deal with a little lag. The FiiO BTA30 looks pretty impressive.


----------



## miserybeforethemusic (Jul 28, 2021)

CJYYZ said:


> I see, thanks for clarifying. I'm looking for a Bluetooth transmitter to connect my tv to my Lypertek Z7 earbuds. They support SMB, AAC and Apt-X Adaptive. Can you recommend a good transmitter? I assume I should use AAC and deal with a little lag. The FiiO BTA30 looks pretty impressive.


To my understanding, aptX Adaptive support also includes legacy support for the other aptX codecs. Pretty sure Avantree makes a pretty cheap aptX/LL transmitter that takes a digital input.

Found one: it's overkill, but should do the trick:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07BQYYDNJ/ref=cm_sw_r_apan_glt_fabc_CQB2KQJCQW8556MD5E0A


----------



## CJYYZ

miserybeforethemusic said:


> To my understanding, aptX Adaptive support also includes legacy support for the other aptX codecs. Pretty sure Avantree makes a pretty cheap aptX/LL transmitter that takes a digital input.
> 
> Found one: it's overkill, but should do the trick:
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07BQYYDNJ/ref=cm_sw_r_apan_glt_fabc_CQB2KQJCQW8556MD5E0A


Thanks, I've had the Oasis Plus on my wish list for a while. I don't think it's overkill. When I buy tech, I try to imagine every possible scenario of what features I may need in the future. Then I compare available models' prices and buy the best I can afford. 

What do you think of the Fiio BTA30? It's metal chassis looks sexier, has a built in DAC and has LDAC and coaxial in with 192k/24bit support. It's only $30 more than the Oasis Plus. Here's a review from Headfonia: https://www.headfonia.com/fiio-bta30-review/


----------



## miserybeforethemusic

CJYYZ said:


> Thanks, I've had the Oasis Plus on my wish list for a while. I don't think it's overkill. When I buy tech, I try to imagine every possible scenario of what features I may need in the future. Then I compare available models' prices and buy the best I can afford.
> 
> What do you think of the Fiio BTA30? It's metal chassis looks sexier, has a built in DAC and has LDAC and coaxial in with 192k/24bit support. It's only $30 more than the Oasis Plus. Here's a review from Headfonia: https://www.headfonia.com/fiio-bta30-review/


Looks legit, though I see no mention of latency, which would be a pretty hefty concern for one of these things. If you can find someone's reports on that, you should have your answer, but I like what I see so far.


----------



## slair76116

Monstieur said:


> Those numbers are mostly irrelevant. The algorithm used by the encoder and device-specific implementation have the highest impact on fidelity. The bitdepth such as 16-bit and 24-bit is only applicable to PCM signals and the concept is not applicable to psychoacoustic codecs like AAC and MP3. aptX uses adaptive PCM compression, so while bitdepth is still applicable, it's reduced at the output and the number is just a marketing gimmick.
> 
> SBC encodes with audible distortion and can be written off immediately. Someone conducted an analysis of SBC and found that most devices have a low quality implementation. In rare devices with a high quality implementation, it was not audibly distorted.
> 
> ...


I don't have much technical knowledge to refute your claims, But I can say I have tried APT X and LDAC and to my ears LDAC is far closer to FLAC where most my music is stored. 

Tried it on Samsung phone to Sony XM3 Headphones, and due to the quality and convien9ice I completely started using wireless when walking about outside now, no more cables at all.


----------



## miserybeforethemusic

slair76116 said:


> I don't have much technical knowledge to refute your claims, But I can say I have tried APT X and LDAC and to my ears LDAC is far closer to FLAC where most my music is stored.
> 
> Tried it on Samsung phone to Sony XM3 Headphones, and due to the quality and convien9ice I completely started using wireless when walking about outside now, no more cables at all.


If it didn't require root, I'd give it a go. Would have to leave a couple of my beta programs to give this a shot, unfortunately.

Think it's been known for a while that BT stacks in general have about 5 million band-aid patches throughout the years and that's why Google's been working on Gabeldorsche. In my testing, I could find no real-world benefit to using Gabeldorsche over the default stack, though.


----------



## slair76116

I had to enable it VIA developer settings because I had an older Samsung s8+ the newer phones have LDAC enabled I think. Now I have an Iphone 12 and no more LDAC


----------



## Tal00

visanj said:


> Please don't use aptx adaptive. Aptx HD is way better codec than Adaptive. for starters, aptx adaptvie limits quality to 470 kbps ps and the quality varies depending on the signal strength and most of the times it falls to lowest quality of 270 kbps which is lower than normal aptx. LDAC is facing same problem now. LDAC supports upto 990 kbps but since its adaptive, most of the time it defaults to 330 kbps which is worse.
> 
> After using all the codecs, I can safely say that Aptx HD is way better codec than LDAC


Thanks. I appreciate the info as well. 
Can you recommend a pair of wireless in-ear Aptx HD headphones that will take full advantage of my brand new M11 Plus Ltd capabilities?  IEM wireless adapters are an option as well since I have 5 sets of IEMs 🤦🏻‍♂️ 😆 
Thanks in advance for your advice Visanj.


----------



## PoloJCP

alsorkin said:


> Should have it on Friday and will post impressions soon after.


Hi @alsorkin, how was your experience with B&W I7? Possible to share? I am consider one myself. Thanks!


----------



## Vash369

I need (want) a transmitter with adaptive as latency is of priority than sound quality. Sucks my headphones does not support aptx-ll


----------



## michicaust

miserybeforethemusic said:


> To my understanding, aptX Adaptive support also includes legacy support for the other aptX codecs. Pretty sure Avantree makes a pretty cheap aptX/LL transmitter that takes a digital input.


Sadly, it doesn't.

I've recently bought an Avantree Audikast Plus Bluetooth 5.0 Transmitter in order to use it with the brand-spanking-new Bowers & Wilkins PX7 S2, which support adaptive, but no LL.

There's a definite, albeit small-ish- lag when watching TV with these, as opposed to my Amiron Wireless in LL mode, and the transmitter won't light the "LL" LED with the Bowers'.


----------

